The biggest contradiction in Quran. Part 2. The crucifixion

Jason Voorhees

Jason Voorhees

๐•ธ๐–Š๐–—๐–ˆ๐–Š๐–“๐–†๐–—๐–ž ๐•ฎ๐–”๐–—๐–• โ€ข ๐Ÿ๐ŸŽ๐Ÿ๐Ÿ’๐Ÿฅ‡
Joined
May 15, 2020
Posts
92,857
Reputation
280,951
Part 1 here



This the biggest contradiction in Islam by far and is very central to the idea of Christianity. So let's make it clear

The crucifixion of Jesus is considered a "bedrock" fact. Jewish, Christian, Roman, Atheist historians and theologists all agree with the fact that Jesus Christ was crucified infact the execution of Jesus of Nazareth under Pontius Pilate (Roman prefect of Judea, ~AD 26-36) is one of the most certain facts about his life alongside his baptism. This is considered a universal fact and is not even up for debate.


This is even confirmed by multiple different non Christian sources outside the gospel

Tacitus (Roman historian, Annals ~AD 116): "Christus, from whom the name [Christians] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty [crucifixion] during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus."


1000190024


Josephus (Jewish historian, Antiquities of the Jews ~AD 93): Refers to Jesus as a wise man executed by Pilate via crucifixion. Josephus also clarified James as "the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ."

1000190027


And the all the sources i mentioned come from Roman, Jewish, and non Christian perspectives and they all independently reported the same event word for word as it was written in the gospels and arrived at the same conclusion. No ancient historian or even Christian haters that bashed jesus on his teachings like Celsus denied the crucifixion itself what they disagreed and disputed about was its meaning or the resurrection claims that followed.

1000190028


We have even found Archaeological evidence supports the practice: 1st-century crucified remains (e.g., the heel bone of "Yehohanan" with a nail) confirm Roman crucifixion methods in Judea matched Gospel descriptions exactly

1000190030


But Surah An-Nisa (4:157) directly conflicts with the historical evidence for Jesus's crucifixion.

1000190029


You'll only find this in Islamic texts and nowhere else. The Quran is divine revelation and thus infallible, so earlier sources (Gospels, historical records) must be mistaken, corrupted (tahrif), or illusory as per 4:157 and overall there's 0 convincing explanation and argument given for this by Muslim scholars

Some Muslims argue the verse only denies that the Jews succeeded in killing Jesus (Romans carried it out), or that Jesus didn't truly "die" in a spiritual sense, or that the appearance was deceptive by divine act or that Jesus was substituted for someone else and some modern ones like certain Ahmadis or scholars like Shabir Ally in softer readings allow for a crucifixion that didn't result in permanent death. But all mostly deflections that non islamic scholars and historian simply reject


1000190031


Christians see the crucifixion as central to atonement and prophecy fulfillment. The crucifixion of Christ is the main event in Christianity while Muslims see it as incompatible with a prophet's dignity and God's sovereignty so it remains a sensitive topic but that doesn't take away from the massive contraindication that exists in Quran. There are 2 more such contraindications that exist that I'll make. A thread about later
 
Last edited:
  • +1
  • Woah
  • Love it
Reactions: icebl00d._.03, aaronbp, topology and 37 others
1777606951516
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Xcruvia, Truebloatcel, inceltriad78 and 13 others
Us mudslimes need to be bomebd
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Xcruvia, Jager, callard and 12 others
muhammad was a man making shit up as time went by for his own benefit canโ€™t believe people really believe in that shit, as if them having a satanic pagan tradition wasnโ€™t enough :feelswhy:
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Xcruvia, Divineincel, Truebloatcel and 6 others
@imontheloose @Lonely @1966Ford
 
  • +1
Reactions: inceliusndius
DNR but how old was Aisha
 
  • +1
Reactions: inceliusndius and Jason Voorhees
@connive @Swarthy Knight @dhusc @Sub5kang @davidlaidisme67
 
No
 
  • +1
Reactions: Jason Voorhees and Jgns
@Zaref @cortisolman2 @Jager @exvh @SplashJuice
 
  • +1
Reactions: exvh and inceliusndius
  • +1
Reactions: ltnbrownacnecel
@Mogmo @ccwb @Gamerspyy786 @topology
 
  • +1
Reactions: Mogmo
I already wrote about this in OP and it already got rejected by scholars. If you have some new argument or some unique perspective then post it here.

