₦airaland Forum

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.

Ohyoudidnt:
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.

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.


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

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.

Ohyoudidnt:
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.

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!

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?

Ohyoudidnt:
I see you are more concerned with poking fun.

Poking fun? How? I am simply telling you to explain the thorny situation that Muhammad put his adherents.

If you go to the Middle East or any Muslim-dominated region today, there is real disobedience to the words of God with people eating the camel, lobsters, the prawn, all sorts of detestable meat that God has clearly identified as unclean and with people re-marrying their wives who had re-married because Muhammad said it's okay. Do it.

Making fun? How?

Ohyoudidnt:
Essentially what is at the root of food choices?

The root of food choices is left for God to tinker with, not with me and you. What is at the root of the food choice is not for me and you to debate. God has identified them as unclean for food. That is more than enough. If there has been a rule for what is clean and what is not before even Moses was born, during the time of Noah when the patriarch hadn't been born, more than a thousand years apart, how can you be asking this question. Are you going to ask us to explain why God instructs us in the way he does?

Save for blood and the pig, Muhammad essentially put away the food laws that God had given to us to obey for no apparent reason because they do not create a ripple effect in the society. In his depraved mind, these meat do not make us inherently bad and should not have been forbidden. How does eating the snake make you a bad person? Or the lizard? He is also asking the same question you are asking me and thus concludes by putting off the yoke that God had placed on us.

Ohyoudidnt:
Even at that you definitely hold on to wrong propositions.

Taking sides on what and why?

Taking sides on the matter. Can it be said that God made several leaves for what he had forbidden earlier? Why would he?

Would he make leaves for what he had clearly forbidden before there was any law giver? Should it be said that the great God who inspired Moses, the great law giver, and spoke to him repeatedly over a span of 40 years also inspired Muhammad to set aside what he took pains to make known to us? Could Muhammad have been inspired by the same God to contradict and make a leave for what has been forbidden earlier? Can the Kingdom of God be likened to a kingdom, the kingdom of Nigeria, where different regions operate on different laws? Wouldn't these contradictions cast aspersion on and weaken the divine government when there are laws and counter laws during the reign of the same monarch? Can any good thing be said about his character? Who then is to be blamed for this, God or Muhammad? If you say God, that is unthinkable, for God can do no wrong and does not contradict himself. If you say Muhammad, that would also be problematic for the great prophet is inspired to say what the Lord his God says

The Muslim who sincerely wants to do God's will would find this counters very problematic and not try to defend Muhammad's stupidity. You asked me to prove how Muhammad contradicted the law and I just did that; using not one or two situations but three. Even if I could only dig up one where he contradicts laid down law, then we have enough to prove that he was not inspired by the same God that inspired Moses.

Baldwretch:
Poking fun? How? I am simply telling you to explain the thorny situation that Muhammad put his adherents.

If you go to the Middle East or any Muslim-dominated region today, there is real disobedience to the words of God with people eating the camel, lobsters, the prawn, all sorts of detestable meat that God has clearly identified as unclean and with people re-marrying their wives who had re-married because Muhammad said it's okay. Do it.

Making fun? How?

I fail to understand your interplay of seriousness and unseriousness.

With or without prophet Muhammad pbuh those who will disobey God or any other constituted authority in institutions like industries or government will. This is the individuality and free will of humans.

What is a delicacy to some is detested by others. The Chinese eat all sorts from bats, reptiles, roaches and all which was looked upon by a western writer as a window through which wild animal pathogens would cross the divide and afflict human beings. At least as far back as 2007 before the Covid epidemic however true or false it has been.

Baldwretch:
The root of food choices is left for God to tinker with, not with me and you. What is at the root of the food choice is not for me and you to debate. God has identified them as unclean for food. That is more than enough. If there has been a rule for what is clean and what is not before even Moses was born, during the time of Noah when the patriarch hadn't been born, more than a thousand years apart, how can you be asking this question. Are you going to ask us to explain why God instructs us in the way he does?

Save for blood and the pig, Muhammad essentially put away the food laws that God had given to us to obey for no apparent reason because they do not create a ripple effect in the society. In his depraved mind, these meat do not make us inherently bad and should not have been forbidden. How does eating the snake make you a bad person? Or the lizard? He is also asking the same question you are asking me and thus concludes by putting off the yoke that God had placed on us.



