₦airaland Forum

Baldwretch:
Clearly, you do not have a defense. You are still on - Well, Islam is right because even Christianity does not observe Kosher.

You know I asked you a question earlier: How many people have to believe the wrong stuff for it to become true?

If all Christians believe an untruth (of God's law), does it make it true for Muslims?

Clap for yourself. .

Besides, the reasons Christians do not observe Kosher is different, radically different from the Islamic perspectives; just like the reason the pig is unclean for both faiths. If, on the Day of Judgment, God asks the Christian why he eats pork and doesn't observe Kosher, his defense would be quite different from the Muslim's. Well, the Christians eat pork that's why we also eat it is very inexcusable.


I just put you in a corner where you either have to assume the most debased, fickle, inconstant, depraved character of Godthe Almighty or of Muhammad, and you have refused to take sides.

THANK GOD FOR YOUR GOOD SENSES! YOUR HEAD CORRECT!

I see you are more concerned with poking fun.

Essentially what is at the root of food choices?

Even at that you definitely hold on to wrong propositions.

Taking sides on what and why?

MightySparrow:
I debunk lies and hypocrisy. I corrected the grammatical error noticed as pointed out. I agree to have beam in my eyes. I don't believe a blind person sees the beam, Yusuf, is blinding people's eyes. The blind leading a congregation of blind people.
Are you one his disciples?

Ohyoudidnt:
Perhaps you should watch from 2:48:__ and 2:55:01 as this is a very long video. Perhaps for 2 to 3 minutes only.

You are free to watch it all at your convenience. AREOPAGUS APOLOGETICS is here indeed to steal, mislead and deceive

Excuse my forgetting to include the video


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiFJR0bQpCc?si=ZG6Ysm76DrkoF-tX



watch from 2:48:__ and 2:55:01 as this is a very long video. Perhaps for 2 to 3 minutes only.

Baldwretch:
Did I tell you I am a Christian? Even if I am a Christian, I am not arguing from a traditional Christian position. Pretend you are talking to an orthodox Jew.

Appeal to what you believe. Christianity says that is the case does not make it so.

Christianity's truths are not Islamic truths. Appeal to what you believe.


You pointed out some verses in the Bible and I refer you to verses depicting otherwise in the same Bible..

What is the force?
The issue is which of the biblical verses should be obeyed?


Edit: [/b]Well, I would defend your counters from a traditional Christian position, but not yet.

We must stop this act of deflecting arguments. Counter. Just counter me, don't say well your own religion says the same thing. [b]We can all be wrong

No deflection. It is just showing you that indeed some things changed over time. Judaism didn't change perhaps because Jews reject Jesus as a messiah and prophet.

Baldwretch:
Another one:

God says of the camel in that same chapter. Verse 4.



In the Quran Muhammad repeatedly (in several Surahs) talks of the camel as pack animals to cherish, to eat in a sacred place, and to handle lightly. The God who instructed us not to eat this animal (with clearly stated reasons) could not have inspired his angel to contradict his earlier position. That is thinking the unthinkable. Perish the thought!

And like I said, an impostor spirit does not have to contradict every law that God had given. One contradiction is enough. I would not be able to pull up Quranic verses on websites which might be data-zapping due to data constraints to prove Muhammad's approval of the camel, but they are right there on Google. Google it.

And then we have the subject of men re-marrying the women they have once divorced even if these women had married someone else after the first husband divorced them. The Bible says no, don't do it. It is detestable before God, but the Quran permits it.

Let me quote two verses of the bible that forbids it:

Jeremiah three verse one. Also, Deuteronomy 24. Verse 3. I have omitted verse one and two.

Deu. 24 vs. 3.



The book of Jeremiah chapter three and verse one reiterates this sentiment differently.

In the Quran, Muhammad cheers you on, saying yes you can re-marry her even if another man had married her.

These are not abstract laws like in the field of Mathematics where the questioner is asking you to prove Minkowsky's inequality or Pythagoras theorem. These laws were made to tackle real-life situations that humans often find themselves enmeshed in. Two contradictory laws cannot be both true.

Clearly, if God would send angels, the angel would say what the Lord his God has instructed him to say and nothing more. God would not send an angel to counter what he sent an earlier angel to say. NO! God would never screw his government in the most debased of ways. He always upholds his laws, being the foundation of his government.

I have not bothered to read the Quran but I am quite sure that if I did, I would find many more worms and filth that indicate an impostor spirit.

Again what do these verses mean in comparison to the verses in Acts and Mark I shared in my previous post.

I put it to you that Judaism not Christianity may have some prohibition regarding the Camel.