This isn't a contradiction and is misinterpreted
 
  • +1
Reactions: inceliusndius and ltnbrownacnecel
Part 1 here



This the biggest contradiction in Islam by far and is very central to the idea of Christianity. So let's make it clear

The crucifixion of Jesus is considered a "bedrock" fact. Jewish, Christian, Roman, Atheist historians and theologists all agree with the fact that Jesus Christ was crucified infact the execution of Jesus of Nazareth under Pontius Pilate (Roman prefect of Judea, ~AD 26-36) is one of the most certain facts about his life alongside his baptism. This is considered a universal fact and is not even up for debate.


This is even confirmed by multiple different non Christian sources outside the gospel

Tacitus (Roman historian, Annals ~AD 116): "Christus, from whom the name [Christians] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty [crucifixion] during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus."


View attachment 4989459

Josephus (Jewish historian, Antiquities of the Jews ~AD 93): Refers to Jesus as a wise man executed by Pilate via crucifixion. Josephus also clarified James as "the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ."

View attachment 4989460

And the all the sources i mentioned come from Roman, Jewish, and non Christian perspectives and they all independently reported the same event word for word as it was written in the gospels and arrived at the same conclusion. No ancient historian or even Christian haters that bashed jesus on his teachings like Celsus denied the crucifixion itself what they disagreed and disputed about was its meaning or the resurrection claims that followed.

View attachment 4989476

We have even found Archaeological evidence supports the practice: 1st-century crucified remains (e.g., the heel bone of "Yehohanan" with a nail) confirm Roman crucifixion methods in Judea matched Gospel descriptions exactly

View attachment 4989485

But Surah An-Nisa (4:157) directly conflicts with the historical evidence for Jesus's crucifixion.

View attachment 4989479

You'll only find this in Islamic texts and nowhere else. The Quran is divine revelation and thus infallible, so earlier sources (Gospels, historical records) must be mistaken, corrupted (tahrif), or illusory as per 4:157 and overall there's 0 convincing explanation and argument given for this by Muslim scholars

Some Muslims argue the verse only denies that the Jews succeeded in killing Jesus (Romans carried it out), or that Jesus didn't truly "die" in a spiritual sense, or that the appearance was deceptive by divine act or that Jesus was substituted for someone else and some modern ones like certain Ahmadis or scholars like Shabir Ally in softer readings allow for a crucifixion that didn't result in permanent death. But all mostly deflections that non islamic scholars and historian simply reject


View attachment 4989507

Christians see the crucifixion as central to atonement and prophecy fulfillment. The crucifixion of Christ is the main event in Christianity while Muslims see it as incompatible with a prophet's dignity and God's sovereignty so it remains a sensitive topic but that doesn't take away from the massive contraindication that exists in Quran. There are 2 more such contraindications that exist that I'll make. A thread about later
What religion do you follow? Do you believe in anything?
 
  • +1
Reactions: Jason Voorhees
  • +1
  • Love it
  • Woah
Reactions: Xcruvia, Divineincel, Kara and 4 others
@MLP @mohito @Sayori
 
  • +1
Reactions: Sayori, Pony and mohito
I think itโ€™s said that Jesus is the best documented figure in history
 
  • +1
Reactions: Xcruvia, Divineincel, callard and 1 other person
I already wrote about this in OP and it already got rejected by scholars. If you have some new argument or some unique perspective then post it here.
The quran mentions it wasn't actually jesus, and people were made to believe it was

,,rejected by scholars''

Which scholars? In what field? On what basis?


