its not even Talmud (Talmud is commentaries written by Jewish scholars) its the Mishna which is the Oral Torah. Jewish people believe that God gave written Torah (5 books) as well as the oral Torah
@@kashifkhan-yr8wiSo, you admit that Christians selectively choose what to accept from Judaism. If they believe the Torah is divine, why not the Oral Torah (Mishna) which they claim is also divinely inspired? It seems like convenience, not logic, guides their beliefs.
Whats to love about islam? A prophet being a warlord? Terrorist? Pedophile? Moses chasing after stones who stole his clothes? And he beat that stone up for messing with the mighty prophet of Allah? A religion who has endless amounts on end with contradictions in the Quran? I could go through many of these wrongs as it continuesly debunk itself.
He tries to act smug but he doesn’t make any sense the point the original response made was that we have no written records of anything in the Talmud prior to 300 AD. Then he asks why do we trust the Torah. In reality the Torah has written records 300 years PRIOR TO CHRIST, the Torah predates the Talmud almost 600 years and was quoted from extensively by Jesus, the new testament, and even early Church fathers
Read Deuteronomy 22:28-29 New International Version (NIV) If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives
@@AbjectTestament.Allah doesnt mean god in arabic. Stop listening to arab Christians. And dont come back telling me Allah means the God cuz it also doesnt mean that
@@harleyb7880 The word Allah is not a name. There are 99 names of Allah and the word Allah isn't there so it's clearly not a name because if it is then we would have 100 names of Allah instead of 99 names of Allah. So clearly Allah isn't a name. Allah means God
No the Talmud has never been thought of as scripture by any real Christian, the talmud dates 300 years after Christ. We believe the Torah and Old Testament are the words of God because it contains the passages of prophets like Moses, David, Noah, Abraham and so on. The Talmud was written as a set of laws for the jews at the time, similar to the US consistution was written mostly by Christian men. But we take neither as scripture. The torah predates the talmud 600 years. Our earliest manuscript dates to 300 BC before Christ.
@@miftahuljannat3050 No because the talmud was never scripture, just like the United States Constitution is not scripture, it’s simply a set of laws for a society.
@@BuffAle yes and Jesus said to follow everything they say, he never said to only follow the religious book but follow everything they say. That includes the jewish oral laws 🤷♂️
@@miftahuljannat3050 No, Matthew 23:1-3: Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. Jesus explicitly points out that when the Pharisees sit on the seat of Moses people must follow, this is the condition set by Jesus. Jesus himself says when talking about the pharisees In Matthew 15 “Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition”. Jesus argues that the word of God and law of Moses is what the people should follow, not the talmud which came 300 years later. Jesus is not talking about the Jewish oral laws 🤦♂️
The irony Deuteronomy 22:28-29 New International Version (NIV) If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives
Absolutely wild how his actual counterargument for the problems in his own religious scripture was literally 'well it's all unverified anyways' this guys in the running to be the no 1 clowntianity grand priest 🤣
Well believe or not the argument was that the Talmud is unverified. If you didn’t know Christians don’t follow the talmud which was written 300 years after Christ. We actually have manuscripts of the Old Testament dating to 300 years prior to Christ. So this guys response actually makes no sense. He says we don’t have any written records of the Torah prior to Jesus, which is simply a blatant lie. 😂 The Talmud is not taken as authoritative by any Christian, it’s a set of laws for Jewish life, it’s like saying why don’t Christians take the Consistution as scripture, it’s because even if the consistution was written by Christian men, we don’t follow it as written by divinely inspired words of God.
@@randomdude5950 >the Christian texts have many contradictions >pointing these out is now cherry picking >only focusing on the parts that support your narrative and ignoring the rest is however somehow not cherry picking Looks like we have a new frontrunner
Without the Oral Law you cannot observe the commandments in the Torah. For example, the commandment to keep the Sabbath holy: *Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. [Exodus 20:8]* When we search the Torah for specific laws regulating how to observe the Sabbath, we find only basic information. What constitutes "work" violating the Sabbath is not made clear. A man was literally stoned to death for collecting woods on Sabbath (Numbers 15:32-36). Another example is the commandment on how to observe Yom Kippur: *It is a sabbath of solemn rest for you, and you shall afflict your souls. It is a statute forever. [Leviticus 16:31]* What does even mean when it says "afflict your souls?" Again it is not made clear in the Torah but in the Oral Law it is understood to be fasting which is later confirmed in the Prophetic books such as Isaiah: *"Why have we fasted, and You did not see; we have afflicted our soul and You do not know?" Behold, on the day of your fast you pursue business, and from all your debtors you exact payment. [Isaiah 58:3]* So the Torah alone is not sufficient for daily Jewish life. What is needed is a legal commentary to accompany the Torah. Jews believe this can be found in the Talmud, an oral tradition believed to have originated from Moses and passed down by Rabbis over the centuries.
Sorry but no, there is no picking and choosing the fact is that the Talmud simply did not exist at the time of the writings of Scripture. Our earliest manuscript of the Old Testament dates 300 BC while the Talmud dates 300 AD that’s 600 years of difference. Christians never had access to these jewish laws and were never considered scripture because they were laws of men and not revealed by God. That’s like asking why don’t Christians have the US constitution as scripture.
@@BuffAle blud the Mishna was at the time of Ezra not after Jesus and if your criteria is the manus then why you don't reject the new testament because the earliest complete manu is 350 years after Jesus?
"So it didn't reach it's final form until the 3rd century" you mean like your trinity needing between 300 to 400 years to become established and true reaching it's final form😂 "The teachings of the mishna were not being written down until 70ad, so we don't know how old and reliable each passage is" hmm reminds me of something that starts with New and ends with testament and I also wonder when the bible took it's final form😂and as brother Rumzi said, why deny the mishna and not the old testament if you want to go by your logic Each "answer" is just an argument against them
Rebecca's age from the bible and scholars: It doesn't have to be mentioned by number (Although your core religion concept the trinity isn't mentioned my name or concept in the bible yet you for some reason believe it) there's things called exegesis, history, context, logical conclusion, math, tradition, commentaries and scholarly works. According to Rabbis in medieval history in example Rabbi Rashi one of the most respected Rabbis, she was no older than three 3-years-old. The Rabbis deduced this age number for Rebecca, from the Bible itself. A second early source, puts her age at 10. So at least between 3 and 10 years old so any christian or jew using the argum-ent of Aisha RA is igno-rant. To find Rebecca’s age of marriage, we can look at the bible specifically Genesis, God had promised Sarah will bear a child, and he will be named Isaac: Genesis 17:17: "Will Sarah bear a child at the agd of ninety?” Genesis 17:21: "But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom sarah will bear to you by this time next year". The above text tells us that Sarah was around 90 or 91-years-old when she gave birth to Isaac. Sarah di-ed at the age of 127, looking at Genesis 23:1-2: "Sarah lived to be a hundred and twenty-seven years old. She di-ed at Kiriath Arba (that is, Hebron) in the land of Canaan, and Abraham went to mo-urn for Sarah and to w-eep over her.” Since Sarah gave birth to Isaac at 90 (or 91), Isaac would have been around 36 (or 37) when his mother had di-ed. This would mean that Isaac was 36 or 37-years-old when his father tried to sacr-ifice him on Mount Moria in Genesis 22 This fact that Isaac was sacr-ificed in his 30s is well attested by nearly all ancient sources and Rabbis in example Rabbi Shim’on (2nd Century): "Issac was already thirty seven years old" and Rabbi Rashbam (1085 - 1158 AD): "Yitzchok (Issac) was at least 37 years olf before Avraham heard about the birth of Rivkah (Rebecca)" the same answer that he was either 36 or 37 have been said by/in Rabbi Abraham Cohen De Herrera (1570 - 1635 AD), Targum Jonathan on Genesis 22:1 and even by Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges "Therefore Issac must then have been thirty seven years old", Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible "It appears probable that he was more: there were about thirty seven years from his birth to the d-eath of Sarah; so that it is not unlikely", Gospel scholar David J. Ridges: "Issac would have been 37 at the time of her dea-th." and Professor Jules Gleicher: "This would make Isaac thirty seven at her de-ath…" This proves that Rebecca was born when Isaac was in his late 30s (37), just before the de-ath of Sarah. Five verses down after Abraham and Isaac’s in-cident of sacr-ifice, we are told Rebecca was born: “20 Some time later Abraham was told, “Milkah is also a mother; she has borne sons to your brother Nahor: 21 Uz the firstborn, Buz his brother, Kemuel (the father of Aram), 22 Kesed, Hazo, Pildash, Jidlaph and Bethuel.” 23 Bethuel became the father of Rebekah. Milkah bore these eight sons to Abraham’s brother Nahor. 24 His co-ncubi-ne, whose name was Reumah, also had sons: Tebah, Gaham, Tahash and Maakah.” - Genesis 22:20-24 (NIV) Straight after the birth of Rebecca we find out the de-ath of Sarah, when she was 127 years old in Genesis 23:1-2 So the significance of Isaac’s age at the time of his sacr-ifice is that according to the Bible, Isaac was 37-years-old when he went up on Mount Moriah with his father. Rebecca was born straight after Isaac and Abraham, came down from the Mount Moriah and they went to Beersheba. Isaac was married to Rebecca when he was 40-years-old (Genesis 25:20). Genesis 25:20 "Isaac was forty years old when he married Rebekah daughter of Bethuel the Aramean of Paddan Aram." Since that is the case, this would mean Rebecca, was married off when she was 3 (or 4) years old. This would render Rabbi Rashi’s statement and others of Rebecca being 3-years-old when married to Isaac, as true when we look at Genesis account closely. Rabbi Tobiah Ben Eliezer (1050 - 1108 AD) also confirms that she was 3-years-old when she was married to Isaac: “Isaac was thirty-seven-years old at his binding… When Abraham returned from Mount Moriah, at that very moment Sarah di-ed, and Isaac was then thirty-seven; and at that very time Abraham was told of Rebekah’s birth; Thus we find that Rebecca was three years old when she married Issac.” (Pesikta Zutrata (Lekah Tov), Gen. 24., Midrashic commentary on the Pentateuch, by Rabbi Tobiah Ben Eliezer) "But it says woman!" No your later translations changing it to woman when it's girl isn't an argument for you but against you: Gensis 24:15-16: 15Before he had finished speaking, behold, Rebekah who was born to Bethuel the son of Milcah, the wife of Abraham’s brother Nahor, came out with her jar on her shoulder. 16((The girl)) was very beautiful, a v1rgin, and no man had had relations with her; and she went down to the spring and filled her jar and came up." "But she carried jars of waters!" Yes I'm familiar with all your l0usy excuses, people back then were stronger and more mature than people today, you can't use presentism as an argument