Baldwretch:
I am currently low on data. I wouldn't be able to pull up Quranic verses on websites for fear of running out of data completely. . This new data hike, my eyes have seen wien.

That being said, this is the first order to the world of mankind:



Meanwhile, the spirit that inspire Muhammad inspired him to say this:

It is interesting you take this stand point but ignore your own books.

Acts 10:
13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.

And also Mark 7:
18 Are you so dull? he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them?

19 For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.).
.
Perhaps you can explain a little more the position of these verses as to if it takes precedence over Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14.

Ohyoudidnt:
I should have gone with my initial conviction to reply to you first but felt it better to slow down to holistically reply to you.

I have seen your previous post which you nicely included here but fail to identify the laws countered. Could I implore you to specifically state these?




Could you clarify how the laws of Moses were contradicted in prophethood of Muhammad ; peace be on both of them.

Baldwretch:
Okay, good. We are getting there. We might be on the same page soon.

An impostor spirit (or prophet) would eventually reveal himself, yes. You are very right.

He did eventually reveal his true self not just by different accounts of historical account. That can be taken.

He did reveal himself by the laws he countered. Sorry, by the laws he gave. Clearly, proving his lack of authority.

I started a thread

https://www.nairaland.com/8313525/gods-orders-counter-order-proves-muhammmad

Proving that he is who he is - an impostor. I would encourage you to read it. We started off the discussion with one law - the sea creature.

And then I capped it off with another, the camel. I rounded off the post with this biting comment:



In the thread I am directing you to, I summarized my post in twelve lines. Let me share it here.




Please go through that thread or only the comments I made in the thread. There is just so much for you to ponder and think over if you are sincere. Clearly, an angel who inspires a law that contradicts laid down instruction for all of mankind given even before we have the Lawgiver, Moses, is an impostor spirit.

I now see it or some of it.

The prohibition of alcohol is consistent with Mosaic Law as it upholds the principle of preventing harm. The Bible includes examples where intoxication resulted in adverse outcomes such as Genesis 9:
20 Noah, a man of the soil, proceeded to plant a vineyard.
21 When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent.

Additionally, certain interpretations of Jewish law advise against excessive drinking.

In Luke 21:34 Jesus is said to have cautioned
"Be careful, or your hearts will be weighed down with carousing, drunkenness and the anxieties of life, and that day will close on you suddenly like a trap."

Therefore, Islam's position is in harmony with the wider biblical ethic that encourages self-restraint and the avoidance of harm.

AntilsIam:
I hope you have read this news

https://www.nairaland.com/8346976/no-evidence-usaid-funds-boko

America or Americans can't be foolish like you daddies in Islam to have sponsored terrorism

You will just be lying, lying everytime. You deserve a national award on taqqiya

Don't try to divert, between you and I did you not lie against me that I waved myself good bye? Before talking about others talk of yourself.

AntilsIam:
I don't just understand the reason why you keep on quoting me despite waving yourself goodbye

This is now 6 dqys old.

AntilsIam:
Good that you said I didn't rejected yours, but I kicked against all the sources you came with after discovered that they lied as they were against Britannica that can't be edited, that is not an open source like yours

Contradicting yourself? What do you mean by:

AntilsIam:
Anything outside britanicca on this matter, is a lie

Is this not rejection because they didn't support your faulty perception?

AntilsIam:
When you brought up your diffent sources, did I rejected them? But when I countered you back with Wikipedia showing how both Christians and Muslim formed anti balaka you condemned it by saying Wikipedia is an edited site which prompted me to quickly used britanicca that exposed your lies.

You didn't reject them you say but insist that what Britannica says supersede them despite subtle pointers in it towards the same end.

Did I lie that Wikipedia content is open to anyone editing?

AntilsIam:
Bobo, again show us from a realible source where Israel firstly attacked Palestine, this shouldn't be difficult for you to do

?

Let's put your truth to a test. For the umpteenth time show me by quoting where I waved good bye to this conversation.

Baldwretch:
Okay, good. We are getting there. We might be on the same page soon.

An impostor spirit (or prophet) would eventually reveal himself, yes. You are very right.

He did eventually reveal his true self not just by different accounts of historical account. That can be taken.

He did reveal himself by the laws he countered. Sorry, by the laws he gave. Clearly, proving his lack of authority.

I started a thread

https://www.nairaland.com/8313525/gods-orders-counter-order-proves-muhammmad

I should have gone with my initial conviction to reply to you first but felt it better to slow down to holistically reply to you.

I have seen your previous post which you nicely included here but fail to identify the laws countered. Could I implore you to specifically state these?

Baldwretch:
Please go through that thread or only the comments I made in the thread. There is just so much for you to ponder and think over if you are sincere. Clearly, an angel who inspires a law that contradicts laid down instruction for all of mankind given even before we have the Lawgiver, Moses, is an impostor spirit.

