₦airaland Forum

TenQ:
Indeed you are a denialist to the core!
It is either you piece by piece dismantle my argument and answer my questions otherwise, it is a complete waste of time discussing with you!

AGAIN:
I will answer just the first part to prove to you that you are an unrepentant deliberate and confirmed Denialist!
Prove me wrong!
No long grammar, Address the issue at stake!


You give the impression of one who just heard of the English word from the dictionary and decides to use it whether he understand them or not. Same way when you began to throw around words like metaphysical and ontological without knowing their meanings.


You are the one who doesn't know what a contradiction is and you give examples in similitude to " An Orange is contradictory to an Apple" and you fly with it as truth.

At least, here you agree that
A Human Being of Identity AAA = BODY
A Human Being of Identity AAA = SOUL

Thus the BODY and SOUL are distinct parts of the same Human Identity AAA and THUS, the SOUL can be Immortal while the BODY is Mortal
Is this correct?



Let me test your Comprehension

Using the same Argument

A Being of Identity Jesus = THE WORD
A Being of Identity Jesus = MAN


Thus the HUMAN andTHE WORD are distinct parts of the same Identity Jesus and THUS, THE WORD can be Immortal while the HUMAN is Mortal
Is this correct?


Wrong Question:
When the Body of the Human Jesus hungered, did the WORD Hunger? NO!
When the Body of the Human Jesus died, did the WORD Die? NO!
When the Body of the Human Jesus felt PAIN, did the WORD feel Pain? NO!

So, answer your own question again
When the Body of the Human Identity "AAA" died, did the SOUL die?
When the Body of the Human Identity "AAA" was Buried, was the SOUL Buried?
When the Body of the Human Identity "AAA" was Cut, was the SOUL Cut?

If your answers are NO: then resolve the CONTRADICTIONS if you think these are contradictions!


Again:
1. When Jibril INCARNATED as a perfect man, did he cease being an Angel?
2. Did the INCARNATED Jibril have the characteristics of a Man or the Characteristics of Angels ?
In similar manner:
3. When the WORD INCARNATED as Jesus the Man, Did He cease being God?

I can almost predict your answers:
And your preemptive response is why I call you a Denialist as by nature, you will deny the above and repeat your questions borne out of gross ignorance.

Your emotional outburst and petty insults are a clear indication that you are unable to intellectually and theologically handle the implications of your own doctrine. Throwing around words like “denialist” repeatedly does not answer the serious contradictions I raised. It only exposes your frustration and inability to reconcile the clear inconsistencies in Trinitarian theology.

Let’s get to the core issue — without your dramatics.

1. Your "Soul and Body" Analogy Fails Miserably

You attempt to use the human composition of body and soul as a parallel for Jesus being both God and man. This analogy collapses instantly.

The body and soul are two parts of one created being — a human.

Jesus being both fully God and fully man is not a union of two created substances, but an alleged union of the Infinite (God) and the finite (man).

Unlike body and soul, God is uncreated, eternal, omnipotent, and unchanging. Man is created, limited, and mortal. Merging the two results in a contradiction in essence.

So no — your analogy fails. God is not comparable to a human soul, and your attempt to smuggle in Trinitarian confusion through a simplistic soul-body example is intellectually dishonest.

2. You Didn’t Answer the Question — You Evaded It

I asked:

> If Jesus is God, how can he hunger, not know the Hour, and be tempted by Satan — when God by definition is free of these limitations?

You replied with:

> “When the body of Jesus hungered, did the Word hunger? No!”

This is nothing but theological double-speak.

If Jesus is fully God and fully man, then when he is tempted, YOU CANNOT claim “only the man part was tempted” and “the God part was not.”

You don’t get to divide Jesus into parts when it becomes inconvenient. That’s called Nestorian heresy — separating the divine and human natures of Christ as if they operate independently.

If only the man part hungered, died, or lacked knowledge, then your doctrine of hypostatic union becomes meaningless. You’ve split Jesus into two beings — which destroys the “fully God, fully man” claim.

So again, your reply dodges the real contradiction by smuggling in theological sleight of hand.

3. Temptation Is a Moral Test — Not Just Physical

You wrote:

> “The Word was not tempted, only the human body.”

Then how do you explain James 1:13:

> “God cannot be tempted by evil.”

If Jesus is God, and he was tempted by Satan (Matthew 4:1), you have a contradiction.

You can’t say, “only the human side was tempted,” because temptation targets the will — and according to your theology, Jesus has one unified will, not two separate agents.

If Jesus was truly tempted, he was either susceptible to evil (which disqualifies him as God), or the entire temptation was a sham and meaningless — which makes the Bible deceptive.

4. Your Jibril Comparison Is Another Failure

You bring up Angel Jibril (Gabriel) appearing as a man. You ask:

> “Did he stop being an angel?”

No — but Gabriel never claimed to be BOTH man and angel at the same time in essence.

He appeared in human form, but no Muslim says “Jibril is fully man and fully angel.”

He was still functionally an angel, not ontologically a man.

Your attempt to compare this to the ontological claim that Jesus is God and is man simultaneously is a red herring.

5. What You're Really Doing: Playing Mental Gymnastics

You’ve reduced theology to a gymnastics contest:

When Jesus is hungry — “that’s just the man.”

When Jesus walks on water — “that’s God.”

When Jesus doesn’t know the Hour — “that’s the man again.”

When he forgives sins — “ah, that’s God again.”

This is not theology. This is intellectual fraud.

The very idea of being "fully God and fully man" at the same time, in one person, leads to absurdity. You are not explaining a mystery — you are defending a contradiction.

✦ Final Reminder:

In Islam, there is no confusion.

God is God — eternal, all-knowing, above all weakness.
Jesus (peace be upon him) is a noble Prophet and Messiah — but a servant of God, not God Himself.

The One God is not composed, not incarnate, not tempted, and not crucified. He is above such limitations.

So if you're done with childish name-calling and personal attacks, and you're ready to actually defend your theology logically, then I’m here.

Otherwise, keep shouting “Denialist” — it only confirms you’ve already lost the argument.

TenQ:
I will answer just the first part to prove to you that you are an unrepentant deliberate and confirmed Denyalist!
Prove me wrong!

You give the impression of one who just heard of the English word from the dictionary and decides to use it whether he understand them or not. Same way when you began to throw around words like metaphysical and ontological without knowing their meanings.


You are the one who doesn't know what a contradiction is and you give examples in similitude to " An Orange is contradictory to an Apple" and you fly with it as truth.

At least, here you agree that
A Human Being of Identity AAA = BODY
A Human Being of Identity AAA = SOUL

Thus the BODY and SOUL are distinct parts of the same Human Identity AAA and THUS, the SOUL can be Immortal while the BODY is Mortal
Is this correct?



Let me test your Comprehension

Using the same Argument

A Being of Identity Jesus = THE WORD
A Being of Identity Jesus = MAN


Thus the HUMAN andTHE WORD are distinct parts of the same Identity Jesus and THUS, THE WORD can be Immortal while the HUMAN is Mortal
Is this correct?


Wrong Question:
When the Body of the Human Jesus hungered, did the WORD Hunger? NO!
When the Body of the Human Jesus died, did the WORD Die? NO!
When the Body of the Human Jesus felt PAIN, did the WORD feel Pain? NO!

So, answer your own question again
When the Body of the Human Identity "AAA" died, did the SOUL die?
When the Body of the Human Identity "AAA" was Buried, was the SOUL Buried?
When the Body of the Human Identity "AAA" was Cut, was the SOUL Cut?

If your answers are NO: then resolve the CONTRADICTIONS if you think these are contradictions!


Again:
1. When Jibril INCARNATED as a perfect man, did he cease being an Angel?
2. Did the INCARNATED Jibril have the characteristics of a Man or the Characteristics of Angels ?
In similar manner:
3. When the WORD INCARNATED as Jesus the Man, Did He cease being God?

I can almost predict your answers:
And your preemptive response is why I call you a Denialist as by nature, you will deny the above and repeat your questions borne out of gross ignorance.

To the one who dodges clear contradictions with philosophical gymnastics,

You can twist words, invent analogies, and create imaginary metaphysical categories all you like — but you will not escape the fatal blow that reality deals to your theology:

> God cannot be tempted. Jesus was tempted. Therefore, Jesus is not God.

Now instead of answering this contradiction, you ran behind a wall of pseudo-intellectual babble about "identity" and "body/soul dualism" like you're lecturing from a failed seminary.

Let’s dissect your circus act.

🔥 1. Your Soul-Body Analogy is a Theological Joke

You said:

> “When the body of Jesus suffered, the Word did not suffer. Just like when your body is cut, your soul isn’t.”

This is a poor attempt to excuse the absolute contradiction of your belief. You’re comparing the eternal, unchanging nature of God to a soul inhabiting a body — but here’s your error:

🔻 The soul is created. God is not.
🔻 The soul is distinct from the body. But in your belief, Jesus IS FULLY GOD and FULLY MAN — not just inhabited by the Word.
🔻 You claim Jesus is God, not just that he contains the divine Word.

So if Jesus IS God, and Jesus was tempted, then God was tempted — which contradicts James 1:13. Your analogy falls apart on impact.

🤡 2. You Keep Saying “THE WORD” Didn’t Die — But the Bible Says Otherwise

If “The Word” didn’t die — then congratulations, you’ve just nullified the crucifixion.

Who died for your sins? The “man” part only?

But your doctrine claims: “God died for us.”

Yet you just said: “God (the Word) didn’t die.”

So either:

✅ You admit Jesus wasn’t God, and it was just a man who died (which invalidates your atonement),
or
❌ You accept that God died, which is blasphemy and logically impossible.

Pick your poison. You can’t have it both ways.

💣 3. The “Incarnated God” Fantasy is Pure Pagan Invention

You asked:

> “Did the Word cease being God when incarnated as man?”

Let’s ask you instead:

> Did the Almighty Creator, the Sustainer of the heavens and the earth, become a helpless baby? Did He get hungry, cry, sleep, bleed, and die?

That’s not a God. That’s a Greek myth with Hebrew labels.

The concept of an “incarnated God” is not monotheism — it is the exact pagan nonsense the prophets were sent to destroy.

No prophet — not Adam, not Noah, not Moses, not even Jesus — ever taught that God became a man. This idea is a Christian innovation, imported from Roman theology and wrapped in the name of Jesus.

📖 4. Your Bible Refutes You, Not Us

You referenced “the Word became flesh” (John 1:14) — as if that justifies divine mutation.

But let’s remind you:

The Bible says “God is not a man” — Numbers 23:19

The Bible says “No one has seen God at any time” — John 1:18

The Bible says “God cannot be tempted” — James 1:13

The Bible says “God is immortal” — 1 Timothy 6:16

You can invent a thousand analogies — but your Bible has already condemned your theology as contradictory and false.

🕋 5. The Islamic View: No Confusion, No Contradiction

In Islam:

God is absolutely One — indivisible, eternal, self-sufficient.

He does not become His creation, nor does He change His essence.

Jesus (peace be upon him) was a mighty prophet, born miraculously, but never divine.

This view doesn’t need philosophical acrobatics to make sense. It’s pure, consistent, and honored by every prophet, not just Islam.

✅ Final Word

You called me a “denyalist” — but what am I denying?

I deny:

That God can die

That God can be tempted

That God becomes a man

That God needs to eat, sleep, or bleed

I deny paganism dressed in a priest’s robes.

You can cling to your invented metaphors and soul-body excuses. But at the end of the day, your God died on a cross, and your scripture says God is immortal.

That is not theology.
That is idolatry wrapped in philosophy.

Now, if you want to debate further, bring a real answer, not emotional tantrums. Until then, your Trinitarian house of cards stands refuted by its own contradictions.

BibleInterpreta AntiChristian CreativeOrbit gofh honesttalk21 NairaLTQ MaxInDHouse advanceDNA

TenQ:
Then for once, lets be able to hear what Allah is saying without your re-interpretations. Allah is not a toddler whose words are not clear.

Reaffirming your standard islamic narrative doesn't make it true. It just confirms that you are manufacturing excuses for your wicked slave master: it called trauma bonding!



Only Muslims claim that their hand written scripture is from Allah! Is the Qur'an not the speech of Allah? Is the Bible the Speech of Allah?


So, Logically if I confirm a fake currency, I am only confirming the part of it that is correct.

Islamic logic 101!

LOL


The scriptures were corrupted BEFORE Allah revealed the Qur'an BUT Allah was IGNORANT of it till you Modern Muslim scholars discovered it.

It speaks well of Allah's knowledge.


Really, then let's confirm this error of the perfect preservation of the Qur'an of you can stand the truth!




The book of Mark is anonymous nut is was written by a man called Mark
The book of Matthew is anonymous nut is was written by a man called Mathew
The book of Luke anonymous but is was written by a man called Luke

But Allah affirms these books!?

Who wrote the Qur'an?
Was it Mohammed, Abubakar, Uthman or the Government of Egypt who adopted the Hafs Qur'an?

Don't tell me about Islamic traditions.



At least from the corrupted books of the Jews and the Christians, Mohammed's name should appear.

Please can you show me?






I could almost cry.

More than 90% of your Hadiths are Daif and Maudu yet Islam is not a religion of Lies?

When Allah can't even speak good clear language again , whose fault

To the confused Christian attempting theology with mockery,

You’ve once again shown us that mockery is your only defense when your Trinitarian doctrine is exposed as logically bankrupt.

You were given a clear, rational question:

> How can Jesus — who was tempted, ignorant, tired, and hungry — be “fully God,” when your own Bible says “God cannot be tempted” (James 1:13)?

And instead of answering with anything remotely intelligent, you spiraled into incoherent rambling about trauma bonding, fake currency, da'if hadith, and who wrote what. If your goal was to dodge the question while embarrassing yourself, congratulations — mission accomplished.

Let me now respond to your blunders point-by-point, with the clarity your theology lacks.

🔥 1. Your God Was Tempted by Satan – That’s Blasphemy

You laugh and mock, but you still haven’t answered how:

The “Most High” became a baby who soiled himself

The “All-Knowing” didn’t know the Hour (Mark 13:32)

The “Self-Sufficient” cried in weakness

And the “Unchangeable God” grew in wisdom (Luke 2:52)

This is not divine mystery — it’s theological madness.
You’re worshiping a man who died on a cross, then calling him the “Immortal God.” The contradiction is so blatant even children recognize it — which is why your churches are emptying, while Islam continues to grow.

📖 2. “Anonymous Gospels” — And You Still Call This Revelation?

You proudly declare:

> “The Gospel of Mark is anonymous but was written by Mark…”

How can you be this casual with lies?

Every Gospel in your New Testament is anonymous.

None of the writers claimed divine inspiration.

The titles “according to Matthew” or “according to Luke” were added decades later by men with no chain of narration, no isnād, no mass transmission.

If someone gave you an anonymous pamphlet today and said “God wrote this,” you’d laugh. But you base your salvation on four anonymous books written by non-eyewitnesses decades after Jesus — and call it “divine revelation.” This isn’t faith. It’s blind historical naivety.

🕋 3. Yes, The Qur’an Is the Speech of Allah — Preserved & Protected

You scream:

> “Only Muslims claim their hand-written scripture is from God!”

Correct — and unlike you, we actually have:

An unbroken chain of transmission

Thousands of manuscripts from the earliest centuries

Millions who memorized it cover-to-cover across 14 centuries

And zero contradictions in theology, unlike your book of confusion.

The Qur’an was revealed to Prophet Muhammad ﷺ word-for-word, and preserved by mass memorization and documentation — not by anonymous men centuries later in Greek.

You mock Hafs — but can you even explain the qirā’āt system, or are you just parroting YouTube missionaries? Your biblical manuscripts disagree in thousands of places — not because of qirā’āt, but because of human tampering. That’s why your Bibles are still being edited in 2025.

🧠 4. “Allah Didn’t Know the Scriptures Were Corrupted”?

This is your most embarrassing claim yet.

Your Bible says:

> “How can you say ‘We are wise, and the law of the Lord is with us’? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes has made it into a lie.” — Jeremiah 8:8

Even your scripture admits the Torah was corrupted. And you think God didn’t know?

No, what you’re failing to understand is:
The Qur’an speaks of the original Torah and Gospel — not your church-edited versions.
That’s why Allah says:

> “They distort the words from their [proper] usages...” — Qur’an 4:46
“Woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and say, ‘This is from Allah’...” — Qur’an 2:79

So don’t blame Allah. Blame the forgers of your religion — the ones who turned a prophet of God (Jesus) into a man-god, and a book of monotheism into polytheistic confusion.

🧾 5. “Where Is Muhammad in the Bible?”

Where’s your brain?

The Bible was altered, but despite that, even your current scriptures contain:

Prophecies of the coming of a prophet like Moses (Deut 18:18)

A “Comforter” who will come after Jesus (John 14:16) — whose description perfectly fits Muhammad ﷺ, not the Holy Spirit.

Besides, you’re now demanding Muhammad’s name appear in a corrupted book, when you can’t even prove Jesus ever claimed to be God. Where in the Bible does Jesus say “I am God, worship me” in those words?

Nowhere. Yet you deify him.

☠️ 6. “Most Hadith Are Da’if or Maudu” – And That’s a Strength

Unlike your religion — where you blindly accept anonymous books as gospel — Islam has a rigorous science of hadith:

We classify narrations: ṣaḥīḥ, ḥasan, da’īf, mawdū‘

We evaluate the character, memory, and reliability of each transmitter

We don’t hide our weak reports — we expose them

That’s called academic integrity. Your religion has no system for filtering truth from forgery — that’s why your Gospel includes forged verses like 1 John 5:7 (the Trinity verse), which was added in the Middle Ages and removed in modern versions.

✅ Final Word

You’ve mocked Allah, mocked the Prophet ﷺ, mocked the Qur’an — yet you still haven’t answered a single contradiction in your own belief:

> How can God be ignorant, tempted, and killed?

Until you answer that, don’t bring your house of lies to the doorstep of Islam.

You want debate?
Then open the thread:
“Is the Qur’an preserved? Who corrupted the Bible?”

Stop dodging. We will expose every error you worship.
And you will witness — once again — that the Qur’an is truth preserved, and your religion is nothing more than myth repackaged.

🟩 Tawhid will prevail.
🔥 Falsehood will burn.
📖 And the Qur’an will stand as it always has — clear, preserved, unmatched.

BibleInterpreta AntiChristian TenQ CreativeOrbit gofh honesttalk21 NairaLTQ MaxInDHouse advanceDNA

TenQ:
You have said it all Tasdiq has been re-interpreted to conform to the interpretation of the Scholars of Islam.

It is the reason why you cannot be trusted.

Let's test the Qur'an if it is qualified to be a criterion over the scripture of the Jews and Christians
1. What is the true name of Abraham in the Qur'an?
Is it إِبْرَاهِيم (Ibrāhīm) or إِبْرَاهَام (Ibrāhām)?
2. According to Allah, who is the man called Israel?
3. Which servant of Allah was taken to then farthest mosque?

Talk is cheap!






Did I not give you evidence from the words of Allah about the fact that the Furqan refer to all scriptures.
Of course, you don't believe in Allah one bit. You believe in Ibn Kathir and Shabir Ali more that Allah and your prophet.

Allah accused you Muslims for writing the fake scripture. I asked you, was the Qur'an written by Muslim hands? Did they claim the words are from Allah? Sorry, Allah refers to you Muslims corrupting the Qur'an.



Allah has 140,000 thousand prophets with a library of at least 40,000 but Allah could only protect one book (the Qur'an) put of these numbers.
Indeed, Allah is the almighty librarian!




You assume repeating exactly what you want to hear will suddenly convert it into the truth!
LOL!

What exactly did Allah say?

Oh, Allah doesn't mean that, he means the Scripture that remains to be corrupted.

See how the lying pen of you and your scholars have made the Qur'an and Allah a lie!





Again, I say, we should debate on the preservation of the Qur'an and let's see if the Qur'an is preserved.

Do you accept the challenge?

In the Name of Allah — the One, Eternal, and Unborn.

TenQ,

You were given a serious theological question that exposed the logical contradiction of your Trinitarian doctrine:

> How can Jesus be “fully God” and yet suffer from hunger, fatigue, ignorance, and temptation?

Rather than respond intelligently, you evaded the core issue and started babbling about Hebrew names, irrelevant side issues, and childish mockery. Since you insist on deflecting and disrespect, you’ll now be dealt with in your own tone — but with facts, not foam.

🔥 1. Trinitarian Confusion: You Still Haven’t Answered

Let’s remind you of what you're dodging:

Jesus was tempted by Satan (Matt 4:1), yet your own Bible says “God cannot be tempted” (James 1:13). Contradiction.

Jesus didn’t know the Hour (Mark 13:32), yet God is all-knowing. Contradiction.

Jesus grew in wisdom (Luke 2:52), yet God is eternally perfect and doesn’t “grow.” Contradiction.

These aren't “interpretations.” These are your own scriptures exposing your man-made theology. Your religion invented a three-headed god, then broke your neck trying to explain how a limited, tempted, ignorant man can be God. Don’t run — answer the question.

📚 2. The Qur’an vs the "Fake Scriptures" You Follow

You mock the Qur’an and demand to “test” it. Good. Let’s test your Bible first:

Your Bible can’t even agree on Jesus’ genealogy (compare Matthew 1 vs Luke 3).

It teaches God “regrets” (Genesis 6:6), gets “tired” (Exodus 31:17), and even wrestled with a man and lost (Genesis 32:24–30). That’s not scripture — that’s blasphemy.

You asked:

> “Was the Qur’an written by Muslims and claimed to be from Allah?”

Yes — it was revealed by Allah to His Messenger ﷺ, memorized by thousands, written by trusted scribes, and passed through mass oral and written transmission with no contradiction, no version war, and no textual chaos like your Bible.

You, on the other hand, follow a book that was:

Compiled centuries after Jesus by anonymous authors

Edited and manipulated by Church councils

Missing entire books considered “canon” by others (compare Catholic vs Protestant Bibles)

Proven to have interpolations (e.g., 1 John 5:7 — the “Trinity verse” — is a fabrication)

So you have no leg to stand on. You attack the Qur’an only because you have no scripture left that can withstand scrutiny.

🕌 3. Your Desperation: Name Games and Emotional Meltdowns

You think asking whether it’s Ibrāhīm or Ibrāhām is some kind of knockout punch? That’s pure ignorance.

Names change in pronunciation from Hebrew to Arabic all the time — like Moses → Musa, John → Yahya, Jesus → Isa. This is standard linguistic shift, not corruption.

You even asked, “Who is Israel?” The Qur’an identifies Israel as Ya’qub (Jacob) — just as the Torah does. Again, nothing you asked is a contradiction — it’s just a display of your poor research and weak Arabic.

📖 4. “Allah is an Almighty Librarian”

Yes — Allah protected one final book, because it abrogated all previous scriptures that were corrupted by liars like your church scribes, as your own Bible admits in Jeremiah 8:8.

You laugh because that’s all you have left. But we Muslims still have a Book memorized by millions word-for-word — even children — in every corner of the world.

Meanwhile, you’re quoting a book that:

Has no original manuscripts

Went through centuries of anonymous editing

Contains doctrinal contradictions

And was weaponized by colonial powers

The fact that you mock preservation only proves you’re bitter you don’t have it.

💥 5. You Keep Screaming: “Debate Qur’an Preservation!”

Yes. We accept your challenge.

But stop barking. Create a clean topic:
🟩 "Is the Qur’an preserved or corrupted?"
Then bring your evidence — not sarcasm, not Wikipedia rants, not name games.

I will bring:

The historical chains of transmission

The multiple qirā’āt and their preservation

The Uthmanic codex and early manuscripts

The miracle of mass memorization from day one till today

You will bring emotional outbursts and irrelevant noise. But we welcome the exposure.

✅ Final Word

Until you can answer how “God” can be tempted, hungry, and ignorant — your house of theology remains burning.

Islam gives you a God who is Eternal, All-Knowing, Unchanging, and Absolutely One. No need for fusions, fabrications, or failed logic.

We challenge you — create your topic. We’ll bury your claims one by one, using both reason and revelation.

Come. The Lion of Tawhid is waiting.

BibleInterpreta AntiChristian TenQ CreativeOrbit gofh honesttalk21 NairaLTQ MaxInDHouse advanceDNA

TenQ:
Islam teaches that Every prophet is a Muslim, it question was obvious AT least ONE of them will insinuate that Jibril is the Holy Spirit!

Who amongst them: just one is enough?

This is the question.




Didn't I show you evidence from your Qur'an that Mohammed used to copy from the Jews?
You said they were harmless traditions he copied!
But then I showed you that shaped your theology and Mohammed's own

Show us prior times when Mohammed prayed for refuge from the torment of the grave before hearing these old women?

Can you show us any Rabbinic narrative that affirms the torment of the grave!?





Jesus was fully human too and humans do not enjoy pain: it is understandable.

Your Prophet is supposed to be guaranteed of paradise. He is the first to be resurrected! Yet, he is afraid of torments of the grave.
If your prophet is not to experience Pain in the grave, what is he afraid of?

Even the small me is NOT afraid of death: how much more the greatest prophet of Allah!


In modern Arabic, the word "makr" (مكر) is always negative. It means deceit, cunning, trickery, or scheming — typically with malicious or manipulative intent.
Otherwise, give me just 5 positive sentences in Arabic showing makr in any positive sense?


