Instigator / Pro

Slave123

1500

rating

debates

0.0%

won

Topic

#6190

Allah vs Yahweh

Status

Voting

The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.

Voting will end in:

Tags

Religion

Parameters

Publication date: 05.23.2025 08:54PM
Last updated date: 06.07.2025 08:28AM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 3
Time for argument: Three days
Max argument characters: 10,000
Voting period: Two weeks
Point system: Winner selection
Voting system: Open

Contender / Con

AdaptableRatman

1522

rating

debates

60.0%

won

Description

Yahweh isn’t real but a made up impossibility and there is no God but Allah and Muhammad saw is the last and final messenger and prophet amen

Round 1

Slave123

05.23.2025 09:14PM

Pro

There is only one God and there can only be one God and that is Allah swat

Yahweh is an impossibility

First of all we don’t even know how to pronounce his name yhwh has no vowels

He is only mentioned in the Old Testament and is described as a cold hearted merciless tyrant who commits genocide and orders genocide and even tell people to exterminate women children babies and animals!

Jesus never mentions Yahweh

Con believes Jesus is conjoined with Yahweh as part of the trinity

The trinity makes no sense and was fabricated in the fourth century

The Bible never mentions trinity

Jesus never claimed to be Yahweh or to be conjoined with Yahweh so why do you believe this

Con believes Yahweh is 3 and 1 at the same time

Con also believes 3=1 which is mathematically impossible and has no proof in any scripture but was something ordinary men made up in the fourth century

Tell me Con if Yahweh can be 3=1 why can’t he be 4=1?

If Yahweh can become a man why can’t he become a woman or animal or statue?

The Hindu God or gods are more consistent than Yahweh

The Bible also say Yahweh is a jealous god?

Who is Yahweh jealous of??? If Yahweh is real and the only true god and other gods don’t exist what is Yahweh’s problem?

It is like me being jealous of Santa Claus when Santa Claus doesn’t even exist

Allah is real and is more align with El Eli or Elohim in the Bible

Jesus called god Eli not Yahweh

The Bible has changed we don’t have the original we don’t have the original language,

People decided themselves what goes in and what goes out of bible

The authors of bible never claimed to be inspired by God.

Allah is real

The Islamic narrative is the Quran was revealed to Muhammad saw by angel gabriel

There is no challenge to the Islamic narrative

Muhammad saw couldn’t read or write so who is the author of the Quran?

The Quran contains scientific miracles and knowledge ahead of its time thousands of years ahead of its time

It mentions the embryo looks like a leech

We recently only proved this with microscope

The Quran mentions the Big Bang and the expansion of the universe which is in line with modern cosmology

While the Bible says the earth is flat the sky is dome of glass there’s water above the sky the universe was created in six days Yahweh got tired on the 7th

Look your Yahweh is so weak he got tired in 6 days

He is also mortal of you believe he is Jesus and if Yahweh died why do you worship a dead god?

Your Bible says light existed without light source ie sun

And plants came before the sun while plants can’t exist without photosynthesis

You also believe Yahweh is conjoined with a Holy Ghost

This ghost is so big and scary it assumes the form of a pigeon a common animal cats eat

So in turn Yahweh isn’t real and it is impossible for Yahweh to exist

Allah is real there is only one God and it’s Allah

Worship Allah alone with no partners

And follow the sunnah of the last prophet Muhammad saw the chosen one saw

InshAllah Ameen

Thanks

AdaptableRatman

05.26.2025 08:17PM

Con

Legal disclaimer

This is me arguing against and disapproving of the teachings and the deity of Islam and Sharia. This is not me inciting hatred to the individuals that have fallen victim to this doctrine of abusive honor killings, apostate executions, lashings and more trapped in cycle of said abuse.🙏 I hope to save souls, including Pro's.

====

Allah is a robbed God-concept from Judaism that then had Christianity interwoven and somehow denies both.

Muhammad founded his entire religion on a most insane notion; that Abraham, Moses, Elijah and even Jesus were secretly Muslims lying to everyone.

He then told that they were not liars, just very confused. Then he decided Mary was a virgin at the birth of Christ but nothing else about her or Jesus was special and she apparently had sex later.

The Qur'an and Hadiths revolve around mimicking Tanakh's ruthless stoning and execution mantra, amplifying it even, while simultaneously having Christian concepts such as Shaitan being the Satanic and Iblis being representative of both Lucifer and Satan. They have Jinn which are like hybrids of old testament angels and new testament demons.

They not only stole the entire concept of Y*w*h from the Tanakh, they even stole values. These include not eating pork, circumcision of males, men having innate authority over women (this gets amplified).

====

Jesus, Trinity and putting it to Rest.

It is difficult to explain Trinity to many, even some Christians get it wrong. It is not 3 modes of God that he switches between since all 3 are active at all times as 3 persons.

The best way to imagine it is as follows:

One brain (God other than Jesus isn't using physical brain just try and imagine it). Around this brain is 1 head. This head has 3 faces in triangular formation. One face is Jesus, another is a white Dove's face, that is Holy Spirit and Father actually is not a man with beard etc it just helps us in our human brains to picture it to understand.

This say of imagining it helos because it is 1 mind, thus not a 3 headed entity. 1 mind, 3 Persons, all active at all times.

What I know is Father on his own lacks a body. He is away from us, we are not panentheistic. He necessitatively begot Jesus een before the human was born as far back as concerns us, Old Testament had Angel of the Lord that claimed to be God/Lord multiple times, it is likely Jesus was the OT's unnamed AotL. Not an AotL but the one.

I will give verses.

To Hagar

The first recorded appearance of the angel of the LORD was to Hagar, Abraham's mistress, and the mother of his son Ishmael.

The angel of the LORD also said to her, "I will so greatly multiply your offspring that they cannot be counted for multitude" (Genesis 16:10).

This angel said He Himself would multiply the descendants of Hagar.

After the appearance of the angel of the LORD Hagar said.

She gave this name to the LORD who spoke to her: "You are the God who sees me," for she said, "I have now seen the One who sees me" (Genesis 16:13).

