Haha agree

He might be worshiping the spaghetti god or something

imagine they must have imagined the peaks of human knowledge and they see flying spaghettis monster and omnipotent pizza. Atheist's are just hungry.

@@person81045 Why not? If god is almighty, he can be a pizza. Illogical? Heh, only because allmight is illogical, that's a reductio ad absurdum

@eadgonly Okay, so let's not limit the pizza. Have a "limitless pizza", how does that disapprove God being all knowing?

@Moneyxl00 you're a moron, the point is there is 0 evidence that god has any of these omni properties

Yeah you should have unlimited pizza for All next time

“For God So loved The Criminals That He Gave His only Son, that whoever believes in him should Not Perish But have Eternal Life.........J o h n..... 3 : 1 6... Congratulations Criminals 🚨👊🏻 🔫 💣 🔪 🗡Just Believe & Continue to commit crimes. Source : The Holy SaTaNiC Bible. 👿

@@thetruthwithproof8802 you are misquoting the Bible. Would you love a christian misquoting our qur'an? No? Then do not do that with other faith because this is disrespectful.

@@thetruthwithproof8802 maybe pick your battles, since there's nobody mocking Islam in this thread i think. Go over to Farid Responds there's a lot of mocking over there. Peace.

@@Diamondraw4Real Idiot

@@patrickcarter8762 Idiot you lot are the only ones always misquoting..What does Jesus died for your sins mean ?

@Valeek Rafeeh Hello insecure indian. How are you today? You said in countries like Pakistan say they are Muslims but are Hindus, do you hav any proof for that? Of course not. You just like to spread your pathetic mindset to the world. I mean you get it from your media. Anyways, enjoy your 3rd class country :) and make sure you have proof of your citizenship :) .

@AH03 true

i just watched this video about magnet and is realted to this type of question in science check this out kzfaq.info/get/bejne/g7VgpZxklbnSj2w.html

@Valeek Rafeeh havoc happening sadly anyway no matter what ppl believe. Wish it weren't so.

@Valeek Rafeeh Muslims aren't Hindus tho.

@Benton Wisemore praised not worshiped. unlike ur trinity

There's a saying in old Arabic that is remotely translated as "nearly everyone is overly satisfied with their take/understanding of their own history". Of course both of your arguments are biased, but truth be told, Borsalino isn't blinded by hatred.

@Benton Wisemore kid.. all your saying is fake shit from your dumb brain. Funny how you didn't provide any information ot reference. Lmaoooo

@Benton Wisemore you don't know what are you talking about? All these claims are already discussed in the park. Are you new?

Benton Wisemore Where do you get your knowledge about the Quran from? The adrenal glands sit on the top of the kidneys produce sex hormones and the verse about the sun is clearly about a geographical location,you only need to get your head out of your asshole and read the verses after the one you referenced.next.btw the light of the sun is 400-000 times brighter than the moon but your little Jesus didn’t know the difference. You have my permission to include some of these verses to make the Bible look like it’s from the creator. “Allah is He, who created the sun, the moon, and the stars (all) governed by laws under His commandment.” (7:54) - [ ] “And He subjected the sun and the moon (to His law); each one runs its course for a term appointed.” (13:2), (31:29), (35:13), and (39:5) - [ ] “God is the One Who created seven heavens and of the earth a similar number. The command descends upon them so that you know that God has power over all things and comprehends all things in His knowledge.” (65:12) “And made the moon a light in their midst and made the sun as a (Glorious) lamp.” (71:16)h - [x] “It is He who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon, all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its orbit.” (21:33) Blessed is He who has placed in the sky great stars and placed therein a[ burning ]lamp and a luminous moon.025-061. “It is not allowable for sun to reach the moon ,nor does the night overtake the day ,but each in an orbit ,is swimming.036.040 . - [ ] “Consider those (stars) that rise only to set. And move (in their orbits) with steady motion. And float (through space) with floating serene. And yet overtake (one another) with swift overtaking. And thus fulfil the (Creator’s) behest!” (79:1-5) 055:005:the sun and the moon [move] by precise calculation. 055.007:And the heaven He raised and imposed the balance. Sahih international: 051-007 By the heaven containing pathways. 081 ,15 Sahih international : so I swear by the retreating stars - 081.016 : Sahih international : those that run their courses and disappear . “Then He turned to the sky when it had been smoke and said to it and to the earth, condense willingly or unwillingly. And they said, “We condensed willingly.” (41:11) “He Who created the seven heavens, one above another: No want of proportion will you see in the creation of Most Gracious, so turn your face again; Do you see any flaw ... .... And We have adorned the lowest heaven with lamps ....” (67:3-5) “The sun and moon (are subjected) to calculations.” (55:05

