₦airaland Forum

honesttalk21:
➜Muslims do not worship Muhammad pbuh. Their prayers, known as solat, are directed solely to God; sending blessings upon Muhammad is not the same as worship. Do we also worship Abraham?
➜ Concepts like virgin birth, ascension, and unique roles do not imply divinity. For instance, Adam had no parents, and angels are exempt from judgment, yet none of them are considered God. The Qur’an clearly states that Jesus is not divine see verses 4:171 and 5:72. .

1. 5 Times a day, you say your Muslim prayers; you literally pray to Mohammed, who is dead in his grave somewhere. And it never occurred to you that, because you have to do this and literally live your life to mirror his in most places, you worship him? Come on!

...The worshiper will arise from the prostration to return to the standing position and say, "God is the greatest," completing one full rakah (cycle of prayer).
When the worshiper reaches the end of the second cycle of prayer, and they are sitting on their knees, they will perform the tashahud, or the following steps.
All the compliments, prayers and pure words are for God.
Peace be upon you, O Prophet, and the mercy of God and His blessings.
Peace be upon us, and on the righteous slaves of God.
I bear witness that none has the right to be worshiped except God, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger.
If this is the final rakah (cycle) in the prayer then the worshiper will add this part:
O God, send prayers upon Muhammad and upon the family (or followers) of Muhammad, just as You sent prayers upon Ibrahim and the family (or followers) of Ibrahim.
Verily, You are full of Praise and Majesty.
O God, bless Muhammad and the family (or followers) of Muhammad as You blessed Ibrahim and the family (or followers) of Ibraaheem.
Verily, You are full of Praise and Majesty.

You literally direct those words in red to Mohammed himself, even as you continue to pretend you only reverence Allah in the rest of the prayer. And the fact that you have to mention Mohammed's name literally so many times already shows the man has a divine role to play in your belief there. Your prayer literally portrays the fact that Allah cannot forgive you of any sin if you do not first make supplication to a dead man, and that does not ring bells in your head regarding the divinity of this man, who was called Mohammed in your lives? How can anyone who prays those mechanical prayers 5 times a day not get that much?

2. Adam had no parent; any human after Adam can also have no parent, and there is nothing special about this. Right? Was Adam also raised, by passing judgment entirely to be with Allah? Was Adam also raised as a witness/judge against all those who came after him?

honesttalk21:
➜Shared figures do not equate to shared religion. Islam is an independent Abrahamic faith that fundamentally differs from Christianity, rather than being a sect of it. ...

Not according to your Quran, which insists they are all from one and the same. Even your Allah pretends he is the same that is referred to as YHWH in both the Torah and the Injeel. Come on! 🥱🥱🥱

We are talking of the same lineage— non-Israelites—, same book(Torah and Injeel—, and supposedly the same deity here... Allah claims to be YHWH... why the need for two different religions for the same deity? Even holy water used by the catholics is a part of the Islamic religion, Quran 14 vs 37.🥱🥱

AntiChristian:
➜Answer the question! What the God that commanded killings in the old testament different from the one in the New Testament?
➜ Is the God of the Old Judaism God - Brutal and violent!
➜ And God of the New Testament - Meek and Princely Prince of peace? If na same God - He don change o! No be the same yesterday, today and forever again o!

Religion is a brainwashing tool used to deprive individuals of the ability to reason about life and living for themselves.

---

YHWH gave His people a country— a nation complete with land mass with borders, with Constitutional Law, an army, leaders, people, rights, etc., not a religion. 🥱

According to the books of the Bible, YHWH gave to His people a nation and a Constitutional Law under which to live in that nation, which He carved out, primarily for them. Part of that Law included the famous law requiring death to all in the land who committed treason against Him, the Constitutional Law of the Land. Blasphemy in the land of Israel at the time was met with the punishment of treason. And this only within the borders of the land of Israel. 🥱🥱

Jesus Christ of Israel was famously condemned and killed for this very same by his people... treason/blasphemy against the Law in Israel, His Father. Yeah, that was the accusation raised against Jesus Christ of Israel by the Jews who hated him. 🥱

2. There is no historical evidence to show that the laws against treason in the land of Israel, which existed up until about 2000 years ago, were the worst in the region or time in question. And yes, we say the time in question because the nation of Israel that was constituted by the God and Law of Israel in the land of Canaan was destroyed and the people exiled— they were punished by Him—, according to the book, by the YHWH of Israel, for a period beginning 2000 years ago.

So, to answer your question, the God/Constitutional Law in the land of Israel was not more brutal or more violent than the laws in other lands at that time. Again, recall that the nation was a nation that was of this earth ... of men. 🥱

3. According to the Gospels, Jesus Christ of Israel came to give His followers a country— the Kingdom of God, a nation not of this world. The nation comes complete with borders(inside and all around His Followers), inhabitants(Born-agains all of whom are Israelites), Constitutional Law that is Jesus Christ of Israel Himself, Rights, etc.— not a religion, much like His Father before Him. To have the people He wanted, He had to submit to and die the death that His Father wanted Him to. And Jesus Christ of Israel made abundantly clear that He would continue to do that which He sees His Father do, implying He did not come to oppose but to continue the works of His Father before Him. Clearly, YHWH of the Old did not change, and Jesus Christ of Israel evidenced this through His Words and deeds. 🥱🥱🥱

Yep! The same yesterday, today, and forever they both are, according to the books. 🥱🥱

P.S. Also note that the blasphemy laws(along with some other laws) of Israel at the time applied only to those within the borders of the land of Israel. Israelites who went to live in Egypt or other lands were not subject to the blasphemy law, along with many other laws that applied only within the borders of Israel. They instead became subjects to the laws of the foreign lands they lived in. If you read the law of Moses in detail, you will find repeated mentions of the laws being effective in the land of Canaan(Israel).

honesttalk21:
✓ You're not correcting misinformation; you're repeating a heated false argument. When John of Damascus called Islam a Christian heresy, it only shows how a Christian thinker from the 7th or 8th century saw a religion he saw as a rival. He looked at the Qur’an through a Christian lens, so naturally he labeled things he disagreed with as heresy. That’s describing his view, not proving what Islam actually teaches.
✓ More importantly, looking at the facts, Islam clearly rejects the idea that Muhammad pbuh is divine and condemns worshiping any human (Qur’an 18:110, 41:6). Saying he was worshiped is simply wrong. Islam also denies the main ideas of Christianity seen in the Trinity, the Incarnation, Jesus as the Son of God, and Atonement. A sect changes part of a religion; Islam rejects its core beliefs entirely.
✓ Believing Jesus is a prophet doesn’t make someone Christian. Jews believe in Moses without being a group within Judaism; Christians accept Hebrew prophets but aren’t just a branch of Judaism.
✓ Using John of Damascus as a source means relying on a critic’s theology and calling it history. By that logic, Jewish criticisms would make Christianity a Jewish heresy too.
✓ The bottom line is Islam isn’t a Christian sect that grew into a big religion. It’s a separate Abrahamic faith that directly opposes Christianity’s main teachings. Calling something heresy doesn’t mean it came from those beliefs it just shows where biases lie.

