₦airaland Forum

PeterJamesJohn:
Please don't put Jesus and Mohammed in the same category. Jesus is God

so Jesus is not the way to God anymore but God himself? 👀

immortalcrown:
Someone cannot be a graduate without education.

Let's break it down. Being a moralist is different from being a child of God. You can be a moralist without being guided by religion. But to be a Child of God, you have to know God's principles through religious activities. Below are some of the clear differences.

A moralist will not condemn sex before marriage as long as the sex is consensual and involves only adults, especially if the parties have agreed to marry each other. A child of God will avoid premarital sex even with his fiancée or her fiance, he or she will wait until marriage.

A moralist will do good to fellow humans while lacking the concept of praying to and praising God. A child of God does good to humans and dedicates time to praises and prayers. And this is where worshiping in a congregation is compulsory.

A moralist will support execution of criminals, a child of God will not.

A moralist will want gay people to be killed or excommunicated. A child of God will condemn the act of gay but will not harm gay people, he or she will keep hoping for gay people to repent.

A moralist will support divorce if the marriage is not peaceful. A child of God will not support divorce but will advise for living apart. Living apart is different from divorce.

A moralist will revenge if repeatedly offended, a child of God will keep forgiving.

so church is education and not the Holy spirit. "And Jesus said the church will teach you"? I understand if you say the church is where people learn from those who speak from the Holy Spirit but it's not limited to the four walls is it

ErebeOcoco:
The growing trend common in people these days is, I don't go to church but I am a spiritual person. Some would say I do good and I love God but I don't belong to any church.

Is it possible to love God, do good and not be affiliated to any denomination?

Religious experts, can a man claim to be a child of God without devotion?

you changed it from without church to without devotion, are they the same thing to you?

To answer your questions.

Yes it is possible to love God, do good and not be affiliated to any denomination.

Besides we are one in the body of Christ.

Devotion and church is not what makes one a child of God, it is the children of God that make up the church and body of Christ and those who are devoted and obedient to God are the children of God, not devoted to any religious body or institution but being devoted to the word of God and obeying God.

Those who obey and love God belong to the church and body of Christ.

AntiChristian:
But you guys have never being truthful in the threads created in the islamic section.

You keep mixing falsehood with truth and interpreting Islam with your holy spirit.

look at yourself you think calling others a liar makes one truthful?

Well not surprised the basis of the Quran is to call the Tanakh and Bible a lie for it to be taken as the truth

TenQ:
Have you checked AI for what I wrote?
Languages retain a lot of borrowed words which point to the sources of those words ORIGINALLY before the language morphs.

Ask any Muslim:
What is the name of the creator, they would say Allah!
Ask what is the meaning of Allah?
No Muslim knows the meaning.

The Word "God" in English Language was influenced by the German word "Gott" .
persona" via French)
English word "Common" from Latin "communis"
English word "Frequently" from Latin "frequentare"
English word "War" (from Old French "werre"

Should we throw off history because the meaning of words have changed?

What we do is to acknowledge them!


It is bad for Muslims because the Religion of Adam, Lot, Abraham, Ishmael and Jacob when NEITHER Hebrew NOR Arabic existed is ISLAM and the name of their God is ALLAH.
Thus, we can trace the name of Allah back to the Aramaic sources.
Do you agree with this?

ya I know Allah isn't a name, I have stated that in a post is "Hubal Allah"? Allah seems to refer to a specific deity, why they take it has his name and reject YHVH even though they claim they serve the same God as Israel, we have seen them flatter a number of times.

As much as words can be gotten from other languages, Aramaic is not the source of Arabic combination that produced Allah, they may have turned Aramaic elaha to ilah in Arabic. Even the Aramaic original text doesn't use aleph and lamed El or Al to mean the or a definitive article.

It's like oke in igbo and in Yoruba having two different meaning even though they have similar spelling.

I now checked Google to confirm my understanding of Aramaic

No, the definite article "al-" in Arabic is not directly derived from Aramaic, though both languages are Semitic and share some similarities.

Happy new month everyone and a happy Sunday Nairalanders, we are in June the beginning of the 6th month of 2025 and today is a Sunday, a wonderful day to give God thanks for the months gone by.

For those of us that began the year with resolutions and prophecies, how many can you say have come to pass as we approach half the year. What are you most thankful for, share your testimony and thanksgiving and help encourage someone this Sunday. Encourage someone that the 150 days that has past is just a preparatory stage for you to break forth like an eagle into the skies with new life.

Once again happy new month and happy Sunday. Don't give up, this is june which means joy, so rejoice.

GanagiBitrus:
The problem is that most of these false doctrines are not preached out of genuine mistake & ignorance, but done deliberately to control the minds of followers for selfish & personal gains.

Matter of fact, most worship centres are set up by native doctors & Babalawos repackaged as Prophets & Men of God.

The fact that anybody can wake up & easily start a church has subjected true Christianity to a great deal of corruption so much so that some level of radicalism is needed to restore sanity & normalcy.

Like one sage said "It is easier to wake up a person who is actually sleeping than a person who is pretending to be sleeping"

💯 agree with what's written here.
we shouldn't be expecting those who willingly serve mammon to openly confess and repent without any form of rebuke.

cutecommand let's not pretend like they don't get letters and ignore them, but instead respond to those who they feel are attacking their image which they value more than the truth.

we should call brood of vipers brood of vipers, wolves wolves, hypocrites hypocrites. let's not sugarcoat those who consistently and unrepentantly lie with the word of God misleading people while they themselves do not enter them kingdom of God.

Peter, Paul, John, Jude that's four already rebuke false preachers, prophets, teachers, I feel even James did so as well, and like cutecommand wrote shameless sinners should be rebuked openly.

TenQ:
The use of El-, Al- or IL- for God or Deity is very old and it is from the Aramaic sources as it influences both Hebrew and Arabic languages deeply.

Languages change with time, like
Gay used to mean Happy, but now it means an homosexual man.


Same with El- or Al- or IL-: which used to mean God or Deity BUT later became the definite Article similar to "the" in English.

You can confirm this with AI Chatbot and let me know.

you're using a previous definition? Imagine if I ask you, oh are you gay because of what happened?

So are you saying God values what he put in us or what he gave us above us?

You wrote
"Anytime you allow people to think of you as the treasure, God is not pleased, and you’re setting yourself up to fail."

So please tell us are we less valuable than the treasure God has given?

Do you truly believe all God does is to use people, "Let’s face it; God uses people..."

To share testimony by being truthful, for also our word of testimony by the spirit of prophecy is our testimony about Jesus.

Did David keep the commandments more than Saul?

What commandments did Saul break?

David a man after God's heart because he was broken hearted and merciful.

Do you know how many times David broke the laws of Moses?

They are one. Stop hating on our pastor and his wife, she shows humility and submission following her husband's example stop painting it in bad light. They are getting fit for each other.