This isn't even a real refutation it's an appeal to authority, historians accept the crucifixion of jesus as the most likely explanation, thats not the same as absolute certainty or proof, the same historians reject miracles of jesus like turning water into wine, because their method can't verify supernatural sources, so ofc they're gonna reject anything that involves devine intervention including alternate explanations of the crucifiction

There is not a single authority group that can universally reject a religious interpretation of the Quran

Your first part makes no sense either, but ill focus on this one for now

Also not to mention the hundreds of thousands of real contradictions in the bible
 
  • +1
Reactions: cortisolman2
@tansel @Verdam
 
  • +1
Reactions: tansel, deludedsuhumanbald, JbwKlassik and 1 other person
Part 1 here



This the biggest contradiction in Islam by far and is very central to the idea of Christianity. So let's make it clear

The crucifixion of Jesus is considered a "bedrock" fact. Jewish, Christian, Roman, Atheist historians and theologists all agree with the fact that Jesus Christ was crucified infact the execution of Jesus of Nazareth under Pontius Pilate (Roman prefect of Judea, ~AD 26-36) is one of the most certain facts about his life alongside his baptism. This is considered a universal fact and is not even up for debate.


This is even confirmed by multiple different non Christian sources outside the gospel

Tacitus (Roman historian, Annals ~AD 116): "Christus, from whom the name [Christians] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty [crucifixion] during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus."


View attachment 4989459

Josephus (Jewish historian, Antiquities of the Jews ~AD 93): Refers to Jesus as a wise man executed by Pilate via crucifixion. Josephus also clarified James as "the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ."

View attachment 4989460

And the all the sources i mentioned come from Roman, Jewish, and non Christian perspectives and they all independently reported the same event word for word as it was written in the gospels and arrived at the same conclusion. No ancient historian or even Christian haters that bashed jesus on his teachings like Celsus denied the crucifixion itself what they disagreed and disputed about was its meaning or the resurrection claims that followed.

View attachment 4989476

We have even found Archaeological evidence supports the practice: 1st-century crucified remains (e.g., the heel bone of "Yehohanan" with a nail) confirm Roman crucifixion methods in Judea matched Gospel descriptions exactly

View attachment 4989485

But Surah An-Nisa (4:157) directly conflicts with the historical evidence for Jesus's crucifixion.

View attachment 4989479

You'll only find this in Islamic texts and nowhere else. The Quran is divine revelation and thus infallible, so earlier sources (Gospels, historical records) must be mistaken, corrupted (tahrif), or illusory as per 4:157 and overall there's 0 convincing explanation and argument given for this by Muslim scholars

Some Muslims argue the verse only denies that the Jews succeeded in killing Jesus (Romans carried it out), or that Jesus didn't truly "die" in a spiritual sense, or that the appearance was deceptive by divine act or that Jesus was substituted for someone else and some modern ones like certain Ahmadis or scholars like Shabir Ally in softer readings allow for a crucifixion that didn't result in permanent death. But all mostly deflections that non islamic scholars and historian simply reject


View attachment 4989507

Christians see the crucifixion as central to atonement and prophecy fulfillment. The crucifixion of Christ is the main event in Christianity while Muslims see it as incompatible with a prophet's dignity and God's sovereignty so it remains a sensitive topic but that doesn't take away from the massive contraindication that exists in Quran. There are 2 more such contraindications that exist that I'll make. A thread about later
shit thread
 
  • +1
Reactions: Jason Voorhees
Kinda funny how Islam has the least convincing evidence out of all the major world religions (meme religion to anyone with a brain). Yet somehow it has the most pious followers and martyrs
 
  • +1
  • JFL
  • Ugh..
Reactions: cortisolman2, callard, deludedsuhumanbald and 3 others
Kinda funny how Islam has the least convincing evidence out of all the major world religions (meme religion to anyone with a brain). Yet somehow it has the most pious followers and martyrs
Youโ€™d be surprised what you can achieve by brainwashing kids from the moment they are born with violence and promises of virgin ladies and unlimited pleasure when they go to heaven, klassik sandmonkeys :lul::lul:
 
  • +1
Reactions: ltnbrownacnecel, deludedsuhumanbald, Swarthy Knight and 1 other person
The quran mentions it wasn't actually jesus, and people were made to believe it was

,,rejected by scholars''

Which scholars? In what field? On what basis?


