₦airaland Forum

AntiChristian:
The question should not arise at all since Jesus has the demography he was sent to! He said he has his sheep given to him by his father in John 10:26-29. Since he wasn't sent to us then we have no business obeying him.

And the message of Jesus has been abrogated by the Qu'ran just as Jesus's message abrogates the Torah!

by his father, you mean the God, right? the one you call Allah who sent Jesus?

Okay you are quoting from the igneel the part you believe isn't corrupted right, let's look at it and see if you are correct that you have no business obeying Him, even if I do not disagree with you saying you are not one of his sheep anyway.

John 10
John.10.24 - The Jewish leaders surrounded him and asked, "How long are you going to keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly."
John.10.25 - Jesus replied, "I have already told you, and you don't believe me. The proof is what I do in the name of my Father.
John.10.26 - But you don't believe me because you are not part of my flock.

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.

1. If you say you believe in Jesus and you are not part of his flock, then what are you?

What was the purpose of Jesus going to the flock, let's read
John.10.27 - My sheep recognize my voice; I know them, and they follow me.
John.10.28 - I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one will snatch them away from me.

2. If you believe Jesus is the Messiah do you follow and obey him?

3. Do you believe that Jesus came to give you eternal life, by God's authority?

This are simple questions from the part of the igneel that's not corrupted according to one of you.


Okay. Hmm

You are not using the word abrogate properly because Jesus did not do away with the Torah but fulfilled the promises contained in them, which was the very purpose of he Torah which also contained temporal laws and priesthood which is what was abrogated by God. So the message doesn't abrogate the Torah, it is good news speaking concerning the fulfillment contained in the Torah. So to say that the message of Jesus was done away with by the Quran you would have to explain to us, how and why that is?

If you are basing that the Quran did to the gospel what it did to the Torah, because you see it that the gospel is against the Torah and destroys it, so also the Quran does so. Or you agree and understand that to be incorrect and that the gospel is a fulfillment, so show us how the Quran fulfills and abrogates the gospel(which is the message of Jesus)?

Any Muslim can try and attempt these questions please.

AntiChristian:
Yes, they and anyone who believes in Allah, worships Him and submit to Him alone are Muslims.

Race does not matter!

okay so if the Israelites were Muslims according to you and Jesus was sent to the Muslims, why are you saying Jesus was not sent to you?

This man and his subtle way of attacking those who will still say he respects

honesttalk21:
For he may feign forgetting.


If he didn't tag you perhaps you were not his friend yet

you tagged me, and from his response it had little to do with the title you wrote nor the response I read so share the link, so I can understand your dialogue with him

I find it very strange that Muslims claim to believe in Jesus but do not obey him. Not just Muslims, anyone, even those who call themselves believers. Saying you believe but you do not obey is a lie not taught by God.

Now do Muslims who claim to believe Jesus, obey him, https://www.nairaland.com/8437720/muslims-obey-jesus#135540533

Having taken away what some claim to have been the corruption of the gospel, my question detailed a bit in the above link, is that do you obey the other parts that are not corrupted?

RightChanneI:
What is false? How does Adam observe his own salah and how does he observe his own hajj one of the five pillars of Islam for calling him a Muslim?




😂😂 so allah the founder of Islam as you claimed forgot to revealed the five pillars of Islam to Adam the first Muslim as you said right?




Is allah a lecturer, is allah of yesterday different from today, your allah didn't revealed any book to Adam on how to worship him yet according to you, Adam was the first Muslim despite the fact that Quran affirmed muhammad as the first Muslim on earth. It seems you know Islam more than the author of Quran!

😂😂.
any Muslim can please come and answer how is Allah the founder and Adam the first muslim. How the he find it and how did Adam follow it, come and explain

AntiChristian:
Because the only religion with Allah is Islam.
And all those people submitted to Allah totally becoming Muslims.

The issue becomes when any of you claim that Allah is the God of Israel. Are you saying that Israel were Muslims? Yes or no

AntiChristian:
Jesus wasn't sent to us. He was sent to the children of Israel. We are not Israelites! If Jesus were to descend today we'll follow him as he uses the Shari'ah of Muhammad.

The Injeel has been abrogated by the Qur'an till the world ends! Only the Qur'an exists as the only scripture from Allah!

Jesus said he was not sent but to the lost sheep of Israel!

So how should we obey Jesus?

this is you claiming you seldomly respond but here you are responding to a question you were not directly asked.

And again you are not tracking the conversation. Instead you are trying to justify your own reasoning.

Jesus came from God and preached the message of God or are you going to tell us the specific message sent to the Israel was only what he taught, then tell us what is it. You are not tracking because orbit mentioned what is corrupted in the igneel and the question still stands do you obey the rest that you don't find corrupted. But you are saying no because Jesus wasn't sent to you.

It's like saying you don't obey, thou shall not murder because God spoke to the people of Israel.

RightChanneI:
Why calling Jesus and others Muslims when they were not sent to you people in Islam?

that's another point, why are they trying to associate themselves with Moses and Jesus who wasn't sent to them, is there a need other than seeking to show authenticity by associating with the ones who are authentic.

One who would want to remove doubt from themselves will associate themselves with those who are trusted. And then declare themselves unquestionable is highly suspicious.

AntiChristian:
This is one of the reasons i seldom engage you and similarly unreasonable Christians like you!

