May Allah protect you and grant tawfiq(success) & make u from amongst the people of sunnah( way of the prophet Muhammad pbuh)

Gianni Andreotti May Allah bless you and protect you and guide you to His right path. You may enjoy watching yusuf estes really an amazing guy that make you happy watching his video, good luck

Brother inshaAllah your Islam going to grow stronger and stronger, But you have to go to a masjid or to a group of Muslim to take your shahada and teach more and stay in touch with u

welcome and el hamdoullah brother ♥️ now all you have to do brother is go to imam and will teach how to pray and inchallah

Islam was the religion of your ancestors, we are delighted to have you back.

ameen

@Art Hur how can you say religion doesn't make sense or have logic then use the word hell right after? That is illogical. The concept of hell comes from religion, folklore, mythologies, which according to you doesn't make sense or have logic. Now you must ask yourself, who is the actual stupid one?

@Art Hur "or have a logic" lol seems you don't have logic bro

InshAllah

@Art Hur I wonder if there is anything in that brain of yours that is actually sincere

jazaakallahu khayran, please remember to hit the like button & share this video to your friends & family and share on all your social media platforms.

I agree with you I listen to the hole think I have no problems with Muslims but when they are rude about Jesus then I'm angry

Susan Maxim are you kidding me ?! A Muslim can never disrespect Jesus Chris or any other messenger or a prophet of God because we believe in all of them ( peace be upon them all) , anyone who would disrespect them wouldn't be a Muslim; Allah says in the Quran: { The Messenger has believed in what was revealed to him from his Lord, and [so have] the believers. All of them have believed in Allah and his angels and his books and his messengers, [ saying] , we make no distinction between any of his messengers. " And they say, " We hear and we obey. [ We seek ] forgiveness, our Lord, and to You is the [ final ] destination." } Translation of the meaning of Quran ( 2:285) . And it's one of the sixth pillars of faith to believe in all of Allah's messengers. Please keep watching this channel and DUS Dawah channel to know more about Islam. I wish you the best 💕🌷

@@monitoot thank you I'm sorry if I was rude I live in Muslim home I love them as my own respect Allah too so sorry

Susan Maxim oh dear you're rude😊you're just misinformed, may Allah guide us all to what he loves and pleases him 💕🌷

The Legendary Outdoorsman The Truth does not change time to time.Only a lie does.We are not here to entertain the People..You convey to the people the same truth you related to the one before...

مكتبة السنة Whats ur point?

My point is the salafis manhaj is consistent and goes back to the phrophet becuase basically we are just repeating everything down the line alhamdulilah.. I’m not sure which point of my comment you didn’t comprehend.

The Legendary Outdoorsman JazakAllahu khayraa

I think islam is a copy of Judaism and Christianity. That's why it came later. Its the last religion. Think about it

@Art Hur Yeah because the earth just magically popped out of nowhere??

Art Hur can you even spell cause I got an aneurysm trying to read that. May Allah guide you and peace and blessing of Allah be upon Muhammad :)

@@shenol369 Ameen

@Art Hur You reek of incest DNA if only ur parents was not siblings i guess you could be more useful in life your value is as equal as an ant according to ur athiesm...but since ur parents were siblings i guess u r even worst.

Why are you calling hum a maskeen? Does he look like a maskeen to you? Ask for forgiveness for what you just said

@Art Hur What? Who is the idiot here, the one who expresses his opinion genuinely, or the one who is insulting someone bc of his opinion?