She believed that she had spoken directly to God.

To Abraham And Sarah At Mamre

Three men appeared to Abraham and his wife Sarah at the plains of Mamre. They had come to inform Abraham and Sarah concerning two matters. The son that God had promised them would be born to Abraham and Sarah the next year, and the evil cities of Sodom and Gomorrah would be destroyed. One of the three visitors who gave them this information is specifically called the LORD.

The LORD appeared to Abraham by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the entrance of his tent in the heat of the day (Genesis 18:1).

To Abraham On Mount Moriah

God told Abraham to bring his son Isaac to Mount Moriah to be sacrificed. Abraham obeyed and was about to take Isaac's life when God intervened. The angel of the LORD stopped Abraham saying:

He said, "Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me" (Genesis 22:12).

He called a second time to Abraham:

The angel of the LORD called to Abraham a second time from heaven (Genesis 22:15).

In this instance the angel of the LORD, who called out to Abraham, seems to be the LORD Himself.

To Jacob
This angel appeared a number of times to Jacob.

Then the angel of God said to me in the dream, 'Jacob,' and I said, 'Here I am' (Genesis 31:11).

Jacob wrestled all night with a man who finally disabled him. The next morning Jacob understood that it was God Himself whom he had wrestled:

And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved (Genesis 32:30).

At the end of his life, Jacob spoke of God, and the angel of the LORD, as identical.

the Angel who has delivered me from all harm - may He bless these boys. May they be called by my name and the names of my fathers Abraham and Isaac, and may they increase greatly upon the earth (Genesis 48:16).

Moses And The Burning Bush
The angel of the LORD appeared to Moses in the burning bush.

There the angel of the LORD appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up (Exodus 3: 2).

The angel explained who He was.

He said further, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God (Exodus 3:6).

blueletterbible

What Islam does to handle this is it says that AotL and Holy Spirit are the same entity, Angel Gabriel. In Arabic they force the name of any mo otbeistic God to be Allah because to them semantically God is Allah.

Angel Gabriel in Arabic has the smae name as Holy Spirit, basically. This was cunning by Muhammad and his sub-Imams who intentionally made it so in Arabic as it was evolving still linguistically in this regard.

Thus they deny Trinity despite holding Tanakh of Old Testmament as true scripture by making both Holy Spirit and AotL seems to be the same entity which neither are, namely Angel Gabriel.

They completely ignore that AotL explicitly claimed to be God/Lord

Islam claims that we cannot know Allah at all as he is too complex to comprehend yet they insist they kmow he is not triune and deosn't work that way.

So, what did Jesus say?

For one example, He said that whilst we are not under law to tithe, we should still do it (Luke 23.23). In the same style, He did claim to be God.
In John 10.30, Jesus said, “The Father and I are one.”
Those present knew very well what was being said. They knew Jesus was claiming to be God by asserting His equality with God. Look at their reaction:
“The Jewish leaders picked up rocks again to stone him to death. Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good deeds from the Father. For which one of them are you going to stone me?” The Jewish leaders replied, “We are not going to stone you for a good deed but for blasphemy, because you, a man, are claiming to be God.” (John 10.31-33, NET, emphasis added)
Those present, those who heard Him, knew exactly what was being communicated, and their reactions show us that without a shadow of a doubt.
Jesus made another statement claiming to be God in John 8.58:
“Jesus said to them, “I tell you the solemn truth, before Abraham came into existence, I am!” (NET)
The reaction is the same (John 8.59) because the claim is the same: Deity.
Did Jesus claim to be God? Yes, in many ways (Matthew 14.33, cf. Luke 4.8) and with many words. Perhaps not the words we might use ourselves, but He certainly did.

calvarychapel

What Islam forces its adherents to do is deny all this and pick and choose which parts of Bible suit their agenda.

====

Hatred and violence of Qur'an

Pro wants you to believe the God that empowered Moses and was directly leading Abraham ends up teaching the following:

O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you – then indeed, he is [one] of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people.

corpus.quran

violent-verses-in-the-quran

^ these verses encourage and vindicate Muslims to slay any either Infidel (those against Islam even by sinning) or enemies within it. It clarifies, in context that you should relent abusinng/maiming only if they surrender to Allah.

Now for sex slaves:

Prophet Muhammad's Approval of Sexual Relations with Captives In a hadith narrated by Abu Surma (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Hadith 135), he relates a conversation about 'azl (coitus interruptus). He says, "Did you hear Allah's Messenger mentioning al-'azl?" The companions confirm they had, and then Abu Surma recounts: "We went out with Allah's Messenger on the expedition to Banu al-Mustaliq and took some Arab women as captives, and desired women and loved to do coitus interruptus ('azl), so we intended to do it. We asked Allah's Messenger, and he said, 'It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born until the Day of Resurrection will be born!" This hadith shows that during the expedition, the companions took female captives and had sexual relations with them. They sought guidance from Prophet Muhammad regarding the practice of 'azl, and he gave his approval, without addressing any concerns about the captives' consent. The lack of prohibition suggests that these captives were viewed as lawful to engage with sexually, even without their consent.

Quranic Basis for Sexual Relations with Female Captives: The Quran also supports this view. In Surah An-Nisa (4:24), it says: "And [forbidden to you are] married women except those your right hands possess. [This is] the decree of Allah upon you. And lawful to you are all others beyond these, provided that you seek them [in marriage] with your property, desiring chastity, not unlawful sexual intercourse."

Note that in whole Qur'an the only woman mentioned is Mary and frankly disrespects her after pretending to respect her.

In Hadiths we have Muhmad being a pedophile to Aisha and women are seen solely as objects. More modern, more misogynistic.

Round 2

Slave123

05.27.2025 05:10AM

Pro

Ok so the topic of the debate is Allah or Yahweh. In order for con to prove his point he must first prove Yahweh exists according to his doctrines and Allah doesn’t exist and Islam is a hoax. So far con has not done that.