How did Allah call Jesus Lord?

Allah says:
And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): "O 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: 'Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?' " He will say: "Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would surely have known it. You know what is in my inner­self though I do not know what is in Yours, truly, You, only You, are the All­Knower of all that is hidden and unseen. Al-Maidah 5:116.

Jesus will denies the claim entirely!

And the next verse goes thus:
"Never did I say to them aught except what You (Allah) did command me to say: 'Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.' And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them, and You are a Witness to all things. (This is a great admonition and warning to the Christians of the whole world). Al-Maidah 5:117.

Talking about Jesus the Messiah again, Allah mentions about Jesus:

"He ['Iesa (Jesus)] said: Verily! I am a slave of Allah, He has given me the Scripture and made me a Prophet;" Maryam 19:30

So i still don't get where your Holy Spirit Cherry picking is coming from!

lmao you seldomly engage me 😂, did you feel good making that statement.

Once again you can't keep track of the convo, was the question concerning if jesus should be worshipped or not?

One has to have a poor memory to respond seldomly to a person that repeatedly reminded them the subject of the convo isn't about whether jesus is divine or not. Either that or you are pretending. But you are clearly showing that you have no intention to engage in the subject but the undermine the very text quoted from your Quran.

You by yourself asked yourself a question, did Allah calling Jesus Lord but fail to answer it but instead quoted a place When Jesus humbles himself and calls himself a servant. But that's the kind of response you give so it's expected and true to who you are.

CreativeOrbit:
You keep screaming ‘truth’ like it’s some sacred weapon, but all you’re doing is spitting out overinflated trash wrapped in arrogance.

Your ‘simple question’ is only impressive to you because you clearly lack the capacity for anything deeper. A toddler might understand it—because it’s infantile, just like your logic.

You mistake my refusal to entertain your nonsense as confusion, when in reality, it’s pity. You're not insightful—you’re insufferable.

You’re not provoking thought—you’re begging for attention in the loudest, most embarrassing way possible.

You didn’t offend me—you exposed yourself as a clown swinging wildly in a conversation that left you behind long ago.

I didn't scream it, I wrote it, and if it bangs in your head as a scream it reaffirms what I wrote of you running your head into it like a brickwall. And Lol, I did not call myself the truth that offends you but then I do not disagree with you seeing me as that truth. 😊

honesttalk21:
@Tenq @gohf

Your title 'Man Comfortably Represent Satan by Lying" acts as a satirical jab at certain Islamic beliefs and figures, using mockery and distortion to get its point across. When it says "comfortably represent Satan," it's making an exaggerated claim meant to belittle people while also casting a negative light on common Islamic symbols like beards and turbans.

Moreover, the sweeping generalizations about religious individuals create a caricature that suggests they have an inherent tendency toward dishonesty. The laughter and scorn found in the comments only serve to heighten this mockery, showing a lack of genuine critique. This method reinforces a narrative of disrespect instead of fostering constructive dialogue, ultimately hindering the chance for meaningful discussions on the topic.

cc @Seun

tenq what title is this one talking about?

By the way honesttalk21 I believe I have quoted you and asked you a thing or two of which you ignored before making this post which such verbosity and inconcurrent assertions that are baseless and mere accusations with an attempt to justify yourself as if you have engage in a dialogue with me that has been meaningful and constructive, without adding your personal prejudice or sentiments

TenQ:
Don't mind muslims. Check all their deliberate mistranslations of Quran 9:31 . They cannot admit whether it is an error or a deep theological discuss from Allah

Qur'an 9:31
They (Jews and Christians) have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah and the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him.

The Questions still waitng for Muslims to answer:
1. Knowing that the Qur'an is clear and simple to understand, is Allah associating the Messiah as partners with him?
2. Is this Quranic verse an error or mistake OR is it exactly what Allah intend to say?
3. Does Allah truly want us to make the Messiah LORD with him?

people like creativeorbit and Antichristian, they are selective in their choice of texts and their interpretation of it is eisegesis, while the former has an intellectual base for diverting and strawmaning logical reasoning, the later is just, the less said the better.

AntiChristian:
You switched off your thought process again! Are you not the one comparing Holy Spirits to Tafsirs and co?

May you be healed!

to answer your question, no I am not. You are the one who switched off your mind and forgot that you were the one who compared the holy Spirit to tafsirs, even stating that the Holy Spirit was not involved in the writing of the bible

TenQ:
A man mesmerised his gullible fellow arabs that a Demon (Afrit) came to the mosque to disturb his prayers AND he would have tied the demon to one of the poles of the mosque for all Muslims to see, except that everything was AUDIO.

As you know, Muslims do not ask Questions. They swallow every lie hook, line and sinker

The Question is:
Are Demons Physical Beings?
What kind of ropes can be used to tie up demons to a tree?


Sahih al-Bukhari 461
Narrated Abu Huraira:
"The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Last night a big demon (afreet) from the Jinns came to me and wanted to interrupt my prayers (or said something similar) but Allah enabled me to overpower him. I wanted to fasten him to one of the pillars of the mosque so that all of you could See him in the morning but I remembered the statement of my brother Solomon (as stated in Quran): My Lord! Forgive me and bestow on me a kingdom such as shall not belong to anybody after me (38.35)." The sub narrator Rauh said, "He (the demon) was dismissed humiliated."