1. So, the view of Christians who lived during the time of the Caliphates and had the chance to examine the different iterations of the Quran, before the final standardization which is what you have today, is invalid? 🥱🥱🥱

2. Islam rejects Mohammed's divinity yet requires that Mohammedians pray to Mohammed 5 times a day? 😩😩😩

3. The Quran's Jesus suggests a prophet and human being very much different from what we consider human. The Jesus of the Quran is said to skip judgment entirely and will serve as a judge over his followers. Does that seem to you like any human you know of? Even Mohammed, does not have such elevation to his status despite equally being portrayed in his book as a divine one. 🥱🥱🥱

4. This isn't reliance on the theology of critics but merely pointing to the fact that Islam as a part of Christianity has been around since the dawn of Islam. 🥱🥱

5. Opinions do not erase known facts.

Just like sects such as Scientology, Unitarian universalists, World Mission Society Church of God, unification Church, etc., are considered Christian even with nothing of that which is Nicene respected by any of them, so also, Islam, too, can be considered a Christian sect. 🥱🥱

ope2711:
Thanks very much to everyone for your advice.
I now realized today that she has followed her friend to Egypt.

The last thing you need is to spend your time monitoring the life of someone who left you. Even if she wan go Libya, e no suppose concern you as you have there 4 people there who need your attention. Please stop getting yourself distracted with the mundane and focus your energy on what matters which is you raising your children even better than their mother would have been able to has she remained with you. 🥱🥱

Arowojobe86:
How Colonialism, Christianity, and Western Education Fractured Yoruba Muslim Society
—Bashir Arowojobe
When cultures collide, the outcomes are rarely neutral. Sociologist J. Milton Yinger (1963) outlined the possibilities: domination, parallel coexistence, or a transformative intermingling.
The encounter between Yoruba Muslim society and the trident of British colonialism, Christian missionary enterprise, and Western education was not a meeting of equals. It was an asymmetric assault that did not merely add new elements to our culture, but actively fractured it from within. This is not a comprehensive history, but an analysis of key strategic wounds—distortions that continue to shape our religious practice, scholarship, and identity today.

1. The Sectarian Fracture: A Strategic Diversion
Faced with the missionary bait of "education for conversion," Yoruba Muslims devised three responses: outright rejection, the creation of Arabic schools (Al-madaris an-Nidhamiyyah), and the pooling of resources to establish private Muslim schools.
While the third strategy was pragmatically brilliant, its legacy is a paradox. The very organizations formed to unite Muslims for survival became the breeding grounds for enduring sectarian cleavages. The struggle against an external threat turned inward, fragmenting the community along lines of mundane organizational allegiance, diverting energy from consolidation to internal rivalry. The colonial challenge didn't just create Muslim schools; it helped create Muslim factions.

Islam came in to colonize Yoruba land, attempting to replace even Yoruba culture with what is the culture and traditions of the colonizers but failed. And you don't see how that worked out in favor of Yoruba s and Yoruba tradition? 🥱🥱

You don go Sudan or Somalia where there is literally no local cultures and traditions to be found except foreign Arab culture among those who live there, despite the rich cultures of other African nations? 🥱🥱

Why does my response to OP keep getting banned? How in the worlds is an objective opinion based on facts considered an insult to a religion? I don't get banned when I call out the hypocrisy of Christianity based on clear facts but the moment I call out the hypocrisy of Islam, I get banned? Come on now ..🥱🥱🥱

AntiChristian:
➜What about Prophets Hud, Saleh and Shu'ayb that are not mentioned in the Bible, ignoramus? This just proves that Prophet Muhammad's knowledge is superior and richer!
➜ Where is the claim that Ishmaeel is the one chosen by Allah in the Qur'an?
Allah says what means: "We have revealed to you (O Messenger), as We revealed to Noah and the Prophets after him; and We revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the descendants..." Surah An-Nisa (4:163)
➜So it is clear there were all appointed and chosen by Allah!
➜But Jesus was not human but God or son of God! How can God have ancestry?
➜What you are saying is that Jesus is free to copy from Moses and David and no Problem that's not plagiarism but others are not free to do same! That pretty obnoxious prejudice don't you think?

1. Wow...talk about shifting of goal posts. Need I remind you of your question?

AntiChristian:
✓ Which Torah stories are inside the Qur'an? Do provide clear proofs!
✓ And if Jesus quoted a verse from the Old testament do you say he copied it too?

I am certainly not the ignoramus here.🥱

Oh, definitely! Mohammed definitely had a knack for taking stories from here and there. The Quran is literally filled with references taken from myths that existed long before his time. 🤔

2. Are you insinuating that the Hadiths are alsocorrupted too? It seems a lot of you are quick to throw the Hadiths under the bus whenever it suits you. Sahih Muslim 2276 explicitly states that Ishmael was the one chosen for his covenant. 🥱

“Verily, Allah chose Kinanah from the sons of Ishmael, he chose the Quraysh from Kinanah, he chose the tribe of Hashim from the Quraysh, and he chose me from the tribe of Hashim.” -Sahih Muslim 2276

Allah then listening prophets from the bloodline of Isaac, the ones to whom he refused to give his Covenants, is what I am asking. 🥱🥱

3. The Jesus of the Quran was not portrayed in the same light as any human I know of. We should probably get clues from the Quran on the why of this. Why does the Quran reject the divinity of the person of Jesus in the Quran, while at the same time, giving him superhuman capabilities that even Mohammed could not compare to?

4. Wrong! Moses and David are ancestors of Jesus Christ of Israel; therefore, He infringed upon no copyrights when He quoted the statements made by His ancestors. 😂😂😂

Shopwise:
Many say the Kingdom of God is “within you.” But Daniel saw a stone that crushed empires,real Governments
Jesus said He’d receive an *everlasting kingdom*.
The apostles asked to sit on thrones.
The Government will be upon his shoulders
This isn’t just a feeling—it’s a coming global government.

👉 Watch the full breakdown: Why the Kingdom is too big to be “just inside you.”

"Within You" vs. "In Your Midst": The Real Meaning of Luke 17:21

If you read all of the Gospels and combine all that is said on the subject instead of your usual religious cherry picking, you would find that the message is instead that the Kingdom of God of Israel is inside and all around the followers of Jesus Christ off Israel whose followers are first and foremost Israelites. 🥱🥱🥱

Bahamas95:
I ain't dragging women backward.
It seems you skipped the part where I said delaying childbirth is one of the factors causing fibroid in women. Women that have given birth can also suffer from fibroid.
As a matter of fact all the women I know with this fibroid problem are childless, why is it like that?

Stop spreading what is obviously false information in 2026. 🥱🥱

You only need to engage your brain cells to see how silly the claim up there about delay in pregnancy being responsible for fibroids in women. If a 15 year old girl develops fibroids, does it have to do with her not getting pregnant on time? If a 60-year-old childfree woman never developed uterine fibroids at any point in her life, do we also claim that your reasoning holds? 🥱🥱

AntiChristian:
✓ Which Torah stories are inside the Qur'an? Do provide clear proofs!
✓ And if Jesus quoted a verse from the Old testament do you say he copied it too?