This isn't even a real refutation it's an appeal to authority, historians accept the crucifixion of jesus as the most likely explanation, thats not the same as absolute certainty or proof, the same historians reject miracles of jesus like turning water into wine, because their method can't verify supernatural sources, so ofc they're gonna reject anything that involves devine intervention including alternate explanations of the crucifiction

There is not a single authority group that can universally reject a religious interpretation of the Quran

Your first part makes no sense either, but ill focus on this one for now

Also not to mention the hundreds of thousands of real contradictions in the bible
It isn't just Christian scholars. Agnostic Bart Ehrman Jewish Paula Fredriksen and even a few modern islamic scholars accept crucifixion. They don't do this based on 'divine intervention' but on the same rules of evidence used for Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar. Scholars reject it not because they are biased but it is based on the fact that every 1st century source Christian, Jewish, and Roman agrees on the physical event. whereas the substitution theory only appeared 600 years later
Bible can have all the contradictions in the world but it doesn't change the fact that the two accounts of this specific event cannot both be historically accurate.
 
  • +1
Reactions: callard, ltnbrownacnecel, silently_said and 2 others
Part 1 here



This the biggest contradiction in Islam by far and is very central to the idea of Christianity. So let's make it clear

The crucifixion of Jesus is considered a "bedrock" fact. Jewish, Christian, Roman, Atheist historians and theologists all agree with the fact that Jesus Christ was crucified infact the execution of Jesus of Nazareth under Pontius Pilate (Roman prefect of Judea, ~AD 26-36) is one of the most certain facts about his life alongside his baptism. This is considered a universal fact and is not even up for debate.


This is even confirmed by multiple different non Christian sources outside the gospel

Tacitus (Roman historian, Annals ~AD 116): "Christus, from whom the name [Christians] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty [crucifixion] during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus."


View attachment 4989459

Josephus (Jewish historian, Antiquities of the Jews ~AD 93): Refers to Jesus as a wise man executed by Pilate via crucifixion. Josephus also clarified James as "the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ."

View attachment 4989460

And the all the sources i mentioned come from Roman, Jewish, and non Christian perspectives and they all independently reported the same event word for word as it was written in the gospels and arrived at the same conclusion. No ancient historian or even Christian haters that bashed jesus on his teachings like Celsus denied the crucifixion itself what they disagreed and disputed about was its meaning or the resurrection claims that followed.

View attachment 4989476

We have even found Archaeological evidence supports the practice: 1st-century crucified remains (e.g., the heel bone of "Yehohanan" with a nail) confirm Roman crucifixion methods in Judea matched Gospel descriptions exactly

View attachment 4989485

But Surah An-Nisa (4:157) directly conflicts with the historical evidence for Jesus's crucifixion.

View attachment 4989479

You'll only find this in Islamic texts and nowhere else. The Quran is divine revelation and thus infallible, so earlier sources (Gospels, historical records) must be mistaken, corrupted (tahrif), or illusory as per 4:157 and overall there's 0 convincing explanation and argument given for this by Muslim scholars

Some Muslims argue the verse only denies that the Jews succeeded in killing Jesus (Romans carried it out), or that Jesus didn't truly "die" in a spiritual sense, or that the appearance was deceptive by divine act or that Jesus was substituted for someone else and some modern ones like certain Ahmadis or scholars like Shabir Ally in softer readings allow for a crucifixion that didn't result in permanent death. But all mostly deflections that non islamic scholars and historian simply reject


View attachment 4989507

Christians see the crucifixion as central to atonement and prophecy fulfillment. The crucifixion of Christ is the main event in Christianity while Muslims see it as incompatible with a prophet's dignity and God's sovereignty so it remains a sensitive topic but that doesn't take away from the massive contraindication that exists in Quran. There are 2 more such contraindications that exist that I'll make. A thread about later
mohammad was a FAGGOT who died like a BITCH by a jewess queen
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: callard and Jason Voorhees
The quran mentions it wasn't actually jesus, and people were made to believe it was

,,rejected by scholars''

Which scholars? In what field? On what basis?