MrPresident1:
Get busy with what?

See IQ smh. Get busy labouring and slaving under the roman yoke, I see that's what you mean

stop making sounds by shaking your head and use it properly

TenQ:
I wish it was true that AL- or El- is solely the definite article BUT it isn't. Modern Semitic languages now use it either as a definite article equivalent to "the" in English but as a sign of RESPECT.

El- or Al- or Il means God or Deity in the Old Semitic Languages

So,
Al-LAH would mean God-LAH
Al-Manat would mean God-Manat
Al-Uzah would mean God-Uzah
Al-Lat would mean God-Lat




If you doubt this, I respectfully ask you to tell me the meaning of the following names.
Ishma-el or Isma-il
Gabri-el or Jubra-il
Isra-el or Isra-il


Just be truthful to yourself!
Peace!

what is simple written there is that in Arabic al means THE

But in Hebrew el means GOD

Hebrew and Arabic are two different languages

So if you are saying that the Arabic form of El is il, is still agrees with what AI showed that ilah is God and al is the, making Allah to mean the God.

Now: In Arabic, "al-" is the definite article, meaning "the." When combined with "ilah" (meaning "god", it forms "al-ilah," which is the source of the word "Allah." So, while "al-" doesn't mean "God" on its own, it plays a crucial role in forming the Arabic word for God, which is "Allah," meaning "The God".

Maybe some use Al as a shorten form of Allah, 🤷🏾‍♂️, but names like Alisha, Aliyah even Ali doesn't mean my God like how Eli means my God in Hebrew.

Allah isn't even an Arabic form of Elohim, because they mean different things, for instance Elohim is the commonly used term which can singular as eloah and in Hebrew ah, ha (hey) is used to state a definite term, the.


I may not know Arabic as you do but I can tell you a bit about Hebrew. What I wrote here about Arabic is from Google.

honesttalk21:
You use Hebrew to interpret Arabic? Now that is genius in reverse isn't it?

The term Al-ilah (ٱلْإِلَٰه) translates to "the god" in Arabic.

Breaking it down:
"Ilah" (إِلَٰه) means god or deity, while "Al-" serves as the definite article "the."

So, when you put it all together, "al-ilah" means "the god."

On the other hand, "Allah" (الله) is the specific name for the One Supreme God in Islam. It's not just a general term for "god"; it's the unique name for the singular, transcendent deity.


(ٱلْإِلَٰه) Is different from (الله) so your theory is totally opposite to smart.

that was from Google AI. Gosh you are something else, do you realize you don't even have a single point that contradicts what I wrote and what's with using Hebrew, is that what you understood there. 🤦🏾‍♂️🤦🏾‍♂️

MrPresident1:
Every Christian is called to be an OCCUPIER (a Jihadist) anywhere and everywhere they find themselves, to resist Rome and its influences everywhere on the face of this earth

Luke 19:12-13
King James Version
12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.
13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.

Every Christian, professing Christian, born again christian, unborn again Christian, you are part of the ten servants, the number ten is a completion

You are ordered to OCCUPY TILL I COME! Rule, dominate, overtake, struggle, takeover till I come

occupy means get busy and not what you wrote.

In Arabic, "lāh" is part of the word "Allāh," which is the standard Arabic word for God. It is used by Muslims, Christians, and Jews who speak Arabic. The word is thought to be derived from the Arabic article "al-" and "ʾilāh," meaning "god" or "deity," creating "al-lāh," which translates to "the God".


So while in Hebrew el means God
In Arabic al is used for definite article, meaning the. Allah is the God

AntiChristian:
No, Jesus was not sent to Muslims!
Jesus is a messenger. A messenger is sent to a disbelieveing people to make them Muslims submitting to Allah's worship alone. Just like Noah, Moses, Abraham and Muhammad.

Open your Medulla Oblongata!

so Jesus was sent to unbelievers while Muhammad was sent to believers abi? 😂

Okay so everyone who believes in Jesus is a Muslim right or wrong?

AntiChristian:
So even if it's a minority sect are they no more Jews again?

Allah accused the Jews and Christians of taking their Monks Rabbi and Jesus as lord!

What about the Rabbis and Monks? Why did you omit them?

should we apply that same logic and level of accusations to muslims 😏

Maybe make a book and religion out of it

AntiChristian:
All of us are slaves of Allah since we worship Him. The Biblical Jesus too did worship his God many times.

I mentioned some of the differences and also stated there are also many similarities.

The real Jesus son of Mary we believe didn't die but was raised up body and soul. He was not a God or one in a trinity! God does not have a son and will never have a daughter! And doing miracles doesn't make him God! The miracles he did was never done on his own authority. Even Jesus said by himself he can do nothing! But as usual, you'll always exagerate!



Umar ibn al-Khattab reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Do not exaggerate my status as the Christians have done with the son of Mary. Verily, I am only a servant, so refer to me as the servant/slave of Allah and His Messenger.”

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 3445

Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Al-Bukhari

I am not Muhammad, are you Muhammad? I asked if Muhammad is a slave not if all of us are slaves.

What did I exaggerate, none of what you wrote here addresses the post you quoted
Now you say
"Even Jesus said by himself he can do nothing!" So which Jesus, the Muslim one or the bible one that is different?

Because you cannot be confusing us like this

Is the exaggeration that God raised him from the death or which one? Or that God anointed him and he started preaching and doing miracles, frankly is it okay for you to find a baby taking and a child bringing clay to life an exaggeration because it's your own personal thought?

Is Muhammad and the prophets all slaves of God?

Is it that hard to answer, yes Muhammed is a slave. Quoting a verse is also an answer but do you realize you all exaggerate Muhammeds status more like the catholics do Jesus.

AntiChristian:
I am quoting the translated copy of the copy of the copy of the copy of the copy of the copy........of the Injeel at best! The original copies of the Bible as written by the first authors are all extinct! I am not an Israelite. Even Jesus discriminated against a Canaanite woman due to her race!



But why not quote verse 29 where Jesus says "My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all" This still means it was his father that gave those sheep to him. The lost sheep of Israel. A specific demography!

glad you quoted vs 29, yet it doesn't collaborate your point that Jesus is ONLY sent to the Israelite nor contradict what I have written. You said you are not a sheep of Jesus that also means God did not give you to Jesus.

Matthew 15:24 - Then Jesus said to the woman, “I was sent only to help God’s lost sheep—the people of Israel.”
I no be Israelite! Jesus was not even sent to all Israel. But the lost ones!

yes and according to you Jesus turned away and the women left, is that what the Muslim Jesus did? Did your Muslim Jesus reject her and let her child die, even though she has faith to come to God? Did your Muslim Jesus reject every non Israelite that came to him or was brought to him by God?

