₦airaland Forum

CreativeOrbit:
Thank you for sharing your concerns. I understand that your views stem from personal experiences and certain interpretations of Islamic texts, and I appreciate the opportunity to clarify and respond.

Firstly, regarding marginalisation, I do not deny that individuals can experience mistreatment at the hands of people from any group—including Muslims. However, it is important to distinguish between the actions of individuals and the teachings of a faith. Islam, like other major religions, is not immune to misrepresentation or abuse by its followers. If you were wronged by Muslims, I sincerely regret that and pray for justice and healing. However, this should not serve as a blanket judgment on the religion itself or on Muslims who strive to live ethically and peacefully.

Now, regarding your interpretation of specific Qur’anic verses and historical events, I would like to address them one by one:

1. Qur’an 9:29

This verse is often quoted without historical and textual context. It was revealed in a time of war and political tension between the early Muslim community and the Byzantine Empire. It is not a blanket command to kill non-Muslims. The term "jizyah" refers to a historical tax that exempted non-Muslims from military service, while Muslims were obligated to fight in defense of the state and pay zakat. The verse addresses hostile combatants, not peaceful coexistence. Islam has a long record of religious tolerance—as demonstrated in Muslim-ruled Spain and the Ottoman Empire.

2. Prophet Muhammad’s actions

You cited the execution of individuals like Abdullah ibn Khatal. These individuals were not targeted simply for being non-Muslims but were guilty of severe crimes, such as treason, murder, and inciting violence against Muslims during wartime. Even modern legal systems prescribe capital punishment for treason in times of war.

As for Banu Qurayza, historical sources, including non-Muslim historians, confirm that their leadership broke a critical treaty during a time of existential threat to the Muslim community (Battle of the Trench). The punishment—carried out by a Jewish arbitrator chosen by the Banu Qurayza themselves (Sa’d ibn Mu’adh)—was consistent with the Jewish law of the Torah (Deuteronomy 20:10-14), which they abided by.

3. Al-Fatiha and "those who have gone astray"

This is a common misunderstanding. Al-Fatiha is a supplication to be guided on the straight path—not a condemnation of any particular group. Classical Islamic scholars interpreted “those who have earned anger” and “those who went astray” as types of behavior, not ethnic or religious identities. Moreover, the Qur’an explicitly affirms the validity of previous scriptures (e.g., Qur’an 2:62), and Prophet Muhammad lived peacefully with Christians and Jews in Medina.

4. Qur’an 5:51 – 'Do not take Jews and Christians as awliyaa'

The word awliyaa has various meanings: protectors, political allies, guardians. It is not a blanket prohibition on friendship. Many scholars agree that this verse refers specifically to political alliances in contexts of conflict, where loyalty to justice and ethical conduct must not be compromised. The Qur’an elsewhere encourages kindness and justice toward non-Muslims who are not hostile (Qur’an 60::

"Allah does not forbid you from being kind and just toward those who have not fought you because of your religion..."

Conclusion

Islam does not ask Muslims to hate or harm non-Muslims. It calls for justice, compassion, and peaceful coexistence. Any verse or historical event must be interpreted in its proper context—linguistically, historically, and ethically. A true Muslim is not torn between loving his neighbor and being faithful to God; rather, loving and respecting others is a part of his faith.

If peaceful Muslims are the "problem" in your view, then I respectfully suggest that perhaps the issue lies not with Islam itself, but with how it is being misunderstood.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

Hello,
Here is an example: is there compulsion in religion in Islam!?


Zamfara Christian Convert, Zainab Muhamadu To Face Trial In Sharia Court
https://www.nairaland.com/8430159/zamfara-christian-convert-zainab-muhamadu



This was what I was complaining about.

According to the Hadith of your prophet,
If anyone leaves his religion, kill him!

Sunan an-Nasa'i 4060
It was narrated from 'Ikrimah:
"Some people apostatized after accepting Islam, and 'Ali burned them with fire. Ibn 'Abbas said: 'If it had been me, I would not have burned them; the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'No one should be punished with the punishment of Allah.' If it had been me, I would have killed them; the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'Whoever changes his religion, kill him.'"