Con argues tha Islam plagerized the Bible and Jewish writings and threw many strawmans. First of all prophet Muhammad saw couldn’t read or write. This is a known fact accepted by all scholars. He couldn’t read Arabic let alone Greek or Hebrew so how could he copy the Bible? The fact there are parallels between Islam and jeudochristianity proves my point. The same God authored the Quran and Bible. God sent messengers all over the world to every nation including the Hebrew nation but not just them. These prophets were for a temporary time and place. The last and final and complete prophet saw is for all times and places. The Bible has been changed since it wasn’t intended by God to be for all people and nations. The Quran is for all people and nations that’s why it’s still in it’s original form perfectly unlike the Bible.

Con misrepresented his trinity doctrine. One head with three faces is modalism or partialism both heresies in the church and a misrepresentation of the trinity. If God wears one face at a time it’s modalism. If he has all three faces conjoined it’s partialism because it’s three parts combined. The trinity makes no sense. Con quotes a lot of Bible verse but none of them are Jesus saying he is God or Yahweh or part of the trinity. Even Jesus never mentions Yahweh. So there’s no proof of his conjoined three faced Yahweh existing in the bible in the first place.

Con also says the Quran is lying by calling prophets such as Moses and Jesus Muslims. The very word Muslim means one who submits to God. So by definition they are all Muslims because they couldn’t be prophets in the first place if they don’t submit to God

Con also accuses Islam for being violent. Did he forget how violent his Yahweh is? He ordered genocides left and right and ordered to kill women children babies and animals! The Quran only permits wars in self defense and orders us to never harm women or children or animals or plants! And all Muslim wars were fought as such in self defense and they only fought armed male soldiers and not civilians or women or children. Isla is peaceful but Yahweh is a violent tyrant that hitler cannot even compare too. Con even believes Yahweh will torture hitler Ghandi and everyone regardless of they are good or evil in hell forever if they simply don’t blindly believe his contradictory existence? I think con needs to seriously sit down and think and pray for guidance Ameen.

He talks about Prophet Muhammad saw marriage with Aisha which is irrelevant to the topic but in short child marriages were a norm back then. Women didn’t work or go to school back then so when they were done playing with dolls it’s time to get married.

The Bible never once says what age we should marry and children married young in biblical times anyways so the Bible doesn’t condemn it nor can any secular argument condemn it since it has no basis in morality. And as I said it’s irrelevant to the topic because times have changed since now women work and go to school.

So in short con proved nothing but just threw red harings and straw man’s. Allah exists and Yahweh doesn’t alhumdolillah Ameen

AdaptableRatman

05.30.2025 04:28AM

Con

Stolen/plagiarised ideas from Judaism and Christianity in Islam

Pro decides to 'flex' to us that the holy prophet of Islam was apparently entirely illiterate.

He definitely could not write well, reading may not have been a 0 for him. Muhammad did however know about Judaism and Christianity. He knew by ear and spoken gospel.

This is proven in a multitude of ways. First of all in Islam, it says Muhammad declared Abraham (Ibrahim), Moses (Musa), Jesus (Isa), and Mary (Maryam) as valid prophets. However, after some confusion that the misogynist would call Mary a prophet, it became widely agreed that Mariam was messenger (Rasul) and not prophet (Nabi).

Sub-point about Quranic misogyny

Mary is the only woman in the entire Qur'an that is named.

catholic.com

In the entire Qur'an women are never directly talked to. All teachings specific to women are talked about as third person and yet male teachings are far more often talked to in second person (you) or first as in Muhammad tells about himself as a man and what men should do with 'we', 'us' and 'our' wording.

Here some concrete examples:
There's a whole chapter "النساء"(the women) but no "men" chapter. And in the women chapter, rulings about women are given in the POV of men.
in alnisaa(women) chapter verse 128 vs. verse 34. Here it's interesting because it's almost the same message, one for men and one for women. but in 34 (for men) it says : والاتي تخافون نشوزهن. so the quran directly talks to men. but in 128 (for women) it says: و ان امرأة خافت من بعلها نشوزا. so it talks about the women in third person.
Verse 12 in alnisaa about the heritage. The case when the husband/wife dies. The case where the wife dies the quran uses: you (و لكم نصف ما ترك ازواجكم), the husband case however it switches to third person (و لهن الربع).
All kinds of male specific rulings. like polygamie or the right to sleep with your slave. The quran doesnt neutrally state that it's allowed. Rather the quran directly speaks in you form although women also read the quran and it doesnt apply to them. Note that the other way never happens. Women specific rulings like hijab are explictly stated for example in the form of, "oh prophet tell to the women" (Al-Ahzaab 59 or Al-Nur 31). As a man whenever the quran says "you", then it's valid. Women need extra interpretation and fiqh layer to derive which rules are only for men.
baqarah 187: هن لباس لكم و انتم لباس لهن Here in one verse the quran explains what men are to women and what women are to men (not sure how to translate libas). But again uses the male POV instead of a neutral which would be: هن لباس لهم و هم لباس لهن. So it says: you(men) are libas to them(women) , and they are libas to you
In paradise the quran shows us the male POV (most stuff is gender neutral anyways like food) . hooris (حور العين ) are mentioned often and are not just mates, but specific that they are females for the muslim men. There are no women specific rewards.
I know of no instance where the quran directly speaks to women exclusively. Only exceptions are the wifes of the prophet (Al-Ahzaab 32) or ofcourse when the quran speaks to all muslims (the women would be automatically involved)

So back to the main point, did Islam base itself on stolen/plagiarised ideas? Yes.

In contrast to Christianity that claims Jesus is the Jewish Messiah and upholds Tanakh scripture as part of its old testament holy text, Islam picks and chooses what parts of Judaism and Christianity suit it, to discredit both.

They claim, as I have already said, that Moses, Abraham, Jesus and many others significant in Judaism and Christianity were secretly Muslims that were either liars or too stupid (sorry to God for saying this) to know better.

The religion of Islam would have you believe that the holy prophets before Muhammad all were either liars or confused and/or stupid. They fake respecting Jesus saying peace be upon him yet they discredit everything he taught and say they know better.