This isn't even a real refutation it's an appeal to authority, historians accept the crucifixion of jesus as the most likely explanation, thats not the same as absolute certainty or proof, the same historians reject miracles of jesus like turning water into wine, because their method can't verify supernatural sources, so ofc they're gonna reject anything that involves devine intervention including alternate explanations of the crucifiction

There is not a single authority group that can universally reject a religious interpretation of the Quran

Your first part makes no sense either, but ill focus on this one for now

Also not to mention the hundreds of thousands of real contradictions in the bible
Arabs are so subhuman LMFAO ur ugly asf keep getting bombed bitch u defend a faggot

jewish girl killed mohammad HAHA fuck u
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: callard, Jason Voorhees, JbwKlassik and 1 other person
Kinda funny how Islam has the least convincing evidence out of all the major world religions (meme religion to anyone with a brain). Yet somehow it has the most pious followers and martyrs
pious? they do shit not from their heart but fear of Hell. they rape people, are retarded liars dont even follow their religion all saudis are not even pious
 
  • +1
Reactions: Jason Voorhees and JbwKlassik
It isn't just Christian scholars. Agnostic Bart Ehrman Jewish Paula Fredriksen and even a few modern islamic scholars accept crucifixion. They don't do this based on 'divine intervention' but on the same rules of evidence used for Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar. Scholars reject it not because they are biased but it is based on the fact that every 1st century source Christian, Jewish, and Roman agrees on the physical event. whereas the substitution theory only appeared 600 years later
Bible can have all the contradictions in the world but it doesn't change the fact that the two accounts of this specific event cannot both be historically accurate.
you cooked the FAGGOT donkey subhuman
 
  • +1
Reactions: Jason Voorhees
Part 1 here



This the biggest contradiction in Islam by far and is very central to the idea of Christianity. So let's make it clear

The crucifixion of Jesus is considered a "bedrock" fact. Jewish, Christian, Roman, Atheist historians and theologists all agree with the fact that Jesus Christ was crucified infact the execution of Jesus of Nazareth under Pontius Pilate (Roman prefect of Judea, ~AD 26-36) is one of the most certain facts about his life alongside his baptism. This is considered a universal fact and is not even up for debate.


This is even confirmed by multiple different non Christian sources outside the gospel

Tacitus (Roman historian, Annals ~AD 116): "Christus, from whom the name [Christians] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty [crucifixion] during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus."


View attachment 4989459

Josephus (Jewish historian, Antiquities of the Jews ~AD 93): Refers to Jesus as a wise man executed by Pilate via crucifixion. Josephus also clarified James as "the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ."

View attachment 4989460

And the all the sources i mentioned come from Roman, Jewish, and non Christian perspectives and they all independently reported the same event word for word as it was written in the gospels and arrived at the same conclusion. No ancient historian or even Christian haters that bashed jesus on his teachings like Celsus denied the crucifixion itself what they disagreed and disputed about was its meaning or the resurrection claims that followed.

View attachment 4989476

We have even found Archaeological evidence supports the practice: 1st-century crucified remains (e.g., the heel bone of "Yehohanan" with a nail) confirm Roman crucifixion methods in Judea matched Gospel descriptions exactly

View attachment 4989485

But Surah An-Nisa (4:157) directly conflicts with the historical evidence for Jesus's crucifixion.

View attachment 4989479

You'll only find this in Islamic texts and nowhere else. The Quran is divine revelation and thus infallible, so earlier sources (Gospels, historical records) must be mistaken, corrupted (tahrif), or illusory as per 4:157 and overall there's 0 convincing explanation and argument given for this by Muslim scholars

Some Muslims argue the verse only denies that the Jews succeeded in killing Jesus (Romans carried it out), or that Jesus didn't truly "die" in a spiritual sense, or that the appearance was deceptive by divine act or that Jesus was substituted for someone else and some modern ones like certain Ahmadis or scholars like Shabir Ally in softer readings allow for a crucifixion that didn't result in permanent death. But all mostly deflections that non islamic scholars and historian simply reject


View attachment 4989507

Christians see the crucifixion as central to atonement and prophecy fulfillment. The crucifixion of Christ is the main event in Christianity while Muslims see it as incompatible with a prophet's dignity and God's sovereignty so it remains a sensitive topic but that doesn't take away from the massive contraindication that exists in Quran. There are 2 more such contraindications that exist that I'll make. A thread about late
I will respond in 1 hour
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Jason Voorhees and iblamexyz
Kinda funny how Islam has the least convincing evidence out of all the major world religions (meme religion to anyone with a brain). Yet somehow it has the most pious followers and martyrs
u think Vishnu being a perv is more believeable?
 
