Seb (@sebconverted) header
Seb (@sebconverted) profile picture

I mainly use Instagram & YouTube

Joined April 2022
Photo by Seb (@sebconverted)Photo by Seb (@sebconverted)Photo by Seb (@sebconverted)Photo by Seb (@sebconverted)Photo by Seb (@sebconverted)Photo by Seb (@sebconverted)Photo by Seb (@sebconverted)Photo by Seb (@sebconverted)Photo by Seb (@sebconverted)Photo by Seb (@sebconverted)
Claiming that Moses taught the Trinity is a greater historical anachronism than claiming the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ used WhatsApp.
(INTENSE) @GodLogic_GL Apologetics Vs Dr. Javad Hashmi on if Any Jews Believed in the Trinity
24
32
5
309
8,969
Seb retweeted
Why is this still your pinned tweet?
“The wicked flee when no one pursues, but the righteous are bold as a lion.” - Proverbs 28:1
2
13
295
Seb retweeted
なんでクルアーンがアラビア語なのかやっと理解できた
6
1
4
102
37,937
Replying to @lucamarcelino
It’s not an account of Jesus rising from the dead, it’s just a misleading repackaging of Josephus’ testimonium flavianum.
8
15
2
332
6,305
Replying to @serrrated
I'd only being joining him in heaven as we're both Muslim.
1
1
27
624
You realize they’re removing people from Republican rallies for wearing hats that say “America First,” right?
376
1,121
89
8,107
386,438
How do you know these aren’t modalists? Or Subordinationist? Or that they merely believe the spirit is a power not a person? Or that they believe the Son and Spirit are co eternal?
Clear evidence of Trinitarian worship before 325AD. Yeah Inn Kathir is wrong, wrong, wrong...
12
2
97
3,397
Seb retweeted
🔹Does the Qur'an make a mistake in its two retellings of the good news of Yahya?🔹 An analysis by Dr Fadel Samarrai ... 🧵
✅ Challenge accepted. The Quran, considered “perfect, divine, and free of contradictions” by Muslims, is nevertheless a contradictory work containing glaring human errors. Here is just ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE (which, incidentally, involves no fewer than three contradictions!), a more in-depth analysis of which can be found in my book 100 Contradictions and Scientific Errors in the Quran. In the Quran, Allah sometimes recounts the same historical event twice, in two different surahs, as when He describes, in two different places in the Quran (Surah 3 and Surah 19), the moment when He has His angels announce to Zechariah that he will have a son: John. However, the human author hiding behind Allah's pen made the mistake, in each of these two surahs, of describing this event using verbatim quotations, that is, dialogues, and more specifically, statements made in the first person. Indeed, a perfect God who knows everything—and therefore knows the exact words spoken during a specific historical event—should not present TWO CONTRADICTORY VERSIONS OF ONE AND THE SAME FIRST-PERSON STATEMENT, which He should quote identically whenever He reproduces it in different surahs of the Quran. So, what did Zechariah reply when Allah conveyed to him the announcement of John's birth? According to verse 40 of Surah 3, Allah states that Zechariah, surprised, replied: “My Lord, how will I have a boy when I have reached old age and my wife is barren?” Yet, in verse 8 of Surah 19, Allah states that Zechariah, at that very same moment, said: “My Lord, how will I have a boy when my wife is barren and I have reached extreme old age?” These two Quranic quotations, from Surahs 3 and 19, supposedly reproduce the same words spoken by Zechariah during one single, specific historical event. They should therefore have been identical, word for word. Yet these two quotations reverse the order of the two arguments, while also differing by an adjective that appears in one version but is absent from the other. You must answer these three simple and binary questions to demonstrate that Allah does not contradict Himself in the Quran: ➜ 1. When Zechariah, surprised by the announcement Allah had conveyed to him, replied, did he say “I have reached old age” or “I have reached EXTREME old age”? ➜ 2. And did Zechariah mention his old age BEFORE or AFTER mentioning his wife's barrenness? The factual and historical account presented in Surah 3 contradicts and invalidates the one presented in Surah 19, even though both are supposedly equally divine and truthful. Furthermore, what answer did Zechariah receive to his request? Here again, there is a contradiction! The divine response that follows is not quite the same in the two accounts. For while, in verse 41 of Surah 3, Allah indicates that the response begins with “Your sign is that you will not be able to speak to the people for three days” (أَيَّامٍ / ayyāmin), the version of the beginning of the response in verse 10 of Surah 19 is “Your sign is that you will not be able to speak to the people for three nights” (لَيَالٍ / layālin). Did Allah therefore have two different recollections of the dialogue with Zechariah recorded in Surahs 3 and 19 of the Quran? ➜ 3. So which was the correct expression addressed to Zechariah: “three days” or “three nights”? The issue is not whether “three days” and “three nights” are equivalent in duration. These are supposed to be verbatim quotations describing one and the same specific statement. We should therefore find exactly the same words in both versions, in Surah 3 and Surah 19. The human author of the Quran made the mistake of recounting the same historical event multiple times while including first-person dialogue. And I have found other contradictions of the same kind in the Quran: involving Moses, Abraham, Mary the mother of Jesus, and others. I analyze them all in the chapter of my book 100 Contradictions and Scientific Errors in the Quran devoted to narrative contradictions. Allah, who “neither errs nor forgets” (Surah 20, verse 52), should be capable of remembering His exact words, word for word, and therefore reproducing them word for word. Allah should not be imprecise or have two different recollections of the exact words He heard or spoke during one and the same event.