I believe in Jesus as God sent to the people of Israel just like I did others before him. Moses wasn't sent to me. Noah wasn't sent to me.. Jonah wasn't sent to me! Joseph wasn't sent to me. John the Baptist wasn't sent to me! Jesus wasn't sent to me! Only Muhammad salallahu alayhi wasalam is sent to all of us. Everyone of them had the respective people they were sent to!

yes Noah wasn't sent to you because you fell off from the sky? Yes only Muhammad was sent to you, and he taught you not to follow Muslim Jesus did he not?

I asked you If you say you believe in Jesus and you are not part of his flock, then what are you?
I even explained to help you understand your own logic:
Now you as a Muslim claim to believe in Jesus and say everyone who serves God is a Muslim. From this incorruptible statement by Jesus that those who do not believe Jesus as the Messiah are not part of his flock.. therefore we can also say that those who believe are part of his flock.

The simple answer is that you don't believe that Jesus was sent to you, you don't believe nor follow Jesus and you are not part of his flock. Simple. Expect like you said Muslim Jesus is different, so maybe you are not a part of bible Jesus flock but part of a folk of Muslim Jesus. 😁

Is the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15:24 among his sheep? If so then Jesus lied by saying “I was sent only to help God’s lost sheep—the people of Israel.”

yes John.6.37 However, those the Father has given me will come to me, and I will never reject them.

Or did your Muslim Jesus reject her?

If Canaan is not Israel how can Nigeria or Africa be Israel?



Do I have to obey Moses, Noah and others too? No!

The Messiah is to guide the lost sheep of Israel to salvation and not Africans.

well you clearly don't obey Moses who said people should obey Jesus, neither do you obey any of the prophets who spoke about the Messiah. That's your answer. Even if God commands the world to obey Jesus you won't, I understand 😊

If people must obey me and not those who came after me I must claim to be the last and say is it not like those who stopped obeying Moses and obeyed Jesus. 😏

So is it Muhammad that should guide Africans?

Did he?
Because at least Jesus is still alive and Muhammad has die, so did Muhammad guide the Africans?
Was Muhammad sent to Africa? Did he go to Nigeria? Wait did he go to Egypt or Ethiopia?

It's so funny that you don't even know what Canaan and Canaanites are to Israel and israelites 😂 😆

He didn't even preach to the Canaanite woman at all. Did he came to save her or guide her to eternity?

oh he preached to her and she acknowledged her state and showed faith, great faith that brings salvation even to those who are not Jews.
A dog can only enter the house when the door is open for it, or else how did the door eat crumbs falling from a table that's inside the house if the dog never turn away from the outside and came in.

I guess this story wasn't corrupted right? 😊

Are you saying that the basis of your believe concerning Jesus is based on Matthew 15:24
But do you realize what happens in verse 25 😏
Matt.15.25 But she came and worshiped him and pleaded again, "Lord, help me!"

Was she wrong to worship Jesus whom God commands the angels to worship as Lord, so that her child would not die?

Is this Jesus the Muslim Jesus and she is a Muslim who believed in God. Or should she have turned away and let her child die?

If saying Jesus is Lord to God's glory, doesn't that mean denying he is Lord doesn't give glory to God?

How do you know which part is corrupted or not? Our judge is our Qur'an! Whatever the Qur'an affirms is true!

No trinity! Jesus is fully human! He did miracles by Allah's leave. He didn't die but was raised up body and soul.

and apart from what you just wrote here the rest is true right, especially matt 15 you quoted and John you quoted.
If Quran is taken as a book that judges the gospel then tell it should also state what is true and what is false in it right?

But you are making it sound more like a gossip spread to undermine someone else. Is that really the basis of the Quran?

That's your own opinion or maybe the Christian opinion. The Torah was a law for the people of Moses and some other Prophets after him.

are you saying there were prophets of God who did not follow the Torah? Mention some of them let's learn

When Jesus came some laws in the Torah were abrogated and some relaxed! This is a major change! This is why Christians today separates the old testament and new testament. Why do you still fight about tithing till today? How many old testament laws do you still observe apart from the major ten commandments?

Can you stone your stubborn or rebellion child as stated in the old testament?

The way the Bible was written makes it look like a separate God exists in the old testament and in the New testament. One is fierce and brutal while the other is cool, calm and forgiving!

lol separate God that didn't kill Abraham for lying, or the other countless examples of him forgiving those who offended. That brutal God sent Jonah to Nineveh.. don't be myopic in reasoning o and only see what you want to see.

You don't even know the purpose the nation was founded by God. It's so funny that the very people who claim to serve the same God as Israel refused to give the "Jews" back their land and are still fighting them till date 😂 😂 😂 😆 😆

The gospel as well as the Torah were never preserved as scripture! Human hands has crept into them both. That's why their originals in the language Jesus spoke never existed.

but the Quran was because that's what they told you 😂 😂 😆

How can Jesus be speaking Aramaic and the Book exists as Greek? Was Jesus a Greek?

Jesus didn't write a book, infact he gave his Holy Spirit to teach us, which cannot be corrupted or altered but here you are distrusting people of changing scripture but trusting some others or not doing so 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣.

By the way why are you writing in English are you from England? 😂😂😂 You don't even know that the oldest original Tanakh was translated to Greek, Septuagint long before the masoretic text.

Scriptures are meant to replace and confirm one another! The Injeel did mention and confirmed the Torah. The Qur'an too did mention and confirmed all previous scriptures before it.

No scripture is against any other scripture! The Injeel in its true form will not be against the Qur'an. Same as the Torah!

But these do not exist anymore!

Only the Qur'an survived!

did Injeel did not just mention it, it quoted from it severally associating the Quran that contradicts both is fallacy. Your basic reasoning is that the true gospel will not go against the Quran the same Quran that teaches you that the Torah and Injeel don't exist anymore 😂😆 even when it clears exists. Is that not a fallacy?

AntiChristian:
Your accussation was that Allah calls Jesus lord! Why are you changing like a Chameleon? Allah mentions clearly that there's not God but Him.

Going back to the context of the the verse:

And the Jews say: 'Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allah's Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth!

They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allah), and (they also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary), while they (Jews and Christians) were commanded [in the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) to worship none but One Ilah (God - Allah) La ilaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He). Praise and glory be to Him, (far above is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)." (At-Tawbah 9:30-31)

They actually took their Rabbis, Monks and Jesus as lords! So why the emphasis on Jesus here?

continue diverting attention meanwhile I have address that scripture in another post. Where it is a false accusations against the Jews and your allah curses them for something assumed to be said by a minority sect.

Anuway

You still did not answer the two questions

Will you say that the verse accuses anyone of taking the Messiah as lord?

Is the understanding of this verse not saying that there is only one God who is Lord and the Messiah who is also Lord, but the rest should not be taken as Lords?

AntiChristian:
Jesus of the Qur'an is a slave of Allah!

Jesus of the Bible is assumed to be God in human form, one of trinity!

So i think they are different in many ways and similar in some ways or let's say the Biblical Jesus was exageratted!

can you assume you are also saying that other prophets like Muhammad were not slaves of Allah and Jesus was the sole slave of Allah?