Wallahi unbelievable that patience

May Allah? what about his daughters al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat....Chuckle , chuckle..🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

@@MarcosJ-mq4lk ?

@@pillowlighter7045 Act dumb! go research> Here is how the Koran once read with the satanic verses: Here is how it reads today in the Koran: Near it is the Garden of Abode. Behold, the Lote-tree was shrouded (in mystery unspeakable!) (His) sight never swerved, nor did it go wrong! For truly did he see, of the Signs of his Lord, the Greatest! Have ye seen Lat. and 'Uzza, And another, the third (goddess), Manat? Near it is the Garden of Abode. Behold, the Lote-tree was shrouded (in mystery unspeakable!) (His) sight never swerved, nor did it go wrong! For truly did he see, of the Signs of his Lord, the Greatest! Have ye seen Lat. and 'Uzza, And another, the third (goddess), Manat? These are the exalted cranes (intermediaries) Whose intercession is to be hoped for. [Words of Satan Deleted] What! for you the male sex, and for Him, the female? Behold, such would be indeed a division most unfair! (an-Najm 53:19-22) What! for you the male sex, and for Him, the female? Behold, such would be indeed a division most unfair! (an-Najm 53:19-22)

@@pillowlighter7045 "And their purpose was to tempt thee away from that which We had revealed unto thee, to substitute in our name something quite different; (in that case), behold! they would certainly have made thee (their) friend! And had We not given thee strength, thou wouldst nearly have inclined to them a little. In that case We should have made thee taste an equal portion (of punishment) in this life, and an equal portion in death: and moreover thou wouldst have found none to help thee against Us!" (Koran 17:73-75) "Never sent We a messenger or a prophet before thee but when He recited (the message) Satan proposed (opposition) in respect of that which he recited thereof. But Allah abolisheth that which Satan proposeth. Then Allah establisheth His revelations. Allah is Knower, Wise; That He may make that which the devil proposeth a temptation for those in whose hearts is a disease, and those whose hearts are hardened - Lo! the evil-doers are in open schism" (Koran 22:52-53)

@Neil Smith 😂😂😂 haters gonna keep hating. And making shit up

@Neil Smith you're a liar. show me he had sex with a child. pure liar. Haters

His point of saying that was to say the brothers argument could be applied to anything.

Danial Gill But omnipotence by definition cannot be applied to everything, no one sincerely believes a pizza is omnipotent, which is why he needs to be more sincere in his approach to truth

@Benton Wisemore to be fair, your church has a very dark history of abusing people and murdering. Just look at what your priests and popes enjoyed as hobbies were sexually engaging with men and little boys. Seems like Prophet Lot and his peoples demise wasn't enough for you christians

unfortunately they already had the discussion.

Benton Wisemore go and listen to Farid responds to cp that perverts is your figure lol 😂 I see where you coming from

@Benton Wisemore I'm laughing. poor guy show me where Paul is messanger in Quran. #liar_hater_of_Islam

Benton Wisemore have you heard of Bart erhman? Now that’s what I call a scholar . Tell your cp or dp to learn English first . No one would call that bastard who doesn’t know what respect mean all his arguments is donkey or Abdul that’s all why would he call him ? That son Of bh ignorant

Benton Wisemore I am well mannered toward well mannered Christians I am not Muhammad hijab , if you were well mannered you wouldn’t be referring to him . You surely know about how he used to insult our prophet. Y’all are the same hypocrites with double standards !

