₦airaland Forum

TenQ:
Even your Scholar Al-Jalalayn saulys that Dhul-Qarnayn is Alexander! Are you unaware of this?

Tafsir Qur'an 18.83 Jalal - Al-Jalalayn
And they, the Jews, question you concerning Dhū’l-Qarnayn, whose name was Alexander; he was not a prophet. Say: ‘I shall recite, relate, to you a mention, an account, of him’, of his affair

There were minor questions you should answer because the case of Dhul-Qarnayn is a HISTORICAL event isn't it?
1. So then, who is Dhul-Qarnayn in history apart from Alexander the Great?
2. Where is the remnants of the wall he built?
3. Who were the people he found beside the setting of the sun?
4. Where is the location?




I am surprised you didn't know that Allah said he died for ALMOST one year before he was discoverd.
Quran 34:14
And when We decreed death for him, nothing showed his death to them save a creeping creature of the earth which gnawed away his staff. And when he fell the jinn saw clearly how, if they had known the Unseen, they would not have continued in despised toil.

The three scholars of Islam were unanimous in their commentaries that it was almost a year
1. Tafsir Ibn Kathir Qur'an 34:14
2. Tafsir Ibn ‘Abbâs Qur'an 34:14
3. Tafsir Al-Jalalayn Qur'an 34:14

If you disagree that his death was NOT almost a year, can you tell us how many minutes it took for Solomon's death to be a miracle?





Where did your scholars got the almost one year timeline? Were they fabricating history?

I have brought three witnesses to support my position, where are your witnesses?



Awn!
What an argument?
Did you not see that I wrote FOUR accounts from four different cultures including ARABIC from Allah?

The legend of the seven sleepers was a story written by
The Greek account by Simeon Metaphrastes
The Latin account by St. Gregory of Tours and
The Syriac version by Jacob of Serugh, from which Coptic and Georgian accounts arose.
The Arabic version by Allah and his prophet Mohammad


What it means it that they were copying each other and only one was the original source of the story.
The Arabic version is the latest of the four meaning that the version in the Qur'an copied their earlier ones.

If you think the version of Allah is the correct version,
1. Can you tell me exactly how many people were in the cave and how many dogs (surely, Allah must know the answer)?
2. Can you explain how Allah preserved the Christian in a cave (who believed that Jesus was crucified and rose from the dead by the third day) contrary to Islamic invention?



The three scholars of Islam were unanimous in their commentaries

1. Tafsir Ibn Kathir Qur'an 34:14
2. Tafsir Ibn ‘Abbâs Qur'an 34:14
3. Tafsir Al-Jalalayn Qur'an 34:14

What arabic or translation says 1 year in the verse?

Write out your Tafsir showing 1 year and prove they categorically say 1year.

TenQ:
At least you concur that the story of Dhul-Qarnayn is a HISTORICAL truth, then you must be able to answer these questions


Since you are so sure that Dhul-Qarnayn is NOT Alexander the Great,
1. So then, who is Dhul-Qarnayn in history apart from Alexander the Great?
2. Where is the remnants of the wall he built?
3. Who were the people he found beside the setting of the sun?
4. Where is the location?

Finally, does the sun set inside ANY kind of water?

If it is history, it must be reality!




Otherwise, if you claim that Dhul-Qarnayn is Cyrus,
1. Where is the wall he built or it's remnants?
2. Who were the people he met beside the setting place of the sun

True to yourself; kindly continue your argument with yourself.

I believe in all the Quran revealed by Allah to prophet Muhammad pbuh as truth. If you have a problem with it remember it's your problem.

Have I journeyed to all ends of the world? Would I? If I leave that long will the effects of those the wall partition me from not be seen?

Is there Gog and Magog in your Bible? Where are they at this very point in time?

If you don't understand allegorical speech kindly take English lessons

TenQ:
Why are you denying Alexander the Great?

Did not your Allah speak directly to him (things he did not do even for Mohammed)?


Did you never read the Tafsir of Al-Jalalayn

Tafsir Qur'an 18.83 Jalal - Al-Jalalayn
And they, the Jews, question you concerning Dhū’l-Qarnayn, whose name was Alexander; he was not a prophet. Say: ‘I shall recite, relate, to you a mention, an account, of him’, of his affair


Why do you think Al-Jalalayn named the two Horned one as Alexander and not TenQ?

The identification of Zul-Qarnain has been a controversial matter from the earliest times. in general the commentators have been of the opinion that he was Alexander the Great but the characteristics of Zul-Qarnain described in the Qur'an are not applicable to him. However, now the commentators are inclined to believe that Zul-Qarnain was Cyrus, an ancient king of Iran. We are also of the opinion that probably Zul-Qarnain was Cyrus, but the historical facts, which have come to light up to this time, are not sufficient to make any categorical assertion.

-Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi

As expected you pick the slightest argument that agree with your fancy and stop looking.
Why?
Is this how you ascertain what is true without thorough probe?

TenQ:
Since you are so sure that Dhul-Qarnayn is NOT Alexander the Great,
1. So then, who is Dhul-Qarnayn in history apart from Alexander the Great?
2. Where is the remnants of the wall he built?
3. Who were the people he found beside the setting of the sun?
4. Where is the location?



Tell me, did Solomon actually died for almost a year and no one knew about his death?


