Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Egyptian

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18

look mokko , the three links you gave are filled with points ,so I would suggest you to make the discussion more focused :

would you provide the top 5 reasons ,according to you, that the_Quran_isn't from God?
the top 5 Contradictions, in_the_Qur'an,according to you?
the top 5  Scientific_errors_in_the_Quran ,according to you?

I think my suggestion is a good one to make a focused,civil,fruitful discussion ,would you accept my suggestion?

If you do,then be sure I will be pleased to dedicate a time for that thread .


Quote from: Final Overture
Actually, Jesus himself quoted Psalms 22 in Mark 15:34.
And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”
And Psalms 22:1
My God, my God, why have you forsaken me


1st : we are Muslims and don't believe that Jesus was crucified,isn't it? If so , I think no sense to use words that are claimed to be uttered by Jesus while he was crucified ,to make a point negating Jesus crucifixion.

2nd: The language in psalms ,is not a language of predictions if read carefully objectively ,it simply conveys the message of David that was assured that the Lord would preserve his life in the face of death. He rejoiced because God enabled his body to rest securely even when confronted with death.

I think cutting any psalmist passage out of context ,to make a prophecy, means that anyone can accommodate the psalm to contemporary fancies !

we blame(rightly) the christians for taking some passages out of context from the psalms applying it to Jesus,claiming they predicted his crucifixion. yet we do the same exact thing when we take some passages out of context from the psalms applying it to Jesus,claiming they predicted him not killed,nor crucified.!

3rd: Even,for the sake of argument, we ignore what a valid language of a prophecy should be,assuming the passages quoted as a prediction of crucifixion ,or a protection from death to be used as prophecies, still remains the problem of exclusiveness !!!
in other words how do you know that such (so called) prophecies are applied to Jesus and not anyone else ? how many righteous been exposed to dangers and some been executed and others were saved? their experiences are all valid as a fulfillment to such prophecy ,isn't it?!


Brother Final Overture wrote:  We know from Qur'an that Jesus is the Messiah.

As a title (that lots of others before him had), or as the messiah that is predicted in the old testament?

 if you believe the second ,then I need elaboration with authentic textual support for that ,plz.?

Thank you Bro Final Overture ,QuranSearchCom for your input ....

though I disagree with you on the means to disprove the crucifixion "I disprove it with another approach"  ,yet we all held to the same conclusion...
Thank you for your patience reading ...May Allah bless you always.

I want to know if this Im'ran (peace be upon him and his family whoever he was) is the biological father of Mary, mother of Jesus (peace be upon them).

Imran has to be the biological father of Mary...

as even if some would argue that "daughter " in the following verse :

Holy Quran 66:12 And Mary the daughter of 'Imran, who guarded her chastity.

could be a metaphorical daughter , or a remote descendant of Imran , still the following verse leaves no doubt that Imran is the direct the biological father of Mary :

Holy Quran 3:35(Remember) when the wife of ( imraatu ) 'Imran said: My Lord! I have vowed unto Thee that which is in my belly as a consecrated (offering). Accept it from me. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Hearer, the Knower!

the translators who rendered the word " imraatu" as (a woman of [the House of] `Imran ) , eg:
Yusuf Ali, Shakir, and Sher Ali ,Assad


In the Quran the structure " imraatu X" means always " the wife of X"

Surah 12:30   imraatu alAAazeezi
The wife of the 'Aziz 

Surah 28:9 : imraatu firAAawna
The wife of Pharaoh

Surah 66:10 imraata noohin
the wife of Noah

Surah 66:10: imraata lootin
the wife of Lut

That Mary mother of Jesus,according to the Holy Quran, had a direct  biological father that was called Imran (just as lots of Jews had the same name then) is something should be above questioning....


Jesus didn't meet such qualifications to such predicted king messiah ....
so what does that mean?

for Islam ,no problem at all ,as nothing in the Quran says that Jesus was supposed to fulfill such predictions about the king messiah , actually the very basic prediction  of such messiah (as the seed of king David via Solomon), would exclude the born of a virgin ,Quranic Jesus ....
all that we have in the Quran is that Jesus had a title"the messiah" lots of others had.

for Christianity , calling Jesus with the technical use of the title "THE MESSIAH" ,is not just a problem ... it is a disaster that shakes and destroy the trustworthy of the writers of the new testament , turning the whole theology of the new testament to nothing but human fantasies...