Ezekiel said God deceived him into giving a message to the Israelite when He already knew that God's word will not result in any change in them. Read the book again.

Here Allah gives himself the TITLE the very best Al-Makr. This is an Identity rather than an activity.

Eg. One can kill without being a Killer
One can get drunk without being a Drunk
Here is a serious Identity Problem: Allah himself is the Al-Makr


I have shown you that it is only Muslims who wrote the Qur'an with their hands and said this is from Allah!

None can change the Words of Allah BUT then written words of Allah can be changed.

Jeremiah 8:8 was simply saying that just as you Muslims (re-interpreted the words of Allah in the Qur'an), the scribes have made false to words of God by their re-interpretations of the Torah.

Unfortunately, if you insist that the Torah at the time of Jeremiah was corrupted, then it is a conclusive proof that Allah cannot be God because he is IGNORANT of this that the Jews at the time of Mohammed had the uncorrupted Torah!

Did Allah make this difference or you are the one helping him to speak clearly as usual.

Islam is a contradiction of lies!

Don't you Muslims use this verse to prove that the Quran is word for word, letter for letter preserved even up to the diacritical marks? Is this another lie?



You got it: you said,
> “Judaism confirms the New Testament but then rejects it… just like Islam.”

That’s historical and theological nonsense.

Judaism does NOT confirm the New Testament. They reject Jesus as Messiah, period.

You just proved that Islam is a historical and theological nonsense

Islam affirms the Scripture of the Jews and the Christians, then turns around to reject both their Scriptures and Religion.

Indeed it is a Historical and A theological nonsense!




I guess, we should debate on the preservation of the Qur'an and let's see if the Qur'an is preserved.

Do you accept the challenge?

In the Name of Allah, the Most Just, the Most High.

TenQ,

You were asked a focused, theological question:
If Jesus is fully God, how can he be ignorant of the Hour, tempted by Satan, feel hunger, and grow in wisdom?
These are not trivial attributes — they are contradictions to the very definition of divinity.

Rather than provide a direct answer, you unleashed a barrage of chaotic accusations and emotional rants — a clear sign of doctrinal insecurity. Since you wish to open multiple fronts, I will respond in kind — point by point, without dodging, unlike your reply.

1. Jesus: God or Man — You Can’t Have It Both Ways

You claim “Jesus was fully human too,” as if that magically resolves the contradiction. That is exactly the problem: God is not “fully man” by definition. God does not:

Hunger or thirst

Grow in wisdom (Luke 2:52)

Get tempted by Satan (Matt. 4:1)

Not know the Hour (Mark 13:32)

You cannot claim divine perfection while affirming human weakness — that’s logical schizophrenia. James 1:13 says “God cannot be tempted,” yet you admit Jesus was tempted. Either Scripture is lying, or your doctrine is false. Choose.

Islam spares you from this confusion: God is One, eternal, and absolutely unlike His creation. Jesus (peace be upon him) was a noble prophet — not a god in flesh.

2. The Prophet and the Torment of the Grave

You mock Prophet Muhammad ﷺ for seeking refuge from the torment of the grave. That shows your ignorance of Islamic theology.

Our Prophet ﷺ taught us to fear Allah even while having hope in Him — because he is the most God-conscious. His fear wasn't personal doubt — it was teaching by example. He wasn’t arrogant like you, bragging about not fearing death. That’s not bravery; that’s foolishness. The Prophet ﷺ, despite being the best of creation, was humble and fearful of God — a mark of true righteousness.

You think being unafraid of death makes you greater than the Prophet? That level of delusion is exactly why you follow a theology of confusion.

3. "Makr" and the Strawman Fallacy

You clearly don’t know Arabic. The word makr means strategic planning, and yes — it can be used negatively or positively depending on context.

In the Qur'an, Allah says: “They plan, and Allah plans. And Allah is the best of planners (makireen).” (Surah Al-Anfal 8:30)

It means that while disbelievers plot against truth, Allah outwits their schemes. That is divine justice — not deceit. The Arabic root doesn't always imply malice; that’s just your missionary talking point, which fails under linguistic scrutiny.

Your Bible uses worse terms: In 2 Thessalonians 2:11, it says God sends a delusion so people will believe lies. Shall we talk about that?

4. The Qur’an’s Preservation vs Biblical Corruption

You say, “Only Muslims wrote the Qur'an with their hands and said it’s from Allah.”

You clearly have no idea how the Qur’an was revealed or preserved. The Qur’an was revealed orally, memorized by thousands of companions word-for-word, and transmitted through mass tawatur, a level of transmission unmatched in human history. The early written mushafs only served as a confirmation of the oral tradition — not a replacement.

Unlike your Bible, which has:

Unknown authors (e.g. Hebrews)

Contradictory manuscripts (Codex Sinaiticus vs Vaticanus)

Dozens of versions (KJV, NIV, ESV, etc.)

Additions and removals (cf. 1 John 5:7, the Trinity verse, a known interpolation)

As for Jeremiah 8:8 — it proves your own scriptures admit corruption. You confirmed it.

You asked: “Was the Torah corrupted at the time of Muhammad?”
Answer: Yes. That’s why Allah sent the Qur’an as the final, preserved revelation.

5. Challenge Accepted — Let’s Debate Qur’an Preservation

You threw down a challenge on the preservation of the Qur’an?

Good. Create a clear topic. Bring your best arguments. I will walk you through manuscript history, oral transmission, qira’at, and Uthman’s recension — and I will show you why your own Bible has been changed, corrupted, and edited over centuries.

Let’s see if you can bring evidence or just angry noise.

Final Note

You’ve jumped from topic to topic, thrown out wild accusations, and failed to answer the original question:

> If Jesus is God, how can he not know, hunger, grow, and be tempted?

Until you can answer that, your whole religion is built on confusion. Islam, on the other hand, offers clarity, consistency, and perfect monotheism.

So stop dodging and create your topic on Qur’anic preservation — if you’re ready to be exposed again.

“Say: He is Allah, the One. Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born. Nor is there to Him any equivalent.”
— Surah Al-Ikhlas (112)

Let’s debate properly. Truth stands clear from error.

TenQ:
I have shown you that your easily understood Taoheed is applicable to Iblis.
So, how are you special!

Indeed, you are a denialist!
Just like in what is called "Trauma Bonding" , you defend the one taking you to hell fire.
It's the same characteristics of behaviour sir!



Is air not above and below Allah?
Then, he is a subset of the universe and thus not Omnipresent!



All you need to do is to combine seen the sun setting in the horizon and finding a people near it: it is a perception IMPOSSIBILITY sir.
Did Dhul Qarnyn find the sun setting in a POOL or the Sea?

Allah's words must be re-interpreted as he cannot speak clearly.


If Allah truely created the heavens and the earth, why does he mix up the sequence?
Why was it impossible for him to give Mohammed his most important prophet signs? Why always silly excuses?



Is this not shameful in your hearing?
Tell me,
Is it islamic for a Muslim man to enter into the house of a woman whose husband is not at home?

Who said this statement:
Praise be to Allah who makes my heart flip for you..
It was said to the hearing of the wife of a married woman who was a wife to a Muslim!

You will defend shamelessness I know!!



1. Did Allah allow Muslim men to operate a brothel with their girls?
Yes or No!
2. Did Allah abrogate Mutah anywhere in the Qur'an?
Yes or No?
3. Did any prophet before Islam allow halal prostitutions?

Paradise with orgies:
1. Is it UNTRUE that your prophet promised you endless erections?
2. Is it untrue that your job in paradise would be deflowering virgins?
3. Is it untrue that there is a market in paradise where you can point to any 3D image of men and women and go into them?
4. Is it untrue that FEMALE inmates of Hell would be given to Muslim men in paradise and the qualifications of those girls is simply because they have good cleavages (I don't want to use vulgar terms)?

And you say you paradise is not a brothel!



First handle the gross difference between the God of Abraham, Moses, David and Jesus, then come back again!

Islam cannot handle scrutiny, it breaks down the twin towers an 9/11 in USA

There is no escaping for you sir. For if Allah is false, Islam is false.
Unfortunately for you, if we assume for the sake of argument that Allah is real, Christians, Jews and Sabeans (who worship stars) will enter paradise!

Is this confusion or ignorance of Mohammed?

🔥 Enough Screaming. Let’s Dissect Your Delusions — Piece by Pathetic Piece

Your entire reply is not a theological argument. It’s a desperate rant — an incoherent fusion of Islamophobic slogans, missionary myths, and juvenile filth masquerading as a debate.

You didn't respond to a single logical point I raised. Instead, you hurled accusations, fabricated hadiths, and weaponized vulgarity like an online troll who lost the argument 10 messages ago.

But since you insist on exposing your ignorance, let me gladly put it on display.

⚔️ 1. You Compared Tawḥīd to Iblīs?

Congratulations. You’ve officially abandoned all theological sanity.

Yes, Iblīs believes in one God — but refuses to submit. That's called kufr, not tawḥīd. Even Pharaoh said "I am your lord most high." Does that make him a monotheist?

Monotheism isn’t merely stating “God is one.” It’s worshipping Him alone, without idols, sons, or co-equal persons. Your god-man theology is the very shirk Iblīs promotes — not what he practices.

So thank you for proving: Tawḥīd is intact, and Christianity is Iblīs’s theology — because only Satan benefits from turning God into a man who gets crucified.

🧠 2. You Say “Air is Around God” — So God Isn’t Omnipresent?

This is your idea of a philosophical point?

Islam teaches that Allah is not a physical body inside space. That doesn’t mean He’s “boxed in” by creation — it means He’s transcendent, unlike your god who was nailed to a cross and needed someone to feed him.

You don’t even understand your own critique. Omnipresence doesn’t mean "God is part of the air.” It means God’s knowledge, power, and will encompass all things — without being physically in the creation.

> “There is nothing like unto Him.” (Qur’an 42:11)

We don’t turn God into an atom or a man — you do.

📚 3. Your Attacks on the Qur’an Are Laughably Weak

You said the sun can’t set in a muddy spring? No kidding.

The verse says:

> “He found it setting in a dark, muddy spring…”
(Qur’an 18:86)

It’s describing Dhul Qarnayn’s perspective, not a physics textbook. The same way your own Bible says:

> “The sun rises and sets” (Ecclesiastes 1:5)

Are we to believe your Bible is false too?

As for creation sequence — read Surah 41 properly. Allah says:

He created the earth in two periods.

Then turned to the sky while it was smoke.

Then completed the heavens and spread the earth.

Not mixed up — just your inability to read Arabic or tafsīr.

🤥 4. You Lie About Prophet Muhammad ﷺ

Let’s tackle your filth point by point:

❌ “Your Prophet entered a house of a woman alone.”

Baseless. This is pure missionary slander with no authentic narration.

❌ “Praise be to Allah who makes my heart flip…”

A weak narration, distorted in meaning, with no connection to sin. Unlike your Bible, where David lusts after Bathsheba, commits adultery, and kills her husband (2 Samuel 11). And yet you call him a prophet?

❌ “Did Allah allow brothels?”

No. Islam outlawed all forms of prostitution, including pagan practices of temple sex slavery. You’re confusing temporary marriage (which was legislated in a specific wartime context and later abrogated) with harlotry — again showing your ignorance.

❌ “Is Mut'ah in the Qur’an?”

Yes — it was permitted in 4:24. Then abrogated by the Prophet ﷺ, just like alcohol was gradually prohibited. That’s called progressive revelation, something your own Bible admits in Hebrews 7:12.

❌ “Endless erections? Virgin deflowering? 3D market orgies?”

You're not quoting Islam — you’re quoting orientalist lies, fabricated narrations, and perverse interpretations invented by enemies of Islam to insult Paradise.

> “No soul knows what joy is hidden for them…” (Qur’an 32:17)

That’s what Allah promised — not your twisted fantasies.

Meanwhile, let’s talk about your “heaven”:

> “They will be like the angels in heaven, neither marrying nor given in marriage.”
(Matthew 22:30)

So your eternal reward is what? Celibate angelhood?

Enjoy your ghost-like eternity while mocking the reward of Jannah, which Allah prepared for those who believe and do righteous deeds — not idolaters who call a man “God.”

🤯 5. You Said 9/11 Was a Breakdown of Islam?

That’s your climax? A terrorist attack done by a deviant group — as if that proves a theological doctrine false?

Shall we judge Christianity by the Inquisition, the Crusades, the colonial genocide of Africa, or the burning of women as witches?

You don’t want to go down that road.

🚨 6. Final Exposure: You Still Can’t Defend the Trinity

I asked you logical questions — and you dodged every single one:

Can God be omniscient and ignorant at the same time?

Can God die and remain immortal?

Can God be tempted while being untemptable?

Instead of answering, you rage-type insults and babble nonsense.

So once again, here is your intellectual noose:

> If Jesus is fully God and fully man, Then he is both mortal and immortal, Omniscient and ignorant, Tempted and untemptable.

This is not deep. It is delusion.

🛡️ Islam Stands. Christianity Falls.

Islam:

One indivisible God.

Eternal, unchanging, omnipotent.

Revelation free of contradictions.

A Prophet of moral perfection.

Scripture preserved.


Christianity:

God died.

God cried.

God got whipped by Romans.

God doesn’t know the Hour.

Scripture corrupted by councils.

Trinity that defies all logic and all prophets before.


So here’s my challenge — again:

> ❓ Can you defend the core of Christology without contradiction?

No diversions. No mockery. No missionary filth. Just answer:

How can one being be 100% God and 100% man without violating the law of non-contradiction?

Until then, know this:

We are Muslims. We worship the Eternal God.

You are grasping at smoke — and calling it truth.

TenQ:
Khai!
Your willful ignorance is disheartening
You admit that
A soul can be immortal AND
A body can be mortal.

According to Christian theology
1. Is the Word Jesus (who created all things)
2. Is the Son of Mary (the human) still Jesus?

But you are still confused!?
You need help



And you think When the Word became human, it is a contradiction
Like when Jibril (an Angel) became human, it is a contradiction!?

You need help sir!


Are the characteristic properties of a wave and the characteristic property of particulate matter exactly the same and NOT contradictory?

I guess you should answer the question!


Of a truth, that yours is wilful self imposed ignorance
I am further convinced that you are a Denialist at heart as you combine an obstinate, unreasonable, dogmatic, partiality to plain doctrines.
The Truth is not important to people like you!

Your emotional outburst and ad hominem tantrum only confirm what’s been clear from the start: when reason fails, you resort to insult. You’ve abandoned rational argument and now accuse me of "willful ignorance" while dodging every logical challenge I’ve placed before you.

Let me respond in kind—without theatrics, just truth.

📌 1. You Still Don’t Understand What a Contradiction Is

You shouted:

> “A soul can be immortal AND a body can be mortal.”

And I already agreed—because they are two different components of one being. There’s no contradiction in Moses having a mortal body and an immortal soul—because those are distinct parts.

Now compare that to your doctrine:

You claim Jesus is one person—not two.

And this one person is:

Fully God (eternal, omniscient, untemptable)

Fully man (mortal, ignorant, tempted)

That’s not two components with different roles. That’s one subject with contradictory attributes. And unlike body and soul, divinity and humanity are metaphysically exclusive.

You still haven’t answered:

> When Jesus hungered, did God hunger?

> When Jesus said, “I don’t know the Hour,” did God not know?

> When Jesus died, did God die?

You dodge. You spin. You name-call. But you don’t answer—because the only options are:

1. The divine lost divine attributes (so no longer God)

2. The human was just an illusion (so no real incarnation)

3. You affirm contradictions (so logic is dead)

Pick your poison. Because all three are fatal to your theology.

🚫 2. You Repeated the Quantum Analogy — And Still Don’t Understand It

You asked:

> “Are the properties of wave and particle not contradictory?”

No. They are complementary, not contradictory. Learn the difference.

In physics, wave-particle duality means subatomic entities behave differently based on observation and interaction. But they never manifest two contradictory properties at the same time in the same way.

Your Christology, however, claims one person is:

Immutable and changeable

Infinite and finite

Almighty and helpless

Simultaneously. In the same person. Without qualification.

That is not complexity. That is philosophical suicide.

And no, Jibril becoming human is not comparable—because an angel is created, and taking a different created form doesn’t involve contradiction. But you are saying that the uncreated became created, the infinite entered finitude, and the eternal was born. That’s not a mystery. It’s blasphemy dressed as theology.

🔥 3. You Rant, Because You Have No Response

Your final resort is to declare me a “denialist” because I reject your incoherent doctrine. That’s not an argument. That’s a confession of defeat.

You accuse me of being “dogmatic”? I’m using the same logic you apply to all other religions when you reject their gods, prophets, or scriptures. I simply apply it consistently—to Christianity as well.

You appeal to emotion. I appeal to reason.

You hide behind “mystery.” I expose contradictions.

You rely on inherited dogma. I rely on coherent monotheism.

❗️Islam: Where Logic Meets Revelation

Unlike Trinitarianism, Islam never asks us to believe that the Creator became creation, or that the all-knowing became ignorant, or that God died.

> “He neither begets nor is begotten.” (Qur’an 112:3)

Not because we lack imagination, but because we refuse to violate reason.

We submit to the truth without needing to suspend logic to believe it.

So here’s your challenge:

Either explain how “God died” is not a contradiction, or admit your doctrine depends on abandoning reason.

And if you can’t distinguish between a paradox and a contradiction, then you don’t need a debate—you need a dictionary.

QuinQ:
Thanks for your Politeness.
Once again my analogy using QM is to illustrate just a little bit how limited man's logic is. We still don't know the why of QM, we just know it is the way it is. Naming something or using mathematics to describe it doesn't mean you understand why it is so.

Can't you see you can't win this argument? Because if you apply logic to religion as a whole it will also collapse. You can't selectively apply logic. You touched on it when you said that'd mean other religions are also right. YES, they are also "right"! It's all about belief NOT logic!
You keep using the word "truth". Just because you believe something doesn't make it the truth!

If you don't mind, please address only this paragraph in your next response, to keep things short and simple. Thanks.
Please, in simple language, clearly tell us the difference between your logical objections to incarnation and these:
* God knows everything (meaning everything is predetermined), yet man has free will
* God is in Heaven yet same exact God is everywhere and in everyone
* God never changes yet at some point same God changed and started creating things
* God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all good, yet evil exists.
* God is all-loving yet pain, disease, and natural disasters exist
* God is just, yet injustice exists and destinies seem alloted arbitrarily not based on merit

Add yours

Thank you again for your continued engagement and for narrowing the focus of the discussion. I appreciate your desire for clarity and simplicity, so I will address the core of your paragraph as requested.

The Key Distinction: Paradox vs. Contradiction

You asked: What is the difference between my objection to the doctrine of Incarnation (God becoming man) and theological questions such as:

God knows everything, yet man has free will

God is beyond space yet present everywhere

God never changes yet began creating

God is all-good, yet evil exists

God is all-loving, yet suffering exists

God is just, yet injustice exists

This is a fair and important question, and the answer lies in a critical distinction between mystery and logical contradiction—or more precisely: paradox vs. impossibility.

1. Islamic Theology Affirms Divine Mystery Without Logical Contradiction

In all the examples you listed, there is tension or mystery, but not an outright logical contradiction. Let me illustrate:

a. Divine Knowledge and Human Free Will

> Apparent paradox: If God knows all future actions, how can humans be free?

Response: Islam acknowledges this as a profound mystery. But it is not a contradiction unless you assert that God’s knowledge causes human action in a deterministic sense. Islam holds that God's foreknowledge does not negate human freedom—He knows what we will choose, but we are still the agents of those choices.

The two can coexist without logical contradiction, even if the mechanism is mysterious.

b. God Being Beyond Space Yet Present Everywhere

Response: Islam teaches that God is not a body, not in a place, and not subject to spatial constraints. His “being everywhere” refers to His knowledge, power, and authority—not physical presence. There is no contradiction here, only a distinction between transcendence and immanence.

c. God Never Changes Yet Created

Response: Creation is not a change in God’s essence, but a manifestation of His eternal will. God’s will to create is eternal, but the effects of that will manifest in time. There’s no change in God Himself—only in the created world.

d. The Problem of Evil and Suffering

Response: This is an emotional and philosophical problem, not a formal contradiction. God may allow evil and suffering for purposes that include testing, purification, moral growth, or wisdom beyond human grasp. While we may not fully understand why, the existence of suffering does not logically contradict God’s attributes unless we define “goodness” in a limited, human-centric way.

2. The Incarnation Is a Logical Contradiction

Now contrast this with the doctrine of Incarnation—that Jesus is fully God and fully man at the same time and in the same person.

This is not a paradox or mystery—it is a formal contradiction:

God is immortal – cannot die

Man is mortal – does die

God is all-knowing – cannot be ignorant

Man is limited in knowledge – learns and forgets

God is independent – needs nothing

Man is dependent – eats, sleeps, suffers

To say Jesus is 100% God and 100% man simultaneously is to say:

He is mortal and immortal

Limited and unlimited

Created and uncreated

These are not mysteries—they are mutually exclusive attributes. It’s not that we don’t understand how this works; it’s that it cannot logically work by definition. To affirm both at the same time is to affirm that A = not-A, which violates the principle of non-contradiction—the foundation of all rational thought.

3. Conclusion: Logical Boundaries Matter

So, to answer your challenge directly:

> The difference is that your list includes paradoxes, which are difficult but not logically impossible.

> The doctrine of the Incarnation is a contradiction—affirming two opposite truths in the same respect, at the same time.

Islam respects mystery, but it does not affirm the logically absurd. Belief does not require rejecting reason. Rather, true belief integrates heart and mind.

If belief asks us to affirm that the unlimited became limited or the unchangeable changed, we are not dealing with mystery—we are dealing with incoherence disguised as faith.

Thank you for the thoughtful exchange. I remain open to continuing the conversation.

> “Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and the earth… are signs for those who reflect.” (Qur’an 3:190)

TenQ:
You are the one who makes a mockery of the words of Allah and not me. How, by re-interpreting every thing he says that you don't like?

Is it UNTRUE that Your Standard Islamic Narrative says that Abraham, Moses, David. Solomon and Jesus are Muslims?

If they are, show us where ANY of them remotely says that the Holy Spirit is an Angel?

Did the Jews and Christians erase those from their scriptures?




Let me show you one of those harmless traditions which was a lie believed by your prophet. If you disagree that the tradition of the Jews is true, show us one source of the Jews where they taught of the torment of the grave.


Sahih Muslim 586 a
'A'isha reported:
There came to me two old women from the old Jewesses of Medina and said: The people of the grave are tormented in their graves. I contradicted them and I did not deem it proper to testify them. They went away and the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) came to me and I said to him: Messenger of Allah I there came to me two old women from the old Jewesses of Medina and asserted that the people of the graves would be tormented therein. He (the Prophet) said: They told the truth; they would be tormented (so much) that the animals would listen to it. She ('A'isha) said: Never did I see him (the Holy Prophet) afterwards but seeking refuge from the torment of the grave in prayer.

1. Two old Jewish women told fables about the torment of the grave
2. Mohammed became so scared that he incorporated it into his Deen and
3. Believed it so much that he couldn't pray without seeking refuge from this torment

Here is your prophet who was supposed to be praying in his grave as the most beloved prophet of Allah, afraid of the torment of the grave!

Does this make sense to you?

Compare with Jesus:
John 14:5-6:
"Thomas said to him, Lord, we know not where you go; and how can we know the way?"
"Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father, but by me."

I invite you to the Messiah for your salvation and deliverance from the punishment of Hell Fire!




1. I have attached the dictionary meaning of the word Makr please judge

2. According to Muslim, is the Qur'an, Taurat and Injeel Allah's words? If they are

Can someone change the words of Allah?

Don't forget that even the Torah was written by Allah for Moses.

Tell me, is this the words of Allah or not?

Qur'an 7:145
"And We wrote for him on the Tablets [al-alwāḥ] something of all things — instruction and explanation for all things — [saying], 'Take them with determination and order your people to take the best of it.'"

3. You then gave an absurd and Illogical analogy and said:
Judaism proves Christianity false—since Jews reject your Trinitarian doctrines.

NO sir, it is more like
Judaism confirms the New Testament but then Rejects both the New Testament and Christianity


Exactly like
Islam confirms the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians but then Rejects the Bible and Judaism with Christianity



Sorry, Islam breaks down terribly under scrutiny,,,.

Your reply once again displays more sarcasm than substance, more emotion than exegesis, and more memes than theology. Let’s clean up the intellectual mess you’ve left behind.

🔹 1. "Abraham, Moses, Jesus Were Muslims – But Where Did They Say the Holy Spirit is an Angel?"

You’re confusing yourself with your own flawed logic.

Islam teaches that every prophet submitted to God (Allah)—this is the definition of a Muslim. It doesn't mean they all spoke Arabic or used later terminologies.

Now you ask:

> "Where did Abraham or Jesus say the Holy Spirit is an angel?"

Here’s the rebuttal:
Where did ANY prophet say the Holy Spirit is God?

> Did Abraham say: “Worship the Holy Spirit”?
Did Moses say: “The Holy Spirit is the third person of the Trinity”?

No prophet ever did. So by your own criteria, your belief is crushed.

The Qur’an is the final clarification, and it states explicitly:

> “The Holy Spirit brought it down from your Lord” (Qur’an 16:102)
“Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel... it is he who brought it down” (Qur’an 2:97)

Same task. Same role. Same identity. The conclusion is obvious.