@Tel Aviv MATTHEW AND LUKE DISAGREE!!! MORE CONTRADICTIONS OF THE BIBLE AKA THE WORD OF GOD ACCORDING TO CHRISTIANS: Matthew and Luke give two contradictory genealogies for Joseph (Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). They cannot even agree on who the father of Joseph was. Church apologists try to eliminate this discrepancy by suggesting that the genealogy in Luke is actually Mary's, even though Luke says explicitly that it is Joseph's genealogy (Luke 3:23). Christians have had problems reconciling the two genealogies since at least the early fourth century. It was then that Eusebius, a "Church Father," wrote in his The History of the Church, "each believer has been only too eager to dilate at length on these passages." 2. Why genealogies of Joseph? Both the genealogies of Matthew and Luke show that Joseph was a direct descendant of King David. But if Joseph is not Jesus' father, then Joseph's genealogies are meaningless as far as Jesus is concerned, and one has to wonder why Matthew and Luke included them in their gospels. The answer, of course, is that the genealogies originally said that Jesus was the son of Joseph and thus Jesus fulfilled the messianic requirement of being a direct descendant of King David. Long after Matthew and Luke wrote the genealogies the church invented (or more likely borrowed from the mystery religions) the doctrine of the virgin birth. Although the virgin birth could be accommodated by inserting a few words into the genealogies to break the physical link between Joseph and Jesus, those same insertions also broke the physical link between David and Jesus. The church had now created two major problems: 1) to explain away the existence of two genealogies of Joseph, now rendered meaningless, and 2) to explain how Jesus was a descendant of David. The apostle Paul says that Jesus "was born of the seed of David" (Romans 1:3). Here the word "seed" is literally in the Greek "sperma." This same Greek word is translated in other verses as "descendant(s)" or "offspring." The point is that the Messiah had to be a physical descendant of King David through the male line. That Jesus had to be a physical descendant of David means that even if Joseph had legally adopted Jesus (as some apologists have suggested), Jesus would still not qualify as Messiah if he had been born of a virgin - seed from the line of David was required. Women did not count in reckoning descent for the simple reason that it was then believed that the complete human was present in the man's sperm (the woman's egg being discovered in 1827). The woman's womb was just the soil in which the seed was planted. Just as there was barren soil that could not produce crops, so also the Bible speaks of barren wombs that could not produce children. This is the reason that although there are many male genealogies in the Bible, there are no female genealogies. This also eliminates the possibility put forward by some apologists that Jesus could be of the "seed of David" through Mary.

Maryam bosna fear allah and conceal your beauty that ALLAH has given u from the world sister

Aria Khan what’s wrong with you ? Who are you to judge her ? No wonder all the women hate desi guys. You guys have no clue how to act towards women.

Aria Khan looooool why u changing your comment fool

Jundullah desi means Pakistani and Indian men. First of. Second I agree with you we are all one ummah so that’s why I got upset with him talking about the sister like that. Who are we to judge anyone being Muslim or non Muslim.

Maryam bosna Kako si beautiful?

bashscrazy I came to watch it next time just for this best moment😅...

he realize the meaning of shamsi statement very quick he is a smart guy, I hope he will soon choose the correct path to follow in his life...💚💚

His reaction was quick 😂

Yes he understood fast what some muslims dont even realize...

