₦airaland Forum

I just had a thought.

If everyone on this platform gives you just a hundred naira via bank transfer; wow, just wow, you account balance would sooner be reading in six, nine or even in the twelve digits. Wow. Just wow. You actually remind me of a subreddit on reddit that is specially dedicated to this - called millionairemakers.

Let me talk about the elephant in the room since you're the huge elephant.

What. Do. You. Want. To. Use. The. Raised. Amount. For?

Prozico22:
Water was before the creation that what I mean

If God didn't create water, where did it come from?

Prozico22:
Water is life abi? no be bible God create Water.can I tell you that Water as power more than any thing on earth.

I thought I would read stuff.

What are you saying?

Itisallright:
You dare not take offence kid, you're talking with your dad age mate, i graduated far before you were born, i have four boys already and have about 5 workers working for me, so bow your head and learn....

Itisallright:
Another toddler with low IQ

I wouldn't take offense.

After all, I just graduated from Balogun Comprehensive Model college here in Lagos with a First class honours degree in Mathematics, Civic Education, Intro Tech, English, Biology, Chemistry, and Agric at the age of 14.

Itisallright:
1. Look for a busy place and start selling fruits/plantain
2. A busy and start roasting bole and groundnuts
3. A busy place and start selling fresh breads
4. Enter street and start selling cold drinks
5. Add more money and enter market place for pos

WE MUST SURVIVE IF WE'RE NOT LAZY.....

man most work, no excuses for failure...

You're the only reason for your failure.

God kills the hard-working, if he wills.

Fixed: We would survive if we're not not lazy.

The could be other reasons people end up as failures. Time might not smile on them. They could be victim of chance. And God might not will it. So I have
Fixed this one for you too: You might be the reason for your failure

Qasim6:
You don't need to go to all these Jonah, Ezekiel.

The only 2 candidates for that prophecy as at today is Jesus or Muhammad.

Because those are the two their followers claim have something to do with the Gentiles and bring new laws.

Jesus said he was not sent to the Gentiles.

The only easy way out of this for you is to claim the prophecy is yet to be fulfilled so we can move on.

You still don't get me. What I am saying is that it could be neither of them. The prophecy is addressed to a specific person. When looked more closely, Jesus satisfies the condition of the chosen servant because he is a Jews. Mohammed isn't. The prophet Isaiah could have called the chosen prophet an outsider, a gentile prophet, a on-Jews, or something to that effect that signifies that he is not an Israelite but he didn't. If he did, then sincere followers of the bible would have agreed with you.

You will agree as well as I do that Isaiah is not a prophet that was sent to mankind. He lived in Judah and preached exclusively to his people the Jews (in the book of Kings and Isaiah, you can read about how God used him to prophecy the defeat of the Assyrians causing an angel of God to slaughter 185, 000 foot soldiers in one day), so if he was going to prophecy about a chosen prophet that is non-Jewish, he'd say it clearly. His prophecy is about his people, God's punishment and promises for them.

It's just like a mathematics professor talking about a concept in a mathematics class and someone takes some words in his lessons and applies it to astronomy or physics because they are similar or interchangeable. Just satisfying the conditions of a specific prophecy doesn't mean the prophecy is talking with reference to you that is why I had to use Jonah to contradict your claims. Jonah was called, a chosen servant so to speak, to preach to a people whose language he didn't understand, a people far away who are non Jewish. Since this is a prophecy about a chosen servant sent to preach to the ends of the earth not just to the Jewish people, then for the sake of argument, Jonah satisfies the conditions too.

If Isaiah were talking about a gentile prophet or an Arabian prophet sent to the people at the ends of the earth, then he would have called him so.

Qasim6:
In your opinion the God's Kingdom is not physical
It is going to be a spiritual kingdom?

The ottoman empire might not be in existence, but the countries that made up the empire are still under Islamic rule, for me that count as forever.

Since the prophecy is open to different interpretations, we can ignore the prophecy.

You can respond to the other Prophecy.

For the sake of argument. The chosen one In Isaiah is actually Jonah son of Amittai.

For the sake of argument, not all Jewish prophets were sent to their own people; some were sent to non-Jewish nations.

Jonah was to travel to Assyria by sea. He took God's words, a message of warning, to non-Jewish people. He is also a prophet. This is the first time that it was put on record that a Jewish prophet ministered to the ends of the earth - to non-Jewish people because God instructed him to, so if God sends warnings to non-Jews (who live very far away and can be likened to be the ends of the earth) through the mouth of his servants who are Jews, why should we think that Isaiah wasn't referring to one of the Jewish prophet whom God would instruct to carry his message to non-Jews? Why do we have to think that God sends Jewish prophets only to the Jews? After-all, Nineveh is a non Jewish territory quite far from Israel and Jonah is Jewish, and God sends a message to the ends of the earth through the mouth of a Jews. Do you get me?

Why do we have to think Isaiah was referring to a non-Jews taking God's word to the ends of the earth if God also uses Jews to do the same? If God intends that non-Jews would hear his message through whomever he chooses, why should we assume that the verse is a specific allusion to Muhammad? My friend, how far?

Qasim6:
In your opinion the God's Kingdom is not physical
It is going to be a spiritual kingdom?

The ottoman empire might not be in existence, but the countries that made up the empire are still under Islamic rule, for me that count as forever.

Since the prophecy is open to different interpretations, we can ignore the prophecy.

You can respond to the other Prophecy.

Not necessarily a spiritual kingdom because it says during the reign of those kings.

However, I think all conditions must be satisfied for any entity to be fitted in.

There is no prophecy of Muhammad anywhere in the scripture. This is because Muhammad is not a Jews.

God made a covenant with the Jewish people and their descendants. This should be written in letters of gold and every word spelled out one by one because you clearly do not understand what this means. God accepts worship from non-Jews, certainly, but it still has to be stated that God entered into a covenant with the Jews. If you have proof that God entered into a covenant with other non-Jews, share it. It might be the case, but a proof should suffice, since no one can say with certainty all of God's dealing in time. Even Jesus understood that, that was why he said he was sent to the house of Israel, God's lost sheep.

Now, In Verse 10 of the chapter you quoted, it reads:
Sing a new song to the Lord!
Sing his praises from the ends of the earth!

Then it begins to list what it perceives to be the ends of the earth.