If it's so simple, then simply answer how.

@@elliot16 What a fallacious reasoning: "If you know the what then you must know the how". As hijab repeatedly stated, we can't know how god works, by the very definition of what god is and what we are.

says you, if I ask someone who is not Muslim, they will tell me their god is the originator.

@@bentmercer Their god? You mean their conception of god. There's only one god and it's the same god, it's just the conceptions that differ.

@@bentmercer Difference between Islam and every other false creed/theology is that the natural human inclination doesn't agree with the false religions, *only* agrees with Islam.

And bro MoHijab did his best, answering patiently....so proud of you

Key word believe and a Christian can say the same thing you said

WHATS VIRAL? When you’re answering to someone who thinks that he knows better than you about your religion and are arrogants what else is there to say sister ?

WHATS VIRAL? Did you hear his question ? He asked how does Allah knows that Allah’s knowledge is correct ? Out of 100 persons how many would ask this kind of nonsense question ? Not knowing how airplanes ✈️ works that doesn’t stop me from trusting it . Does everyone who travels by flight knows how airplanes works ?

WHATS VIRAL? Ok I agree with you sis

Such a beautiful argument

Cheickna Camara he won’t get the message because he don’t exist. Myths made up by man passsed on by man. A fairy tale.

Mind don't exist!

@@incineratorium lol then nothing exist for u

@@openupyoureyes9230 God alone is enough for me.

@@openupyoureyes9230 whoosh

Lol

I agree, Hijab has alot of atheist followers as well which is interesting

Shams Rasool much better than Netflix

How knows arheists about Thruth?

Sure, nobody knows the answer to every question others ask. It means zero zip nada but some things are easier to answer that's all.

@Benton Wisemore wat came first, chicken or egg ?

@tanainlarnae Bale Quran does say that ants talk, and scientists actually found out that ants talk! So Quran was right about it!

@@huntedguy9013 It's proven that all the animals have form of communication between animals

@@gamehunter1010 yes I know. But non Muslims used to say upto this point that ants specifically don't talk. It was a well known subject. But Quran already told that they do infact speak

@Benton Wisemore lol really? Allah always laid down commands to His people according to their circumstances. And when those circumstances were over, Allah abrogated certain commands with an even better because now they were in a situation where they could follow the new command.

@Benton Wisemore for example?

Well when someone is being as arrogant as the atheist is and not entertaining the question, there are two ways to go about it and this is one way. The other way is to let them walk all over us and make the discussion go their way. Best way to argue ignorance is with ignorance. When people like this come with a fixed mindset, not to discuss but to argue, then fight fire with fire. When he started answering his questions Hijab started treating him as someone on the same grounds as him. We are a simple religion; but we won't let people walk all over us.

@@ibross100 exactly what i was about to say.

He already lost the argument when he made a strawman argument out of the pizza.. and he knew this

That's not a good analogy my friend but i get you...

WELL SAID!!!

Part 2 lol

How does that explain galaxy,the sun,the stars or black holes seems like the Quran is quite boring compared to what’s actually there “the word of god” that u think is illogical,scientifically incorrect and it contributes nothing to mathematics,physics,chemistry nor biology.

@@bronzesweetqueen4227 L

Don't muslims do exactly the same thing when they are debating polytheist's for example. Using that logic no muslim should ever debate a hindu on the existence of multiple gods or on the Christian trinity because they do not believe in these things themselves.

@@garyh183 ummm muslims prove that polytheism don't make sense.. atheists argue about the attributes of something which they don't even believe in! there's a difference

@@comedownmachine4682 but from an atheists perspective they are just proving muslims don't make sense. Muslims have no way of proving polytheistic gods aren't real and an atheist cant prove Allah isnt real, it's exactly the same dilemma.