Taking sides on the matter. Can it be said that God made several leaves for what he had forbidden earlier? Why would he?

For someone who accuses the other of taking sides can you explain why you ignore the sayings of Jesus in the Bible which is a book written and compiled at least 300 years before the Mushaf of or the revelation of the Qur'an?

In all cases what has human advancement in scientific studies come to find about these?

Baldwretch:
Would he make leaves for what he had clearly forbidden before there was any law giver? Should it be said that the great God who inspired Moses, the great law giver, and spoke to him repeatedly over a span of 40 years also inspired Muhammad to set aside what he took pains to make known to us? Could Muhammad have been inspired by the same God to contradict and make a leave for what has been forbidden earlier? Can the Kingdom of God be likened to a kingdom, the kingdom of Nigeria, where different regions operate on different laws? Wouldn't these contradictions cast aspersion on and weaken the divine government when there are laws and counter laws during the reign of the same monarch? Can any good thing be said about his character? Who then is to be blamed for this, God or Muhammad? If you say God, that is unthinkable, for God can do no wrong and does not contradict himself. If you say Muhammad, that would also be problematic for the great prophet is inspired to say what the Lord his God says

The Muslim who sincerely wants to do God's will would find this counters very problematic and not try to defend Muhammad's stupidity. You asked me to prove how Muhammad contradicted the law and I just did that; using not one or two situations but three. Even if I could only dig up one where he contradicts laid down law, then we have enough to prove that he was not inspired by the same God that inspired Moses.

Well, well, you persistently make force about prophet Muhammad contradicting the laws and it seems to centre around just one;food. I wonder what the other two are.

In any case before Muhammad pbuh Jesus had essentially disqualified the law so why focus on Prophet Muhammad pbuh if one before him did same?

TV01:
True!

How is the descriptor "the truthful spirit" to be understood? I know that some Islamic scholars equate Jibril with the Holy Spirit, who is also known as "The Spirit of Truth" in Christianity. Just an aside though, as this is not the main thrust here.

In some ways this poses more questions around the claimed prophethood. Firstly, as confirming the torah and gospel, serves only to falsify the koran, and secondly, why if this prophet was the last and the seal, did God not speak to him directly a lá Moses, Joshua, David etc. all the way to The Lord Jesus Christ (who the bible notes as the summary and end of patriarchal prophethood)? Again, not central to this question on the "identity of the entity", but building up the wider case.

Sure, once this identity of this entity is confirmed.


The name Gabriel, as with all angelic names (and those of the patriarchal prophets), specifically reference (in an anthropomorphic sense so to speak) The God of the said torah and gospel. The name Jibril does not follow this pattern.

Pertinent, but only in part. The recognition was supposedly based on Waraqah' "learning and great understanding" - there is no reading of the bible that would suggest an unidentified being, who manhandled the one it appeared too and whom himself considered it dark and demonic, could be angel Gabriel of the Christian scriptures. A more reasonable, if speculative position may be that Wraqah was primarily concerned about Mohammed' wellbeing, given the traumatic nature of the encounter.

Recognition by "the then Arabs", does not provide us with a relative or absolute measure of learning and understanding, nor divine writ to speak on the matter.


TV

I experienced some trouble giving back feedback as you seem to post questions then answer them yourself.

By confirming the previous scriptures it is pertinent to understand that this is a testimony to the truth that these were actually revealed to these prophets by God.

It also follows in saying he too got revelation about what had happened centuries or thousands of years before him. There is mention that God doesn't change a thing if and when he does except with better.

I will appreciate if you can elucidate on how exactly God spoke with Moses, Joshua and David? Was this from across the table while having tea as a clergy is reported to have said in Nigeria?

You have a problem with recognition by the then Arabs and should kindly explain this?

Barka da Eid-Fitr dear Muslim readers.

My eran odun is still in limbo. You'd have given me enough meat and even more to spare without having to see me in person if you answer these questions through this online platform:

1. God gave Moses certain laws for all of mankind. These laws can be likened to an order. In fact, some of these orders were given long before Moses was born. During the time when Noah and the patriarchs walked the earth.
As to the bold-faced, please see this post: https://www.nairaland.com/8306103/torah-supposed-benefit-all-mankind

2. Some parts of the Torah have been corrupted, but not all parts of it. The Quran confirms some parts of the Torah and since it confirms some parts of the Torah, not all parts have been corrupted as even the Quran agrees. For if all parts of the Torah have been corrupted, then the parts the Quran confirms as authentic are also corrupted which means the Quran itself is corrupted.