(Part 1) This rebuttle is aga'inst any muslim(yes uneducated ones rather than research assume the wo'rst of their own prophet), jew, christian or athiest or anyone not knowing the reality of the world that want to use the argument of Aisha: To show people what kind of edged sword christians and jews are trying to use not knowing the bible and hindus mot knowing their scriptute and not knowing science/history as well as if athiest den'ying science and nonetheless athiests have no base to judge someone as athiests morality is subjective depending on each persons feelings and whi'ms so they can't objectively say something is moral or not ergo right or wro'ng and to show that proper research is needed: •For those that don't get it yes pe'do actions are wro'ng and Islam con'dems them and so do I that's why it's not allowed with ch'ild'ren but says readiness in Islam of when someone becomes an adult, it should be clear from my answers but some have diffic'ulty putting 2 and 2 together. And what people don't understand that one country/group/individual calling someone a p'edo for example for marrying at 14 not 15 the next country/group/individual will the call the first a pe'do for marrying at 15 not 16 that's why it's a problem to follow subjective whims of morality and we should follow objectively what's right and wron'g not an age but readiness as Islam says ergo as God says. •For Hindus: In Skanda Purana, it is clearly mentioned that Sita was 6 years old when he married her. Original Text: The bow of Isvara that was kept in the abode of Janaka, was bro'ken. In his fifteenth year, O king, Rama married the six year old beautiful daughter of the king of Mithila, Sita who was not bo'rn of a wo'mb. On getting Sita, Raghava became contented and happy Reference: Skanda Purana>> Book 3: Brahma Khanda>> Section 2: Dharmaranya Khanda>> Chapter 30: Rama’s life>> Verse 8-9(>> Page 156) •For Christians and Jews: According to the catholic encyclopedia: "From the age at which Hebrew maidens became marriageable, it is possible that Mary gave birth to her Son when she was about thirteen or fourteen years of age." So is the Bible God ergo Jesus a Pe'do... So why was it allowed and not declared by God from before by any prophet that the age of marriage and giving chil'dr'en is 18... And others believe she was 12 when she gave birth to Jesus. And according to some apocryphal accounts state that at the time of her betrothal to Joseph, Mary was 12-14 years old. And according to ancient Jewish custom, Mary could have been betrothed at about 12. So what does that make Mary and what does that make Joseph and does that make the God of the bible... And search: "Girls at the age of 3 were fo'rc'ed into s'e'x in both the Talmud and the Bible by answering christianity" While Islam doesn't have this and Islam states readiness... Note: We as muslims don't believe many of the things the bible say the prophets did as that don't befit their good character examples are we don't believe what the bible says moses PBUH did in numbers 31: 17-18 nor do we believe God would order him to do that as that doesn't befit God. So how can you objectively prove Islam is wro'ng in the marriage of Aisha when it states readiness backed by science and looking at history of how the life of Aisha in how she good was treated by the Prophet PBHU and still is treated good by muslims around the world in looked at with high regards and how can you have double standards when christians beliefs and bible are the same and even wor'se. •Islam does not allow that act with chil'dre'n which is backed by the Quran and hadith. Quran verses (4:25)(24:59)(4:6) 1)Chil'dr'en reaching "the age of marriage" in Noble Verse 4:6. 2)Female-c'hildr'en becoming "fataaya" (young ladies) become ready to be "wed" (4:25). 3)"atfaal" اطفال (babies and young chi'ldr'en) are not allowed to get married (4:25, 24:59). For more info on these verses and this topic search:What is the minimum age for marriage in the Holy Quran? By answering christianity •There's no hadiths that shows he did it before pub**ty the only hadiths present actually shows other*ise. Sahih al-Bukhari 5134 Narrated `Aisha: that the Prophet (ﷺ) marri*d her when she was six years old and he consu**ated his marriage when she was nine years old. There a difference between just marriage and actually doing something: Why did he marry her at 6 and wait 3 years for her to become an adult at 9 and not do it instantly if he doesn't ca're about morality and her wellbeing. Narrated AISHA: (the wife of the Prophet) I had seen my parents following Islam since I attained the age of PU'BER'TY. Not a day passed but the Prophet visited us, both in the mornings and evenings.” Sahih al-Bukhari volume 1, Book 8, Hadith 465 Some cri'ti'cs have cast doubt on the Hadith where it mentions that Aisha hit “pub'erty” and cla'im that the translation that was made by the renowned scholar Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan is unreliable. As such we looked at Arabic-English Dictionaries on the word a’qal. The la'te professor Hans Wehr (1909 - 1981) who studied at the University of Munster published a book, “A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic”. He comments on the word “A’qal”: “… a’qal more reasonable; brighter, smarter, more intelligent | … a’qal al’umr the most reasonable time of life, the years of reason and MAT'UR'ITY.” Hans Wehr A Dictionary of Modern written Arabic [Edited by John Milton - Spoken Language Services, Inc. 1976], page 737 Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan’s rendering of “pub'erty” in the first report is line with Professor Hans Wehr’s understanding of the Arabic language. The narrations presented prove that Aisha had already h'it pub'erty before the con'summa'tion of the marriage taken place. •Those that call it "Ra'pe" When she con'sen'ted🤦🏻 and did you know Aisha was to be married to someone else before Muhammed PBUH. And if she was an adult then where's the problem who are to decide the age when people should marry some say 12, some 15, some 14, some 18 when Islam says readiness not an age. •Those that say his ene'mies didn't use it against him because it was normal then, yes it was and you have no way objectively to say it's wro'ng to marry an a proper adult then or now after 1400 you can't say it's wrong and people for maybe 1300 years didn't use it agai'nst him because marrying adults is no probl'em until this subjective argument that is baseless. (Part 2) Plus if he was int'o chi'ld'ren then why only Aisha and not many more, try to use logic. •And those that use the argume'nt that 10 year olds can't consent or be mentally aware then go look through history where 10 year olds and such ruled empires so people from young age are able to be ready for marriage when they're able to rule empires and life expectency was not as today so people needed to marry young or the human race would have gone ext'inct. Plus you need to prove it objectively why it's wro'ng you can't say it's wron'g because you feel it's wrong that's not how things work and science and what happened between them show there's nothing wron'g and as I told you before but just want to go in circle and here it is again: If you want to ar'gue with science that females hit pub'er'ty at different ages then you're delusi*nal, Islam does not f*rce a woman to marry but she needs to consent and even if her guardians when she was young promised a woman to someone later, when she becomes an adult she can nulify the marriage, and she needs to be physically, mentally and psychologically ready on the other hand in france, britain, japan and america it states a specific age like britian stated a hundred such years ago that the age of marriage was 6 to 7 and Mary in christian beliefs at 12 married a man in his 90s and another girl rebecca who married at 3 to Issac whos 40s and what moses in the bible said to his men in numbers 31:17-18 to little girls 3 years old (We as muslims don't believe this) all without talking about readiness why the double stand*rds not going agai*st them and just Islam while Islam states readiness scientifically: According to Mass General Birgham Mass General for Chil'dre'n and Massachusetts General Hospital, Pe'diatr'ic En'docri'nolo'gy Center: "Normal p'ub'erty is when c'hi'ldr'en’s bodies start to grow and develop into young (((adult))) bodies. Girls usually start to go through p'ub'ert'y between the ages of 8-13 years." According to healtline: "What's the chi'ldbear'ing age? Technically, women can get pre'gna'nt and bear chil'dr''en from pube'rty" According to Cleveland clinic: "P'ube'rty is the time in your child’s life when they transition from a child to an (((adult))). Special hormones are produced and released that trig''ger the signs of pu''be''rty. Your child will go through the five stages of pu''ber''ty. By the end of the process, they’ll have reached s'ex'ual m'atur'ity." "Girls generally begin pu''b'erty about two years earlier than boys. Pu'b'e'rty for girls usually starts between the ages of 8 and 13. However, Black and Hispanic girls tend to start p'ub'ert'y earlier than white girls (age 7½ instead of 8)." According to Saintlukeskc: "Once it begins, it lasts about 2 to 5 years. But every c'h'ild is different. And there's a wide range of what's normal. Your ch'ild' may begin p'uber'ty a little earlier or later and finish sooner or later than their friends."