@@garyh183 yes they do. God by definition is the one above all so it wouldn't make sense to have two ones above all

@@comedownmachine4682 well that's only according to theistic beliefs. And also most pantheons of God's usually have a top god or god of gods, like Zeus or Odin so your definition of one above all still applies to them, it's just they are also above other gods.

He has faith

Jane Dughatir LMAO what are you even talking about? Mohammed Hijab was the one who didn’t understand how light was emitted from the Sun or a candle. He thinks it’s an intrinsic property of a candle. Why can’t people be mature and listen to each other? Everyone is so busy following what they already believe to be right and refuse to admit they could be wrong.

@@ibstah92 you should check our br shamsi. he's much more eloquent and sincere than hijab from what I gather

As a Muslim, please don’t make claims you are not expert about. Light is made of photons and it’s properties have been studied thoroughly. These are physical facts that can be proved.

Liam Gallgher I know about Shamsi and have met him in person, a very kind individual. Nothing bad to say about him. Nor do I have anything bad to say about Hijab but people shouldn’t make fun of things they don’t understand. I always see Muslims with little to no scientific knowledge making fun of others when in fact they are correct.

@@ibstah92 the last sentence is a bit condescending but alright. i'm glad you like shamsi he's my favourite 👍🏻

The difference between pizza and allah is the pizza actually exists.