The real issue is this: You’re trying to force Trinitarian dogma onto scripture that never teaches it. That's not exegesis—that’s doctrinal colonization.

🔹 2. The “Torment of the Grave” Hadith – Your Strawman Burns Again

Let’s break it down since you clearly didn’t read your own citation.

You quote:

> "Two old Jewish women said the dead are tormented… The Prophet ﷺ said: They spoke the truth."

And then you mockingly say:

> "See? He copied it from them!"

What a lazy and self-defeating argument.

First, the Prophet ﷺ corrected his own assumption after revelation confirmed the reality. That’s called honesty—not blind copying.

Second, if a Jewish woman says 2+2=4, and the Prophet agrees—does that mean he copied her? No. Truth remains truth regardless of who states it.

Third, this tradition matches Islamic theology, not Jewish mythology. Just because remnants of truth survive in other religions doesn’t mean Islam borrows from them.

> “They told the truth…”
This doesn’t mean: “They invented it and I’ll adopt it.” It means: “What they said happens to be true, and Allah has confirmed it.”

Your desperate attempt to turn an incidental overlap into doctrinal plagiarism only exposes your shallow reasoning.

🔹 3. Mocking the Prophet’s Fear of the Grave Torment – But Jesus Cried and Sweated Blood?

You mock the Prophet ﷺ for fearing the torment of the grave.

Yet your Bible says:

> Hebrews 5:7 – “Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to Him who was able to save him from death…”
Luke 22:44 – “And being in agony, He prayed more earnestly; and His sweat became like drops of blood…”

So let’s apply your own mockery:

> "Jesus was so afraid, He begged God not to die and sweat blood. How can He be divine if He was so terrified?"

Be consistent. If fear invalidates prophethood or truth, your theology collapses on itself.

🔹 4. Makr (Divine Planning) – Your Hypocrisy is Blinding

You said:

> "Here's the dictionary definition of makr—so it means deceit."

Stop playing the dictionary game when it suits you. Here’s the full truth:

🔸 Makr in Arabic means strategic planning, often in response to enemy schemes. It can be used positively or negatively based on the context.

In the Qur’an:

> “They planned, and Allah planned. And Allah is the best of planners.” (3:54)

It clearly refers to Allah outwitting evil schemers—not lying.

Now compare with YOUR Bible:

Ezekiel 14:9 – “If the prophet is deceived, I, the LORD have deceived that prophet.”

2 Thessalonians 2:11 – “God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie.”

That’s actual deception, not strategy. So again: double standard exposed.

🔹 5. “Can Someone Change the Words of Allah?” – You Misunderstood the Qur’an, Again

You asked:

> “If the Torah and Injeel are Allah’s words, can they be changed?”

Answer:

Yes, Allah's revealed messages can be corrupted by people, but His ultimate decree and final revelation (the Qur’an) cannot.

Let’s be precise:

Qur’an 6:115 – “None can change His words…”
Refers to Allah’s decrees, not every past scripture written down by humans.

Qur’an 2:79 – “Woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and say, ‘This is from Allah.’”

That’s your answer: Yes, people tampered with Allah’s previous revelations—the Qur’an says so.

Even your own Bible agrees:

> Jeremiah 8:8 – “The lying pen of the scribes has falsified it.”

So if you trust the Bible, start by believing it when it admits the text has been tampered.

🔹 6. You Butchered the Analogy

You claimed:

> “Judaism confirms the New Testament but then rejects it… just like Islam.”

Wrong. That’s historical and theological nonsense.

Judaism does NOT confirm the New Testament. They reject Jesus as Messiah, period.

Islam, however, affirms:

Jesus was born miraculously

He was a prophet

He brought the Injeel

He will return

But rejects fabricated divinity, crucifixion myths, and Pauline distortions.

Islam clarifies and completes previous revelations—not contradicts them without basis like Christianity did with Jewish monotheism.

🔚 Final Verdict: Your Argument Is Nothing But Strawmen, Cherry-Picking, and Mockery

You bring:

✗ No proof that Jesus taught the Trinity

✗ No proof the Holy Spirit is a divine person

✗ No proof that the current Bible is unaltered

✗ No explanation of Biblical contradictions

✗ No consistent theological method

Just mockery, memes, and misquotes. If this is how you defend your faith, you’ve already lost.

Islam doesn’t tremble before sarcastic missionaries or recycled polemics. It stands on:

✅ Clear revelation
✅ Rational theology
✅ Historical preservation
✅ Prophetic integrity

If your only method is mockery, then:

> “Let them mock—indeed, Allah is the One who has the last laugh.” (cf. Qur’an 9:79)

And as Allah says:

> “To you your religion, and to me mine.” (109:6)

But remember:

> “Indeed, the religion with Allah is Islam.” (Qur’an 3:19)

TenQ:
Thank God for prophet Internet , do you know him?

Let me ask him to explain the meaning of the word (تَصْدِيق) from Arabic

My prophet says the dictionary meaning of (تَصْدِيق)
Is
1. To attest to
2. To confirm something
3. To validate something
4. To Ratify an information
Let me attach the dictionary for your from prophet Google!
LOL!


Then you went on to use another word which you assumed I wouldn't know from

Qur’an 5:48
“And We have revealed to you the Book in truth, confirming what came before it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it...”

1. Is it untrue that Linguistically, "Furqan" means "that which separates or distinguishes," and it can apply to anything that differentiates right from wrong, not just a specific book.
2. Can you say that the Furqan is only the Qur'an or affirm that every scripture is the Furqan!
Qur'an 2:53
"And [recall] when We gave Moses the Scripture and the Furqān, that perhaps you would be guided."
Qur'an 21:48
"And We had already given Moses and Aaron the Furqān, and a light and a reminder for the righteous."

3. According to the Quran itself, this Reminder also includes the previous Scriptures which God sent down for mankind.
Quran 21:7
And We sent not before you (O Muhammad) but men to whom We inspired, so ask the people of the Reminder (ahla al-thikri) [Scriptures - the Taurat (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel)] if you do not know. cf. Quran 21:48, 105; Quran 40:53-54


Quran 15:9:
Lo! We, even We, reveal THE Reminder (al-thikra), and lo! We verily are its Guardian.

Tell me, Did Allah fail to protect his books?


This is what you are trying hard to prove sir.

Your reply is yet another display of mockery dressed up as theology, memes replacing meaning, and sarcasm substituting scholarship. So let me respond without the emojis and playground taunts—with Quranic clarity and unapologetic truth.

🔹 1. You Mock the Word “Tasdīq” — and Expose Your Own Ignorance

Congratulations on Googling a dictionary. But you’ve once again misunderstood the difference between dictionary meaning and Qur'anic usage (istilāh)—a basic distinction in every field of study, including Biblical exegesis. Let me teach you the part your “Prophet Google” forgot:

Yes, “tasdīq” lexically means "confirmation, attestation, ratification." But Qur’anic usage is contextual, not wooden literalism.

> Qur'an 5:48: “And We have revealed to you the Book in truth, confirming (muṣaddiqan) what was before it and **as a criterion (muhayminan) over it...”

Here’s the key point your sarcasm failed to notice:

🔸 The Qur’an doesn’t just confirm—it also oversees (مُهَيْمِنًا) and judges previous scriptures.
That means it corrects, clarifies, and discards falsehoods that people added over time.

So the tafsir (explanation) of scholars like Ibn Kathir and Al-Tabari is crystal clear:

> The Qur’an confirms the original truth that came before—not the corrupt versions Jews and Christians altered.

This destroys your claim that tasdīq = blind ratification.
You’re either unable to understand context, or unwilling. Either way, you’re wrong.

🔹 2. You Confuse the “Furqan” with the Whole Bible — That’s Desperation

You appeal to the word “Furqan” being applied to Moses and Aaron’s scripture. So what?

> Yes — the Torah was Furqan before it was corrupted.
Yes — the Qur’an is Furqan and remains uncorrupted.

The designation of “Furqan” doesn’t mean every scripture today is still Furqan.
By your logic, since a torch was once lit, it must still be burning. Nonsense.

Here’s what you ignored:

Qur’an 2:75 – “Do you (Muslims) still expect them to believe you while a group of them used to hear the Word of Allah and then knowingly distort it after understanding it?”

Qur’an 2:79 – “Woe to those who write the book with their own hands and say ‘This is from Allah.’”

If the earlier scriptures are still protected and unaltered, explain why Allah accuses people of writing fake scripture.

You can’t.

You just pick random words (“Reminder,” “Furqan”) and use them without context like buzzwords in a meme war.

🔹 3. “Did Allah Fail to Protect His Books?”

No—Allah protected the original revelations when they were revealed. But He never promised to preserve all scriptures forever—until the Qur’an.

Let’s quote the verse you twisted:

> Qur’an 15:9 – “Indeed, We have revealed the Reminder (al-dhikr), and We will certainly preserve it.”

This verse is explicitly about the Qur’an, not the Bible or Torah. All classical tafsir agree.

So your question—“Did Allah fail to protect His books?”—is like asking:

> “If you had an older version of software that was corrupted, and now you release the final secure version with protection, did you fail before?”

No—the earlier versions were provisional, meant for a time and people, and corrupted by those people.
Only the final version—the Qur’an—was promised eternal protection.

You conflate different revelations, time periods, and audiences—because that’s the only way to cling to your failing argument.

🔹 4. “Ask the People of the Reminder (Qur’an 21:7)”

Another classic Christian misquote.

The verse says:

> “So ask the people of the Reminder (Ahl al-Dhikr) if you do not know.”

This doesn’t mean affirm everything they say. It means to ask those who were informed previously if you are ignorant—about what came before, not as a confirmation of current corrupt texts.

Moreover, the “Reminder” in their possession was what remained of God’s message, not the corrupted volumes Christians today parade around.

Even then, Qur’an 2:101 says:

> “A party of those who were given the Scripture threw the Book of Allah behind their backs…”

So stop cherry-picking verses. The Qur’an doesn’t trust all of them. It exposes many of them for corruption.

🔚 Final Blow: Your Whole Foundation Is Built on a Fallacy

You keep screaming:

> “See! It says Torah and Gospel! So your Qur’an affirms our Bible!”

No. That’s like saying:

> “You said ‘Jesus’! That must mean you accept everything we say about him!”

Not at all.

The Qur’an refers to:

The original Torah (Tawrat) revealed to Moses,

The original Gospel (Injeel) given to Jesus,

Not your current canon chosen by Roman councils and tampered by scribes over centuries.

So let me be crystal clear:

🔸 The Qur’an confirms the revelation sent to Moses and Jesus.
🔸 It does not confirm the current Bible which contains:

Dozens of forged letters (like 2 Peter),

Anonymous Gospels contradicting each other,

Roman Trinitarian theology invented long after Christ.

Your entire argument collapses under scrutiny. All you’re left with are cheap jokes, dictionary screenshots, and out-of-context verses.

If your religion were so strong, you wouldn’t need mockery and manipulation to defend it.
But Islam stands unshaken, because the Qur’an exposes corruption and preserves truth.

> May Allah humiliate falsehood and elevate the truth, even if the disbelievers hate it.

TenQ:
When I said Islam cannot survive without lies, it is an understatement. Muslims must re-interprete Allah's clear words as if he is incapable of making clear conscise statements.

Let me address your erroneous defences.
1. You said: When the Qur’an refers to what is “with them,” it is referring to:
The original revelations that existed among them
AND Remnants of truth still preserved amidst corruption

You see, like helping a toddler just learning to speak, you have to help the meaning of the words of Allah which to me is a complete disrespect for Allah by you. The sarcasm isn't at Allah but at you until you learn to respect him and take him by his words.

Qur'an 7:157
Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them. He will enjoin on them that which is right and forbid them that which is wrong. He will make lawful for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul; and he will relieve them of their burden and the fetters that they used to wear. Then those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful.

1. What are the names of the two Books of Allah in this verse?
2. Who are these two books of Allah with? (Who are the them in this verse?)
3. Where is the name of this unlearned Messenger whose name is found in the corrupted Torah and Injeel?


Let's look at the second and third verses
Qur'an 2:41
And believe in what I reveal, confirming the revelation which is with you, and be not the first to reject Faith therein, nor sell My Signs for a small price; and fear Me, and Me alone.

Qur'an 2:89
And when there cometh unto them a scripture from Allah, confirming that in their possession - though before that they were asking for a signal triumph over those who disbelieved - and when there cometh unto them that which they know (to be the truth) they disbelieve therein. The curse of Allah is on disbelievers.

1. Let's assume the Torah and Injeel are corrupted: your argument is that the Qur'an confirms the corrupted revelations that was with the Jews and Christians?
2. Do you affirm that If the Qur'an confirms a corrupted revelation that is in the possession of Jews and Christians, then the Qur'an MUST logically also be also corrupted?


Let's look at the fourth verse of the Qur'an:
Qur'an 2:101
And when there cometh unto them a messenger from Allah, confirming that which they possess, a party of those who have received the Scripture fling the Scripture of Allah behind their backs as if they knew not,

1. Is it untrue that Even though Mohammed cannot read nor write (according to the standard Islamic Narrative), he confirms our scriptures?
2. When Allah says: "a party of those who have received the Scripture fling the Scripture of Allah behind their backs as if they knew not" , what does it mean ?



So, you have to fabricate lies to re-interpret what was clearly said by Allah.
When was the Scriptures of the Jews and that of the Christians distorted?
I need dates or period!



You then went to expose the fact that Allah was ignorant of the fact that some people in 325 AD rewrote the Torah and Injeel which was in use 300 years after, during the time of Mohammed.
Unfortunately, Allah either didn't know of the Council of Nicea / Laodicea and their corruption so, This corrupted scripture of the Jews and Christians in 630 AD was confirmed by both Allah and his prophet Mohammed!
Does this even make sense to you!?

You quoted
Qur’an 2:79
“So woe to those who write the Scripture with their own hands, then say, ‘This is from Allah.’”
Tell me,
1. Was the Qur'an written with hands of men or by the finger of God?
I will answer you, up to 1924, the Qur'an was written by Hands?
2. Who are the people who claims that their handwritten scripture is from Allah?
Is it the Jews, or the Christians or the Muslims?




What does it even mean by the word "CONFIRM" in the phrase "Confirming a Book"!?


Do you see how your answers make you look hilarious!?


Like I said, I wasn't mocking Islam, I was stating exactly what Allah and your prophet said:
But to Muslims, many sound stupid and irrational and this is why Muslims have to reinterpret the Quran or the Hadiths to make sense!

Your entire reply is a parade of arrogance, willful ignorance, and circular reasoning cloaked in mock sincerity. Let’s strip it down piece by piece and expose the intellectual bankruptcy of your claims.

🔹 1. “You are disrespecting Allah by interpreting His words”

This is perhaps the most laughable part of your entire rant. You pretend to be so concerned about the “honor of Allah” while denying the Qur’an and His final Prophet (ﷺ). Your sudden piety is hypocrisy in its purest form.

If you think quoting a verse means no contextual or linguistic understanding is needed, then your entire religion is a house of cards. Are you suggesting that every verse—no matter the audience, timeframe, or usage—is to be read like a fortune cookie? That’s not reverence. That’s biblical literalism gone mad.

The Qur’an does not confirm the corrupted Bible, it confirms what originally came from Allah—not what you have today, filled with human insertions, contradictions, and missing authors (your own scholars say this, not us). Quoting verses like 7:157 and 2:89 in isolation and pretending they affirm the modern Bible is either delusion or dishonesty—likely both.

🔹 2. You ask: “What are the names of the two Books of Allah in 7:157?”

Answer: Torah and Injeel. The Qur’an does not deny that these books were originally revealed. But you conveniently ignore Qur’an 2:79, which you couldn’t even refute:

> “Woe to those who write the book with their hands and then say, ‘This is from Allah.’”

This exposes you. The Qur’an directly accuses people of fabricating scripture and falsely labeling it divine. So yes, it acknowledges the names of the books while condemning their altered content. That’s not contradiction—it’s divine precision. If you can’t grasp that, go back and read again—slowly this time.

🔹 3. “If the Qur’an confirms what they have, does it confirm corruption?”

Absolutely not. Your error lies in your failure to grasp the difference between “tasdiq” (confirmation) and “tafsil” (full validation).

🔸 Tasdiq means confirmation of truths that are still present—not blind acceptance of everything between your man-made covers.

Even Christian scholars like Raymond Brown admit the textual corruption of your scriptures. So your demand that Islam accept the entirety of a corrupted text or reject all of it is a false dichotomy—a logical fallacy unworthy of a serious discussion.

🔹 4. “When were the scriptures distorted? I want dates!”

You're asking “when” something occurred that your own scholars can’t precisely date. Are you denying that biblical textual corruption exists unless we can timestamp every edit? By that logic, if I don’t know the exact day Judas betrayed Jesus, then it never happened.

Let me educate you:

The ending of Mark (16:9–20) is a later forgery. Christian scholars agree.

The Johannine Comma (1 John 5:7) is a Trinitarian fabrication.

The Book of Hebrews is anonymous and contradicts Levitical Law.

The Council of Nicaea (325 CE) established divinity doctrines never preached by Jesus.

This is documented history—not Muslim conspiracy.

So don’t play dumb. The corruption is cumulative. Like spoiled milk, it decays over time.

🔹 5. “The Qur’an was written by hand too!”

This is an attempt at false equivalency.

Yes, the Qur’an was written by hands—but under direct supervision, memorization, and transmission from the Prophet ﷺ and his Companions. The Qur’an is mutawatir—mass transmitted, verified by thousands, recited word-for-word across the globe for 14 centuries. No council voted it into existence. No Roman emperor dictated its canon. No one inserted verses centuries later.

Now contrast that with:

Gospel of Mark: Anonymous

Gospel of Matthew: Anonymous

Gospel of Luke: “It seemed good to me also…” – Luke 1:3 (your author admits he’s writing his own version)

So don’t compare divinely preserved oral and written revelation with your patchwork quilt of Greco-Roman hearsay.

🔹 6. “The Prophet confirms the Scripture they had!”

Yes—he confirms what was originally from Allah, not your Greek-influenced, Pauline-tinged gospel according to anonymous scribes.

Even your own book says the Jews corrupted the scripture:

> Jeremiah 8:8 – “How can you say, ‘We are wise, for we have the law of the Lord,’ when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?”

You quote verses from the Qur’an with zero comprehension. You pretend every reference to “Torah” or “Injeel” means endorsement of the exact books sitting on your shelf—as if Allah didn’t warn about corruption, tampering, and hiding the truth.

🔹 7. You accuse Muslims of lying to defend the Qur’an?

Projection at its finest. The lies are yours:

You lie about what “confirm” means.

You lie about the Qur’an affirming your entire book.

You lie about the Qur’an being like the Bible.

You lie about early Church councils being irrelevant to scriptural distortion.

Islam doesn’t need to lie. The Qur’an exposes you. You’re just upset it doesn’t bend to your manipulated scriptures and man-made dogmas.

🔚 Final Words:

You demand “clear words” from Allah, yet when He says “Woe to those who write the book with their hands,” you play dumb.

You treat the Qur’an like it should validate your man-altered texts—but Allah doesn't submit to Rome or the pen of Paul.

> You want confirmation for your corruption? That’s like asking a judge to endorse a forged contract.

Until you can prove:

that your Gospels were written by eye-witnesses (you can’t),

that your canon was divinely preserved (it wasn’t),

and that your scripture was not edited by councils (it was),

you are in no position to lecture Muslims on “truth” or “clarity.”

May Allah guide those who seek truth, and expose those who hide it.

QuinQ:
Once again, thanks for your erudite response.
With respect, what you fail to grasp is the enormous limitations of human reasoning and logic. That's what my QM analogy is meant to illustrate. Remember, QM is still within this our dimension and within our microscopic spec of part of the universe, yet it doesn't make sense to us!
But the really big deal is that you selectively (actually deceptively) apply your insistence on detailed vigorous logical coherence and consistency, when in fact religion as a whole cannot withstand such test. Otherwise explain to us how:
* Allah can be in one place and everywhere at same time
* Allah can simultaneously listen to one person and every person at same time
* Never shows himself
* Is inside everyone yet separate in one place
* Starts creating when he never changes
* Should care about your extremely microscopoc spec of a world and minutae of your life when
there are trillions of galaxies
Etc.
So you see, we instinctively know certain things though they can't stand logical scrutiny. We know God can and did take on human form and visit planet earth. If you must subject that to rigorous logical examination, then subject religion itself to same, and you'll also conclude it doesn't make sense. Yet we instinctively know it is true.

Respectfully, this should be the end of the discussion. I don't see how you can have anything to say after this

Thank you for your reply and for engaging with the topic so candidly.

While I appreciate your sincerity and the intent behind your comments, I believe your response unintentionally illustrates the very dilemma I was highlighting—namely, the conflation of mystery with logical incoherence. Let me address your points clearly and respectfully.

1. Quantum Mechanics Does Not Justify Theological Contradictions

You’ve reiterated that quantum mechanics (QM) defies our understanding, suggesting that, similarly, theological contradictions should be acceptable. However, this comparison fails in a critical way.

Quantum mechanics may be counterintuitive, but it is not incoherent. It functions within a rigorous and mathematically consistent framework. Scientists may not intuitively understand wave-particle duality or quantum entanglement, but these concepts do not violate the law of non-contradiction. They are observable, testable, and mathematically predictable.

Contrast that with theological statements such as:

God is omniscient and grew in knowledge

God is immortal and died

God is immutable and became flesh

These are not mysteries—they are logical contradictions if affirmed in the same sense and at the same time. And no appeal to scientific mystery can resolve a formal contradiction. The issue is not that we don’t understand how these things work—it’s that they are logically impossible when taken literally.

2. Misrepresenting Islamic Theology Does Not Justify Trinitarian Contradictions

You proposed several rhetorical challenges to Islamic beliefs, such as:

“How can Allah be in one place and everywhere at once?”

“How can He hear all people at the same time?”

“How can He act while being unchanging?”

But these are not contradictions; they are theological questions that fall within the realm of divine attributes.

Islam holds that:

Allah is not limited by space or time. He is not "in" a place; He is beyond all spatial and temporal constraints (Qur’an 6:103).

Allah hears and knows all things, not sequentially or through physical mechanisms, but by His timeless, attribute of knowledge and will (Qur’an 2:255).

Allah acts without undergoing change in His essence, because His will is eternal, and His actions manifest in creation without altering His being.

These are mysteries of transcendence, not violations of logic.

But the claim that God is simultaneously fully God (immortal, all-knowing, omnipotent) and fully man (mortal, ignorant, limited) in the same person at the same time is a category error that collapses under logical scrutiny.

3. Reason Is Not the Enemy of Faith

You stated:

> “We instinctively know certain things though they can't stand logical scrutiny.”

But if that principle is consistently applied, then every theological claim—true or false—becomes equally valid simply because someone “instinctively” believes it. A Hindu could say, "I instinctively know there are many gods," or a polytheist might say, "I instinctively believe in divine incarnations." Does that make their beliefs true?

If we abandon logic as the filter, then all truth claims become equally unverifiable and indistinguishable.

Ironically, your very appeal to instinct or experience still relies on reason to argue that those instincts are valid and should be trusted. One cannot say, “Logic fails,” and then use logic to argue for that conclusion.

4. Faith Must Be Reasonable, Even If Not Exhaustive

No Muslim claims that God is fully comprehensible. Islam affirms God's transcendence and mystery. But it distinguishes clearly between what is beyond reason and what is against reason.

God’s essence may be incomprehensible. But His revealed attributes must be logically coherent:

Eternal = not subject to death

All-knowing = not ignorant

Independent = not in need

Islam never says “God became a man.” Because that would entail that the Unlimited became limited, the Eternal entered time, and the Dependent became Independent—which are mutually exclusive.

5. Ending a Conversation Doesn’t End the Inquiry

You concluded by saying:

> “Respectfully, this should be the end of the discussion. I don't see how you can have anything to say after this.”

I understand that theological discussions can be intense, and you are of course free to disengage. But truth is not a matter of who gets the last word—it is a matter of coherence, consistency, and sincerity in seeking it.

As Muslims, we believe in using the mind God gave us to test claims, weigh evidence, and avoid affirming contradictions—because the One who revealed Himself is also the One who created reason.

> “Will they not reflect?” (Qur’an 59:21)

If a claim demands that we suspend the very tools God gave us for discernment, then it is not a divine mystery—it is a human fabrication.

Conclusion

I don’t say this to win a debate, but to clarify a principle: Mystery is not a license for incoherence. Faith begins where reason ends, but it must never begin against reason.

Let us not confuse reverence with irrationality.

Islam’s message remains:

> “He is Allah, the One.
Allah, the Eternal Refuge.
He neither begets nor is born,
Nor is there to Him any equivalent.” (Qur’an 112)

This is not evasive simplicity—it is sublime coherence.

I remain open to sincere discussion should you choose to continue.

With respect and clarity!

TenQ:
Tell me, did Allah say these in the Quran?

Qur'an 7:157 is
Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them. He will enjoin on them that which is right and forbid them that which is wrong. He will make lawful for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul; and he will relieve them of their burden and the fetters that they used to wear. Then those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful.