Sing, all you who sail the seas,
all you who live in distant coastlands.
Join in the chorus, you desert towns;
let the villages of Kedar rejoice!
Let the people of Sela sing for joy;
shout praises from the mountaintops!
Let the whole world glorify the Lord;
let it sing his praise.

This verses doesn't say that the chosen servant is from the ends of the earth.

Actually, it only means that the works of this chosen prophet would spread far and wide that the people who live in distant coast lands, those who live in desert towns, those who live in villages of Kedar and the people of Sela would rejoice because of the things that would be wrought there.

If God had sent a Jewish prophet to warn people in non-Jewish lands, (Nineveh the capital city of Assyria during the days of Jonah), why should we think that there are no striking parallel to this in the bible. What if I told you that the chosen prophet is Jonah? It doesn't mean the chosen prophet is an Arab; this would not be the first or last time that non-Jewish prophets ministered in gentile lands.

Qasim6:
What is your opinion about the prophecy of Isaiah 42?

Who do you think is the chosen servant?

Who I think is the chosen servant? The chosen servant is a Jew - and this is as clear as light.

Yes, the villages of Kedar and the people of Sela as spoken of in verses 11 and 12 are descendants of Ishmael, but that is because God's chosen servant is a guide for the nation. He would be extremely useful everywhere, not just in Jewish lands but in Arabia and the farthest ends of the earth as well.

In verse 6 of Isaiah 42, it reads:

“I, the Lord, have called you (the chosen servant spoken verse 1) to demonstrate my righteousness.
I will take you by the hand and guard you,
and I will give you to my people, Israel,
as a symbol of my covenant with them.
And you will be a light to guide the nations.

A symbol of God's covenant with his people cannot be a gentile. That would be like a German father getting his son an Italian wife as part of some agreements they had. God would not take a descendant of Ishmael and give to the descendant of Israel as a symbol of his covenant with them. Your position is quite meh. It has to be one of their own people, otherwise the passage would have clearly stated a distinct origin. if more information about a certain character is not given, then it must be understood to mean a Jews. Everything must be understood as being addressed to the Jewish people except God deems it fit to expatiate his will by divulging more information.

If you have read the Bible, you would observe that God made a covenant with the Jewish people in the wilderness. All of them. The mountain was smoking hot and billowing with fire and the people, fearful, said to Moses, don't worry, everything God says, we will do. They entered into a covenant with their God that time and God's dealings with them must be understood to be that.

Any righteous person who has had impact on humanity can fit perfectly into the description of the chapter you shared, so no, it cannot pass for Mohammad. The verse is not very descriptive of who this chosen person is. It doesn't say his nationality, his gender, his race, tribe, and other identifying information about him. But one thing is certain, this chosen servant is a Jews.

What is God's covenant with the Jews? It is the fact that he called their ancestor Abraham and chose one of his sons through whom the covenant might be ratified that he might be his God and that of his descendants after him.

Qasim6:
Muhammad: He claimed to be sent to all mankind and the prophecy is giving us some Arab vibes.

Muhammad is the first non-Jewish prophet sent to all of mankind. Woah! That's quite tough. As if that is not enough, he is also the last. So he is the first and last non-Jewish prophet sent to all of mankind. The prophet of Islam is quite smart. Smarter than I actually thought of him, after all; what is stopping a Chinese an Indian, an African or people of any nationality from making the same claim, so yes, he has to be the last.

This is quite tough bro. Very, very distasteful to handle. He is not. Muhammad distorted earlier revelations and has made God a liar. The jokes is on you, though.

Qasim6:
I totally agree with you. There need to be testimony of those that came before him.





In Daniel 2, The king of Babylon saw a vision, which Daniel interprets as 5 successive kingdoms.
The first of the 5 kingdoms is Babylon and the last will be a God's Kingdom.

Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

Historically the first 4 kingdoms were
Babylon - Persia - Greece - Rome
And the kingdom that came after the Roman empire was Islamic Empire.

The Christians did not defeat the Roman empire, infact they became an extension of the the Roman empire, the Roman christains exiled the Jews from Jerusalem and dump filths at the site of the holy temple, they persecuted non trinitarian christains. It was the Muslims that cleanse the temple site and allow the Israelites back into Jerusalem when they defeated the Romans and take Jerusalem from them.

Again on this subject.

You have to realise that when you type "The Fall of the Roman empire" on google; it usually refers to just the western Empire; what about the eastern empire? Isn't this supposed Islamic caliphate supposed to defeat both empires as evidenced from these two passages:

As you watched, a rock was cut from a mountain, but not by human hands. It struck the feet of iron and clay, smashing them to bits. 35 The whole statue was crushed into small pieces of iron, clay, bronze, silver, and gold.

That is the meaning of the rock cut from the mountain, though not by human hands, that crushed to pieces the statue of iron, bronze, clay, silver, and gold.

“During the reigns of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed or conquered. It will crush all these kingdoms into nothingness, and it will stand forever. 45 That is the meaning of the rock cut from the mountain, though not by human hands, that crushed to pieces the statue of iron, bronze, clay, silver, and gold.


Granted, the western empire fell in the fifth century and the eastern half, the Byzantine empire with its capital in Constantinople, continued for more than one thousand years and fell to the Ottoman empire, but this is at variance with the prophecy shown to Nebuchadnezzar.

The rock is not even an empire or a caliphate per say. I think the rock is divine assistance or used to signify a force outside human capabilities; it is supposed to pave the way for the kingdom of God that would be setup. Mark the words - that would be setup. If you claim that the passage only makes it clear that the feet of the fourth empire would be struck, not the entire legs, and that should been construed to mean Byzantine, then I would partially agree, but the kingdom that was setup in its place no longer exist - Ottoman. When the Ottman defeated the Byzantine empire, it was already very weak; this cannot be seen as a "crushing" of previous empires into nothingness. The kingdom is supposed to serve a purpose. So clearly, the last empire would not fall through guerilla warfare because any empire that topples the fourth empire has already been setup. Further reading shows that this kingdom is said to stand forever because it is not an earthly kingdom.

The passage is supposed to be understood as God toppling very strong empires and establishing his own kingdom after men must have wrestled and wrangled power from each other for a long, long time.

Qasim6:
I totally agree with you. There need to be testimony of those that came before him.





