#1

@asfahawolde7915
4 months ago -@

Ppl time to wake up.

Those man made religions jewish, christianity and islam (shouldn't included in Abrahamic religion).

Are demonic teaching hajjact the books to be a snar to soul of men.

Find instead those that teach accordinly as the books say to teach.

To all wise muslims I assure you.

Allah is imposter the devil pretend to be the holy one God the creater of heaven and the earth. The holy one God is known by his statutes and commandments which is FOREVER.

Allah is imposter.
#2

@memeHub451
4 months ago -@

Alhamdulillah muslim 💞 for everything 💕💕💕
#3

@saywhatuwanttosay
4 months ago -@

Alhamdulillah for islam 🤍
#4

@Dejistic
4 months ago -@

Islam is the fastest growing religion because of birth rate not conversion
#5

@janganmarah8614
4 months ago -@

This loser is deceiving himself..
#6

@mdshahinur34
4 months ago -@

it's cool that you have started uploading videos
#7

@rider4745
4 months ago -@

Mashallah 💜
#8

@chauvinschristianministry762
4 months ago -@

Jay Smith is the best of deceivers.
#9

@cure4islamophobia649
4 months ago -@

Quranic Teachings about Satan and about Morality

Some claim that the Quran was the work of the devil.[1] Let us examine how much sense (or non-sense) this allegation makes.
If he authored or inspired the Quran, why would Satan curse himself and call himself the worst enemy of man (Q.35:6; 36:60)? Why would Satan command that before reciting the Quran, one must first say:
“…I seek refuge in God from Satan the accursed.” (Quran 16:98)
How could Satan so vehemently condemn himself? Is it really acceptable to common sense to hold the view that Satan would ask people to do good, to be moral and virtuous, to worship none but God, to not follow Satan or his whispers, and to avoid and struggle against evil?
To hold such a view is clearly repugnant to reason, as Satan has only undermined himself through this means if he is the author. Even the Bible attests:
“And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but is coming to an end.” (Mark 3:26)[2]
This argument applies to any “Satanic forces”, be they “evil spirits”, “deceitful aliens”, etc
#10

@cure4islamophobia649
4 months ago -@

What’s Missing from Codex Sinaiticus, the Oldest New Testament

Other omissions are taken more seriously, however, especially when they are confirmed by Codex Vaticanus and other manuscripts of better quality. Sinaiticus is also regarded more highly as a good example in the case of substitutions and additions. The scribe of Sinaiticus was not suggested to making erratic substitutions and additions, but deliberate additions or omissions to reinforce their doctrine.

Other "inspired" modification of the Church to Codex Sinaiticus and our modern Bibles are:

In Matthew 5:22, the words "without cause" are missing in both the codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.

The words of Matthew 6:13 "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever." Do not exist in these two most ancient manuscripts as well as many others. The parallel passages in Luke are also defective.

The original text of Matthew 8:2 as found in Codex Sinaiticus tells us that a leper asked Jesus to heal him and Jesus "angrily put forth [his] hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean." In our modern Bibles, the word "angrily" is strangely absent.

Matthew 17:21 is missing in Codex Sinaiticus.

Matthew 21:7 in our modern Bibles reads "And [the disciples] brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set [Jesus] thereon." In the original manuscripts, this verse read "and they set [Jesus] upon them," However, the picture of Jesus being placed upon two animals at the same time and being asked to ride them at once was objectionable to some, so this verse was changed to "and they set [Jesus] upon him" (which "him"?). Soon after, the English translation completely avoided this problem by translating it as "thereon."

Matthew 27:35 in our modern Bibles contains the words "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots." This passage, once again, is not found according to Rev. Merrill in any Biblical uncial manuscript dating before the ninth century.

In our modern Bibles, Mark 1:1 reads "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;" however, in this most ancient of all Christian manuscripts, this verse only reads "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ" Strangely, the very words which are most grating to the Quran, "the Son of God," are completely missing. Isn't that interesting?

In Mark 6:11, our modern Bibles contain the words "Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city." However, these words are not to be found in either of these two most ancient of Christian Biblical manuscripts, having been introduced into the text centuries later.

In Mark chapter 9, the words "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." are again missing.

The words of Jesus in Luke 9:55-56 are missing.

Luke 22:44 in Codex Sinaiticus and our modern Bibles claim that an angel appeared before Jesus, strengthening him. In Codex Vaticanus, this angel is strangely absent. If Jesus was the "Son of God" then obviously it would be highly inappropriate for him to need an angel to strengthen him. This verse, then, must have been a scribal mistake. Right?

The alleged words of Jesus on the cross "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Luke 23:34) were originally present in the Codex Sinaiticus but was later erased from the text by another editor. Bearing in mind how the Church regarded and treated the Jews in the Middle Ages, can we think of any reason why this verse might have stood in the way of official Church policy and their "inquisitions"?

John 5:4 is missing from Codex Sinaiticus.

1 Timothy 3:16 originally read "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: which was manifest in the flesh.." This was then later ever so subtly changed to "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh…." Thus, the doctrine of the "incarnation" was born

http://www.usislam.org/revise/4222CodexSinai.htm