You said: Are the sleepers of Ephesus conclusively adjudged to myth or legend?
Response: It is both a myth and a legend


You said :
Is it similar to other legends and myths you accept as truth?
Response: Does it matter especially if Allah thought that the myth and legend is REAL?

The legend of the seven sleepers was a story written by
The Greek account by Simeon Metaphrastes
The Latin account by St. Gregory of Tours and
The Syriac version by Jacob of Serugh, from which Coptic and Georgian accounts arose.
The Arabic version by Allah and his prophet Mohammad

The story was written to encourage people struggling against the unbelieving rulers to be patient as they will ultimately overcome.
The story was written after the peak of the Christian persecution by the Roman government in (249-251 AD)

Mohammed put it in the Qur'an of Allah in 600+ AD


Why did Allah present the story as Real?

What else is to be expected from Mr Argument, Argument?

The identity of Dhul-Qarnayn remains a subject of speculation and interpretation, as different people have offered diverse perspectives on this enigmatic figure.

Dhul Qarnayn can be any good ruler who helped the oppressed against the oppressor, stopped corruption, applied the law of God, and established justice among people.


2. Where is it categorically stated that prophet Suleiman may Allah be pleased with him died for a year before his death was discovered?

The rate at which termites eat wood can vary based on several factors such as the species of termite, colony size, type of wood, climate, and location. Was it the whole length of the walking stick that was eaten be it toppled over under load?
You try to show a higher degree of intelligent reasoning.

3. Legend, myth or reality who are you to determine exactly how messages are delivered? Depending on which calendar is presented what is your age?

There is wide disagreement about where they were located. Some say Greece. Some say Turkey. Some even mention Andalusia or Islamic Spain however the similarity of this story through different people and culture should point to some reality about it.

I see you have referred to Tafsir Jalalyn. How many Tafsir share this view?

FxMasterz:
Now, this is what you said below. Where's the question about idolizing someone?

Ohyoudidnt:
Is your faith blind or you don't have the capacity to reason independently and only follow what who you idolize tell You?

If you can be honest? How many sentences are there above?

FxMasterz:
The question was premised on the fact that there was someone I was idolizing. You never asked, are you idolizing someone?

Is what you term the premise separate from the question or in the question?

FxMasterz:
You categorically insulted me by telling me I idolized someone. Did you ask me if I idolized anybody?

I believe you understand what this sign ? means in a sentence.

FxMasterz:
You don't need to abuse me or my faith. I only asked you a question! Why are you getting so agitated?

TenQ said he is a prophet in Islam. I'm sure He has his proofs.

I have read that verse myself regarding the "you will not leave my soul in the grave nor suffer your holy one to see corruption" in the Quran online. I'll search it out and bring it.

Continue using Tenq as your benchmark.

I look forward to your successful online search.

I simply ask you questions too bad you interpret these to be insulting

FxMasterz:
But is Alexander the Great not truly a prophet in Islam?

I do not doubt that it's there. I researched it and found it. I think it's Zabur 3:5 or something.

Look at something else I found. Can you explain the screenshot?

Alexander the great is not a prophet of Islam and was never said to be.

Have you found your psalms equivalent in the Quran?


Is your faith blind or you don't have the capacity to reason independently and only follow what who you idolize tell You?

TenQ:
Alexander the Great is the Two Horned One (Dhu Qarnayn) do you want to refute this?

You may want to read what Ibn Kathir wrote about him and show in history any one else called the two Horned one.

Tell me, did Solomon actually died for almost a year and no one knew about his death?

Was the legend of the seven sleepers a real occurrence or a fiction?

Alexander the Great and Dhul Qarnayn are two different individuals and this is conclusive based on actual research.

You can twist your thoughts and views but they will only remain your personal mischief.

What is the concept of time to the Jinn? Do you have an encounter with them to know? Maybe as they seem to be or trouble you? What is the essence of the verse you refer to?

Are the sleepers of Ephesus conclusively adjudged to myth or legend? Is it similar to other legends and myths you accept as truth?

TenQ:
How about legend of Alexander the Great or the Legend of the seven sleepers or Solomon dieing for almost a year on his walking stick.

Are you Shure this was Allah or Mohammed narrating these stories?

I have come to know you as habitually argumentative even when there is uncertainty in your claims. The Quran is entirely from Allah.

You will need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that legend of Alexander the Great is mentioned in the Quran.

Whatever doubts you have about the people of the cave or the death of Solomon are entirely yours to as you were neither there nor have any convincing evidence to the contrary.

FxMasterz:
You know really much bro. So, the legend of Alexandra is also in the Quran? It was Allah who revealed that too?

Fortunately you have a mind of your own. Make your own research and don't follow the ignorant whims of another that has an erroneous quarrel with himself about the truth.

The Quran is the central religious text of Islam and contains guidance for all aspects of life. It does not specifically mention the legend of Alexandra. It is important to focus on the teachings and guidance provided in the Quran and the authentic Hadiths when seeking knowledge about Islam.

Were you told Psalm 16:10 is in the Quran and you believe it without verifying?

PulsingPurple:
Chai... I'm not trying to claim that you're pushing anything on me. I was just trying to understand what you were pointing this out and the expected response from me.