All Mohammed's miracles do not have any evidence. only he is the evidence

Since you brought up the TOPIC again, you may wish to answer the following questions supported with ANY hadith (sahih or daif) the answers to the questions
Mr honesttalk21,
1. Tell me, which of the followers of prophet Mohammed saw the afreet?
2. What did prophet Mohammed use to tie up the afreet?
3. Who finally untied the afreet or was it killed?
4. Can you describe a little how the afreet look like?

I do not know if demons are physical but then one could argue that Jacob wrestled with an angel, and abraham fed angels, lot and his family were grabbed and taken away by angels. It makes one to probably assume that demons could as well make physical appearance though it could be a faulty conclusion as demons are not angels.

TenQ:
Adam and Eve being ONE is a compound Unity not Unitary or singular unity

yes I understand, just as you can use the word "same" for singular and plural purpose. He is the same person, they are both the same.

No Hebrew scholar gives echad the sole interpretation of being a compound unity because they use it severally to mean a singular unit.

CreativeOrbit:
I don’t waste my time engaging with people who clearly lack the mental capacity to grasp even the simplest concepts. No matter how thoroughly or patiently you try to explain, it’s like talking to a brick wall—absolutely pointless. Some minds are just too far gone to reason with. I’m done. Goodbye.

the truth you are avoiding which is clearly beyond your reasoning, a obvious simple question that even a toddler will comprehend became a brick wall for you to run into and hopefully knock some sense into you, but instead of sense all you got was offense with the truth.

AntiChristian:
I'm not the same person as NairaLTQ in your conversations. I don't know of what importance it is if Allah calls Jesus lord in the Qur'an. It has a context. Even in your Bible, there are many other "Elohim" apart from Yahweh. And Yahweh did mentioned them too.

Since Yahweh called smaller gods Elohim why don't you also call them Elohim too?

That's why your thoughts has folly embedded in it.

Christ is one of the messengers of Allah. That some worship him as lord doesn't make him one. And once again, Muslims honour Christ but he wasn't sent to us. On judgement day, each Prophets will come with their nations.

Jesus will come with his and Muhammad will come with his. As well as others, some having more that others!

Where does it says Adam will go to hell? All believers will pass over it. And those who are sinful will be drawn into it for their sins as Allah wills.

Of course, Muhammad ran the last lap of prophethood so all other prophets will have to follow him.

there are a number of other things you don't know but I do appreciate the honesty in your stating that you don't know the importance of Allah calling Jesus Lord in the Quran. But despite agreeing and being aware of your ignorance, you still try to undermine and strawman your own Quran text.

There's a difference between recognizing that the Messiah is Lord and speaking of false gods that would die and be destroyed. You may pretend not to know the difference but since your thoughts are embedded with folly, you probably would.

AntiChristian:
Tafsirs, etc are human efforts and can be authentic or otherwise!

Your own holy spirit can enter Samson to kill.

So I don't see how relevant they are!

Despite the holy spirit there are many tafsirs (Exegesis) of the Bible too.

Examples includes the attached.

if you don't see how relevant your tafsirs and hadiths are why even consider them

honesttalk21:
Allah is over and on top literally or otherwise?
Clarity required

What sort of shape does Allah have please explain?

Allah created Adam in his image sounds more like what Christianity says.

tenq quoted scriptures of those who said or wrote that Adam/man is the image of God. My question to you is are they Christians he quoted?

TenQ:
Let me show you how Echad is used: not as singular one but compound one!

Like

Gen 2:21-24:
"And YHWH God causes a deep sleep to fall on the man, and he sleeps, and He takes one of his ribs, and closes up flesh in its stead. And YHWH God builds up the rib which He has taken out of the man into a woman, and brings her to the man; and the man says, “This at last! Bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh!” For this is called Woman, for this has been taken from Man; therefore a man leaves his father and his mother, and has cleaved to his wife, and they have become one flesh."



The two of Adam and Eve shall become ONE (Ehad) Flesh


Deu 6:4:
"Hear, O Israel: Our God YHWH— YHWH [is] one!"

The ONE is a compound One not Unitary One!



I asked you some questions

Questions
1. Do you concur that if the following are TRUE that
1. Allah is one and
2. Allah is over/on top of the universe and
3. Allah is not a spirit and
4. Allah has at least a shape
then Allah CANNOT be LOGICALLY Omnipresent?
2. Mohammed said that Allah created Adam in his image and then goes on to describe Adams image in the physical terms of face and height.
Can you thus explain in clear terms how Adam is created in Allah's image?

not interested in this discuss, but hope you realize that even the picture you used, stated echad is one, a number, a masculine singular usage, not in compound. And echad does mean one not one of, it can also mean united. Even Jesus taught the meaning which the teachers agree to, it means YHVh alone is God.

CreativeOrbit:
Your argument is a messy cocktail of half-truths, pseudo-history, and arrogant speculation, pulled straight from anti-Islam playbooks that have long been debunked. Let’s dissect it with precision and give your confusion the burial it deserves.

1. "Allah means The God" – So you're saying ‘The God’ was the name of a specific deity?"