i laughed so much hahah

Sky Walker it's your choice to be like that

Brother..are you Muslim...btw

@Tel Aviv MATTHEW AND LUKE DISAGREE!!! MORE CONTRADICTIONS OF THE BIBLE AKA THE WORD OF GOD ACCORDING TO CHRISTIANS: Matthew and Luke give two contradictory genealogies for Joseph (Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). They cannot even agree on who the father of Joseph was. Church apologists try to eliminate this discrepancy by suggesting that the genealogy in Luke is actually Mary's, even though Luke says explicitly that it is Joseph's genealogy (Luke 3:23). Christians have had problems reconciling the two genealogies since at least the early fourth century. It was then that Eusebius, a "Church Father," wrote in his The History of the Church, "each believer has been only too eager to dilate at length on these passages." 2. Why genealogies of Joseph? Both the genealogies of Matthew and Luke show that Joseph was a direct descendant of King David. But if Joseph is not Jesus' father, then Joseph's genealogies are meaningless as far as Jesus is concerned, and one has to wonder why Matthew and Luke included them in their gospels. The answer, of course, is that the genealogies originally said that Jesus was the son of Joseph and thus Jesus fulfilled the messianic requirement of being a direct descendant of King David. Long after Matthew and Luke wrote the genealogies the church invented (or more likely borrowed from the mystery religions) the doctrine of the virgin birth. Although the virgin birth could be accommodated by inserting a few words into the genealogies to break the physical link between Joseph and Jesus, those same insertions also broke the physical link between David and Jesus. The church had now created two major problems: 1) to explain away the existence of two genealogies of Joseph, now rendered meaningless, and 2) to explain how Jesus was a descendant of David. The apostle Paul says that Jesus "was born of the seed of David" (Romans 1:3). Here the word "seed" is literally in the Greek "sperma." This same Greek word is translated in other verses as "descendant(s)" or "offspring." The point is that the Messiah had to be a physical descendant of King David through the male line. That Jesus had to be a physical descendant of David means that even if Joseph had legally adopted Jesus (as some apologists have suggested), Jesus would still not qualify as Messiah if he had been born of a virgin - seed from the line of David was required. Women did not count in reckoning descent for the simple reason that it was then believed that the complete human was present in the man's sperm (the woman's egg being discovered in 1827). The woman's womb was just the soil in which the seed was planted. Just as there was barren soil that could not produce crops, so also the Bible speaks of barren wombs that could not produce children. This is the reason that although there are many male genealogies in the Bible, there are no female genealogies. This also eliminates the possibility put forward by some apologists that Jesus could be of the "seed of David" through Mary.

yes subhanallah if allah in the end only allah can chang his heart

give him time to learn. insyaallah he will accept islam

That's so good to hear! Are you a Christian yourself?

@@30251 yea sorta. My family are all Christian. I'm not super into it , I'm interested in what different people believe. ✌

Hi my dear brother, Matt , I am very glad to read your nice comments I sincerely request you to embrace Islam , so that you may get eternal peace happiness and success both in this world and in the eternal world hereafter May Allah bless you , my dear brother

Zaki Ibrahim May Allah give your courage to come forward as a Muslim and follow the truth when you see it

@Pete Kondolios spread hate more we are still standing, your non sense biased statements won't change anything, but Islam will change people

@Pete Kondolios jihad means hard work, effort, it's an Arabic word u ignorant fool

@Pete Kondolios stop embarrassing yourself here, ur so lame

@Pete Kondolios what, read history mate

@Pete Kondolios you just described the westerns loot after the wars 😂

@Art Hur الله يهديك

Aameen ya Rabal Aalameen

@Tel Aviv I know you're here to argue but I can't even entertain your ignorance. the 1st one takes some explaining but the second, all you have to do is simply read. you won't get another reply. Ask the God of Abraham for guidance

He's not smart if he gets fooled into Islam.

@@JonathanDeLeon-em4px Wdym

@@aminelahnin837 Anyone who converts to Islam lacks sound judgment. They have not studied the Bible, history or science to know any better.

@@JonathanDeLeon-em4px Well what if I told you it's the other way around, bible lacks lots of characteristics necessary for a book to be holy namely, christian scholars states that they don't even know who are the real authors of the bible lol (who is luke, jhon, mark etc..) and it has been changed countless times that it has now dozens of versions unlike the Qur'an which hasn't been changed from the time it has been revealed(1400 yrs ago). Also, the concept of the Trinity which is a fundamental belief in Christianity hasn't been mentioned 'til 300 years after the death of Jesus(pbuh) how come nobody believed in the trinity in the 1st century after the death of Jesus(pbuh), at least ppl believed in the Tawheed at the time of Mohammed(SAW) when he preached the message.

@@JonathanDeLeon-em4px what do u have say bout that

@Tel Aviv open your mind! Islam is very clear

@Tel Aviv not only to me but to almost 2 billion people worldwide. And still growing

@Tel Aviv are you taking about Cristian? Because they are living the cristianity not Muslims are living. And you know it very well?

inshallah brother I do agree that UK is a great country

‘Third world’ as in once the richest but has since had all its good shit stolen from a murderous bunch of hooligans. You are right there though mate, we aren’t like you, but it’s probably coz we’re different, which I know u don’t like, but It’s amazing how untrustworthy people can be once they’ve been raped and pillaged. So don’t blame it all on us yeah. Cheers

@Gray Kin He said in third world countries you can't preach freely and openly. He did not mention Israel or any first or second world countries which deny ppl basic freedoms like the freedom to travel to work and school. You didn't get what he was saying.