More like Mohammed used the names of Israelite Prophets listed in the Torah to spin his own tales. He claims Ishamael was the one chosen by Allah, however, all of the prophets before him came from the bloodline of Isaac, the one not chosen by Allah. How come? Abraham has other children, so why only from the bloodline of the one whom Mohammed's Allah did not choose? 🥱🥱

2. Jesus Christ of Israel was promised in the Old Law and the Prophets, and He also happened to be of the very same bloodline that is the Law and the the Prophets. No copying there since it is all part and parcel of His very ancestry. 🥱🥱

Bahamas95:
➜I’ve been thinking about this issue for a while but what happened yesterday pushed me to share my thoughts and hear other opinions
I’m not encouraging having children outside marriage. However when things don’t go as planned people should consider practical options. My wife’s godmother nearly 50 was diagnosed with fibroid. She’s not the first woman I know facing this, many of the women I know with fibroid happen to be childless. Though being childless is not the direct cause. Fibroids are mainly influenced by hormones and genetics, and delaying childbirth may sometimes increase the risk.
Many women delay having children because of marriage issues or societal pressure only to risk health problems or end up childless. When a husband isn’t forthcoming is it wise to keep waiting?
I’ve also noticed that many people reject adoption because of fear of what society will say. Ten years ago a childless woman about 60 years old in my neighbourhood adopted two children. Today those kids have brought joy and purpose into her life. If she had adopted earlier the children would be grown now and she could even have grandchildren.
My point is simple: Nigerian women should not let society, religion or whatever reason stop them from making choices that protect their future and wellbeing.

African men are part of the reason why the healthcare system continues to discriminate and belittle the health and concerns of African women. 🙄🙄🙄

We know that some women who have had kids can also go on to develop fibroids, and some women without children at all could live their lives never encountering problems with PCOS or fibroids. There may be limited research that has been carried out on this to date, but we know enough to no longer link fibroids with pregnancies. So, why in 2026, are you looking to drag women back to where it was approximately 30 years ago? 🙄🙄

honesttalk21:
...Your argument lacks rigour and consistency.

Again, I am not arguing anything but simply focused on correcting misinformation here. Much of your statements seem geared towards ignoring historical facts(including facts of claims made in the Quran itself) all for a man called Mohammed worshipped by his followers. 🥱

Op isn't the first to raise the argument that Islam is a sect of Christianity that blew up big. John of Damascus, a Christian who lived in the area that is Syria today made similar observations back around 100 years after the death of Mohammed. he analyzed the Quran and came aware describing Mohammed as a heretic..not a pagan(a person of another religion).

There is also the superstition of the Ishmaelites which to this day prevails and keeps people in error, being a forerunner of the Antichrist. They are descended from Ishmael, [who] was born to Abraham of Agar, and for this reason they are called both Agarenes and Ishmaelites. They are also called Saracens, which is derived from Sarras kenoi, or destitute of Sara, because of what Agar said to the angel: ‘Sara hath sent me away destitute.’ [ Quran 99] These used to be idolaters and worshiped the morning star and Aphrodite, whom in their own language they called Khabár, which means great. [ Quran 100] And so down to the time of Heraclius they were very great idolaters. From that time to the present, a false prophet named Mohammed has appeared in their midst. This man, after having chanced upon the Old and New Testaments and likewise, it seems, having conversed with an Arian monk, [ Quran 101] devised his own heresy. Then, having insinuated himself into the good graces of the people by a show of seeming piety, he gave out that a certain book had been sent down to him from heaven. He had set down some ridiculous compositions in this book of his, and he gave it to them as an object of veneration. http://orthodoxinfo.com/general/stjohn_islam.aspx

He also noted how Mohammed seemed fixated on making himself the god with his many ideas, which seem nothing but twists on that written in the Bible. 🥱

The Abbasid Empire was more Persianized, and it's in it's in, Baghdad. Keep in mind when these Arab Muslim conquests happened, most of so let's say Egypt and Syria, were highly Christian. Let's say in the 8th to 10th century, the majority were still Christian. And there are Jews also as well, especially in Alexandria and various cities. And you have a lot of Zoroastrians and Persians. You have all these different groups who are living under the Islamic rule. They're the ones who are doing all the stuff that we call the golden age. It's Christians, it's Jews, and especially it's Persians in the Abbasid era. And it's not because of anything special about Islam. I mean, they are literally not Muslims, and a few of them who are are literally like they just converted. They're first-generation converts, which means they're still primarily whatever their former religion was. Sure, it could be said that Muslims sponsored much of the work done during that era, maybe paid for it. But there was nothing intrinsic to Islam about any of the work of those periods.
... continued

The Abbasid Empire was more Persianized, and it's in it's in, Baghdad. Keep in mind when these Arab Muslim conquests happened, most of so let's say Egypt and Syria, were highly Christian. Let's say in the 8th to 10th century, the majority were still Christian. And there are Jews also as well, especially in Alexandria and various cities. And you have a lot of Zoroastrians and Persians. You have all these different groups who are living under the Islamic rule. They're the ones who are doing all the stuff that we call the golden age. It's Christians, it's Jews, and especially it's Persians in the Abbasid era. And it's not because of anything special about Islam. I mean, they are literally not Muslims, and a few of them who are are literally like they just converted. They're first-generation converts, which means they're still primarily whatever their former religion was. Sure, it could be said that Muslims sponsored much of the work done during that era, maybe paid for it. But there was nothing intrinsic to Islam about any of the work of those periods.

But once Islam started to harden, because even at this time, the Abbasid caliphate in the golden age, there were still debates between the various schools of Islamic law. And some were actually considered liberal, if we can use that term. Sometime in the 10th-11th century, what's known as uh the doors of Ishtahed... The doors of Ijtihad (independent legal reasoning in Islam) refer to the ongoing, scholarly effort to derive and interpret Islamic law from the Quran and Sunnah. While some historical perspectives suggested the "gates" closed around the 10th century to prevent unqualified interpretation, many scholars maintain that the doors remain open for qualified experts to address modern, evolving issues. Ijtihadwas a way for the liberals to get around draconian Islam. However, history suggests the doors were closed beginning around the 10th century, giving power over to the hardliners who won the Islamic debate, leading to the decline in the embrace of the sciences and the last golden age.

So it was never because of Islam, but there was a time when Islam, in its early national period, was liberal enough to allow this sort of advancement to happen. And the people who were doing the achievements were actually not Muslims. And if they were, they were like literally just converted to join the winning crowd, as a lot of people did over the years; their mind and the way they thought, and their heritage was still non-Muslim. So that's why I give you that analogy about Saudi Arabia and these places, if you look at their worldview, their culture, which is based on Islam, well, yeah, it's draconian Sharia law, living in a desert, polygamy, etc, but they have wealth, and look at what they can have. They can build skyscrapers, they can have the greatest stuff that westerners can't have, but that doesn't mean it's actually part and parcel of Islam.

... (cleaned and corrected) transcript continued

There were, in fact, two Islamic golden ages

⚈ Harun ibn al-Mahdi was the fifth Abbasid caliph of the Abbasid Caliphate, reigning from September 786 until his death in March 809. He was allied with or on friendly terms with Charlemagne. Charlemagne(2 April 748 – 28 January 814) was King of the Franks from 768, King of the Lombards from 774, and Emperor of what is now known as the Carolingian Empire from 800. Charlemagne spread Christianity to his new conquests (often by force), as seen at the Massacre of Verden against the Saxons. He also sent envoys and initiated diplomatic contact with Harun al-Rashid, the Abbasid caliph in the 790s, due to their mutual interest in Iberian affairs.

⚈ There's also a supposed golden age in Spain, the Umayyad, in Cordoba. The Umayyad Caliphate of Cordoba (929–1031) marked the golden age of Muslim Spain, transforming it into a center of intellectual, cultural, and economic prosperity. Under leaders like Abd al-Rahman III and al-Hakam II, Cordoba became one of Europe's largest, most advanced cities, famous for its libraries, scientific advancements, and the architectural masterpiece, Madinat al-Zahra.