Okay I think we failed to establish that God had promised to give Abraham and Sarah a child.
Hence Abraham marrying a maid just to get the same child that was promised is a compromise of faith (believe) in God.
We also know he was compelled to do it, if not, he probably wouldn't have bothered.

Hence the term: Compromise

It's the reason why I gave that analogy where a father promises a phone for the child, but the child goes ahead to get the phone using his own means



Hmm... Would still like to interact on the matter if you please.
Not necessarily to change your views...

This statement from your post does indicate you say I try to push my views on you?

PulsingPurple:
Even though I've not really pushed anything on you, I think I've given you room to accommodate new lines of thoughts...

Now you tend to slander Abraham as being impatient yet he was steadfast against Idolatry done by his father Terah and obedient when God asked him to leave his homeland and kinsmen to embark on a journey to a land that would be shown to him (Acts 7:3).

You now tend to say he was wrong in going into his maid as a concubine?

Hagar was Abraham’s concubine and the mother of his son Ishmael. She was purchased in Egypt and served as a maid to Abraham’s childless wife, Sarah. Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to conceive an heir.

A concubine was a woman who lived with a man as his secondary wife, providing children to increase the workforce and satisfy the man’s sexual desires. Concubines held certain rights and protections under Hebrew law, but they were not equal in status to a wife.

In Exodus 21:7-11, if a man bought a Hebrew girl as a concubine, he must commit to providing for her for life or return her to her father without demanding payment.

In extreme poverty situations, women could avoid prostitution and homelessness by choosing to sell themselves as a concubine to one man (Exodus 21:7)

Remember that when Hagar became pregnant, she became arrogant and Sarah treated her harshly, causing her to flee into the wilderness. There, she was found by an angel of the Lord who told her to return home and promised her that she would have many descendants through her son, Ishmael.

Also recall that in Genesis 16:2
And Sarai said to Abram, "Behold now, the Lord has prevented me from bearing children. Go in to my servant; it may be that I shall obtain children by her." And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai.

Sarah chose to give her servant Hagar to Abraham, in accordance with the custom of the day, so that Sarah could have a child through her

Why then is there in the biblical scripture Genesis 16
7 The angel of the Lord found Hagar near a spring in the desert; it was the spring that is beside the road to Shur.

8 And he said, “Hagar, slave of Sarai, where have you come from, and where are you going?”

“I’m running away from my mistress Sarai,” she answered.

9 Then the angel of the Lord told her, “Go back to your mistress and submit to her.”

10 The angel added, “I will increase your descendants so much that they will be too numerous to count.”

About 14 years after the birth of Ishmael, Isaac was born.

Question is if the child of Hagar is not important why will an angel from God appear to get in regard of her pregnancy/child?

The first aspect of God’s promise to Abraham is fulfilled through Ishmael, Abraham’s son with Hagar, his Egyptian handmaiden. This promise is chronicled in the Book of Genesis (16:10, 17:20)

The second aspect of God’s promise to Abraham is the birth of a child through Sarah, Abraham’s wife. Despite her advanced age, God reaffirms the promise, stating that Sarah will bear a son, Isaac, who will become the progenitor of the Israelites (Genesis 17:15-21, 18:9-15, 21:1-3).

Don't bother with a published answer. Just reflect on this.

PulsingPurple:
Okay I see

Please also note that the phrase 'whom you love' is like an adjectival clause attached to the son Isaac.
God saying Abraham loved Isaac doesn't imply that Abraham didn't love the other.

It's just like saying, “Bring that my white shirt that is ironed...”
It doesn't mean that the other shirts aren't ironed. It just indicates that the white shirt is indeed ironed.

So I think the main contention here will be the idea of God calling Isaac the 'only son'



True.
But it's worth noting that Ishmael was gotten under compromise.
That's to imply that in the normal scheme of things, there would have been no Ishmael.


Abraham was a good man. Who is to say he didn't love his son? (even though he was gotten through a not-so-good means)



I'm not opposing your views or anything oo, but since you have shared it, let me also share a line of thought.

Let's introduce analogies and points if views.

1. Assuming I'm your father and I promise to give you a phone, but you end up waiting so long and eventually do a few semi-illegal stuff and get a phone (of course, the money isn't enough so you buy a quack phone but still 'love' it).
I later buy a good phone for you, a special one for that matter.
Now one day I call on you and say, “Ohyoudidnt bring me your phone, your only phone, which you love...” Which phone will you be bringing? The one you got out of compromise or the one I got for you?

Then also I'm a Christian (a Believer), so the first belief is that God is God.
He has to be right whenever He speaks, and it's my duty to understand why I felt He's wrong (after all the small simple human mind won't be able to completely understand the mind of a complex God).

Even though I've not really pushed anything on you, I think I've given you room to accommodate new lines of thoughts...

It's sad that you feel I am pushing anything on you by pointing out clear truths.

Abraham had Ishmael with Hagar, his wife Sarah’s handmaiden, when Sarah was unable to bear children. This does not imply he is still childless but he has no child from his 1st wife.

You tend to imply there is wrong doing in this being done. You have interpreted that Abraham had Ishmael in compromise however is this view stated by God or any in the Bible?

However Ishmael was conceived does not remove the fact that he is the first child and was only child before Isaac was born. Incidentally it seems more plausible he was to be sacrificed if indeed he was born in compromise so this can be corrected.