In Daniel 2, The king of Babylon saw a vision, which Daniel interprets as 5 successive kingdoms.
The first of the 5 kingdoms is Babylon and the last will be a God's Kingdom.

Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

Historically the first 4 kingdoms were
Babylon - Persia - Greece - Rome
And the kingdom that came after the Roman empire was Islamic Empire.

The Christians did not defeat the Roman empire, infact they became an extension of the the Roman empire, the Roman christains exiled the Jews from Jerusalem and dump filths at the site of the holy temple, they persecuted non trinitarian christains. It was the Muslims that cleanse the temple site and allow the Israelites back into Jerusalem when ey defeated the Romans and take Jerusalem from them.

Antispam bot banned me for 24hrs and pulled down my wall of text, but I hope you read it.

To summarize what I said because I don't even remember what I wrote.

Daniel speaks of five empires, not four as you think. Babylon was the first empire then Persia, Greece and then Rome.

Actually, succeeding empires were just an extension of the latter empire, so they were larger but not necessarily stronger. What do I mean? When the Persians defeated the Babylonian, they annexed Babylon's territory and often claimed it for themselves. Similarly, for Greece and then Rome.

For clarity, this is the passage:

27 Daniel replied, “There are no wise men, enchanters, magicians, or fortune-tellers who can reveal the king’s secret. 28 But there is a God in heaven who reveals secrets, and he has shown King Nebuchadnezzar what will happen in the future. Now I will tell you your dream and the visions you saw as you lay on your bed.

29 “While Your Majesty was sleeping, you dreamed about coming events. He who reveals secrets has shown you what is going to happen. 30 And it is not because I am wiser than anyone else that I know the secret of your dream, but because God wants you to understand what was in your heart.

31 “In your vision, Your Majesty, you saw standing before you a huge, shining statue of a man. It was a frightening sight. 32 The head of the statue was made of fine gold. Its chest and arms were silver, its belly and thighs were bronze, 33 its legs were iron, and its feet were a combination of iron and baked clay. 34 As you watched, a rock was cut from a mountain,[d] but not by human hands. It struck the feet of iron and clay, smashing them to bits. 35 The whole statue was crushed into small pieces of iron, clay, bronze, silver, and gold. Then the wind blew them away without a trace, like chaff on a threshing floor. But the rock that knocked the statue down became a great mountain that covered the whole earth.

36 “That was the dream. Now we will tell the king what it means. 37 Your Majesty, you are the greatest of kings. The God of heaven has given you sovereignty, power, strength, and honor. 38 He has made you the ruler over all the inhabited world and has put even the wild animals and birds under your control. You are the head of gold.

39 “But after your kingdom comes to an end, another kingdom, inferior to yours, will rise to take your place. After that kingdom has fallen, yet a third kingdom, represented by bronze, will rise to rule the world. 40 Following that kingdom, there will be a fourth one, as strong as iron. That kingdom will smash and crush all previous empires, just as iron smashes and crushes everything it strikes. 41 The feet and toes you saw were a combination of iron and baked clay, showing that this kingdom will be divided. Like iron mixed with clay, it will have some of the strength of iron. 42 But while some parts of it will be as strong as iron, other parts will be as weak as clay. 43 This mixture of iron and clay also shows that these kingdoms will try to strengthen themselves by forming alliances with each other through intermarriage. But they will not hold together, just as iron and clay do not mix.

44 “During the reigns of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed or conquered. It will crush all these kingdoms into nothingness, and it will stand forever. 45 That is the meaning of the rock cut from the mountain, though not by human hands, that crushed to pieces the statue of iron, bronze, clay, silver, and gold. The great God was showing the king what will happen in the future. The dream is true, and its meaning is certain.”

In the scripture you quoted, the hand is the first empire; then its chest and arms, another empire; its belly and thighs, the third empire; its legs and feet must be seen as one empire for two reasons: first, the feet is actually a part of the leg and this is evident from the colour used to describe both. I mean, both are one and the same colour.

The problem seem to be the rock cut from a mountain. The rock cut from the mountain is not an Islamic empire or caliphate. Clearly, it isn't. Is there any empire however big or powerful that has stood tall and remained unconquerable for all times?

Also, the extent of the Roman empire makes totally dissolution via warfare from a bunch of warriors an abstract concept. The Roman empire did rule most of Europe, portions of northern Africa, and much of the Middle East, including Israel. Which people or group are able to coalesce to form an empire or caliphate with the aim of defeating such a big territory? What I am saying is that the said group that would form an Islamic caliphate didn’t conquer the entire Roman empire.

Again, some school of thought believe that the fourth empire is a future one while others believe that is is not Rome because Rome didn't satisfy all the conditions of the fourth empire; the Roman’s didn’t completely conquer the landmass that the Greeks did conquer. It's quite dicey. Divine revelation is not subject to personal interpretation.

In fact, if you read a post here; the writer is of the view that the Islamic caliphate is the fourth Kingdom, not the rock cut as you alleged.
cliffwellman(dot) wordpress dot com slash 2019 slash 03 slash 16 slash daniel-2-explained

Which empire has been able to withstand onslaught and several guerilla warfare till today? Could you mention the Islamic empire that defeated the Roman empire as you claimed; I would like to know what became of them today and if they still exist.

Qasim6:
I totally agree with you. There need to be testimony of those that came before him.





In Daniel 2, The king of Babylon saw a vision, which Daniel interprets as 5 successive kingdoms.
The first of the 5 kingdoms is Babylon and the last will be a God's Kingdom.

Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

Historically the first 4 kingdoms were
Babylon - Persia - Greece - Rome
And the kingdom that came after the Roman empire was Islamic Empire.

The Christians did not defeat the Roman empire, infact they became an extension of the the Roman empire, the Roman christains exiled the Jews from Jerusalem and dump filths at the site of the holy temple, they persecuted non trinitarian christains. It was the Muslims that cleanse the temple site and allow the Israelites back into Jerusalem when they defeated the Romans and take Jerusalem from them.

Will get back by 8:30pm. battery is down.

Qasim6:
I know you don't believe in the Prophethood of Muhammad, I don't know if you consider Jesus as a Prophet or Son of God or God himself or all of the above.

It's been over 2000yrs Jesus/John the Baptist walk this earth mate! when should we be expecting the next prophet?