Qur'an 2:41
And believe in what I reveal, confirming the revelation which is with you, and be not the first to reject Faith therein, nor sell My Signs for a small price; and fear Me, and Me alone.

Qur'an 2:89
And when there cometh unto them a scripture from Allah, confirming that in their possession - though before that they were asking for a signal triumph over those who disbelieved - and when there cometh unto them that which they know (to be the truth) they disbelieve therein. The curse of Allah is on disbelievers.

Qur'an 2:101
And when there cometh unto them a messenger from Allah, confirming that which they possess, a party of those who have received the Scripture fling the Scripture of Allah behind their backs as if they knew not,

So, you have to fabricate lies to re-interpret what was clearly said by Allah.
When was the Scriptures of the Jews and that of the Christians distorted?
I need dates or period!



So, Mohammed was copying HARMLESS RELIGIOUS PRACTICES!?
Okay!
Sahih al-Bukhari 5917 was correct after all but needs re-interpretation by modern Muslims!
Tell me where your propjet first heard of the Torment of the Grave!


Islam is a continuation of the Religion of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Solomon and Jesus BUT not even one of them says that the Holy Spirit is any Angel. As they Treated the Holy Spirit either as the Person of God Himself or as the Power of God!

It means you tell lies!
Otherwise, I challenge you to give me one example any of your prophets hinted that the Holy Spirit was an Angel!


Unfortunately, these are LIES
1. Jibril is as tall as a mountain
2. Jibril is identical to Mohammed's boyfriend Dihyah al-Kalbi
3. Jibril is the only Angel that squeezes prophets and never says "Peace be unto you" to them!

The day the Spirit (singular) and the Angels shall stand in rows: but Jibril is an Angel!





Is it illegal to Quote Allah?
What is the essence of the Quran when you have to inject yourself between Allah and his speech?

Admit that Allah either doesn't understand Arabic or he is the worst communicator alive!
Jesus is a "Spirit from Allah" and your prophet even went higher to call him "Ruhullah" (spirit of Allah) :
BUT According to you Allah and Mohammed actually do not mean what they said: they means something else!
SMH!!



So, you have to tell lies to resolve your problem
RUH=NAFS!
Islamic dictionary 101
Jibril is Nafs Al- Qudus
According to you, the quran mean "The day the Nafs and the Angels will stand in rows..."!

Your conclusion is that Allah's arabic doesn't know the difference between Soul and Spirit, so you have to help him re-explain his words.

Thank you!


Okay then
If Allah or Mohammed knew what the spirit is, why didn't they just say it when the Jews began pestering with their questions?
Let me help you with two answers that would have help Allah and his prophet
1. The Ruh is Jibril the Angel of Allah
2. The Ruh is Prophet Isa
3. The Ruh is Nafs the Soul
And we would have been satisfied!

BUT, what Allah doesn't know, he gives excuses about it.


Moses says so in the Taurat in case you don't know!

Genesis 1:1-3
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.


Did not Allah say that he is the Best Deceiver!?
Sorry:
I forgot that in Arabic, the word Deceive mean to Guide aright!



Allah never said these in his Quran
Qur'an 2:41, Qur'an 2:89 , Qur'an 2:101
Secondly,
Allah claims that no one can change his words
Quran 6:115, Quran 10:64, Quran 15:9:

Thirdly,
According to the Quran itself, this Reminder also includes the previous Scriptures which God sent down for mankind. Case in point:
Quran 21:7
And We sent not before you (O Muhammad) but men to whom We inspired, so ask the people of the Reminder (ahla al-thikri) [Scriptures - the Taurat (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel)] if you do not know. cf. Quran 21:48, 105; Quran 40:53-54


Quran 15:9:
Lo! We, even We, reveal THE Reminder (al-thikra), and lo! We verily are its Guardian.

Did Allah fail to keep his books?


So, the Muslims are in a dilemma.
If the Quran confirms the Bible, then Islam is FALSE for the Bible contradicts it.


Sorry, I wasn't mocking Islam, I was stating exactly what Allah and your prophet said:
To Muslims, many sound stupid and irrational and this is why Muslims have to reinterpret the Quran or the Hadiths to make sense!

Your latest reply once again abandons calm, logical reasoning for sarcasm, misquotations, and intellectually dishonest polemics. Let me dismantle your claims step by step, using your own Bible, Islamic scripture, and consistent logic—not emotional outbursts.

🔹 1. Misuse of Verses About the Bible Being “With Them”

You quote verses such as Qur’an 7:157 and 2:41–101 to claim that Islam affirms the current Torah and Gospel as they exist today.

This is a shallow misreading.

When the Qur’an refers to what is “with them,” it is referring to:

The original revelations that existed among them

Remnants of truth still preserved amidst corruption

> Qur’an 2:79 explicitly says:
“So woe to those who write the Scripture with their own hands, then say, ‘This is from Allah.’”

It is not a contradiction to say the Qur’an confirms the original Torah and Gospel and simultaneously rejects the current corrupt versions. Your Bible includes anonymous authors, editorial insertions, contradictory accounts, and centuries of redaction—all documented by Christian scholarship itself (see Bart Ehrman, “Misquoting Jesus”).

So your question, “When were the scriptures distorted?” is like asking when milk became sour—it spoils over time.

Historical clues:

The Council of Nicaea (325 CE): major doctrinal decisions on the divinity of Jesus.

The Synod of Laodicea (4th century): canon formation, many books excluded.

Gospel authors are anonymous; earliest complete manuscripts are centuries after Jesus.

Ask your own scholars about textual corruption (e.g., interpolated endings in Mark, the Johannine Comma, etc.). Your demand for a “date stamp” on distortion is a red herring.

🔹 2. The Fallacy About Confirming the Scriptures = Approving All Their Content

You commit a category error by assuming that the Qur’an “confirming” the scriptures means affirming all of their current content. This is false.

“Tasdiq” (تَصْدِيق) in Qur’anic Arabic means to affirm the truth that remains and expose deviations. Qur’an 5:48 says:

> “And We have revealed to you the Book in truth, confirming what came before it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it...”

If the Qur’an is a criterion, it judges, not blindly affirms.

Your assumption is like saying:

> “If a teacher confirms a student’s original essay had value, he must affirm every later edit and forgery made to it.”

This is simply illogical.

🔹 3. Jibrīl (Gabriel) as the Holy Spirit – You Ignored the Qur’anic Evidence

You ignored direct Qur’anic evidence equating Rūḥ al-Qudus with Jibrīl:

Qur’an 2:97: “Say, whoever is an enemy to Gabriel—for he is the one who brings it (the Qur’an) down...”

Qur’an 16:102: “Say, the Holy Spirit has brought it down from your Lord…”

Same task, same revelation, same role = same identity.

Your childish mockery (“So Allah doesn’t understand Arabic?”) shows desperation, not argumentation. You quote Genesis 1:2 about “the Spirit of God,” but fail to prove it is a distinct divine person. Where does Genesis say, “The Spirit is co-equal and co-eternal with God and deserves worship”? Answer: Nowhere.

Your theology is retroactively injected into the text, just like your forced Trinitarian readings into ambiguous verses.

🔹 4. Your Challenge: “Show One Prophet Who Called the Holy Spirit an Angel”

Here’s your logical trap: you assume that if no prophet called the Holy Spirit an angel explicitly, it cannot be true.

Where did Moses, Jesus, or David explicitly say: “The Holy Spirit is God”?

> Give a verse where any prophet says: “Worship the Holy Spirit.”

You won't find it. That’s why your standard fails you.

Islam is not bound to Jewish or Christian post-biblical definitions. Gabriel is called the Spirit in Christian apocryphal texts too. Moreover, if the Qur’an clearly names the Holy Spirit as Gabriel, your appeal to what Jewish rabbis or early Christians thought is irrelevant to Islam.

🔹 5. You Mock “Harmless Religious Practices”

You continue to beat a strawman.

No Muslim said the Prophet ﷺ copied theological beliefs from the People of the Book. Sahih al-Bukhari 5917 refers to harmless customs, like hairstyles—not divine doctrines. Your attempt to conflate imitation of neutral customs with doctrinal borrowing is logically laughable.

Also, mocking traditions like “Torment of the Grave” ignores the fact that this is found in authentic hadith, not fabricated legends. If you want to debate hadith authenticity, come with proper isnād analysis, not rhetorical jabs.

🔹 6. The “Best of Deceivers” Canard

You dishonestly twist Qur’an 3:54 (makr) as “deceit.”

> Makr in Arabic = strategic planning in response to the enemy’s schemes.

God foils plots of plotters. If you call that “deception,” then your Bible should be condemned too:

Ezekiel 14:9: “If a prophet is deceived, I the Lord have deceived that prophet.”

2 Thessalonians 2:11: “God sends them a powerful delusion…”

Your double standard is exposed. You mock makr in Islam but ignore deceit attributed to God in your Bible.

🔹 7. “Qur’an Says No One Can Change Allah’s Words” – Another Misuse

When the Qur’an says:

> “None can change His words” (6:115, 10:64),

It refers to His decrees and promises, not the integrity of past scriptures preserved in human hands.

Even your Bible says:

> “The scribes have lied” (Jeremiah 8:,
“How can you say, ‘We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD,’ when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?”

So do you reject Jeremiah too?

🔹 8. Your Final Fallacy: “If the Bible Contradicts the Qur’an, the Qur’an Must Be False”

That is absurd logic.

By that same logic:

Judaism proves Christianity false—since Jews reject your Trinitarian doctrines.

Hindus could claim your rejection of reincarnation proves your religion false.

Contradiction does not mean falsity—unless you first prove the authority of your source. Islam does not grant the Bible that authority in its current form.

You must first demonstrate:

That your current Bible is unaltered

That Jesus taught the Trinity

That the Holy Spirit is a divine person co-equal with God

You’ve proven none of these—just repeated slogans and mockery.

✅ Final Response:

Your replies are full of:

Fallacious arguments (appeal to consensus, strawmen, red herrings)

Mockery and sarcasm in place of serious theology

Scriptural misreadings and forced Christian dogma

Islam does not need reinterpretation—you need intellectual consistency. The Qur’an remains internally coherent, linguistically unmatched, and theologically unshaken by shallow polemics.

If you wish to continue, I suggest you elevate your discourse. Otherwise:

> “To you your religion, and to me mine.” (Qur’an 109:6)

May the truth prevail.

TenQ:
1. You seem not to have the foggiest understanding of what you even mean by the words metaphysics and ontology
2. Your lack of comprehension is seriously evident by your statement
You said:
In Islam, the soul and body are distinct but not contradictory aspects of human existence.
According to your understanding, in christianity, is the soul and body not distinct but contradictory aspects of human existence.

You made a confused statement like:
> You equate the metaphysical composition of humans (soul and body) with the contradictory divine-human nature you attribute to Jesus
No sir,
I gave you statements like'
Duality of Soul and Body being ONE and the same even though having two different natures
THEN
the Duality of WORD and Jesus being ONE and the same even though having two different natures

But your lack of sincerity made you see exactly whatever you wanted to see!


You did NOT answer my question, you only glossed around it and then convincing yourself that you have answered it.

Let me rephrase if you don't understand:
1a. What is the Name of the IDENTITY of the Person (Body of Moses) in the Grave?
1b. What is the Name of the IDENTITY of the Person (Soul of Moses) in Paradise?

2a. What is the Name of the IDENTITY of the (non physical Quran) Kalām Allāh from the Umm al-Kitab in paradise?
2a. What is the Name of the IDENTITY of the (physical Quran) on Earth of the Kalām Allāh from the Umm al-Kitab in paradise?

Please don't beat around the bush


Your ignorance (sorry for the language) is like that of an uneducated illiterate screaming on top of his lungs repeatedly asking the question "show me the HIV virus on my plate!".

Have you been able to explain how Moses was fully dead (on earth) BUT also fully alive in paradise?
Have you been able to explain how the Quran (on earth) is perishable and with a date of BUT also uncreated/eternal?

These above are your supposed LOGICAL contradictions!

if you don't even understand your deen, how can you understand someone else's doctrine!
SMH!!



So, according to Islamic theology
When Moses died, His Body Died AND His soul Died!?
This willful ignorance was why you couldn't respond to a direct question with a simple YES or NO answer.

I asked:
> "When the Word became human, did the Father and Spirit also become human?"
The Question is exactly like
When Moses body died, did Moses Soul also die?


See how you wave aside the implication of the wave-particle duality
If I get you correctly the characteristic properties of a wave and the characteristic property of particulate matter are exactly the same and NOT contradictory.

I see, that yours is wilful ignorance
I am convinced that you are a Denialist at heart as you combine and obstinate, unreasonable, dogmatic, partiality to plain doctrines.
The Truth is not important to people like you.




As Christians, we see that Allah by the Reason of the Taoheed cannot be God the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth because he lacks the Characteristics of YHWH
Allah is NOT Omnipresent:
Allah is a subset of the Universe as Air is above and below him. A subset of the universe can not be omnipresent. Muslims agree that Allah is on the top of the seven heavens which is above the seven earths. Allah has to descend from his throne to even get close to our lowest heaven thus leaving his throne behind empty

Allah is NOT Omniscient:
Allah says Dhul Qarnayn saw the setting place of the sun and he even met a people there. Women have reproductive fluids coming from their Taraib (ترائب). As far as Allah is concerned, hail stones are cut from mountains of ice in the sky. Even the stars are missiles to chase the Jinn to prevent them from eavesdropping on Allah (muslims have not explained how they would pass through the seven gates to reach where they can listen to Allah). Allah's historical records in the Quran are not above the level of the knowledge of an uneducated Arab man of the 6th century. Allah doesn't even know if the destiny of a boy is to die as a young boy or to become a mushrik at adulthood. Allah does not even sure of the pronunciation of Abraham in the Quran.

Allah is NOT Omnipotent:
Allah doesn't even have the power to be somewhere and everywhere at the same time. Allah cannot enter what he calls his creation. Allah couldn't even make Mohammed perform a single miracle. Allah couldn't say the sequence by which he created the universe without getting it wrong.

Allah is NOT YHWH:
Allah claims that he is YHWH the God of the Christians and Muslims. Unfortunately, from his 99 names, none of the names is YHWH. It was a blessing that the Jews do not call God their Father by Name: if not, Mohammed would have put it inside the Quran.
YHWH disciplines His prophets when they commit sins: Allah justifies the Sins of his Messenger:
Moses was punished for Adultery and Murder, Solomon was punished for Idolatry, Samson was Punished, Eli was punished, King Saul was punished. How about Allah? He arranged how Mohammed married the Wife (Zainab) of his Adopted son (Zaid): Allah thereafter cancelled adoption just to legalise this sin so that every muslim man can marry the wife of their adopted son. Allah gave the ordinance of Mutah and halal prostitution to Muslims which Mohmmed later (out of shame) abrogated.

The paradise of Allah is different from the Paradise of YHWH:
In the paradise of YHWH, Jesus said people do NOT marry just like Angels don't get married. Allah and his prophet promises marriages, brotels, endless orgies where you will drink as much as you want without getting intoxicated. Allah women from Hell whose qualification is that they have nice front and inside (I pity women who are not well endowed) who enter hell fire as they have no escape.


God back to YHWH, the God of the Real Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
God back to the God who doesn't give excuses but backs up his prophets with His power and presence




Using your Claim:
Satanist worship one God and his name is satan. He is just one person and simple to understand.
For satanists: One indivisible God — whose name is Satan (Iblis).
No incarnation, no death of Satan, no logical paradox.
Clear metaphysical categories, consistent with reason and revelation.

See how Alike you Muslims are with worshippers of Iblis

Your response is not only logically incoherent but laced with juvenile mockery and theological ignorance masquerading as cleverness. You confuse verbosity for reasoning, sarcasm for scholarship, and polemics for precision. Let’s strip away the noise and face your theological and philosophical failures point by point.

📌 1. You Still Don’t Understand the Argument — and Repetition Isn’t a Refutation

You have once again repeated your flawed analogy between the soul/body duality and the divine/human duality — despite it being thoroughly dismantled. You falsely assume that two complementary components (soul and body) in a created being can serve as an analogy for a logical contradiction in God’s essential attributes.

Let me spell this out for you one more time — slowly:

A soul can be immortal.

A body can be mortal.

These are not contradictions because they belong to different parts of the same human.

But what you claim about Jesus is that one single, unified person (not two beings) is:

Fully omniscient and ignorant at the same time

Fully immortal and mortal at the same time

Fully untemptable and tempted at the same time

This is not metaphysical complexity. It is a logical contradiction.

You claim the “Word became flesh.” Fine. Now answer: Did the divine Word lose divine attributes when it became flesh or not? If yes, then it was no longer fully God. If no, then it possessed contradictory attributes at once — which violates the law of non-contradiction.

You’re not answering the critique. You’re dodging it with false analogies and circular logic.

🔄 2. Your "Name Game" Questions Are Linguistic Red Herrings

You ask:

> What is the name of the soul of Moses in paradise?

> What is the name of the body of Moses in the grave?

The answer is obvious and already given: Moses. It’s one person with two components, each with different properties. But again, no contradiction arises unless you claim his body is both dead and alive in the same respect, which no Muslim does.

The same applies to the Qur'an:

The eternal Qur’an is the uncreated speech of Allah (Kalām Allāh).

The physical mushaf is a temporal medium that contains that speech in a created form.

Different manifestations, not contradictions. You’re confusing ontology (what something is in essence) with modality (how something appears or is transmitted). That’s your failure — not ours.

🚫 3. Your Quantum Analogy Still Doesn’t Work

Wave-particle duality does not teach that something is fully a wave and fully a particle at the same time in the same respect. It describes how subatomic entities display different properties depending on how they are observed.

That’s not a contradiction. That’s conditional behavior — which respects logic. Your Christology, however, violates the law of identity and non-contradiction.

You’re trying to justify metaphysical nonsense with scientific uncertainty. That’s intellectual laziness.

🔥 4. You’ve Resorted to Mockery Because You’ve Run Out of Reason

You call me a "denialist", accuse me of being “uneducated,” and liken Muslims to “Satanists.” This is pure emotional deflection. It is a clear admission that you cannot answer the contradiction posed in your own doctrine, so you resort to petulant sarcasm and pseudo-theological insults.

But fine — let’s return the favor, with substance.

⚔️ 5. You Attack Islam with Fallacies, Lies, and Fabricated Theology

Let’s demolish your points, one by one:

❌ “Allah is not omnipresent”

Correct — in Islamic theology, Allah is not inside creation. That’s not a weakness. That’s transcendence.

Unlike your god, who allegedly entered the womb of a woman, came out of her private parts, and was crucified by his own creation — our God is not bound by space, time, or flesh. He knows all things, hears all things, and is near without being physically “inside” creation.

That’s called divine perfection, not limitation.

❌ “Allah is not omniscient”

Your claims here are misinterpretations and distortions.

The sun “setting in a muddy spring” is the perceptual description in the story of Dhul Qarnayn — not a scientific claim.

The “tara’ib” issue is a misreading of Arabic grammar — and has been refuted by scholars for centuries.

Hail from the sky and stars as missiles? These are metaphors describing cosmic phenomena, not physics textbooks.

You think you’re making theological critiques, but you're just regurgitating orientalist misunderstandings that have been refuted in every serious tafsir.

Meanwhile, your own God didn’t know the fig season (Mark 11:13), claimed mustard seeds are the smallest seeds (which is false), and allegedly created light before the sun. Take the plank out of your own eye.

❌ “Allah is not omnipotent”

This is ironic. According to Christianity:

God died on a cross, cried on the cross, and begged to be saved.

God cannot forgive without blood.

God was powerless to send down a scripture without making Himself a human.

That’s impotence — not power.

Meanwhile, Allah says:
“When He wills a thing, He says to it, ‘Be!’ and it is.” (Qur'an 36:82)

No need to incarnate. No need to suffer. No need to die.

🚮 6. Your Attacks on Prophet Muhammad ﷺ Are Blasphemous and Ignorant

Let’s clarify:

Zayd’s divorce was initiated by him, and the marriage to Zaynab was by divine command to abolish pre-Islamic taboos — not justify sin.

Temporary marriage (mut'ah) was permissible for a time, then abrogated — that’s called gradual legislation, not “halal prostitution.”

As for “paradise with orgies” — that’s your vulgar mind talking. The pleasures of Jannah are beyond your comprehension. The Prophet ﷺ said:
“No eye has seen, no ear has heard, and no heart has imagined what Allah has prepared…”

You ridicule what you don’t understand.

✅ Islamic Tawḥīd vs. Christian Contradiction

Let’s compare:

Islamic Monotheism:

One God.

Absolute oneness.

No contradictions.

No death of God.

No divine ignorance.

No humiliation of the Creator by His own creation.

Christian Trinitarianism:

Three “persons” but one essence (which no one can define).

God dies.

God weeps.

God gets tempted.

God doesn’t know the Hour.

God is hungry and whipped by Roman soldiers.

Then you say this is “the truth.”

You’ve taken Greek metaphysics, baptized it in confusion, and called it revelation.

🧠 Final Challenge: Can You Defend Christology with Logic?

> How can Jesus be fully God and fully man without violating the law of non-contradiction?

You’ve dodged this question repeatedly.

No amount of rhetorical noise will help you until you answer it. So I challenge you again:

Is Jesus omniscient or not?

Is he mortal or not?

Is he subject to temptation or not?

Pick a side — because claiming “both at once” is not theology. It’s intellectual suicide.

Return to the truth of pure monotheism.

One indivisible God.

Eternal.

All-Knowing.

All-Powerful.

Above His creation.

Free of contradiction.

This is Tawḥīd. This is Islam. This is reason aligned with revelation.

Now, unless you have a logical, coherent, and respectful answer to the contradiction within Christology — spare us the mockery and emotional theatrics.

Because theology is not a circus, and truth is not served by noise.

QuinQ:
Thanks for your polite response.
For the sake of brevity and to not type too much I've tried NOT to repeat things I already said elsewhere or say things that should be obvious. But I see that doesn't really work.

So I'll instead use an analogy from Quantum Mechanics. In QM a particle is able to appear on the other side (pass through) a barrier it can't possibly pass through. Now, it can't possibly pass through the barrier BUT it did pass through it. We don’t come and use Bible and Quiran and logic to say it didn't pass through the barrier. We can ONLY say we don't fully understand what's going on.

Likewise with Christ, we start with the certainty that he is God, the Son of God, based on EVIDENCE - same way we started with the certainty that the particle passed through the barrier based on evidence.

The only way you can "prove" the particle didn’t pass through the barrier is to deny that it happened. Likewise, the only way you can "prove" Jesus is NOT God is by saying the Bible is false or is made-up. You can't accept that Bible is true and at same time try to use etremely limited human logic to say Christ is NOT God - because his being God is based on evidence NOT logic!

Just as the case in QM, you can’t say something didn't happen because it can't. The fact is, it DID happen. God DID come to earth. The fact that your extremely limited human logic tells you it could not have happened does not mean it did not happen!

Thank you once again for your response.
I appreciate your attempt to use an analogy from quantum mechanics to address the perceived paradoxes in Christian theology. However, with respect, your analogy—while imaginative—is flawed both in scope and category. Let me explain why, and respond directly to the claims you’ve made:

1. Category Error: Physics ≠ Theology

Quantum tunneling, as observed in quantum mechanics, describes a physical phenomenon occurring under specific probabilistic laws of subatomic behavior. It is not a logical contradiction, even if it defies classical intuition.

Physicists do not say:

> “A particle is in two logically opposite states at once (e.g., dead and alive in the same sense)”
They say:
“Our classical intuitions don't apply at quantum scales, but the event remains mathematically consistent within a testable framework.”

Now compare that to Trinitarian claims:

God is immortal and died.

God is omniscient and grew in knowledge.

God is unchanging and took on a new nature.

These are not merely counterintuitive—they are internally contradictory if taken literally in the same sense at the same time.

So the analogy to quantum mechanics misrepresents the nature of the contradiction. A mystery is not the same as a logical impossibility. One is unknown; the other is incoherent.

2. Evidence Cannot Justify Logical Absurdity

You said:

> “We start with the certainty that Jesus is God based on evidence.”

This raises an important question: What kind of evidence?

If the evidence you cite is scriptural, then we must ask: Does that scripture consistently and clearly teach the divinity of Jesus, without contradiction?

But even if one claims to have overwhelming textual evidence, it still does not resolve the issue. For example:

If someone says,

> “Here is strong textual evidence that 2+2=5,”
we do not accept the conclusion simply because it’s “evidenced.” We test it against logic and coherence.

Likewise, if a text asserts that God is both mortal and immortal, both omniscient and ignorant, both all-powerful and subject to death, we must ask whether the conclusion is logically tenable, not merely whether it's “claimed.”

Your assertion that logic is too “limited” to test such claims is self-defeating. Because your very appeal to “evidence” requires the use of logic to assess it.

If human logic is truly too limited to assess the claim “Jesus is God,” then you cannot also use human logic to argue that the “evidence” proves it.

3. We Must Distinguish Mystery from Incoherence

It is not arrogance to test theological claims with reason—it is essential. God, in all monotheistic traditions, is the author of both revelation and reason. To suspend one in favor of the other is to divide what God has unified.

Islam does not claim full knowledge of God's essence, but it affirms what God has revealed about Himself:

> “There is nothing like unto Him.” (Qur’an 42:11)

That is not speculation—it is revelation. And that revelation creates a logical boundary:

If God is eternal, He does not die.