(Part 3) And Aisha was congratulated for her marriage and she is considered one of the best women and scholars of Islam and the marriage was done with her parents present ergo consent from them as well as hers. •People around the world before this subjective morality age used to marry young and start families even work not just in Islam but asia, africa, europe, ... while people at this age at their 50s can't even afford a car while the former at 10 would rule empires so stop comparing people for 1400 years ago to the people of this age and Islam whether then or now states readiness not an age number. •I'm not going to respond to going in circles yes he married her a 6 which I addressed, I already talked and re'futed anyones cla'im about Aisha how about people amount to 0.1 percent of what she did in her life for herself, others and religion and get 0.0001 of the respect she has then come be her white knight. (Part 4.1) And the problem with having a minimun age limit is that someone as I explained can be not ready but the government says they are and when they marry not ready mentally and psychologically and cause disf'unctio'nal families in societies then what, and if they are mentally ready but not physically and the person has problems because of having se'x when their bodies can't handle it then what a trip to the hospital and maybe they can't have children ever again then what oh sorry we thought you're ready... And if someone actually is ready to marry, to own a land, ect as we see today young entrepeneurs and the government says no you're too young then they're being ro'bbe'd of their rights. (Part 4.2) And to add: Here is a classical opinion which for'bids the consu'm'attion of prepu'besce'nt marriages: “Ibn Taymiyyah narrated from Ibn Shubrumah that he said: It is not permissible to arrange a marriage for a young girl who has not reached the age of pu'berty, because if we say that that is subject to her consent, her consent does not count (because she is too young to make such decisions), and when she does reach the age of pub'erty we believe that she should not be f'orce'd into a marriage. Ibn Taymiyyah said: This view is the correct one, that the father should not arrange a marriage for his daughter until she reaches the age of pub'erty, and when she reaches the age of pube'rty he should not arrange a marriage unless she gives her consent.” (Al-Sharh al-Mumti‘, volume 12, page 57 - 59) And even scholars that allow marriage before pub'erty say that they need to be compatible and that she isn't allowed to live with the husband before pub'erty even Aisha herself didn't live with the Prophet PBUH before she became ready so what of other muslims, she has to consent ergo she can nuli'fy the marriage before even entering it when she does hit pube'rty and they aren't allowed to cons'umate before she is ready as even if she hits pub'erty but her body can't handle it then consu'mation isn't allowed until she is able so what ch'ild marr'iage in this the way people try to portray it in Islam with all these requirements and restri'ctions. (Part 4.3) وَٱلَّـٰۤـِٔی یَىِٕسۡنَ مِنَ ٱلۡمَحِیضِ مِن نِّسَاۤىِٕكُمۡ إِنِ ٱرۡتَبۡتُمۡ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلَـٰثَةُ أَشۡهُرࣲ وَٱلَّـٰۤـِٔی لَمۡ یَحِضۡنَۚ وَأُو۟لَـٰتُ ٱلۡأَحۡمَالِ أَجَلُهُنَّ أَن یَضَعۡنَ حَمۡلَهُنَّۚ وَمَن یَتَّقِ ٱللَّهَ یَجۡعَل لَّهُۥ مِنۡ أَمۡرِهِۦ یُسۡرࣰا [سُورَةُ الطَّلَاقِ: ٤] Notice the clear wording نسائكم women for those that want to reference this verse (Part 4.4) The Maliki Jurist Ibn Battal said: “It is not perm'itted for her husbands to consu'mmate the marriage except if she is capable the se'x'ual aff'airs and can affo'rd men’s (se'xu'al de'sire). The sta'te of each woman differs (from one to another) in this matter according to their capability and endurance.” Ibn Battal, Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 7, pp. 172-173 And what people need to realize that this Aisha RA cla-im is new ergo maybe 100 or so years ago so if Islam did in fact allow chi-ld se--x and everyone before didn't m-ind then Islam didn't need to go aga-inst it nor did the islamic scholars need to go agai-nst it as there wouldn't be the need to do so and whos message is Islam put 2 and 2 together the Prophet Muhammed PBUH so logically he's agai-nst it and Allah is agai-nst it. So this refu'tes the Myth that Islam permits se'xu'al int'ercou'rse with pre'pube'scent girls.
@@Exor_.We don't believe in the Talmud, we use it against you just like when you use the Qur'an against us, so basically you leave the Qur'an alone then we will leave your Talmud.
@@burakcoskun1865 actually inspiring philosophy has debated many people including Muslims. If Rumzi thinks hes right he should debate him. It’s easy to refute strawmen when no one is there to call them out
It's the Special Pleading Fallacy. They also have no problem accepting the New Testament which has largely unknown authors, no original texts and late and sparse 'early' manuscripts.
When he had finished the bath, he moved towards his clothes so as to take them, but the stone took his clothes and fled; Moses picked up his stick and ran after the stone saying, 'O stone! Give me my garment!'
I'm a Christian, but I love this response given even though I'm obviously going to disagree with the conclusion. I think both parties made good points that lead to a fascinating conversation. Here's why I would still say IP is right on this one. This content creator is correct in that the earliest written portion of the Torah we have is from 600 BC (Ketef Hinnom scrolls). Which is about 600 years after Moses (approximately 1,200 BC). This 600 years does have to be accounted for, but here's how Christians believe it is accounted for. 1.) There are many references in the oldest Jewish scriptures that mention the revelations from God were immediately written down (The Torah has Moses with written content, the book of Joshua says Joshua wrote down things immediately and added it to the book of the law (Moses' orignaly writing), and in 1st Samuel his writings are immediately written down and stored properly. So while it's true there is no physical manuscript recovered before 600 BC, Christians don't believe that the majority of the Torah and early books of the old testament had an oral tradition that was relied on without the assistance of some level of written documentation. There's also basically no written documents that ever get recovered from that long ago unless under perfect conditions. So I would never expect to find a biblical manuscipt that old but we do still belive a written tradition was relied on until the books came into their final form. That would be the Christian's case for an evolving written tradition over time through the exile. 2.) Regardless of whether you agree with my first point or not, it wouldn't change this second point which is a less subjective. This creator acts as if the Mishna is on par with the Torah or the previously inspired scripture according to the Jews. It's pretty simple to show that no one at that time or any time viewed the Mishna as inspired scripture. The purpose of the Mishna was similar to what you see in scholarship where different specialists publish and critique each other's work to see which opinions win out. The purpose of the Mishna was to help interpret the Torah correctly and how to best fill in the gaps of previous scripture. Ex. Scripture says not to work on the Sabbath. Rabbis then would debate over time to decide what qualifies as work and what doesn't so that they can follow the law of God as accurately as possible. So I'm not sure why this creator is holding the Mishna up against what Jews believe are inspired old testament scriptures. This is comparing Apples to Oranges. I love this response from the creator. Great video and great conversation starter!
Now this is a great response coming from a Muslim, saying he made a great point but made a few problems, unlike David Wood who would try to misinterpret things and say everything was wrong with the worst logic appreciate u my guy have a nice day!
And you didn’t even mention how they believe in the New Testament, which oldest manuscript is in Greek, 300 years after the time of Isa (as). Christians are something else 😅
The question isn’t the authenticity of the Mishnah, the Mishnah probably said that. The question is when it was actually written. We have ways of estimating the date of the Gospels, the Mishnah likely wasn’t written until after Jeeus, so Jesus couldn’t have been referring to it. Again, no one is denying the Mishnah said that, the question is whether or not Jesus was actually referring to the Mishnah, and he likely wasn’t. Also, Jesus never said that the Mishnah should be upheld, just the Torah. The Mishnah is a debate on what the Torah could mean, not an authoritative text, and Jesus never affirmed it
BUT - the law was continuouslypreserved in WRITING! When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me; ... And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them: *Deuteronomy 17:14-19* And when Jesus quoted scripture in the synagogue, it was WRITTEN DOWN And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: *Luke 24:44-46*
Also the new testament should be thrown under the bus because we dont know how reliable the new testament is since it's compiled after at least 300Ad. How convenient
Christians don't accept that the Mishnah is that old because the book is explicitly the sayings of Jewish sages who lived after ***70 AD.*** "450 BC" lmao
It's honestly simple, if Jesus came affirming the Torah and zabur present during he's we don't need anything before that, even though we do have and agrees perfectly. Your argument focuses on the fact that Christianity arose from Judaism, while this is true, we only have to obey what Jesus said, he said we can respect the rabi but we must not act like them. There is really no need for Jewish texts outside the old Testament
So basically, they're trying to gain as much benefit as possible on their side only but when it comes to Jewish side, they all like, nah you're on your own. Quite convenient indeed
Again, read a book. The Dead Sea scrolls date back 2,300 years. This would put them right after Malachi. The Septuagint was put together in 295 BC. That means the same writings used for the scrolls were the same as what those who wrote the Septuagint used. These were not of oral tradition. Thusly, you are 0-460!