Could you clarify how the laws of Moses were contradicted in prophethood of Muhammad ; peace be on both of them.

TV01:
I of all people admire wordsmithery. But when deployed solely to lend credence to assertions that cannot otherwise be validated, it has to be decried. Shouldn't all reading be primarily to understand?
TV

The understanding can vary as we perceive things differently

TV01:
But there is no record of this entity ever confirming who it was directly to the person who claimed to have received divine revelation from it. And, i do not agree that Jibril of the koran is angle Gabriel of the bible. The name Gabriel has a clear meaning ascribing to God - what does Jibril mean?
TV

An initial look in the Qur'an for proof on the identity of Jibril reveals:

1. In Quran 26:192 Indeed this is a revelation from the Lord of the Universe;
:193 which [b]the truthful spirit[/b]has carried down
:194 to your heart that you might become one of those who warn (others on behalf of Allah

Now you may argue that Jibril isn't mentioned here specifically? If you read further into Quran 2:97 further understanding should be attained.

2. Quran 2:97 Say (O Muhammad): Whoever is an enemy to Jibreel (Gabriel)(let him die in his fury), for indeed he has brought it (this Quran) down to your heart by Allah’s Permission, confirming what came before it [i.e. the Tauraat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] and guidance and glad tidings for the believers

I leave you to study the hadiths where Jibril came in the form of a man while the Prophet pbuh was in company of his companions to teach them about the fundamentals of Islam.

جبريل; Jibril, is directly translated to Gabriel in English which derives from Hebrew.

It derives from the Arabic root “jabar” meaning to heal or to restore,and it refers to might from Allah.

He is described as Shadeed al-Quwa; Possessor of Great Strength in Surah Al-Najm (53:5-6). - Taught to him by one intense in strength (Shadeed al-Quwa), one of soundness. And he rose to [his] true form while he was on the higher horizon-

TV01:
I of all
Which Waraqah neither saw, nor had the authority to confirm.

Again, I don't want to come off as simply jibing, but all these claims and assertions about Waraqah are essentially baseless, and make your submission mere storytelling and not a fact based narrative. With "deep knowledge? Relative to whom or what? Where is the record of his instruction or learning? Who were Waraquah' academic antecedents. We know Paul learnt at the feet of Gamaliel for example.
TV

Well even if Jibril was physically present before Waraqah, I wonder how well he would have been seen being that the latter's sight was already waining.

Waraqah was known amongst the Arabian Christians as he translated and transcribed their books. He was recognized by the then Arabs as a man of learning and great understanding.

AntilsIam:
In addition to what I said above that Muhammad forcefully grabbed Saudi Arabia for Islam and Muslims, violently, Muhammad killed over 700 Christians and Jews all because he wanted Islam to be the ONLY religion in Saudi Arabia



“Then they surrendered, and the apostle (Muhammed) confined them in Medina in the quarter of d. al-Harith, a woman of B. al-Najjar. Then the apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. Among them was the enemy of Allah Huyayy b. Akhtab and Ka`b b. Asad their chief. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900. As they were being taken out in batches to the apostle they asked Ka`b what he thought would be done with them. He replied, "Will you never understand? Don't you see that the summoner never stops and those who are taken away do not return? By Allah it is death!"


Ibn Isḥaq wrote several works. His major work is al-Mubtadaʾ wa al-Baʿth wa al-Maghāzī—the Kitab al-Mubtada and Kitab al-Mab'ath both survive in part, particularly al-Mab'ath, in ibn Hisham and al-Mubtada otherwise in substantial fragments

We should review your reference for this and critique the errors and limitations of this narrative.

Particularly so as you have an interesting closing remark.

AntilsIam:
I said from a realible source... Must it be britanicca

Again, bring proof from a realible source that Israel firstly attacked Palestine

Imagine! I have given numerous proof about the terrorist actions of Anti-Balaka including writing from within the Britannica pointing to this, the ICC and Amnesty international which you have rejected.

How do I expect one who is both lazy and more likely untruthful about me waving good bye by not giving proof to now have become reformed or shall we say born again?

Look into the rise of political zionism before the Balfour declaration that sought to make Palestine a national homeland for Jews. The Nebi Musa riots and the violent actions of the Haganah. You; off-course, will have some nonsensical opinions of the British led and funded Arab revolt against the Ottoman. Those biblical long mischief centered around the hand Esau but the voice of Jacob.

Oh! please.

AntilsIam:
Bring up your proof from a realible source that Israel firstly attacked Palestine

Proof of which or what exactly?