If God is self-sufficient, He does not hunger.

If God is all-knowing, He does not grow in knowledge.

To say otherwise is to affirm contradictions—not mysteries.

4. A False Dilemma: Deny the Bible or Accept Contradiction

You stated:

> “The only way you can prove Jesus is not God is by denying the Bible.”

Respectfully, this is a false dilemma.

I do not have to deny every verse of the Bible to reject the doctrine of the Trinity or Jesus’s divinity. I can:

Recognize that the Bible contains authentic teachings of past prophets,

Acknowledge that it has undergone textual evolution and human interpretation,

And conclude that certain later theological claims—such as the full divinity of Christ—are not part of the original message of monotheism.

The Qur’an confirms earlier revelations but also corrects distortions introduced by people over time:

> “They distort the words from their places…” (Qur’an 5:13)

Thus, Islam neither rejects all of the Bible nor blindly accepts later theological innovations that contradict the message of pure monotheism taught by all prophets.

5. Conclusion: Faith Must Be Reasonable

Let me summarize respectfully:

Quantum mechanics describes physical mysteries—not logical contradictions.

Appealing to evidence does not override logic—it must be consistent with it.

Mystery does not license incoherence.

Faith in God does not require suspension of reason—it invites its use.

If the claim “Jesus is God” leads to a collapse of logical categories, then it is not the mystery that needs defending—but the claim itself that needs re-examination.

Islam teaches:

> “Say: He is Allah, [who is] One.
Allah, the Eternal Refuge.
He neither begets nor is born,
Nor is there to Him any equivalent.” (Qur’an 112:1–4)

That is not irrational simplicity—it is divine clarity.

Let us continue our discussion not by dismissing reason, but by honoring the very faculty God gave us to seek the truth.

TenQ:
So, why do you adopt their scriptures but reject it at the same time.
Isn't it because Islam is contrary to the reports of the prophets you claim you believe?

Islam believes in 144,000 prophets but all the ones you know by name are the ones mentioned in the scriptures of the Jews and the Christians.

There are just TWO views of the Holy Spirit by Jews, Christians and Jehovah's witnesses
1. That the Holy Spirit is the Divine Power of God manifested in His Presence
2. That the Holy Spirit is God Himself

In rabbinic tradition, the Holy Spirit, also known as "Ruach ha-Kodesh," is understood as a divine attribute or power, not a separate person or entity, like in Christian theology. It's viewed as a manifestation of God's presence, enabling individuals to prophesy or experience spiritual insight. In some rabbinic interpretations, the Holy Spirit is used as a metonym for God, signifying His presence and power.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Spirit_in_Judaism

Not ONE of the Monotheistic Religion see the Holy Spirit as an Angel. It is a Blasphemous ERROR in Islam that an Angel is the Holy Spirit

If you still feel that this is an overgeneralization, then I challenge you to present just one disagreement amoungs t the Jews or Christians on this.



Oh, I see, Islam is clearly independent

Sahih al-Bukhari 5917
Narrated Ibn `Abbas:
The Prophet used to copy the people of the Scriptures in matters in which there was no order from Allah. The people of the Scripture used to let their hair hang down while the pagans used to part their hair. So the Prophet (ﷺ) let his hair hang down first, but later on he parted it.


Speaking about removing the ladder you used after climbing the stairs.


There is no justification for bad grammar!
Why is it that you are quick to come to the defence of Allah whenever he speaks?
Doesn't Allah speak perfect grammar?

How do we even know if the spirit in question is NOT Jesus: was Jesus not explicitly said to be a Spirit from Allah?
How many Spirits do you know in Islam?


If Mohammed and Allah do not know what the spirit is, would it be you that know what it is?




Let us assume that all the prophets meant that the Holy SPirit was not God Himself BUT He is the Manifest Presence of God's Power or the divine attribute or metonym for God, rather than a distinct entity.

Is this an Angel?


So, Jibril was part of creating the Universe?
You don't understand that to cover your doctrinal failures, you have to invent many things!
LOL!


You give the dumbest response to my questions (Im sorry, its not supposed to be an insult but I lack better words) and you think they are good answers to the questions.

Like I said:
If Allah speaks and Mohammed Speaks, do you think both are bad communicators that require you to re-interpret what has been said clearly?

Like I said: Allah guarantees you hell fire (at least temporarily) but you think he means otherwise. Allah says that he is the best of the deceivers, but you interpreted it to mean that Allah guides you. If your aim is to find the truth, the same Jewish prophets you despise their words, you have to look at it
WHY!
Allah says that "He revealed our Scriptures AND our scriptures are with us" unfortunately, the Quran contradicts our scriptures.
thus you have a dilemma

If Islam is TRUE about our Scripture, then Islam is FALSE for our Scriptures contradict Islam.
On this falsehood you hold your doctrine.

If Jesus came indeed to be our Ransom from Hell Fire, you are in serious trouble.
If there exist just one lie or falsehood or error in the Quran, it cannot be from God!

Thank you again for your response. However, your latest message reflects a shift from substantive dialogue to polemical rhetoric and ridicule. For a fruitful exchange, I invite you to return to clear, logically sound reasoning and respectful engagement. I will now address your objections systematically.

1. “Why Adopt Their Scriptures but Reject Them?” – A Misframing

Islam does not “adopt” the scriptures of the Jews and Christians. It affirms that previous revelations were originally divine (e.g., the Torah and the Injīl) but have been corrupted or altered over time (Qur'an 2:79, 5:13). The Qur’an explicitly claims to confirm what remains true and correct what has been distorted (Qur’an 5:48).

> Claiming that Islam must fully agree with today’s Jewish or Christian texts to be legitimate is like arguing Christianity is false because it doesn't conform to Judaism.
This is a category error.

You also cited the number of prophets (124,000) and asked why most known by name are also mentioned in Judeo-Christian scriptures. The answer is simple:

> The Qur’an states that some prophets are named, and many are not (Qur’an 40:78).
Islam’s naming of past prophets is not “borrowing” but affirmation of true prophethood where it occurred—while rejecting theological distortions that evolved afterward.

2. Misunderstanding the Nature of Revelation

Your citation of Sahih al-Bukhari 5917 about the Prophet ﷺ following certain customs of the People of the Book is unrelated to theological doctrine. It concerns non-religious social customs, such as hair styles, which Islam neither prohibits nor mandates unless divine command exists.
Copying a harmless cultural practice is not equivalent to theological borrowing.

This analogy fails logically and theologically.

3. “Not One Monotheistic Religion Sees the Holy Spirit as an Angel” – Argument from Consensus Fallacy

You argue:

> “No monotheistic religion sees the Holy Spirit as an angel. Therefore, Islam is wrong.”

This is a fallacious appeal to consensus (argumentum ad populum).
Truth is not determined by popularity or the number of religions agreeing on a point. Otherwise:

The Trinity would be false, since Judaism unanimously rejects it.

Christianity’s divinization of Jesus would be invalid, since both Jews and Muslims reject it.

Furthermore, Islam is not Judaism 2.0 nor Christianity 1.5. It is a separate, final revelation. You are insisting Islam conform to a Judeo-Christian consensus while simultaneously defending doctrines Judaism rejects—which is a contradiction in your own method.

4. Islamic Identification of the Holy Spirit as Jibrīl (Gabriel) Is Scripturally and Linguistically Sound

You never addressed the actual textual correlation I provided:

Qur’an 2:97 — Jibrīl brought down the Qur’an

Qur’an 16:102 — Rūḥ al-Qudus brought it down

These are not ambiguous metaphorical references. They are direct and consistent. In Arabic grammar and Qur’anic context, Jibrīl is identified as Rūḥ al-Qudus.

Rejecting this without any refutation of the semantic, textual, and exegetical basis is not a rebuttal—it is dismissal.

5. “Is the Spirit Not Jesus?” – A Misconstrual

You ask: “Was Jesus not called a spirit from Allah?”

Yes, the Qur’an calls Jesus “Rūḥun minhu” (a Spirit from Him) (Qur’an 4:171).
This does not mean Jesus is the Holy Spirit. The phrase means Jesus was created by God's command, as was Adam, and given a spirit from Him, just as all humans are (Qur’an 15:29, 32:9).

The phrase “spirit from God” does not imply divinity or identity with the Holy Spirit. It refers to origin and divine creation—not essence.

6. “How Many Spirits Are There?” – Equivocation Fallacy

You conflate different uses of the word “spirit” (Arabic: rūḥ) without distinction:

Human spirit: The soul breathed into man (Qur’an 32:9)

Revelatory agent: Jibrīl, also called Rūḥ al-Qudus

Jesus: Described as a “spirit from God” in a metaphysical, not ontological, sense.

> Just as “word” in the Bible has various meanings (e.g., God’s speech, Jesus as the Logos, or ordinary speech), “spirit” in Arabic and scripture also has contextual meanings.
Failing to distinguish these is a category mistake.

7. Qur’an 17:85 – What Does “You Know Not About the Spirit” Mean?

You mockingly state: “If Mohammed and Allah do not know what the Spirit is, would it be you that know?”

That’s a gross misreading. The verse does not say Muhammad ﷺ does not know the Spirit’s identity, only that its full metaphysical nature is beyond human comprehension.

Likewise, you don’t claim to know the full nature of God’s essence—but that doesn’t mean you know nothing about Him. This is an epistemological distinction between:

Identification (what something is called)

Essence (what something is in full metaphysical nature)

8. “Was Jibrīl Involved in Creation?” – A Strawman

You ask sarcastically: “So Jibril was part of creating the universe?”

Nowhere does Islam claim this. Jibrīl is a servant of God who delivers revelation—not a co-creator or divine power.

This is like saying the postman wrote the letter he delivered. It's a false attribution of divine agency to an angelic intermediary.

9. “Allah Is the Best of Deceivers” – Out-of-Context Polemic

This is a frequently debunked polemical attack. The Arabic word used is makr, which refers to strategic planning or counter-planning, especially against the plots of enemies.

God “deceives” only deceivers—those who scheme against the truth (Qur’an 3:54). The same applies in the Bible:

> “With the pure You show Yourself pure, and with the crooked You make Yourself seem tortuous.” (Psalm 18:26)

Your objection reflects a misunderstanding of classical Arabic idiom.

10. Final Logical Fallacy: “If Our Scriptures Contradict the Qur’an, Then the Qur’an Is False”

This is your closing assertion:

> “If Islam is TRUE about our Scripture, then Islam is FALSE, for our Scriptures contradict Islam.”

This is a false dilemma. Islam does not affirm the current text of the Bible as fully preserved. It accuses your scriptures of:

Corruption (taḥrīf) in content

Omission and addition

Misinterpretation of symbols and prophecy

So, if your scripture today contradicts the Qur’an, it is not Islam that is internally inconsistent—it is your assumption that your scripture has remained unaltered.

✅ Conclusion:

Your response was not a logical rebuttal but a series of:

Fallacies (appeals to consensus, false dilemmas, category mistakes)

Misreadings of Islamic scripture

Mockery and emotionally charged language, not rational refutation

Once again, I invite you to focus on sincere, rational engagement, not rhetorical jabs. If you reject the Qur’anic view, do so based on a coherent argument, not selective outrage.

> “Say, O People of the Scripture, do not exaggerate in your religion beyond the truth, and do not follow the inclinations of people who went astray before.”
(Qur’an 5:77)

If you're willing to continue respectfully and rationally, I am open. If not, I leave you with:

> "To you your religion, and to me mine." (Qur’an 109:6)

May God guide us all to the truth.

QuinQ:
Thanks for your polite abd erudite response.
This is really a VERY simple matter that doesn't require too much talk. You try to confuse it by throwing in Bible and Quiran and Church fathers, etc.
Here's a succinct summary of it.
We know something must have created us. That something we call God. That God exists in a different dimension that is totally beyond our comprehension (hence "one God" to us may not necessarily be same as "one God" over there). Beyond these we have no way of knowing the full nature of this God. We MUST believe Jesus Christ is God if we believe those things in OT written about him and things said and done by him. This is so because we don't have the capacity to formulate an argument against it being so!
You keep talking of contradiction, you can’t say something is contradiction when 1) you don't know what it is supposed to be contradicting 2) You really don't know exactly what's going on

Thank you again for your response. I appreciate the attempt at simplicity, but I must respectfully point out that oversimplification—especially in theology—can obscure rather than clarify.

Let me respond directly and clearly to the core of your argument:

1. Appealing to Mystery Does Not Eliminate Contradiction

You say that we cannot speak of contradiction because we “don’t know exactly what’s going on.” But this approach confuses mystery with incoherence.

Let me illustrate:

It is one thing to say we do not fully comprehend God's essence.

It is another to say God became mortal, ignorant, and died, while still being immortal, all-knowing, and eternal—at the same time.

These two sets of qualities are not merely mysterious—they are mutually exclusive. A being cannot logically be all-knowing and ignorant, eternal and mortal, self-sufficient and in need, all in the same sense and at the same time.

This is not a matter of "not knowing what's going on." This is a matter of logical coherence. [b]A square cannot also be a circle. [/b]And claiming that it is so “in another dimension” is not an explanation—it’s an evasion.

2. You Cannot Claim Knowledge and Deny It at the Same Time

Your argument contains a deep contradiction. You say:

> “We have no way of knowing the full nature of this God.”

Yet you also say:

> “We MUST believe Jesus Christ is God.”

But if we “have no way of knowing,” then you cannot also claim certainty about Jesus’s divinity. One cannot affirm a claim while denying the epistemological tools necessary to verify it.

You’re effectively saying:

“We don’t know what God is, or what divinity means, but we do know Jesus is divine.”

This is not humility. It is selective reasoning—asserting divine mystery when challenged, and certainty when convenient.

3. True Simplicity Does Not Mean Ignoring Reason

You mentioned that this is a “VERY simple matter.” Simplicity, however, does not mean ignoring complexity where it genuinely exists. The question of God's nature is not a trivial one—it is central to all theology.

If I were to say:

> “God cannot be three persons in one because that's contradictory—case closed.”

You would likely accuse me of dismissing too quickly, and rightly so. But when you say:

> “Jesus is God because we can’t argue otherwise—end of story,”

That is not a reasoned defense. That is intellectual resignation.

4. Islamic Consistency: Transcendence Without Absurdity

Islam does not claim to fully comprehend God. But it does affirm that God is:

Absolutely One—not composed of persons or parts

Eternal—not subject to time or death

Self-sufficient—not in need of food, rest, or protection

This is not speculative philosophy. It is what God Himself revealed. The Qur’an asserts:

> “There is nothing like unto Him.” (Qur’an 42:11)

This gives us a standard to test claims about God. If someone claims that God became a man, was tired, bled, and died, then we are not being arrogant to say: [/b]this contradicts what we know of God’s revealed nature.

5. Conclusion: Mystery Cannot Override Logic

Let me summarize the issue with clarity:

You claim we must accept that Jesus is God because we lack the capacity to reject it.

[b]But if we lack that capacity, then we also lack the capacity to affirm it.

Therefore, your argument defeats itself.

Appealing to mystery cannot justify accepting what contradicts God’s revealed attributes. True faith is not belief in logical contradictions, but trust in what is consistent with both revelation and reason.

So again, I say respectfully:

If Jesus was born, limited, and subject to death—then he cannot be the eternal, unlimited, immortal God.

That is not confusion. That is coherence.

Let us continue our discussion with sincerity—but let us do so without hiding contradiction behind the veil of mystery.

QuinQ:
Thanks 4 your polite and detailed response.
The problem with your thesis is that you start from a FALSE position. You start with the position that man knows the nature of God, you then present things that contradict that nature. The HONEST, REAL-LIFE position to start with is that man knows almost nothing, talkless of knowing the nature of God. Man, in real-life, practical terms, is almost blind, deaf, doesn't know where he is, doesn't know why he is there, and doesn't even know if he is really there. So you MUST start with the position that we know almost nothing, talkless of the nature of God. So that if things happen as they happened with Christ, we MUST accept that he is indeed God, the Son of God, because we are INCAPABLE of formulating any argument against it, because we know almost nothing, talkless of knowing the nature of God!

Thank you for your reply. I appreciate the tone of sincerity in your response, and I will address your core claim directly.

You argue that my position is false because it begins with an assumption that humans can know something about the nature of God. You then assert that because humans are profoundly limited in knowledge, we are “incapable of formulating any argument” against claims such as the Incarnation.

With respect, I believe this position, while sounding humble, ultimately undermines the foundations of theology itself—Christian or otherwise. Allow me to explain why:

1. Without Some Knowledge of God, Faith Itself Collapses

If we truly know nothing of God’s nature, as you suggest, then we have no basis to say that anything is true or false about Him. That would include:

That God is One

That God is eternal

That God is all-powerful

That God is loving or just

That Jesus is God

If we follow your logic consistently, then we must also admit that we cannot even know whether Jesus is divine—because that would require knowing something about what divinity is. Thus, your argument does not support the Incarnation; it nullifies the very claim that Jesus is divine.

On the contrary, both the Bible and the Qur’an repeatedly call humans to reason and to recognize basic truths about God through reflection and revelation.

> “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord.” (Isaiah 1:18)

> “Do they not reflect?” (Qur’an 88:17)

Therefore, while our knowledge of God is certainly limited, it is not non-existent. We know enough about God—through revelation and reason—to identify contradictions when they arise.

2. Absolute Skepticism Is Self-Defeating

Your position leads to an epistemological contradiction. If humans are too ignorant to judge claims about God, then we are also too ignorant to affirm that Jesus is God.

You said:

> “We must accept that he is indeed God... because we are incapable of formulating any argument against it.”

But if we are incapable of formulating arguments against it, then we are equally incapable of formulating arguments for it. Total ignorance cuts both ways.

This radical skepticism is not a stable foundation for theology—it is a surrender of reason altogether.

3. The Islamic Approach: Affirming Revelation, Not Speculation

Islam affirms that God is beyond full human comprehension—but not beyond all understanding. God has revealed His names and attributes, and they are not arbitrary labels. They are coherent, meaningful, and non-contradictory.

God is not like creation. He is:

Eternal, not born or dying

All-Knowing, not learning or growing

Self-Sufficient, not hungry or in need

These are not “human inventions” or philosophical constructs. They are divinely revealed attributes that even Christian thinkers like Anselm, Augustine, and Aquinas accepted.

So when someone claims, “God became a baby, learned to walk, and died,” we are not being arrogant by asking, “How is that consistent with eternal, self-sufficient divinity?” We are doing exactly what the Bible and Qur’an tell us to do: examine, reflect, and reject contradiction.

4. Faith Is Not Blind Submission to Contradiction

Faith does not mean accepting what contradicts reason. Even in Christian theology, the Church has long used reason to defend doctrines—consider the entire field of Christian apologetics.

To quote C.S. Lewis:

> “Nonsense remains nonsense, even when we talk it about God.”

Islam affirms this approach: God is beyond us, but never absurd. He does not reveal to us that which contradicts His own essence. And if a doctrine requires throwing logic out the window, then it is not humility to accept it—it is confusion mistaken for faith.

5. Conclusion: Humility Requires Discernment, Not Despair

You are right to emphasize human limitation. But from limitation does not follow irrationality. A blind man may not see everything, but he can still recognize the difference between fire and water.

Likewise, we may not grasp the fullness of God, but we can still affirm what God has clearly told us: that He is One, Eternal, Absolute—and that He does not become flesh, suffer, and die.

The Qur’an offers this clarity:

> “There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.”
(Surah Ash-Shura 42:11)

So I repeat my earlier point in a spirit of respect:

If Jesus was ignorant, limited, and mortal—then by definition, he cannot be the eternal, all-knowing, immortal God.

This is not arrogance; this is theological consistency.

Let us continue this dialogue with mutual respect, but let us not hide contradiction behind the veil of mystery.

TenQ:
You speak good English but you seem not to even understand by
1. The phrases Ontological and Metaphysical
2. I hope you meant to say that
I don't know the difference between "Metaphysical Reality" and "Ontological Contradiction" and not that I dont know the difference between "Metaphysical Duality" and "Ontological Contradiction"

Secondly,
Your explanation of the difference between Soul and body in Islam you gave is FALSE.
In Islam
Is the Soul of Moses TRUELY Moses in Islam or not?
Is the Body of Moses TRUELY Moses in Islam or not?

Even though you don't believe in TRINITY of Man, Islam believes in the DUALITY of Man.

If you don't understand this basics, how can you understand the basics of the Trinity of Man or the Trinity of God.



In as much as you cannot respond to the CONTRADICTIONS that
1. Moses could be Dead YET Alive at the same time
2. Moses could be in the Grave on earth YET walking about in Paradise.
3. The Qur'an is Eternal and Uncreated YET has a date of publication and a publisher

If you cannot answer these questions, your repeating your question is borne out of gross ignorance



Your lack of comprehension is obviously affecting you.
1. Was Moses TRUELY buried on earth and is in his grave praying?
2. If the above is TRUE, who then told Mohammed to reduce the prayer time given by Allah from 50?

If both answers about Moses is YES, then your understanding needs help for that is the meaning of Duality of Man (if you reject the Trinity of Man)



Is the Hafs Qur'an, a Quran or not?
If it is Qur'an according to you Muslims, then your arguments are futile.

Do you Muslims allow a woman having her mensuration to touch the Qur'an?
Quran 56:79
"Which none shall touch but those who are clean:"

Is the physical Book the Qur'an or not?

It is the Qur'an sir!

So, my question remains:
If the physical book is the Qur'an , even as a recitation, it has a beginning and can be destroyed.



You have displayed gross ignorance of the subway hand and you are forming knowledge from lack of understanding and misrepresentation of Clear explanations.

At the risk of redundancy,
Let me show you again
a. Moses is at least a duality (as Christians, every human being is a Trinity).
-There is Moses's Physical Identity by which everyone on earth recognises him and by which he interacts with the physical realm. This is Moses's BODY and he is known on Earth as Moses!
- There is Moses's Spiritual Identity by which everyone in paradise recognises him and by which he interacts with the spiritual realm. This is Moses's SOUL and he is known in paradise as Moses!
b. Moses is ONE but he has at least TWO different identities.

Thus, Moses can be dead and Alive at the same time. His Duality makes this not contradictory.

2. According to Muslims, the Qur'an is Kalām Allāh from the Umm al-Kitab in paradise and is eternal and uncreated.
This Quran became a book on earth and you call it the Qur'an. You treat is a the exact words of Allah! You give the book honour by the way you treat is.
It means that
a. The Qur'an is a duality of the Qur'an in paradise and the Qur'an on earth.
b. The Qur'an on earth is not eternal and is created. The Qur'an in paradise is uncreated and eternal.

Thus the physical Qur'an can be destroyed and yet the Qur'an still remains undestroyed.

3. YHWH is ONE Being who exists with the IDENTITY of the Trinity of the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit.
If you like (as an analogy)
*YHWH with the Identity of the Holy Spirit
He is invisible and the whole physical and spiritual universe are within Him. He is Omnipresent identity of God whose power is distributed throughout the Universe
*YHWH with Identity as the Father
He is visible to the Angels in paradise and He presides over the physical and spiritual realm.
*YHWH with the Identity as the Word
He is the manifest presence of God anywhere in Creation. By Him everything was commanded to be. He became human by incarnating and taking up human nature with it's weaknesses.

I have asked you the question before
When Jibril became a perfect man, did he cease being an Angel?
AND
When the Word became Human, should he cease to be the Word?

Phillipias 2:6
"Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage."

Philippians 2:7-8
"But emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross."

Hebrews 4:15
"For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin."



As a test to your sincerity
According to Christians, Moses is ONE Being having the Identities of a Body, a Soul and a Spirit.
BUT For your sake (I will use the dual nature of man: meaning that Moses has a Body and a Soul).

When Moses died,
1. Did Moses Body Die?
2. Did Moses Soul Die?
Is Moses truely Living or Dead?


When the Word put on Limitations, according to the Christian doctrine.
1. Did the Father also put on Limitations?
2. Did the Holy Spirit also put on Limitations?
Did God become Limited or remain Unlimited?

Your answer to this will show if all these discussions is a WASTE of precious time or not


NB:
The fact that you cannot comprehend the Wave-Particle Duality of Matter doesn't make it false. It only shows that you are ignorant.

Thank you for your response. I continue to value interfaith dialogue conducted with sincerity and reason. However, your latest reply, while passionate, unfortunately does not meet the standard of logical clarity required for theological discourse. It primarily reasserts already addressed claims without logically resolving the contradiction I originally posed to your Christology.

Allow me to address your points in order, and then return to the central issue.

📌 1. Category Confusion: Still Not Resolved

You accuse me of “not understanding metaphysics and ontology,” yet you proceed to make the exact same category error I previously highlighted — and have yet to answer:

> You equate the metaphysical composition of humans (soul and body) with the contradictory divine-human nature you attribute to Jesus.

In Islam, the soul and body are distinct but not contradictory aspects of human existence. When the body dies, the soul continues to live in the barzakh. This is not a contradiction, because different properties are attributed to different components (body is mortal; soul is immortal). This is metaphysical duality — not an ontological paradox.

Your Christology, however, proposes something else entirely: that one and the same individual Jesus is both omniscient and ignorant, immortal and mortal, untemptable and tempted — within the same unified person. That is a contradiction in essential attributes, and repeating the example of Moses does not solve this problem. It merely shifts the topic and avoids the original challenge.