Idk about the Christian guy in this video. But asking us to follow a tradition that insults Jesus and don’t recognise him as the Messiah makes zero sense.
What is the point of following the mishnah? We as Christians don't need documents talking about the messiah codified 2 centuries after he's ascension, you bringing up the mishnah, a book about the old Testament which comes after the whole point of the book to begin with is like feeding a hungry man bread after he is dead🤦♂️
Shema yisrael YaHuWaH Elohinu YaHuWaH Echad. Qul HUW Allah HUW Ahad. Huw=yhwh Allah=Elohinu (our Eloh) Huw=yhwh Ahad=Echad. Shema yisrael=Hear o israel. What they needed to hear? Our prophet explain it with Qul Qul=Tell them (let them hear) Prophet could not make it up as jews ceased pronouncing that name. Quran also has a word in refernce to God which is same as YHWH. Surah 17:23 you should worship none but IYYAHU IYYAHU=YHWH EliYAHU YeshaYAHU YAHUshua
It's ok not to believe in all the old testament the Christian doctrine can be established from the gospels and paul letters U went there because u know that ur argument for jesus condoning child marriage doesn't work
Okay according to who, your feelings and secularism, did you forget who revealed the old testament, your God aka jesus, or are you thr0wing your own god under the bus😂😂
No your destroying your own argument. IP has responded and buried you already you cherry picked ip to accuse ip of him cherry picking. your ignorance is killing me.
At the time of all other prophets when Jesus peace be upon him wasn't even mentioned fro example at the time of Moses peace be upon him, what was the way to the father and heaven, wasn't it each prophet was the only way at their time to the father, think for yourself
Yet you accept the teachings of a man who wasn’t alive for any of the events of first Temple period or second Temple period. The double standard of doubting the authenticity of OT manuscripts when you accept a book with zero connection to 400BC-33AD literature, archaeology, or theology just because “God said so”. Even atheists acknowledge the authenticity of events and writings of the OT like some of the genealogy of the Kings of Israel and Judah. There is direct archaeological evidence for Kings like Josiah and David. Theologically, you can make whatever argument you want. Historically, you cannot when I can hold the stone tablets with names of kings in my hands no faith required. So dismissing books like Ezra or Nehemiah may contradict archaeological evidence of the destruction of Israel and subsequent rebuilding after king Nebuchadnezzar. So I hope you are not denying the books totally.
Who told u there is no record of old testament at the time of christ. Septuagint and dead sea scrolls are before christ. Problem is that u think refute someone. But u dont, u make a one sided video and declare u told the truth
I bet nobody has idea what did you just try to say! Moreover I’m pretty positive that you do this just for money. There’s no way that someone would say stupidity like this
Wow a Muslim trying to force a written text on a Christians that was written after the Jesus 😮We believe Talmud is written before Christ but the Niddah was written after Christ Where can i find this verse in Dead Sea Scrolls?😂
@@jamesmcternen4608 oh look its my lowkey salty anti islam closet fan yapping in the comments section of an Islamic channel! Buyalabuyalabu? Is that u?
So they believe the Torah from Jewish people but reject the Talmud from Jewish people. How convenient
Real
its not even Talmud (Talmud is commentaries written by Jewish scholars)
its the Mishna which is the Oral Torah. Jewish people believe that God gave written Torah (5 books) as well as the oral Torah
@@kashifkhan-yr8wiSo, you admit that Christians selectively choose what to accept from Judaism. If they believe the Torah is divine, why not the Oral Torah (Mishna) which they claim is also divinely inspired? It seems like convenience, not logic, guides their beliefs.
@@admirberisha1591 Bro, I think he's a muslim.
+1 @@admirberisha1591
They keep contradicting themselves because they're not truly looking for the truth, they're just trying to win the argument.
Kinda like how Rumzi constantly makes excuses and just pretends to be confident? 🤣
Then make a debate video to rumzi itself @@Exor_.
@@Exor_.says the one that only resorts to insults
I see, because he is speaking out the truth so you just say he is making up 'excuses',those excuses he made up came from your source. 😂😂😂@@Exor_.
@@Exor_.prove him wrong then.
Man you make me love Islam more and more
Whats to love about islam? A prophet being a warlord? Terrorist? Pedophile? Moses chasing after stones who stole his clothes? And he beat that stone up for messing with the mighty prophet of Allah? A religion who has endless amounts on end with contradictions in the Quran? I could go through many of these wrongs as it continuesly debunk itself.
ua-cam.com/video/7B7hyQ0qzU4/v-deo.htmlsi=FAsHkdhxmCiXhDVz
Islam will send u to hell
My son
You are just destroying these lying preachers
Liars destroy themselves, Rumzi is just pointing it out 😂
He tries to act smug but he doesn’t make any sense the point the original response made was that we have no written records of anything in the Talmud prior to 300 AD. Then he asks why do we trust the Torah. In reality the Torah has written records 300 years PRIOR TO CHRIST, the Torah predates the Talmud almost 600 years and was quoted from extensively by Jesus, the new testament, and even early Church fathers
@@maazabbasi9174 I'm sorry for commenting negatively bro I thought you were a xtian
@@BuffAlethe Torah has been changed too many times for it to be a credible force
@@3am572 For sure! Can I get some scholars with that claim? Or are you just going to regurgitate the same claims as your imams?
Isn't that the guy who said it's embarrassing to read the bible?
😂
Yeah that's him 😂
How can these people function in daily life seriously
@@YungShoe Yeah i also wonder how.
Read
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 New International Version (NIV)
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives
You wanna read some Hadiths 😂
Continue the dawah brother !
@IsmailBinImranif that’s really the only thing you can say, then don’t bother saying anything at all
May Allah bless and reward you and all those involved for all your effort
Excellent response Rumzi
Allah is God
@@harleyb7880 you literally said god Is god
@@AbjectTestament.Allah doesnt mean god in arabic.
Stop listening to arab Christians.
And dont come back telling me Allah means the God cuz it also doesnt mean that
@@AbjectTestament.
Allah is God's name.
@@invaderopbr sure bud, keep telling yourself that
@@harleyb7880 The word Allah is not a name. There are 99 names of Allah and the word Allah isn't there so it's clearly not a name because if it is then we would have 100 names of Allah instead of 99 names of Allah. So clearly Allah isn't a name. Allah means God
They choose what the churches wanted them to believe
No the Talmud has never been thought of as scripture by any real Christian, the talmud dates 300 years after Christ. We believe the Torah and Old Testament are the words of God because it contains the passages of prophets like Moses, David, Noah, Abraham and so on. The Talmud was written as a set of laws for the jews at the time, similar to the US consistution was written mostly by Christian men. But we take neither as scripture. The torah predates the talmud 600 years. Our earliest manuscript dates to 300 BC before Christ.
@@BuffAleso basically you guys choose what you wanted to believe instead of believing in both the torah and the talmud 🤨
@@miftahuljannat3050 No because the talmud was never scripture, just like the United States Constitution is not scripture, it’s simply a set of laws for a society.
@@BuffAle yes and Jesus said to follow everything they say, he never said to only follow the religious book but follow everything they say. That includes the jewish oral laws 🤷♂️
@@miftahuljannat3050 No, Matthew 23:1-3: Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. Jesus explicitly points out that when the Pharisees sit on the seat of Moses people must follow, this is the condition set by Jesus. Jesus himself says when talking about the pharisees In Matthew 15 “Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition”. Jesus argues that the word of God and law of Moses is what the people should follow, not the talmud which came 300 years later. Jesus is not talking about the Jewish oral laws 🤦♂️
"Those whose house made of glass, shouldn't throw rock at other people"
The irony
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 New International Version (NIV)
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives
Alhamdulillah for Islam ☝️
This kid Michael using ChatGPT for His Answers...
Meanwhile Br Rumzi Uses his Brain.
MaashaAllaah, May Allaah Reward You Akhi, Ameen!! 💙🕋❤️
Lol Rumzi got destroyed 🤣
@@Exor_. How????