The order in question (as given to Moses) have not been corrupted. It is not the case of a textual corruption which puts the blame squarely on man's sinful tendencies and absolves God of all blame.

3. Muhammad contradicts these laws. I used an illustration to show that even the devil doesn't give or permit his subordinates to give orders and counter orders in his realm.

4. Regardless of human locale, environment, or settings, God does not contradict or modify his laws which are the foundation of his government.

5. The conclusion is therefore necessary: Muhammad could not have been from God.

If you object to my argument, please let me hear yours. Your beautiful arguments is my eran odun!

BlackfireX:
There was a time our prophet SAW said somethings that he later renounced that it wasn't from his Allah.

Another incident is a Christian man who writes the current recitation (Qur'an) for Muhammad, but he later left Muhammad and he was gruesomely killed by our prophet.

The issue of receiving so called revelations that goes contrary to sanity.. collecting his Adopted son's wife, infact at a point Aisha the 9 year old wife said is like the so called revelations is meant to favour you.

Please would you grant me a verifiable reference for the bolded?

In an unrelated post that hit front page today, you challenged a Christian to comparative religion debate. I am stupefied. Wow!

I didn't know we have gurus on this platform. Where have you been, I have been on the lookout for people like you.

In your challenge, you said

[quote author= abuhlawal post=134770540]You swore that you were a Muslim before getting access here, have you realize that you started decieve yourself before everyone.
Do you think there is any deception greater than you decieving yourself like you have just done.
For comparative religious debate, if you get mind and know you are on the right path, DM me and get clarity over your religion from your own religious Book
Follow the rules and be safe
God bless you[/quote]You seem like a really good fellow.

And then you repeated yourself again:

[quote author= abuhlawal post=134770540]Ok ooo
For comparative religious debate, if you get mind and know you are on the right path, DM me and get clarity over your religion from your own religious Book.
I will not quote a single verse from the Qur'an.
If you get mind check my signature and DM me.
Follow the rules and be safe
God bless you[/quote]Someone is shitting on your religion and all you're saying is "God bless you." You seem like a great chap. A different breed.

That being said, that guy no get mind but me I get mind die.

So I challenged Muslims today and this is what I said:

[quote author= Baldwretch post=134770540]Barka da Eid-Fitr dear Muslim readers.

My eran odun is still in limbo. You'd have given me enough meat and even more to spare without having to see me in person if you answer these questions through this online platform:

1. God gave Moses certain laws for all of mankind. These laws can be likened to an order. In fact, some of these orders were given long before Moses was born. During the time when Noah and the patriarchs walked the earth.
As to the bold-faced, please see this post: https://www.nairaland.com/8306103/torah-supposed-benefit-all-mankind

2. Some parts of the Torah have been corrupted, but not all parts of it. The Quran confirms some parts of the Torah and since it confirms some parts of the Torah, not all parts have been corrupted as even the Quran agrees. For if all parts of the Torah have been corrupted, then the parts the Quran confirms as authentic are also corrupted which means the Quran itself is corrupted.

The order in question (as given to Moses) have not been corrupted. It is not the case of a textual corruption which puts the blame squarely on man's sinful tendencies and absolves God of all blame.

3. Muhammad contradicts these laws. I used an illustration to show that even the devil doesn't give or permit his subordinates to give orders and counter orders in his realm.

4. Regardless of human locale, environment, or settings, God does not contradict or modify his laws which are the foundation of his government.

5. The conclusion is therefore necessary: Muhammad could not have been from God.

If you object to my argument, please let me hear yours. Your beautiful arguments is my eran odun![/quote]@abuhlawal, shey you get mind like this?

harqinhola:
@OP, I understand what you are trying to do but I hope I am able to convince you to desist from this line of thought after reading my comment. This is going to be a long one, so get a chair .

1. Theological Evidence (Qur’an & Hadith)

The Qur’an explicitly states that the revelations Muhammad (PBUH) received were from God via Angel Gabriel not a lying spirit

Surah Al-Baqarah 2:97:

“Say, ‘Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel, it is he who has brought the Qur’an down upon your heart, O Muhammad, by permission of Allah, confirming that which was before it and as guidance and good tidings for the believers.’