And what needs to be understood about the golden age is this... Let me try to start off by giving you an analogy. Imagine, many, many decades or centuries from now, those buildings are still standing. Everything's changed, and Islam may be gone or whatever. And people look at it and go, "Wow, that was a golden age, that country, that civilization, because look what it led to. "Now, we would say, well, no, I mean, they had their Islam, sure, but this is actually money, and Westerners built it ...western technology, western workers... and it just so happened that these Arabs had the money to spend on it. That, I submit to you, is the best way to understand the golden age that happened historically. It didn't happen due to Islam. Quite the contrary, it happened despite Islam.
... continued

honesttalk21:
➜The chronology of hadith doesn't support your argument either.
➜ Regardless of one's views on hadith transmission, Islamic teachings are based on the Qur'an, which explicitly denies the divinity and crucifixion of Jesus.
➜ These beliefs contradict all Christian doctrines, rather than borrowing from them. Saying there are bits and pieces is merely speculation, not evidence. Similarities don't prove one religion copied another; if they did, you could argue that Christianity borrowed from Judaism and Judaism from Mesopotamian traditions, which would reduce all religions to mere plagiarism.
➜ The comparison between Alexander and Dhul-Qarnayn fails for the same reason. Shared themes do not imply that one is dependent on the other. Ancient cultures shared stories orally without necessarily borrowing authorship.
➜ Lastly, the Islamic view of Jesus not being co-eternal does not stem from Arianism; it contradicts both Nicene and Arian Christianity. Islam is not just a variation of Christianity; it fundamentally rejects its core beliefs.

1. What chronology of the Hadiths? You claimed information contained in at least one of the Hadiths was not valid because the Hadith was supposedly compiled many, many decades after the death of Mohammed, so I asked, based on the fact that all the Hadiths were compiled almost 150-200 years after the fact, you should probably let us know before hand which Hadiths we should throw out as unauthorized/corrupted. 🥱🥱

2. Is the Quran, therefore, the only valid Islamic text there is? 🥱🥱

Also, how can it be said that the Quran denies the divinity of Jesus in the Quran if the Quran declares he was born of a virgin woman(described as a pure woman Quran 66:12), and instead of dying, was lifted by Allah, directly into Allah's Paradise(Quran 3 vs 55 & Quran 4 vs157-158 )... an opportunity given to no other man(not even Mohammed, the divine one of Allah)? Jesus of the Quran is said to have been born pure and without a father (Quran 19 vs 19-21 & Quran 3 vs 47). So, where do you get this notion that the Quran denies the divinity of Jesus Christ? Yes, the Quran goes to great lengths to deny Jesus of the Quran worship by claiming Allah has no son, but at the same time, Allah gave the Jesus of the Quran no other as father, and even lifts him to himself — by passing judgment altogether — while insisting that Jesus would stand as witness against his followers at the end; Mohammed will face judgment but Jesus of the Quran will not. 🥱🥱

3. Not necessarily, as even the belief of the Satanists fits in well with Christian belief.... it is all based on the religion that was created by the Romans of the ideas stolen from the original movement, which began with the Israelites(Jews) in Judea before they were eventually kicked out by the Romans. 🥱🥱

Judaism is a religion that began in Babylon during the time that the people of Judea(the Jews) were in captivity there. And, yes, there are common elements between all religions. However, if you notice, my only reason for separating these particular religions remains that one was created and still is administered to this day by those who are of the chosen bloodline of YHWH, while the other(Islam included) isn't.🥱🥱

4. It isn't a comparison. Historians have it that Quran 18 vs 83–101 literally retells the myth that existed at the time about Alexander, the Great. 🥱🥱

The Hellenistic Alexander Romance is a 3rd-century BCE Greek fictionalized biography of Alexander the Great, blending historical events with myth, fantasy, and propaganda. Often attributed to "Pseudo-Callisthenes," it features tales like Alexander as the son of Egyptian Pharaoh Nectanebo II, diving bell adventures, and journeys to the edge of the world.

5. That isn't true since Arianism is one of the major sects out there, at the time, known for its belief that Jesus was created and hence not co-eternal with his father. 🥱🥱

A lot of Christianity does not conform to the Nicene treaty which was entered into only after many Christian houses had established themselves. Nicene was considered a power play by Rome to bring all of the sects under the same umbrella that later became the Catholic church, but if you go back through your history, you will find that not all of the sects agreed with Nicene nor followed the lead of the Roman church.

Mohammed mentioned the monastics in his Quran. Did you know that there were many who embraced the monastic ideas but were not joined with the church of Rome, even at the time of Mohammed?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zy5iwkzgtXA?si=KUPvKTa68PQ5lKk3
Below is the transcript o the video, trimmed and corrected for posting.

honesttalk21:
✓ Your own references contradict your assertion. Old Arabic can be traced back to the 1st millennium BCE, which aligns it with the earliest Hebrew inscriptions such as the Gezer Calendar around 950 BCE and Aramaic around 900 BCE. In terms of written records, these languages appeared within a few centuries of one another. Arabic is not one of the most recent Semitic languages; it has a rich history spanning over 3,000 years. You seem to be confusing the later standardization of Arabic with its age as a language.
✓ The Bahira/monk story comes from Islamic writings created more than a century after Muhammad pbuh's death and is not based on contemporary historical evidence.
✓ Importantly, Arians not Aryans did affirm beliefs in the crucifixion, resurrection, and atonement. Their disagreements were about Christ's nature (homoousios vs. homoiousios), not the key events of salvation. You are mixing up Arianism with Gnosticism. There is no credible evidence to suggest that Muhammad pbuh had sustained interactions with any particular Christian group.
✓ This conspiracy theory that Christianity was created and funded by Romans is at somewhat at odds with historical facts. For over 250 years, Christianity faced persecution from Rome under leaders like Nero and Diocletian. The letters of Paul, written in the 50s CE, show that Christianity existed independently before Rome took an interest, especially before the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE. Early Christians were often executed rather than funded. Constantine’s conversion in 312 CE occurred three centuries after Jesus’ time. This assertion is dismissed by serious historians, both secular and religious.
✓ Your reasoning suggests that cultures like Homeric Greece, Vedic India, and pre-literate Norse societies had no history worth documenting, which misinterprets how oral cultures maintain knowledge. External sources, such as Sozomen, Jerome, and Byzantine chronicles, have recorded pre-Islamic Arab traditions and their connection to Ishmael. Expecting written records from oral societies and then claiming their absence means there was no tradition is flawed reasoning.

1. You are obviously not paying attention. I said the Nabatean scrots of the Nabatean language -- primarily of Aramaic coding -- evolved to Arabic scripts.
https://www.reddit.com/r/learn_arabic/comments/1j46k5v/the_origins_of_the_arabic_script_from_nabataean/

2. All of the Hadiths were written and compiled beginning 150 - 200 years after the death of Mohammed. So, which are you intending for us to consider corrupt in this case? 🤔

3. Mohammed didn't need to have a documented sustained interactions with particular Christian groups though for there to exist a connection between his idea and those of Christians he may have interacted with. The same way he did not need to have any sustained interactions with Grecians for him to tell the story of the two horned one, a myth that connects back to Alexander the great. What is clear from the Quran is that Mohammed took bits and pieces from various beliefs that existed around his time.🤔🤔

He may not have taken the ideas regarding the crucifixion from the Arian (thanks for the correction by the way) what we do know is that his insistence on Jesus Christ not co-eternal as claimed in the Injeel by Jesus Christ Himself, may have come from that interaction. 🤔

Arianism arose in the early 4th century, when Arius began teaching that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was not co-eternal with the Father and was instead the first and highest of all created beings. Arius was attempting to preserve a strict form of monotheism by subordinating the Son to the Father, denying the full deity of the Son. Arius famously stated, "There was a time when the Son was not," implying that the Son had a beginning and was not eternal like the Father.