Brittanica doesn't contain detailed information of all occurrences.

Though an important academic reference, it now receives criticism for not offering comprehensive information, even with its attempts to present diverse content.

As a reference, it no longer provides comprehensive information, due to its shortcomings in academic discussions. A strong reference should strive for diversity, depth, and thoroughness, allowing for meaningful engagement with complex concepts.

AntilsIam:
I am certainly sure you are aware that Saudi Arabia doesn't belong to Muslims or Islam. Muhammad arrogantly, violently, forcefully, just name it grabbed Saudi Arabia for Islam and Muslims. Don't you think Muhammad was a great disaster, criminal, land grabber in the history of mankind

I should question if Muslims or Islam are a tribe or ethnic group. This puts your statement in question as some tribes may owm certain areas but Islam and Muslim are not tribes.


The Hadith narrated by 'Umar bin Al-Khattab, found in both Sunan At-Tirmidhi and Sahih Muslim, represents a significant moment in the early history of Islam. It reveals the Prophet Muhammad's pbuh's intention to remove Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula, a decision shaped by the need to establish a unified Islamic state during a challenging period. However, it's important to interpret this Hadith with a broader perspective that transcends its historical context.

While the Hadith pertains to specific situations faced by the early Muslim community, it should not be regarded as a universal rule for today's interactions between Muslims and non-Muslims. In our diverse world, Muslims are encouraged to foster environments of justice, tolerance, and peaceful coexistence with individuals of various faiths. This commitment to harmony is vital for countering stereotypes and misconceptions, particularly in discussions about Islam's relationship with Judaism and Christianity.

Though jthe Hadith is historically significant, it should not be used as a rationale for conflict or exclusion in modern society. Instead, it underscores the core Islamic values of mutual respect and understanding, advocating for inclusive dialogue that promotes unity among different religious communities.

MightySparrow:
Yeah. No Muslims have given any answers but abuses and dodging the questions.

Realise you duplicated your post principally and started on another topic in another post.

Pretty interesting. In this age of comparatively easily accessible information do you need all information? Will it be useful or wasteful to you?


Disregarding your sentionalization and attempt to paint ACADIP and Islam in bad light.

Salvation Islam comprises achieving success in the Hereafter by gaining Allah's mercy and being granted entry into Paradise. This is accomplished through faith and good deeds along with genuine repentance and trust in Allah’s mercy.
Quran 2:82 And those who believe and do good will be the residents of Paradise. They will be there forever.

AntilsIam:
So who first attack each other, Israel or Palestine?

AntilsIam:
So who first attack each other, Israel or Palestine?

AntilsIam:
So who first attack each other, Israel or Palestine?

How far back can you honestly trace? Is it the Bar-Giora ofv1907 or later HaShomer of1909 by the Jews?

Would you want to include the bandit robberies that afflicted both Jewish and Arab communities too?

Or you prefer to justify forceful however convertedly resettlement of Jews in Palestine at the socio economic disadvantage and oppression of the native Palestinians?

AntilsIam:
You funny slave, am I not on the subject? Let me flash you back because you might have lost your memory as usual


This is from Anti.Islam



Here is your response to the above statements



Below is Anti.Islam reply to what you said above




Israel and Palestine conflict is the subject of the matter before going back to 1917. And I never see Israel FIRSTLY attacking Palestinians but it was your Palestine and neighboring Arab countries that firstly launched their attacks against Jewish cities, settlements, and armed forces

Go back to the same history you asked for.. See guy, you can't be glorifying taqqiya here sogbo, this is Anti.Islam should incase if you don't know

Your gumption did not inspire you to question what necessitated the Balfour declaration in 1917? Do you feign ignorance that in the late 19th century, Jewish immigrants to Palestine primarily came from Eastern and Central Europe, as well as parts of the Middle East and North Africa? Does this try to explain some of the British interest,?

AntilsIam:
Don't use question to answer question..

Shey Israel is now British?

Who first attack each other between Israel and Palestine? You can go to 1200 history

Shey if your chief imam ask you question, you'll reply him by asking question abi

Stay on the subject. You mentioned the Balfour declaration but are grossly uninformed about it.

Yes Britain is not Israel and No Israel isn't Britain but Israel depended on the declaration of the British to lay claim to a region of land that is not originally theirs.

That indeed is the root of the problem. A clear case of arrogant theft.

Baldwretch:
Ex-kiss me sir! Ex-kiss me sir! You have not said anything. Ex-kiss me sir! Ex-kiss me sir! All you did is assume and then proceed to talk in detail about what you have just assumed. WOW! How convenient? Oh no, not very convenient!

I wish I could explain this stuff to you like a man explains basic arithmetic to a five-year-old.