You are right

India is Shit country myself from India here politicians are retarded

@Lance Gin if you look at the majority of Christians compared to Muslims today, then you'd see who's clearly following the path that the creator wanted us to. Jesus is very important to us, Very. However, the creator is more important, we don't bow down 5 times a day to man. No. We bow down to the one and only true creator that Abraham did.

@Lance Gin Satan cannot be the author of the Qur'an and I will tell you why, the Qur'an clearly curses countless times Satan, and tells us to get away from him, and to seek refuges from Satan, it is impossible for a demon to write a book that keeps cursing him and insulting him all the time

Bruh Lance "gin" only Muslims will get this 😂

@@mrmu3448 these people are in every comment . they try so hard to show islam is wrong

@Tel Aviv MATTHEW AND LUKE DISAGREE!!! MORE CONTRADICTIONS OF THE BIBLE AKA THE WORD OF GOD ACCORDING TO CHRISTIANS: Matthew and Luke give two contradictory genealogies for Joseph (Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). They cannot even agree on who the father of Joseph was. Church apologists try to eliminate this discrepancy by suggesting that the genealogy in Luke is actually Mary's, even though Luke says explicitly that it is Joseph's genealogy (Luke 3:23). Christians have had problems reconciling the two genealogies since at least the early fourth century. It was then that Eusebius, a "Church Father," wrote in his The History of the Church, "each believer has been only too eager to dilate at length on these passages." 2. Why genealogies of Joseph? Both the genealogies of Matthew and Luke show that Joseph was a direct descendant of King David. But if Joseph is not Jesus' father, then Joseph's genealogies are meaningless as far as Jesus is concerned, and one has to wonder why Matthew and Luke included them in their gospels. The answer, of course, is that the genealogies originally said that Jesus was the son of Joseph and thus Jesus fulfilled the messianic requirement of being a direct descendant of King David. Long after Matthew and Luke wrote the genealogies the church invented (or more likely borrowed from the mystery religions) the doctrine of the virgin birth. Although the virgin birth could be accommodated by inserting a few words into the genealogies to break the physical link between Joseph and Jesus, those same insertions also broke the physical link between David and Jesus. The church had now created two major problems: 1) to explain away the existence of two genealogies of Joseph, now rendered meaningless, and 2) to explain how Jesus was a descendant of David. The apostle Paul says that Jesus "was born of the seed of David" (Romans 1:3). Here the word "seed" is literally in the Greek "sperma." This same Greek word is translated in other verses as "descendant(s)" or "offspring." The point is that the Messiah had to be a physical descendant of King David through the male line. That Jesus had to be a physical descendant of David means that even if Joseph had legally adopted Jesus (as some apologists have suggested), Jesus would still not qualify as Messiah if he had been born of a virgin - seed from the line of David was required. Women did not count in reckoning descent for the simple reason that it was then believed that the complete human was present in the man's sperm (the woman's egg being discovered in 1827). The woman's womb was just the soil in which the seed was planted. Just as there was barren soil that could not produce crops, so also the Bible speaks of barren wombs that could not produce children. This is the reason that although there are many male genealogies in the Bible, there are no female genealogies. This also eliminates the possibility put forward by some apologists that Jesus could be of the "seed of David" through Mary.

Hatun's voice in my nightmares

@Tel Aviv Hahahah u just made my day with u stupid interpretation lol 😂 if u just read the verses that are before this verse u well know that the Surah talks about the man “ the human being “ not the sperms as u saying 😂 And the second one I really don’t need to reply because it’s clearly saying “APPEARS TO HIM ” have a good one And study more 😉

Islam forever would have sufficed but your secterian slogan made it lose value

Just be a Muslim. Don’t label yourself a Sunni, Shia...