This in similar way that his idea to claim that the encounter he had in the cave was with an angel called Jibril linked to the Scriptures which we know existed at his time. 🤔

4. I am afraid it is, in fact, what history reveals. Jesus Christ of Israel and His disciples were Jews and Jews were persecuted by Rome during the first century BC during which a third of the population were killed, and a huge potion of those left in Judea afterwards were then exiled from Judea and much of the Roman empire. (Many were sold into slavery and dispersed to faraway lands; only a small number of them were allowed to remain in Judea to serve the Roman government, right before the region was renamed Syria Palestine out of spite for the Jews.) After that point onwards, we read of Christianity, a movement that was largely led by non-Jews/non-Israelites and centered around Rome. 🤔

Everything you claim to know of the religion is as operated under the lead of Roman citizens who were all non-Israelites and so has nothing to do with the Abrahamic covenant which was instead given to descendants of Isaac and then Jacob. 🤔🤔

5. We are talking in context of Scripture here. Remember? 🤔

honesttalk21:
✓ Your statement that Islam could be seen as just another sect under Christianity is fundamentally wrong. It rejects the core theological beliefs of Christianity, establishing it as a distinct religion rather than merely a sect.

There are 1000s of Christian denominations out there even today that reject those same core Christian doctrines. 🥱🥱

Several historical and early Christian-related sects have rejected the physical death, crucifixion, or bodily resurrection of Jesus, often viewing his earthly existence as phantom-like (Docetism) or spiritual. Key groups included Gnostics, Basilides, Corinthians, and those holding the swoon hypothesis or substitution hypothesis, which suggests another died in his place.

See there that even the claim that another died in the place of Jesus Christ is not unique to Islam. There were so many Christian groups that believed such ideas before Islam. Some were ostracized by the Roman church that prevailed but that don't change the fact that they are of Christian roots. 🥱🥱

honesttalk21:
✓ Your assertion that Muhammad pbuh was converted by Christians or just a Christian is totally untrue and doesn't hold water historically. There's no real evidence suggesting he ever practiced Christianity or went through any kind of conversion from it. Islamic texts portray him as a monotheist in a society full of polytheism, not as someone who used to be Christian and then started a new religion.
✓ Saying that accepting the virgin birth and Jesus as a prophet makes him a Christian is a huge stretch. By that logic, anyone who respects Jesus would automatically be a Christian which makes the definition so broad it loses all meaning. Christianity has some core, non-negotiable beliefs which are Christ's divinity, his sacrifice for sins, and his resurrection.
✓ Islam has rejected all three of these from the very beginning. Muhammad pbuh didn't break away from Christianity because he was never part of it to begin with. If just sharing a few beliefs makes religions the same, then Jehovah's Witnesses and Catholics would be the same religion.
✓ Your claim about pre-Islamic Arabian writings mentioning Abraham falls apart when you bring up the Epic of Gilgamesh, which is from Mesopotamia, not Arabia, and existed centuries before Abraham. This shows a basic misunderstanding between Sumerian (Iraqi) and Arabian cultures. If you have tons"of pre-Islamic Arabian texts, you should name them specifically instead of vaguely pointing to stuff from completely different civilizations.
✓ The idea that Muhammad wasn't persecuted by Christians is irrelevant when it comes to classifying religions. Mormons weren't universally persecuted by Christians either, but they're still considered a distinct religion. Persecution doesn't define theological boundaries doctrine does. Islam's clear rejection of Christianity's core beliefs makes it a separate religion, regardless of whether Christians helped early Muslims or whether Muhammad pbuh ever encountered Christian teachings.

1. The Quran and other Islamic Hadiths only report that Mohammed proclaimed he only worshipped one god but his actions reveal otherwise. For instance, the first Caliph, in one of the Hadiths is reported to have insisted that he only touched and kissed the black stone, a relic and tradition dating back before Pre-Islamic period because he saw Mohammed do same. He pondered why such poly theistic relics would be repacked and rebranded as monotheistic by a man who claimed he only worshipped one Allah. 🥱

2. Oh, Indeed! The definition of what it means to be Christian is indeed broad. Even the Mormons Satanists, and Jehovah's witnesses are Christians, and isn't all that far off. 🥱🥱

3. This is to be debated. Islam accepts the Virgin birth, accepts that someone was crucified...only that Allah claims the one who was crucified was not Jesus Christ. As for the resurrection, well, in its place, Allah instead took Jesus Christ " up to Paradise" instead of a resurrection. That there sounds along the lines of the ideas traded by the Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses and co. Am I wrong? 🥱🥱🥱

4. Not trying to hold brief for the other here but if you have in fact ever read the Epic of Gilgamesh, you would note immediately that it was not meant in any way as a historical record for any people who ever existed. It is more of less a fable told by the Mesopotamians, not meant to be considered literal accounts or records of any events or persons. 🥱

5. Mormornism is not classified as a distinct religion from Christianity. It gets its roots from the religion of Christianity; it isn't a traditional Christian but that doesn't make it any less Christian than all other movements/denominations like it out there in the Christian world. Basically, so long as it's roots can be traced back to the Roman Catholic roots of Christianity, it is Christian. 🥱🥱

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zy5iwkzgtXA?si=KUPvKTa68PQ5lKk3
Below is the transcript o the video, trimmed and corrected for posting.

There were, in fact, two Islamic golden ages - The Umayyads' golden age happened around 750 AD, whereas the golden age of the Abbasids in Baghdad happened around 900AD.

Harun ibn al-Mahdi (famously known as Harun al-Rashid ) was the fifth Abbasid caliph of the Abbasid Caliphate, reigning from September 786 until his death in March 809. He was allied with or on friendly terms with Charlemagne. Charlemagne(2 April 748 – 28 January 814) was King of the Franks from 768, King of the Lombards from 774, and Emperor of what is now known as the Carolingian Empire from 800. Charlemagne spread Christianity to his new conquests (often by force), as seen at the Massacre of Verden against the Saxons. He also sent envoys and initiated diplomatic contact with Harun al-Rashid, the Abbasid caliph in the 790s, due to their mutual interest in Iberian affairs.

There's also a supposed golden age in Spain, the Umayyad, in Cordoba. The Umayyad Caliphate of Cordoba (929–1031) marked the golden age of Muslim Spain, transforming it into a center of intellectual, cultural, and economic prosperity. Under leaders like Abd al-Rahman III and al-Hakam II, Cordoba became one of Europe's largest, most advanced cities, famous for its libraries, scientific advancements, and the architectural masterpiece, Madinat al-Zahra.