Muhammad is not a prophet at all, but a God-fearing fraud. Oops sorry, I said what I shouldn't have said. Kai. Oooo. If not for you, but for Muslims (and they are quite many) whom I have benefited from in one way or another, I shouldn't be saying what I said on a public space, but then I hope I am truly anonymous.

Jesus promised to send his representative because men cannot do without God's guidance; Men need guidance and they need God's persona from time to time, and it will always be so from now till eternity. In fact, like food, men need God everyday. His representative is certainly not Muhammad, but the Holy Spirit.

Qasim6:
Are u kidding me?
You think this Us Vs them thing for me?

If the Jews and Arabs are at loggerheads, it is non of my business.

I was only pointing out to you how detailed and coherent the genesis is

A 16 yrs old at that time should be married with kids, yet we see passages like Hagar puting the boy under the bushes in Gen 21:15

A 16 years old male even in days gone by is not some super human being compared to 16 years old we have today. I have seen and interacted with many 16 years old and a large number still rely on their parents for survival. How many independent 16 year old have you seen today? Even Abraham, at what age did he marry? Most established 16 year old in days gone by are so by virtue of their parents.

What makes it a subject of debate that a 16 years old would be fully reliant on his mother in those times? Even 30 year old could still be. I don't see the problem, or is there something you're seeing that I am not?

Qasim6:
Are those eye witness still alive today?
The truth of the matter is you and I, we are not likely going to witness any of those mighty miracles in our lifetime.
I did not meet Muhammad or any of the prophets I believe were sent by God nor did u meet Daniel or any other prophets you believe were sent by God.
It is left for us to investigate with sincerity the books they leave behind

The easiest coup out for any religious difficulty is to say: God told me this. God told me that. This is the revelation I got from God. That's all that is needed to have a field day.

Even if your detail is right. How would we know? We would, of course, have to use the testimony of those who came before him because God's work cannot be established on the testimony of one prophet.

Qasim6:
I don't really know why u r looking into Qur'an if if it's quest for truth or you are just having fun
If it's quest for the truth, then there is a problem with your approach, the problem with your approach is you are putting the cart before the horse. You already made up your mind on what should be revealed to Muhammad if he is a true prophet. Whereas, I believe what you first need to establish if he is a true prophet, if he is a true prophet then whatever revealed to him is what God deem perfect to reveal.
These are the bold claims Muhammad made about himself.

Good. Please, could you point me to any works of God by the Jews (it has to be by from a Jews) that claims that God would send a gentile prophet, not just to the Jews, but to all mankind. I choose to use the word gentile because it is broader in scope and includes Arabia.

Qasim6:
He has been foretold in previous scriptures

If I can establish the fact that he has been foretold then all of ur argument crumbles

We can start with Daniel prophecies.

Which scripture? If you can establish it, I would believe and not just that, I would send you 20, 000 naira. I am waiting.

Qasim6:
If the Chinese man has been foretold in the early scripture, we would have to follow him.

Unfortunately for the Chinese man, Muhammad is the seal of Prophethood.

This man you're giving it to me hot-hot.

Seal of what? Do you mean the last prophet?

Okay, let me be a bit specific. Is he the last prophet of the Jews? Or the Arabs? or the last prophet of the Abrahamic covenant? Or the last prophet from the seed of Adam? What exactly do you mean by the seal of the prophets?

Why do you think men can be bridled with a body of instructions and would not go astray from time to time? Who is supposed to call them to obedience when they do? Dead prophets in their graves or tons of manuscripts left behind? Do you think men can do without divine guidance from time to time? Do you think there was ever a point in the history of time where men were specifically without God's servant? Do you think an organized body of instruction is all that is needed to keep men in check for all time? This is what I would call ignorance per excellence. Let me speak French: Grandeur de ignorance!

God is faithful my friend. He is very very faithful. God would not leave his people to a written set of instructions for all time.

Where is the sense of justice in that if one can be damned despite making the claim that he continued in the path of sinfulness because there was no prophet to correct him and he's not a fan of the books?

I don't understand why people think God has done his best and would not continue to try. Why should any reasonable fellow think of a one last prophet in the Abrahamic covenant. Where is the sense in that? Did God ever say there would come a time when he would stop sending messengers and that men would have to rely on the books? Prove it for me.

jendoslim:
I am learning under you sir.

Learning under me? No sir, I still insist that you're wiser than I am. Your comment is grade one, top-notch, crystal clear, and so on point.

That being said, I am tempted to ask any Muslim apologist:

What if another prophet, maybe a Chinese comes today from his LORD, what if he comes with his own version of the times and dealings of the Jewish people and their relationship with God. A Chinese! What if? What if his testimony sometimes agrees with, and is sometimes at variance with theirs. What if this said prophet claims that Muhammad is dead right in everything he believed.

But he has been sent to finish the works of Muhammad with some vital nuances from his Lord. What if the said prophet said that God didn't intend that his people rely on the Bible and Quran alone; but on the authentic revelations from their LORD which would be given to him over the years. What if the said prophet starts pulling a large following, teaching hardcore Sunni Islam that very much appeals to Quran-thumpers and some very indecisive people who want to follow their God by going the extra mile for him.

From the five daily prayers to other articles of faith, what if this prophet believe in everything Muhammad believed in and even more; it's just that he has had more revelations from God and God asked him to liberate mankind with these messages. What if he lived a very devout lifestyle and can be set as an example for others. Or, what if it's another Arab prophet sent from his Lord to mankind not a Chinese, or an Ethiopian, or a Korean.

Should we believe him? Should we believe his testimony of events that happened more than two thousand years before he was even born despite many authentic manuscripts written by reliable eyewitnesses of the same events scattered in different parts of the world? Would God hold me guilty of unbelief if I don't believe him? These are the questions I would like to ask them.


There is no end to this things my man.

jendoslim:
Islam is a very [b]funny [/b]religion.

Revelations are given only when there is no documented evidences by witnesses. In other words, past events or future events are only revealed if and only if no previous records of it exists or documented.

A group of homogeneous people documented their generations and their itineraries over a long period of time and someone who wasn't even born, nor travelled to or even understood their indigenous ways of life now comes up and saying he had a revelations that what eye witnesses penned down were wrong

It can be likened to Prof Soyinka writing a book about Pharaoh Amentohep III or Tutankhamen discrediting what Egyptian wrote about them, even changing their names, their way of life/living, religion, belief systems, family values et al.