ALL of the writers of the new testament agree with each others that Jesus was the promised Davidic king messiah ..

if we compared the promises of the messiah in the old testament and the descriptions and actions they attributed to Jesus in the new testament ,and found out that what Jesus said or done "according to the new testament" ,are against what the predicted messiah must do ,then we can safely say that Jesus isn't such predicted messiah. that means :

ALL of the writers of the new testament were wrong when they claimed that Jesus is such predicted king messiah ,hence proving themselves as non-inspired men ,and their writing not fully the word of God.

that leads to another serious conclusion as well...
The trouble the writers of the new testament have with their believes in Jesus as the king messiah would extend logically to their believes in him as God "assuming some or all of them believed in him as God" .....

If they erred assuming Jesus the predicted king messiah,then that necessarily require they erred assuming God as well .isn't it?

 kill two birds with one stone  ;D .


thank you Bro Final Overture for your comment any other comments ,objections are welcome.

You don't believe Jesus is the Messiah?! :o

I wrote before in that study that The term messiah, has both technical and non- technical use....

(the non- technical use) we can correctly call Jesus the messiah "aka the anointed" ,as one of the several messiahs been sent by God , one who had been set apart by God and enabled for a special task.

but It would be incorrect calling Jesus "The messiah" (the technical use) ,claiming him as such imagined special Messiah who is predicted in the old testament as descended from King David via Solomon , during his era all the Israelites will be returned to their homeland , Nations will recognize the wrongs they did to Israel ,All the peoples of the world will turn to the Jews for spiritual guidance ,the whole world will worship the One God of Israel . etc etc etc .....

The Quranic view of Jesus is not in accordance with the old testament view of the predicted davidic king messiah .... 

what does that mean? It simply means that such predicted character exists only in the imaginations of some of the bible writers.

I mentioned before the reasons for the Jews to fake such character,after the destruction of the Jewish kingdom ,the Jews were longing for the unity,strength, and justice of the idealized united Davidic monarchy of the past , so the Jewish writers of the bible ,started to wrote their wishes in the form of prophecies of a great king who will restore the golden times for the Jews etc etc...

I know , most "if not all" the Muslims who read the study will be surprised when they read me arguing against Jesus being THE MESSIAH ...

I understand such reaction , because they simply don't understand the difference between the term messiah, when applied to any Jewish religious figure who had been set apart by God and enabled for a special task.
and the term messiah as applied to ONE special figure been predicted that with his arrival the Jews will be back to their times of glory etc etc....

that term was applied to other characters before Jesus:

Quote from: Wikipedia,messiah
The literal translation of the Hebrew word moshiach (messiah) is “anointed,” which refers to a ritual of consecrating someone or something by putting holy oil upon it.[1 Sam. 10:1-2] It is used throughout the Hebrew Bible in reference to a wide variety of individuals and objects; for example, a Jewish king,[1 Kings 1:39] Jewish priests,[Lev. 4:3] and prophets,[Isa. 61:1] the Jewish Temple and its utensils,[Ex. 40:9-11] unleavened bread,[Num. 6:15] and a non-Jewish king (Cyrus king of Persia).[Isa. 45:1]


some suggestions to the verse that the term  "sister of Harun",was metaphorical,hence the suggested meaning, is that Mary sister of Aaron in faith etc,or  Brotherhood in clan as Mary was descended from Aaron ....  but I'm not convinced to that understanding ...