TenQ:
My issue is that
1. Ahad (Arabic) and Echad (Hebrew) are linguistically the same in meaning: meaning "Compound ONE or Union" or Unity or "One Of"
2. Everywhere in the Qur'an it means exactly this UNTIL we show you the inconsistency of having Allah as Ahad.

It is then you redefine Ahad specifically to suit your doctrine of Ahad.

It becomes worse when instead of Waheed for Allah, you still use the word Taoheed (Unification or Unity): another major problem unless you redefine the term specifically for Allah.


I understand that this is atopic you will rather want to debate within the circles of Islamic scholars rather than with a Christian because we will ask further questions that may not be acceptable to you. Like:
Is Allah one of many?

So, this is food for thought for you: Muslims don't ask questions. They depend on the consensus of their Scholars even for what is clearly stated in the Qur'an!

It's a big shame you have issues with what isn't but your faulty creation.

The Arabic word Ahad and the Hebrew term Echad both translate to one, but they hold distinct meanings and theological significance.

In Islam, Ahad signifies God's absolute and indivisible oneness, highlighting His uniqueness, particularly in Surah Al-Ikhlas. On the other hand, in Judaism, Echad is used in the Shema to convey a sense of oneness that can embrace unity within diversity, offering a rather different understanding of divine oneness. Obviously they are not exactly the same.

Do you not reason or think to see the meaning due to word association? You obviously read through my previous submission without thorough consideration. It's ok being you have a fixation on what you are convinced is correct though it's not.

Try to be not too rigid to learn

TenQ:
Hello,
Here is an example: is there compulsion in religion in Islam!?


Zamfara Christian Convert, Zainab Muhamadu To Face Trial In Sharia Court
https://www.nairaland.com/8430159/zamfara-christian-convert-zainab-muhamadu



This was what I was complaining about.

According to the Hadith of your prophet,
If anyone leaves his religion, kill him!

Sunan an-Nasa'i 4060
It was narrated from 'Ikrimah:
"Some people apostatized after accepting Islam, and 'Ali burned them with fire. Ibn 'Abbas said: 'If it had been me, I would not have burned them; the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'No one should be punished with the punishment of Allah.' If it had been me, I would have killed them; the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'Whoever changes his religion, kill him.'"

So you dug up a single headline and an out-of-context Hadith, slapped them together, and called it an argument? That’s not critical thinking—it’s weak sensationalism.

Your entire logic rests on intellectual laziness. “There is no compulsion in religion” (Qur’an 2:256) is a clear, standing declaration of religious freedom in Islam. Full stop. But of course, you ignore that because it doesn’t fit your narrative.

Your Hadith quote? Try understanding jurisprudence before using it as a weapon. The scholars didn’t read it the way you are. Most understood it as a response to treason during wartime—not personal belief change. But nuance obviously isn’t your strong suit.

Dragging a single Sharia court case in Zamfara to indict 1.9 billion people is laughably pathetic. That’s like blaming all of Christianity because of one crooked judge in Alabama. You’re not arguing—you’re fearmongering.

Your complaints don’t expose Islam. They expose your bias, your ignorance, and your unwillingness to think critically. If you want to debate religion, bring arguments—not headlines and half-truths.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

CreativeOrbit:
So you dug up a single headline and an out-of-context Hadith, slapped them together, and called it an argument? That’s not critical thinking—it’s weak sensationalism.

Your entire logic rests on intellectual laziness. “There is no compulsion in religion” (Qur’an 2:256) is a clear, standing declaration of religious freedom in Islam. Full stop. But of course, you ignore that because it doesn’t fit your narrative.

Your Hadith quote? Try understanding jurisprudence before using it as a weapon. The scholars didn’t read it the way you are. Most understood it as a response to treason during wartime—not personal belief change. But nuance obviously isn’t your strong suit.

Dragging a single Sharia court case in Zamfara to indict 1.9 billion people is laughably pathetic. That’s like blaming all of Christianity because of one crooked judge in Alabama. You’re not arguing—you’re fearmongering.

Your complaints don’t expose Islam. They expose your bias, your ignorance, and your unwillingness to think critically. If you want to debate religion, bring arguments—not headlines and half-truths.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

This is exactly my point
That some significant Muslims are willing to THEOLOGICALLY interpret your religion to justify this violence is the problem!