Yes—exactly. “Allah” is a contraction of “Al-Ilah”, meaning “The God.” This wasn’t some random idol plucked from a desert pantheon—it referred to the supreme creator deity, even before Islam, across monotheistic currents in pre-Islamic Arabia. Arab Christians before and after Muhammad used the same name for God—Allah. So yes, “Allah” referred to the same supreme, singular Creator, not some pagan statue in a dusty shrine. Your confusion stems from an inability (or refusal) to separate linguistic meaning from idol worship, which are not the same thing.

2. Hubal in the Kaaba: The Flawed Historical Leap

Yes, the Kaaba housed idols before Islam, including Hubal, but here’s the part your sources conveniently ignore: Islam obliterated that idol worship. When Prophet Muhammad conquered Mecca, what did he do? He destroyed all the idols, including Hubal, and rededicated the Kaaba to the worship of the one true God—Allah. Islam did not inherit polytheism; it eradicated it. Citing Hubal’s presence in the Kaaba before Islam to undermine Islamic monotheism is like citing Aztec sacrifices to criticize modern-day Mexico. It's historically illiterate.

And don’t toss around names like “Julius Wellhausen” as if quoting outdated 19th-century Orientalist conjecture makes your point valid. His “suggestions” were speculative, often unbacked by archaeological or linguistic evidence, and have been challenged or discarded by modern scholarship. You’re leaning on colonial-era armchair guesswork, not real history.

3. The Black Stone and Kaaba: “Man-made” ≠ Idolatry

You say: “Aren’t the Kaaba and Black Stone man-made?”
Yes. So is every religious building on Earth. By your logic, no place of worship—churches, synagogues, temples—would be valid because bricks and stones are “man-made.” That’s not an argument; that’s philosophical laziness.

And no, Muslims do not worship the Black Stone or the Kaaba. The Black Stone is respected, not venerated as a deity. It is not prayed to, it does not speak, and it holds no divine essence. It is a symbol—nothing more. Muslims pray towards the Kaaba, not to it. If you can't tell the difference between direction and deification, that’s on you—not Islam.

4. Your Conclusion: Hollow, Misleading, and Already Refuted

You’re trying to force a link between pre-Islamic paganism and Islamic monotheism with a shoddy bait-and-switch. You throw around names and historical scraps, hoping it’ll stick—but it doesn’t. Islam’s entire mission was to purge paganism, and your failure to grasp that basic fact makes your argument not just wrong—it makes it intellectually bankrupt.

So yes, your historical claim is either a lie or the result of parroting bad scholarship without fact-checking. Either way, it crumbles under real scrutiny. Try again—this time with something grounded in facts, not recycled propaganda.

AntiChristian TenQ

lol read what you wrote and read this, from the same Moses and God Muhammad and Quran try to associate with

Deut.7.5 Here's what you are to do: Tear apart their altars stone by stone, smash their phallic pillars, chop down their sex-and-religion Asherah groves, set fire to their carved god-images.
Deut.7.25 "You must burn their idols in fire, and do not desire the silver or gold with which they are made. Do not take it or it will become a snare to you, for it is detestable to the LORD your God.

Deut.12.2 Destroy completely all the places on the high mountains and on the hills and under every spreading tree where the nations you are dispossessing worship their gods.

So are you telling us the same God that commands people to destroy what's use to worship idols, let you all keep the kabba and black stone to worship him through it?

Please explain why, because it's not our fault for associating Allah to Hubal, blame that on those who still use the kabba and the black stone. Do explain why the kabba and the black stone??

CreativeOrbit:
You know what’s truly mind-blowing? The way you casually twist complex theological, historical, and political realities into a cheap attempt at sectarian fearmongering. Let’s rip this apart piece by piece because this is not just flawed—it’s dangerously misleading.

1. "A Muslim could rightly say they have the right to be unkind to the Igbos who fought them in the civil war" — Are you serious?

This is one of the most reckless and disgusting logical leaps I’ve ever read. You take a Quranic verse about defensive ethics, rip it out of context, then use it to justify tribal hatred in Nigeria’s civil war—a conflict with deep political, ethnic, and economic roots that had nothing to do with Islam as a religion.

Let me say this clearly: no verse in the Quran or Islamic jurisprudence gives anyone the license to target a group of people today based on a war that ended over 50 years ago. You’re using manipulative, weaponized guilt by association to project some sick fantasy of religious justification for ethnic violence that simply doesn’t exist in Islamic doctrine.

This isn't interpretation. This is incitement disguised as reflection, and it’s both cowardly and intellectually bankrupt.

2. “I’m beginning to understand why Igbos in the north are wary of Muslims” – Then maybe try understanding truthfully.

Fear, suspicion, and intercommunal tension in Nigeria are often politically engineered and socially fueled. But instead of promoting peace, you’re here justifying that fear with fabricated theology and painting Nigerian Muslims as secretly hostile because of what? A butchered verse and your personal insecurity?

Let’s be real: millions of Igbos and Muslims live side-by-side peacefully every day in the north and elsewhere. Intermarriages, businesses, friendships—you name it. But you want to overwrite that lived reality with your twisted hypothesis that Islam endorses grudges from historical wars? That’s not just wrong—it’s maliciously divisive.

3. “Don’t you think it’s wrong to call those who have faced such [marginalization] hypocritical?” – No, I think it’s wrong to weaponize trauma dishonestly.

