Is the Crucifixion based on conjecture?

No video

Is the Crucifixion based on conjecture?

Рет қаралды 1,666

Albee Al

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 51

@πιστότητα Ай бұрын

DEBATE TOPIC: Who rejects the Quran more!

@not.tobeconfusedwith Ай бұрын

😂😂😂😂 LOL!

@abadirabdo10 Ай бұрын

Kalbee going of topic every single times because he knows the crufiction is conjecture 😂😂😂

@bricemakes1180 Ай бұрын

At the beginning, he tried to control the narrative of what Albee can or cannot do. He knew that he would lose if that was the case. If he can use the Bible and distort it to fit his narrative then why not use the Quran to show that he is wrong. Majority of his talking points are critiques on the authenticity of the Bible, and not addressing the crucifixion. Then he wanted, Albee to address his talking points on the reliability of the Bible regarding the New Testament. When that’s not the topic. Plus, it’s easy to bring up so many assertions and it’s hard to address many of those assertions within a certain time. So that’s unrealistic Muslims often times will stray away from topics so you will address what they want and not stay on topic what is needed to be addressed. Relying on scholarship is kind of weak times, because the scholars don’t agree with each other at times. What Emenin tried to do as tear down the reliability of the gospels and the New Testament. To try to disprove the crucifixion from the Bible. The problem with that is, he’s not proving how it’s not true. Most scholarship would disagree with him on the crucification topic. Plus, he lied about the authenticity of the gospels which most of his points can easily be disproven with internal external and artifact evidence. Relying on scholarship is kind of weak times, because the scholars don’t agree with each other at times. What Emenin tried to do as tear down the reliability of the gospels and the New Testament. To try to disprove the crucifixion from the Bible. The problem with that is, he’s not proving how it’s not true. Most scholarship would disagree with him on the crucification topic. Plus, he lied about the authenticity of the gospels which most of his points can easily be disproven with internal external and artifact evidence. He kept appealing to gnostic sources that hold no weight and aren’t taken seriously. He is trying to make them historically accurate. If that’s the case he would also have to conclude that Jesus is God as well. Can’t cherry pick. My last comment: Godlogic was correct that he is arguing like a Athiest. He is bound to the historical statements of the Quran. Attempting to tear down the Bible doesn’t get rid of his Delima. The Bible still stands to be true and as he admitted. The majority consensus is that majority of historians believe the crucifixion happened.

@sasa_sasa_sasa230 Ай бұрын

Actually he just quoted and probably even distorted opinions of the scholars who oppose on authenticity or dating of the Gospels. Albee did good job not to running to answer all hos robish. What he could do is make his point of the scholars and quoted list of 20 modern liberal scholars who agreed on authenticity of the historicity of the Gospels. And also quoted just short two academic pages or libraries that said what most liberal scholars said.

@bricemakes1180 Ай бұрын

@@sasa_sasa_sasa230I know the dating to the Gospel are much earlier than what he is saying. I wish Albee would have expounded on that lie that he was trying to push. It’s easily refuted in many ways. The next thing it’s weird to quote liberal scholars that are not taken seriously and are easily refuted. He just either miss used the liberal scholars or just quoted there commentary. With no line of reasoning for most of the things he was putting out. He didn’t really deal with the actually crucification, but attempted to attack the integrity of the Bible. Another thing. If M&M can attack the integrity of the Bible which is which is off topic. Why can’t Albee attack the integrity of the Beliefs of the Quran? Which make historical claims.

@sasa_sasa_sasa230 Ай бұрын

@@bricemakes1180 actually that's the point, Albee should bring bunch, concensus of scholars that Gnostic writings are fabrication and lie 🤥 and appealing on them and in the same tome on history and text criticism is suicide. 😂

@remalaka2788 Ай бұрын

well done albi . You made him confess that they are a continuation from gnostism at one point. Wow .. All they do is gish gallop and expect you to answer. I would have declared victory when he admitted his book is not a history book. God bless bro

@calledtoserve729 Ай бұрын

Excellent Work Brother Albee, you gave it to him like he lives. Glory to the Trinue God Father Son and Holy Spirit.

@davida3343 Ай бұрын

Next debate is waraqah ibn nawfal founder of Islam

@BruceWaynee. Ай бұрын

💀

@josesantiago8666 Ай бұрын

Brilliant!! How did Waraqah know it was Gabriel with mahammed wanting to committe suicide.