It is not worth discussing any further and your views are valid as yours and mine to me.

Best wishes.

PulsingPurple:
Sorry please I didn't get the point.

Is this a question or you're pointing out an observation?
Cos it's far from the discussion topic too.
Please clarify 🙏

It's an observation in reference to your statement

[2] “Take your son,” God said, “your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah. Offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will show you

[quote author=PulsingPurple post=130542436]Now, ‭Genesis 22:1-13
“[i][1] Some time later God tested Abraham and said to him, “Abraham!” “Here I am,” he answered.
[2] “Take your son,” God said, “your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah. Offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will show you.”
...
/quote]

An issue of confusion perhaps contention is
Ishmael was Abraham’s son as the Bible clearly states that Ishmael was Abraham’s son, born from his relationship with Hagar (Genesis 16).

Abraham loved both sons but your referrence hete implies Ishmael wasn't loved and is not the first child born to Abraham.

The Bible doesn’t explicitly state that Abraham loved Isaac more than Ishmael. In fact, there are instances where Abraham shows concern and affection for Ishmael, like when he intercedes with God to save Ishmael’s life (Genesis 21:17).

It is important to note that polygamy was practiced during the old biblical times. Abraham, the patriarch of the Israelites, had three women in his life with whom he had children: Sarah, Hagar, and Keturah.

Clearly it is known that Hagar bore child before Sarah that didn't die.

DMerciful:
If you read well, you'd have seen where i said the compromised judiciary

Even at this claim of a compromised judiciary the truth will have been common and succinct.

Efforts were made to dump a lot of files without any clear description of how there was manipulation by the lawyers. At least approximate if not accurate figures of what the true votes were should have been presented.

Clear and convincing evidence are impossible or at worst difficult to deny. The presentation of petition is at best building castles in the sky.
No clear evidence was presented.

In any case there often always is tomorrow to try again. Best of luck.

There are no entirely free elections anywhere in the world if we are totally sincere.

DMerciful:
Obi got enough genuine votes to win the election. INEC saw the votes coming in and were scared. They shutdown IREV and changed a lot of results to win. This narrative they're trying to portray is dead on arrival.

They couldn't change small Abuja, that's why Abuja results did not come after 4 days yet the compromised judiciary said 25% doesn't matter. So why were they trying to manipulate Abuja results to get 25% ?

2027, Obi will win again but no more going to court. They've got it coming!

I wonder how and why your first paragraph was too different to convincingly present in court. They missed your advise and expertise.

HellVictorinho6:
Can u help me with 10k as a muslim?

Begging is discouraged in Islam except for specific categories of people in genuine need. These are those who are in debt, have suffered a disaster, or are acknowledged as destitute by their community.

The act of begging is seen as a sign of laziness and a misuse of the goodwill of others. Islam promotes self-sufficiency, hard work, and preserving one’s honor by earning a living through legitimate means.

Explore2xmore:
Indeed it is tiresome discussing with these folk especially those that claim an awareness beyond religion.

You are very much correct as prayer is a powerful tool for expressing our grievances and frustrations to a higher power. When we turn to prayer as a complaint, we are acknowledging our feelings of discontent and seeking comfort and resolution from the divine.

Most Christians view Jesus's crucifixion as the ultimate sacrifice for humanity. More so Hebrew 7:27 reads unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.

Yet Jesus said in Matthew 26:39...... Father, if it’s possible, let this cup ⌞of suffering⌟ be taken away from me. But let your will be done rather than mine.

Did Jesus not know this was how it will play out? Did the script authors feel they can turn on and off his willingness without care?

In any case the OP is simply asking if Jesus Wanted To Be Crucified, And Why?

It seems this will be in obedience to God the father who is also Jesus as said by their majority.

Very reasonable points to question understanding that in the Gospel of Matthew 26:39, Jesus prays to God in the Garden of Gethsemane before his crucifixion, saying, “Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; yet not as I will, but as you will.”
This prayer reflects Jesus’ at a time of anguish and reluctance towards the suffering he was about to endure on the cross. The phrase “let this cup pass from me” indicates Jesus’ desire for an alternative to the impending crucifixion, showing his humanity and vulnerability.

Is your point questioning a divine and human Jesus wishing for different unlike the fully human Abraham and Ishmael who didn't seek a change but willfully proceeded and were found worthy to having a substitute.

Are we reviewing if Jesus prayer was answered or not and why?

Kobojunkie:
First of all, Jesus Christ was not a child sacrifice. He never said He was any such so I am not certain why you would assert that which is not even of His Truth. Second, can you explain how any of the highlighted amounts to a complaint? ...
...
Which of the above do you reason is a complaint?

Indeed Jesus was not a child but is repeated referred to as son of God. How different is a son of God from a child of God?

Abraham who was performing the sacrifice is not classified as a child but the father.

Prayer and complaining can coexist within our relationship with God. We may start with a complaint, but ultimately turn to prayer for strength, guidance, and hope. From a desire against something to a desire for something comes the prayer.

Kobojunkie:
1. I didn't limit the Gospel, God Himself did! God of Israel declared that no man can add, remove, or change anything declared in His Laws, of which the Gospel is one.

2. Galatians is not the Gospel/Law of God. If you are not able to debate only that contained in the Gospel as indicated by the OP, then no point.