The answer I'm convinced to, is in the following Hadith :

Mughira b. Shu'ba reported:  "When I came to Najran, they (the Christians of Najran) asked me:  You read "O sister of Harun (Aaron)" (i. e. Mary) in the Qur'an, whereas Moses was born much before Jesus.   When I came back to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) I asked him about that, whereupon he said:  The people of the old age used to give names after the names of Apostles and pious persons who had gone before them. (Sahih Muslim, The Book on General Behaviour )"

The meaning of the Hadith is that such similarity was due to ,people in old ages (and even some in modern times) ,like to give names to their new born babies after the names of Apostles and pious persons, who had gone before them.
 ... in other words ,the Mary's Im'ran  is not Moses' Im'ran .... and that Mary"mother of Jesus" had a literal brother named Harun , but not the brother of the prophet Moses (peace be upon them all)...

would you be amazed for example, if you find a Muslim living in current times , whose name is Mohamed ,naming his children Fatima ,Zainab ,Ibrahim ... and his daughter Fatima having children naming them Hassan and Hussein etc..?


Quote from: MESSIANIC PROPHECIES  ,Dennis McKinsey
Not long ago we heard a debate in which a noted fundamentalist contended Jesus had to be the Messiah because no one else could fulfill so many of the OT prophecies. From his perspective there was no one else who could "fill the bill." A few of the prophecies may fit certain individuals but no one else could fit so many. The odds were just too great. Josh McDowell expressed the attitude typical of most apologists when he said, "Now the OT was written over a period of a thousand years and contains over 333 messianic prophecies....all of the prophecies that were fulfilled in one person, Jesus Christ, were written down at least 400 years before he was born because the OT was completed around 450-400 B.C...there are 60 major prophecies and 270 ramifications, all fulfilled in one person, Jesus Christ....Let's apply the modern science of probability. For only 48 of these prophecies to be fulfilled in any one individual using the modern science of probability, is one in every 1 X 10 to the 157th power. That means 157 zeroes" (Evidence for Faith, Practical Apologetics by Josh McDowell, pages 159 & 161). The importance of this entire field lies not only in its alleged "proof" that Jesus is the long-sought Savior of the world but in the constant reliance upon accurate biblical prophecy as proof of the Bible's uniqueness. As the apologist in the debate said with reference to the Bible's predictive accuracy in general, "There aren't that many atoms in the universe." In other words, pure mathematics not only proves Jesus is the Messiah but the Bible is God's Word. No other book even comes close to having so many accurate prophecies; at least that's the theory. When asked how their book differs from the writings of the Moslems, Hindus, Buddhists, etc., the most common reply by biblicists is that the Bible contains hundreds of accurate prophecies which the others lack. The ability to predict the future is seen as proof that the Bible alone is God's word because only God knows the future.
So what's the problem biblicists ask. The problem is quite simple. Not one of the prophecies cited clearly pertains to Jesus. The entire messianic structure is built on conjecture, speculation, and interpolation. Ingersoll stated. "There is no prophecy in the OT foretelling the coming of Jesus Christ. There is not one word in the OT referring to him in any way--not one word. The only way to prove this is to take your Bible, and wherever you find these words; 'That it might be fulfilled' and 'which was spoken' turn to the OT and find what was written, and you will see that it had not the slightest possible reference to the thing recounted in the NT--not the slightest" (Ingersoll's Works, Vol. 5, p. 277). Because this topic is of such importance to the Bible's validity in general and the messiahship of Jesus in particular, an all but exhaustive critique of the "Messianic prophecies" is in order.

Farrell Till (ex-christian missionary and preacher),wrote:

Usually, Bible "prophecies" turn out to be prophecies only because imaginative Bible writers arbitrarily declared them to be prophecies. The same can be said of their alleged fulfillments: the fulfillments are fulfillments only because obviously biased New Testament writers arbitrarily declared them to be fulfillments.

Quote from: ACCOMMODATIONS ,Dennis McKinsey
One of the most egregious violations of intellectual integrity by the founders of Christianity is shown by their gross distortions of the OT for purposes of indoctrination. In their never-ending quest for religious legitimacy and status, they have not hesitated to twist, distort, pervert, and concoct OT verses as expediency dictated. Here, as much as anywhere else in the Bible, the true colors of the creators of Christianity come through in all their radiant splendor. Examples of their perfidious display of propagandistic propensities are abundantly evident to anyone with a reasonably critical eye.