2
7
31
1,419
What’s the point of this?
1
10
148
1,365
He reached out to @mulimorthodoxy after that wonderful conversation and is ready to become a muslim This amazing may Allah ease his journey and make him a good believer
6
39
2
664
14,039
Non Muslim Scholar Dr Samuel Zinner isn’t convinced Belle Liu He thought I cooked though lowkey
Does the Bible make this mistake?
1
12
161
5,455
I’d love to host a panel on Dhul Qarnayn with people representing all different opinions and perspectives on the subject. It’s a shame we haven’t done this yet, but I think a respectful discussion could be a genuinely fruitful step forward. Just not sure who’d be down lol.
14
5
77
3,174
If the greatest, most knowledgeable students of Imam Ja’far were all Sunni, what does this tell you about Imam Ja’far? 🤔
HANAFIS ❤️ JA’FARIS Imam Abu Hanifa was the student of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq Imam Abu Hanifa was a Tabi’i. He was from the second generation, from the Salaf. He was earlier than Imam Malik, Imam Shafi, Imam Ahmad and Imam Bukhari.
22
25
2
377
17,407
Dear Christians, Jesus would be proud of you if you embraced Islam. Look for the truth and REPENT!
165
15
17
92
33,873
Just discovered Arabic gumball
170
4,559
411
44,275
1,541,731
Gordon Nickel, a well respected scholar of Islam admits that he is interested in Islamic studies only because he wants to refute polemics made against Christianity by Muslims and hopefully his works can cause Muslims to have doubts about the Quran and the Hadith 🤣👍 Fair enough but a glaring double standard arises. Why is Nickel's work seen as serious scholarship? I mean would anyone take works done by Muslims who believe the Quran is the word of god and does apologetical works against the Bible and for the Quran whether in Quranic or Biblical studies? I think the answer is clear for why Gordon Nickel’s work is sometimes taken more seriously than that of Muslim scholars with openly apologetic commitments is a double standard within the field. Muslim scholars who affirm the Qur’an as divine revelation are often treated as inherently biased, whereas a Christian scholar who is openly critical of Islam may still be regarded as comparatively objective. The Orientalist field is racist and biased towards White people as well as those from western backgrounds and cultures whose works are seen as less biased..
5
9
80
5,332
Seb retweeted
This is even more impressive when you realize that Quranic exegetes for centuries did not realize these.
The Quranic author knows Hebrew! 😯 Speaker: Dr Ali Ataie
29
323
8
3,014
125,649
I debated the Code 19, Quran-only’s favorite heretic on Sean Kelly’s podcast. And he just proves that they have nothing to stand on.  From rejecting verses of the Quran to appealing to September 11th as divine evidence, this conversation EXPOSES their nonsensical stance.
52
24
3
200
24,625
Seb retweeted
This is a popular, deceptive polemical comparison that has been circulating for many years. You'll notice that the person who made it altered the Arabic د (dāl), as in محمد, to look more like the Syriac ܥ (ʿayn), as in ܝܫܘܥ
This quoted post is unavailable.
2
1
1
9
2,114
Dr Samuel Zinner a Phd holder and specialist in the Bible and Quran, confirms that my theory of the Paraklete being referenced by the Qurans application of the term “Ahmed” is plausible. He mentions later in the discussion that the idea of the paraklete being the holy spirit is not what he holds to. He believes the Paraklete is applied by the author of John to be himself. This can lay the groundwork for muslim arguments that the Paraklete is in reference to a future human figure who is glorified and will glorify Jesus, and thus “Ahmed”. As Quran 61:6 says: “And ˹remember˺ when Jesus, son of Mary, said, “O children of Israel! I am truly Allah’s messenger to you, confirming the Torah which came before me, and giving good news of a messenger after me whose name will be Aḥmad.” Yet when the Prophet came to them with clear proofs, they said, “This is pure magic.” (Quran 61:6)
10
24
3
116
6,297