No one is denying that injustice exists. But here’s the problem: you're not defending victims, you're weaponizing selective pain to frame Muslims as inherently hypocritical or threatening. That’s not solidarity—that’s a slander campaign cloaked in pseudo-concern.

You admit to having "good Muslim friends"—then throw them under the bus by suggesting that Islam inherently supports hostility against Igbos. That’s not an honest question. That’s emotional manipulation and betrayal of your own supposed values.

Final word:

You aren’t unpacking a theological issue—you’re injecting sectarian venom into a national wound. You cherry-pick a verse, misinterpret it, rip it from context, and then hang it like a threat over the heads of peaceful Nigerian Muslims and Igbos alike.

If you truly care about peace, unity, or justice, start by dropping the bad-faith arguments, the tribal baiting, and the cowardly scapegoating.

Because what you’ve written here isn’t “mind-blowing”—it’s dangerously ignorant, historically blind, and morally bankrupt.

TenQ AntiChristian

lol you called it defensive ethics 😂😂 is it from this verse you quoted "Allah does not forbid you from being kind and just toward those who have not fought you."

Try and take on track with the convo please.

By the way I am being very serious, not your serious scholarly but a serious note like tenq, which you undermined with hypocrisy.

Is Allah saying you should be kind to those who fought you?
A simple question like this, but being you, would you not be errant in your response.

Guy you are funny, to you it doesn't matter people's personal experience you probably never went to a federal school and lived mostly in doors with a internet enabled system.

Look no matter how verbal or grammatical you want to be, you cannot undermine a simple truth that those who have been aware of what is written and taught by Islam have been wary of you guys more than those of us who were ignorant.

Personally I never understood why Muslims would try to kill an evangelist who comes to tell them about Jesus being the Messiah because I didn't fully understand the view you guys had towards Christians.

When you say people are mislead and Jews have angered God. Lol you said it's dangerous, I can see how welcoming the Muslim Arabs are to the Jews. I think you leave in a fantasy world where what you think Quran Islam should mean isn't what it actually stands for in reality.

Because something contains some truth doesn't make it the truth.

MaxInDHouse:
I'm not interested in chatting with you it's the Muslim guy i want to know what he understands by the Arabic word:

"Al-Masih"

I don't want him to feel i'm on the same page with you so please let him respond after all i've told you:

"if you're not one of Jehovah's Witnesses you and i aren't worshiping the same God"

That has not can not and will never change!

lol and you think I am laughing with you 😂😂😂, you are still full of self and opinion of your self 🤣🤣🤣

CreativeOrbit:
No—what’s actually "essential" here is some intellectual discipline, which you're clearly trying to sidestep with vague philosophical tap-dancing and weak rhetorical traps. Let's unpack your confusion, because it's not deep—just loud and wrong.

1. “You haven’t debunked Tenq’s guesswork properly” – You mean you ignored what I already explained.

I already dismantled Tenq’s claim about Hubal with textual, historical, and linguistic evidence. If you’re still whining about it, it’s not because it wasn’t debunked—it’s because you didn’t like that it was debunked. Big difference.

seems like you are forgetting yourself, maybe because I just read it and you forgot what you actually wrote. Be humble and go and reread your responses and not stay here and assume you did your imagination. All you did was say Quran teachings this, maybe you quoted one verse and this thing you are typing here about lingu and histo, is you just being a philologaster

Also, let’s not pretend Tenq came with some scholarly goldmine. He brought shallow conspiracy-tier arguments fueled by 19th-century Orientalist guesswork, not facts. That’s what I buried—because nonsense doesn't need a seminar, just a shovel.

ya shovel you used to dig a hole for yourself. True tenq wasn't overly scholarly or verbose as esteemed self, but calling him quoting Quran a shallow conspiracy oriental guesswork is pure bul**ocks

2. “Are you saying the interpretation of essentials is more valid than the Qur’an itself?” – That’s a deliberate distortion.[quote]simple questions to you is either confusion or deliberate distortion. Shaking my head


[quote]No, I’m saying the essentials (Usul)—which are derived from the Qur'an—are the structured framework used by scholars over 1400 years to interpret, understand, and apply the Qur’an correctly. They're not more valid—they are the method by which the text is honored, not butchered.

This is how mature traditions work: you don’t throw raw verses at each other like darts in a bar fight. You study the context, the language, the grammar, the Asbab al-Nuzul (reasons for revelation), and consensus (ijma) from qualified scholars—not YouTube interpretations and bad-faith guesswork.

if it's not more valid then doesn't that mean it doesn't change the original context or meaning or a text, no does it give it a modern meaning which is different from the texts intent. Meaning we are looking at objective interpretations that help one understand the Quran, right? If you can humbly answer and not speculate.

If you answer is yes, why then did you use the said essentials to properly and accurately correct the wrong interpretations you claimed tenq gave.

3. “Christians say ‘the letter kills but the spirit gives life’” – That’s not a point, it’s a distraction.

Quoting a Christian theological idea in this debate is irrelevant and frankly a smoke bomb. Islam doesn’t operate on vague “spirit vs letter” binaries. The Qur’an is both a divine message and a legal-textual system that requires a rigorous methodology to understand—not poetic ambiguity that justifies personal whims.

If you want to apply Pauline Christian theology to defend misreadings of Islamic scripture, then you’re not here to discuss—you’re here to confuse. And I won’t entertain lazy analogies meant to derail with soft-sounding mysticism.