And based on your own understanding of the Jesus in the Bible you are saying they are different. Simple right.

Personally I think you should stick with the Jesus of your Quran that you believe isn't exaggerated, because unlike your personal thought the Jesus of the Bible was the prophet spoken of by Moses, confirmed by John the baptist, by the voice of God, by miracles and declared to be the son of God by resurrection and ascension.
Is the exaggeration that God raised him from the death of which one? Or that God anointed him and he started preaching and doing miracles, frankly it's okay if you do not find a baby taking and a child bringing clay to life and exaggeration because it's your own personal thought.

So pls answer is Muhammad a slave or not?

TenQ:
Mr JimRohn,
According to Allah, who is ISA?
Since ISA is a prophet, who was he sent to?
What is the meaning of his name?


Very simple questions that should be backed up with the Qur'an of Allah!

the meaning of his name, thank you tenq your head is there 🥂.

Jimrohn quit your long-winded responses and tell us what is the meaning of Isa, Jesus.

JimRohn:
Let’s deal with your latest display of intellectual hopscotch and shifting goalposts.

First of all, CreativeOrbit and AntiChristian have already addressed your previous points — multiple times — with clarity, but you conveniently ignore what doesn't serve your bias, only to repackage it in slightly different words as if you’re saying something new. That’s not curiosity. That’s willful blindness and rhetorical evasion.

1. “Did the basis for salvation change?”

No — the standard for salvation in Islam has always been the same: Submission to the will of God, through the revelation He provided at the time. You’re trying to create a contradiction that doesn’t exist.

In pre-Islamic times, people were judged based on the truth they received — whether it was the Torah, the Gospel (before distortion), or innate monotheism (fitrah). After the Qur’an was revealed and completed, it became the final and preserved standard. That’s not a shift — that’s progressive revelation, a concept even the Bible acknowledges, unless you plan to argue that Moses and Jesus brought identical legal and spiritual teachings.

And to your next hypothetical:

> “What if someone is righteous and didn’t receive any truth?”

Islam already addressed that. The Prophet Muhammad explicitly said that people who never received the message will be tested by God in a fair way on the Day of Judgment. No one is condemned for ignorance — but no one gets a free pass for rejecting truth once it's clearly delivered either. So spare us the fake moral dilemma.

2. “You may notice I’m ignoring areas you are ignorant about…”

How noble of you to admit to cherry-picking what you want to address. You accuse others of ignorance, but won't engage their actual arguments or citations. That’s not a theological stance — that’s intellectual cowardice.

If you truly think Paul’s letters define Christian truth, you’ve already abandoned what Jesus taught. Paul made contradictions to Jesus on salvation (e.g., faith vs. law), the nature of God, and even ethics. So it’s ironic you now ask:

> “Do Muslims believe and practice what Jesus taught?”

Let’s flip that on you:
Do YOU? Or have you buried Jesus' teachings under a pile of Pauline reinterpretations, Church councils, and creeds Jesus never uttered?

3. “Do Muslims follow Jesus' teachings?”

Yes — more than modern Christians do.

Jesus taught monotheism? So do Muslims.

Jesus prayed to God with his face to the ground? Muslims still do.

Jesus fasted? Muslims fast an entire month.

Jesus forbade worshiping him as God? Muslims obey that too.

Jesus called people to obedience, charity, humility, and prayer? These are pillars in Islam.

In contrast, your theology promotes worship of Jesus, dismisses the law, and relies on Paul's words more than Christ's actual sayings.

So no — you don’t get to ask, “Do you follow Jesus?” when your entire faith structure stands on rejecting what Jesus lived and taught.

Summary:

Don’t pretend to be the gatekeeper of truth when your own position is riddled with inconsistency. If you want to talk theology, bring arguments, not arrogance — and at least do the courtesy of acknowledging when your questions have already been answered.

Until then, stop running in circles and acting like no one sees it.

TenQ gohf AntiChristian CreativeOrbit

Lol I almost missed this one 😂😆

Well I refer the rubberband game, as unlike you Jim who may probably wears skirts and loves to jump loops and squares. I can respect that about you 😊 but not your personal bias evaluation about others nor expect you to be object after reading a few of your responses.

You make baseless accusations without stating any proof nor references, do you think people are that gullible or are you calling those who read your post gullible?

Here is my question that proves your intellectual dishonesty in strawmaning it
"it seems that the basis for salvation changed according to what you are writing. Are you saying that after the Quran was completed people are judged not more on their righteousness but based on the truth they received? So what if someone is righteous and didn't receive any truth?" Which was directed to creativeorbit to access his reasoning for making a statement.

But you

You are speaking from both sides of your mouth, creativeorbit wrote: "The Quran acknowledges that salvation is open to righteous Jews, Christians, and Sabians before the message of Islam was completed"

So the Quran acknowledges that before it's Islam message was completed there was a different basis for salvation but you are coming here thinking you are a wise guy, speaking about clarity, bias, shifting posts, willful blindness whereas darkness is thy sight and ignorance thy bliss.

You want me to evade, infact you should beg me to evade your contradictions.

You wrote NO, the basis doesn't change and that I am trying to create a contradiction where none exists. That's poor vocabulary handling when you don't understand the basis of what was written which was an acknowledgement of what occured before the Quran which is different from what happens after, but then you say NO it doesn't change, and still write that, "through the revelation He provided AT THE TIME." This is purely a fallacy of inconsistency..

Something that doesn't change, does not depend upon on what will be revealed at the time or any time.

Your response is inconsistent because your assumption is basing that while the revelation at a time can constitute a change the basis of salvation remain the same, so you said no, it doesn't change. Let me strongman it a bit by stating this is only possible when the change isn't related to salvation.
That's if you even understand your own logic but
This should be logical for you to understand, should it not


But your so called explanation of it and some of your inference, is a non sequitur, that it is not a shift but progressive revelation, trying to rope the bible into it and suggest I plan to argue that Moses and Jesus brought identical legal and spiritual teachings. Are you suggesting they brought different teachings and that you understand their teachings? If a revelation as a time doesn't follow previous revelation then it is a shift, a massive shift

While Ignoring your fallacious and illogical statement, those who know their bible know that the basis of salvation spoken by Moses and the prophets all point to the Messiah's fulfillment of it, and that is why those scriptures were used to teach the same salvation and fulfillment that Jesus taught, making it coherent and in agreement. Now back to our discuss. This is what progression is, you see the connection that shows God doesn't lie, what he said in the beginning he will do, he doesn't change his word.

Saying that people are saved based on the truth they received accommodates a thought that several diverging truths exist but they are not contradictory to one another but in reality that assumption is not true. The one consistent truth from the bible you tried to rope in is, salvation is from God and for the righteous. And the one means God promised from the beginning in Genesis to the prophets is concerning the Messiah. But quran isn't progressive as you claim because there is no continuation from the divine revelations written from the Torah that agrees with the basis in the Quran which seems to contain subtle changes, contradiction and assertions of being the sole and final truth, which points more to a shift than a progression. If you indeed can tell the difference between the two.