@@Exor_.Sure sure human worshipper 😂
@@Exor_.i agree,you can't beat idiots anyways 😅
@@burakcoskun1865 🤣So True, Akhi!
Absolutely wild how his actual counterargument for the problems in his own religious scripture was literally 'well it's all unverified anyways' this guys in the running to be the no 1 clowntianity grand priest 🤣
Right 😂😂. Like who’s gonna tell em?? 😂😂😂😂
Well believe or not the argument was that the Talmud is unverified. If you didn’t know Christians don’t follow the talmud which was written 300 years after Christ. We actually have manuscripts of the Old Testament dating to 300 years prior to Christ. So this guys response actually makes no sense. He says we don’t have any written records of the Torah prior to Jesus, which is simply a blatant lie. 😂
The Talmud is not taken as authoritative by any Christian, it’s a set of laws for Jewish life, it’s like saying why don’t Christians take the Consistution as scripture, it’s because even if the consistution was written by Christian men, we don’t follow it as written by divinely inspired words of God.
Well if Mr dawah didn't cherry pick the multiple arguments InspiringPhilosophy makes you wouldn't really think that.
@@randomdude5950 >the Christian texts have many contradictions
>pointing these out is now cherry picking
>only focusing on the parts that support your narrative and ignoring the rest is however somehow not cherry picking
Looks like we have a new frontrunner
That was never a good argument to begin with… and yet he posted it online… I guess he intentionally gave the spot to dawah brothers to rebuke him.
Brother, may Allah grant you jannah. Keep the work
Without the Oral Law you cannot observe the commandments in the Torah. For example, the commandment to keep the Sabbath holy:
*Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. [Exodus 20:8]*
When we search the Torah for specific laws regulating how to observe the Sabbath, we find only basic information. What constitutes "work" violating the Sabbath is not made clear. A man was literally stoned to death for collecting woods on Sabbath (Numbers 15:32-36).
Another example is the commandment on how to observe Yom Kippur:
*It is a sabbath of solemn rest for you, and you shall afflict your souls. It is a statute forever. [Leviticus 16:31]*
What does even mean when it says "afflict your souls?" Again it is not made clear in the Torah but in the Oral Law it is understood to be fasting which is later confirmed in the Prophetic books such as Isaiah:
*"Why have we fasted, and You did not see; we have afflicted our soul and You do not know?" Behold, on the day of your fast you pursue business, and from all your debtors you exact payment. [Isaiah 58:3]*
So the Torah alone is not sufficient for daily Jewish life. What is needed is a legal commentary to accompany the Torah.
Jews believe this can be found in the Talmud, an oral tradition believed to have originated from Moses and passed down by Rabbis over the centuries.
that is hypocrisy, chosing and picking what they want
"I will steal what i want from your books but will not take other books so we can criticize Religion"
IP probably
Sorry but no, there is no picking and choosing the fact is that the Talmud simply did not exist at the time of the writings of Scripture. Our earliest manuscript of the Old Testament dates 300 BC while the Talmud dates 300 AD that’s 600 years of difference. Christians never had access to these jewish laws and were never considered scripture because they were laws of men and not revealed by God. That’s like asking why don’t Christians have the US constitution as scripture.
@@BuffAle
idk what you're yapping about
@@bossyt6980 Sorry if you can’t understand, it must take a lot of brain power to understand the lies you’re being feed 🤪🤪🤪
@@BuffAle blud the Mishna was at the time of Ezra not after Jesus and if your criteria is the manus then why you don't reject the new testament because the earliest complete manu is 350 years after Jesus?
And regardless of when it was written Jesus still gave them authority to make the law in the Bible
Subhan Allah. They take what fit them and reject what does not fit the ever changing Bible
You bodied him akhi 😂
If u try to find the truth sincerely (+without pride and ignorance)
U will find islam
Dude I love you, you are just amazing keep it up ❤
Please Ramzy talk about the atrocities that are happening in Sudan!
Rumzy please debate this guy and put him to rest
Rumzi is not a debater.
Whats a Rumzi?
@@TheTruth-hc7ww So you have 100+ comments here and yet you don't know who is rumzi?
@@BYardleyOfficial
Nothing gets past muslims at all
@@TheTruth-hc7ww This is an Islamic channel what do you expect?
المثناة ليست من الوحي، بل مازيد عليه انظر الحديث
"So it didn't reach it's final form until the 3rd century" you mean like your trinity needing between 300 to 400 years to become established and true reaching it's final form😂
"The teachings of the mishna were not being written down until 70ad, so we don't know how old and reliable each passage is" hmm reminds me of something that starts with New and ends with testament and I also wonder when the bible took it's final form😂and as brother Rumzi said, why deny the mishna and not the old testament if you want to go by your logic
Each "answer" is just an argument against them
Rebecca's age from the bible and scholars:
It doesn't have to be mentioned by number (Although your core religion concept the trinity isn't mentioned my name or concept in the bible yet you for some reason believe it) there's things called exegesis, history, context, logical conclusion, math, tradition, commentaries and scholarly works.
According to Rabbis in medieval history in example Rabbi Rashi one of the most respected Rabbis, she was no older than three 3-years-old. The Rabbis deduced this age number for Rebecca, from the Bible itself. A second early source, puts her age at 10. So at least between 3 and 10 years old so any christian or jew using the argum-ent of Aisha RA is igno-rant.
To find Rebecca’s age of marriage, we can look at the bible specifically Genesis, God had promised Sarah will bear a child, and he will be named Isaac:
Genesis 17:17: "Will Sarah bear a child at the agd of ninety?”
Genesis 17:21: "But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom sarah will bear to you by this time next year".
The above text tells us that Sarah was around 90 or 91-years-old when she gave birth to Isaac.
Sarah di-ed at the age of 127, looking at Genesis 23:1-2:
"Sarah lived to be a hundred and twenty-seven years old. She di-ed at Kiriath Arba (that is, Hebron) in the land of Canaan, and Abraham went to mo-urn for Sarah and to w-eep over her.”
Since Sarah gave birth to Isaac at 90 (or 91), Isaac would have been around 36 (or 37) when his mother had di-ed.
This would mean that Isaac was 36 or 37-years-old when his father tried to sacr-ifice him on Mount Moria in Genesis 22
This fact that Isaac was sacr-ificed in his 30s is well attested by nearly all ancient sources and Rabbis in example Rabbi Shim’on (2nd Century): "Issac was already thirty seven years old" and Rabbi Rashbam (1085 - 1158 AD): "Yitzchok (Issac) was at least 37 years olf before Avraham heard about the birth of Rivkah (Rebecca)" the same answer that he was either 36 or 37 have been said by/in Rabbi Abraham Cohen De Herrera (1570 - 1635 AD), Targum Jonathan on Genesis 22:1 and even by Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges "Therefore Issac must then have been thirty seven years old", Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible "It appears probable that he was more: there were about thirty seven years from his birth to the d-eath of Sarah; so that it is not unlikely", Gospel scholar David J. Ridges: "Issac would have been 37 at the time of her dea-th." and Professor Jules Gleicher: "This would make Isaac thirty seven at her de-ath…"
This proves that Rebecca was born when Isaac was in his late 30s (37), just before the de-ath of Sarah. Five verses down after Abraham and Isaac’s in-cident of sacr-ifice, we are told Rebecca was born:
“20 Some time later Abraham was told, “Milkah is also a mother; she has borne sons to your brother Nahor: 21 Uz the firstborn, Buz his brother, Kemuel (the father of Aram), 22 Kesed, Hazo, Pildash, Jidlaph and Bethuel.” 23 Bethuel became the father of Rebekah. Milkah bore these eight sons to Abraham’s brother Nahor. 24 His co-ncubi-ne, whose name was Reumah, also had sons: Tebah, Gaham, Tahash and Maakah.” - Genesis 22:20-24 (NIV)
Straight after the birth of Rebecca we find out the de-ath of Sarah, when she was 127 years old in Genesis 23:1-2
So the significance of Isaac’s age at the time of his sacr-ifice is that according to the Bible, Isaac was 37-years-old when he went up on Mount Moriah with his father. Rebecca was born straight after Isaac and Abraham, came down from the Mount Moriah and they went to Beersheba. Isaac was married to Rebecca when he was 40-years-old (Genesis 25:20).
Genesis 25:20 "Isaac was forty years old when he married Rebekah daughter of Bethuel the Aramean of Paddan Aram." Since that is the case, this would mean Rebecca, was married off when she was 3 (or 4) years old. This would render Rabbi Rashi’s statement and others of Rebecca being 3-years-old when married to Isaac, as true when we look at Genesis account closely.
Rabbi Tobiah Ben Eliezer (1050 - 1108 AD) also confirms that she was 3-years-old when she was married to Isaac:
“Isaac was thirty-seven-years old at his binding… When Abraham returned from Mount Moriah, at that very moment Sarah di-ed, and Isaac was then thirty-seven; and at that very time Abraham was told of Rebekah’s birth; Thus we find that Rebecca was three years old when she married Issac.” (Pesikta Zutrata (Lekah Tov), Gen. 24., Midrashic commentary on the Pentateuch, by Rabbi Tobiah Ben Eliezer)
"But it says woman!"