😂 😂 😂 you that distracting write ups a lot, making some one read a bunch of meaningless words whereas you don't derive to a point that actually addresses the question. Whereas even a simple minded person would easily comprehend the point of my quoting that inference from the bible, so that you can have an answer as clearly as some of those Christians would have. Why, they can give you book chapter verse, even though some misquote and misuse it. It's for us to at least give us a reference as well as your answer, instead of wasting time writing words meaningless and irrelevant to the convo

Final Reality Check:

The Qur’an stands supreme, and its correct understanding comes through the tools it commands us to use: reflection, consultation, language, history, and scholarship. That’s what the "essentials" are. They’re not in competition with the text—they are how the text is respected instead of abused.

So let’s not pretend your question is deep. It’s not. It’s a rhetorical gimmick trying to trap me into admitting something I never claimed. If you’re serious about understanding, engage with honesty. If you’re here to stir smoke with theological buzzwords, I’ll keep clearing it with fire.

TenQ AntiChristian

you are not at an intellectual level to be passing stricture passims on others. For questions beyond your shallow observation you are unable to give properly responses not dialogue in an appropriate manner

MaxInDHouse:
Please can you expatiate further on the meaning of this world:

al-Masih (Messiah)

lol you expect him to explain clearly the truth 😂😆😂

CreativeOrbit:
Your comment is a textbook example of confusion layered on arrogance, topped with a sloppy misunderstanding of theology—Islamic and Christian. Let’s untangle your mess point by point.

1. “So antiChristian, your Quran calls the Messiah Lord?” – No, you’re cherry-picking and still getting it wrong.

First, the Qur’an does not call Jesus “Lord” (Rabb) in the way Christians use it. Islam calls him Messiah (al-Masih), a prophet, the Word of God, born of a virgin, and highly honored—but not divine.

the devil is said to be an author of confusion and so are his children, it's probably as a result of arrogance which brings ignorance of the truth, the kind of pride that causes one to fall.

A mess is when one leaves the context of the verse quoted and "cherry picks" another which neither rebutes what was stated and yet claimed to be confusion. Where you not the one tenq told Jesus is called the word of God but you wrote instead of agreeing with what he wrote, stated and implied that well Jesus was just formed from God's word. I can get accustomed to your semantics. First you undermine, then you strawman then change the context of conversation into a different narrative that wasn't mentioned nor stated. Such is real example of confusion and messes reasoning and approach to any subject matter.

Did I tell you that Jesus is God or that the Messiah is divine? Can you not understand the simple basis of the text I quoted from your own scripture?

The Qur’an makes it crystal clear:

“Indeed, the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was no more than a messenger of Allah…” (Qur'an 4:171)

if you were intellectual honesty I wouldn't have had to check what that verse said and realized that you left out the part that says he is a fulfillment of God's word, because the question then becomes what word was Jesus coming to fulfill. But such an answer I will accept from one who is honest and clear about what is true.

Islam doesn’t reduce Jesus’ status—it restores it to what he actually taught: submission to One God. That’s not dishonor. That’s truth stripped of pagan fusion and theological inflation.

you ignored a text, you removed our of a text you quoted, what you are doing isn't that an example of what Islam does? Or should I take it has what you are doing, removing what you don't like and adding what befits you.

So no—Muslims don’t call Jesus “Lord” because worship is due to God alone. You can’t accuse Muslims of disrespect for refusing to commit shirk (associating partners with God)—that’s like calling a surgeon anti-medicine for refusing to drink poison.

forgive me for not accepting your response which is based on your personal misunderstanding.

2. “You honor him lesser than Muhammad?” – That’s not a contradiction. That’s consistent theology.

that is why the said theology is said to be inconsistent and doubtful, contradicting it's own words and phrases. Making a statement doesn't qualify for an explanation that was requested for.


One of the contradiction is that deviates and shows it illogical is your following statement

Muhammad (ﷺ) is the final prophet, the seal of the messengers, sent with the universal message for all of mankind. Jesus (‘Isa), peace be upon him, was a mighty prophet, sent to the Children of Israel.

Islam doesn't rank prophets like a fanboy list. It honors them all, but acknowledges that some were given specific roles and statuses by divine decree (Qur’an 2:253).

it's funny the Quran 2:253 you quoted states And these Messengers (who have been designated to guide people), We have exalted some of them above the others. Among them are such as were spoken to by Allah Himself, and some He exalted in other respects. And We granted Jesus, son of Mary, Clear Signs and supported him with the spirit of holiness.

Speaking of exaltation and Jesus given signs and supported by the Holy Spirit.

Look even usage of text is poor, nevertheless you claim you don't rank prophets yet you still claimed that Muhammad is higher. Another example of confusion. These are readable verifiable proofs unlike one accusing another of confusion with no proof. Yours is quite clear

If you’re angry that Muhammad has a higher status in Islam, that’s not a theological critique—it’s just ego dressed up as outrage. We don’t rewrite divine hierarchy to please your feelings.

here you are getting side tracked making another assumption and accusation towards how I possible feel, when I possible really don't care as probably should, because if I did I would read the Quran myself but reading your responses to simple questions and trying to verify it's accuracy shows inconsistency and dishonesty. But you can continue focusing on how you think I feel though.