And what needs to be understood about the golden age is this... Let me try to start off by giving you an analogy. Imagine, many, many decades or centuries from now, those buildings are still standing. Everything's changed, and Islam may be gone or whatever. And people look at it and go, "Wow, that was a golden age, that country, that civilization, because look what it led to. "Now, we would say, well, no, I mean, they had their Islam, sure, but this is actually money, and Westerners built it ...western technology, western workers... and it just so happened that these Arabs had the money to spend on it. That, I submit to you, is the best way to understand the golden age that happened historically. It didn't happen due to Islam. Quite the contrary, it happened despite Islam.

The Abbasid Empire was more Persianized, and it's in it's in, Baghdad. Keep in mind when these Arab Muslim conquests happened, most of so let's say Egypt and Syria, were highly Christian. Let's say in the 8th to 10th century, the majority were still Christian. And there are Jews also as well, especially in Alexandria and various cities. And you have a lot of Zoroastrians and Persians. You have all these different groups who are living under the Islamic rule. They're the ones who are doing all the stuff that we call the golden age. It's Christians, it's Jews, and especially it's Persians in the Abbasid era. And it's not because of anything special about Islam. I mean, they are literally not Muslims, and a few of them who are are literally like they just converted. They're first-generation converts, which means they're still primarily whatever their former religion was. Sure, it could be said that Muslims sponsored much of the work done during that era, maybe paid for it. But there was nothing intrinsic to Islam about any of the work of those periods.

But once Islam started to harden, because even at this time, the Abbasid caliphate in the golden age, there were still debates between the various schools of Islamic law. And some were actually considered liberal, if we can use that term. Sometime in the 10th-11th century, what's known as uh the doors of Ishtahed... The doors of Ijtihad (independent legal reasoning in Islam) refer to the ongoing, scholarly effort to derive and interpret Islamic law from the Quran and Sunnah. While some historical perspectives suggested the "gates" closed around the 10th century to prevent unqualified interpretation, many scholars maintain that the doors remain open for qualified experts to address modern, evolving issues. Ijtihadwas a way for the liberals to get around draconian Islam. However, history suggests the doors were closed beginning around the 10th century, giving power over to the hardliners who won the Islamic debate, leading to the decline in the embrace of the sciences and the last golden age.

So it was never because of Islam, but there was a time when Islam, in its early national period, was liberal enough to allow this sort of advancement to happen. And the people who were doing the achievements were actually not Muslims. And if they were, they were like literally just converted to join the winning crowd, as a lot of people did over the years; their mind and the way they thought, and their heritage was still non-Muslim. So that's why I give you that analogy about Saudi Arabia and these places, if you look at their worldview, their culture, which is based on Islam, well, yeah, it's draconian Sharia law, living in a desert, polygamy, etc, but they have wealth, and look at what they can have. They can build skyscrapers, they can have the greatest stuff that westerners can't have, but that doesn't mean it's actually part and parcel of Islam.

References
https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/ijtihad
https://www.oreateai.com/blog/the-legacy-of-the-caliphs-of-c%C3%B3rdoba-a-tapestry-of-power-and-culture/82b8bc527908092bd5497389f0fe2a1d
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Frankish_kings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_Caliphate
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_caliph
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harun_al-Rashid
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxons
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Verden

Babatunjo:
Make we clock am.
Dating don change.
If you marry before smartphones, social media and dating apps, your experience no fully match today reality.
Before:
- Options few
- Competition small
- Communication slow
Now:
- Options plenty
- Attention dey everywhere
- One swipe fit end interest
So advice like “be patient,” “keep trying,” “she’ll come around” fit work before, but today e fit just keep man stuck.
We dey play new game.
Different time.
Different rules.
Different advice (iykyk).

Such advice only kept people trapped and miserable in marriage before now. I mean, you go out there to ask women and men who have been married for over 25 years about their marriage... even their appearance alone would tell you how miserable it had all been for them. The reason people no longer wish to be tied down in the same way in this social media era is that many have finally realized the futility of it all. 🥱🥱🥱

honesttalk21:
➜It is indeed abnormal the addition of statements not made by me to mine then expecting me to respond.

My post was instead meant to correct a lot of the misinformation contained in your post there. You keep twisting the facts to make even more non-facts, I have noticed. 🥱🥱🥱

AntiChristian:
➜Confirming it means acknowledging the existence of the scriptures and Prophets. The stories do not need to add up as we know your scriptures are not preserved.
➜ You can't even authenticate any of them!
➜ What nonsense is this? Where did I mention any date of corruption to your scriptures?
➜ Can you tell us who penned down the scriptures and how it was preserved generationally before it was discovered in modern times?Where's the blunder except the one in your head?

1. Acknowledge the existence of prophets from a bloodline that Allah claims Allah did not choose? We are talking of prophets of YHWH of Israel, whereas Allah claimed he instead chose the bloodline of Ishmael. How does that work? 🥱🥱

1a. Authenticate the works— the Torah and the Gospel—that Allah claims his Quran affirms the inspiration, preservation, and authority of? 🥱🥱

2. Are you backtracking now? You no longer believe the Scriptures, which Mohammed himself confirmed as true(without fault) from Allah at the time he showed up on the scene, were valid? 🥱🥱🥱

I had asked you exactly when the Torah and the Injeel had been corrupted, and you said after the fall of Jerusalem, which I presume is 70AD, was it not? 🥱🥱

3. Why does it matter the particular identities of those who penned down the Scriptures and how they preserved them if the important information here is that it was penned down by those chosen by YHWH to do so? 🥱🥱

According to Surah 6 vs 114 to 116, no one can change the words of Allah.

˹Say, O Prophet,˺ “Should I seek a judge other than Allah while He is the One Who has revealed for you the Book ˹with the truth˺ perfectly explained?” Those who were given the Scripture know that it has been revealed ˹to you˺ from your Lord in truth. So do not be one of those who doubt. The Word of your Lord has been perfected in truth and justice. None can change His Words. And He is the All-Hearing, All- Knowing. ˹O Prophet!˺ If you were to obey most of those on earth, they would lead you away from Allah’s Way. They follow nothing but assumptions and do nothing but lie - Quran 6 vs 114 - 116

If Allah indeed sent those same books which you now claim are corrupted, then are you insinuating that Allah must have been in error regarding the extent of his power in this? 🥱🥱

More importantly, if no man can change the words of Allah, yet you believe that the Torah and Injeel have been corrupted, wouldn't this logically lead you to the conclusion that the only one who could have carried out such corrupting, as you choose to believe, is Allah himself — the only one capable of changing Allah's own word?

I mean, nowhere in the 114 chapters of your Quran is it claimed that the Torah and Injeel were corrupted, or that they were corrupted, at the time Mohammed venerated those same books. So, where exactly does this idea of yours that the books were corrupted really come from if Allah himself said the opposite of them in your Quran? Clearly, my head ain't the one filled with blunders here. 🥱🥱

honesttalk21:
➜Demanding Arab scriptures is a bit of a misstep. Pre-Islamic Arabia relied on spoken word, not written texts. You really don't know? Just because there aren't written records doesn't mean there were no traditions. If that were the case, we'd have to say most ancient peoples had no history, which isn't true.
We actually have accounts from outside sources. Christian, Jewish, and Byzantine writers before Islam mention Arabs identifying as Ishmaelites, practicing circumcision, and claiming descent from Abraham. Even Jewish scripture mentions Ishmael's twelve princes and recognizes his descendants as distinct groups (Genesis 25; Psalm 83). To say there are no known descendants goes against both your own Bible and historical records.
➜ Regarding Jesus; believing he was a prophet and born of a virgin doesn't automatically make someone a Christian. Christianity hinges on the concepts of divinity, crucifixion, resurrection, and atonement. Islam clearly rejects all of those. Agreeing on a couple of points while disagreeing on the core beliefs doesn't mean you belong to the same religion.
➜ Christianity separated from Judaism despite sharing prophets, and Islam breaks away from Christianity in a similar way. Just because they share some figures doesn't mean they're the same religion.
➜ Your argument doesn't hold up because it asks for written proof from a culture that prioritized oral tradition,overlooks historical accounts from external sources,and confuses surface-level agreement with true theological alignment. That's not really evidence, it's more like trying to bend the rules. It's special pleading.