Quote from: MESSIANIC PROPHECIES  ,Dennis McKinsey
With the possible exception of eschatology (biblical predictions of what is to come) in no area of scripture does the Christian imagination wander more wildly and irresponsibly than in that of messianic prophecy (OT predictions of the coming Messiah). Christian apologists have diligently searched the OT for any verse, any text, any word, that could possibly be twisted, distorted, or perverted in such a manner as to link Jesus with the foretold Messiah. With what can only be described as reckless abandon, they have interpreted sizable portions of the OT for purely partisan theological purposes. Regardless of relativity, anything and everything of a positive or uplifting nature has been depicted as a type or harbinger of Jesus and everything of a negative, but equally applicable import, has been ignored or minimized. Hundreds of verses have been interpreted either literally or figuretively, as conditions dictate, with little regard for context or original intent. Except in the arena of eschatology, here, more than anywhere else, the full breadth and depth of Christian duplicity rears its ugly head. Perversion, prevarication, and pathetic prognostication are only some of the descriptive terms one could apply to their strategy of deception. "Everything in the Jewish books is perverted and distorted into meanings never intended by the writers." ("Examination of the Prophecies", The Life and Works of Paine, Vol. 9, p. 241) and "...whoever will take the trouble to read attentively, will find in all those passages where the OT is cited, only an obvious abuse of words, and the seal of falsehood on almost every page" (Voltaire on Religion by Ken Applegate, p. 147). Interestingly enough, apologists rely heavily and freely upon the very tactic--taking out of context--which they so readily attribute to their opponents. As Paine said, "The practise which the writers of the books (gospels--Ed.) employ is not more false than it is absurd. They state some trifling case of the person they call Jesus Christ, and then cut out a sentence from some passage of the OT and call it a prophecy of that case. But when the words thus cut out are restored to the places they are taken from, and read with the words before and after them, they give the lie to the NT" (The Life and Works of Paine, Vol. 9, p. 269).


2- Devising the belief of a first century second coming of Jesus , they conceded that the arrival of Jesus did not usher in that which was predicted and his credentials seem tarnished, but another appearance will rectify the situation. What wasn't fulfilled the first time will be completed during his second time around.
leading New Testament scholar, Bart Ehrman :

Quote from:  Bart Ehrman
The one thing we
know about the Christians after the death of Jesus is that they turned to their scriptures to try and make sense of it. They had believed Jesus was the Messiah, but then he got crucified, and so he couldn’t be the Messiah. No Jew, prior to Christianity, thought that the Messiah was to be crucified. The Messiah was to be a great warrior or a great king or a great judge. He was to be a figure of grandeur and power, not somebody who’s squashed by the enemy like a mosquito. How could Jesus, the Messiah, have been killed as a common criminal? Christians turned to their scriptures to try and understand it, and they found passages that refer to the Righteous One of God’s suffering death. But in these passages, such as Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 and Psalm 61, the one who is punished or who is killed is also vindicated by God. Christians came to believe their scriptures that Jesus was the Righteous One and that God must have vindicated him. And so Christians came to think of Jesus as one who, even though he had been crucified, came to be exalted to heaven, much as Elijah and Enoch had in the Hebrew scriptures.How can he be Jesus the Messiah though, if he’s been exalted to heaven? Well, Jesus must be coming back soon to establish the kingdom. He wasn’t an earthly Messiah; he’s a spiritual Messiah. That’s why the early Christians thought the end was coming right away in their own lifetime. That’s why Paul taught that Christ was the first fruit of the resurrection. But if Jesus is exalted, he is no longer dead, and so Christians started circulating the story of his resurrection. It wasn’t three days later they started circulating the story; it might have been a year later, maybe two years. Five years later they didn’t know when the stories had started. Nobody could go to the tomb to check; the body had decomposed. Believers who knew he had been raised from the dead started having visions of him. Others told stories about these visions of him, including Paul. Stories of these visions circulated. Some of them were actual visions like Paul, others of them were stories of visions like the five hundred group of people who saw him. On the basis of these stories, narratives were constructed and circulated and eventually we got the Gospels of the New Testament written 30, 40, 50, 60 years later.