3. “Adam was forgiven but it says they will all go to hell?” – Learn to read before you debate.

Adam was forgiven by Allah, full stop. Islam doesn't teach that he was condemned to hell. You’re confusing temporary consequences on Earth with eternal damnation, and once again showing you haven’t read the Qur’an—you’ve read bad summaries of it.

As for "they will all go to hell," you’re likely mangling Qur'an 19:71, which says:

“And there is none of you but will pass over it (hellfire); this is upon your Lord an inevitability decreed.”

But the next verse (19:72) clarifies:

“Then We will save those who feared Allah and leave the wrongdoers within it, on their knees.”

So passing over doesn't mean eternal damnation. It refers to a moment of judgment—a test that the righteous will pass, and the wicked will not. If you’re going to quote the Qur’an, quote both verses, or don’t quote at all.

unlike you I have been honest from the beginning stating clearly that I have little knowledge of the Quran and haven't read it, but you obviously didn't see it or you did and forgot because you are set in your own ways and right in your own eyes, so it doesn't matter. Whatever you right is true even if it's subjective it must be accepted if not, the person is a lazy illiterate, your words, which show how humble you are and the state of your mind to being questioned about things concerning your religion. Are you not proving that when Muslims are questioned they get offended and angry.

If you were not so touchy you would also know some bible believers think all will pass hell. It doesn't undermine the question that was based on what someone said. But you are too full of yourself to actually use what's on your shoulders.

4. “Even creativeorbit said the Messiah Lord will follow Muhammad” – Exactly. That’s Islamic eschatology.

Yes, Jesus (peace be upon him) will return. And guess what? He won’t come with a new religion. He will return as a follower of Muhammad (ﷺ)—as part of the finale revealed path, not as a separate savior figure.

This isn’t confusing—it’s coherent, consistent, and rooted in tawheed (oneness of God).

The real confusion is in trying to understand Islamic theology through a Christian lens, twisting verses, demanding contradictions, and then calling Islam “confusing” when it doesn’t mirror your broken framework.

Final word:

Your argument is riddled with poor comprehension, selective quoting, and bad logic. You’re not here for dialogue—you’re here to poke holes using cut-up verses and confused theology. But this isn’t Sunday school. If you want to attack Islam, come with facts, not this mangled mess of misinterpretation and emotional noise.

Until then, don’t confuse your misunderstanding with Islam’s clarity.

TenQ AntiChristian

is this one not confused, who said any about Jesus bringing in a new religion? So all this verbosity is to undermining your own verses that state the Messiah is Adoni, lord, as one anointed as king in God's kingdom.

Just look at yourself, okay show how I tried understand Islamic theology through a Christian lens?

You are good at making assumptions and accusations than you are at making any logical explanation to be frank.

Even if I poked holes and cut up verses, you failed to quoted the verses accurately nor use them. Instead went on a tirade of trying to ridicule a simple statement that provokes what you fear to be true

CreativeOrbit:
Your attempt to corner Muslims into a false dichotomy with a simplistic “gotcha” question reeks of both intellectual laziness and dishonest intent. You’re not asking in good faith—you’re looking for ammunition, not understanding.

could you quit repeating the same tiresome **** it's getting stale reading such from one who shouldn't be so lazy to think of an alternative approach to regard in text, it's like reading an automated response by an 1985 bot.

Let’s get this straight: the verse you're referring to (likely Quran 5:51) does not say “Muslims are categorically forbidden from being friends with Jews and Christians.” That’s a mistranslation and misinterpretation commonly weaponized by anti-Muslim propagandists who rip verses out of context like it’s a game of ideological Jenga.

The Arabic word “awliyaa” doesn’t simply mean “friends” in the casual sense. It means allies, guardians, or political protectors in a conflict—and was revealed at a time when Jews and Christians in Arabia were actively conspiring with enemy tribes against the Muslim community. The context is historical and political—not a universal command to socially isolate or discriminate.

when one pathetically shows aggression and self justifies it by assuming the other person's intent, isn't that low and should such a person be listened to? Your response is evidence you are not moderate in your approach nor friendly in your opinion. Subtly trying to undermine others instead of being calm and quoting the text you claim should be viewed in context. What assures us that if we go through the chapter we would get an interpretation inline with what you have arrogantly responded with? And why not just go with that approach.

Now to your baited question: Are Muslims “taught not to vote for non-Muslims”? No. That is a gross overreach. Islam teaches Muslims to act in justice, wisdom, and the best interest of society. There's no blanket prohibition against political cooperation or participation in pluralistic systems. What is discouraged is blind allegiance to oppressive systems or hostile forces, regardless of faith.

Let’s flip your logic: should Christians avoid voting for Jews? Should Jews avoid voting for Muslims? Your implication reduces interfaith dynamics to paranoia and tribalism, which says more about your worldview than it does about Islam.

The truth is, you're distorting scripture to push a divisive narrative, and that’s not a critique—it’s manipulation dressed up as inquiry. If you’re truly interested in what Islam teaches, go to qualified scholars, not political forums or your own biased echo chamber.

So no, Islam is not the caricature you're trying to paint. But if you're hell-bent on spreading this ignorance, at least admit you're arguing in bad faith—don’t pretend you’re asking honest questions when you’ve already decided the answers.

you attempt to flip said logic shows how inept one's reasoning could be. Was there a quote from the said new testament that would even surmise your logical buhaha? But it seems fit to you to imply that my implication reduces interfaith dynamics to paranoia and tribalism, which says more about your worldview than it does about Islam. Indirect personal attacks? is that probably what you were taught to do, because it is showing in your response.