The most severe example is indeed what Pro is fixated on, did Jesus claim to be God? Yes, several times. I already gave examples. How can the same man saying he and the father are one or he has seen all the father has seen and as old as the father (concept being he was begotten by Father outside of time itself) be not claiming to be God?

Why would Islam be claiming to not eat pork, circumcise, have a sabbath day which for them is Friday, reject lgbtq so on and so forth if the religion is not based on Judaism and also Christianity? It even has a tale of Iblis/Shaitan and Jinns which is akin to Satan and fallen angels except Jinn are also angelic at times. Yes, you need to realise in Islam the demons and Iblis itself are all doing Allah's will. That is because in Islam they think God is not good. They think he is also evil and we are to be fearful slaves to a tyrannical yet merciful master rather than willing servants acting slavelike to a loving, caring king or lord. The phrase 'slave of Allah' brings a Muslims joy and peace, this is also why Islamic.culture is consistently tyrannical and anti democratic. I am not judging it I am observing it. If Allah is the real God, it would make sense to be that way as Allah is a tyrant and wants worldwide slavery. This of course is one of the biggest issues with the faith inside of democracies as it is incompatible but that is another debate for another time.

Did Jesus claim to be God in difering words and contextually make it blatant? Yes many times.

Examples of Jesus' claims to be God:
John 8:58:
"Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."

John 14:6:
"Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father unless through me."

John 14:9:
"Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?"

John 10:30:
"Jesus said, "I and the Father are one."

John 1:1:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

Hebrews 1:3:
"...the radiance of the glory of God and the exact representation of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power."

Other instances:
Jesus forgives sins (Mark 2:5-7) and claims to be the Lord of the Sabbath (Mark 2:23-28).

He states that he will send his angels (Matthew 13:41, Luke 12:8-9).

He claims to be the one who will judge the world (Matthew 25:31-46).

He claims to have the power to raise himself from the dead (John 2:19, 10:17-18).

He claims to have the authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:5).

He claims to be sent from Heaven (John 6:38, John 4:34, John 3:13).

He claims to be the light of the world (John 8:12).

He claims to be the gate for the sheep (John 10:9).

He claims to be the resurrection and the life (John 11:25).

Google AI citing Bible.

Pro seems to deny that is blatantly Jesus claiming to be God.

Trinity and Heresies

The modalism heresy is to say God is 1 of them at a time.

Modalists believe God is one entity who changes modes as He sees fit. Hence, He was God the Father in the Old Testament, shifted into God the Son (Jesus Christ) in the New Testament, and now operates as the Holy Spirit. It logically follows that no divine mode can be eternal or distinct.

christianity.com

I did not commit modalism heresy. I also said it is an anlogy not the reality. Trinity is not 3 faces around 1 brain because God does not need a brain, Jesus happens to have one as he has maintained his resurrected body that we dont know how different a glorified body is to his unenhanced human one to know if he uses brain or not, he doesn't need it once ascended. The reason he doesn't need it necessarily is because he thinks with God's single mind. As a human he allowed the Father Person to restrict him somewhat so he had divine knowledge at times but not pure omniscience. Hensce how he could be surprised or change his mind at times. Jesus was God experiencing genuine human life. It helped God realise what life is like as a human rather than just know all the details and data, he got an actual first-hand experience. That is also why he forgave us for our sins as he died on the Cross. It was because he experienced first-hand the human struggle rather than knowing about it, actually experiencing it led to us being forgiven.

Jesus, God and HS as 3 faces around 1 brain is a good way to imagine trinity for a nonbeliever such as Pro, to grasp it fast.

It cannot be modalism heresy as all 3 are active at all times.

Partialism Heresy is actually what even some Catholics do when describing trinity, not just Protestants. They say Father is creator and enforcer, Jesus is Word and Holy Spirit is the love/heart. This is true but by only describing it that way it sounds as if each is 1/3 of God rather than 100% God. 3 faces around 1 brain is a metaphor. Firstly Father has no face. I do not know why Catholics or others draw a man with white beard etc. maybe it helps us picture him but that is clearly not him. In fact Father is not physically male how Jesus is. He is masculine by his aura and chosen personality. Hily Spirit thus is a masculine male dove in his person.

All 3 have 1 mind, 1 will and are 3 persons active at all times.

I do not need to explain how it works to win this debate. I only need to disprove that it is impissible or untenable.

Regarding child marriage and violence

Aisha was 6. She was grommed by Muhammad from even earlier than that tog et her parents to let her go. He married her at 6 ir at least lived with her as if she was a wife. Did the 'deed' at 8 towards 9 (it was 9th lunar birthday which is still 8 solar).

The fact Muhammad made child marriage normalised is a huge issue.

Christians were minimum 12 when getting married. 6 was not normal.

Why does Islam tell us to be violent to others? Why does it declare all Jews and Christians as enemies and say any Muslim.befriending them is an enemy too.

Round 3

Slave123

05.30.2025 06:17AM

Pro

Once again the debate topic was Allah vs Yahweh. Con has once again failed to prove his three faced tyrant named yahweh and disprove the God of Islam or that Islam is a hoax. Con instead posts irrelevant red harrings left and right that have nothing to do with the debate.

The Quran in multiple places says the prophet saw was illiterate which con agrees. Con makes the claim prophet Muhammad saw orally heard the Bible and Judaism and Christianity

Con has no proof of this he is making that up.

The majority of the people in Arabia were pagans why would they tell him about the Bible?

There is no proof anywhere form where I heard that prophet saw would listen to stories from Christians? There is no proof of this.

Furthermore why the Quran correct all the Bible’s mistakes? For example the king of Egypt wasn’t called pharaoh during the time of Joseph . This was a mistake the Bible made but the Quran got right? How would someone living 1400 years ago who never went to school never learned how to read and write know this? How can he plagiarize correct events and not incorrect ones? Explain con?

And con again accuses Islam for lying by saying the previous prophets were Muslims?

Con did you read my arguments? Or do you have some script you are plagiarizing?

What does Muslim mean?

What is the literal definition of Muslim?

It is one who submits to God

Did the prophets submit to god?

Yes or no?

Yes!

Con please read my arguments and think before you publish irrelevant material

Again Jesus never used the exact words “I am God!”