Unlike you creativeorbit was preferable right to suggest God judged people based on their righteousness and not truths like you put it. You sound more Christian who claims knowing something is what justfies them.

So to you it is fake moral dilemma because you lack empathy to reason with other people's plight. Because you may not know the consequences of those statement.

Just like being ignorant of what Paul wrote, because Paul stated clearly the laws he spoke about which doesn't save anyone, and that wasn't in reference to the 10 commandments Jesus taught, none the perfect laws of love taught by the first church, it apostles and James, which Paul himself taught and practiced. But then again
That's why I said I was ignoring the ignorance but claiming it is cherry picking is either you are hungry for cherries or have afaxia (improperly spelt purposely) if so 😞😞

Look, the question you cannot answer and instead flipping it, let me answer you yes I obey the teachings of Jesus to love God and love my neighbors, and even my enemies instead of trying to hurt them as well and justify myself. Instead of being a hypocrite and judging others by standards I do not want to be judged by. Instead of lying to myself and others, and having the fruit of repentance and the spirit of God.


Well, can one whose righteousness is based on what they eat and drink truly obey and believe in Jesus?

My theology doesn't promote worship of Jesus as God as you divertly try to claim, it calls him lord just as your "perfect" Quran does. the difference is that while you think bowing your head to the ground and fasting a month makes you like Jesus, it doesn't because your heart can still be far from God. You can do all that and still be wicked to others, you can pray and fast and not obey God. It shows that your understanding of the gospel of Jesus is shallow and based on perfunctory duties. Even though you mentioned charity I doubt you understood the intent or message from Jesus concerning it as your focus flew past that point.

You lack understanding of Paul's word concerning love and Jesus command concerning love but you claim that their teaching dismisses the law. What is the purpose of the law, to hurt others? Or to show them love, to care, to forgive? Yet it dismisses the misinterpretations of the law that gives you a so called right to hurt and hate others in the name of religion and act in pride and selfishness. be merciful and have charity is that not the gospel you claimed is corrupted, because it goes against most of the laws and sacrifices Islam teaches?

So while you think you get to define what others should ask because you are uncomfortable with their questions, will you instead condemn a person than help them understand?,

O “Do you follow Jesus?” it's a simple question yet it provokes you, why?. You accuse people of rejecting what Jesus taught when the only thing you think you know he taught is that there is only one God. Did Jesus not teach love? Did he not teach the way to eternal life?

Even the prophets in Torah said God doesn't delight in the blood of animals, yet what do you say. Jesus said God desires mercy and not sacrifice yet what do you say. I do not get to ask you, why? because you are above being asked?

I do not care what you claim to see, circles or not, if you stopped jumping you won't be dizzy and maybe you would see clearly instead of acting like you are right because you think others are wrong. Look at yourself did you bring arguments and not arrogance, was it a debate of oh the bible is more right than you. Your insecurity lead you in your response so do not blame others for that. And stop expecting to receive any courtesy towards fallacy, I don't need to be gatekeeper of any truth to acknowledge what is true and what is inconsistent.


The question once again was do you obey Jesus and not do you worship Jesus, I do not care of your personal offense towards others and their theology if you cannot focus on the conversation and reply appropriately then leave the conversation.

Why can't you say you follow Jesus if it is true, judging if others follow him or not does that make you a follower of Jesus? Is condemning others what makes you a follower of Jesus?

2. “Do you honor Muhammad more than Jesus?”

We honor both, but we worship neither — that’s the difference between Islam and Christianity.

a university graduate who faced exams would realize that you failed this question. The question isn't if you honor them or not, but if you honor one more than the other. Jimrohn, do you realize how you have failed here. No one is asking you about Christianity, but you can't answer an Islamic question without referencing another religion. Is the basis of Islam Christianity? You would say no, but it shows you can't address a question without making such references even while not even understanding the question in the first place.

Jesus is one of the five greatest prophets in Islam. But Muhammad ﷺ is the final messenger — the one through whom the last and complete revelation was delivered. That doesn’t reduce the honor of Jesus — it clarifies the hierarchy of prophethood based on their roles. If you think honor equals divinity, that’s a problem with your theology, not ours.

now if it's a revelation to complete what God has been revealing, surely you should know the revelations from the beginning as well as the gospel and the final revelation, can you claim to be ignorant of other parts and still claim to have the whole because you have the final piece.

Now you look at yourself saying it clarifies the hierarchy of prophethood, which means one is greater than the other if you indeed were genuinely saying that it wasn't to reduce the honor of Jesus it's either you are stating he never had such honor or that hierarchy is just a mere number to how they came and not how they should be evaluated and honored. So your simple answer should have been yes we honor Muhammad above Jesus then followed by this explanation as to why that this. Franky it's your own problem if you assume someone's else makes a fallacy of claiming honor equals divinity. You are addressing someone without respectfully first enquiring of their theological believes. You can't answer questions properly because you are treating it like warfare which is sad and appalling.

3. “Adam was forgiven but cast out — so what was the point of forgiveness?”

Your confusion comes from treating God's forgiveness like a “reset button.” Being forgiven doesn’t erase all consequences — it removes the spiritual penalty, not the worldly effect.

Adam was forgiven — yes — but paradise was never meant to be his eternal home at that point. Earth was always the plan. His fall was not “original sin,” it was a mistake followed by repentance and elevation. Islam rejects the idea that all of mankind is born sinful because of Adam’s mistake — a toxic doctrine that paints God as unjust and man as inherently damned.

okay so if Adam's sin was not the first and original sin, who or what was the first sin based on Islam and the Quran?

I understand what you have written that Islam rejects the idea that all mankind is born sinful, but can you tell us why sins and falls into temptations if according to you man lacks a sinful nature?

Okay, you said elevation, so tell us elevation in what sense?

And another question which you can ignore since it wasn't you who said it, but apparently the Quran or Islam says Allah will throw all into hell, that should include Adam whom he has forgiven right?

4. “Aisha’s age: 9 or older?”

Aisha's age is used obsessively by Islamophobes who don’t care about context, history, or scholarship. Yes, some hadith report she was 9 at consummation — and these are found in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim, considered strong sources. However, classical and modern scholars have pointed to other evidence (like her involvement in battles, historical gaps, or statements by her relatives) that suggest a higher age.

But let’s get brutally honest: None of this was controversial until Western morality began to falsely universalize modern standards. In her society, this was normal, dignified, and unchallenged. You don’t get to retroactively impose your lens on 7th century Arabia while ignoring far worse age gaps in Christian Europe’s royal marriages.