He was inspired in the Cave of Hira which had caves insides caves inside caves - ten thousand caves embedded in total, I agree!

He was asked to recite the Quran when he had no mouth, I agree. It's true.

He met the holy one, the great Jubril, a fearsome and terrible angel with ten million wings, it's true. Muhammad saw him and I can relate!

These claims and many more are not up for dispute. I agree with these claims and more. You are right. I do not argue these with you. After all, it's not as if we are talking of natural events here.

What I am arguing is that this so-called angel that appeared to him might be an impostor. I mean, an angel from the devil or from other sources claiming to be an angel from God. And since he is claiming to be who he is not, the so-called angel would have to be very consistent (in words and in deed) with the persona which he claims to represent - an angel from God. An angel who claims to be Jubril in words, but who is not, would try as much as he can to be the angel Jubril in deeds. That is speaking definitionally.

Then, I proceeded to posit that we cannot know (and neither can Muhammad) if this fearsome angel is from God or from the devil just by the staggering powers he exercises on Muhammad, or by the rules and laws he enacts from his Lord or by... and more. We cannot know things that are beyond us. We can, however, identify sources by the authority they possess. Unfortunately, the angel that appeared to him couldn't prove the authority they posses.

For instance, an angel who has authority over the waters would exercise his overreaching power over the waters in a way that angels who do not have authority over the waters do not and could not. All Godly angels whether the lower or higher ranked ones have been commuted some authority that evil angels do not enjoy. One of such is the ability to be made manifest in the physical plain to humans. Unfortunately, the angel that appeared to Muhammad could not demonstrate this authority. That is what evil angels can not do.

Since the angel revealed himself to Muhammad and to only him, he is definitely not from God.

This is actually one of the ways God restrains them otherwise they would screw his government since their appearance would justify man's proclivity to unbelief. If you saw the devil in his glory today and you tow his path worshiping and praying to him, wouldn't that warrant what could be called - justified unbelief, or do you think that it's a coincidence that animals cannot talk?

His eloquent words, sharp rebuke, threats of Hell, his immense glorification of God, his detailed code of conduct for the believers and many more are not definitive proofs that God sent him. These, in and of themselves, are not definitive proofs of the angel's authority.

That being said, It seems false prophets have a knack for usurping authority and claiming to be a co-central authority by contradicting what has been made plain and prescribing their own laws. The devil can replicate the exact same command that God gave to Moses word for word if he is going to be the authority on the subject.

Do you get the objection now?

The fact of a matter should be established by more than one witness. He cannot be the only witness to a divergent path that God has prepared for his people. If Muhammad (and us) would tow a radical path that has not been towed before, then this calls for a greater witness. Extraordinary demands calls for extraordinary evidence.

Indeed I understand you somewhat better now however no matter how pretentious an impostor is the true nature eventually reveals.

Perhaps previous 'good' actions were to lure you in and gain your trust then the true 'bad' nature reveals when you're too far gone to think otherwise.

So tell which bad actions did the alleged impostor angel perform. I am sure you have quite a number to share. The scene is yours now. Give us a show!

MightySparrow:
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxR-kuCHagi8xe2aOV4WqSLtfX5Sn4XxtI?si=KEGyXrxh61mM_NSE

I have heard the Islam believes that Jesus is مسيح, masīḥ. In this very short video, the poster asked very important questions that I will like Muslim in the house to answer.
The video is about a minute.

Perhaps you should watch from 2:48:__ and 2:55:01 as this is a very long video. Perhaps for 2 to 3 minutes only.

You are free to watch it all at your convenience. AREOPAGUS APOLOGETICS is here indeed to steal, mislead and deceive

AntilsIam:
Had it been your people in seleka didn't attacked or wage war against peace loving people, would there be anything called Anti balaka?

Hamas asked for war on Oct 7th, IDF gave them what they asked for. Will you blame IDF for this? Did you expect IDF to fold their hands watching your daddies in Hamas sending them to grave? To whom brain is given, sense is expected

Is it a lie that Anti-balaka reacted to the coup removing Bozize by adopting violence?

Perhaps you can prove Patrice-Edouard Ngaïssona was discharged and acquitted of all charges.

AntilsIam:
Shey Israel is now British? Who first attack each other between Israel and Palestine


NOTE: You're free to glorify taqqiya but be mindful of which taqqiya to be adopted

I've gotten many evidences for you on this sha be mindful of your taqqiya I won't say more than that

Can you disprove that the The Balfour Declaration was issued by Arthur Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary, on November 2, 1917?


Yes or No and go on to explain your position.

AntilsIam:
So who first attack each other?

The Balfour declaration was in 1917?