Con quotes stuff like I and the father are one

Jesus later prays his disciples be one also.

Should the disciples be part of the trinity?

No it means one in purpose

Jesus spoke in parables and metaphors

I and the father are one means one in purpose

Jesus being the son of god is metaphorical for being a godly person.

No one on the face of the planet believes Jesus is biologically begotten by god as physical organisms are.

Con says Yahweh has one brain and three faces

First of all where did con get this heresy? It’s not mentioned in the Bible or early church fathers or even in the council of Nicaea or any Christian council doctrine or creed.

Con made this up.

It is basically partialism

And if God has one brain or mind then he is one not three

God is invisible so how does con know God looks like this? And how can he if he’s immaterial and has no nose eyes ears moth face head and isn’t made of atoms?

Con I pray you come to Islam because you are confused.

Also the Bible has changed and isn’t in its original form like the Quran is so we can’t trust it since we don’t know how much of it has been tampered with.

For example if I’m a scientist doing an experiment and my sample has been tampered with then my results will be unreliable.

So the Bible is unreliable to begin with. Jesus doesn’t specifically say he’s God which suggests this probably wasn’t his claim. And all the verse that suggests something similar to being God could for all we know be fabricated since we don’t know how much of the Bible ordinary scribes actually altered?

And the stuff con says about Mary and women in Islam is totally irrelevant to the debate?

Morality is derived from God which both con and I agree so if God says something is good how can con claim different.

Atheists have no basis in morality so I don’t know why con is quoting atheism? Con has no basis in his arguments against Islam

I already proved Yahweh is way more violent than Islam and con hasn’t addressed that point at all

The rest of con’s point are irrelevant to the debate?

And the marriage of Aisha ra is also irrelevant to the debate and doesn’t have prove anything in con’s favor.

If Aisha herself and her father and God himself never had a problem with what is con’s business in butting into someone’s personal life 1000 years ago

Comparing today’s culture with 1400 years ago is a historical fallacy and con is just repeating debunked arguments of islamaphobes and plagerizing them and con himself doesn’t know what he is talking about.

Audience please don’t let con’s long paragraphs deceive you. He has posted no good relevant argument in them and doesn’t know what he is talking about. And his position stance and arguments make no sense.

This is a common sense question souls we worship one God who created the universe and that creator alone or should we worship con’s three faced tyrant monster? This is common sense and the difference between heaven and hell

The purpose of this debate is not to prove who is smarter? Me or con? It is to show what is the truth and to save souls from hellfire

Please vote for the truth and more importantly believe the truth because you’re going to your own grave and the fate of your soul is between you and the true god ameen

AdaptableRatman

06.02.2025 05:52AM

Con

If Islam holds Moses, Abraham and Jesus as holy prophets, it follows that we can observe the reality; it stole ideas from both.

It does not list tabakh as holy scripture, nor Bible.

The reality is that the entire concpt of Allah obviously has some true elements because Islam stole ideas from Old Testament aa well as some from New.

Islam is misogynistic, encourages hatred to jews and christians, violence to all non believers and apostates leaving Islam and generally is rooted in fear and abuse. Look are Sharia nations if you don't believe .e.

tigerlord

06.07.2025 08:28AM

#81

-->

@Slave123

He is over smart, nothing else.
And lucy, I know all those things all along, I am doing debate since 2012. And I have seen a lot on DDO and now this DART.

Slave123

06.07.2025 04:32AM

#80

-->

@Barney

lol Barney I just had to sing that song about you lol no offense with all due respect

Slave123

06.07.2025 03:34AM

#79

Barney is a dinosaur from our imagination! And when he’s tall he’s what we call a dinosaur sensation! Barney teaches us lots of things like how to play pretend! ABCs and 123s and how to be a friend

Slave123

06.07.2025 12:56AM

#78

-->

@Sir.Lancelot

Sure sounds good

I would enjoy having that debate

It would be a good discussion and great way for us and everyone to learn

Thanks I accept

Sir.Lancelot

06.06.2025 11:52PM

#77

-->

@Slave123

Hello, welcome to the website.
Would you be up for a debate about Buddhism vs Islam?

Slave123

06.06.2025 11:31PM

#76

-->

@LucyStarfire

Thanks and you’re welcome

I hope you have a nice day and everything goes well

LucyStarfire

06.06.2025 11:08PM

#75

-->

@Slave123

I am not even nice or fair. You dont even know me. But I do appreciate compliments.

Slave123

06.06.2025 10:58PM

#74

-->

@LucyStarfire

It’s ok I like you better than Barney

You seem more genuine and nice and fair

That’s at least what I think

LucyStarfire

06.06.2025 10:56PM

#73

-->

@Slave123

"Thanks for the advice it helps thanks"

I didnt do it to help you. I just did it to look smart.

tigerlord

06.06.2025 10:46PM

#72

-->

@Slave123

ameen

Slave123

06.06.2025 10:03PM

#71

-->

@tigerlord

Yeah I’ll try that to allow no moderators especially Barney

I’m sorry he cheats so much and gives you a hard time always

InshAllah Allah swat is watching his actions and Allah swat always judges fair

Whether Barney believes it or not, Allah swat is in charge of everything and we must fear and obey him and him alone.

Barney and everyone knows when they are deliberately doing wrong so we must be careful because no one can hide from Allah swat and indeed Allah swat is strict in punishment

For this reason I still pray for Barney and his kind of people that Allah swat gives them hiddayah and opens their hearts and they become Muslim inshallah

Inshallah Islam will always win whether Barney likes it or not inshallah ameen

tigerlord

06.06.2025 09:27PM

#70

-->

@Slave123

Put a rule for your other debates that no moderator is allowed to vote.

tigerlord

06.06.2025 09:27PM

#69

-->

@LucyStarfire

This is not the case for us, bro. I set rules in one of my debate and barney discarded it and when asked whiteflame about he said he can do that. You can see I put forfeit rule for my first debate, and they took the rule and I lost and I could not do anything about as it was out of my control as there was no internet in my country for 3 days. But when it comes to my debate they intentionally discarded the rule where I said burden of proof is shared while barney put it on me. on my last debate i put rule barney cannot vote, lets see.