@Michael-fq5ge Ай бұрын

Albee clear win amen

@Theosis_EO Ай бұрын

Great stuff dude

@BruceWaynee. Ай бұрын

Albee don’t ever use the Quran for historical use it’s stupid (and i quote m&m ) 💀

@MrSimpoge Ай бұрын

Why do they always treat “alllah” as a name? It’s a title, not a name. They don’t know the name of their god. We do, it’s Satan/hubal

@MrBeastjebuz Ай бұрын

Actually, maybe allah is supposed to be the name. Al ilah shorten makes allah for some reason ilah is the word for God in Arabic. Allah has been thought of as the official title due to islame. They even say allah is the only ilah or something like that

@MrSimpoge Ай бұрын

@@MrBeastjebuz it’s not. They don’t know who their god is. But we do. It’s hubal/satan. Hubal was called Allah. All they say is there is no god but God. They don’t know which god that is. They say their God’s name is God. Likes saying my dog’s name is dog

@rramos7488 Ай бұрын

Debate starts at 20:15

@DJRoll15 Ай бұрын

Eminem….”to use it (the Quran) as history would be dumb..)” 1:54:00

@abadirabdo10 Ай бұрын

"Genre of revelation "

@Zephaniah2 Ай бұрын

All Ham To Allah

@mariongranbruheim4090 Ай бұрын

This was fun! 👏🏻😄

@zechariahbalan5550 Ай бұрын

Circumcised your ears hahahahaha😂😂😂 dude you own him

@briankim8139 Ай бұрын

Bro the muslims opening was literally restarted. muslim: don’t use the Bible Also muslim: Proceeds to use the Bible

@jmlx.m5611 Ай бұрын

Em crucified him 😂😂

@SultanFinnad Ай бұрын

He'll nah

@Catchmydrift372 Ай бұрын

Your boy got baked 😂😂😂 Allah is running from sam shamoun

@MrSimpoge Ай бұрын

2:12:53 good job. He appeared to gnostic writings which we reject then has a problem Muslims who believe Jesus was crucified

@Kakeshii Ай бұрын

history doesnt care about theology lmao, its history...

@MrSimpoge Ай бұрын

@@Kakeshii exactly. History says Jesus was crucified. Thanks

@Gonefishinagain7 Ай бұрын

How do I get the discord

@MyLife-ux1vs Ай бұрын

You guys are delusional if you think albee won this debate. As an objective outsider, with all due respect, Albee got his ass kicked. The debate topic was crucifixion and the other guy even said in his opening abd many times over that going to the quran can't help you, and yet Albee kept going to quran to prove crucifixion. And as far as I can member Albee couldn't give 1 external source besides Paul who can attest to the crucifixion. And to top it off Albee admitted that the earliest source for any attestation to the 4 gospels was Ironeus in 185 AD. And I won't even mention the scholarly work the other guy cited when he asked for 1 source who agreed with him and named like 5 or 10 sources, some of whom I know as well who are considered the foremost experts in textual criticism. Over all, Albee wasn't prepared and god demolished. But the sad part is his Christian fan boys are here cheering him on. Con guys grow some balls and tell him the truth so next time he can be better prepared or not debate him ever again. This was flat out embarrassing. I ve even seen on tiktok where Christians were discussing how bad albee was going to do on the debate and were praying that albee doesn't get destroyed. And I ve heard Christians discuss why albee tool the debate in the first place etc. I think all this debate did was bring to light the fact that the early Christian history doesn't support your current theology. And the worst part was from a historical perspective when the other guy was showing him evidence that there were sects that didn't believe in the trinity Albee kept dismissing them by saying they were heretics. The whole point of presenting evidence is to establish the historical account of what happened... the fact that those groups were later called heretics by the church simply shows that the church simply picked a narrative that they wanted to push and everyone that existed that had contrary opinion was pushed aside. But that is exactly the point... the debate was was there evidence for crucifixion and when someone shows u evidence that there was no crucifixion you or anyone calling them heretics simply means that any evidence anyone brings Albee would just dismiss it as heretics ..if that's the case why not just come out and claim it.. Just say that you do t care about what the evidence shows, we want to believe in crucifixion and we don't care about what the evidence shows. IN ANY CASE, I hope Christians start being honest with their scholarship and go wherever the truth takes them.. and if the evidence shatters their theology then they should rethink their position... that is better than living a lie. All just my humble opinion

@jakeyu-me2lc Ай бұрын

All due respect, i object this. Reason why is because he pointed out to gnostic gospels to prove his point which is literally like a chicken defending KFC, which you wouldn't know but oh well. And I fact checked everything that Eminem brought up... All of which has objections due to other scholarly reports that concluded that this is a weak argument, Eminem got his butt handed too him when he brought up Astronomy to prove his arguments to be valid. Secondly 3rd of his sources has other pages where in the books it literally says word for word, ''Jesus did infact died as a historical fact.'' Simon has some what of historical biography around his dating, and it shows proof that Simon lived 50 years after the cruxifction!!!!. If Simion didn't die then who did? who fits that narrative hm? Jesus does!!!.

@jakeyu-me2lc Ай бұрын

Also to point out, all of the so called forgeries have been debunked by Dr Wallace. Not just that but all of our manuscripts fit the same narrative to the one we have right now, making it historical accurate and that's facts. Fun fact 100% of the bible we have today, fits our manuscripts we have over 50,000 greek manuscripts and so many textual variants. Which disagree with his arguments. and just that being said, I seen two of my muslim friends lose faith in Eminems arguments after the debate had finished. Stay safe, stay away from Islam.