Your response is clumsy and no one was baiting you to respond in such manner. Meanwhile you believe a conspiracy is a more valid explanation that solicitates your view whereas you are devoid of contextual explanation has to how my implications, which you exaggerated and misguided from what I interpreted, as an instruction to not support Jewish and Christian politicians and leaders is wrong. Calling it lazy is also undermining the majority of Nigerian muslims who probably follow such precept in their preferences.

I honestly took time to read your responses and you have portrayed Islam as what you termed it.

"a caricature" in your own words.

Maybe you should focus on the subject instead of being overly verbose

Can that verse be used to teach what I implied or is there a better interpretation? But that's not something you can answer when you already assume other people intentions and respond in such inappropriate manner.

CreativeOrbit:
Your post is a patchwork of historical distortion, orientalist fantasy, and outdated polemics that have been thoroughly debunked by serious scholarship. Let’s tear it down, brick by brick.

First, your claim that "Allah" was a moon god with daughters is not just false—it’s laughably ignorant. “Allah” was the Arabic word for God long before Islam, used by Arab Christians and Jews alike. Even today, Arabic-speaking Christians refer to God as “Allah.” Conflating Allah with a moon deity is a lazy, discredited trope pushed by fringe sources and pseudo-historians who can’t distinguish between mythology and linguistics.

Second, let’s talk about the so-called “Satanic Verses” incident—yes, the one you're parroting without critical thought. The story is not from the Quran itself, and Islamic scholars have historically regarded it with extreme skepticism or outright rejection. Why? Because it contradicts the Quran’s core claim that God protects the revelation from corruption (Quran 15:9). The alleged event appears in a few weak, conflicting reports centuries after the Prophet’s life—not the Quran, not the Hadith collections with strong isnads, and not anything you can credibly call a “fact of history.”

Moreover, the argument that Muhammad was “deceived by the devil” is circular nonsense. You cite a narrative not accepted by the majority of Islamic scholarship, then use it to attack the integrity of the Quran. That’s not logic; that’s intellectual dishonesty.

And your smug conclusion that this “raises more doubts” is just rhetorical fluff with zero substance. If you’re going to critique Islamic theology, do it with real evidence and a basic understanding of how isnad (chain of narration), tafsir (exegesis), and usul al-fiqh (principles of jurisprudence) work. Otherwise, you’re not debating—you’re regurgitating tabloid-level propaganda.

You want to raise questions? Fine. But don't pretend you're operating from a position of reason while spreading historically illiterate fiction.

TenQ

you call something an oriental fantasy claiming to debunk it with "serious" scholarship to make a joke of others or yourself. Definitely, yourself, for building an expectation that one would read something scholarly from one who laughs ignorantly without understanding what he even read. "I came across an info"

Your first point is inept of any scholarly input nor view but a barrage to undermine a simple reference which is accurate that Allah means the God. But never the less reading through ur noncince with respect to scholarly seriousness, I would simple say or simple put are you not an ostentatious philologaster?

With all your verbosity you find a way to skip past the point in your rhetorics.

You could have simply said none of your essentials which you claimed were important to understanding the Quran claimed that Muhammad was deceived at some point.

One can arrogantly look at others as lazy and still pathetically call it extreme skepticism but is that truly a scholarly view while ignoring to explain or show how incorrect the view is. I believe as shown by your response who the lazy is as you fail to properly answer and clarify your view, but instead you give us this as your serious scholarly response, "The alleged event appears in a few weak, conflicting reports centuries after the Prophet’s life—not the Quran"


And you acknowledging the narrative as cited but not accepted by the majority of Islamic scholarship, is that supposed to be your logical and intellectual honest input to something you don't even consider debate but an illiterate fiction posed as a question. Meanwhile you are agreeing that the narrative as I found it, exists. It's obvious Islamic scholars would debunk such a narrative but honestly your response is as crappy as your reasoning.

CreativeOrbit:
The Quran acknowledges that salvation is open to righteous Jews, Christians, and Sabians before the message of Islam was completed (Quran 2:62). After that, people are accountable based on the truth they receive. You might want to study context before quoting verses in isolation.

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?

5. Your challenge on distortions:
i. What was distorted?
The divinity of Jesus, the Trinity, and salvation by blood sacrifice—none of which Jesus preached.
ii. How?
Through councils, Roman influence, Hellenistic philosophy, and Pauline theology.
iii. When?
Primarily from 70 CE to 400 CE, as doctrines were debated and canonized.
iv. Who?
Early church leaders—especially Paul—who shifted the focus from Jesus' monotheistic message to a Romanized interpretation that conveniently aligned with empire.

you may notice I am ignoring areas I feel you are ignorant concerning the teachings of the new testament especially about what Paul wrote. But my question to you is this do you believe and practice everything Jesus taught in the gospels?

Note, Jesus never taught that he is God, but for the rest of what he taught, concerning love, forgiveness, prayer and the rest do you believe and obey God and what he taught, removing the said distortions and neglecting all Paul wrote. Do you and Muslims believe and practice what Jesus taught?