No your later translations changing it to woman when it's girl isn't an argument for you but against you:
Gensis 24:15-16:
15Before he had finished speaking, behold, Rebekah who was born to Bethuel the son of Milcah, the wife of Abraham’s brother Nahor, came out with her jar on her shoulder. 16((The girl)) was very beautiful, a v1rgin, and no man had had relations with her; and she went down to the spring and filled her jar and came up."
"But she carried jars of waters!" Yes I'm familiar with all your l0usy excuses, people back then were stronger and more mature than people today, you can't use presentism as an argument
(Part 1)
This rebuttle is aga'inst any muslim(yes uneducated ones rather than research assume the wo'rst of their own prophet), jew, christian or athiest or anyone not knowing the reality of the world that want to use the argument of Aisha:
To show people what kind of edged sword christians and jews are trying to use not knowing the bible and hindus mot knowing their scriptute and not knowing science/history as well as if athiest den'ying science and nonetheless athiests have no base to judge someone as athiests morality is subjective depending on each persons feelings and whi'ms so they can't objectively say something is moral or not ergo right or wro'ng and to show that proper research is needed:
•For those that don't get it yes pe'do actions are wro'ng and Islam con'dems them and so do I that's why it's not allowed with ch'ild'ren but says readiness in Islam of when someone becomes an adult, it should be clear from my answers but some have diffic'ulty putting 2 and 2 together.
And what people don't understand that one country/group/individual calling someone a p'edo for example for marrying at 14 not 15 the next country/group/individual will the call the first a pe'do for marrying at 15 not 16 that's why it's a problem to follow subjective whims of morality and we should follow objectively what's right and wron'g not an age but readiness as Islam says ergo as God says.
•For Hindus:
In Skanda Purana, it is clearly mentioned that Sita was 6 years old when he married her.
Original Text: The bow of Isvara that was kept in the abode of Janaka, was bro'ken. In his fifteenth year, O king, Rama married the six year old beautiful daughter of the king of Mithila, Sita who was not bo'rn of a wo'mb. On getting Sita, Raghava became contented and happy
Reference: Skanda Purana>> Book 3: Brahma Khanda>> Section 2: Dharmaranya Khanda>> Chapter 30: Rama’s life>> Verse 8-9(>> Page 156)
•For Christians and Jews:
According to the catholic encyclopedia:
"From the age at which Hebrew maidens became marriageable, it is possible that Mary gave birth to her Son when she was about thirteen or fourteen years of age." So is the Bible God ergo Jesus a Pe'do... So why was it allowed and not declared by God from before by any prophet that the age of marriage and giving chil'dr'en is 18...
And others believe she was 12 when she gave birth to Jesus.
And according to some apocryphal accounts state that at the time of her betrothal to Joseph, Mary was 12-14 years old. And according to ancient Jewish custom, Mary could have been betrothed at about 12. So what does that make Mary and what does that make Joseph and does that make the God of the bible...
And search:
"Girls at the age of 3 were fo'rc'ed into s'e'x in both the Talmud and the Bible by answering christianity"
While Islam doesn't have this and Islam states readiness...
Note: We as muslims don't believe many of the things the bible say the prophets did as that don't befit their good character examples are we don't believe what the bible says moses PBUH did in numbers 31: 17-18 nor do we believe God would order him to do that as that doesn't befit God.
So how can you objectively prove Islam is wro'ng in the marriage of Aisha when it states readiness backed by science and looking at history of how the life of Aisha in how she good was treated by the Prophet PBHU and still is treated good by muslims around the world in looked at with high regards and how can you have double standards when christians beliefs and bible are the same and even wor'se.
•Islam does not allow that act with chil'dre'n which is backed by the Quran and hadith.
Quran verses (4:25)(24:59)(4:6)
1)Chil'dr'en reaching "the age of marriage" in Noble Verse 4:6.
2)Female-c'hildr'en becoming "fataaya" (young ladies) become ready to be "wed" (4:25).
3)"atfaal" اطفال (babies and young chi'ldr'en) are not allowed to get married (4:25, 24:59).
For more info on these verses and this topic search:What is the minimum age for marriage in the Holy Quran? By answering christianity
•There's no hadiths that shows he did it before pub**ty the only hadiths present actually shows other*ise.
Sahih al-Bukhari 5134
Narrated `Aisha:
that the Prophet (ﷺ) marri*d her when she was six years old and he consu**ated his marriage when she was nine years old.
There a difference between just marriage and actually doing something:
Why did he marry her at 6 and wait 3 years for her to become an adult at 9 and not do it instantly if he doesn't ca're about morality and her wellbeing.
Narrated AISHA: (the wife of the Prophet) I had seen my parents following Islam since I attained the age of PU'BER'TY. Not a day passed but the Prophet visited us, both in the mornings and evenings.”
Sahih al-Bukhari volume 1, Book 8, Hadith 465
Some cri'ti'cs have cast doubt on the Hadith where it mentions that Aisha hit “pub'erty” and cla'im that the translation that was made by the renowned scholar Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan is unreliable. As such we looked at Arabic-English Dictionaries on the word a’qal. The la'te professor Hans Wehr (1909 - 1981) who studied at the University of Munster published a book, “A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic”. He comments on the word “A’qal”:
“… a’qal more reasonable; brighter, smarter, more intelligent | … a’qal al’umr the most reasonable time of life, the years of reason and MAT'UR'ITY.”
Hans Wehr A Dictionary of Modern written Arabic [Edited by John Milton - Spoken Language Services, Inc. 1976], page 737
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan’s rendering of “pub'erty” in the first report is line with Professor Hans Wehr’s understanding of the Arabic language.
The narrations presented prove that Aisha had already h'it pub'erty before the con'summa'tion of the marriage taken place.
•Those that call it "Ra'pe" When she con'sen'ted🤦🏻 and did you know Aisha was to be married to someone else before Muhammed PBUH. And if she was an adult then where's the problem who are to decide the age when people should marry some say 12, some 15, some 14, some 18 when Islam says readiness not an age.
•Those that say his ene'mies didn't use it against him because it was normal then, yes it was and you have no way objectively to say it's wro'ng to marry an a proper adult then or now after 1400 you can't say it's wrong and people for maybe 1300 years didn't use it agai'nst him because marrying adults is no probl'em until this subjective argument that is baseless.
(Part 2)
Plus if he was int'o chi'ld'ren then why only Aisha and not many more, try to use logic.
•And those that use the argume'nt that 10 year olds can't consent or be mentally aware then go look through history where 10 year olds and such ruled empires so people from young age are able to be ready for marriage when they're able to rule empires and life expectency was not as today so people needed to marry young or the human race would have gone ext'inct. Plus you need to prove it objectively why it's wro'ng you can't say it's wron'g because you feel it's wrong that's not how things work and science and what happened between them show there's nothing wron'g and as I told you before but just want to go in circle and here it is again:
If you want to ar'gue with science that females hit pub'er'ty at different ages then you're delusi*nal, Islam does not f*rce a woman to marry but she needs to consent and even if her guardians when she was young promised a woman to someone later, when she becomes an adult she can nulify the marriage, and she needs to be physically, mentally and psychologically ready on the other hand in france, britain, japan and america it states a specific age like britian stated a hundred such years ago that the age of marriage was 6 to 7 and Mary in christian beliefs at 12 married a man in his 90s and another girl rebecca who married at 3 to Issac whos 40s and what moses in the bible said to his men in numbers 31:17-18 to little girls 3 years old (We as muslims don't believe this) all without talking about readiness why the double stand*rds not going agai*st them and just Islam while Islam states readiness scientifically:
According to Mass General Birgham Mass General for Chil'dre'n and Massachusetts General Hospital, Pe'diatr'ic En'docri'nolo'gy Center:
"Normal p'ub'erty is when c'hi'ldr'en’s bodies start to grow and develop into young (((adult))) bodies. Girls usually start to go through p'ub'ert'y between the ages of 8-13 years."
According to healtline:
"What's the chi'ldbear'ing age? Technically, women can get pre'gna'nt and bear chil'dr''en from pube'rty"
According to Cleveland clinic:
"P'ube'rty is the time in your child’s life when they transition from a child to an (((adult))). Special hormones are produced and released that trig''ger the signs of pu''be''rty. Your child will go through the five stages of pu''ber''ty. By the end of the process, they’ll have reached s'ex'ual m'atur'ity."
"Girls generally begin pu''b'erty about two years earlier than boys. Pu'b'e'rty for girls usually starts between the ages of 8 and 13. However, Black and Hispanic girls tend to start p'ub'ert'y earlier than white girls (age 7½ instead of 8)."
According to Saintlukeskc:
"Once it begins, it lasts about 2 to 5 years. But every c'h'ild is different. And there's a wide range of what's normal. Your ch'ild' may begin p'uber'ty a little earlier or later and finish sooner or later than their friends."
