Again found a refutation of Miss Lily Jay · Liberty Politics Discussion

Again found a refutation of Miss Lily Jay

I am no Christian but found a Christian commenting.

Ahh, Lily (and the chorus of Islamic apologists echoing the same tired lines)—how many times do we have to patiently dismantle these same objections before you stop recycling them? Your videos rack up views by speed-talking through half-truths, ignoring context, mangling Greek, and holding Christianity to a microscope while giving Islam a free pass. Let's go deeper and expose why these claims collapse under basic scrutiny.

❌1.“Others were worshiped too” – the classic false equivalence on proskuneō

Yes, the Greek word proskuneō can mean "bow down" or "do homage" in secular or political contexts (like Joseph's brothers in Genesis or the wise men to earthly kings). But context is everything—and Islamic polemicists love stripping it away.

When mere humans receive it, it's never divine adoration, and it's never accepted as such without rebuke (e.g., Peter refuses it in Acts 10:25–26; angels refuse it in Revelation).But Jesus repeatedly accepts it as divine:

Matthew 14:33 – After walking on water, the disciples proskuneō Him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.” No correction from Jesus.

Matthew 28:9, 17 – Post-resurrection, the women and disciples worship Him—He accepts it.

John 20:28 – Thomas declares, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus doesn't say, “Don't call me that—I'm just a prophet.” He blesses belief in it.

No Old Testament prophet, no angel, no one else ever accepts post-resurrection divine worship without rebuke. If Jesus were merely a prophet (as Islam insists), why didn't He stop them like Peter did? Why accept what only God deserves? This isn't ambiguity—it's blatant divine claim.

❌2.John 10:30 (“I and the Father are one”) vs. John 17:21 – category error 101

You equate Jesus' ontological oneness with the Father to His prayer for believers' "oneness." Nice try, but it's apples and oranges.

In John 17:21–23, "one" means unity of purpose, love, and mission—believers sharing in relational harmony, not becoming divine essence. If it meant essence, then all Christians would be God—something even the most zealous Muslim da'wah worker would reject as absurd.

But John 10:30 triggers an immediate Jewish stoning attempt: “You, being a man, make yourself God” (v. 33). They understood it as a claim to deity, not mere "unity of purpose." Jesus doesn't backpedal—He doubles down by citing Psalm 82 and affirming His unique Sonship. Muslims repeat this mix-up endlessly, but it only shows they don't read the text in context.

❌3.“Jesus prayed, so He can’t be God”

This objection literally refutes Islam's own misunderstandings more than Christianity. The doctrine of the Incarnation (fully God, fully man) means the eternal Son took real human nature—hunger, tiredness, prayer included.Praying doesn't disprove divinity; it proves genuine humanity.

Two natures in one person (hypostatic union) isn't "two gods"—that's a strawman Muslims love to knock down. Christianity never taught God changed or divided; the Son voluntarily humbled Himself.

If prayer disproves God, then Allah "descending" to the lowest heaven, regretting, or being surprised in hadiths raises bigger problems.

❌4.“Jesus didn’t know the Hour” (Mark 13:32 / Matt 24:36)

Addressed since the early Church: kenosis (Philippians 2:6–8). The Son, while fully divine, voluntarily limited His human knowledge in the Incarnation—not out of ignorance, but out of humble submission to the Father's will.

He still exercises divine omniscience elsewhere (knowing thoughts, Peter's denial, Nathanael's history). This isn't a contradiction—it's the mystery of the God-man. Muslims act like this is a "gotcha," but it's standard Trinitarian theology they've ignored for centuries.

❌5.“God is not a man” (Hosea 11:9, Numbers 23:19)

These affirm God's unchanging, non-physical nature—Christians fully agree.

The Incarnation doesn't mean God "became" a man in essence or ceased being God; it means the divine Son assumed human nature without confusion or change.

If this verse rules out incarnation, then Islam's own texts collapse: Allah "comes down" at night, "descends" to the sky, places His "shin," speaks with a voice, etc. Anthropomorphisms everywhere—yet Muslims demand literalism only when attacking Christianity.

❌6.Textual variants = "corruption"

Christians are upfront: they have over 5,800 Greek manuscripts, thousands more in other languages. Variants exist (mostly minor spelling/grammar), but no core doctrine (Trinity, deity of Christ, resurrection) hangs on disputed verses.

Contrast with Islam's claims of "perfect preservation": multiple ahruf (readings) from Muhammad, abrogated verses, lost surahs (e.g., stoning verse eaten by a goat per Aisha), and qirā’āt with meaningful differences (e.g., "slave" vs. "with"). If variants destroy reliability, the Qur'an fares far worse.

❌7.“Paul invented Christianity / high Christology”

Pure historical fiction. Pre-Pauline material shows worship of Jesus as God from the earliest days:

Philippians 2:6–11 (likely a pre-Pauline hymn, 30s–40s AD) – Jesus in the form of God, equal with God, worthy of every knee bowing (echoing Isaiah 45).

1 Corinthians 15:3–8 (early creed, mid-30s AD) – resurrection appearances to disciples.

Jewish monotheists worshiping a crucified man immediately post-resurrection.

Paul didn't invent; he inherited and defended what the apostles already believed. Claiming otherwise ignores the timeline and the Jewish context.

Bottom line: These arguments win clicks by fast-talking, cherry-picking, and attacking a cartoonish "Trinity" that no serious Christian holds. They ignore Greek nuance, incarnation basics, and early evidence, while applying impossible standards to the Bible that Islam couldn't survive.

If Jesus was merely a prophet, why did strict Jewish monotheists—people who would stone you for blasphemy—worship Him as God right after seeing Him risen, and why didn't He correct them? The early Church didn't "evolve" into divinity claims; they started there because that's what Jesus revealed and accepted.

Keep posting videos, Lily—but the text, history, and logic keep pointing to the same conclusion: Jesus is Lord and God. The question isn't whether Christians can refute these claims—it's why Islamic apologists keep recycling them when they crumble so easily. Time to engage honestly instead of strawmanning.

https://youtu.be/QtDAvI1vIYY

0 comments