The British were fighting the Ottoman empire between 1914 and 1918. They saw use in increasing their strength with the Israelite jews.

Note that from the late seventeenth century the British inacted violence in the Mediterranean following the establishment of the colony at Tangiers in 1661, with naval wars against the Ottoman autonomous regencies of Tripoli (1674-6) and Algiers (1677-83).

So who started the aggression?

AntilsIam:
So anti balaka should fold their hands watching your people in seleka sending them to grave?

Did Anti-Balaka explore more effective means to stop the killing?
No, they themselves become worse killers.

Amnesty International and the International criminal court documented serious crimes committed by the Anti-Balaka militia in the Central African Republic (CAR).
The Anti-Balaka became infamous for committing massacres, ethnic cleansing, and war crimes, particularly against the Muslim population and suspected Seleka supporters.

Patrice-Edouard Ngaïssona; the most senior leader and the "National General Coordinator" of the Anti-Balaka in Central African Republic (CAR), is documented as responsible for crimes committed in various locations in the CAR, including Bangui, Bossangoa, the Lobaye Prefecture, Yaloké, Gaga, Bossemptélé, Boda, Carnot and Berberati, between at least 5 December 2013 and at least December 2014, as follows:

1. Crimes against humanity;murder and attempted murder, extermination, deportation or forcible transfer of population, imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty, torture, rape and attempted rape, persecution and other inhumane acts; and

2. War crimes; murder and attempted murder, torture, cruel treatment, mutilation, outrages upon personal dignity, intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population, intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, pillaging, rape and attempted rape, enlistment of children under the age of 15 years and their use to participate actively in hostilities, displacement of the civilian population and destruction of the property of an adversary.

TV01:
Nicely worded, but easily spotted as a "just so" story. Way below a parable, which affords real spiritual insight. Not even at the level of a fable, which at least has moral import. More akin to tales by moonlight .

Sorry tpo burst your bubble, but Waraqah would not have been able to validate a 600 winged being as being Angel Gabriel of the bible - and definitely not from the bible itself. Perhaps there is some gnostic gospel or extra-biblical text to be referenced? And with what writ or from whom did Waraqah have the authority to validate the divine which he did not or could not see?

Whoever or whatever it was, it was not Angel Gabriel, who is not Jibril. I was not validated by the Bible and is certainly not of divine imprimatur.
Sorry, not sorry !


Please come to Christ - who will judge the living and the dead at His coming.


TV

Perhaps my narrative could have been structured differently though I doubt you tried to understand.

1. Jibril who you know as angel Gabriel appeared to prophet many times not just once.

2. Waraqah ibn Nawfal did not validate the angel appearing with 600 wings rather it was solely in the case of the prophet's encounter in the cave.

Waraqah was a learned man with deep knowledge of the scriptures and Gnostic traditions. His understanding of religious texts and prophetic signs allowed him to uniquely validate Muhammad's experiences in the cave of Hira. He saw parallels between the prophet's experience in the grave and those of previous prophets.

Waraqah passed away in 610AD

When Jibril appeared to the Prophet Muhammad pbuh in the Cave of Hira during the first revelation, he did not show all of his wings. Instead, he took on a human form to convey the message of revelation to the Prophet.

The way angels present themselves to prophets can differ depending on the situation and the wisdom of Allah.

Come to Christ to do what and in what manner? Christ will judge not God? I don't get it, are the former and latter the same with the former definitely stating the latter is greater than him?

MightySparrow:
Yeah. No Muslims have given any answers but abuses and dodging the questions.

And you were unable to get out any relevance to your questions?

AntilsIam:
Seleka started this conflict, Anti balaka is not a terrorist group pls take note of that.

Anti balaka was created to defend themselves against your seleka that are waging war on them

So the Séléka seeing to a change of government that was partial an irresponsible was them starting conflict as the Anti-Balaka originated a strong and violent response to this?

AntilsIam:
Your childish brain ought to have tell you to go back to history b4 vomiting thrash

It is the same history I'll use to nuke you as usual. Read about Balfour Declaration, you'll see who started the war sebi you no wan get sense nii

Nice that you yourself bring up the Balfour declaration. Can it be analyzed to understand how it is part of this many decades or over a century long wars?

The Balfour Declaration, issued on November 2, 1917, a statement from the British government that expressed support for the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people, the Israelites in Palestine. It was directed to Lord Rothschild, a prominent figure in the British Jewish community, and was signed by Arthur Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary. The Rothschild family is a wealthy Ashkenazi Jewish noble banking family originally from Frankfurt. They are the most famous of all European banking dynasties, which for some 200 years exerted great influence on the economic and, indirectly, the political history of Europe.