Slave123

06.06.2025 08:45PM

#68

-->

@LucyStarfire

Yeah moving forward I might do that

Thanks for the advice it helps thanks

LucyStarfire

06.06.2025 08:42PM

#67

-->

@tigerlord

@Slave123

You can do 2 things:

For standard debate:

Pick judges for that debate. Only people you select will be able to vote.

For rated debate:

Set in rules description who can vote. That way, all votes which are not listed can be removed.

Slave123

06.06.2025 08:35PM

#66

-->

@tigerlord

Yeah I agree these guys are biased against Islam this whole website is a joke.

We shouldn’t waste time with these cheaters

They might as well stay here and debate themselves who is the best cheater and liar

tigerlord

06.06.2025 08:31PM

#65

-->

@Slave123

Can you not see he removed my vote and cast his own against you, and then even taken away reporting privileges as well? HAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

tigerlord

06.06.2025 08:28PM

#64

-->

@Slave123

This debate website is better to debate about meowgod lol. It's better to debate rap battles, it's better for troll debates. This barney guy is so against Islam. And always cast trash vote against Islamic debate. Have you not seen not many Muslims here? People like him make this kind of platform to die. DDO died because of this bull shit. He is fcking moderator and do moderator jobs why fcking involve in voting at all. Giving star war analogy for Allah vs Yawah. It's childish and nonsense. The debate I am doing if I found any fck with it, I am leaving this website for sure. This is a great platform if these kinds of bull shits are not present here. You do not see they are all followers of devil and are on a mission, and he considered my vote biased and look at his. He never cast a vote in favor of Islam. My dream debate, he did it so shit. And also another debate where he even changed my own rules of debate. I cannot imagine someone can go low beyond that level. Islam will prevail no matter what. The light of Islam is divine; no amount of noise, mockery, or effort can put it out. They run this site and they do not want Muslim to be here as they cannot defeat us fair and square.

Slave123

06.06.2025 06:39PM

#63

-->

@Barney

Why didn’t con respond to my point that the same God authored the Bible and Quran?

And why don’t you?

Care to explain that was central to the topic and why I should win

Barney

06.06.2025 04:24PM

#62

-->

@Slave123

Dear Mr. Slave,

The quick report button is a privilege, which you lost when you chose to spam reports against comment made by anyone you dislike. You may have thought this makes the reports more important, but it hides important ones under the backlog. In the past this has literally caused bad votes to not be deleted in time (once the timer ends, we cannot delete them).

You still have the right to make manual reports. This is done much as you already have, tag one or more moderators, let them know what you are reporting and most importantly why.
In this case, when I revoted I preemptively reported it on your behalf, as you are sure to report anything which doesn't favor you.

Slave123

06.06.2025 02:06PM

#61

-->

@David

Why isn’t Barney’s vote reportable I think it strawmaned my position and is again unfair

I think con didn’t engage in the debate

And Barney is just helping him cheat

Slave123

06.06.2025 02:05PM

#60

-->

@Barney

Con didn’t point out that’s the case, he didn’t address any of my points

You straw maned my argument by saying the 7th century came before the 3rd century I never claimed this

I claimed that the author of the bible and the Quran is the same God hence the similarities

The Bible has been changed and corrupted since it was never intended by God to be eternal or for all human beings

Neither you nor con addressed this point.

I’m sorry to say but I think you’re voting biasedly

I’m going to report your vote because it’s again unfair because con didn’t debate me but had a monolog with himself.

Slave123

06.06.2025 02:41AM

#59

-->

@tigerlord

It’s ok brother I respect your time

Yeah I can see that this sort of thing with Barney wastes a lot of time

I’ve gotten over it too because it is exactly a waste of time.

InshAllah may your debate go well and best of luck inshallah

Yeah we should all be adults here and not waste time with whatever Barney talks about

tigerlord

06.05.2025 10:53PM

#58

-->

@Slave123

Bro, I am sorry, kind of busy and cant do it again. Well, I would suggest bringing more important topics than this. What barney did, he does it often with me. No matter what kind of vote he cast against me is acceptable. My vote did not break any rule and policy, it was fair vote. But barney kid is good at faking things and ignoring things. If I take his statement and reason for my vote removal and do a whole debate for it, he will lose, yet he will make himself win. But I have done it a lot and I do not want this anymore. I also have a debate argument due. Still 10 days, I will if I have time.

LucyStarfire

06.05.2025 07:00PM

#57

Allah destroyed the bad vote, allahshallah!

Barney

06.05.2025 05:03PM

#56

--- Original RFD ---
I'm going to do the unconventional route on an analogy: Pro argues Kylo Ren is the greatest Sith Lord of all time, way better than Darth anything... Bases his case around episodes 1-6 having never been filmed, so there were no previous Sith Lords, in fact Vader was made up in the 4th century! And then con basically points to Kylo Ren being Darth Vader's emo grandson, along with the episode number 7 being the 7th in the series (albeit, owned by Disney, so a rather obvious regurgitation of previous content).

Moving on to R2, pro insists con must prove the Kylo Ren didn't appear in episode 7, and that Mickey Mouse is illiterate so couldn't have possibly copied any concepts from the previous films... Con is politice about this, but to continue changing out material into the analogy, he reminds us that one need not have read/watched StarWars to have heard of Luke Skywalker.

...

Change StarWars to Abrahamic religions, and the above summarizes the debate. Getting deeper is like digging up and beating the skeleton of a horse, with such extra highlights as pro attempting to move the goalposts by complaining that just because con used sources to prove that Allah is plagiarized from Yahweh, doesn't mean con has proven Allah is a hoax.

Had pro not based his entire case around Allah being the first Abrahamic religion, this could warrant deeper analysis, but he bet the farm on con not knowing really basic history.

LucyStarfire

06.05.2025 06:48AM

#55

Masyallah

whiteflame

06.05.2025 03:48AM

#54

-->

@Slave123

I appreciate that. I hope I was able to clarify some things at least.