And unless you’re ready to apply that same outrage to Solomon, David, or even Mary’s “engagement” to Joseph in your own religious texts, maybe sit this one out.

telling me to sit it out is pathetic. I personally do not care how old she was. Our Nigerian great grandfather's may have done same, but you had to pathetically do the same thing hypothetices do to Aisha to Mary as well just o justify what exactly. A level headed person would choose to understand how she could have been way older than some claim, it's funny that the Bible doesn't even mention the ages of women or wives but no way you calculate it and claim Mary was preteen.

5. “Did Jesus fail his assignment?”

This is pure ignorance — and no, Muslims do not believe Jesus failed. We believe his mission was interrupted, not failed. His return is part of completing that mission — not bringing new revelation, but affirming Islam, breaking the cross, and killing the false messiah (Dajjal).

Anyone who says “Jesus failed” is either misrepresenting Islam, or parroting half-baked statements. The failure lies in what people did with his message, not the message itself.

speak for yourself as you claimed some of you are purely ignorant, which I agree. Now based on your own view of his mission being interrupted clear to clarify how you came about that understanding? Is it because he left and is coming back?
So can we say that he succeeded his mission before he left, and you could also tell us what his mission from God was?

6. “Why did God create man according to the Qur’an?”

This one’s easy. Qur’an 51:56 —

> “And I did not create jinn and mankind except to worship Me.”

We were created for submission, worship, and moral responsibility — not to “fall” and then beg for salvation based on inherited sin. We’re here to prove ourselves, to be tested, and to return to our Creator.

You want a purpose? That’s it: Know God, submit to Him, live morally, die with faith.

lol you could have simply answered to worship God. But seeing how enthusiastic you are, why not tell us how God revealed that purpose to the first man, through Jesus and through Muhammad and tell us what does worship God mean, what does it mean to worship God.

7. “Why did God send Jesus?”

Because God sent prophets to every nation (Qur’an 16:36). Jesus was sent to the Children of Israel, as a reformer and a prophet, confirming the Torah and bringing the Injil. That’s Qur’an 3:49 and 61:6.

He was never sent to be crucified for sins he didn’t commit. He wasn’t sent to change God's law or start a new religion. He came to call his people to repentance and monotheism. Period.

Closing Note:

You claim to be asking out of ignorance, but the way your questions are framed shows loaded assumptions, subtle insults, and cherry-picked controversies. If you're sincere, fix your tone, read a Qur’an for once, and stop relying on internet polemics.

If you want truth, seek it. If you want to argue, be ready for the weight of a 1400-year-old religion with answers sharper than your questions.
CreativeOrbit AntiChristian TenQ gohf

You could have focused on the Quran and even quote the verses you mentioned. Anyway
Quran 16:36
For We assuredly sent amongst every People a messenger, (with the Command), “Serve Allah, and eschew Evil”: of the People were some whom Allah guided, and some on whom error became inevitably (established). So travel through the earth, and see what was the end of those who denied (the Truth).

So this verse is saying a messenger, are you saying this messenger is Jesus based on the context of your answer? Yes or no?
If you say no, then does it mean messengers are sent from every nation, how does this line up with the final messenger when well there are new nations and no more messengers?

Quran 3:49
And [make him] a messenger to the Children of Israel, [who will say], 'Indeed I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I design for you from clay [that which is] like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird by permission of Allah . And I cure the blind and the leper, and I give life to the dead - by permission of Allah . And I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your houses. Indeed in that is a sign for you, if you are believers.

Now this verse doesn't state that he is only a messenger to the children of Israel.

Can we say that Muhammad was only a messenger to the middle east and people he spoke to?


Pardon me to add verse 50
And [I have come] confirming what was before me of the Torah and to make lawful for you some of what was forbidden to you. And I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, so fear Allah and obey me.

Here isa, Jesus, clearly obey me. The question now is, the Muslims the disciples obeyed him, do you Muslims obey Jesus?

I don't see where it is written that you should disobey Jesus or that he is sent only to Israel or that because he is sent to Israel you should disobey him.

Quite frankly, if Allah could teach Jesus the Torah, there is no excuse for Muhammad not knowing the Torah and the gospel which are supposedly before the Quran.

Okay, the next verse you quoted Quran 61:6
And call to mind when Jesus, son of Mary, said: “O Children of Israel, I am Allah’s Messenger to you, I verify the Torah which has come before me, and I give you the glad tiding of a Messenger who shall come after me, his name being Ahmad.” Yet when he came to them with Clear Signs they said: “This is sheer trickery.”

This is amazing. Jesus says I give you the gospel of a messenger to come, his name is Ahmad.

Now if I am to assume the Ahmad is Muhammad and that Jesus is either calling him the gospel that is to come or that he is given them the glad tidings that Muhammad would also bring.

It still begs to be answer, the question what is the gospel preached and taught by Muhammad, what is the good news from the Quran?

2. “Do you honor Muhammad more than Jesus?”

We honor both, but we worship neither — that’s the difference between Islam and Christianity.

jimrohn a university graduate who faced exams would realize that you failed this question. The question isn't if you honor them or not, but if you honor one more than the other. Jimrohn, do you realize how you have failed here. No one is asking you about Christianity, but you can't answer an Islamic question without referencing another religion. Is the basis of Islam Christianity? You would say no, but it shows you can't address a question without making such references even while not even understanding the question in the first place.

Jesus is one of the five greatest prophets in Islam. But Muhammad ﷺ is the final messenger — the one through whom the last and complete revelation was delivered. That doesn’t reduce the honor of Jesus — it clarifies the hierarchy of prophethood based on their roles. If you think honor equals divinity, that’s a problem with your theology, not ours.

now if it's a revelation to complete what God has been revealing, surely you should know the revelations from the beginning as well as the gospel and the final revelation, can you claim to be ignorant of other parts and still claim to have the whole because you have the final piece.

Now you look at yourself saying it clarifies the hierarchy of prophethood, which means one is greater than the other if you indeed were genuinely saying that it wasn't to reduce the honor of Jesus it's either you are stating he never had such honor or that hierarchy is just a mere number to how they came and not how they should be evaluated and honored. So your simple answer should have been yes we honor Muhammad above Jesus then followed by this explanation as to why that this. Franky it's your own problem if you assume someone's else makes a fallacy of claiming honor equals divinity. You are addressing someone without respectfully first enquiring of their theological believes. You can't answer questions properly because you are treating it like warfare which is sad and appalling.

3. “Adam was forgiven but cast out — so what was the point of forgiveness?”

Your confusion comes from treating God's forgiveness like a “reset button.” Being forgiven doesn’t erase all consequences — it removes the spiritual penalty, not the worldly effect.

Adam was forgiven — yes — but paradise was never meant to be his eternal home at that point. Earth was always the plan. His fall was not “original sin,” it was a mistake followed by repentance and elevation. Islam rejects the idea that all of mankind is born sinful because of Adam’s mistake — a toxic doctrine that paints God as unjust and man as inherently damned.

okay so if Adam's sin was not the first and original sin, who or what was the first sin based on Islam and the Quran?