3. First of all, Jesus Christ never said He was a sacrifice like Isaac so I don't understand the connection the other attempted to make. Second, there is no decree given by God that man is not to ask particular things in prayer. Third, Jesus Christ never said He died for mankind. Now to the fourth, Jesus Christ prophesied of His Death in Matthew 12 vs 40, Mark 8:31-33, Mark 9 vs 30-32, Mark 10 vs 32-34, Matthew 17 vs 22–23 & Luke 9 vs 43–45 & John 10 vs 7-18 & Luke 18 vs 31-34 & Luke 9 vs 21-22. Following what is presented in the Gospels regarding His death, He did not mention before Gethsemane, that He would need to drink the cup of God's poison in any of the above references.

I hope you are done with this meaningless back and forth at this point cause this seems more and more an attempt to convolute that which is simply stated in the Gospels out of ignorance.

Didn't you say

Kobojunkie:
1. This thread is not about what is written in Galatians but what is presented in the Gospels.

2. Reading through the Gospels, there is no mention of the taking of this curse of Mankind you keep insisting on throughout all of the Gospels.
3. Abraham? I don't follow! Exactly what point?

Is there reference to the Gospel in the Galatians and are the two not part of the Biblical scripture? Seems you forgot.

Jesus didn't die for mankind but this is said of him.

Jesus is also said to be God who is reported to say he so loved the world that he gave his 'only begotten son' that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. This is in line with John 3:16.

The sacrifice of Jesus on the cross is seen as an expression of God’s love and mercy towards humanity. See Matthew 16:21, Mark 8:31etc.
Did Paul not say in 1 Corinthians 15:14-17 that
And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith?

Was this statement of Paul not in reference to the Gospel?

The point again is as recorded by the scripture and Gospel; if Jesus knew he was to suffer many things including death why then did he pray against it and attempt to have the disciples guard against his capture to fulfilling this?

Does it mean that Jesus the son of God did not fully submit to the will of God?

I end my submissions.

Kobojunkie:
1. This thread is not about what is written in Galatians but what is presented in the Gospels.

2. Reading through the Gospels, there is no mention of the taking of this curse of Mankind you keep insisting on throughout all of the Gospels.

3. Abraham? I don't follow! Exactly what point?

Did you not say?

Kobojunkie:
1.

What remains obvious from many of these questions is that your understanding of Scripture does not come from actually investigating the book for yourselves but from religious interpretations that do not align with what is written.

You now limit to the Gospels as they are separate from the scripture? The entire Bible then is not scripture

Does Galatians 1: 6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ.

In reference to the Gospel?

Following too on this comment by Explore2xmore

Explore2xmore:
Come to think of it; can we compare this to the sacrifice of Abraham though not as a means to salvation of his first son as he had pledged?

I have not come across Abraham's initial planned first child sacrifice complaining. Is there a case of Abraham's child being more submissive than the Biblical Jesus?

Is it that Abraham and his first child had a less human side than the allegedly divine and human Jesus?

Specifically in this case you say

Kobojunkie:
I still don't understand what you are saying at all.

Jesus Christ knew He had to die and accepted that fact. Later, we discover that not only did He have to de but it had to be a cursed death, a death which no man who loves God would even desire

Do you say Jesus knowing he had to die which is understood as a means to redeem mankind he will not be taking up the curse of mankind?

Kobojunkie:
1. He didn't know how of what.

2. What is written in Galatians was not recorded as the Words out of the mouth of Jesus Christ, so try to focus. The question was regarding what was said by Jesus Christ Himself, and not that which was said of Jesus Christ.

So what is written in Galatians is not related to Jesus and what he did? Oh please.

Do you infer Jesus didn't know his being sacrificed to redeem mankind involved his taking up the curse of mankind?

Matthew 26:39 Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.

You don't see that there is nothing similar recorded about Abraham and his first child? Now this exactly is the point.

Kobojunkie:
1. Where did Jesus Christ state that He had to take on the curse of all mankind for Pete's sake? The man was a Holy and Righteous man who was to be subjected to death, not just any kind of death but the death of a cursed man. He prayed that if it be God's Will to have Him not die by a curse, that God grant Him this. Simple! The same Jesus Christ right there and then said, "Not my Will, but yours be done!, so where do you get that He was not willing?
...
...
How is what is clearly shown to be simple complicated for you?

2. Where is it written that because He was there with God in the Beginning, He therefore Knows All Things though? Why do you lot keep subjecting Him to your very imaginations and not in fact what is written?

What remains obvious from many of these questions is that your understanding of Scripture does not come from actually investigating the book for yourselves but from religious interpretations that do not align with what is written.

Is it not stated in Matthew 5:17 that Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

If he didn't know how then was he fulfilling these laws?

Doesn't Galatians 3:13 not read Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.


Seems you are verifying that even the author of Galatians didn't understand zit or is it you?

Kobojunkie:
I still don't understand what you are saying at all.

Jesus Christ knew He had to die and accepted that fact. Later, we discover that not only did He have to de but it had to be a cursed death, a death which no man who loves God would even desire -- God forsakes those who are cursed ---, and so Jesus Christ prayed that the father to take that kind of death away from Him if it be an option in His Will. Turned out it was not an option and Jesus Christ had to endure it. So, He did and when the curse came upon Him for hanging in a tree to die, Jesus Christ made it known by way of the statement He made on the Father, Father, Why have you forsaken me... a statement spoken by David in His Psalms. And following that same statement, the same Jesus Christ said, "Father(the same Fathe), into your hands I command my Spirit." The end.