Prof Soyinka who is existing hundreds of years after their demise.

Case study of someone up there saying emphatically that King Solomon, son of David is not same as King Sulaiman just cos what their books said is at variance with what was penned down by King Solomon scribes.

Was it after King Solomon reigned that your Islamic King Sulaiman reigned over Israel ?

Jubril of Sudan and Buhari - double body had been existing for aeons ohh.....lol

An irony I would suppose!!!

You are more than ten times more intelligent and wiser than I am; and no, I am not fucking kidding you.

I need to bookmark this. Thank you.

Unfortunately, my PC would poof anytime soon and I haven't been able to state somethings.

Have a good night rest.

Qasim6:
You don't need to spell out the false prophet accusation, what kinda prophet use previous [b]revelations [/b]to write his then claim he is receiving revelation from God?

The point is what you don't get. When God manifested himself to some people or many people as the case may be, when he punished some rebels with instant judgement, when he sent angels to earth, when he wrought miracles, displayed his mighty power and more. A lot of these events happened with many live witnesses present. Humans who saw and heard what happened - not one or two or three or four. Sometimes thousands of them.

Some witnesses deem it upon themselves to pen down what happened. There is not a need for revelation in this instance. A large part of the stories in the Bible was written by reliable first-hand witness who saw with their eyes what happened and need no revelation from God. Only a few events can be known by revelation -- like the creation of the Heavens and the earth, the creation of the first human, the first sin, the flood, the formation of diverse human languages and more. These and many more especially in the book of Genesis can only be known by revelation because obviously man hadn't been created then.

Moses could not have known about the Genesis creation story because he has not been created then, but he was one of the central figures when the Israelite had their fair share of God in the wilderness. Does Moses need revelation of what happened in the wilderness? Of he killing an Egyptian? Of he parting the Red Sea? Of Gushing water out of a rock by divine power? No, of course not. He was there, for goodness sake. He witnessed the event.

And when Moses died, we had a long line of prophets who came after him from God. These prophets did not try to explain what the earlier prophets received. None came and started re-telling a different version of what had already been written. Elijah. Elisha. Daniel. Jeremiah. Ezekiel. Isaiah and many more. None of these prophet had a different revelation or even try to "explain what God revealed" to them about what happened in the past. Do we have an Elijah, Elisha, Daniel, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, or an Isaiah who comes up with, by divine revelation, a different or a slightly different tale of God's dealing with his people in the past? In fact, do we have anyone, or have we had anyone who calls himself a prophet and writes his own version, whether by divine inspiration or not, in a bid to do God's bidding. None, my brother.


What genuine prophet explains with some clarity what GOD revealed to other prophets of his? Is this not madness? Is it not ungodly on all fronts to try to explain divine revelations that wasn't handed to you unless God makes it clear that another prophet of his would do the interpretation. Is this like some sort of Nebuchadnezzar's dream? I thought a divine revelation is letting you in on what is unknown. Would God teach sucklings and babes whom we call prophets masters -level advanced Calculus and use notations from Quantum mechanics for interpretation? And if that's the case, what is Muhammad interpreting?

Qasim6:
It is a two sided sword bro, it cut both ways. Since according to you the absence of Daniel from the Qur'an is the ultimate litmus test for divine authorship of the Qur'an, why can't we just reverse that and see what warnings do we have from Daniel and all other previous prophets about a certain false Prophet from Arabia?

It is not the ultimate litmus for divine authorship, but it is one of them. The absence of the book of Daniel clearly shows that the Quran could not have been inspired. Why is God not correcting ALL the errors of the past? Why is God silent on some spectacular event which he wrought in a strange land. Daniel wrote the book in Aramaic for good reasons.

I just googled

"books of the hebrew bible and language written in"

And google brought this for me:

Except for a few passages in Aramaic, appearing mainly in the apocalyptic Book of Daniel, these scriptures were written originally in Hebrew during the period from 1200 to 100 bce.

Oh, and by the way, Hebrew bible is a synonym for the Old testament. The prophet of Islam has an opinion on all the books of the Hebrew bible except the one written in a different language, haha. And you think it is okay. Go and find out why. Don't take everything as said or read.


They didn't warn??, there might actually be warnings?? Which one is it??

If there are warnings you can bring them forth.

Qasim6:
Oh oh, you are talking of how something might have been part of divine plan.? I thought u r like second in command to God that know what God should reveal and what he shouldn't.



No bro, you thinking The all knowing God would have been completely silent about a false prophet that would pull that kinda huge following is dogshit crazy way of thinking

I believe in the sovereignty of God, but I still think one's responsible and should try to reason and explain things too. China has more than a billion people, but God has allowed a large part of them to go their ways. God has allowed far worse, far terrible things to happen in time, so this is just an icing. There is nothing special allowing a man to pull this on billions of people.


You can't just make claims, why not bring forth some of those contradictions that has been proven that the Qur'an account is false while the biblical account is the absolute truth.

Qasim6:
Coherent and detailed like portraying a sixteen years old Ishmael as a babe that Hagar was carrying around right?

This must be a joke. Where was he more than 2000 years? Where were his descendants? Why didn't he come out to defend this false claims? How many line of prophets do we have who are of his genealogy? Where was he when the Israelite through their ancestors claimed to be the beneficiaries of the covenant? Where were his descendants? For more than 2000 years, he was nowhere to be found. For more than 2000 years, none of his descendants could even contend with what is widely believed and held to be true. Away with such fellow; I hate wimps.

Qasim6:
I'm just going to give u a short narration in response to this.

When the Europeans first came across the Qur'an and found there in story of Moses, Pharaoh and a certain Haman (Haman according to Qur'an is one of the chiefs of Pharaoh); They called Prophet Muhammad all sort of unprintable names, that he picked Haman from the book of Esther and muddled it up with story of Moses. Haman according to the book of Esther was an aide to a Persian King.

Today, most Biblical scholars believe book of Esther is fictional because it doesn't line up with Persian History. guess the only book of the old testament missing from the dead sea Scrolls?

While with the decoding of hieroglyphs in the 19th century, we now know there was a certain Haman in ancient Egypt.

Qasim6:
.