The way they applied such strategies ,is the best chance for us to investigate the truthfulness,legitimacy and status of those writers and Christianity .....

when it comes to the first previously mentioned strategy, objective study to their writing would expose their misleading quotations ,their misuse of the old testament ... they selected some of old testament passages and tried to convince the readers, that those passages were predictions of Jesus' life and mission, while in fact ,they are nothing but misquotations, non-quotes, and misinterpretations.


before we visit the old and new testament analyzing those passages ,we would quote some scholars who noted such serious problem ,that shakes the foundations of Christianity ,and destroy the concept that the new testament is divinely inspired and not a human made collection of some of the true words of Jesus accompanied by false traditions,misleading exegesis.

Dennis McKinsey ,Author of "The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy" and  "Biblical Errancy (A Referance Guide)".wrote

welcome Brother Final Overture ,and I will be pleased for any comment ,correction.

we knew that before the mission of Jesus , generally the Jews thought the messiah would be a warrior who would drive out the roman occupiers; some others saw the messiah as a heavenly being and others expected him to be a great priest. yet no prove that any Jew expected that the messiah would be a crucified criminal.

so what happened? why Those writers of the new testament ,digested the idea of a crucified messiah? Were they paid to make such propaganda for a crucified messiah?!  Not at all ...

all what happened is that they after receiving the Jewish propaganda that they killed Jesus ,they searched the old testament for some passages that would explain the current events , Is it possible that the messiah be killed? they asked themselves!!......

They came to see Jesus as the messiah in spite of his execution after their reading of passages in the Jewish scriptures that talk about one of Cod's righteous ones suffering for the sins of others (cf. Isaiah 53: Psalm 22) S. These passages don't explicitly refer to the Messiah but those Christians claimed they did. they reasoned that Jesus' death must have had a divine purpose and concluded that Jesus death was the way God deals with sin.... it brought a right relationship with God.
still remained another problem for their new theory ,If the  true Messiah die,then how about the events that must accompany his arrival according to prophecy? eg; the arrival of Elijah , during his era all the Israelites will be returned to their homeland ,  Nations will recognize the wrongs they did to Israel ,the whole world will worship the One God of Israel , death will be swallowed up forever , There will be no more hunger or illness, and death will cease, All of the dead will rise again... etc  etc ?

They solved that problem by two strategies:

1- Searching the old testament for some verses to quote and be included in their writings, that they believed, would show some significance for the traditions they received regarding Jesus and the present society they lived in.
It seems that they did the opposite as well "historicizing The old testament prophecies" ,some UN-historical elements of the Gospels appear to be based on the the Hebrew scripture .
in other words ,  as Neil Godfrey describes: The gospels were theological constructions built on Old Testament and other stories as a result of a need for some 'biographical' narrative to illustrate an emerging Christian sect rooted in mysticism and other theological and philosophical roots in both the Diaspora Jews and Hellenistic philosophy.....


As'salamu Alaikum dear brother

sometimes I make spelling mistakes, miss writing something .... , would you enable the edit post function ,plz?

Jazakallahu khairun Bro Osama ....

 welcome Bro Final Overture,to the thread ... 

First : I agree with you that The idea that through Jesus everything is created comes from "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made" ,the writer of John believed that Jesus is that word.

Second: Again I agree that "Jesus never said that through him everything was created" , it is the writer of John ,also the writer (s) of 1 Corinthians 8:6 , Colossians 1:15 , Hebrews 1:1 ,who said so .

1 Corinthians 8:6
Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

Hebrews 1 1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

Though Trinitarians understand the verses as Jesus God the pr-existent creator, Unitarians understand the verses as the function of God the Father as the SOURCE of creation is distinguished from Christ's role as MEDIATOR of creation
the Father alone is the source and his first creation (the only direct creation by Him), His only-begotten son, is the channel through whom he caused all the rest of creation to be.

Such controversy shouldn't bother us even for a minute, as both of their understandings are against Islam ... Jesus neither God the creator nor the channel through whom he caused all the rest of creation to be.
The Islamic Jesus is a by product of the word ,not the word ,and wasn't the entity through whom the universe was created....