So, what exactly are you arguing here?

This appears a very complicated twist. Was Jesus not willing to take up the curse of all mankind in order to redeem them?

It brings more questions as to if he was there with God from the beginning and now forgets the curse and generational inheritance of the original sin and ancestral sins due to disobedience.

SIRTee15:
Baba oniro. Why U dey lie like this.

Labeling someone as cognitive dissonance is a gross accusation and too dismissive.


Your insulting language

SIRTee15:
Oga I didn't insult U. I didn't insult your Allah or prophet.
I only said Islam is a pagan religion. And sir, that's not an insult but an observation. Unfortunately U couldn't bring evidence to prove otherwise.


No problem since U have rejected all hadiths and generated your own opinion based on bias logic.
Now based on your own hermeneutics, ihat means a Yoruba traditional worshipper who is pouring libation on a stone due to association with obatala hasn't done anything wrong. Muslims cannot accuse such person of idolatry
Agree with above and we will end the discussion.


I never asked U to turn the other cheek and I don't subscribe to it either. That verse is one of the most misinterpreted verse in the bible.


Muhammed told U Muslims multiple times not to follow him blindly. He warned U that if a statement from his mouth isn't a revelation, thread with caution.
Muhammed never brought a verse on black stone. U don't know why he kissed the black stone- maybe in honour of his dead father. I just saw him kissed the black stone and Muslims decided to kiss the black stone.
Unfortunately, U guys dont have access to angel jibril to correct any mistakes or error. Angel jibril stopped communicating with mankind after the death of Muhammed.
Now Muslims are trapped with kissing the stone which is evidently idolatry no matter how U argue it out.



I already answered the questions.
Over a million Jews worship in churches with Christians. I told U to research messianic Jews, did U look into it?

Other Jews that continue to pray to temple walls are idolaters. Maybe that's why they are happy to worship in mosque since they both share similar pagan practice.
In fact, I see no reason why pagan Jews and Muslims cannot go and pray in shrines. Seriously, I can't deduce why not.
The practice is similar in all 3 religion- idolatry.

The thread remains

Remember this post is Fun Fact: Jews Can Pray In A Mosque But The Church?

Enough of your derailment please though it's a common tactic with you and your likes when you cannot adequately address issues pertaining to your creed.

We are not asking about Jews that convert to Christianity or messianship of Jews but the Jews practicing in accord with the old testament which you say you don't follow.

Jews practicing Judaism believe that the Messiah, or Mashiach, will be a human leader who will bring about an age of peace and understanding for all people. This belief is based on various prophecies in Jewish scripture, such as those found in the books of Isaiah and Jeremiah. One of the most well-known prophecies about the Messiah is found in Jeremiah 23:5, which states, “The days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what is just and right in the land.”

Jews believe that the Messianic Age can only begin after the arrival of the Messiah on Earth, while others believe that humans can bring about the Messianic Age through their actions. Regardless of these differences, however, most Jews agree that the Messiah will be a human being who will bring peace and understanding to all people.

They believe the expected messiah to be a powerful leader who would establish Israel as a dominant nation, defeat their enemies, and usher in an era of peace and prosperity. The prevailing expectation was that the Messiah would be a victorious warrior-king like David rather than a suffering servant.

Are these differences not part of why they don't consider Christianity or worship in the church? Do they expect the messiah to re-establish the Temple?

Zechariah 6:
12 Tell him this is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘Here is the man whose name is the Branch, and he will branch out from his place and build the temple of the Lord.

13 It is he who will build the temple of the Lord, and he will be clothed with majesty and will sit and rule on his throne And he will be a priest on his throne. And there will be harmony between the two.’

Furthermore; Isaiah 11:1-5 speaks of a future ruler from the line of Jesse (King David’s father) who will possess wisdom, understanding, counsel, might, knowledge, and fear of the Lord. This figure is often interpreted as a messianic figure who will bring justice and righteousness to the world.

SIRTee15:
See below and tell me this is not idolatry.
https://youtube.com/shorts/fWycluxLpvM?si=B1p3z11c5fqAVfVH

The thread remains

Remember this post is Fun Fact: Jews Can Pray In A Mosque But The Church?

Enough of your derailment please though it's a common tactic with you and your likes when you cannot adequately address issues pertaining to your creed.

SIRTee15:
TenQ how do you deal with this guys? U show them the truth, they become emotional and start insulting U.
Is this what you ve been going Thu all these years!!!!

He kept shouting Quran Qur'an Quran yet there's no mention of the black stone in the Qur'an at all.
Ohyoudidn't since U said we should use the Qur'an as the final authority, why do U kiss the black stone when the Qur'an never mentioned the black stone? Why?

Ohyoudidn't calm down and drink lots of water, then come back and show me the difference btw these two actions....

For your age, training and experience this is grossly disappointing and unexpected.
Trace who started insults and you will find yourself.

Touching or kissing the Black Stone is for association with the great Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him); it does not imply any reverence whatsoever

Sorry I don't subscribe to the concept of turning the other cheek.