The Qur’an consistently affirms its divine origin:
Surah Al-Najm 53:3-4: “Nor does he (Muhammad) speak from his own inclination. It is not but a revelation revealed.”

If the revelation had come from a lying spirit (Satan), the Qur’an would not have repeatedly condemned falsehood and deception. In fact, Surah Al-Haqqah 69:44-47 states that if Muhammad (PBUH) had fabricated anything about God, he would have been punished immediately.

2. Muhammad’s (PBUH) Character and Integrity

Before receiving revelation, Muhammad (PBUH) was known as Al-Amin (the Trustworthy) by his people. A person known for honesty and integrity would not suddenly fabricate divine claims.

Even his enemies admitted that he never lied. Abu Sufyan, a leader of the Quraysh who opposed Islam, was questioned by the Roman Emperor Heraclius about Muhammad’s honesty and admitted that Muhammad never lied.

3. The Message’s Consistency and Ethical Standards

The Qur’an’s teachings are deeply moral, advocating justice, kindness, and truthfulness. If a lying spirit inspired it, why would it command worship of the one true God and prohibit falsehood?

Unlike deceitful spirits that promote corruption and chaos, the Qur’an guides humanity towards righteousness, which aligns with divine revelation rather than deception.

4. The Transformative Impact of the Revelation

The Qur’an revolutionized Arabian society, abolishing practices like female infanticide, tribal vengeance, and economic exploitation. Falsehood does not produce a civilization based on justice, compassion, and learning.

The rapid spread of Islam and its lasting influence show the power of truth, as deceit does not lead to long-term positive change.

5. Biblical Precedents: Angel Gabriel’s Role in Revelation

Angel Gabriel (Jibreel) is a well-known messenger of God in the Bible, appearing to Mary (Luke 1:26-38) and Daniel (Daniel 9:21-23). If Gabriel was truly sent by God before, why would his role be questioned in Islam?

Conclusion

All the evidence scriptural, historical, moral, and logical supports that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) received revelation from God through Angel Gabriel, not a lying spirit. His character, the Qur’an’s teachings, and the transformative impact of his message affirm its divine origin.

Is Allah of Mecca the Jehovah of Israel?

MaxInDHouse:
In the Bible God declared Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob {Exodus 3:15} no nation got information from God without the connection of Israel (Jacob)
So it's impossible for anyone from any other nation to receive any information from this same God unless such a person is connected in one way or another to Israel!

So Jehovah of Israel is not Allah of Mecca.

Prove beyond all reasonable and unreasonable doubts your claim.

MightySparrow:
So Jehovah of Israel is not Allah of Mecca. Prove beyond all reasonable and unreasonable doubts your claim.

What is your own contribution to the thread?
Àbí your own God didn't teach you? Psalms 115:4-8

MaxInDHouse:
What is your own contribution to the thread?
Àbí your own God didn't teach you? Psalms 115:4-8

Ps.115.4 - Their idols are silver and gold, the work of men's hands.
Ps.115.5 - They have mouths, but they speak not: eyes have they, but they see not:
Ps.115.6 - They have ears, but they hear not: noses have they, but they smell not:
Ps.115.7 - They have hands, but they handle not: feet have they, but they walk not: neither speak they through their throat.
Ps.115.8 - They that make them are like unto them; so is every one that trusteth in them.

Meaning what?

MightySparrow:
Ps.115.4 - Their idols are silver and gold, the work of men's hands.
Ps.115.5 - They have mouths, but they speak not: eyes have they, but they see not:
Ps.115.6 - They have ears, but they hear not: noses have they, but they smell not:
Ps.115.7 - They have hands, but they handle not: feet have they, but they walk not: neither speak they through their throat.
Ps.115.8 - They that make them are like unto them; so is every one that trusteth in them.

Meaning what?

What has your own god taught you?

MaxInDHouse:
What has your own god taught you?

Nothing, that is why I want to know.

MightySparrow:
Nothing, that is why I want to know.

Go and ask your Papa Oyedepo!

MaxInDHouse:
Go and ask your Papa Oyedepo!

He is not on this platform. For the benefit of others who love to hate Oyedepo bùt wants the truth, say your own.

MightySparrow:
He is not on this platform. For the benefit of others who love to hate Oyedepo bùt wants the truth, say your own.

So wait for others to ask me!