(Part 3)
And Aisha was congratulated for her marriage and she is considered one of the best women and scholars of Islam and the marriage was done with her parents present ergo consent from them as well as hers.
•People around the world before this subjective morality age used to marry young and start families even work not just in Islam but asia, africa, europe, ... while people at this age at their 50s can't even afford a car while the former at 10 would rule empires so stop comparing people for 1400 years ago to the people of this age and Islam whether then or now states readiness not an age number.
•I'm not going to respond to going in circles yes he married her a 6 which I addressed, I already talked and re'futed anyones cla'im about Aisha how about people amount to 0.1 percent of what she did in her life for herself, others and religion and get 0.0001 of the respect she has then come be her white knight.
(Part 4.1)
And the problem with having a minimun age limit is that someone as I explained can be not ready but the government says they are and when they marry not ready mentally and psychologically and cause disf'unctio'nal families in societies then what, and if they are mentally ready but not physically and the person has problems because of having se'x when their bodies can't handle it then what a trip to the hospital and maybe they can't have children ever again then what oh sorry we thought you're ready... And if someone actually is ready to marry, to own a land, ect as we see today young entrepeneurs and the government says no you're too young then they're being ro'bbe'd of their rights.
(Part 4.2)
And to add:
Here is a classical opinion which for'bids the consu'm'attion of prepu'besce'nt marriages:
“Ibn Taymiyyah narrated from Ibn Shubrumah that he said: It is not permissible to arrange a marriage for a young girl who has not reached the age of pu'berty, because if we say that that is subject to her consent, her consent does not count (because she is too young to make such decisions), and when she does reach the age of pub'erty we believe that she should not be f'orce'd into a marriage. Ibn Taymiyyah said: This view is the correct one, that the father should not arrange a marriage for his daughter until she reaches the age of pub'erty, and when she reaches the age of pube'rty he should not arrange a marriage unless she gives her consent.” (Al-Sharh al-Mumti‘, volume 12, page 57 - 59)
And even scholars that allow marriage before pub'erty say that they need to be compatible and that she isn't allowed to live with the husband before pub'erty even Aisha herself didn't live with the Prophet PBUH before she became ready so what of other muslims, she has to consent ergo she can nuli'fy the marriage before even entering it when she does hit pube'rty and they aren't allowed to cons'umate before she is ready as even if she hits pub'erty but her body can't handle it then consu'mation isn't allowed until she is able so what ch'ild marr'iage in this the way people try to portray it in Islam with all these requirements and restri'ctions.
(Part 4.3)
وَٱلَّـٰۤـِٔی یَىِٕسۡنَ مِنَ ٱلۡمَحِیضِ مِن نِّسَاۤىِٕكُمۡ إِنِ ٱرۡتَبۡتُمۡ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلَـٰثَةُ أَشۡهُرࣲ وَٱلَّـٰۤـِٔی لَمۡ یَحِضۡنَۚ وَأُو۟لَـٰتُ ٱلۡأَحۡمَالِ أَجَلُهُنَّ أَن یَضَعۡنَ حَمۡلَهُنَّۚ وَمَن یَتَّقِ ٱللَّهَ یَجۡعَل لَّهُۥ مِنۡ أَمۡرِهِۦ یُسۡرࣰا
[سُورَةُ الطَّلَاقِ: ٤]
Notice the clear wording نسائكم women for those that want to reference this verse
(Part 4.4)
The Maliki Jurist Ibn Battal said:
“It is not perm'itted for her husbands to consu'mmate the marriage except if she is capable the se'x'ual aff'airs and can affo'rd men’s (se'xu'al de'sire).
The sta'te of each woman differs (from one to another) in this matter according to their capability and endurance.”
Ibn Battal, Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 7, pp. 172-173
And what people need to realize that this Aisha RA cla-im is new ergo maybe 100 or so years ago so if Islam did in fact allow chi-ld se--x and everyone before didn't m-ind then Islam didn't need to go aga-inst it nor did the islamic scholars need to go agai-nst it as there wouldn't be the need to do so and whos message is Islam put 2 and 2 together the Prophet Muhammed PBUH so logically he's agai-nst it and Allah is agai-nst it.
So this refu'tes the Myth that Islam permits se'xu'al int'ercou'rse with pre'pube'scent girls.
My guy you're very intelligent keep up the good work and expose thede liars
You need to get out more
@@TheTruth-hc7wwUmm
sighs these people are so desperate.
bro really went for the ' no use refuting me, cause im unreliable' move
Why does Michael believe in the New Testament books?
He refuted himself.
Why do you believe in the Talmud? YOU refuted yourself 🤣
“New covenant” or something
@@Exor_. But don't You guys Love it? So we use your own scripture against you.
Such as using Veda or Bible to prove ISLAAM!
@@Exor_.We don't believe in the Talmud, we use it against you just like when you use the Qur'an against us, so basically you leave the Qur'an alone then we will leave your Talmud.
@@BYardleyOfficial My Talmud? I DON'T believe in the Talmud at all! It's no better than the Quran. Probably worse 🤣
Christianity ❌
Conviency ✔️
Debate him already
Quit whining already
Rumzi won't debate, he just hides behind his scripted "refutations" and echo chamber 🤣
@@Exor_. "Scripted refutations" same as the dude at the beginning of the short the difference is that rumzis refutations r actually right 😂
@@Exor_. Oh really? How did He refute the arguments then???
@@burakcoskun1865 actually inspiring philosophy has debated many people including Muslims. If Rumzi thinks hes right he should debate him. It’s easy to refute strawmen when no one is there to call them out
In Algeria we Don't say : he got him
We say : bud got him in unhealed wound
He talks about reliable yet only relies on the anonymous authors of the Bible... XDDD
Alhamdulillah
rumzi stop teasing us just go ahead and debate him live😂
That same guy said it's embarrassing to read bible
@@Ichigo_edits Fr Lol
Classic xtian move
Hmm....so when the koran alludes to and repeats the same biblical stories from the Torah .....they are true ????😊😅😊😅😮😅😅😊
@@merriotChardyes because the Quran is preserved and affirms them. But name me some of those stories you're talking about
Christianity and contradictions go hand in hand
Like Islam and ….ism 🤭🤯
@@TheTruth-hc7ww show me one contradiction, I leave islam
@@Rizvi-2
Was iBlis a Jinn or an Angel in Islam?
@@TheTruth-hc7ww jin
@@mudassirahmad7862
Who did alllah tell to Prostrate to Adam?
First
Congrats
It's the Special Pleading Fallacy.
They also have no problem accepting the New Testament
which has
largely unknown authors,
no original texts
and late and sparse 'early' manuscripts.
“‘How can you say, “We are wise,
for we have the law of the Lord,”
when actually the lying pen of the scribes
has handled it falsely?
Jeremiah 8:8
Another home run! This brother just keeps knocking them out of the park 😅
Amazing how your easily amazed 😂
Their hearts are closed
This is actually also a criticism of hadith rejectors
You remind me of a young Steve Guttenberg
When he had finished the bath, he moved towards his clothes so as to take them, but the stone took his clothes and fled; Moses picked up his stick and ran after the stone saying, 'O stone! Give me my garment!'
lol that preacher indirectly destroy his bible with that counter argument.....and he still not perceive it....double lol
peak whataboutism
I'm a Christian, but I love this response given even though I'm obviously going to disagree with the conclusion. I think both parties made good points that lead to a fascinating conversation. Here's why I would still say IP is right on this one. This content creator is correct in that the earliest written portion of the Torah we have is from 600 BC (Ketef Hinnom scrolls). Which is about 600 years after Moses (approximately 1,200 BC). This 600 years does have to be accounted for, but here's how Christians believe it is accounted for. 1.) There are many references in the oldest Jewish scriptures that mention the revelations from God were immediately written down (The Torah has Moses with written content, the book of Joshua says Joshua wrote down things immediately and added it to the book of the law (Moses' orignaly writing), and in 1st Samuel his writings are immediately written down and stored properly. So while it's true there is no physical manuscript recovered before 600 BC, Christians don't believe that the majority of the Torah and early books of the old testament had an oral tradition that was relied on without the assistance of some level of written documentation. There's also basically no written documents that ever get recovered from that long ago unless under perfect conditions. So I would never expect to find a biblical manuscipt that old but we do still belive a written tradition was relied on until the books came into their final form. That would be the Christian's case for an evolving written tradition over time through the exile. 2.) Regardless of whether you agree with my first point or not, it wouldn't change this second point which is a less subjective. This creator acts as if the Mishna is on par with the Torah or the previously inspired scripture according to the Jews. It's pretty simple to show that no one at that time or any time viewed the Mishna as inspired scripture. The purpose of the Mishna was similar to what you see in scholarship where different specialists publish and critique each other's work to see which opinions win out. The purpose of the Mishna was to help interpret the Torah correctly and how to best fill in the gaps of previous scripture. Ex. Scripture says not to work on the Sabbath. Rabbis then would debate over time to decide what qualifies as work and what doesn't so that they can follow the law of God as accurately as possible. So I'm not sure why this creator is holding the Mishna up against what Jews believe are inspired old testament scriptures. This is comparing Apples to Oranges. I love this response from the creator. Great video and great conversation starter!