  • +1
Reactions: Ahmed88
Part 1 here



This the biggest contradiction in Islam by far and is very central to the idea of Christianity. So let's make it clear

The crucifixion of Jesus is considered a "bedrock" fact. Jewish, Christian, Roman, Atheist historians and theologists all agree with the fact that Jesus Christ was crucified infact the execution of Jesus of Nazareth under Pontius Pilate (Roman prefect of Judea, ~AD 26-36) is one of the most certain facts about his life alongside his baptism. This is considered a universal fact and is not even up for debate.


This is even confirmed by multiple different non Christian sources outside the gospel

Tacitus (Roman historian, Annals ~AD 116): "Christus, from whom the name [Christians] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty [crucifixion] during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus."


View attachment 4989459

Josephus (Jewish historian, Antiquities of the Jews ~AD 93): Refers to Jesus as a wise man executed by Pilate via crucifixion. Josephus also clarified James as "the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ."

View attachment 4989460

And the all the sources i mentioned come from Roman, Jewish, and non Christian perspectives and they all independently reported the same event word for word as it was written in the gospels and arrived at the same conclusion. No ancient historian or even Christian haters that bashed jesus on his teachings like Celsus denied the crucifixion itself what they disagreed and disputed about was its meaning or the resurrection claims that followed.

View attachment 4989476

We have even found Archaeological evidence supports the practice: 1st-century crucified remains (e.g., the heel bone of "Yehohanan" with a nail) confirm Roman crucifixion methods in Judea matched Gospel descriptions exactly

View attachment 4989485

But Surah An-Nisa (4:157) directly conflicts with the historical evidence for Jesus's crucifixion.

View attachment 4989479

You'll only find this in Islamic texts and nowhere else. The Quran is divine revelation and thus infallible, so earlier sources (Gospels, historical records) must be mistaken, corrupted (tahrif), or illusory as per 4:157 and overall there's 0 convincing explanation and argument given for this by Muslim scholars

Some Muslims argue the verse only denies that the Jews succeeded in killing Jesus (Romans carried it out), or that Jesus didn't truly "die" in a spiritual sense, or that the appearance was deceptive by divine act or that Jesus was substituted for someone else and some modern ones like certain Ahmadis or scholars like Shabir Ally in softer readings allow for a crucifixion that didn't result in permanent death. But all mostly deflections that non islamic scholars and historian simply reject


View attachment 4989507

Christians see the crucifixion as central to atonement and prophecy fulfillment. The crucifixion of Christ is the main event in Christianity while Muslims see it as incompatible with a prophet's dignity and God's sovereignty so it remains a sensitive topic but that doesn't take away from the massive contraindication that exists in Quran. There are 2 more such contraindications that exist that I'll make. A thread about later
 
  • Hmm...
  • +1
Reactions: Jason Voorhees and Ahmed88
It isn't just Christian scholars. Agnostic Bart Ehrman Jewish Paula Fredriksen and even a few modern islamic scholars accept crucifixion. They don't do this based on 'divine intervention' but on the same rules of evidence used for Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar. Scholars reject it not because they are biased but it is based on the fact that every 1st century source Christian, Jewish, and Roman agrees on the physical event. whereas the substitution theory only appeared 600 years later
Bible can have all the contradictions in the world but it doesn't change the fact that the two accounts of this specific event cannot both be historically accurate.
What don't you undertand, yes even tho scholars accept the crucifixion under pilate, it is still a historical reconstruction not absolute truth, based on later latery written sources, not the same level of certainty as julius or alexander, also all sources agree is just wrong, even your main sources, tacitus and josephus wrote decades later and have possibility of edits conducted by Christians, also just because something appeared 600 years later doesn't make it wrong, all this isn't

a fact, debunk or propf that Islam is false or contradictory, you're trying to apply scientific logic to divine miracles, which is stupid

Also no the Bible cannot have multiple contradictions if it's the so called divine word of god??????
 