@Art Hur lol I was Hindu Only religion made sense to was Islam

Art Hur Don’t cry you dirty dog! Who are to wipe Islam??? Hahaha many have tried and failed! NOT ONE SINGLE ONE OF YOU DOGS CAN STOP IT! EVER! IT WILL BE IN EVERY HOUSE HOLD!

Art Hur Hahahaha making up utter stupidity again! Why do you lie to yourself and others???? Islam truly is the most beautiful religion. Just because you cannot stop your backwards way of life don’t stop others!

And then when the creators of salaf-us-salih WILL be all stood at the gates of hell he be behind them. May Allah SWT keep him away from all salafis and only guide him to Islam of Prophet Muhammed(pbuh) and help him please Allah Pak

@@beardedbloke2521 who are you to dictate where anyone will end up? that's between the creator and the creation alone.

Ali Waii where dictate that?

Why do so called salafis never have nothing good to say anybody who doesn't profess to be salafi I once invited a salafi couple to my house for dinner the first thing I didn't like was the fact that his wife went to my bookshelf and start looking to see whether or not the authors were salafi scholars or muftis I worked in a bookstore for over 5 yrs because she didn't know some of the scholars we knew she told my wife not to take dawah from that person I said I'm gonna take knowledge from anyone who's following the minhaj of prophet Muhammad and his companions and I said doesn't that make me a salafi he said yes then I said why do I have to say that I'm a salafi you making it sound like a sect and prophet Muhammad saw said to stay away from sects so I'm just happy with saying I'm just a Muslim following the sunna of prophet Muhammad they were the best of mankind and they never called themselves salafis anyways that ended our friendship they have a habit of running ppl away from Islam I never see anyone taking shahada from them giving dawah .

Thats a causal fallacy. And Salaf didn't call themselves Salafi because they were the Salaf, it's in the name come on.

jazaakallahu khayran, please remember to hit the like button & share this video to your friends & family and share on all your social media platforms.

@Tel Aviv hahaha don't cry .

Amir...just wanna share some information. Is your birth date according to modern calender or the hijri calender? Google ur birth date n convert to hijri..and thats ur true birthday date.

His birthday is his birthday.

This is a mistranslation it doesn’t mention egg it mentions earth is spread out

Wonderful exposition and antidote against Pride

@Tel Aviv MATTHEW AND LUKE DISAGREE!!! MORE CONTRADICTIONS OF THE BIBLE AKA THE WORD OF GOD ACCORDING TO CHRISTIANS: Matthew and Luke give two contradictory genealogies for Joseph (Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). They cannot even agree on who the father of Joseph was. Church apologists try to eliminate this discrepancy by suggesting that the genealogy in Luke is actually Mary's, even though Luke says explicitly that it is Joseph's genealogy (Luke 3:23). Christians have had problems reconciling the two genealogies since at least the early fourth century. It was then that Eusebius, a "Church Father," wrote in his The History of the Church, "each believer has been only too eager to dilate at length on these passages." 2. Why genealogies of Joseph? Both the genealogies of Matthew and Luke show that Joseph was a direct descendant of King David. But if Joseph is not Jesus' father, then Joseph's genealogies are meaningless as far as Jesus is concerned, and one has to wonder why Matthew and Luke included them in their gospels. The answer, of course, is that the genealogies originally said that Jesus was the son of Joseph and thus Jesus fulfilled the messianic requirement of being a direct descendant of King David. Long after Matthew and Luke wrote the genealogies the church invented (or more likely borrowed from the mystery religions) the doctrine of the virgin birth. Although the virgin birth could be accommodated by inserting a few words into the genealogies to break the physical link between Joseph and Jesus, those same insertions also broke the physical link between David and Jesus. The church had now created two major problems: 1) to explain away the existence of two genealogies of Joseph, now rendered meaningless, and 2) to explain how Jesus was a descendant of David. The apostle Paul says that Jesus "was born of the seed of David" (Romans 1:3). Here the word "seed" is literally in the Greek "sperma." This same Greek word is translated in other verses as "descendant(s)" or "offspring." The point is that the Messiah had to be a physical descendant of King David through the male line. That Jesus had to be a physical descendant of David means that even if Joseph had legally adopted Jesus (as some apologists have suggested), Jesus would still not qualify as Messiah if he had been born of a virgin - seed from the line of David was required. Women did not count in reckoning descent for the simple reason that it was then believed that the complete human was present in the man's sperm (the woman's egg being discovered in 1827). The woman's womb was just the soil in which the seed was planted. Just as there was barren soil that could not produce crops, so also the Bible speaks of barren wombs that could not produce children. This is the reason that although there are many male genealogies in the Bible, there are no female genealogies. This also eliminates the possibility put forward by some apologists that Jesus could be of the "seed of David" through Mary.