Now this is a great response coming from a Muslim, saying he made a great point but made a few problems, unlike David Wood who would try to misinterpret things and say everything was wrong with the worst logic appreciate u my guy have a nice day!
@user-eg4et4wk8z I appreciate it. You have a great day as well!
And you didn’t even mention how they believe in the New Testament, which oldest manuscript is in Greek, 300 years after the time of Isa (as).
Christians are something else 😅
❤❤❤
Don't forget the New Testament which didn't exist Until 300 years after Jesus
Hell, the Oldest Manuscript of the Torah is 900 years after Moses. I would love to see what spin they'd put on that.
A reaction of a reaction of a reaction video😅
The question isn’t the authenticity of the Mishnah, the Mishnah probably said that. The question is when it was actually written. We have ways of estimating the date of the Gospels, the Mishnah likely wasn’t written until after Jeeus, so Jesus couldn’t have been referring to it. Again, no one is denying the Mishnah said that, the question is whether or not Jesus was actually referring to the Mishnah, and he likely wasn’t. Also, Jesus never said that the Mishnah should be upheld, just the Torah. The Mishnah is a debate on what the Torah could mean, not an authoritative text, and Jesus never affirmed it
They keep waffling!!
bro im starting to feel bad for christians they always lose lol
Because Jesus confirmed the Torah and not the Mishnah
Confirmed torah while he himself was contradicting it 👍
BUT - the law was continuouslypreserved in WRITING!
When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me; ... And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them:
*Deuteronomy 17:14-19*
And when Jesus quoted scripture in the synagogue, it was WRITTEN DOWN
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
*Luke 24:44-46*
I guess “That Hadith Is Weak” doesn’t ring a bell🤷
So? Quran is perfect Hadith arent that's common knowledge
@@Rizvi-2
Sorry man That response was Daif; I reject it
Also the new testament should be thrown under the bus because we dont know how reliable the new testament is since it's compiled after at least 300Ad. How convenient
Quran came from a voice sounding like ringing bell😂😂😂😂… definitely reliable
Eng-Subtitles would be perfect for nonenglish speakers like me, i cant understand most of the speech. Vesselam
you can turn the subtitle on, the second from the bottom there's a three dots, click the "captions
they follow only what desire want
Christians don't accept that the Mishnah is that old because the book is explicitly the sayings of Jewish sages who lived after ***70 AD.*** "450 BC" lmao
Brother remove the music in his video
Israhellis & lies cannot be separated....
Please remove the music
Their arguments get stupider as the days pass smh.
Not surprised, christians believes Jesus and the father are one as God but they reject Jesus when he said the only true God is the father 😂
What is the Mishna and what is it's relevance?
It's honestly simple, if Jesus came affirming the Torah and zabur present during he's we don't need anything before that, even though we do have and agrees perfectly. Your argument focuses on the fact that Christianity arose from Judaism, while this is true, we only have to obey what Jesus said, he said we can respect the rabi but we must not act like them. There is really no need for Jewish texts outside the old Testament
So basically, they're trying to gain as much benefit as possible on their side only but when it comes to Jewish side, they all like, nah you're on your own. Quite convenient indeed
This what happen to you when you believe in a circular reasoning faith with contradictory concepts that lack basic authenticity roles
Again, read a book. The Dead Sea scrolls date back 2,300 years. This would put them right after Malachi. The Septuagint was put together in 295 BC. That means the same writings used for the scrolls were the same as what those who wrote the Septuagint used.
These were not of oral tradition.
Thusly, you are 0-460!
You keep cooking this clown it’s great. 🍿
and also, if the old Testament was to have Joseph in it, I doubt it would be from the time of Moses 🙉
Because it's clear that if it doesn't come 600 yrs after the fact, Muslims can not accept it
so convenient making these videos with no pressure testing.
Can someone explain Sahih Al-Bukhari 6612 to me?
Idk about the Christian guy in this video. But asking us to follow a tradition that insults Jesus and don’t recognise him as the Messiah makes zero sense.
lets see if he's going to reply to this
😮
What is the point of following the mishnah? We as Christians don't need documents talking about the messiah codified 2 centuries after he's ascension, you bringing up the mishnah, a book about the old Testament which comes after the whole point of the book to begin with is like feeding a hungry man bread after he is dead🤦♂️
Now this guy will disappear for the next 6 months... Alhamdulillah for our Dawah brothers.
Shema yisrael
YaHuWaH Elohinu YaHuWaH Echad.
Qul HUW Allah HUW Ahad.
Huw=yhwh
Allah=Elohinu (our Eloh)
Huw=yhwh
Ahad=Echad.
Shema yisrael=Hear o israel.
What they needed to hear? Our prophet explain it with Qul
Qul=Tell them (let them hear)
Prophet could not make it up as jews ceased pronouncing that name.
Quran also has a word in refernce to God which is same as YHWH.
Surah 17:23 you should worship none but IYYAHU
IYYAHU=YHWH
EliYAHU
YeshaYAHU
YAHUshua
I love it. That Christian thinks he a know it all. And all he has been doing is miss leading people. With no foundational proof
It's ok not to believe in all the old testament the Christian doctrine can be established from the gospels and paul letters
U went there because u know that ur argument for jesus condoning child marriage doesn't work
It does because according to your belief jesus is god, soo.....
Okay according to who, your feelings and secularism, did you forget who revealed the old testament, your God aka jesus, or are you thr0wing your own god under the bus😂😂
@@john832-w1e Jesus condoning child marriage by not banning it
No your destroying your own argument. IP has responded and buried you already you cherry picked ip to accuse ip of him cherry picking. your ignorance is killing me.
Bro debunked the tora 😂
Alllah must be proud😂
@@TheTruth-hc7ww ? What do you mean 🧐
@@TheTruth-hc7ww and by the way the bible can be debunked easily
@@LogicalLadaGaming
Alllah must be proud that his books were corrupted and debunked 🤭
@@LogicalLadaGaming
Quran is even easier to debunk; it has no beginning middle or end; everything comes from outside this book
Old man with wheelchair♿
You guy should debate instead of making video responses
Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father.
Jesus Christ (pbuh) in his time was the only way to Allah (swt)
@@BYardleyOfficial The truth doesn't change.
At the time of all other prophets when Jesus peace be upon him wasn't even mentioned fro example at the time of Moses peace be upon him, what was the way to the father and heaven, wasn't it each prophet was the only way at their time to the father, think for yourself
@@OAW-LetusDiscuss. The Prophets were never the way to heaven. It was always Jesus.
@@zSwS I don't care for preaching, answer the question properly, so did everyone before jesus just go to h3ll by your logic
Christian looks very sheepish.
Don't talk to a screen,talk to someone like sam shamoun or Christian Prince then we will see how convenient you are😊
Keep copin .
Why don't you refute him than do you need a wife beater that is calling his friends heretics to help you?
Yet you accept the teachings of a man who wasn’t alive for any of the events of first Temple period or second Temple period. The double standard of doubting the authenticity of OT manuscripts when you accept a book with zero connection to 400BC-33AD literature, archaeology, or theology just because “God said so”. Even atheists acknowledge the authenticity of events and writings of the OT like some of the genealogy of the Kings of Israel and Judah. There is direct archaeological evidence for Kings like Josiah and David. Theologically, you can make whatever argument you want. Historically, you cannot when I can hold the stone tablets with names of kings in my hands no faith required. So dismissing books like Ezra or Nehemiah may contradict archaeological evidence of the destruction of Israel and subsequent rebuilding after king Nebuchadnezzar. So I hope you are not denying the books totally.
Who told u there is no record of old testament at the time of christ. Septuagint and dead sea scrolls are before christ.
Problem is that u think refute someone. But u dont, u make a one sided video and declare u told the truth
I bet nobody has idea what did you just try to say! Moreover I’m pretty positive that you do this just for money. There’s no way that someone would say stupidity like this
Wow a Muslim trying to force a written text on a Christians that was written after the Jesus 😮We believe Talmud is written before Christ but the Niddah was written after Christ
Where can i find this verse in Dead Sea Scrolls?😂
Oh look! Its my two favorite shameless chop-artists attempting to one-up each other! Please keep this exchange going! Orobourus? Is that you?!?!
@@jamesmcternen4608 oh look its my lowkey salty anti islam closet fan yapping in the comments section of an Islamic channel! Buyalabuyalabu? Is that u?
Inspiring philosophy aint even christian..it became quite evident when he was debating daniel...dude is confused
Keep refuting them bro
No he didn't refute them he cherry picked IP. iP has already destroyed this Guy and he responded to this one too you Muslims are liars.
@@Wildxgiyu no he hasnt. what is wrong with this responds?