  • +1
Reactions: AppealGod123 and dhusc
Part 1 here



This the biggest contradiction in Islam by far and is very central to the idea of Christianity. So let's make it clear

The crucifixion of Jesus is considered a "bedrock" fact. Jewish, Christian, Roman, Atheist historians and theologists all agree with the fact that Jesus Christ was crucified infact the execution of Jesus of Nazareth under Pontius Pilate (Roman prefect of Judea, ~AD 26-36) is one of the most certain facts about his life alongside his baptism. This is considered a universal fact and is not even up for debate.


This is even confirmed by multiple different non Christian sources outside the gospel

Tacitus (Roman historian, Annals ~AD 116): "Christus, from whom the name [Christians] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty [crucifixion] during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus."


View attachment 4989459

Josephus (Jewish historian, Antiquities of the Jews ~AD 93): Refers to Jesus as a wise man executed by Pilate via crucifixion. Josephus also clarified James as "the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ."

View attachment 4989460

And the all the sources i mentioned come from Roman, Jewish, and non Christian perspectives and they all independently reported the same event word for word as it was written in the gospels and arrived at the same conclusion. No ancient historian or even Christian haters that bashed jesus on his teachings like Celsus denied the crucifixion itself what they disagreed and disputed about was its meaning or the resurrection claims that followed.

View attachment 4989476

We have even found Archaeological evidence supports the practice: 1st-century crucified remains (e.g., the heel bone of "Yehohanan" with a nail) confirm Roman crucifixion methods in Judea matched Gospel descriptions exactly

View attachment 4989485

But Surah An-Nisa (4:157) directly conflicts with the historical evidence for Jesus's crucifixion.

View attachment 4989479

You'll only find this in Islamic texts and nowhere else. The Quran is divine revelation and thus infallible, so earlier sources (Gospels, historical records) must be mistaken, corrupted (tahrif), or illusory as per 4:157 and overall there's 0 convincing explanation and argument given for this by Muslim scholars

Some Muslims argue the verse only denies that the Jews succeeded in killing Jesus (Romans carried it out), or that Jesus didn't truly "die" in a spiritual sense, or that the appearance was deceptive by divine act or that Jesus was substituted for someone else and some modern ones like certain Ahmadis or scholars like Shabir Ally in softer readings allow for a crucifixion that didn't result in permanent death. But all mostly deflections that non islamic scholars and historian simply reject


View attachment 4989507

Christians see the crucifixion as central to atonement and prophecy fulfillment. The crucifixion of Christ is the main event in Christianity while Muslims see it as incompatible with a prophet's dignity and God's sovereignty so it remains a sensitive topic but that doesn't take away from the massive contraindication that exists in Quran. There are 2 more such contraindications that exist that I'll make. A thread about later
also none of what you mention deny the crucifixion either
 
  • +1
Reactions: Ahmed88
Part 1 here



This the biggest contradiction in Islam by far and is very central to the idea of Christianity. So let's make it clear

The crucifixion of Jesus is considered a "bedrock" fact. Jewish, Christian, Roman, Atheist historians and theologists all agree with the fact that Jesus Christ was crucified infact the execution of Jesus of Nazareth under Pontius Pilate (Roman prefect of Judea, ~AD 26-36) is one of the most certain facts about his life alongside his baptism. This is considered a universal fact and is not even up for debate.


This is even confirmed by multiple different non Christian sources outside the gospel

Tacitus (Roman historian, Annals ~AD 116): "Christus, from whom the name [Christians] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty [crucifixion] during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus."


View attachment 4989459

Josephus (Jewish historian, Antiquities of the Jews ~AD 93): Refers to Jesus as a wise man executed by Pilate via crucifixion. Josephus also clarified James as "the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ."

View attachment 4989460

And the all the sources i mentioned come from Roman, Jewish, and non Christian perspectives and they all independently reported the same event word for word as it was written in the gospels and arrived at the same conclusion. No ancient historian or even Christian haters that bashed jesus on his teachings like Celsus denied the crucifixion itself what they disagreed and disputed about was its meaning or the resurrection claims that followed.

View attachment 4989476

We have even found Archaeological evidence supports the practice: 1st-century crucified remains (e.g., the heel bone of "Yehohanan" with a nail) confirm Roman crucifixion methods in Judea matched Gospel descriptions exactly

View attachment 4989485

But Surah An-Nisa (4:157) directly conflicts with the historical evidence for Jesus's crucifixion.