I was supposed to reply in the morning, but my laptop just poof - no light and I had to go out! Haha!

I am coming.

simonlee:
With all the curses we laid on Buhari, he still outlived Mr Ibu the beloved... dey play!

Lol. God's ways is not man's ways.

Qasim6:
Population of Muslims in the world now is around 2 billion and it is envisage to be the most populous by 2050.

I just want to know, did the Bible (previous prophets) warn us about this "False prophet" from Arabia that will be claiming to worship the same God of Abraham, Moses and the likes?

If we have been warned, I will like you to direct me to those verses.
If not, are u going to discard the fact that those Biblical prophets were sent by God, God that should be all knowing?

Qasim, I'm sorry but I don't understand hat you're asking and why you're talking about a "false" prophet in a thread that is majorly about the absence of Daniel or his deeds in the Quran?

The earlier previous prophet didn't warn about a prophet from Arabia for many reasons, but there might actually be a warning about him even in the book of Daniel that I have thundered on; and no, I am not kidding you. Daniel talks about many historical events that even him did not understand. At one point in time, he was trying to pock-nose and he was told to go his way, that what he is told is kept secret.

I would pick some random verses from the 12th book of Daniel and bold them.

But you, Daniel, keep this prophecy a secret; seal up the book until the time of the end, when many will rush here and there, and knowledge will increase.”

I heard what he said, but I did not understand what he meant. So I asked, “How will all this finally end, my lord?”

But he said, “Go now, Daniel, for what I have said is kept secret and sealed until the time of the end.

So divine revelation are not always black and white. Such revelations would not be explicitly stated. And after all, it might be part of the divine plan. That said, the book talks of events that would happen for a time, times, and half a time. What mortal is able to interpret that? None my brother.

So not feel smug thinking, well since no previous prophets calls him out, then they must have endorsed him. No sir, that is batshit crazy way of thinking.

The earlier prophets, however, did give a litmus to know true and false prophets. The first one is this: he must be from God.

Clearly, Muhammad fails this basic test of sound prophet-hood because his narratives of earlier revelations contradicts to a very, very remarkable degree theirs and there's no way to prove his.

There has not been a very coherent, detailed, amazing, beautiful and remarkable story of the past as is found in Genesis. The book of Genesis should be regarded as the first and last book of creation.

Let me use the Fall. I just googled Quranic narrative of the Fall and man, would I say I am disappointed? No. Of course not. There are many versions of creation story, but if you call yourself a prophet of God and contradict in your own narratives the account of everything as given in Genesis. Then clearly, you are not a prophet. Besides, do we even need another narrative about what has already been narrated? Do we need another narratives now when we already had a long line of prophets who had agreed with what was written by not contradicting same? If someone calls himself a prophet and comes up with that idea, what would you call him? Should we take just one person's narrative as true when atleast 100 people who lived at different aeons say otherwise? Is this a reasonable thing to do?

AntiChristian:
You can go ahead and look for the authoritative book you created for Muslims! It seems you're the same as those tenq and the likes!

They already have a standard for your books and even your beliefs!

Sai da safe!

The Hebrews started a "conspiracy" that God made a covenant with their ancestors and not his brother. Fine. At that time and for several thousand years after, we have no counter or opposing report to that effect. Ishmael or his descendants or anyone didn't come forward with a contrary report. We have no revelation that debunks the claim the Hebrews made to that effects. Only silence. We see no line of prophets that are of his brother's genealogy.

We would have even loved to read their works, to hear what they have to say. However, we have a long, a very long line of prophets that come from this said Hebrew. They came in record numbers explaining previous revelations. In fact, events that are totally unrelated to their genealogy and statehood was explained in very great details - like giving an explanation for how the world was created, why it is the way it is, and many more. Of this line of brother, we had some claiming prophet-hood and drawing the people's attention to divine displeasure.

But nothing from the other side.

Nothing at all, probably because there's no contention for anything. And if there was, there is no proof for thousand of years for our perusal.

Then, all of a sudden, after thousands of years, one of a descendant of his brother (which I think is even very contentious) comes out under divine inspiration and wants to explain everything that had had transpired between God and his other brothers. He comes and is re-telling his own narrative about how it went between God and his brother. He is not talking of a line of prophets from his own brother's side whose manuscript was unavailable. He is not talking of the covenant God made with his ancestors the Ishmaelites and its terms and conditions. After all, the Ishmaelites have been in existence for as long as the one has been. To the observant mind, clearly, he agrees that God made a covenant with the one and not with the other. If this is not fucking deadshit crazy and suspicious to you, then I wonder what can be.

Nothing can be very vexatious if this isn't. If the Israelite's rebellion against God their creator in the wilderness just some days after he parted the Red sea for them, their constant worship of idols, their inability to fully occupy the Promised land God had given them, God's beautiful attributes like his angry and instant judgment, the fall of Jerusalem and the northern Kindgom through warfare, their constant sinning and more. If all these I listed and many more of their shortcomings were not concealed, deleted, hidden or whatever, why do we need a different explanations for what happened. Can they be more sinful than they have openly admitted? Why do we need Muhammad at all.

if you talk of standards, then I ask you. On what do you base your standards? Look, Muhammad is a standard but there is no prophets before him, even Arabs, to verify his prophet-hood. If there is, bring it forward and I would embrace Islam.

And by the way, what is sai da safe?

Kingsmeal:
Hunger and hardship sef don get influencers😂😂.

Nigeria my kwantri. Kai

Dear Op, we have a cheaper one called Oha soup.

Oha leaf N100
Thickener N50
Uziza N50
Dried Fish N500
Red Oil N200
Pepper N50
Maggi N50.

This is more balanced

I miss my times with madam. She sabi Oha and draw soup like mad.

The first time I ate there she asked if I wanted Oha and draw or bitter-leaf and draw soup. I chose the former.

I want to ask you:

Do Igbos make draw soup that is not made from okra? I ask because I don't see the okra seeds and the greens in the soup, just some slimy fluid that goes with the leaf.

Auki:
1. In Islam, God is supreme and He is owner of wisdom. He decides what to include as message to mankind.

You neither addressed the topic nor answered the question I asked especially the last one, but anyway, thanks for responding - even though you are making this seem bigger than you.