🔁 2. Your Argument Is Circular and Repetitive

You have restated the same rhetorical questions:

"Was Moses’ soul Moses or not?"

"Was his body Moses or not?"

"Is the physical Qur'an the Qur’an or not?"

"Can something have two aspects but still be one?"

All of these have already been explicitly answered in my previous message — and you have not addressed those answers with counter-reasoning. You’ve only repeated your questions as if repetition substitutes for argument. It does not.

Let me summarize again for clarity:

Moses is one person. After death, his body is in the grave, and his soul continues to exist in a conscious state. This is the standard metaphysical understanding of life after death — affirmed not just by Islam but by Christianity itself.

The physical mushaf (paper, ink, recitation) is created, while the speech of Allah (Kalām Allāh) is uncreated. The medium is not the essence. The Qur’an is eternal in its essence, not in every form it takes.

You are conflating essence with manifestation — a basic philosophical error.

❗ 3. You Still Have Not Answered the Central Contradiction

Let me return, again, to the core challenge I raised — which you continue to avoid:

> How can Jesus be both fully God and fully man when the attributes of divinity and humanity directly contradict each other?

God is omniscient (all-knowing). Man is limited in knowledge.

God is eternal and immortal. Man is subject to death.

God cannot be tempted (James 1:13). Jesus was tempted (Matthew 4:1).

These are not complementary attributes. They are logically contradictory. Claiming that the "Word took on limitations" does not solve the contradiction — it reasserts it.

If the “Word” became limited, then either:

He ceased to be fully God, which contradicts your claim of “fully God,”
or

He remained fully God while also not having God’s attributes, which is a contradiction in terms.

You quote Philippians 2:6-8 — but those verses only describe the claim of incarnation, not how it avoids logical contradiction. Doctrine must not just be asserted, it must be coherently defended.

🧪 4. Your "Test of Sincerity" Backfires

You ask:

> "Did Moses' body die? Did his soul die? Is Moses alive or dead?"

Answer (from Islamic theology):

His body died, and remains in the grave.

His soul lives in the barzakh.

So, he is dead in the bodily sense but consciously alive in the soul. This is not contradictory because different attributes apply to different components.

You then ask:

> "When the Word became human, did the Father and Spirit also become human?"

If your answer is no, then your theology is fractured: the Word (allegedly God) took on ignorance, hunger, sleep, and death — but the rest of the Godhead did not. That would make God divisible, not one in essence. And if your answer is yes, then the entire Trinity lost divine attributes — which invalidates divinity.

Either way, the contradiction remains unresolved.

📚 5. Your Physics Analogy Fails

You appeal to “wave-particle duality” as if scientific paradoxes justify theological contradictions.

But the wave-particle duality is a model of quantum behavior, not a logical contradiction. It does not claim that something is entirely a wave and entirely a particle in the same respect and sense. It means it displays different properties under different conditions. No law of logic is violated.

By contrast, claiming that a being is fully omniscient and fully ignorant at once violates the law of non-contradiction — and no scientific analogy can rescue that.

✅ Conclusion: Stop Repetition — Address the Real Issue

You are welcome to continue this dialogue, but if it is to be fruitful, it must stop circling around rhetorical distractions. I respectfully ask that you address the core question without repetition or deflection:

> How can Jesus be fully God and fully man without violating the law of non-contradiction, when divinity entails omniscience, immortality, and impassibility — and humanity entails their opposites?

If you cannot resolve this contradiction, then simply restating Islamic beliefs about the soul, the Qur'an, or Moses does not help your case — nor does labeling questions as ignorance when they are in fact logical critiques of your doctrine.

As Muslims, we affirm:

One indivisible God — eternal, omniscient, and perfect.

No incarnation, no death of God, no logical paradox.

Clear metaphysical categories, consistent with reason and revelation.

The Islamic doctrine of Tawḥīd offers clarity, coherence, and the unity of attributes — without contradiction. I again invite you to reflect on that.

TenQ:
Modern Jews do not believe that the Holy Spirit is God as a person but they say that the Holy Spirit is the manifest power of God's presence that creates and inspire the prophets.

My argument is simply this: Can you find any prophet of God apart from Mohammed who thinks the Holy Spirit is a created being like an Angel.

If you cannot find one, we have every reason to reject your Islamic theology as fraudulently wrong.

Do you have any support that Jibril is the Holy Spirit other than Islam?

Do you agree that even to the Jews, the notion that an Angel called Jibril is the Holy Spirit is an insult.

Don't forget that Moses, David, Solomon and Jesus taught about the Holy Spirit and NOWHERE is He less than the Power of the Presence of God Himself.


So, if indeed Jesus was correct about the Holy Spirit, then He cannot be an Angel.
The least you can think of the Holy Spirit is that He cannot be an Angel (if Jesus was correct).

If Jesus was correct about this, Islam is wrong!



I am satisfied with the fact that you admit that such statement is NOT Halal in Islam.
This, if Jesus is correct about this, Islam is false calling Jibril an Angel!



Let me accept your evidence here. Indirectly, the Holy Spirit is Jibril in the Qur'an.




The question was to find out if Jibril was an Angel or not.
If Jibril was an Angel, why did Allah say

Qur'an 78:38
"The Day that the Spirit and the angels will stand in rows, they will not speak except for one whom the Most Merciful permits, and he will say what is correct."

Who is this spirit as Jibril is an Angel?

The day the Senator and the soldiers will stand in rows help us know that the Senator is NOT one of the soldiers!

Islam doesn't know what the Spirit is!


I just flipped your question back to you. I needed categorical statements like you asked me to provide.
Was any of these a direct statement in the Qur'an?




All I have done is to show you that not one prophet agrees with you that the Holy Spirit is an Angel.

The worst interpretation you can give about the Holy Spirit is that He is the Power of God's Presence and not God Himself.

If the Holy Spirit is NOT God BUT the Power of God's presence, tell me How it is Possible that an Angel is the Power of God's presence?

Don't forget, your prophet was asked a simple Question by the Jews. Every Jewish prophet interacted with the Spirit of God as not everyone spoken to by an Angel is a prophet.

Qur’an 17:85
"And they ask you, [O Muhammad], about the Spirit. Say, 'The Spirit is of the affair of my Lord. And mankind has not been given of knowledge except a little.'

If the Spirit was Jibril, Why didn't Allah just reply that the Spirit is Jibril?

Till today, no Muslim knows what the Spirit is: do you!?

Thank you again for your response. However, your reply continues to repeat questions that have already been answered clearly and scripturally. For the sake of clarity, I will respond once more—logically, directly, and with respect. But I also urge you to engage with the actual points raised, rather than recycling objections that have already been addressed.

1. Jewish Views Do Not Define Islam

You continue to assert that Islamic theology must be validated by Jewish or Christian prophetic views. This is categorically false.

Islam has its own revealed framework. Just as you do not subject your Trinitarian beliefs to Jewish theology for approval, I am under no obligation to seek Jewish agreement on Qur’anic terms.

Moreover, your argument is inconsistent:

You argue that the Holy Spirit cannot be an angel because Jewish prophets never described Him as such.

Yet Jews also never taught that the Holy Spirit is a separate divine person, let alone part of a Trinity. So by your own logic, Christianity would be “fraudulent” too.

You are using Jewish theology selectively—when it suits you.

2. The Qur’an Identifies the Holy Spirit as Jibrīl

You said: "Do you have any support that Jibrīl is the Holy Spirit other than Islam?"

This question is irrelevant. Islam is an independent revelation, not a commentary on the Bible. It stands on its own scripture—the Qur’an—and authentic prophetic tradition.

But for the record:

Qur’an 2:97 identifies Jibrīl as the one who brought down the Qur’an.

Qur’an 16:102 says the Holy Spirit brought it down.

These are not metaphorical verses—they speak of the same act of revelation. Basic deduction confirms that Rūḥ al-Qudus = Jibrīl.

Early Islamic scholars—masters of Arabic and Qur’anic exegesis—understood this unanimously.

So yes, the Qur’an does support this identity directly, and no, we don’t need Jewish or Christian approval to affirm it.

3. Misuse of Qur’an 78:38

You claimed that since “the Spirit and the angels” are mentioned separately in Qur’an 78:38, this proves the Spirit is not Jibrīl.

But that is a flawed and superficial reading of the text.

Jibrīl can be referred to by multiple titles: Rūḥ, Rūḥ al-Qudus, Rūḥ al-Amīn, and Malak (angel).

The distinction in Qur’an 78:38 is not ontological (as in different species), but functional—just as we might say “the general and the soldiers stood in rank,” without denying that the general is a soldier in category.

This verse simply highlights Jibrīl’s special role on that Day—it does not contradict his angelic nature.

4. Qur’an 17:85 Does Not Contradict Jibrīl’s Identity

You cite Qur’an 17:85:

> “They ask you concerning the Spirit (al-Rūḥ). Say: The Spirit is of the affair of my Lord...”

This verse does not mean Muslims are clueless about the Spirit’s identity. Rather, it emphasizes that its full nature is beyond human comprehension—just as many metaphysical realities are.

It’s also worth noting:

The verse came in response to Jewish polemic questions, meant to test the Prophet ﷺ.

It affirms that knowledge of al-Rūḥ is a divine affair, not that it is undefined or unknowable.

The Qur’an elsewhere does identify the Rūḥ in the role of revelation—which Jibrīl fulfills.

So this verse does not disprove that Rūḥ = Jibrīl—it simply emphasizes divine discretion over metaphysical matters.

5. No Prophet Called the Holy Spirit an Angel?

You asked:

> “Can you find any prophet apart from Muhammad who called the Holy Spirit an angel?”

That’s a misplaced challenge.

No prophet before Jesus called the Holy Spirit a divine person either.

The Old Testament portrays the Spirit as God’s active force—not as a distinct being or person.

No verse says “the Holy Spirit is God” or “a divine person.”

Likewise, nowhere do earlier prophets mention “God the Son.”

By your own reasoning, then:

> If no prophet before Jesus called the Holy Spirit a divine person, the Trinitarian doctrine must be rejected.

Islam actually preserves the biblical pattern—understanding the Holy Spirit as a means of divine action, not divinity itself.

6. Misusing “Power of God's Presence”

You keep repeating:

> “If the Holy Spirit is the power of God’s presence, how can it be an angel?”

Let me clarify:

In Islamic understanding:

Angels carry out God’s commands.

They are vehicles of divine action, but not divine in themselves.

Saying Jibrīl is the “Holy Spirit” means he is the agent through whom God’s Word is revealed—not that he is the power of God’s being.

Just as Moses split the sea by God’s permission, yet was not divine, Jibrīl delivers God’s Word by His command—not by divine essence.

7. Let Us Not Circle the Same Ground

With respect, you are now:

Repeating already answered questions.

Jumping between Jewish, Christian, and Islamic frameworks inconsistently.

Demanding categorical verses while refusing to apply the same standard to your own beliefs.

Declaring “if Jesus is right, Islam is false” as if that settles anything—when Islam does not affirm your version of Jesus to begin with.

If you want a productive conversation, let’s move forward—not in circles.

✅ Final Summary:

Yes: Islam teaches the Holy Spirit is Jibrīl—the angel of revelation.

No: Islam does not derive its theology from Jewish or Christian traditions.

Yes: The Qur’an identifies Jibrīl and the Holy Spirit as the same in multiple verses.

No: Your misuse of isolated Qur’anic verses doesn’t undo this.

Yes: Islam preserves pure monotheism and consistent theology about God, revelation, and the unseen.

I now respectfully ask: Do you intend to respond to these points directly—or will you continue repeating what’s already been answered? If no sincere engagement follows, then with all respect:

> “To you your religion, and to me mine.” (Qur’an 109:6)

May God guide us all to the truth.

QuinQ:
Thanks for your polite response.
Your thesis is so easily dismissible it is almost laughable. You say God is free from all limitations yet you limit him by saying he lacks the capacity to become man! Which is at the core of everything you're saying - "God CANNOT CHOOSE to be fully man if he wanted to, yet he can do anything he chooses to do"! That is the real contradiction not all these other minutae you're obsessed with.

"Classical attributes of God", as determined by who?? YOU! Let's look at who this "you" is in real world practical terms. If our galaxy were shrunk to the size of the earth, then the earth will be smaller than a grain of salt! But that's not all, there are more than two trillion (Trillion!) such galaxies in our universe. That's FACT. Then there is the theory that our universe is only one in a limitless sea of universes. Add to that "you" can only see, hear, feel, perceive only a minuscule percentage of what's there, and has no way of knowing if what he's perceiving is real. That's the "you" that determined "classical attributes of God"!

Thank you for your reply. I appreciate your engagement, but I must point out that your response, while rhetorically passionate, does not resolve the actual dilemma I presented. Instead, it shifts the focus away from theological consistency and substitutes it with an emotional appeal to divine mystery and human insignificance.

Let me clarify my position precisely:

1. The Core Dilemma Is Not God’s Power, But His Nature

You claim I am "limiting" God by asserting that He cannot become man. Respectfully, this is a misunderstanding of the Islamic objection.

In Islam, we affirm that God can do all things consistent with His nature and perfection. But to say that God can do anything—even things that contradict His own essence—is not omnipotence; it is incoherence.

For example:

Can God cease to be God?

Can God be ignorant?

Can God be created?

Can God die?

If you answer yes to these questions in the name of “divine freedom,” then you have destroyed the very concept of God as necessarily eternal, self-sufficient, and perfect. If you answer no, then you already acknowledge that divine power operates within the boundaries of divine nature. That is exactly the Islamic view.

So, the problem is not with God's ability but with the logical coherence of a claim that God can become limited, ignorant, tempted, or mortal—while still claiming to be fully divine.

This is not a limitation on God; it is a defense of His perfection.

2. Appealing to God’s Transcendence Doesn’t Solve a Logical Contradiction

You said: “Your thesis is laughable... you're obsessed with minutiae.”

But what you call minutiae are, in fact, the heart of Christian theology: the Incarnation and nature of Christ. I am not asking speculative or irrelevant questions; I am asking: How can the infinite become finite without ceasing to be infinite? This is not rhetorical—it’s a real theological contradiction.

If Jesus was God:

Was he omniscient while also learning like a human?

Was he immortal while dying on the cross?

Was he all-powerful while being beaten and crucified?

If you answer that this is a “mystery,” you are not solving the contradiction—you are merely shelving it.

3. Your Cosmological Analogy Is a Red Herring

You brought up the vastness of the universe and our insignificance as humans. I do not deny this. The Qur'an itself invites us to reflect on the majesty of the cosmos as a sign of God's power.

But this proves God’s transcendence, not His incarnation.

Your analogy inadvertently supports the Islamic view: God is unimaginably beyond creation, and thus is not subject to its limitations. Why would such a God become a man who eats, sleeps, and suffers?

If anything, the vastness of creation demonstrates how absurd it is to confine the Eternal Creator to a mortal body in a single time and place, as Christian doctrine teaches.

4. On the “Classical Attributes” of God

You asked who determined these "classical attributes." The answer: they are derived from revelation and reason.

Even Christian philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas, Anselm, and Church Fathers have consistently defined God as:

Eternal

All-Knowing

All-Powerful

Self-Sufficient

Unchanging

If Jesus contradicts these, then either:

1. Jesus is not fully God, or

2. The doctrine of the Incarnation compromises God’s classical attributes.

Islam simply preserves the unity and perfection of God without these contradictions.

5. In Conclusion: Logic Is Not the Enemy of Faith

You imply that raising these questions shows arrogance. On the contrary, the Qur’an itself says:

> “Do they not reflect upon the Qur’an? If it were from other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction.”
(Qur’an 4:82)

God invites us to use reason to distinguish truth from falsehood. If a doctrine contradicts both revelation and reason, it deserves critical scrutiny—not blind acceptance.

I am not asking whether God can become man. I am asking: Can a being who is mortal, ignorant, and limited still be God by definition?

If your answer is yes, then you’ve redefined God into something logically incoherent. If your answer is no, then you have affirmed the Islamic position.

Let us continue respectfully, but let us not confuse mystery with contradiction.

TenQ:
The bottom line is that
1. Every Jew already knew the Holy Spirit as the manifest Everpresent power of God.
2. Every Jew knew that The Holy Spirit is Omnipresent, Omniscient and Omnipotent
3. Every Jew knew that the Holy Spirit is NOT an Angel
4. The purpose of Jesus is not to systematically explain Trinity BUT to give us Salvation
5. Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to every Believer as a Seal , as a Teacher and an ever-abiding Comforter.

Unfortunately, Islam attributes Jibril to be God the Holy Spirit. A clear error of ignorance.

Even the heretical JW doesn't think that the Holy Spirit is Jibril BUT an expression for the Power of God. No single Jew believe that the Holy Spirit is an Angel.


1. Does it make sense to you that EVERY sin against God has forgiveness EXCEPT Blasphemy against an Angel? Don't forget that Blasphemy against God is also a sin
2. You think it is Normal to associate the name of an Angel with the name of God?
3. So, post resurrection account isn't a real account exactly as your prophet's visit to heaven and seen post living account of Moses and the other prophets account.
You forgot that part of Allah's deception was to give a fake resurrected Jesus to the disciples so that they would believe that it was the real Jesus crucified.

You will need to prove explicitly that the Holy Spirit both in the Old testament and the New Testament is Jibril to convince even yourself, otherwise, you are in error.




Yes, Spirit in Hebrew is synonymous to Air or Wind and it describes an entity that is unseen but exists because of his power to change things. And this is used as a Description for God's presence and power as you cannot see God but you feel and experience His power and presence.

Even Angels are made of spirit (Gods nature). Only that they are limited, thus the distinction "Holy Spirit" or "Spirit of God" representing the infinite God.

Does the spirit moving over the water mean that at creation, Jibril was moving over the waters?


So, In Islam, with evidence, what is the Spirit?





Just be truthful to yourself:
Is there any creature in Islam either Man, Angels, Animals, Jinn or things that has even one of the three attributes of Omnipresence, Omnipotence and Omniscience?




Both Quran verses you quoted NEVER said anywhere that Jibril was the Holy Spirit. This was an assumption by interpolation of Muslim scholars in both Qur'an 16:192 and Qur'an 2:87 that spirit is Jibril.

Isn't it obvious to you? Is there a single verse that called Jibril the Holy Spirit in the Qur'an?

Secondly, with evidence from the Qur'an Are Angels Spirit in Islam?
Ps 104:4:
"Who makes his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire:"

If angels are not spirits, how can Jibril be a spirit?


No sir,
The phrase is copy of the bible which was misunderstood by Mohammed the Ummi.
Qur'an 15:29
"And when I have proportioned him and breathed into him of My spirit, then fall down prostrating yourselves before him."

Qur'an 38:72
"So when I have fashioned him and breathed into him of My spirit, then fall down to him prostrate."

Did Allah breathe Jibril into Adam?


So. We see that even though Mohammed didn't know what the spirit is AND Jibril was not stated by Allah to be a spirit, the only Spirit clearly stated in the Qur'an is Jesus. Forget about divinity!

How is Jesus who is a Man also a Spirit?
Who else did Allah explicitly describe as a spirit in the Qur'an.

Is this not a proof that your understanding is abysmal with respect to spiritual things?

Quran 10:94 says:
"So if you (O Muhammad) are in doubt concerning that which We have revealed to you, then ask those who have been reading the Scripture before you. The truth has certainly come to you from your Lord, so never be among the doubters."

But you refuse to ask, why wouldn't you mix up spiritual things?


Tell me the truth,
Is Christianity taken ONLY from Jesus or ALL the prophets of God including Jesus?

What is the two powers of heaven according to early Jewish Rabbis ?

How can you ask me to leave
1. The infinity Omnipresent, Omnipotent and Omniscient God for Allah who isn't .
Does Allah have the power to Enter his creation without creasing to be Almighty?
Can Allah be in heaven and the earth equally simultaneously?
2. Guarantee for paradise for a guarantee for at least a time in Hell Fire
Quran 19:71-72 says that ALL Muslims must enter hell as a decree of Allah at least temporarily
3. The Way and Truth for one who doesn't know what will befall him
Quran 46:9
"Say, 'I am not something original among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I only follow that which is revealed to me, and I am only a clear warner.'"
compared with
John 14:6
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."



Satanists are monotheistic (their God is satan)
Muslims are monotheistic (their God is Allah)
Judaism are monotheistic (their God is YHWH)
Christians are monotheistic (their God is YHWH)

Exodus 3:14-15
“God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM.’ And he said, ‘Say this to the people of Israel: I AM has sent me to you.’ God also said to Moses, ‘Say to the Israelites, “YHWH, the God of your fathers—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob— has sent me to you.” This is my name forever, the name you shall call me from generation to generation.’”

Mohammed seems not know that the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is YHWH!


Is any of Allah's 99 names YHWH?

Thank you for your response. I will reply to your claims in a structured and respectful manner, with the aim of clarity—not repetition.

But first, a brief note: many of your points are repeated from your earlier message, without new evidence or development. Repeating an assertion does not make it true. If we are to engage fruitfully, we must go beyond rhetorical restatement and focus on evidence-based reasoning.

1. "Every Jew Knew..." – An Unsupported Generalization

You’ve repeated:

> “Every Jew knew the Holy Spirit is omnipresent, omnipotent, and not an angel.”

Respectfully, this is still a sweeping claim with zero citation from Jewish scripture, Second Temple Jewish writings, or rabbinic sources.

Judaism to this day does not affirm the Holy Spirit as a “person” or a member of a Trinity. The Ruach Elohim (Spirit of God) in the Hebrew Bible is not understood as a co-equal person within God.

If “every Jew” knew the Holy Spirit was omnipotent and divine, why did no Jewish sect in history affirm a Triune God?

The Dead Sea Scrolls, Talmud, and apocryphal Jewish writings do not describe the Holy Spirit as a distinct divine being or object of worship.

Please provide actual sources from Jewish literature rather than rhetorical generalizations.

2. Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit ≠ Proof of Divinity

Your reply:

> “Does it make sense that blasphemy against an angel is worse than blasphemy against God?”

This assumes your interpretation is the only one. But as stated earlier:

In both Islam and the Bible, not all unforgivable sins imply divinity. Rejection of divine revelation (blasphemy against the Spirit) is a serious matter—but that does not make the agent divine.

Jesus said insults against himself could be forgiven—does that mean he was inferior to the Spirit? By your logic, yes—but surely even Christians would reject that implication.

This passage is about resisting divine guidance, not the ontological status of the Spirit.

3. Matthew 28:19 – Still Not a Proof of Trinity

You asked again:

> “Is it normal to associate the name of an angel with God’s name?”

As answered before: Being mentioned in the same sentence is not proof of divinity.

The verse does not say “The Holy Spirit is God” or “God is Three-in-One.”

The baptismal formula’s authenticity is questioned even by many Christian scholars. It does not appear in the earliest baptismal practices in Acts (Acts 2:38, Acts 8:16).

Mentioning three names in a statement does not equate them in nature. You must demonstrate ontological equality, not assert it by proximity.

4. Is Jibril (Gabriel) the Holy Spirit in the Qur’an?

You claim:

> “No verse calls Jibril the Holy Spirit.”

This is incorrect. Let’s again compare two direct verses:

Qur'an 2:97 – Jibril brings down the Qur’an

Qur'an 16:102 – The Holy Spirit brings down the Qur’an

Qur'an 26:193 – The “Trustworthy Spirit” brings it down

Classical tafsīr (Ibn Kathīr, Al-Ṭabarī, Al-Qurṭubī) all affirm that Jibril is the Rūḥ al-Qudus, based on cross-referencing these ayahs.

This is not “ignorant interpolation.” It is textual correlation and scholarly consensus.

> "No single Jew believed the Holy Spirit is an angel."

That is irrelevant to Islam. We don’t derive our theology from Jewish speculation, but from the Qur’an.

5. Are Angels Spirit in Islam?

You quote Psalm 104:4 and ask:

> “If angels are not spirits, how can Jibril be a spirit?”

In Islam:

Angels are created from light (Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2996).

Jibril is called Rūḥ al-Amīn (26:193), Rūḥ al-Qudus (16:102), and Rūḥ (19:17) – repeatedly.

He is a unique angel who brings revelation.

So yes, Jibril is both an angel and a spirit, by Qur'anic description.

6. “Breathed into Adam from My Spirit” – Still Not Jibril

You asked again:

> “Did Allah breathe Jibril into Adam?”

This was already addressed. No. "My Spirit" is an honorific possessive, not a literal part of God, nor is it Jibril.

Just like:

“My House” (Baytī) doesn’t mean God lives in the Ka‘bah.

“My servant” doesn’t mean the servant shares God’s nature.

This language reflects honor, not ontological fusion.

7. Jesus as “a Spirit from God” ≠ Divinity

You write:

> “Jesus is the only one called a spirit in the Qur’an.”

Incorrect.

Jibril is also repeatedly called Rūḥ (spirit).

Every soul is “from God” in the sense of being created by Him (Qur’an 32:9)

Being “a spirit from God” does not imply divinity. It signifies origin, not nature.

Otherwise, Adam—who had no father—would be even more divine.

8. Qur’an 10:94 – Addressing Doubt?

This verse says:

> “If you (O Muhammad) are in doubt…”

You quote it as if it is literal doubt. But as Ibn Kathīr, Al-Rāzī, and Qurtubī explain: this is a rhetorical address to the audience, not to the Prophet himself.