It is no lie that the Quran takes precedence over the Hadith.

Remember this post is Fun Fact: Jews Can Pray In A Mosque But The Church? Never. - Religion - Nairaland so if you have any other questions that haven't been answered open another thread or seek other means of fulfilling your research.

SIRTee15:
Just say U are embarrassed by the hadiths and we will understand , no need for all these Chery picking.

U can't be choosing what suits your fancy in your islamic literatures yet claim to be Sunni Muslim.

We Christians don't follow the old testament but U will never see a Christian deny the OT, we defend it as much just like we do for the new testament because both are seen as word of God. As much as OT is very inconvenient for most Christians, we will never deny it or attempt to throw it under the bus. NEVER.


The black stone is well documented in your hadiths. No be me or any Christian write am.

The black stone was initially white then became black due to sins of those that kiss it. If it's not removing sins, how did it become black?

It was narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaa said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “When the Black Stone came down from Paradise, it was whiter than milk, but the sins of the sons of Adam made it black.”

(Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 877; Ahmad, 2792. Classed as saheeh by Ibn Khuzaymah, 4/219. Al-Haafiz ibn Hajar classed it as qawiy (strong) in Fath al-Baari, 3/462).


This is the most extreme cognitive dissonance argument I've ever witnessed.
U Muslims travel to Mecca to worship Allah in unity. U circumbulate the kabba to worship Allah. In the same act of worship, U queue to kiss the black stone. But this is not idolatry.
However, a yoruba traditional religion worshipper who wakes up in the morning to pour libation to sacred stones is performing idolatry. He didn't worship the stone, neither did he pray to the stone.
But according to Muslims who just returned from Mecca where they kissed a stone.... the Yoruba man is an idolater because he did exactly same thing the Muslims did- stone veneration.

Muslims are hypocrites. If U dont see this as a big problem with your religion, then you are lost.
U guys are no different from stone worshippers in Africa, the difference is you packaged yours better.


Liar...your prophet honoured it. Muhammed touched the black stone and shouted allahu Akbar. Why would he praise Allah while touching the stone.

It was narrated that Ibn ‘Abbas said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) performed Tawaaf on his camel, and every time he came to the corner [where the Stone is] he would point to it and say “Allahu akbar.”

(Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 4987).

Your prophet also commanded that if a person is unable to kiss the Stone, he should touch it with his hand or something else, then he can kiss the thing with which he touched it.

It was narrated that Abu Tufayl (may Allah be pleased with him) said: I saw the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) performing Tawaaf around the House, touching the corner [where the Stone is] with a crooked staff which he had with him, then kissing the staff.

(Narrated by Muslim, 1275).

This shows the level of veneration your prophet gave the black stone. The symbolic gesture of the black stone can be transferred to other objects that touched it according to your Prophet.


The Qur'an didn't mention the black stone at all. Not a single verse was given to the black stone. None.
So why do U guys kiss it, why do U guys venerate it?

This add further proof that veneration of the black stone its not an authentic Islamic practice. Instead it’s spilled over from the ancient Meccan religion into Islam.
The stone represents a goddess of fertility and the whole structure is shaped like a vagina.
Muslims don't realise they follow something ordained by Muhammed and not Allah.
And this makes Muhammed a false prophet.

Its the hadith not Koran that elevated the black stone to level of spiritual significance.

The Black Stone will come forth on the Day of Resurrection and will testify in favour of those who touched it in truth.

It was narrated that Ibn ‘Abbas said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said concerning the Stone: “By Allah, Allah will bring it forth on the Day of Resurrection, and it will have two eyes with which it will see and a tongue with which it will speak, and it will testify in favour of those who touched it in sincerity.”

Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 961; Ibn Maajah, 2944




The gospel of Christ is for everyone. Paul said to the Jews I become like a Jew and to the gentiles I become like a gentile.
The truth is objective and stands out irrespective of religion or belief system. I study every belief system to know how to subjugate it in front of Christ which is the truth.
The problem with Muslims is they fail to think beyond abrahamic religion. They only test their faith against either Christianity or judaism. Oga there are over 1000 religions in the world!!!
Ohyoudidn't, have U ever asked yourself why Islam struggles to penetrate sub Sahara Africa?
Sit down and compare your religion with other African traditional religion, the level of similarity will shock u. This is when it will dawn on you that Islam is a pagan religion.
Yes, it's pagan religion deceiving itself because it's wearing Gucci belt.


God is omnipresent my friend, he's everywhere.

When was these prophecy written up. I dont regard rabbinical Jews who came up 300 yrs after Jesus.
Go and bring what the 2nd temple Jews wrote about the Messiah and we can have a discussion.

Off point. If U want to discuss the passion narrative, open a new thread and tag me.

There you go displaying your inverted reasoning. You and your type make a big deal about the Hadith explaining the Quran yet you cannot bring any Quran verse regarding the black stone.

The Quran always holds the highest authority in Islam, and the Hadith (sayings and actions of Prophet Muhammad) is considered secondary to the Quran. The instruction of the Hadith does not take precedence over the Quran. The Hadith serves as an explanation and commentary on the teachings of the Quran.

When you are able to bring forth a verse on the black stone from the Quran you can continue your advanced diarrhoea. Till then shut up and follow your idol who escaped the confines of your temple.