im palestine i love muslim from indonesia👍❤

Alhamdullilah, I love Indonesian people❤

Om Ayah Yahya me too 😢😢

Allah does not exist.

George Then wait..! I promise you a surprise and the most regretful day ahead of you. From which there is no turning back.

@@user-ok9gy2pc1v Yes, yes. moron - you idiot think there is life after death, ha ha ha ha ha, brainless fool.

George haha 😂 I want to know who is the dumb person that gave you a phone 🥱😒

this three terrify shamsi to death

Zakir Naik

Looool

Sheikh Ahmed Deedat, may Allah have mercy on his soul.

@@mohdzairikamaruddin1526 LOL

Zakir Naik revised all the religious books and he chose Islam

The Sealed Nectar is a good one snd recommended with accordance to the Salafi Da'weh...

@@DiscoverALLAH7777777 that book has the prophet saw biography and the battles! Thank you will purchase Inshallah! May Allah reward in this life and next!

عبدالرحمن Ameen..It goes in deptg even with the days if ignorance dating back pre-islam and also the geneology of the 3 Arab Types of the Extinct Arabs of Aa'd and Tha'mud,the pure Arabs and the Ishmaelite Arabicised ones.

عبدالرحمن Check salafibookstore.com

Go to the Salafi bookstore online

@Tel Aviv MATTHEW AND LUKE DISAGREE!!! MORE CONTRADICTIONS OF THE BIBLE AKA THE WORD OF GOD ACCORDING TO CHRISTIANS: Matthew and Luke give two contradictory genealogies for Joseph (Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). They cannot even agree on who the father of Joseph was. Church apologists try to eliminate this discrepancy by suggesting that the genealogy in Luke is actually Mary's, even though Luke says explicitly that it is Joseph's genealogy (Luke 3:23). Christians have had problems reconciling the two genealogies since at least the early fourth century. It was then that Eusebius, a "Church Father," wrote in his The History of the Church, "each believer has been only too eager to dilate at length on these passages." 2. Why genealogies of Joseph? Both the genealogies of Matthew and Luke show that Joseph was a direct descendant of King David. But if Joseph is not Jesus' father, then Joseph's genealogies are meaningless as far as Jesus is concerned, and one has to wonder why Matthew and Luke included them in their gospels. The answer, of course, is that the genealogies originally said that Jesus was the son of Joseph and thus Jesus fulfilled the messianic requirement of being a direct descendant of King David. Long after Matthew and Luke wrote the genealogies the church invented (or more likely borrowed from the mystery religions) the doctrine of the virgin birth. Although the virgin birth could be accommodated by inserting a few words into the genealogies to break the physical link between Joseph and Jesus, those same insertions also broke the physical link between David and Jesus. The church had now created two major problems: 1) to explain away the existence of two genealogies of Joseph, now rendered meaningless, and 2) to explain how Jesus was a descendant of David. The apostle Paul says that Jesus "was born of the seed of David" (Romans 1:3). Here the word "seed" is literally in the Greek "sperma." This same Greek word is translated in other verses as "descendant(s)" or "offspring." The point is that the Messiah had to be a physical descendant of King David through the male line. That Jesus had to be a physical descendant of David means that even if Joseph had legally adopted Jesus (as some apologists have suggested), Jesus would still not qualify as Messiah if he had been born of a virgin - seed from the line of David was required. Women did not count in reckoning descent for the simple reason that it was then believed that the complete human was present in the man's sperm (the woman's egg being discovered in 1827). The woman's womb was just the soil in which the seed was planted. Just as there was barren soil that could not produce crops, so also the Bible speaks of barren wombs that could not produce children. This is the reason that although there are many male genealogies in the Bible, there are no female genealogies. This also eliminates the possibility put forward by some apologists that Jesus could be of the "seed of David" through Mary.