The Balfour declaration overlooked the following aspects:

1- The declaration was not solely about supporting Jewish aspirations; it was also influenced by Britain's geopolitical goals. The British aimed to secure Jewish backing, especially from influential Jewish communities in the U.S. and Russia, to keep them engaged in World War I.

2 - Britain sought to maintain control over Palestine, a crucial area near the Suez Canal, essential for their empire and trade routes to India.

3. It lies in contradictions to other Promises like the promise Britain had assured the Arabs of their independence in return for their assistance in combating the Ottoman Empire through the McMahon-Hussein Correspondence (1915-1916). Also at the same time, in the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916, Britain and France secretly plotted to partition the Middle East between themselves.

4 - Palestinian Arabs were overlooked as the declaration mentioned that nothing should prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, yet it did not guarantee any political rights for the Arab majority. At that time, Arabs constituted over 90% of Palestine's population.

5- The Balfour Declaration regarded Palestine as a territory open for international negotiation, disregarding the desires of the native Palestinian population in their Colonial mindset. This attitude mirrored the colonial mindset of the period, where European powers made decisions for other regions without their consent.

6. The declaration set the stage for future conflicts, as it resulted in increased Jewish immigration into the region.

MightySparrow:
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxR-kuCHagi8xe2aOV4WqSLtfX5Sn4XxtI?si=KEGyXrxh61mM_NSE

Consequent upon the demand of a brother's request to type out the questions in the video above because of some people who may not be patient enough to watch the video, I have to repost the topic. Please if you have contributed before, you can still share your views so that we can learn together.

1. What is salvation in Islam?
2a. What are you saved from?
2b .What are saved into?
3. Can you Muslims know if you are saved?
4. Did Mohammed need salvation?
5. Was Mohammed saved?
6a.What was Mohammed saved from if received salvation?
6b.whatdid Mohammed saved into?
7. Did Mohammed have the assurance of salvation?

I believe with the volume of comments thus far on your thread, you have gotten your answers.

Baldwretch:
I am not actually questioning how Muhammad figured the angel's identity as Gabriel; I am asking how he could tell that the angel who appeared to him is from God and not from other sources. These are two different, but inter-related questions.

Granted, an angel appeared to him; granted, the angel identified his name as Gabriel; granted, there was a metaphysical influence around the events that indicates that the experience is more than natural, but how do we know that this angel and the experience he had is of God and not from the Devil, or from other sources? An impostor spirit claiming to emanate from and speak for the one true God with a terribly strong metaphysical influence is possible.

That is the state of the question.

Let me use an example. When the angel of God appeared to Moses in the Burning Bush; the bush was burning but was never burning up. Moses was like - wow, what in the world is going on here. How can a bush be burning for this long and not get burnt up, so he goes over and takes a very good look. Turns out, it is of God.

Ah w,ait a seconds, did I just say that it is of God? Well, hold on for a minute. It might not be. Suppose someone who wasn't there when the events happened or suppose some who witnessed the event turn around and claims that the bush did in fact burn and never got burnt up as alleged. Suppose the person's conclusions on the events is polar opposite to Moses' conclusions that the metaphysical influence on Moses and all the circumstances surrounding the events are from the Devil, not from God. It happened yes, but it is just not from God.

Would it be a reasonable and credible arguments he's making? Yes, it would be.

But why? To some degrees, the Devil is also able to replicate the same. So how could we convince this doubting Thomas that the events and the metaphysical influence and all that as experienced by Moses the servant of God is from God and not from the Devil?

That is the state of the question.

You see the thing is, no matter how much evil spirits like to wander and disrupt the divine government, they are still under God's authority and have been restrained from doing certain things. I would like to think that it is not just that they have been restrained, but they are incapable, by virtue of God's overreaching power, of doing certain things they would naturally want to do.

Do evil spirits exist? YES! But if an evil spirit wants to appear to maybe thousands or millions today as God did before the sight of all the Israelite, would he be able to accomplish or replicate the same? NO! Why not? He doesn't have that authority. God is still on the throne and he very much restrains them.

If Muhammad claims that an angel from God appeared to him with strong metaphysical influence; he might be right and he might be wrong, we would need more than his claims to believe. This spirit would have to convince not just him but us by the authority he spirit possess. The spirit would have to prove the authority he possess by appearing, in part, to some of us (or to some of the people who lived in Arabia during the time of Muhammad).

If the devil or his angels wanted to appear to all of us or to all Nigerians today, they couldn't. They do not have such authority!

Only God with the ultimate authority over everyone including the devil is able to do that. God is also able to commute some of those powers to his angels. The devil is absolutely unable to. He has been stripped of this power. No evil spirit or spirit from other sources posses that authority.