View attachment 4989479

You'll only find this in Islamic texts and nowhere else. The Quran is divine revelation and thus infallible, so earlier sources (Gospels, historical records) must be mistaken, corrupted (tahrif), or illusory as per 4:157 and overall there's 0 convincing explanation and argument given for this by Muslim scholars

Some Muslims argue the verse only denies that the Jews succeeded in killing Jesus (Romans carried it out), or that Jesus didn't truly "die" in a spiritual sense, or that the appearance was deceptive by divine act or that Jesus was substituted for someone else and some modern ones like certain Ahmadis or scholars like Shabir Ally in softer readings allow for a crucifixion that didn't result in permanent death. But all mostly deflections that non islamic scholars and historian simply reject


View attachment 4989507

Christians see the crucifixion as central to atonement and prophecy fulfillment. The crucifixion of Christ is the main event in Christianity while Muslims see it as incompatible with a prophet's dignity and God's sovereignty so it remains a sensitive topic but that doesn't take away from the massive contraindication that exists in Quran. There are 2 more such contraindications that exist that I'll make. A thread about later
wow this thread is based MIRIN
 
  • +1
Reactions: Jason Voorhees, deludedsuhumanbald and ltnbrownacnecel
It isn't just Christian scholars. Agnostic Bart Ehrman Jewish Paula Fredriksen and even a few modern islamic scholars accept crucifixion. They don't do this based on 'divine intervention' but on the same rules of evidence used for Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar. Scholars reject it not because they are biased but it is based on the fact that every 1st century source Christian, Jewish, and Roman agrees on the physical event. whereas the substitution theory only appeared 600 years later
Bible can have all the contradictions in the world but it doesn't change the fact that the two accounts of this specific event cannot both be historically accurate.
โ€œBible can have all the contradictions in the worldโ€ how can the divine word of god have contradictions?
 
  • +1
Reactions: Ahmed88
What don't you undertand, yes even tho scholars accept the crucifixion under pilate, it is still a historical reconstruction not absolute truth, based on later latery written sources, not the same level of certainty as julius or alexander, also all sources agree is just wrong, even your main sources, tacitus and josephus wrote decades later and have possibility of edits conducted by Christians, also just because something appeared 600 years later doesn't make it wrong, all this isn't

a fact, debunk or propf that Islam is false or contradictory, you're trying to apply scientific logic to divine miracles, which is stupid

Also no the Bible cannot have multiple contradictions if it's the so called divine word of god??????
Ahmed is a muslimcel couldn't see this coming
 
  • +1
  • Hmm...
  • JFL
Reactions: psltristan1, Jason Voorhees, ltnbrownacnecel and 2 others
What don't you undertand, yes even tho scholars accept the crucifixion under pilate, it is still a historical reconstruction not absolute truth, based on later latery written sources, not the same level of certainty as julius or alexander, also all sources agree is just wrong, even your main sources, tacitus and josephus wrote decades later and have possibility of edits conducted by Christians, also just because something appeared 600 years later doesn't make it wrong, all this isn't

a fact, debunk or propf that Islam is false or contradictory, you're trying to apply scientific logic to divine miracles, which is stupid

Also no the Bible cannot have multiple contradictions if it's the so called divine word of god??????
Nobody cares you ugly subhuman God hates u and ur people get blown up ur faggot prophet die to a jewess ur top debaters lose.

 
  • JFL
Reactions: iblamexyz
Yk I dislike all religion but christianity is definitely better than islam. Only inbred braindead retards defend Islam.
 
  • +1
  • Love it
Reactions: JbwKlassik, silently_said and iblamexyz

Similar threads

yourawesomesauce67
Replies
7
Views
38
fraudislaw
fraudislaw
acm
Replies
2
Views
36
purpleskulltrooper
purpleskulltrooper
Isle of sippy
Replies
0
Views
9
Isle of sippy
Isle of sippy
isis_Bleach
Replies
36
Views
248
nestivv
nestivv
chang cypionate
Replies
13
Views
84
Lemur
Lemur

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top