1. Compared to many of the Semitic languages, Tthe arabic language is among the most recent.

The Arabic language has roots dating back over 1,500 to 1,600 years, with its earliest recognized written forms appearing around the 1st to 4th centuries CE, while its direct ancestor, Old Arabic, emerged even earlier in the 1st millennium BCE. It is a Semitic language that originated in the Arabian Peninsula, developing into its classical form by the 7th century CE with the Quran.
Key Historical Milestones of Arabic:
1st Century CE: Earliest, albeit sparse, inscriptions of Old Arabic, such as the En Avdat inscription (circa 125 CE).
4th Century CE: The Namara inscription (328 CE) in Syria represents one of the earliest, fully developed records.
6th Century CE: Pre-Islamic poetry and early inscriptions (e.g., Zabad, 512 CE).
7th Century CE (Quranic/Classical): Standardization occurred, leading to the language still recognized today.
https://alifarabic.com/what-is-the-history-of-the-arabic-language/

The Nabatean language is considered the precursor to the Arabic language. 🥱🥱

The Nabataean language is not identical to modern Arabic, but it is considered an early, transitional form of Arabic heavily influenced by Aramaic. While Nabataeans spoke a form of North Arabian/Arabic, they used Aramaic for official, written, and administrative purposes, which later evolved into the Nabataean script—the direct ancestor of the Arabic script.
https://www.ancient-origins.net/news-general/oldest-arabic-inscription-provides-missing-link-between-nabatean-and-arabic-writing.

2. This is wrong! The aryan sect to which the monk from whom Mohammed is said to have gotten his ideas regarding Christianity did not hold those ideas of divinity, crucifixion, resurrection, and atonement. The gnostics and other sects that were classified by Rome as heretical sects held ideas different from what is mainstream Christianity today. 🥱🥱

3. Christianity was never a part of Judaism. Judaism was a religion that was created and controlled by the descendants of Jacob for the purpose of administering access to the God of Israel. Christianity, on the other hand, was created and bankrolled by the Romans, who, as they had previously done with the religion of the Greeks, sought to gain control over the Israelites' only movement that had begun in Judea before Rome eventually killed/exiled much of the Jewish population, after the destruction of the Temple.

Islam came in trading stories; it claims to be linked to Christianity, made failed attempts to link itself to the Israelites and their prophets, in much the same way that the Christians before it did. So, in a lot of ways, Islam could be seen as just another sect under Christianity.

4. Even after the language took written form, there was no attempt by the people to document their so-called oral traditions. That is a big issue, as it could be construed that the people did not have a history, of the kind you claim for them, worth documenting. I am simply going off your claims here.🥱🥱

honesttalk21:
➜You've misrepresented Scripture, Christian history, and Islamic theology. Here's a more accurate understanding:
You've misread Matthew 18:15-17. The passage actually says, "If your brother sins against you..." and suggests treating him "as a Gentile and tax collector." This refers to resolving personal conflicts (sins against you), not addressing apostasy or doctrinal differences.
➜ What does treating someone "as a Gentile and tax collector" really mean? Look at how Jesus interacted with them. He shared meals (Matthew 9:10-11), conversed (Matthew 15:22-28, John 4), chose one as an apostle (Matthew), and actively sought them out (Luke 19:1-10, Zacchaeus).

First of all, the statement is that you treat him like a pagan —someone who does not believe in YHWH, God of Israel — or a tax collector. Pagans are not Gentiles. Rather, the pagans were foreigners who lived in the land alongside the Israelites(Note that not all Israelites are Jews, however, all Jews are Israelites). 🥱🥱🥱

15 “If your brother or sister in God’s family does something wrong, go and tell them what they did wrong. Do this when you are alone with them. If they listen to you, then you have helped them to be your brother or sister again.
16 But if they refuse to listen, go to them again and take one or two people with you. Then there will be two or three people who will be able to tell all that happened.
17 If they refuse to listen to them, tell the church. And if they refuse to listen to the church, treat them as you would treat someone who does not know God or who is a tax collector. - Matthew 18 vs 15-17

Second, in the land of Israel and Judea, those who did not believe in God were treated not as brothers and sisters but as foreigners in the land. This is important to note because those whom Jesus Christ of Israel suggested should be treated as pagans were those who no longer belonged to the brotherhood or sisterhood that he is head of (foreigners or pagans to Jesus Christ of Israel). 🥱🥱

Non-Israelites under the Law of Moses were generally to be treated with justice, kindness, and legal equality if they were resident aliens (gēr), but they faced restrictions regarding religious rituals, land ownership, and, in some cases, social standing. While they were to be loved as "native-born" and protected from oppression, they could not participate in the Passover unless circumcised
https://biblehub.com/topical/naves/s/strangers--mosaic_law_relating_to_their_approaching_the_tabernacle.htm

The Islamic Golden Age...there are kind of two. The Umayyads' golden age happened around 750AD period. Whereas the golden age of the Abbasids in Baghdad happened around 900AD.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zy5iwkzgtXA?si=KUPvKTa68PQ5lKk3
Hārūn ibn al-Mahdī (famously known as Hārūn al-Rashīd ) was the fifth Abbasid caliph of the Abbasid Caliphate, reigning from September 786 until his death in March 809. He was allied with or on friendly terms with Charlemagne. Charlemagne(2 April 748 – 28 January 814) was King of the Franks from 768, King of the Lombards from 774, and Emperor of what is now known as the Carolingian Empire from 800. Charlemagne spread Christianity to his new conquests (often by force), as seen at the Massacre of Verden against the Saxons. He also sent envoys and initiated diplomatic contact with Harun al-Rashid, the Abbasid caliph in the 790s, due to their mutual interest in Iberian affairs.

There's also a supposed golden age in Spain, the Umayyad, in Cordoba. The Umayyad Caliphate of Córdoba (929–1031) marked the golden age of Muslim Spain, transforming it into a center of intellectual, cultural, and economic prosperity. Under leaders like Abd al-Rahman III and al-Hakam II, Córdoba became one of Europe's largest, most advanced cities, famous for its libraries, scientific advancements, and the architectural masterpiece, Madinat al-Zahra.

And what needs to be understood about the golden age is this. Let me try to start off by giving you an analogy. Imagine, many, many decades or centuries from now, those buildings are still standing. Everything's changed, and Islam may be gone or whatever. And people look at it and go, "Wow, that was a golden age, that country, that civilization, because look what it led to. "Now, we would say, well, no, I mean, they had their Islam, sure, but this is actually money, and Westerners built it ...western technology, western workers... and it just so happened that these Arabs had the money to spend on it. That, I submit to you, is the best way to understand the golden age that happened historically. It didn't happen due to Islam. Quite the contrary, it happened despite Islam.