Yh, I noticed that one, lol.

Lol I was waiting for him to say say “memorizing a book in Chinese “but he said in arabic lol 😂

So to me

I thought about it too. I thought he would be using the Russian language as example instead.

2manyusernamestaken Asalamu alaikum He uses hikmah when giving dawah I also was thinking which language will he use because he can't say Chinese 😂

He lies without shame. Before someone who knows what to answer, he is... zero, sincerely.

I think he appeals to the westerners better without one lol, epically with all their preconceived notions about people with beards. Anyways many people have beards but are rotten in the heart. Something like that shouldn't matter akhi.

Elisjon Goseni He does not shave it...You keep what Allah gave to you of the beard...Some people cannot grow long beards..

I know. That's why I said it. He need one.

Elisjon Goseni he cant grow one he already said it last weeks video. Some people can’t grow it

wa jazaak, please remember to hit the like button & share this video to your friends & family and share on all your social media platforms.

Mr McDonald This is one of the best channels in speakers corner

Mr McDonald you eat a lotta McDonalds?????

hbk711x I don’t have an issue with what I look like, if you do then don’t look at my profile picture

XD i like ur picture tbh

Mr McDonald think about ur health

@Tel Aviv MATTHEW AND LUKE DISAGREE!!! MORE CONTRADICTIONS OF THE BIBLE AKA THE WORD OF GOD ACCORDING TO CHRISTIANS: Matthew and Luke give two contradictory genealogies for Joseph (Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). They cannot even agree on who the father of Joseph was. Church apologists try to eliminate this discrepancy by suggesting that the genealogy in Luke is actually Mary's, even though Luke says explicitly that it is Joseph's genealogy (Luke 3:23). Christians have had problems reconciling the two genealogies since at least the early fourth century. It was then that Eusebius, a "Church Father," wrote in his The History of the Church, "each believer has been only too eager to dilate at length on these passages." 2. Why genealogies of Joseph? Both the genealogies of Matthew and Luke show that Joseph was a direct descendant of King David. But if Joseph is not Jesus' father, then Joseph's genealogies are meaningless as far as Jesus is concerned, and one has to wonder why Matthew and Luke included them in their gospels. The answer, of course, is that the genealogies originally said that Jesus was the son of Joseph and thus Jesus fulfilled the messianic requirement of being a direct descendant of King David. Long after Matthew and Luke wrote the genealogies the church invented (or more likely borrowed from the mystery religions) the doctrine of the virgin birth. Although the virgin birth could be accommodated by inserting a few words into the genealogies to break the physical link between Joseph and Jesus, those same insertions also broke the physical link between David and Jesus. The church had now created two major problems: 1) to explain away the existence of two genealogies of Joseph, now rendered meaningless, and 2) to explain how Jesus was a descendant of David. The apostle Paul says that Jesus "was born of the seed of David" (Romans 1:3). Here the word "seed" is literally in the Greek "sperma." This same Greek word is translated in other verses as "descendant(s)" or "offspring." The point is that the Messiah had to be a physical descendant of King David through the male line. That Jesus had to be a physical descendant of David means that even if Joseph had legally adopted Jesus (as some apologists have suggested), Jesus would still not qualify as Messiah if he had been born of a virgin - seed from the line of David was required. Women did not count in reckoning descent for the simple reason that it was then believed that the complete human was present in the man's sperm (the woman's egg being discovered in 1827). The woman's womb was just the soil in which the seed was planted. Just as there was barren soil that could not produce crops, so also the Bible speaks of barren wombs that could not produce children. This is the reason that although there are many male genealogies in the Bible, there are no female genealogies. This also eliminates the possibility put forward by some apologists that Jesus could be of the "seed of David" through Mary.