Third : The goal of the study is not to prove a Trinitarian reading against a Unitarian one ,neither the opposite ...    but rather to say that BOTH readings are against Islam , and there are no valuable consequences ,to held any of the readings for the truth of Islam .....
I explained before why the question of whether the Bible contains a textual support for the trinity,is of no merit . and should make no difference for Islam or Muslims.

Fourth : I believe that the writer of John(and others as well,eg;Paul) believed ,at least ,of the pre-existence of Jesus as a conscious entity (whatever grade such entity is considered, whether God or divine but not God)... If you read their texts without any preconceived ideas, expectations ,you most probably agree with me.

Fifth: The matter is different when it comes to the synoptic gospels .
I think nothing compelling to suggest from  any passage from the synoptic gospels, that the writers,in spite of their highly,mostly non Islamic elevated views of Jesus, believed in him as God ...

I hope the next posts I elaborate more those points.


I would like to conclude my positive criticism , with answering the question,What made Muslims commit such mistakes...

Do you know who are the christian Unitarians? Those are the people who (even before Islam) though believed in the new testament as fully the word of God , and Jesus was crucified and atoned the sinful Christians. yet they objected to the trinity. examples of them ,The Arians ,testimony of Jehovah etc.....

their belief of the new testament as fully inspired, and at the same time rejecting the trinity ,forced them to argue that the trinity proof texts are misunderstood by the so called orthodox Christianity.

the Muslim writers made the mistake of following their arguments, assuming they have our exact position,but the fact our problem with the trinity is much deeper that their ..

out problem can't be resolved by believing that the bible has a textual support for the trinity ... because If there was such textual support ,it would be included automatically in the human made passages that are included within the Injeel..

one last word ...

I hope the dear Muslims who read that ,no longer waste their times ,getting themselves into such futile headache called "Is the trinity biblical ,the debate"....


To be continued inshallah

peace be upon you.

so what If a Muslim find out someday that the way that those who believe that the bible teaches Jesus divinity ,is convincing?

the mental reaction should be very simple ,and Islamic..

all what you should do, to include those writers (whether John ,Paul etc) who wrote those passages "that you are convinced to be teaching the divinity of Jesus" into the following noble verse :

The Holy Qur'an 5:72.they do blaspheme who say: "Allah is Christ the son of Mary."

don't feel sorry for them , they weren't true disciples of Jesus .....

all what they did,is that they collected some of the hearsay accounts regarding Jesus (truth and falsehoods as well) ,and added their personal exegesis,concepts ( which possibly include a concept of the divinity of Jesus) .....

To be factual , I think that a Muslim reaction to finding out that the bible teaches the divinity of Jesus,shouldn't be more than a yawn.

The fourth mistake:

Is when the issue of Arius be brought in the discussion .... usually the Muslim while attacking the trinity, would suggest that the Arians were true monotheists ,and a representative of the true Christians ,who been destroyed by the trinitarians (false Christians) ....

but the fact ,with careful thinking ,one would easily understand that merely the belief that Jesus is not God ,doesn't necessarily require that those adherent to such belief to be Muslims or their belief to be in accordance with Islam.......

Though Arians never believed in Jesus as God the almighty ,yet the rest of their beliefs (including their view on the pre-existence of Jesus) are against Islam !.

 I believe, that not only Muslims would be wrong once they believe that Arianism is the representative of the true Christianity ,but also Christians would be wrong if they believe that Mohamed (peace be upon him) integrated and advanced the Arian theology !.....

Who are the Arians?

1-They ,unlike Muslims, believe the new testament as fully the word of God .
2-They, unlike Muslims , believe Jesus to be the son of God ,while divine , was created by God as the agent through whom he created the universe !.
3-They, unlike Muslims ,believe that Jesus was not only crucified but also atoned with his blood those who believe in his message (as it is in the new testament).

Are those supposed to be the true Christians?!!I don't find Islam agree with them in ANYTHING .....They opposed Jesus as God ,yet they preached the pre-existed ,creator Jesus !! both of the two versions against the Islamic created Jesus the prophet . Christians whether Trinitarians or Unitarians are two faces of the same coin ... no big difference is there ,indeed.

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18

What's new | A-Z | Discuss & Blog | Youtube