Lame and stupid statement you make about not following the old testament. Why then is it the old testament kept in the Bible. Your biblical Jesus stating all of the words of God remain valid yet you turn away from it and make a new religion which he himself didn't proclaim? Is this not an advanced psychological disease?


If Muhammad honoured the Black stone as you stupidity claim point to where he praised the stone above Allah or say it was equal or representative of Allah; may such comparison
remain forbidden. It appears you people will need a lot more to get Muslims to make your same type of eternally damming mistake.

Now you got me rolling over. You say God is omnipresent but this presence excludes the temple?

The verses in Micah tell of a universal peace that has not yet manifested. The argument then is if Jesus was this Messiah, why isn’t there world peace? Many Jewish People who are still waiting expectantly for the Messiah are expecting a Messiah who will bring world peace.

The Book of Micah was likely written between 735 and 700 B.C.

Apologies to the OP this guy has diverted your discourse and I have encouraged him. Hopefully he will sincerely and convincingly answer why Jews are not allowed to use their church for worship.

Obviously between the two of them there is severe polytheism that cannot be tolerated by either or critical difference about Jesus and the messiah

SIRTee15:
Baba oniro. Why U dey lie like this.
The stone has the power to forgive sins. Touching the stone makes for atonement for sin.

It was narrated that Ibn ‘Umar said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) say: “Touching them both [the Black Stone and al-Rukn al-Yamani] is an atonement for sins.”

How can a stone forgive sin yet have no spiritual significance. Is the stone not to stand in accusation against insincere Muslims on judgement day?

How can lie bold face and say the black stone has no spiritual significance? U well so?

Which takes precedence inverter SIRTee15 the Quran or the Hadith?

Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “How can you worship besides Allah those who can neither harm nor benefit you? And Allah ˹alone˺ is the All-Hearing, All-Knowing.” Q5:76

He rebuked ˹them˺, “Do you then worship—instead of Allah—what can neither benefit nor harm you in any way? Q21:66

Do I believe the words of Allah or the lies of someone claiming to be of Allah?

For the sake of your mischievous argument you disregard
Sahih al-Bukhari 1597
Narrated `Abis bin Rabi`a:

`Umar came near the Black Stone and kissed it and said "No doubt, I know that you are a stone and can neither benefit anyone nor harm anyone. Had I not seen Allah's Messenger pbuh kissing you I would not have kissed you."

SIRTee15:
We are both saying the same thing. I'm not arguing with u about what Muhammed told U.
All I'm saying is can we apply same principle to African traditional worshippers since they also deal with graven images during their worship.

Are U saying it's ok for a traditional worshipper to bow down to a stone or kiss a wood or circumambulate a graven image during their worship if it's solely for emotional expressions.
Is it ok for Yoruba traditionalist to pour libation on a stone every morning if it's solely to honour the stone?
Is that what U saying ?

We are definitely not saying the same thing you liar.

Indeed, Allah does not forgive associating others with Him ˹in worship˺, but forgives anything else of whoever He wills. And whoever associates others with Allah has indeed committed a grave sin

All the things you list under traditional or pagan worship amount to worshipping other than Allah.

We are not honoring the stone but following the practice of Prophet Muhammad pbuh. There's a clear difference unless you now claim prophet Muhammad pbuh may Allah forbid and forgive me for drawing this analogy worshipped the stone.

Please point me to where it is stated in the words of Allah from the Quran that the Black stone has a special or spiritual value.

It seems comparative religion has excited you to a state of confusion. Sorry if this is the case.

SIRTee15:
The spirit of God has departed the temple since the time of ezekiel so anyone still practicing Judaism is wasting his time.
Even if they rebuild the temple, it's useless because the glory of God will never return to the temple.
Above is evidence that Jesus Christ is the Messiah and now the glory of God on earth.

If the Jews rebuild the temple and glory of God descend into the inner sanctuary, then I will admit the new testament is a lie. But that will never happen because Jesus Christ is the truth.

The sensible Jews have embraced Jesus as the Messiah and are called messianic Jews. The rest are just leaning on the Judeo-Christian ideology to misbehave.
Kissing the temple wall or praying facing the temple wall in 2024 is paganism.

Is your god a physical form that can be confined to a place like a temple and if this is the case obviously there is the idol you worship.

You mean Jews that don't accept the false messianic description of Jesus as he failed to fulfil their prophesy are senseless?

Tell me was Jesus crucified on the day of the passover or the day before the passover?

SIRTee15:
Voudou worshippers kiss their idols.
Anyway the point here is not about kissing but veneration of stone.
Are U saying pouring libation on stone during worship isn't idolatry...is that what U saying?

You and perhaps your kindred must be hunters of sort. Sorry there's nothing to rope or catch here.

The black stone may have been revered and respected by the previous generations, but you ought to know that the Black Stone itself does not hold any spiritual significance.

The pilgrim may touch or if he can approach near enough, kiss the Black Stone as an emotional gesture calling to mind the time when the Holy Prophet(sa) kissed it when he performed the circuit. The Holy Prophet Muhammad(sa) did this, not because of any sanctity attached to the stone, but as an expression of his emotion at the Ka’aba.

Now tell us why Jews cannot conduct religious acts in the church? Do Christians forbid them or the Biblical Jesus say you should have no relationship with them? Do elaborate why please