Allah says elsewhere:

> “Do not be in doubt of it.” (Qur’an 32:23)

There is no contradiction. It’s a stylistic form to affirm the truth of revelation, not an admission of doubt.

9. “Jesus Knew His Fate, Muhammad Didn’t”

You compare:

> Qur’an 46:9 vs John 14:6

Again, this is a false equivalence.

The Qur’an verse shows humility and submission to God’s decree—consistent with the prophetic mission.

The Bible has many verses where Jesus says he doesn’t know the Hour (Mark 13:32), or expresses weakness.

Omniscience is not consistently applied to Jesus in the NT either. So using Qur'an 46:9 as proof of inferiority is flawed.

10. Islam and Hell

You said:

> “Muslims must enter Hell.”

Again, a half-quote:

> “There is none of you except he will pass over it…” (Qur’an 19:71) “Then We will save those who feared Allah…” (Qur’an 19:72)

This refers to crossing over (the Sirāt), not remaining in Hell. It is not a punishment for the righteous, but a test and passage.

11. Is Allah YHWH?

You asked again:

> “Is any of Allah’s 99 Names YHWH?”

This question has been answered.

“YHWH” is a proper name in Hebrew, not a description or title.

“Allah” is the universal Arabic name for God used by Christians, Jews, and Muslims in Arabic.

The Qur’an affirms God's oneness, eternality, and unchanging nature—consistent with the God of Abraham.

Names vary by language. “Theos” in Greek, “Dios” in Spanish, “Khuda” in Persian—none of these invalidate the reference to the same One God.

12. Final Clarification

Your theological claims are rooted in post-biblical doctrine, not teachings of Jesus himself:

Jesus never said “God is three.”

Jesus never taught the Holy Spirit is a person to be worshiped.

Jesus never said “I am God.”

The Qur’an calls people back to the unambiguous monotheism of all prophets:

> “Say: He is Allah, the One. Allah, the Absolute. He begets not, nor was He begotten.” (Qur’an 112:1–3)

This is the monotheism of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus—not the innovation of church councils centuries later.

Request for Intellectual Honesty

Let’s elevate the conversation. Please avoid:

Repeating the same objections without responding to the refutations.

Making claims without citation or evidence.

Misrepresenting Islamic belief through loaded rhetoric.

Let us engage with sincerity and evidence, not emotion and repetition.

If you would like to continue, please address specific points with referenced sources, not assumptions or generalizations.

QuinQ:
The answer is, God is anything he is and whatever that happens to be is what Jesus Christ is. God is NOT limited to human definitions, limitations, and logic. If what happened about Christ happens about another person I'd also belive that person is God {"God the 2nd Son"}

Thank you for your reply. However, your response does not address the theological dilemma I raised but instead dismisses it by appealing to God’s transcendence of human logic. While I agree that God is not bound by human limitations, this does not resolve the inherent contradiction within the doctrine of the Incarnation.

My question was precise: If Jesus, as fully God, experienced human limitations—such as hunger, temptation, or ignorance—does this mean God, in His divine nature, is subject to these limitations? If so, this contradicts the classical attributes of God (omniscience, self-sufficiency, and perfection). If not, then Jesus cannot be fully God in the same unqualified sense.

Your answer—"God is anything He is"—is not a substantive reply but a deflection. It does not clarify how divine nature reconciles with human frailty in Christ. Muslims believe in a God who is transcendent (free from all limitations) and does not enter into His creation in a way that compromises His perfection. This is why we reject the notion of God becoming man, as it introduces logical and theological inconsistencies that remain unresolved in Christian doctrine.

If faith requires suspending logical coherence when addressing core tenets, then it is not the question that is flawed—but the doctrine that cannot withstand scrutiny. I welcome a direct engagement with the dilemma if you have one.

Warm regards,

TenQ:
Why is it difficult to respond to a direct question! The Jews do not believe in Trinity.
The question is : Do the Jews believe that the Holy Spirit is any Angel?

It's a YES or NO question!




I didn't ask you to re-interprete the verse or my question.
Does it make sense that the Blasphemy against angel has no forgiveness either I. This world or the world to come?

It is a YES or NO question sir!


Please answer my direct question:
“Is it halal to say: In the Name of Allah, Muhammad, and Jibrīl…in Islam?”
Or
Is it Halal to say: "Do your Ablution in the name of Allah, Mohammed and Jibril?"

Is it difficult answering direct questions?


Allah spoke of Ruh -Al-Qudus BUT never once said Jibril was the Ruh Al-Qudus.

You want me to accept prophet Ibn Kathir and prophet Al-Tabari re-interpretations of your Qur'an.

Are you aware that
From Muhammad (570 CE) to Al-Ṭabarī (808 CE) is about 238 years.

From Muhammad (570 CE) to Ibn Kathīr (1300 CE) is about 730 years.

From Al-Ṭabarī (808 CE) to Ibn Kathīr (1300 CE) is about 492 years.

If this is where you get your deen, I can imagine why you have swallowed so much lies that you are becoming the lie.




If I understand you, Jibril was not created from Light

Jibril is NOT an Angel!?









After you provide a verse in the Qur'an ran where Jesus explicitly said "I am the Messiah!"
Or show explicitly where Allah says "I am Not a Trinity"
Then we will debate with truth and clarity.

Islam is a religion of amalgamation of many religions: Idolatry, Christianity, Judaism, Sabean etc and the relics about. Unfortunately, it is a deception by the Al-Makr as ALL Muslims will enter the fire only that it will not be temporary.

Thank you again for your reply. I will respond respectfully and clearly—but also directly—because this conversation is now cycling through the same set of previously addressed questions without acknowledgment of the answers given. If we cannot move forward with intellectual sincerity, then continuing the discussion serves no purpose.

1. Do Jews Believe the Holy Spirit Is an Angel?

You insisted on a simple yes or no.

The honest answer is: Jews do not believe the Holy Spirit is a distinct divine person or an angel.

In Jewish theology, the ruach ha-qodesh (Holy Spirit) is understood primarily as a manifestation of God's power or presence, not a person or angel. That is precisely the point I made earlier. Your attempt to force Islamic theology to depend on Jewish angelology or Christian logic is flawed from the outset.

Islam teaches that the Holy Spirit (Rūḥ al-Qudus) is Jibrīl, based on internal Qur’anic evidence (see Qur’an 2:97 and 16:102). The Qur’an, not Jewish or Christian belief, defines the role and identity of the Holy Spirit in Islam.

You’re asking a question rooted in Jewish theology, then using it to reject Islamic theology. That’s a category error.

2. Is Blasphemy Against an Angel Unforgivable?

You demanded a yes or no again. The answer is: Blasphemy against any creature, angel or prophet, is not unforgivable—unless it involves knowingly rejecting divine truth after it has been made clear.

> The verse in question (Matthew 12:32) is from your own scripture, and Jesus Himself says that blasphemy against Him is forgivable, but not against the Holy Spirit. That undermines the argument that unforgivability proves divinity.

Islamic theology, again, does not base the nature of divinity on how unforgivable an act is. So your conclusion is based on Christian logic, which is not binding on me.

3. Is It Halal to Say: “In the Name of Allah, Muhammad, and Jibrīl”?

Your question is irrelevant to Islamic theology.

No, it is not halal, nor is it even a recognized phrase in Islam. Worship and invocation are reserved solely for Allah. That is exactly why Muslims reject the Trinitarian formula of invoking God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.

Your question fails as an analogy. You are comparing a phrase in Christianity that implies divinity and equality (Matthew 28:19) to a hypothetical phrase in Islam that does not exist and would in fact be considered shirk (polytheism). So we reject it entirely.

In short: No, the phrase is not halal, and your analogy is invalid.

4. “Jibrīl Is Not Called Rūḥ al-Qudus in the Qur’an” — False Claim

You said:

> “Allah never said Jibrīl is the Rūḥ al-Qudus.”

This is demonstrably false.

Let’s review the Qur’anic logic again:

Qur’an 2:97 – “Whoever is an enemy to Jibrīl—it is he who brought it (the Qur’an) down to your heart...”

Qur’an 16:102 – “Say: The Holy Spirit has brought it (the Qur’an) down from your Lord in truth...”

The same act (bringing the Qur’an) is attributed to Jibrīl in one verse and to the Holy Spirit in the other. This is not a reinterpretation; this is simple deduction.

So yes, the Qur’an equates Jibrīl with Rūḥ al-Qudus. And Islamic scholarship affirms this with consensus—not because they “made it up centuries later,” but because they understood the Arabic language and Qur’anic context far better than your polemics allow.

5. Is Jibrīl an Angel or Not?

You misrepresented my statements. Nowhere did I deny that Jibrīl is an angel. Islam teaches clearly:

Jibrīl is the chief angel assigned to deliver revelation (Qur’an 2:97, 26:193).

He is also referred to as Rūḥ, because of his role in bringing the divine message.

He was created, like all angels, and is not divine in any sense. There is no contradiction in this Islamic teaching.

6. Where Does Jesus Say: “I Am the Messiah”?

> You challenged: “Show where Jesus says ‘I am the Messiah.’”

That’s easy.

John 4:25–26 – The Samaritan woman says: “I know that Messiah is coming...” Jesus replies: “I who speak to you am he.”

So yes, Jesus calls himself the Messiah. But calling himself Messiah is not the same as calling himself God.

7. Where Does Allah Say: “I Am Not a Trinity”?

> You asked for an explicit statement that Allah says: “I am not a Trinity.”

Here you go:

Qur’an 4:171 – “Do not say ‘Three’—desist! It is better for you. Indeed, Allah is only One God. Far exalted is He above having a son.”

Qur’an 5:73 – “They have certainly disbelieved who say: ‘Allah is the third of three.’”

These are unambiguous rejections of the doctrine of the Trinity.

8. Final Observation: Are We Going in Circles?

You continue to:

Repeat the same questions, ignoring the answers,

Demand “yes/no” answers to complex theological matters,

Shift between Jewish theology, Christian logic, and Islamic terms without consistency.

If your goal is mutual understanding, then let us proceed respectfully, acknowledging responses and debating sincerely.

But if the aim is simply to ignore answers, distort positions, and recycle fallacies—then I must respectfully end this exchange.

✅ Summary:

Yes: Jibrīl is the Holy Spirit in Islam.

No: Muslims don’t invoke Jibrīl or the Prophet in worship.

Yes: Jesus called himself Messiah but never called himself God.

Yes: The Qur’an explicitly rejects the Trinity.

No: Severity of blasphemy ≠ proof of divinity.

Yes: You are repeating questions already answered.

If you wish to continue this discussion, please respond directly to the core Islamic arguments rather than repeating mischaracterizations. If not, then I respectfully close by saying:

> “To you your religion, and to me mine.” (Qur’an 109:6)

Peace be upon those who follow the guidance.

TenQ:
Too bad!
I am using exactly your rules.
If it is physically logically contradictory, it must be a fallacy (falsehood)

All I did was to show you yourself in the mirror, so, do not complain.

I had promised you that I will use your rule against you.





You want me to believe that a human being exist in a DUAL state as a solution to this contradiction!?
1. A human being exist as a Soul
2. A human being exist physically (on earth)

But you vehemently reject Trinity as explanation!?
SMH!

Please find any other explanation as the soul isn't an explanation!


Again, the contradiction of the prophets having their human bodies here on earth but Mohammed also interacting with them in paradise is resolved by appealing to the DUALITY of human existence.

How do you wante to accept your explanation?
Deal with the logical impossibility of the fact that a person doesn't have two physical bodies!



If I get you correctly, Mohammed saw the ghosts of the prophets in paradise and not the real persons!?

I am sorry. Your explanation doesn't resolve any issues as only One Moses exist, Only one prophet Joseph exist etc. It is a logical contradiction for Moses or the other prophets to be two in one.

Okay. Which is the real Moses? The one in the grave or the one in paradise or both?
LOL!


It seems your argument is that the printed Qur'an is NOT the Qur'an.

Is that your final answer?

Because, if the printed Qur'an is the Qur'an, it cannot be eternal. It is a logical contradiction.



I have used your rules:
You have NOT answered ANY of the Logical contradictions raised, therefore either re-explain to resolve it or stop your meaningless repetition of questions you really don't want an answer to.

Again:
1. There is one prophet Moses: but we are seeing TWO. One in Paradise and the other in the grave.
Please don't tell me about the soul as we know of only one Moses NOT two!
Is Moses a BODY or a SOUL or Both?
Please Resolve this contradiction. Is it logical to be dead and alive at the same time?

2. You say the Qur'an is eternal and uncreated. Every Qur'an we have seen down to the recitation of Mohammed had a beginning and thus cannot be eternal not uncreated.
Does it make sense for the Qur'an to be eternal and destructible? Is this not a contradiction?
Are these two not contrary attributes?


+Moses can be dead yet alive is a logical contradiction
+The Qur'an is eternal yet can be burnt and destroyed is a logical contradiction!



Mr JimRohn
I have used exactly your strategy!
It was extremely hypocritical of you to even attempt to explain these so-called logical contradictions with the explanation using DUALITY of natures but you reject explanations by the TRINITY of God's nature.

It is either you quietly accept that
1. The Qur'an cannot be eternal
2. Your prophet didn't see Moses or the other prophets
3. The Prophets are not in paradise
For their logical contradictions or be consistent with your logic. I will understand if you were an Atheist as they don't believe in anything other than the physical nature.

I can choose to be obstinate exactly like you and repeat these my questions a million times while refusing your explanation by DUALITY of Natures.

Have a nice day

Thank you again for your continued engagement. I value meaningful interfaith dialogue, particularly when it is rooted in logic, clarity, and mutual respect. That said, your response unfortunately does not advance the discussion meaningfully. Instead, it repeats previously addressed points while misrepresenting fundamental Islamic metaphysical concepts.

Let me clarify your missteps and respectfully show how you are, in fact, moving in circles and evading the original philosophical problem posed to your doctrine.

🔄 1. You Are Committing a Category Error by Equating Metaphysical Duality with Ontological Contradiction

You repeatedly invoke what you call a "duality" in Islamic beliefs regarding the soul and body, and claim this should justify belief in the Trinity. This is a false equivalence.

Let me explain the difference in precise philosophical terms:

In Islam, the body-soul distinction is a metaphysical duality, not a contradiction. The soul and body are not the same thing, and are not claimed to be so. Death separates the soul from the body; the soul continues to exist in the barzakh (intermediate realm). There is no contradiction in saying a person is dead in body and alive in soul.

In Christian Trinitarian theology, however, you are asserting that one and the same being (Jesus) is:

Fully God (omniscient, immortal, all-powerful)

Fully man (ignorant, tempted, and mortal)

This creates an ontological contradiction — because these attributes are mutually exclusive within one single person. One cannot logically be both omniscient and ignorant, eternal and subject to death, within the same individual nature.

You are conflating metaphysical composition (body/soul) with a logical contradiction of essential attributes.

That is not parity. That is a category mistake.

📌 2. You Still Have Not Answered the Core Question

Let me remind you what the original challenge was — and still is:

> How do you logically reconcile Jesus being God while possessing attributes (ignorance, mortality, susceptibility to temptation) that contradict divine perfection?

Your reply ignores this contradiction and instead attempts to accuse Islam of its own alleged paradoxes — but this does not resolve the contradiction within your own theology. It merely shifts the topic.

This is a textbook case of a red herring fallacy. Whether or not you believe Islam has paradoxes, the question remains: Can your Christology stand up to the test of logical coherence?

So far, your answer is still absent.

🧠 3. You Misrepresent Islamic Belief About the Prophets and the Soul

You say:

> “There is only one Moses — so how can he be both in the grave and in Paradise?”

This is a strawman. Islam does not teach that there are two physical Moseses. It teaches what is entirely coherent:

Moses' body remains in the grave.

Moses' soul exists in the barzakh, in a conscious state.

You ask: “Which is the real Moses?”
The answer is: The same Moses — but his body and soul are currently separated, just as occurs with every human being after death.

This is the consistent position of virtually all religious traditions that affirm life after death, including Christianity. If you find that contradictory, you’re actually refuting your own religion as well.

So again, no contradiction exists — unless you adopt a purely materialist view of death, in which case you'd be better classified as a secularist, not a Christian.

📜 4. Misunderstanding of the Qur’an’s Nature

You argue:

> “If the Qur’an is eternal, how can it be written on paper and burned?”

Again, you are confusing God’s speech as an eternal attribute with the physical representations of that speech.

Islam distinguishes between:

Kalām Allāh — the uncreated speech of God (eternal attribute).

Mushaf — the created, physical form (ink, paper, sound).

Let me draw a clear analogy:

> Suppose you have a thought — that thought is abstract, part of your immaterial mind. If you then write it on paper, the paper can be destroyed, but the thought in your mind remains.

Likewise, the eternal Qur’an (God’s speech) can be written, recited, and memorized — all of which are created forms representing something uncreated.

Thus, there is no contradiction, because the essence and the manifestation are not the same thing.

🔄 5. You Are Circling Back Without Addressing the Initial Contradiction

You accuse me of "repetition," yet your entire reply merely reasserts points that were already addressed in detail — without engaging their logical content.

You do not resolve how God can be both omniscient and ignorant.

You do not resolve how God can be untemptable (James 1:13) yet tempted (Matthew 4:1).

You do not resolve how immortal God (1 Timothy 6:16) can be subject to death on the cross.

Instead, you:

Shift to Islamic topics without first resolving your own.

Demand that “duality” justifies “Trinity” — when one is a non-contradictory metaphysical distinction, and the other a logical impossibility.

If your only defense of the Trinity is that "Islam also has things I don’t understand," then you are conceding that the Trinity is illogical and hoping to deflect rather than justify.

✅ Conclusion: Be Consistent — and Return to the Point

If you want to argue for the Trinity, then do so on its own terms. Show how the same Jesus can be fully God and fully man without violating the law of non-contradiction. That is the challenge before you — and I still welcome your attempt to answer it directly.

As Muslims, we affirm:

One God with no partners, no contradictions, and no confusion.

Clear metaphysical categories: soul/body, created/uncreated.

Logical consistency in divine attributes: omniscience, perfection, immortality — all of which apply only to Allah.

I invite you to examine the clarity and consistency of Tawḥīd, rather than dtradiction by accusing others.

Respectfully,

gohf:
Dear jimrohn,

You are confused,

Warm regards

BibleInterpreta AntiChristian TenQ CreativeOrbit gofh honesttalk21 NairaLTQ MaxInDHouse

Dear gohf,

Your reply says more about your lack of substance than mine does about confusion.

When I ask whether God—according to your belief—is capable of ignorance, hunger, or being tempted, that is a theological question, not a confusion. You believe Jesus is fully God and fully man—so I am asking a direct and necessary question:
Can God be tempted (as Jesus was), feel hunger (as Jesus did), or be ignorant (as Jesus confessed when he said only the Father knows the Hour)?

If your answer is yes—then your "God" is no longer omniscient, self-sufficient, or above human limitations.
If your answer is no—then Jesus cannot be fully God.

Calling this “confusion” doesn’t answer the problem—it evades it.

If your faith cannot withstand direct and honest scrutiny, perhaps it is not the questioner who is confused—but the one offering empty platitudes in place of answers.

Warm regards,
A Muslim who believes in a God who does not hunger, sleep, forget, or get tempted by Satan.

TenQ:
I am sorry, I didn't know how I missed this post of yours


The point is:
Starting from Moses to Isaiah, to David to Solomon, which among the Jews remotely thought that the Holy Spirit was an Angel?

Islam is wrong!



This wasn't the point.
The point is:
Does it make sense that Blasphemy against an Angel has no forgiveness either in this world or the next to come?


If I understand you, it is Halal to say:
In the Name of Allah, Mohammed and Jibril do your good deeds?

Jesus is supposed to be a Muslim, remember!


I challenged you to supply me verses from Allah that Jibril is the Holy spirit and the best you could do was to refer not even to Mohammed but prophet Al-Tabari and prophet Ibn Kathir!?

Please listen to yourself.
Do you take your religion from Allah and Mohammed or from Ibn Kathir and Al-Tabari.

My challenge remains.

Otherwise, define in consistency terms "the spirit"!
Why?
Allah breathe of his spirit into Adam
Jesus is a Spirit from Allah
Jibril is also a spirit!




My question was simple and direct!
Are Angels Spirits in Islam?

It's a YES or NO question!

Thank you for your reply. I will address your comments with clarity and consistency, grounded in the Qur’an and reasoned logic.

1. Did Ancient Jews Believe the Holy Spirit Was an Angel?

You asked:

> “Starting from Moses to Isaiah to David to Solomon, which among the Jews remotely thought that the Holy Spirit was an Angel?”

This question presupposes that the Jewish conception of the ruach (spirit) was identical to the Christian Trinitarian view, which it was not.

The Old Testament does not present the Holy Spirit as a distinct divine person, nor does it present Him as God co-equal with Yahweh. The ruach is often presented as God's power, breath, or presence—not a person.

Furthermore, no pre-Christian Jewish sect (Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, or any group from the Second Temple period) ever formulated or taught a Trinitarian concept of God. That alone should give pause to the claim that belief in the divinity of the Holy Spirit was normative.

So the Muslim claim is not that Jews believed the Holy Spirit was an angel—but rather, that neither Jews nor Jesus preached the Holy Spirit as a third co-equal divine person. And Islam affirms that the Holy Spirit refers to Gabriel (Jibrīl), the angel of revelation—based on Qur’anic internal evidence.

2. Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit: Does Forgiveness Prove Divinity?

You asked:

> “Does it make sense that blasphemy against an angel has no forgiveness…?”

Let’s revisit the actual verse again:

> “Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven…” (Matthew 12:32)

This passage highlights the severity of rejecting divine revelation—not the divinity of the Holy Spirit. Jesus clearly says He Himself can be spoken against, yet that does not make Him inferior in essence.

In Islam, certain crimes such as hypocrisy or denying revelation after knowledge may be unforgivable in the Hereafter—not because the recipient is divine, but because the offense is a willful rejection of truth.

So the logic fails: Severity of punishment ≠ proof of divinity.

3. “In the Name of Allah, Muhammad, and Jibrīl”?

You asked:

> “Is it halal to say: In the Name of Allah, Muhammad, and Jibrīl…?”

This is a false analogy. The formula in Matthew 28:19 includes the Holy Spirit with the Father and Son, implying ontological equality. But nowhere does the Bible define what that equality means, nor does Jesus clarify that the Holy Spirit is God Himself.

In Islam, there is no such phrase pairing Allah, the Prophet, and Jibrīl in worship or invocation. Worship belongs solely to Allah.

Jibrīl and Prophet Muhammad ﷺ are servants of Allah—one an angelic messenger, the other a human messenger. So your analogy fails because Islam preserves strict monotheism (Tawḥīd), while Trinitarianism conflates roles with essence.

4. Qur’anic Identification of Jibrīl as the Holy Spirit

You dismissed my earlier point:

> “You didn’t quote the Qur’an but Al-Ṭabarī and Ibn Kathīr…”

Actually, I did quote the Qur’an—multiple times. Let me clarify again:

Qur’an 2:97 – “Whoever is an enemy to Jibrīl—for indeed he brought it (the Qur’an) down to your heart by Allah’s permission…”

Qur’an 16:102 – “Say: The Holy Spirit has brought it (the Qur’an) down from your Lord in truth…”

From these two verses, the conclusion is clear:

The Qur’an was revealed by Jibrīl.

The Qur’an was revealed by the Holy Spirit.

Conclusion: Jibrīl is the Holy Spirit.

This is not blind reliance on scholars—it is a direct logical inference from the Qur’an itself. Scholars like Al-Ṭabarī and Ibn Kathīr simply explain what the Qur’an already says.

5. Are Angels “Spirits” in Islam? Yes or No?

You wrote:

> “Are Angels Spirits in Islam? It’s a YES or NO question!”

The correct answer: Some angels—such as Jibrīl—are called “spirit” in the Qur’an. But not all angels are spirits.

The Qur’an uses terms with precision:

Jibrīl is called Rūḥ al-Qudus (Holy Spirit), Rūḥ al-Amīn (Trustworthy Spirit), and simply Rūḥ (Spirit), e.g., in 26:193, 16:102, 2:97, 78:38.

Other angels (e.g., the angel of death) are not called "Rūḥ."

So in Islam:

Jibrīl is both an angel and a spirit, as described explicitly in the Qur’an.

Not all angels are spirits, and not all spirits are divine.

Thus, the term rūḥ (spirit) in Islam has multiple usages:

God’s creative command (e.g., Qur’an 17:85),

A special creation like Jesus (Qur’an 4:171),

The angel Jibrīl, who brings revelation (e.g., Qur’an 16:102),

The soul (Qur’an 39:42).

Consistency in Islam is achieved through contextual usage and precise definition, not by flattening all terms into one meaning.

Final Thought

Islam does not claim the Holy Spirit is “just an angel.” Rather, it defines him as Jibrīl, a noble messenger entrusted with divine revelation—distinct from God, not divine, and not a partner in Godhead.

That is pure monotheism: God is One, not three.

Now I return the challenge:

Can you provide a single verse where Jesus explicitly says:

> “The Holy Spirit is God,” or
“Worship the Holy Spirit,” or
“God is three in one”?