Now back to what you said, it is not my intention to debate Islam with you. I am sticking specifically to the topic I created - on the absence of Daniel. If you want me to debate Islam with you, I am more than ready. Create a new thread.

Auki:
2. Quran is a message from Allah, not Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) or any human being.

If the Quran is a message from Allah, then it is incomplete. A message about what, specifically? Is it a message that is based on what he's done in the past? If yes, with whom did he wrought it and to whom is the message addressed?

Let me give you an example. In the bible, God called a JEWISH man named Jonah to preach to one of Israel's fiercest enemies - Assyria. Jonah was to go to their capital city Nineveh, a city of more than 120, 000 people. This is by my own estimation a very, very large city by the standard of the time. Jonah tries to hide from God by boarding a ship in the opposite direction. God sends a mighty whirlwind, a tempest, that threatens to break the ship apart. Jonah gets thrown and by divine providence, a big fish swallows him. He somehow finds his way there and shouts at the top of his lungs -- in fourty days time, Nineveh would be destroyed.

The message was specifically for them, not for the Israelite or the Arabians. A warning message that is very specific in whom it is directed to, but that is not always the case. I know why I elaborated on Jonah because I was going to ask you this: Did Allah send the Quran to the Jews too? In what way is the Quran very different from the Hebrew bible other than a different perspective on the person of Jesus.

If you take the Hebrew bible and the Quran, a very, very unbiased reader would tell you that the Hebrew bible is far more richer, more elaborate and more descriptive of events that happened in the past than the Quran even though it might contains discrepancies. The Quran is not thorough at all. It tells its own version and then goes ahead to exult the divine. The Quran would say something like :"... and XYZ did what we instructed of him and they were confounded. Surely, God is watching and all powerful." The latter makes the former believable but one needs to separate truth from a praise of the divine. People believe the Quran because it praises and exult God more than it tells the truth. After all, there is no way to know the truth

Auki:
It is free from errors and a guide for those who preserve them from evil and follow the straight path.

I am not arguing for it being inerrant, but for the benefit of doubt, I would say why wouldn't it be free from error when one person wrote everything. If you ask two eye-witnesses who witnessed an event to make their contributions on certain event. You are almost guaranteed to hear conflicting stories even if they all agree on the crux of the matter. This is where the Bible almost sweeps the Quran off balance. The bible was written by many authors over different span and they seem to agree on the crux of the matter.

Auki:
3. Stories in the Quran are for lessons. Not just a mere story.Quran specifically acknowledged that not all prophets were included.

Stories are not just for lessons, sir. The are also for instructions even those that we call miracles, so to speak. God doesn't do miracles only because he wants you to know that he is in charge of the elements. He does miracles to instruct you, to strengthen and help your beliefs too. Any work of God that doesn't show the full extent of God is incomplete and should not be regarded.

Auki:
4 Muhammad(Pbuh) is not the author of Quran. He was never being to school.

I would have easily believed you if more than six or let's say seven people wrote it. The Hebrew bible or the New Testament cannot be said to be written by ten people. You have been fed a lie all your life, man. Muhammad is very much literate and has access to all we have access to and even more.

5. Some of the bible manuscript were not accepted. The Quran is complete and the same through out the world. One version. Which of the bible version will you regard as criteria.

6. My intend is to help to those that sincere only. Not here for argument[/quote]How do we verify/validate the Quran? Please answer me. With which holy book do we compare, cross check, and verify its claims?

AntiChristian:
So Daniel is your reason the Qur'an is not the word of Allah?

Yes, one of the reasons. Muhammad could not consult the book of Daniel because it was written in a different language in a strange land. Not many manuscript floating around when he lived and if they were, he couldn't make a head or tail of it.

If the Quran is inspired as claimed, then he need not consult any book. The scanty nature of the book coupled with its strange alphabet and symbols made it inaccessible and unreadable.

AntiChristian:
The Qur'an is not a summary of all previous scriptures!

Sadly, it is a poor summary of previous divine revelations. Almost everything, if not everything, in the Bible had happened before Muhammad was born. Everything! That is why the Bible is very, very narrative in its approach. God revealed to Moses how the Heavens, the earth and the elements were created. Moses could not have known these details. However, God did not have to reveal to Moses what happened between himself and the Israelite at the wilderness because Moses himself was there. He was an eyewitness. It was a live event. He could give a first-hand account of what happened there.

The Quran summarizes what happened; it doesn't state what happened. If you want to know what happened, read the Bible.

AntiChristian:
And its not a must to talk about Daniel or Joshua by name! Allah has said He did send messengers to all nations!

Are you a joker or a clown? It is not a must? Is this some thoughtless statement or what? It is not a must for God to tell us he created the universe? It is not a must for God to inform us of his will? It is not a must for God to require us to worship him? If you bring that logic, I would argue that is is not a must to even worship God and serving God is not obligatory on the creature.


Yes, yes, yes, God is under no obligations whatsoever to his creatures, but the sovereignty of God cannot be taken as a reason why God refrains from strengthening the faith of believers. Besides, God's will in this instance is not clear, so it must not be taken as an affirmative. The main message of the book is not about miracles.

AntiChristian:
So is it necessary to mention the messengers sent to Africa and each and every nations?

No! He picks whatever He wills to reveal to his Prophet and we believe it wholly!

Yes, it is necessary if they are sent from the only true God.

Let me give you one example. Job, I am talking of the book of Job in the Bible. Job is not a Jews, but he is included in the canons of Scripture by both Christians and Jews. He lived in the land of Uz which many believe to be in the East, maybe Arabia, during the times of Moses.

AntiChristian:
About Daniel called Daniyal in Arabic and islam, we believe no doubt he may have been one of the Prophets. There are many Prophets not mentioned in the Qur'an but mentioned in the Sunnah!

When the Muslims conquered Tastar, they came across the grave of Prophet Daniel. And he was reburied somewhere else by the Muslims so that the people won't turn him to another God as they did Jesus worshipping him.

And also his scripture was discovered. Daniyal foretold the Messiah as well as Muhammad (Salallahu alayhi wasalam) in his scripture!

The Muslims read the scripture when they conquered Iraq!

The Sunnah is not an authoritative source of Islamic teaching.

