Il est bien connu que le « christianisme » d'aujourd'hui ait des origines douteuses, qui ironiquement ne vient pas de Jésus, paix soit sur lui (bien que la structure entière est attribuée à lui), mais de Paul de tarse, qui peut être correctement mentionné As « qui apôtre satanique ». Pour lui était Paul qui a établi les bases religieuses du christianisme d'aujourd'hui, doctrines basées sur l'idolâtrie et pensée philosophique de l'empire Greco-Romain alors.
La vidéo suivante près Cheik Khalid Yasin de New York récapitule l'essence de la religion chrétienne en cinq minutes. Cette vidéo est accueillie à Fuite de phase.
Subscribe
Subscribe Articles With
Bloglines, Google Reader, My MSN, Netvibes, Newsburst
Newsgator, Odeo, Pluck, Podnova, Rojo, My Yahoo!, Desktop Reader
By Month
Most Popular Articles
- The Authentic Gospel of Jesus: Evidence That Demands Christians Rethink Their Faith
- The Consensus on Homosexuality and The Illiteracy of Christian Polemicists
- Missionary Activity in Kosovo and the Causes of Muslim Conversions
- Learning Christianity in five minutes
- Response To "Muhammad as Al-Amin (the Trustworthy): How His Enemies Really Viewed Him" And The Christian Missionaries
- An Eye-Opening Biblical Narration
- Another Rational Approach to the Prophethood of Muhammad (P)
Denis Giron dit dessus 7 novembre 2007:
Il m'a frappé en tant qu'étant excessivement difficile de prendre ceci sérieusement.
Par exemple, un lieux de son argument semblent être celui si un livre était compilé 40 années ou plus après la période de Jésus, alors ce livre ne sont pas un texte fiable. La date traditionnelle pour la composition pour le Qur' (de manière significative) des plus de 40 années après le temps n'était-elle pas de Jésus ? M. Yasin soit disposé à admettre que c'est un argument pauvre ? Ou préférerait-il simplement à spécial parlent-il en faveur au nom du Qur' ?
Quel est ce peu au sujet de derniers noms ? Est-ce que chaque homme sur la planète même aujourd'hui, au 21ème siècle, a un premier et dernier nom ? And what is that bit about all the Church Fathers agreeing that, perhaps, these were just pen name, because no man would only put his first name and “according to”? I am very confident that Mr. Yasin would not be able to list even one Church Father who stated such, unless he drastically altered the meaning of “Church Father”.
And what serious authority, whether or Christian or not, actually believes that Paul authored all the books from Acts to the end of the New Testament? I cannot think of a single scholar, whether Christian or secular, who believes that Paul authored either of the two epistles attributed to Peter, the three epistles attributed to John, the epistles attributed to James, the epistle attributed to Jude, much less the Apocalypse attributed to John.
He seems intent on setting up a dichotomy between what Jesus said, and what is said about Jesus in the New Testament. What is his methodology for separating the two? And, as he went through the litany of things those authors said about Jesus, why did he not include the virgin birth? Does the same sort of insinuated reasoning not apply?
In short, and with all due respect to Mr. Yasin, I found this video to be filled with quite a few errors and instances of poor reasoning.
Musa said on 5 December 2007:
Assalamu ‘alaykum
I send to you two little debates about Jesus and his alleged divinity
http://www.dailymotion.com/ivo.....s-god_news
http://www.dailymotion.com/ivo.....ion_events
I think, it’s interesting
Bassam Zawadi said on 18 February 2008:
that khalid yasin speech left 22 australians converting to islam http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related