If not, then the doctrine of the Trinity remains a post-biblical formulation, not a teaching of Christ himself.

Let us debate with truth, clarity, and mutual respect.
Peace be upon those who follow the guidance.

TenQ:
Here are my promised Questions to which I require some logically consistent answers. Just like you, I will choose not to entertain any explanation about the DUAL nature of persons or death or Qur'an.
I want you to convince me with the same kind of explanations that would have satisfied you with respect to your question to me.


1. The Problem of Death in Islam:
While not yet the time of RESURRECTION and noting that your prophet would be the first to be resurrected in the future;
How is it that Abraham, Moses , David etc are dead and buried, yet your prophet related with them in paradise? Is this not a logical contradiction that a person is dead yet not dead at the same time? Meaning that this Islamic report cannot be true!
(Please be careful not to tell me about the nature of Souls as you refused to accept the explanation of Trinity)

2. The Problem of Person-hood:
Are the persons seen by your prophet in paradise the real persons or something impersonating them? Because they are supposed to be DEAD and in their GRAVES doing Worship and Prayers? Can you explain why it is NOT a logical contradiction for the persons of Adam, Moses to be spoken to by your prophet while their persons are supposed to be on earth at the same time?
Is this not a Logical contradiction that a person is interacted with as a person but is not alive Alive?
Just as you expect my answers from the Taoheed point of view, Explain logically how a person can be Dead and Buried yet is NOT dead?



3. The Problem of Bodies:
Are the bodies of the prophets still in their graves while Mohammed was interacting with them in paradise? (Don't forget that it isn't yet the time of resurrection) Can you explain logically why it is NOT a logical contradiction for the Adam, Moses etc to have their bodies both on earth and in paradise at the same time?
(Note: That just like everyone else, even the bodies of the Prophets have not been resurrected yet)


4. The Eternal Qur'an Problem:
Muslims believe that the Qur'an is eternal. It is not created! It is an attribute of Allah! Unfortunately, I have a Qur'an by Yusuf Ali. It was first published in 1934 by Shaik Muhammad Ashraf Publishers, Lahore, Punjab.
Are you sure that this my Qur'an eternal? How come it has a publisher and a date of publication. How come that the Qur'an can be burnt and destroyed if it supposed to be eternal?
(Be sure to tell me that my Qur'an is NOT the Qur'an but a Translation: However, remember that the Hafs Qur'an has a date AND the Qur'an of Mohammed has a date which is certainly not eternal even according to recitation)
Is this not a logical contradiction that something is eternal and uncreated yet we find it having a date of first recital or writing in a book or translation?



Remember that, your problem is that it is a logical contradiction for the One Eternal, Omnipresent, Omniscient and Omnipresent God YHWH who is a Trinity to be Almighty and to have human limitations at the same time: thus a Fallacy!

Thank you as I wait for your response!

Dear TenQ,

Thank you for your reply and for taking the time to engage with the question I posed. I appreciate the effort you’ve made to raise what you perceive as parallel challenges from Islamic theology.

However, I must respectfully note that your response does not directly engage the core issue I raised — namely, how the doctrine of the Incarnation and Trinity can be logically coherent if the same being is simultaneously all-knowing, untemptable, and immortal, yet also ignorant, tempted, and subject to death.

Rather than addressing this theological contradiction, you have shifted the discussion to various perceived "contradictions" in Islamic belief. I will respond to your points for the sake of clarity and fairness, but I must ask: Why did you deviate from addressing the central philosophical question about the nature of God in Christianity?

Let us proceed, then, to your objections — one by one — and clarify their premises and implications.

❓ 1. Are the Prophets Dead or Alive? Is There a Contradiction?

In Islamic theology, death is understood as the separation of the soul from the body, not annihilation. The Qur’an teaches that the deceased enter a barzakh (intermediate realm) where they remain in a conscious state awaiting resurrection (Qur’an 23:100). The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was shown the souls of Prophets during the Isra’ and Mi’raj (Night Journey), not their bodies. These souls are alive in the barzakh, as affirmed by both the Qur’an and authentic hadith.

This is not a contradiction. There is no claim that they are alive in the physical, bodily sense in Paradise while simultaneously buried in the grave. Their souls are what he encountered — and this is clearly stated in Islamic sources.

Your framing assumes that death must mean nonexistence or total unconsciousness — a materialist assumption not shared by either Islam or Christianity, both of which affirm the continued existence of the soul. If you reject Islamic teachings about the soul because I reject the Trinity as illogical, that would be a category error. My rejection of the Trinity is based on the logical contradiction of essential attributes (omniscience + ignorance), not on a dismissal of spiritual realities as such.

❓ 2. Did the Prophet Speak to Dead People in Two Places?

Again, this objection conflates essence with location. When Prophet Muhammad ﷺ encountered the souls of earlier Prophets during the Mi’raj, he was not speaking to their earthly bodies, which remain in the grave. He was speaking to their conscious souls, preserved in the barzakh. Their "personhood" is not extinguished by death.

There is no contradiction here — because Islam does not claim that the same body is in two places, nor that their human essence is both dead and alive in the same sense. Rather:

Their bodies remain buried.

Their souls are alive in the unseen world.

This duality of soul and body is not a paradox, but a foundational metaphysical distinction recognized in both Islam and classical Christian theology.

❓ 3. Bodies in the Grave vs. Presence in Paradise

You ask: “How can the Prophets’ bodies be in the grave while they are in Paradise?”

Answer: The bodies are not in Paradise — their souls are. Islamic belief distinguishes clearly between soul and body, especially before the resurrection. Resurrection has not occurred yet, so bodily resurrection is not in question here.

To claim contradiction, you would need Islam to teach that the same body is both in the grave and in Paradise — which it clearly does not. Hence, there is no contradiction, logically or theologically.

❓ 4. Is the Qur’an Eternal but Also Printed?

Here, you conflate the eternal attribute of the Qur’an (kalām Allāh — the speech of Allah) with created physical manifestations of that speech, such as:

Written mushafs (codices)

Translations

Audio recitations

Islamic theology makes an explicit distinction:

The Qur’an as the eternal speech of God (His attribute) is uncreated.

The written form, like ink on paper, is created, as it is simply a physical recording of God's uncreated speech.

This is akin (for analogy's sake) to a composer’s melody existing in his mind (abstractly), while also being performed by an orchestra or written in notation. The performance is created, but the composition preexisted it.

There is no logical contradiction here. The attribute of God (His Speech) is uncreated, but the means through which humans access or preserve it (books, memory, recitation) are created.

In Islam, these issues involve different levels of reality (physical vs. metaphysical). In Christianity, the contradiction is within a single being: omniscience and ignorance coexisting in Jesus as the God-man. That is the logical impasse I originally raised — and which still remains unanswered.

❓ Return to the Core Question

So I return to my original inquiry, now more pressing:

> How do you logically reconcile the claim that Jesus is God with the fact that he is described as ignorant of the Hour, tempted by Satan, tired, and subject to death — all of which are incompatible with divinity?

Analogies with angels or souls do not resolve this because in your theology, Jesus is not merely representing God — he is God. Thus, his ignorance or temptation affects God Himself in your framework.

That, respectfully, is the contradiction that remains outstanding.

🤝 Concluding Remarks

I sincerely appreciate your willingness to engage. I trust that this response clarifies the false parallels drawn, and I hope we can return to the central theological issue that was raised.

I welcome your response — especially if it directly addresses the logical coherence of claiming Jesus is fully God while subject to attributes that compromise divine perfection.

Kind regards,
Jimrohn

TenQ:
Thank you for your response. The questions I asked seem on the surface unconnected to your main question but trust me, it does. I asked these questions so that
1. You would not turn around to say that the plain hadith is not saying exactly what it is saying.
2. That the same rule you are using for repeatedly asking a question that we have explained over and over, you will use it for yourself and be consistent.


This being said: Your repeated Question was:
> If Jesus is fully God, how can he possess attributes that contradict divinity — such as ignorance (Mark 13:32), weakness, temptation, and death?
OR
> How can the same being who is said to be all-knowing, all-powerful, and unchanging also be ignorant of the Hour, tired, tempted, and crucified?


Every attempt to explain with the Trinity and the fact that YHWH the Word became human and thus necessarily would have human attributes and weaknesses did not change your mind as you repeatedly restated the question as if it wasn't answered according to the Christian theology and scripture.

Your argument was that the nature of YHWH is a contradiction, thus necessarily a fallacy.
You said:

You also said:

Even though, I asked you before this question which you answered but refused to use the same logic to resolve your own query:
I asked you;
When Jibril became a perfect man, did he cease being an Angel?
And you answered correctly; Jibril remain an angel even in his incarnation.
To pull you harder, I even teased you with mundane questions like did Jibril as a man have intestines, does he have saliva in his mouth etc.

Consistency on your part required that:
If Jibril was a perfect man, then he is NOT distinguishable from any man and this must possess ALL of mans nature.
Note:
An Angels nature is completely different from a man's nature.

Thus, if we will use your principle on this post, this is a CONTRADICTION that an Angel is a Physical Being with human eyes, hair, tongue, sweat glands possessing NORMAL human heights, complexion and probably voice and accent and thus a Fallacy and inconsistent.

As a reminder, you wonder how impossible it is that YHWH the Word can put on human nature and have human characteristics and limitations.

I ask again,
When Jibril came as a perfect man, did he cease being and Angel knowing that Angels do not have human characteristics?

When YHWH the Word came as Jesus Christ (a man), did he cease being YHWH the Word, knowing that God do not have human characteristics?

Thank you again for your response and for attempting to draw parallels in order to make your point clearer. I appreciate the effort to establish consistency.

Let me first directly address your comparison between the Islamic belief about Angel Jibrīl (Gabriel) appearing in human form and the Christian claim of the Incarnation — namely, that God (YHWH) became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ.

🧭 On the Comparison Between Jibrīl and the Incarnation

Your argument seems to be that if Muslims accept that Angel Jibrīl can appear in human form without ceasing to be an angel, then it is inconsistent for Muslims to reject the idea that God (YHWH) can become man without ceasing to be God. On the surface, this seems like a symmetry, but it fundamentally fails under closer scrutiny. Here's why:

1. Category Distinction: Functional Manifestation vs. Ontological Fusion

In the case of Jibrīl:

He assumes the outward form of a human being.

He does not become human in essence — his angelic nature is intact and unchanged.

He is merely perceived as a man, and this transformation is external and temporary.

At no point is Jibrīl subject to human limitations like ignorance, sin, death, or hunger in essence. These are not imposed on his being — he remains fully angelic.

In the case of Jesus (according to Christian theology):

The claim is not that God merely appeared in human form, but that God became man.

The divine nature is said to have fused with human nature — in one person.

Jesus, as per Christian doctrine, experienced ignorance (Mark 13:32), temptation, suffering, and death.

These are not surface attributes — they affect the essence of the person.

Hence, you are comparing appearance (Jibrīl) with ontological union (Jesus) — two fundamentally different concepts.

2. Contradiction of Essential Attributes

In Islamic theology:

Angels are created beings with specific attributes; their form can vary without contradiction because their essence remains consistent. They are not omniscient, omnipotent, or eternal, so transforming formally does not result in a logical contradiction.

In Christian theology:

God is said to be eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, and unchanging.

Becoming man (who is by nature finite, ignorant, changeable, and mortal) entails a direct contradiction of essential attributes.

You cannot say that someone is simultaneously omniscient and ignorant, omnipotent and weak, eternal and subject to death — in the same person — without invoking contradiction.

This is not about failing to "understand" the Trinity; this is a matter of logic. Two contradictory attributes cannot exist in a single essence without violating the principle of non-contradiction.

3. Incarnation ≠ Delegation or Representation

If you claimed that Jesus was representing God, that would be a separate discussion (though Islam would still reject it). But to say that God became Jesus means attributing to God the full reality of human limitations.

By contrast, in Islam, no Prophet or Angel is believed to embody God's essence. All creation — including Prophets — are servants of God, not His incarnations.

📌 Clarifying Consistency

You challenged me on consistency. But I submit that the Islamic view is consistent:

An angel taking on an appearance does not compromise its essence.

But God assuming human attributes, including ignorance and death, does compromise divine essence.

The burden of proof remains on you to logically reconcile how the same being can be both fully omniscient and ignorant at the same time without contradiction — not just theologically assert it.

🔄 On Progress and Engagement

You rightly note that I have repeated the core question. But that repetition is not without reason — it's because the answers provided thus far have not addressed the philosophical contradiction itself, only reiterated doctrinal affirmations.

Saying “the Word became flesh” is a claim, not a resolution of the logical problem. To move forward, a theological assertion must be coherently explained, not just repeated.

✍️ Concluding Thoughts

Let me close with this:

I fully respect your right to affirm the Trinity and Incarnation as matters of faith.

But when discussing these doctrines philosophically, one must be prepared to answer how seemingly contradictory attributes can coexist rationally within one being.

As a Muslim, I affirm:

> “There is nothing like unto Him” (Qur’an 42:11)
God is utterly distinct from His creation — and to merge the divine with the mortal is to collapse that essential distinction.

If you wish to continue, I invite you to respond not with analogies, but with a clear logical framework that resolves the contradiction in attributes. That, I believe, is where true interfaith clarity lies.

Kind regards.

FreeIgboho:
Since you're open to continuing the dialogue, taking into account all that happened with Christ, words of the prophets, words of Christ himself, thousands of years of him being worshipped, etc, if all that didn’t convince you he is God, (and bearing in mind you're incapable of comprehending God, and therefore discounting your own preconceived notions of God), please tell us what would reasonably convince you that a person is God

Thank you for your reply and for continuing this dialogue.
I appreciate your willingness to engage sincerely, even though we differ fundamentally in our theological conclusions.

You’ve asked a profound question:

> “If all that didn’t convince you he is God… what would reasonably convince you that a person is God?”

Let me respond to this thoughtfully and in principle.

1. The Starting Point: What Does It Mean to Be God?

To assess whether someone is divine, we must begin with a consistent definition of God. From both a rational and scriptural standpoint, God is understood to be eternal, all-powerful, all-knowing, self-sufficient, and unchanging. These attributes are not optional; they are essential to the very concept of divinity.

So to claim that a person is God, we would expect them to fully and consistently embody these divine attributes, without contradiction or limitation.

Yet in the case of Jesus (peace be upon him), we see clear instances in the Gospels where he:

Did not know the hour (Mark 13:32)

Was tempted by Satan (Matthew 4:1)

Needed sleep and food (John 4:6, Matthew 4:2)

Grew in wisdom (Luke 2:52)

Prayed to a higher will (Luke 22:42)

These are not arbitrary details; they reveal a dependent being, not an all-sufficient one. To affirm divinity in the face of such clear limitation would require redefining God to include ignorance, need, change, and dependence — which would make the term "God" logically incoherent.

So the issue is not a lack of “convincing events,” but rather a conceptual contradiction. If you ask, “What would convince me that someone is God?” — the answer is simple: Consistency with what it means to be God.

2. Appeal to Mystery Is Not a Theological Solution

You mention that we are “incapable of comprehending God” and therefore should not trust our reasoning. But if we abandon reason when it comes to God's nature, then:

We lose the ability to distinguish truth from falsehood.

We could claim anything to be divine without logical grounds.

Every contradictory idea becomes immune to critique by hiding behind “mystery.”

Even the Bible says:

> “Come now, let us reason together…” (Isaiah 1:18)

And the Qur’an says:

> “Do they not reflect upon the Qur’an? Had it been from other than God, they would have found many contradictions in it.” (Qur’an 4:82)

So while we humbly acknowledge that we cannot fully grasp God's essence, we are still called to use the intellect God gave us to test claims about Him — especially when such claims involve fundamental contradictions.

3. Thousands of Years of Worship Is Not Proof of Divinity

You also mentioned that Jesus has been worshipped for thousands of years. With respect, the duration or popularity of a belief does not prove its truth:

The ancient Egyptians worshipped Pharaohs for millennia — they were not divine.

Hindus worship hundreds of gods today — does that make all of them divine?

Emperors in Rome were worshipped — yet they were mortal.

Truth is not determined by how many people believe something, or for how long. It is determined by whether the claim stands up to reason, revelation, and consistency.

4. The Islamic Perspective Offers a Clearer View

From the Islamic worldview, God does not become man, suffer death, or become subject to creation. He is utterly unique, transcendent, and perfect. As the Qur’an states:

> “There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)
“God is not born, nor does He give birth.” (Qur’an 112:3)

Jesus (peace be upon him) is honored in Islam as a miraculous prophet — born of a virgin, a bringer of divine guidance, and the Messiah. But he never claimed divinity. Rather, he called people to worship the One who sent him (John 17:3, Qur’an 3:51).

5. A Final Thought

I do not ask for supernatural spectacles to be “convinced” that someone is God. I simply ask for logical coherence and theological consistency. If a being claims divinity, that being must not also display the signs of dependence, ignorance, or change — for these violate the very nature of God.

In truth, the concept of a God-man — both fully omnipotent and simultaneously limited — is a contradiction, not a mystery.

So respectfully, I turn the question around:
What would convince you that Jesus is not God, but a mighty prophet sent by the one true God — as all prophets were?

Let us continue this exchange with mutual respect, clarity, and a shared desire to seek the truth.

Peace be upon those who follow guidance.

FreeIgboho:
Thanks.
So we differ on that point:
I believe real-world results matter and that 99% of religious terrorism of today is from Islam.
You believe what matters is some nebulous "truth" (knowing fully well there is no such thing and if there were, you wouldn't know it if you saw it!)

As for the original point, these posts answer it:

Likewise, you cannot assert that God is eternal and unchanging, and then say he STARTED creating at some point. That implies change both internally and externally. Massive change at that.

AND THIS:

But I asked you b4:
How can eternally unchanging anything create something?
And
How can there be an all powerful and all good anything yet bad things still happen.

Bottom line, man gave God His attributes when in fact man is incapable of comprehending God!
Example, we know Jesus Christ is God the Son, yet Jesus Christ doesn't know the last day. Does God the Father know absolutely everything? So how come we're encouraged to be a certain way to obtain a certain outcome?

** It’s not just his being worshipped thousands of years, Christ himself said he was God, forgave sins, accepted worship, raised himself from dead (as he said he would), and most importantly, is alive and active in people's lives TODAY!

Thank you again for your reply.
I appreciate your continued engagement, though I must express concern that key theological points I raised still remain unaddressed. Rather than replying to the central philosophical issue of divine contradiction in Trinitarian doctrine, the discussion has again shifted — this time toward sociopolitical statistics and epistemological skepticism. I will address your points systematically.

1. Truth Is Not Measured by Statistics or Power

You assert:

> “99% of religious terrorism today is from Islam”
“Real-world results matter… not nebulous truth”

Let’s be clear: truth is not a function of what some people do in its name, nor is it established by temporal power or geopolitical trends. If truth were determined by the behavior of followers, Christianity too would collapse under the weight of its own history:

The Crusades killed thousands under the cross.

The Inquisition tortured and executed “heretics.”

European colonialism baptized massacres in the name of Christ.

The Ku Klux Klan burned crosses while invoking the Bible.

Does this invalidate the message of Jesus (peace be upon him)? I would say no — and I encourage you to apply the same intellectual fairness toward Islam. A religion must be judged by its teachings, not the misdeeds of those who betray those teachings.

As for the claim that “real-world results” determine truth: by that logic, polytheistic empires, atheistic ideologies, or even unjust but powerful regimes could be seen as “true” merely because they’re dominant. This is a pragmatic argument, not a philosophical one. Truth does not bow to popularity or power.

2. On Your Claim That “Truth Is Nebulous”

You wrote:

> “You believe in some nebulous truth — knowing fully well there is no such thing…”

This is self-defeating. If you assert that truth cannot be known, then you cannot claim your beliefs about Jesus are true either. If truth is unknowable, you have no basis to argue for the divinity of Christ, for the Bible’s truth, or for any theological claim. This approach collapses into skepticism and silences all meaningful dialogue.

Islam affirms that while human knowledge is limited, truth is real and knowable within our capacity — through revelation, reason, and reflection. That is why God revealed books and sent prophets — not to confuse us, but to guide us.

3. Your Deflection from the Original Challenge

I asked a clear question:
If Jesus is fully God, how can he be ignorant (Mark 13:32), tempted (Matthew 4:1), weak, or crucified?

Your reply:

> “Christ is God the Son... yet he doesn’t know the last day.”

This affirms the contradiction rather than resolving it. You claim divinity for Jesus, yet accept limitations that are incompatible with divinity. Appealing to mystery or saying, “man can’t comprehend God,” is not a resolution — it’s an evasion.

If Jesus is God, and God doesn’t know something, then either:

God is no longer omniscient, or

Jesus isn’t fully God.

You cannot have it both ways without violating the law of non-contradiction.

4. On God Creating While Being Unchanging

You said:

> “If God is unchanging, how could He start creating? That implies change.”

This is a common misunderstanding. In Islamic theology, God’s will is eternal — He always willed to create, and creation occurred at the moment He willed it to. The act of creation occurs in time; the will behind it is timeless.

Think of a writer who has an idea eternally in mind, and chooses when to write. The act is new in time; the intention is not. This does not imply change in essence — only in relation to the created order.

Moreover, saying “God must change because He creates” assumes God is subject to time — but time is a created phenomenon. God is not inside time, changing with it; rather, He created time itself.

5. “Jesus Said He Was God” — A Critical Review

You wrote:

> “Jesus said he was God, forgave sins, accepted worship, raised himself from the dead…”

Each of these claims has been debated extensively even within Christian scholarship:

Jesus never explicitly said “I am God” — such a foundational claim should be unambiguous.

Forgiving sins does not necessitate divinity. In Islam, prophets forgave sins by God’s permission.

As for worship, accepting reverence in certain contexts (e.g., bowing) is not proof of divinity — prophets were honored too.

The claim that Jesus raised himself contradicts verses that say God raised him (e.g., Acts 2:24, Galatians 1:1).

Furthermore, your reasoning is circular:

> Jesus is God because he said so, and I believe he said so because he is God.

This does not provide external, rational verification. Islam honors Jesus as the Messiah, born of a virgin, performing miracles — but not divine, because divinity cannot die, be tempted, or be ignorant.

6. Final Clarification: The Islamic Perspective

Islam affirms:

God is absolutely one — indivisible in person and essence.

God does not become man, nor is He subject to death or ignorance.

Jesus (peace be upon him) is a great messenger of God — born miraculously, honored highly, but not divine.

Logic, consistency, and revelation are not mutually exclusive — they work together to form a coherent belief.

❖ In Conclusion

If you wish to continue this conversation, I respectfully ask that we return to the actual theological question:

How can Jesus be both fully God and fully limited — without contradiction?

If the response is to abandon logic, then we must ask: Why argue at all, if reason is dismissed when it becomes inconvenient?

I remain committed to a sincere, respectful dialogue grounded in clarity and truth — not in slogans or deflections.

Peace be upon those who seek understanding.

TenQ:
I suspect you chose to be obstinate with respect to comprehension of plain doctrine backed up with scriptures.

Thus, I will certainly come back to this when you respond to the first post. I want to see if you would apply exactly your logic to it






Here it is below as a reminder:



I want you to assert that my understanding is correct!

Thank you for your reply and for your continued engagement.
Before proceeding, I would like to address a concern regarding the nature of our dialogue.

It appears that we are beginning to repeat ground that has already been covered. The theological points I presented earlier were not primarily about the state of the prophets in their graves, but about the logical coherence of attributing divine and human limitations simultaneously to Jesus, and the philosophical tensions within Trinitarian theology.

Nonetheless, I will address your current observations for the sake of clarity — though they are unrelated to the core argument I raised. Let me clarify the Islamic perspective on the points you mentioned:

✅ Affirmations from Islamic Theology

1. Are the Prophets alive in their graves worshipping Allah?
Yes — according to several authentic Islamic traditions (e.g., Sahih Muslim), the Prophets are alive in a special barzakh (intermediate) state, and they continue to worship Allah. This is a matter of the unseen (ghayb) that we affirm based on revelation.

2. Are their bodies preserved from decay?
Yes — according to authentic ahadith, the earth does not consume the bodies of the Prophets, as a special honor given to them by Allah.

3. Has any prophet, including Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, been resurrected before the Day of Judgment?
No. In Islamic belief, none of the deceased — prophets or otherwise — have been bodily resurrected yet. The Day of Resurrection (Yawm al-Qiyāmah) is when all humans will be raised and judged.

4. Will Prophet Muhammad ﷺ be the first to be resurrected?
According to some narrations, he will be the first to be raised and intercede on behalf of humanity, but again, this will happen on the Day of Resurrection, not before.

📌 A Request for Clarity and Progress

Now that I’ve answered your observations with direct Islamic positions, I kindly ask: what is the relevance of these points to the original theological issue I raised — namely, whether a being who is truly God can be ignorant, tempted, or die without compromising divine perfection?

Additionally, I must respectfully ask:
Why are we circling back to previously answered questions without addressing the main argument?

A productive dialogue requires progress, not repetition. I am more than willing to continue this discussion sincerely and respectfully, but only if it remains focused and forward-moving. If your next set of questions simply reiterates the same points without engaging the core logic of the Islamic perspective or responding meaningfully to the concerns I’ve raised, I suggest — respectfully — that we pause the dialogue here.

I remain open to genuine exchange, grounded in logic, clarity, and mutual respect.