Large swath of them-say, he-said, she-said-that-the-prophet-said. More like the Jewish Midrash. If it is not in the Quran, there is no reason to believe it. Besides, the Sunnah was compiled many years after Muhammad's death. By your admisssion, the Quran is very, very incomplete and should not be taken as authoritative


When the Muslims conquered Tastar, O my goodness, who did this to you? This should be called the first joke of the 21st century.

Auki:
Allah chooses what to include in His book.

No sir, this is a weak defense for why the book of Daniel is not foretold/retold/explained or even mentioned in the Quran. A mere acknowledgement of his prophet-hood or otherwise as is done for others who are only mentioned once, twice, or even three times might suffice. Just coming up with a blanket reason that indicates divine sovereignty is lame. If I tell you that God chooses what he chooses and he has chosen that I remain a Christian, should that be taken as a reasonable explanation by a Muslim apologist who wants me to embrace Islam to back off? No. God is sovereign in the affairs of men, granted, but this is so silly. Every act of God must never be swept off the carpet and made to look as if it never happened. If certain characters of the Quran are only mentioned once, then why should this be taken as a reason why Daniel wasn't mentioned at all? Do you understand me?

Auki:
Some Prophets in the Quran are not in the bible. Jesus infancy is scantily mentioned in the Bible but detailed in the Quran.

Here, you have posited a problem that is no problem at all. If the Quran mentions prophets that are not in the bible, it is because the books that talk about such prophets are in doubt and hence were not canonized. They can still be used for instructions as the Catholic church does for some books, but they are not authoritative.The Quran definitely has its source; these non-cannoized books are its source.

The infancy Gospel of Thomas (which in mainstream Christendom is taken for an apocryphal) mentions with great clarity the situation surrounding Christ birth and his infancy. These non-cannoised books have been written several hundred years before Muhammad was born and he used them as his source. If these books were canonized, they would have certainly being an addition to the Christian bible today, but there are many manuscript floating around. Do you know how many books are not parts of Christian canon and yet Muhammad consulted these books?

Just because you have more details on certain subjects doesn't make it reliable. The Jewish and Christian communities rejected a lot of books. A lot. Quite a lot. Some, because of its heretical and esoteric nature, some because the writers wrote it under a different name, some because of its content and many other reasons I have not bothered to study the subject. Do you know the number of scriptures that Christians and Jews in days gone by accept as part of scripture that is ruled to be defective today? Do you know? Ah, it would blow your mind. The prophet of Islam consulted these books and granted some of these books are quite efficacious.

Auki:
Holy Quran is different from the Bible and using Bible as criteria to validate Quran is wrong approach. You explicitly assumed Bible as standard criteria (Confirmation Bias) for which to judge Quran.

Set your objectives of studying Quran and be wary of your innate bias.

If i don't use the Bible as an objective source, what else would I use? You know and me and you agree that the Bible, let me be a bit specific, the Hebrew bible which we call the Old testament had been completed more than 900 years before Muhammad was born. Now, I want to learn. If we want to validate the Quran, what should we use? The Quran? Of course not, we cannot use the Quran to validate the Quran; it has to be something else. it doesn't have that authority, but I ask again, what should we use?

AntiChristian:
In Judges 15:14-16

As he approached Lehi, the Philistines came toward him shouting. The Spirit of the Lord came powerfully upon him. The ropes on his arms became like charred flax, and the bindings dropped from his hands. Finding a fresh jawbone of a donkey, he grabbed it and struck down a thousand men.

Then Samson said,

“With a donkey’s jawbone
I have made donkeys of them.
With a donkey’s jawbone
I have killed a thousand men.”

Background
Samson's girlfriend was given to his companion as wife. So he was vexed. He burnt the grains of the Philistines because of this. The Philistines who happens to be the ruling class came to request that Samson be capture and delivered to them from his people. He then allow his people to catch him and deliver him to the Philistine. As he was being delivered, the holy spirit came upon him, he broke loose and killed a thousand of them! Then Samson composed the above poem!

Sirtee15, it can't get more confusing regarding this your Holy Spirit!

Why is it that Samson is always killing whenever the holy Spirit enters him?
Why does the Holy spirit keep entering him if he doesn't want him to kill?

I already answered your objections in the former thread. Samson had God's spirit right from birth and as God's vice general for his people on earth, he was on a mandate to liberate his people from the Philistines who were gruesomely oppressing them. Samson was not just a warrior, but he was also the liberator, the king so to speak. I don't know why you have problems with whom God chooses to kill.

What exactly is your grouse? That someone with God's spirit is empowered with brute strength that enables him to seek out and kill those who oppress his people?

FxMasterz:
I've helped you copy them from TenQ. Let's hope they'll respond:

References are included next page!


All my Friends on Nairaland:
LegalWolf Vanessa7 AntiChristian Empiree, Rash4ductluv, BabaHeekmat, aekymbahd, motayoayinde, drlateef, Thatfairguy1, MrCodeSolo , Hisbah21, atsleepboy1 , Lordmoh , OBALOLA55, x123xlolls , Lukuluku69 , mhmsadyq, Ibsaq , Herkeym001 , Sulasa07 , hakeemhakeem , abduljabbar4 ,olaalekan ,Friend22 , uthlaw , Exc2000 , AbuTwins ,Akhirastriver ,Akinbahm , Sino , KayB , youngdroly , jaggabban , ukeleh , Realismailakabir , Bami8064 Greatgr , Gaskiyamagana , compton11, Alfarouq , MrCodeSolo Satmaniac saintHot, drlateef, Donkmore Akinbahm , IMEI , FATHAT , talk2hb1 , iamrealdeji , Encyclopedia1 , SWATMan rolams aheeqilmaktoom , Bintdawood , Flanker , Raheeqilmaktoom , rolams ,honesttalk21 , Negroid001 , Nvestor02 , Coolsat, iamrealdeji madridguy Almunjid MohammadSAW , STRI1 Explore2xmore satmaniac Ohyoudidnt , 4islam ThatFairGuy1 BroOptimist. Bakrabas. Musa95 Ibrahimlagosian Explore2xmore
hakeemhakeem ItsReal correctguy101 Qasim6 youngdroly Bliss52 Qasim6 truthday Almunjid hayzedibd ahmedio2017
cc: MightySparrow SIRTee15 ANTIlSLAM innotutorial FxMasterz advocatejare

Wow, wow. Only me, all this mighty battalion.

For this lol, you deserve 100 cold maltina.