I understand what you have written that Islam rejects the idea that all mankind is born sinful, but can you tell us why sins and falls into temptations if according to you man lacks a sinful nature?

Okay, you said elevation, so tell us elevation in what sense?

And another question which you can ignore since it wasn't you who said it, but apparently the Quran or Islam says Allah will throw all into hell, that should include Adam whom he has forgiven right?

4. “Aisha’s age: 9 or older?”

Aisha's age is used obsessively by Islamophobes who don’t care about context, history, or scholarship. Yes, some hadith report she was 9 at consummation — and these are found in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim, considered strong sources. However, classical and modern scholars have pointed to other evidence (like her involvement in battles, historical gaps, or statements by her relatives) that suggest a higher age.

But let’s get brutally honest: None of this was controversial until Western morality began to falsely universalize modern standards. In her society, this was normal, dignified, and unchallenged. You don’t get to retroactively impose your lens on 7th century Arabia while ignoring far worse age gaps in Christian Europe’s royal marriages.

And unless you’re ready to apply that same outrage to Solomon, David, or even Mary’s “engagement” to Joseph in your own religious texts, maybe sit this one out.

telling me to sit it out is pathetic. I personally do not care how old she was. Our Nigerian great grandfather's may have done same, but you had to pathetically do the same thing hypothetices do to Aisha to Mary as well just o justify what exactly. A level headed person would choose to understand how she could have been way older than some claim, it's funny that the Bible doesn't even mention the ages of women or wives but no way you calculate it and claim Mary was preteen.

5. “Did Jesus fail his assignment?”

This is pure ignorance — and no, Muslims do not believe Jesus failed. We believe his mission was interrupted, not failed. His return is part of completing that mission — not bringing new revelation, but affirming Islam, breaking the cross, and killing the false messiah (Dajjal).

Anyone who says “Jesus failed” is either misrepresenting Islam, or parroting half-baked statements. The failure lies in what people did with his message, not the message itself.

speak for yourself as you claimed some of you are purely ignorant, which I agree. Now based on your own view of his mission being interrupted clear to clarify how you came about that understanding? Is it because he left and is coming back?
So can we say that he succeeded his mission before he left, and you could also tell us what his mission from God was?

6. “Why did God create man according to the Qur’an?”

This one’s easy. Qur’an 51:56 —

> “And I did not create jinn and mankind except to worship Me.”

We were created for submission, worship, and moral responsibility — not to “fall” and then beg for salvation based on inherited sin. We’re here to prove ourselves, to be tested, and to return to our Creator.

You want a purpose? That’s it: Know God, submit to Him, live morally, die with faith.

lol you could have simply answered to worship God. But seeing how enthusiastic you are, why not tell us how God revealed that purpose to the first man, through Jesus and through Muhammad and tell us what does worship God mean, what does it mean to worship God.

7. “Why did God send Jesus?”

Because God sent prophets to every nation (Qur’an 16:36). Jesus was sent to the Children of Israel, as a reformer and a prophet, confirming the Torah and bringing the Injil. That’s Qur’an 3:49 and 61:6.

He was never sent to be crucified for sins he didn’t commit. He wasn’t sent to change God's law or start a new religion. He came to call his people to repentance and monotheism. Period.

Closing Note:

You claim to be asking out of ignorance, but the way your questions are framed shows loaded assumptions, subtle insults, and cherry-picked controversies. If you're sincere, fix your tone, read a Qur’an for once, and stop relying on internet polemics.

If you want truth, seek it. If you want to argue, be ready for the weight of a 1400-year-old religion with answers sharper than your questions.
CreativeOrbit AntiChristian TenQ gohf

You could have focused on the Quran and even quote the verses you mentioned. Anyway
Quran 16:36
For We assuredly sent amongst every People a messenger, (with the Command), “Serve Allah, and eschew Evil”: of the People were some whom Allah guided, and some on whom error became inevitably (established). So travel through the earth, and see what was the end of those who denied (the Truth).

So this verse is saying a messenger, are you saying this messenger is Jesus based on the context of your answer? Yes or no?
If you say no, then does it mean messengers are sent from every nation, how does this line up with the final messenger when well there are new nations and no more messengers?

Quran 3:49
And [make him] a messenger to the Children of Israel, [who will say], 'Indeed I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I design for you from clay [that which is] like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird by permission of Allah . And I cure the blind and the leper, and I give life to the dead - by permission of Allah . And I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your houses. Indeed in that is a sign for you, if you are believers.

Now this verse doesn't state that he is only a messenger to the children of Israel.

Can we say that Muhammad was only a messenger to the middle east and people he spoke to?


Pardon me to add verse 50
And [I have come] confirming what was before me of the Torah and to make lawful for you some of what was forbidden to you. And I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, so fear Allah and obey me.

Here isa, Jesus, clearly obey me. The question now is, the Muslims the disciples obeyed him, do you Muslims obey Jesus?

I don't see where it is written that you should disobey Jesus or that he is sent only to Israel or that because he is sent to Israel you should disobey him.

Quite frankly, if Allah could teach Jesus the Torah, there is no excuse for Muhammad not knowing the Torah and the gospel which are supposedly before the Quran.

Okay, the next verse you quoted Quran 61:6
And call to mind when Jesus, son of Mary, said: “O Children of Israel, I am Allah’s Messenger to you, I verify the Torah which has come before me, and I give you the glad tiding of a Messenger who shall come after me, his name being Ahmad.” Yet when he came to them with Clear Signs they said: “This is sheer trickery.”

This is amazing. Jesus says I give you the gospel of a messenger to come, his name is Ahmad.

Now if I am to assume the Ahmad is Muhammad and that Jesus is either calling him the gospel that is to come or that he is given them the glad tidings that Muhammad would also bring.

It still begs to be answer, the question what is the gospel preached and taught by Muhammad, what is the good news from the Quran?

JimRohn:
If you’re genuinely seeking truth, then start by respecting the subject you’re asking about. Don’t come cloaked in fake humility asking for “love and understanding” while repeating overused polemics and ignorant misrepresentations. Let’s tear through your list with logic and without fluff.

but you here clearly come with accusations and strife in other not to explain and build up but to tear down. I would say it's good you are stating you intent early but you could do without the bias justification for it

1. “What was the message of Jesus the Messiah?”

Let’s correct this from the jump: Yes, Muslims believe Jesus (`Isa), peace be upon him, is the Messiah. But not the messiah in the distorted, church-invented version you were spoon-fed.

there was no need for correction the basis of the question focusing on the Islamic Jesus which has you have clearly put is different from the distorted version so I believe it's either like others you claim there are some truths in their version as it is distorted and you are aware of the what exactly was distorted for you to make such claims against them.