Slave123

06.05.2025 03:29AM

#53

-->

@whiteflame

Ok thanks for trying to answer my questions the best you can. I may not be satisfied but I appreciate you tried and gave me the time to look into this case .

I’m sorry for my harsh tone I was just upset and confused

I’m sorry that I didn’t act my best in front of you, I hope you can still forgive me and pray for me

Thanks for you time and I’m sorry these posts have been so long

I hope you have a good day my friend and thank you for everything thanks I’ll talk to you later InshAllah thanks

whiteflame

06.05.2025 03:11AM

#52

-->

@Slave123

"Ty for voting but it may get reported.
Ty for modding too."

Nothing about this posts suggests that they are colluding. Thanking Barney for his vote, mentioning that it may be reported (as you have), and appreciating that he moderated this debate does not explicitly show nor imply that "they are in cahoots." That's your assertion.

Slave123

06.05.2025 03:07AM

#51

-->

@whiteflame

AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
06.04.2025 11:55AM

#27
-->
@Barney
Ty for voting but it may get reported.
Ty for modding too.

Look at this post they are in cahoots

whiteflame

06.05.2025 03:05AM

#50

-->

@Slave123

I can't explain it any better than I have, so it's clear that either I can't convince you that the words Barney used mean what they say, or you refuse to accept that they do. Either way, there's no point in continuing to try to explain it.

As for saying that I'm working for Con... you clearly have no idea of our history. Among all the people on this site, AdaptableRatman is the very last person who would ever believe I am working towards his benefit.

Anyway, you clearly have a problem with the vote removal. I can tell you now: it's not getting reversed. So, please, contact Tigerlord and encourage him to post a new vote with more of his reasoning. He's cast sufficient votes under the voting standards before, I'm sure he can do it again.

Slave123

06.05.2025 03:01AM

#49

-->

@whiteflame

You are working for con I read your post it makes no sense

Read con’s arguments they were all irrelevant and had nothing to do with the debate

How can Tiger lord evaluate them if they were irrelevant

That’s all Tiger lord said, that con’s arguments are irrelevant and baseless

This is fact

I noticed it from the beginning

I noticed also con only posted them exactly the last minute right before he had to forfeit in every single round

He was always talking about things that are totally irrelevant

He asked me after this debate when I pointed this out before tiger lords vote that all his arguments were irrelevant

He then asked me why Islam condemns art

That had nothing to do with the debate Allah vs Yahweh

Con wants to talk about Islamic history and Islamic fatwahs and even attack Islam

But these arguments were irrelevant to Allah vs Yahweh Con wants

Con just posted Mumbo jumbo at the last minute of his debate time and none of it was on topic

He just did that to confuse gullible moderators like you

And I’m surprised his cheating strategy is working?

whiteflame

06.05.2025 02:52AM

#48

-->

@Slave123

At this point, it feels like you're deliberately misreading my posts.

I didn't say anything about what Con did or didn't do. In the reason for removal, what Con did or didn't do wasn't referenced. Tigerlord being correct or incorrect wasn't referenced. None of this factored in the removal of this vote, which was done for the singular and very simple reason that Tigerlord is, no matter what arguments were given or how correct or incorrect they were, required to show some analysis of those points from each side. He did that for you. He did not do that for your opponent. I'm sure he'll come to the same decision regardless, but he's required to show his work in his RFD. That's all that's required for his vote to be valid. Not a change in who he's picking to win the debate, not even a change in perspective about specific arguments, just clarity on where his perspective on Con's arguments is coming from and why.

Slave123

06.05.2025 02:47AM

#47

-->

@whiteflame

Con did exactly that

Tiger lord reason were correct

Con didn’t engage in this debate at all

He ignored all my points and it looks like he barely read them

And posted irrelevant material that had nothing to do with debate

He insulted our prophet saw he insulted my religion and called me and all Muslims terrorists without any evidence

I rebutted his point by proving what Yahweh did in the Old Testament by ordering the genocide of women children babies and animals

Con never addressed my rebuttal but posted the same debunked argument in the next round and all rounds

Con argued Islam plagerized the Bible

I debunked his arguments by proving the prophet saw couldn’t read the Bible and that the same God Allah authored bible and Quran

Con never addressed this point even though it was crucial to the debate

Tiger lord was right all con’s points were irrelevant and had no evidence and furthermore if my add were offensive and racist and bigoted

You have the evidence in front of you

If con wins this debate he wins by cheating

I will not tolerate that and you shouldn’t either if you are a fair moderator

If he does win I will block him and his team and find real debators and I will warn everyone about con and warn people not to debate this cheating rat

whiteflame

06.05.2025 02:30AM

#46

-->

@Slave123

I will review Barney's vote tonight, but before I do, I'm going to re-post that reason for removal that he posted:

"The voter acted in such a way to suggest they did not give fair weighting to the debate content.
This vote essentially treated the debate as a foregone conclusion (which would be fine had one side simply not attempted to argue anything; but at a glance that is not the case); about the only redeeming trait on it is acknowledging weakness from the favored side (even while still coddling them via voting for them just for being on the preferred side of the issue, without being able to explain anything good about their argument)."

Barney is not saying that Tigerlord is incorrect. At no point in that reasoning does he make any attempt to claim he is wrong. He is, nonetheless, required to include some analysis of arguments presented by both sides. He provides that analysis for you. What little he provided for Con dismissed his argument out of hand, suggesting that he treats this debate as a foregone conclusion. If he had good reason to dismiss Con's arguments, then Tigerlord should have no trouble explaining what that reasoning was and re-posting his vote with it.