Oh come on brother @Tel Aviv nowhere in the Qur'an was it said that the sperm is made in the chest. Read those verses in context. Verse 5 asks man to contemplate what he was created from. Verse 6 said man was created from a jetting fluid. Verse 7 then refers back to man as being issued from between the loin and the breastbones. Tell me, where else is the location of a baby in its mom if not between the ribs and the loin? What got you confused is the pronoun used there. Unlike English, Arabic does not have different pronouns for "it" and "he". "Yakhruju" is an Arabic phrase that can mean either "he comes out" or "it comes out". Why then did you choose "it" rather than "he" (which is the original subject of the verses) As for the sun setting in a murky water, if you read carefully and honestly, you'd find out that the sun is not the subject of the verse, rather Zul-qarnain is, which is why it makes sense. You should see that the whole set of verses are perspectival in the sense that they relate the sun-setting event from Zul-qarnain's point of view, which will be the perspective of anyone standing in front of an ocean. "Wajadaha" is an Arabic phrase that means "HE found it", which means "it appeared to HIM

@Tel Aviv MATTHEW AND LUKE DISAGREE!!! MORE CONTRADICTIONS OF THE BIBLE AKA THE WORD OF GOD ACCORDING TO CHRISTIANS: Matthew and Luke give two contradictory genealogies for Joseph (Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). They cannot even agree on who the father of Joseph was. Church apologists try to eliminate this discrepancy by suggesting that the genealogy in Luke is actually Mary's, even though Luke says explicitly that it is Joseph's genealogy (Luke 3:23). Christians have had problems reconciling the two genealogies since at least the early fourth century. It was then that Eusebius, a "Church Father," wrote in his The History of the Church, "each believer has been only too eager to dilate at length on these passages." 2. Why genealogies of Joseph? Both the genealogies of Matthew and Luke show that Joseph was a direct descendant of King David. But if Joseph is not Jesus' father, then Joseph's genealogies are meaningless as far as Jesus is concerned, and one has to wonder why Matthew and Luke included them in their gospels. The answer, of course, is that the genealogies originally said that Jesus was the son of Joseph and thus Jesus fulfilled the messianic requirement of being a direct descendant of King David. Long after Matthew and Luke wrote the genealogies the church invented (or more likely borrowed from the mystery religions) the doctrine of the virgin birth. Although the virgin birth could be accommodated by inserting a few words into the genealogies to break the physical link between Joseph and Jesus, those same insertions also broke the physical link between David and Jesus. The church had now created two major problems: 1) to explain away the existence of two genealogies of Joseph, now rendered meaningless, and 2) to explain how Jesus was a descendant of David. The apostle Paul says that Jesus "was born of the seed of David" (Romans 1:3). Here the word "seed" is literally in the Greek "sperma." This same Greek word is translated in other verses as "descendant(s)" or "offspring." The point is that the Messiah had to be a physical descendant of King David through the male line. That Jesus had to be a physical descendant of David means that even if Joseph had legally adopted Jesus (as some apologists have suggested), Jesus would still not qualify as Messiah if he had been born of a virgin - seed from the line of David was required. Women did not count in reckoning descent for the simple reason that it was then believed that the complete human was present in the man's sperm (the woman's egg being discovered in 1827). The woman's womb was just the soil in which the seed was planted. Just as there was barren soil that could not produce crops, so also the Bible speaks of barren wombs that could not produce children. This is the reason that although there are many male genealogies in the Bible, there are no female genealogies. This also eliminates the possibility put forward by some apologists that Jesus could be of the "seed of David" through Mary.

Try the internet