The Abbasid Empire was more Persianized, and it's in it's in, Baghdad. Keep in mind when these Arab Muslim conquests happened, most of so let's say Egypt and Syria, were highly Christian. Let's say in the 8th to 10th century, the majority were still Christian. And there are Jews also as well, especially in Alexandria and various cities. And you have a lot of Zoroastrians and Persians. You have all these different groups who are living under the Islamic rule. They're the ones who are doing all the stuff that we call the golden age. It's Christians, it's Jews, and especially it's Persians in the Abbasid era. And it's not because of anything special about Islam. I mean, they are literally not Muslims, and a few of them who are are literally like they just converted. They're first-generation converts, which means they're still primarily whatever their former religion was. Sure, it could be said that Muslims sponsored much of the work done during that era, maybe paid for it. But there was nothing intrinsic to Islam about any of the work of those periods.

But once Islam started to harden, because even at this time, the Abbasid caliphate in the golden age, there were still debates between the various schools of Islamic law. And some were actually considered liberal, if we can use that term. Sometime in the 10th-11th century, what's known as uh the doors of Ishtahed... The doors of Ijtihad (independent legal reasoning in Islam) refer to the ongoing, scholarly effort to derive and interpret Islamic law from the Quran and Sunnah. While some historical perspectives suggested the "gates" closed around the 10th century to prevent unqualified interpretation, many scholars maintain that the doors remain open for qualified experts to address modern, evolving issues. Ijtihadwas a way for the liberals to get around draconian Islam. However, history suggests the doors were closed beginning around the 10th century, giving power over to the hardliners who won the Islamic debate, leading to the decline in the embrace of the sciences and the last golden age.

So it was never because of Islam, but there was a time when Islam, in its early national period, was liberal enough to allow this sort of advancement to happen. And the people who were doing the achievements were actually not Muslims. And if they were, they were like literally just converted to join the winning crowd, as a lot of people did over the years; their mind and the way they thought, and their heritage was still non-Muslim. So that's why I give you that analogy about Saudi Arabia and these places, if you look at their worldview, their culture, which is based on Islam, well, yeah, it's draconian Sharia law, living in a desert, polygamy, etc, but they have wealth, and look at what they can have. They can build skyscrapers, they can have the greatest stuff that westerners can't have, but that doesn't mean it's actually part and parcel of Islam.

References
https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/ijtihad
https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/ijtihad
https://www.oreateai.com/blog/the-legacy-of-the-caliphs-of-c%C3%B3rdoba-a-tapestry-of-power-and-culture/82b8bc527908092bd5497389f0fe2a1d
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Frankish_kings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_Caliphate
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_caliph
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harun_al-Rashid
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxons
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Verden

ALMUSTAQIM:
*👉ANSWER:* Wa alaikum salam warahmatullahi. I am advising you out of care, not judgment. Please read this with a calm heart.
1️⃣ *A WORD OF WISDOM ABOUT SUSPICION AND PRIVACY*
Hajia, Islam teaches us to protect the heart from suspicion, because suspicion brings pain before it brings solutions.
📖 Allah says:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اجْتَنِبُوا كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الظَّنِّ إِنَّ بَعْضَ الظَّنِّ إِثْمٌ وَلَا تَجَسَّسُوا
English translation:
“O you who believe, avoid much suspicion. Indeed, some suspicion is sin. And do not spy.”
Surah al-Hujurat 49:12

● Checking a husband’s phone again and again often brings tears, not peace.
● Not everything we see means betrayal.
● Protecting your heart is also part of protecting your marriage.

➡️ Remember this wisdom: A husband’s phone is like an onion — the more you peel it, the more tears it brings.
2️⃣ *IF A MISTAKE HAS HAPPENED, WISDOM IS BETTER THAN ARGUMENT* If you checked his phone and it caused tension, wisdom is to calm the matter.
You may gently say to him: "My husband, I am sorry for what happened concerning me checking your phone. My intention was not to spy or disrespect you, but to protect our home. If there is anything I am doing wrong, please tell me kindly so I can improve.”
This type of speech softens hearts more than accusations.
📖 Allah says:
وَقُولُوا لِلنَّاسِ حُسْنًا
English translation:
“And speak to people good words.”
Surah al-Baqarah 2:83

3️⃣ *UNDERSTANDING POLYGAMY WITH BALANCE, NOT FEAR* Hajia, Islam allows a man to marry more than one wife, but it does not force him, and it places heavy responsibility on him.
📖 Allah says:
فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلَّا تَعْدِلُوا فَوَاحِدَةً
English translation:
“But if you fear that you will not be just, then marry only one.”
Surah an-Nisa 4:3

● Polygamy is permissible, not compulsory
● Justice is obligatory
● Many desire it, but few can truly fulfill it
Hajia, so do not live in fear, and do not destroy your peace with imagination. Leave what you cannot control to Allah.
4️⃣ *HOW A WISE WOMAN STRENGTHENS HER HOME*

*👉 Join us here: 👇*
https:///islamicfiqh1marriage2andremedies
👉 Ask your questions here: 👇
https:///233257501033?text=Assalamu%20alaikum
👉Join us here if you're not on Telegram:👇
https:///GFjGehsHlrQ2ysG8hZ1BTm?mode=ems_copy_c

👉Without humiliating yourself or blaming yourself, you can strengthen your marriage through good character.

✔ Respectful speech
✔ Appreciation for his efforts and gifts
✔ Dressing nicely for your husband at home
✔ Creating a calm and welcoming atmosphere
✔ Responding to intimacy when you are able
✔ Showing care with love, not fear

📖 The Prophet ﷺ said:
خَيْرُكُمْ خَيْرُكُمْ لِأَهْلِهِ
English translation:
“The best of you are the best to their families.”
Sunan al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 3895

This applies to husbands and wives together.

5️⃣ *WORSHIP THAT PROTECTS MARRIAGE*

Never forget, many homes are protected on the prayer mat, not through arguments.

✔ Guard the five daily prayers
✔ Pray Tahajjud, even two rak‘ah
✔ Make dua for your husband, not against him
✔ Fast optional fasts if you are able

📖 Allah says:
وَاسْتَعِينُوا بِالصَّبْرِ وَالصَّلَاةِ
English translation:
“And seek help through patience and prayer.”
Surah al-Baqarah 2:45

6️⃣ *HEARTFELT ADVICE*

My special sister:

■ Do not chase what will break your heart
■ Do not destroy your home with suspicion
■ Do not compete with fear — compete with character
■ If Allah decrees polygamy, ask Him to make it a source of peace, not pain

📖 Allah says:
مَن يَتَّقِ اللَّهَ يَجْعَل لَّهُ مَخْرَجًا
English translation:
“And whoever fears Allah, He will make for him a way out.”
Surah at-Talaq 65:2

Trust Allah, strengthen yourself, protect your dignity, and let wisdom lead your actions.

🤲DU‘A: O Allah, unite the hearts of spouses, keep Shaytan away from their homes, and make their houses homes of peace, love, and mercy.

We Pray Allah to Continue to Guard and Guide us Aright Protect us Have Mercy on us Increase us in Knowledge Sustenance and Piety and Enable us become Better MUSLIMS Better NIGERIANS Happy Jumaat, Happy Weekend

If I didn't know better, I would have seen this as pure and unadulterated gaslighting! Unfortunately, this is all that Islam has to offer women who sign up for it. The religion strips women of their humanity, their desires, and strips them of their rights to non-negotiables in a relationship. 🥱🥱