You see where I am going: only Muhammad saw the angel Gabriel. Only Muhammad came under his metaphysical influence. Only Muhammad! It's only Muhammad!

If that doubting Thomas doubted the theophany, the Burning Bush that I mentioned earlier, Moses could just say, okay your skepticism is justified. Wait. Just be patient. Don't worry. You would see the glory of God with your own two korokoro eyes and then you'd believe.

In the book of Surah Al-Torah chapter 1 verse 1 and chapter 25, 72, and 1000 of the holy Quran of that Surah, in my own translation, the New Living Translation of the holy Quran, it says:

And the glory of the Lord appeared to all the Israelite as they grumbled in their tents.

In another Surah, Surah Al-Exodus, it says,

To the Israelite at the bottom of the mountain, the glory of the Lord appear like glittering fire while the summit appears like gleaming amber.

There are just so many Surahs that says that God proved himself or his angels for other people to witness in the physical plain besides Moses indicating his absolute authority. That is how we differentiate the good from the bad, the righteous from the unrighteous, by the authority they possess. Not necessarily by the powers they exercise because (in that department) we do not have the ability to conclusively tell the difference. I wish I could meet you in person and talk sense into our head. Maybe, just maybe, if you are sincere you would renounce Islam and do a deeper introspection.



Unfortunately, all of these attributes you mentioned do not indicate conclusively that God is the source. Contrary to what many think, the devil is not terribly bad who wants nothing but bloodshed, murder, thievery, slander, and all sorts of vices, unhinged and unabated. He could make demands of these and even more from those who might believe in him for different reasons than God's, for different purposes, to different ends, and if he would be the authority on the subject. It all boil down to authority wars. Doing what you think is right because "He said so" is far more important than doing the "right thing." If a man would come under metaphysical influence that is not of God, all of these demands and more would be demanded, with absolute strictness in the details, provided it is done because of him. The idea of a depraved, degenerate deity that commands and allows all sorts of vices and crimes have never been a human idea. It only exist in the imagination.

The initial revelation in the Cave of Hira marks a monumental event, demonstrating the profound nature of divine selection. When the Prophet Muhammad pbuh encountered the angel Jibril, the command to "recite" was both a challenge and an invitation to engage with the divine message. The Prophet's initial hesitation, stemming from his unlettered state, highlights the humility inherent in spiritual receptiveness.

The physical manifestation of Jibril a. s encompassing the horizon with his six hundred wings, reinforces the magnitude of this revelation. Such an overwhelming sight instills a sense of awe and certainty in the Prophet about the authenticity of his experience. This was further validated by Waraqah ibn Nawfal, whose recognition of Jibril's role confirms the continuity of divine communication through angels across prophets.

Continued revelations through Jibril cemented this relationship, indicating that the Prophet pbuh was not merely a passive recipient but an active participant in the dissemination of divine wisdom. The Quran explicitly acknowledges Jibril’s pivotal role, affirming him as the "Trustworthy Spirit." Thus, the narrative of Jibril embodies the assurance of divine guidance in a world rife with uncertainty, compelling both believers and skeptics alike to acknowledge his significance as the messenger of Allah.

AntilsIam:
Ahahahaha you called it bias, when Hamas attacked Israel on October 7th, your Arab nations didn't called it bias or act of terrorism. But when IDF give them back what Hamas asked for, you slaves called it genocide, bias, terrorism, etc NO BE TODAY NAH, YOU MUST TALK AND REASON FROM YOUR ANUS AS A SLAVE ANYWAYS

Very limited and childish of you to ignore historical precedents.

This military action of Hamas was a reaction to years of systemic oppression that Palestinians have endured under Israeli rule.

Many view this military action as a reaction to what they see as decades of systemic oppression experienced by Palestinians under Israeli control.

Perhaps you should start from 1917.

AntilsIam:
Is that according to your stewpidity? Or you read that from britanicca

Britannica’s emphasis on historical context mainly from an academic position, it overlooks the significance of Anti-balaka's violent methods but as I show you they gloss over.
You myopically ignore or don't understand which in turn degenerated into a cycle of violent attacks between Christians and Muslims

Various other sources provide detailed accounts of the mass exodus of Muslims from the Central African Republic (CAR) which Brittanica doesn't include for whatever reason.

During the civil war, anti-Balaka militias specifically targeted Muslim civilians, resulting in widespread forced displacement. In 2014, Amnesty International documented several massacres carried out by the anti-Balaka against Muslim civilians, which compelled thousands of Muslims to escape the country.

Once more I ask you about the credibility of Amnesty international? Don't you regard their views regarding matters about Nigeria the country you more likely originate from as credible?