Slave123

06.05.2025 02:23AM

#45

-->

@whiteflame

No tiger lord was right

All of con’s points were irrelevant to the debate

Anyone who can read the debate can see that

Con went on completely different tangents

What does the marriage of Aisha ra have to do with Allah vs Yahweh

His vote shouldn’t be removed because his observations were correct

You guys are cheating

And ignoring the fact con didn’t engage in this debate

Yet you vote for him

I reported Barney vote

Why didn’t you remove it

The dude is talking about starwars

Starwars has nothing to do with the debate

Remove Barney vote then to make it fair

Also I repeatedly debunked cons argument that Islam plagerized the Bible

Con doesn’t even address my rebuttal or any of my rebuttals

Why vote for him

Tiger lord was right

whiteflame

06.05.2025 02:07AM

#44

-->

@Slave123

Barney provided a specific reason for removal. That reason did not include who he chose to vote for, nor did it suggest that votes for you should be uniquely targeted for reports and removal. If tigerlord modifies his vote such that it meets the standards laid out in Barney's comment, then his vote will stand.

It's fine if you believe that you won this debate. I'm not challenging you on that, nor do I plan to read and vote on this debate. But just because you believe you've won doesn't mean that you should automatically be granted the win by everyone who votes here.

If you'd like to report Barney's vote, just say so and I'll review it and post a decision on that as well.

As for boycotting the site, if that's what you choose to do, so be it. That's entirely up to you.

Slave123

06.05.2025 02:05AM

#43

The voting standards show I won

Con just copied and pasted the same thing all three rounds and didn’t even debate

Slave123

06.05.2025 02:04AM

#42

-->

@whiteflame

Tell me why is it illegal to vote for me?

Slave123

06.05.2025 02:03AM

#41

-->

@whiteflame

Why? Just because he voted for me? So anyone who votes for me should be reported?

I answered all of con’s points he answered none of mine.

You guys are cheating your votes should be removed.

You are biasly making con win.

That’s not fair that no one can vote for me even though I’m winning

I am boycotting your site then

whiteflame

06.05.2025 01:58AM

#40

-->

@Slave123

The decision to remove Tigerlord's vote will stand. He's welcome to vote again and improve on his vote to abide by the voting standards.

Slave123

06.05.2025 01:47AM

#39

-->

@David

Tiger lord voted fairly, Barney removed his vote unfairly he abused his power as moderator

Slave123

06.05.2025 01:46AM

#38

-->

@David

Con and Barney are cheating bring back tiger lords vote

Slave123

06.04.2025 09:59PM

#37

-->

@David

Bring back tiger lords vote Barney and adaptable rat are cheating

Slave123

06.04.2025 08:26PM

#36

-->

@David

Have Barney removed as moderator or I’ll instruct everyone on YouTube and all of social media to boycott this website and I’ll have it removed from the internet . A website that promotes lying and cheating and dishonesty shouldn’t even exist

Slave123

06.04.2025 08:12PM

#35

-->

@Barney

You are a terrible moderator! You should be fired from your position since you are a cheater and a liar and abuse your powers as moderator and are super biased and have an agenda and only want your own buddies to win even when they lose! Shame on you I’m going to report your entire profile! You are an insult to the truth and knowledge itself shame on you liar

Slave123

06.04.2025 07:44PM

#34

-->

@Barney

I proved this in my debate

Con didn’t debunk let alone address my points

You and con are cheaters and liars and bigots

Slave123

06.04.2025 07:42PM

#33

-->

@Barney

Allah is the first abrahamic religion

Abraham as worshipped only one God ie Allah swat

He wasn’t a Jew or Christian.

He submitted to the will of God

That is the very definition of Islam and Muslim

Slave123

06.04.2025 07:40PM

#32

-->

@Barney

I debunked all of con’s points con didn’t prove any not even address my points

Tigerlord voted fair.

You are cheating and voting biased you are a liar and cheater and fraud.

May god have mercy on your already erroted soul.

Star Wars was not the topi of the debate.

Barney

06.06.2025 04:08PM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Winner

1 point(s)

Reason:

In short:
Pro built a sandcastle next to the rising tide of historical fact. Con didn't even have to knock it over, just point to the tide.

At length:
I'm going to take the unconventional route and explain this with a Star Wars analogy (or parable if you will...)

Pro argues Kylo Ren (the guy from the 2015 movie) is the greatest Sith Lord of all time, way better than Darth anything, and bases his case around the idea that Episodes 1-6 were never filmed. So there were no previous Sith Lords at all. In fact, Vader was made up in 1999! Then Con shows up in the Millennium Falcon as if it's 1977, pointing out that Kylo is Vader's emo grandkid, and via the birds and the bees that grandkids came after their grandparents, clearing the field to help Luke Skywalker make the one-in-a-million shot (side note: https://wiki.lspace.org/Million-to-one_chance)

Pro, grasping at straws, goes the strange route of claiming that Con must prove Kylo Ren didn't appear in Episode 7, and further that Mickey Mouse is illiterate so couldn't have possibly copied anything from earlier films. Con wisely points out that you don't need to have watched Star Wars to have been exposed to the oral tradition of it, and names multiple characters carried over directly from the previous films.

Now swap "Star Wars" for Abrahamic religions, and that's basically this debate...

Pro's non-sequitur case rests on the implication that the other Abrahamic religions were poor copies of Islam, "fabricated in the fourth century." Which is a rare example of a Retro Hoc fallacy, to which Con reminds us of this poor reasoning with "Allah is a robbed God-concept from Judaism that then had Christianity interwoven and somehow denies both." And of course, numerous sources to support his Burden of Proof (comparatively, Pro offered zero). Pro's defense of this is that Muhammad "couldn’t read or write," so could not have possibly heard of anything at all, but Con is fast to point out "He knew by ear and spoken gospel." Which is a much higher opinion of Muhammad than Pro's arguments imply.

Pro of course makes some other weak assertions, such as an ad nauseum "Allah is real" as if expecting that chant to give him the victory, but he fails to find so much as the weak evidence of anyone in the Qur'an believing that (and yes, while that common tactic is ripe for criticism for being a highly fallacious appeal, it's still far superior to no appeal at all).

To me the entire debate hinges on the timeline. Pro's case is implicitly older equals better, and then picks the newest of the batch. Had he instead argued something like Islam preserved or restored earlier ideas, that might have led somewhere. But he bet the entire moisture farm on Islam coming first (or put plainly, that the 7th century occurred before the 4th, as well as before anything BCE), so once Con pointed out that wasn't the case the debate may as well have been over.

Clear win for Con.