His real message was the same as every prophet before and after him: pure monotheism — worship one God and obey His commands. The Injil (Gospel) that was revealed to him was a divine scripture, not the four gospels written decades after him. His mission was not to be worshipped, but to call people back to the Law of God (Matthew 5:17 echoes that, ironically).

now if as you claim this prophet Jesus gave the same message as every other prophets, then that means Muhammed gave the same message as well, or is Muhammeds message different from every other prophet?
If yes, then is it possible a lie or are you saying that prophets get different messages then therefore the injil has more messages other than the simplified, there is only one God.

If no, Muhammad did bring a different message, then the question still is, what message of the gospel did Muhammad teach?

Now when you speak about obeying his commands, what did Jesus reveal are the commands of God and what did Muhammad reveal are the commands of God.

I see that you have quoted from a distorted text which you said isn't the gospel given to Jesus, the truly ironic thing, with proof, is that you have clearly distorted the verse you quoted. Without adding any other verse nor explaining it, this is what Matt.5.17 says "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Can you explain your intention in distorting this verse and clearly tell us how you came about that Jesus was telling people to go back to the laws of Moses. Also explain to us what it means by Jesus fulfilling the said laws.

So no — Muhammad didn't “preach Jesus’ gospel” because Jesus’ original gospel was the same essence as the Qur’an: La ilaha illa Allah (There is no god but Allah).
CreativeOrbit AntiChristian TenQ gohf

please explain how the gospel and Quran are the same essence but different as you are saying Muhammad didn't preach Jesus's original gospel which is the same essence as the Quran that he preach? Same essence but he preached something different, explain?

honesttalk21:
The question is where did these demons come from?

Is Satan a demon or head demon?

According to your Bible was he an angel?

Did he have a following amongst the angels that rebelled against almighty God with him

this isn't an answer to the question

Do you Muslims believe that Gabriel or Jubril impregnated Mary?

When we say you people don't answer questions people like jimrohn will come with their rhetoric verbosity to claim otherwise, so please answer the question.

AntiChristian:
Tell us about the justifications of the biblical Jihads of Jacob, Samson, Moses, Joshua and Saul with the help of YHVH?

so you are saying that Jacob, Samson, Moses, Joshua and Saul killed people so as not to be dominated and oppressed by them?

2. “No one said Muhammad is another Messiah or a replacement Christ.”

Exactly — because no Muslim ever claimed that Muhammad was a Messiah. You’re attacking a straw man here. Muhammad was the final prophet, not a "Messiah." Islam recognizes only one Messiah — Jesus (`Isa), son of Mary — and yet this Messiah, in Islamic belief, is not divine, not crucified, and not the savior of sins. Instead, he is a prophet who will return, fulfill specific roles, and die a natural death. None of this conflicts with Muhammad’s status as the Seal of the Prophets.

you don't even know the difference between when a person is strongman-ing a point yet you are accusing someone of strawmaning when that's exactly what you are doing. Yet you state things that don't contradict nor show how I strawmaned anything other than you admitting to what I wrote. Making this number 2 useless expect you are answering a question of it Muhammed is a Messiah, if not we can agree what you are simply saying is that Jesus is Messiah, Muhammad is seal of prophets, that's a statement not an explanation that addresses the question.

3. “I want a clear explanation as to how Muhammad is the last prophet and not claims or declarations.”

First, it's disingenuous to dismiss theological explanation as "claims or declarations" just because you don’t like the answer. You’re demanding metaphysical truth while selectively applying standards of evidence. So here’s your clear explanation:

The concept of finality in prophethood is inherent in the Islamic theological framework. The Qur’an (33:40) explicitly states:
“Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets.”
The term Khatam an-Nabiyyin (Seal of the Prophets) is unequivocal and has been understood consistently by scholars — Sunni and Shia alike — for over 1400 years as finality, not continuation.

just look at yourself, you claimed it is disingenuous to dismiss theological "explanation" as declarations and statements, meanwhile you are clearly making a statement from the Quran without an explicit explanation to it and you want us to aspect that as a theological explanation. Then when we quote a statement from Quran the basis changes where you cannot accept the statement as self explanatory.


So instead of accusing me of demanding metaphorical truth, why not readers your response with explanations instead of disgressing into question analysis and stating that your explanation is inherent and claim that as an explanation which shows you do lack understanding even though you can use a bunch of words verbosely.

Historically, no prophet after Muhammad has emerged whose claim to prophethood has withstood scrutiny or received validation by divine signs — in contrast to the centuries-long legacy of validation for prophets from Adam to Jesus.

what was the scrunity that Muhammed faced and passed? And who established that scrunity and when was it set up to verify prophethood?

What were the valid signs that proves Muhammed's prophethood? And how is it in contrast? Or is that a wrong term used there?

If you're seeking a "scientific" or empirical demonstration of Muhammad's finality, you're fundamentally misunderstanding the nature of religious claims — especially ones rooted in revelation.

forget whatever you keep assuming I seek and answer us this, what revelation spoke before hand of the finality of prophethood ending with Muhammad? It has to be Jewish/hebrew and I would even permit if there's any arabic foretelling of such.

Summary:
You’re not asking to understand. You’re asking to entrap, assuming Muslims have no theological depth or consistency. But the reality is: your objections have been addressed, publicly and repeatedly. Repeating your questions doesn’t expose Islam’s weakness — it exposes your unwillingness to engage with the answers.

Now either deal with the answers you’ve been given, or stop pretending the question remains open.

look the fact that you assume or see my questions has a trap already makes you unable to answer them genuinely, even without looking in depth into you, my responding and engaging not just with other but to this post already shows that you are subjective in your analysis and reasoning and shows my willingness to engage with the answers by reaffirming the basis of my questions and neglecting obviously disgressions and statements given in place of explanations.

If you do not realize that you typed a whole lot and instead of clearly explaining things to those who will read you wasted your time trying to trying to discredit me and the questions asked. It shows more about your inability to explain what you believe than any so called attempt to expose any weakness.

You stating that means Islam indeed those have weaknesses, and your response as more than I could in exposing them.

Jimrohn it was long so I had to cut it and respond not you wrote that it is perfectly clear that, let's read what you wrote

So to be perfectly clear:
Muhammad is not judged by Jesus. Jesus, when he returns, submits to the Sharia revealed to Muhammad (peace be upon him). This isn’t conjecture. It’s explicit in Sahih Muslim, Hadith 155.

the problem is that you are not seeing that you are attributing the Quran not to Allah but to Muhammad. You would agree that you people say Allah is the giver of the Quran yes or no?

If yes, how is it perfectly clear that a messenger sent to Muslims isn't under the message nor the judgement of the message, you can explain is Muhammad above the ruling of the Quran?

What you’re asking is akin to asking, “Will Einstein submit to Newton because they both talked about gravity?” It’s a category error born of ignorance or stubborn refusal to engage with the subject honestly.

😂 😂 this is logical fallacy, a non sequitur, basically a syllogistic fallacy.

I will address the rest later