@@brianclone9583 How life began... We have three options: 1. The universe created itself. 2. The universe has always existed. 3. The universe had to be created The universe created itself: For something to create itself it would have to both exist (in order to have the power to act) and not exist (in order to be created) at the same time. This is a contradiction - an illogical position to take. Based on all known scientific understanding and logic we know that from nothing, nothing comes. Therefore, this is not a legitimate response. A person arguing this has violated the law of non-contradiction and is ignoring good science. This now leaves two possible choices: The universe has always existed (no beginning): Atheists in times past used to affirm that the universe had always existed which was proved wrong by the second law of thermodynamics. The second law states that the universe is slowly running out of useable energy. If the universe had always existed it would have ran out of useable energy by now. The fact that the universe still contains useable energy indicates that it is not infinitely old - it had a beginning. The universe had to be created: Since the universe could not create itself and it had to have a beginning, the only logical solution is that the universe had to be created! This leaves us with the original question to the evolutionist, “Where did the matter come from to create the universe?” Any reply not recognising that the universe was created ignores the laws of science and good logic. The common perception presented in many text books and in the media is that life arose from non-life in a pool of chemicals about 3.8 billion years ago. The claim by evolutionists is that this formation of life was the result of time, chance, and natural processes. It is well known that biological molecules (specifically amino acid bonds) are destroyed in the presence of oxygen, making it impossible for life to evolve. Oxygen is a poisonous gas that oxidises organic and inorganic materials on a planetary surface; it is quite lethal to organisms that have not evolved protection against it [P. Ward and D. Brownlee, Rare Earth, p.245] In the atmosphere and the various water basins of the primitive earth, many destructive interactions would have so vastly diminished, if not altogether consumed, essential precursor chemicals, that chemical evolution rates would have been negligible. [C. Thaxton, W. Bradley, and R. Olsen, The Mystery of Life’s Origin: Reassessing Current Theories, p.66] Therefore, in order to avoid this problem, evolutionists propose that earth’s first atmosphere did not contain any freestanding oxygen; however evolutionists then proceed to dig themselves into a deeper hole (as which is often the case). 1. There is no scientific proof that the Earth ever had a non-oxygen atmosphere such as evolutionists require. Earth’s oldest rocks contain evidence of being formed formed in an oxygen atmosphere. [H. Clemmey and N. Badham, “Oxygen in the Atmosphere: An Evaluation of the Geological Evidence,” Geology 10: 141] 2. In that scenario, a fatal problem also arises. Since the ozone is made of oxygen, it would not exist; and the ultraviolet rays from the sun would destroy any biological molecules. This presents a no-win situation for the evolution model. If there was oxygen, life could not start. It there was no oxygen, life could not start. Michael Denton in his book: Evolution A Theory in Crisis notes: What we have is sort of a “Catch 22” situation. If we have oxygen we have no organic compounds, but if we don’t have oxygen, we have none either. Because life could not have originated on land, some evolutionists propose that life started in the oceans. The problem with life starting in the oceans, however, is that as original molecules formed; the water would have immediately destroyed them through a process called hydrolysis. Hydrolysis, which means “water splitting,” is the addition of a water molecule between two bonded molecules (two amino acids in this case), which causes them to split apart. Many scientists have noted this problem. Besides breaking up polypeptides, hydrolysis would have destroyed many amino acids [Encyclopaedia of Science and Technology Vol. 1, p. 411-412] In general the half lives of these polymers in contact with water are on the order of days and months - time spans which are surely geologically insignificant. [K. Dose, The Origin of Life and Evolutionary Biochemistry p. 69] Furthermore, water tends to break chains of amino acids apart. If any proteins had formed in the oceans 3.5 billion years ago, they would have quickly disintegrated. [R Morris, The Big Questions, p. 167] Scientifically, there is no known solution for how life could have chemically evolved on the earth. Let’s look at some other interesting facts of life: First, there are over 300 different types of amino acids. However, only 20 different amino acids are used in life. Second, each type of amino acid molecule comes in two shapes commonly referred to as left-handed and right-handed forms. Only left-handed amino acids are used in biological proteins; however, the natural tendency is for left and right handed amino molecules to bond indiscriminately. Third, the various left-handed amino acids must bond in the correct order or the protein will not function properly [Mike Riddle, Can Natural Processes Explain The Origin of Life?] Scientists know today that it is only because of the instructions (information) in DNA that only left-handed amino acids are linked in the proper order. Cells link amino acids together into proteins, but only according to INSTRUCTIONS encoded in DNA and carried in RNA. [G.B. Johnson, Biology: Visualising Life, p. 193] DNA, RNA, and proteins all need each other as an integrated unit. Even if only one of them existed, the many parts needed for life could not sit idle and wait for the other parts to evolve because they would dissolve or deteriorate. Since scientists have been unable to create life, they are forced to speculate through research and sometimes “sleight of hand” how it “might” have arrived on earth. Such as: - It happens naturally “The formation of biological polymers from monomers is a function of the laws of chemistry and biochemistry, and these are decidedly not random” [Ian Musgrave, “Lies, Damned lies, Statistics, and Probability of Abiogenesis Calculations,” TalkOrigins] Explanation This is an incorrect statement. If it happens naturally, then why can't scientists duplicate this in the lab? Amino acids do not spontaneously bond together to make proteins. First, it takes a source of energy to do this. Second, the natural tendency is to bond left- and right-handed amino acids, but life requires all left-handed amino acids. Third, they must be in the correct order or the protein will not function properly. Fourth, it requires the instructions of DNA to get the right amino acids. Where did DNA come from? Fifth, protein molecules tend to break down in the presence of oxygen or water. Questions for evolutionists Where and how did DNA acquire the enormous amount of information (instructions) to form a protein? There is no known natural explanation that can adequately explain the origin of life, or even a single protein. Since oxygen is known to destroy molecular bonds, and since the lack of oxygen in the atmosphere (meaning no ozone) would cause all potential life to be destroyed by ultraviolet rays, how could life have formed? Since water breaks down the bonds between amino acids (a process called hydrolysis), how could life have started in the oceans? Using all their intelligence and all the modern advances in science, have scientists ever created DNA or RNA in a laboratory through unguided naturalistic processes? Is there any observed case where random chance events creates complex molecules with enormous amounts of information like that found in DNA or RNA?

@@ahmedesam5024 love how the guy you responded to didn’t reply

@@ochentertainment9579 lmao i forgot about this reply long long ago lol

@@ochentertainment9579 he didn’t answered bc as a Former atheist i know . The thinking of a theist person and an atheist person is different so there will no end of this discussion. It’s only a west of time

Yea they are created by them self they thing they will die and mix with in dust god will make there finger tips in perfect shape

انظر إلى الجزء الثاني part 2

Nope he is just avoiding questions