Some Muslims find justification from your doctrines (the Qur'an , Hadiths, Tafsirs, Sunah etc) the things that cause harm to people of other faith. The same way you argue for the contrary is the way they argue for their ways.

Isn't it just matter of opinions!?

CreativeOrbit:
So you dug up a single headline and an out-of-context Hadith, slapped them together, and called it an argument? That’s not critical thinking—it’s weak sensationalism.

Your entire logic rests on intellectual laziness. “There is no compulsion in religion” (Qur’an 2:256) is a clear, standing declaration of religious freedom in Islam. Full stop. But of course, you ignore that because it doesn’t fit your narrative.

Your Hadith quote? Try understanding jurisprudence before using it as a weapon. The scholars didn’t read it the way you are. Most understood it as a response to treason during wartime—not personal belief change. But nuance obviously isn’t your strong suit.

Dragging a single Sharia court case in Zamfara to indict 1.9 billion people is laughably pathetic. That’s like blaming all of Christianity because of one crooked judge in Alabama. You’re not arguing—you’re fearmongering.

Your complaints don’t expose Islam. They expose your bias, your ignorance, and your unwillingness to think critically. If you want to debate religion, bring arguments—not headlines and half-truths.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

There is no compulsion in religion but yet, your prophet said


Sunan an-Nasa'i 4060
It was narrated from 'Ikrimah:
"Some people apostatized after accepting Islam, and 'Ali burned them with fire. Ibn 'Abbas said: 'If it had been me, I would not have burned them; the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'No one should be punished with the punishment of Allah.' If it had been me, I would have killed them; the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'Whoever changes his religion, kill him.'"


Is this not a contradiction?

Meaning that Islam is a matter of personal opinion of what anyone chooses to believe!

TenQ:
This is exactly my point
That some significant Muslims are willing to THEOLOGICALLY interpret your religion to justify this violence is the problem!

Some Muslims find justification from your doctrines (the Qur'an , Hadiths, Tafsirs, Sunah etc) the things that cause harm to people of other faith. The same way you argue for the contrary is the way they argue for their ways.

Isn't it just matter of opinions!?

Your point, though passionately made, reflects a dangerously oversimplified and misinformed understanding of both Islamic theology and religious interpretation in general.

The claim that “some Muslims justify violence using the Qur’an or Hadith” does not prove that Islam promotes violence any more than extremists in any religion prove the inherent violence of that religion. If misuse of scripture were a valid argument against a faith, then no religion would stand untouched—history is full of examples where verses from the Bible, Torah, or even secular ideologies were twisted to justify atrocities.

What you call “a matter of opinion” is actually a matter of context, scholarship, and intellectual honesty. Islam has a rich and disciplined tradition of jurisprudence and interpretation—what a fringe group claims cannot override 1,400 years of mainstream theological consensus that explicitly condemns unjust violence, aggression, and the killing of innocents.

To equate extremists’ warped logic with valid theological reasoning is not only dishonest—it’s intellectually lazy. It’s like saying doctors and quacks are equal simply because they both prescribe medicine. The fact that some people twist religion for violence doesn’t indict the religion itself—it indicts those people and their motives.

If you’re truly concerned about theological interpretations that cause harm, then the responsible approach is to engage with credible scholars, understand the core message, and stop painting over 1.9 billion people with the brush of a misguided minority. Otherwise, you’re not debating—you’re just amplifying ignorance.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

TenQ:
This is exactly my point
That some significant Muslims are willing to THEOLOGICALLY interpret your religion to justify this violence is the problem!

Some Muslims find justification from your doctrines (the Qur'an , Hadiths, Tafsirs, Sunah etc) the things that cause harm to people of other faith. The same way you argue for the contrary is the way they argue for their ways.

Isn't it just matter of opinions!?

Some significant Muslims or mischievous others like you characteristically display. Is it not you that brought up the Hadith to justify this claimed trial?

Did you remember to reconsider when the false show was busted as all a lie? You prefer to ignore those.

The Qur'an is very clear in Qur'an 18:29 and 2:256 that adherence to one religion is not compulsory.

Then
Qur'an 41:46 Whoever does good, it is to their own benefit. And whoever does evil, it is to their own loss. Your Lord is never unjust to ˹His˺ creation.

honesttalk21:
Some significant Muslims or mischievous others like you characteristically display. Is it not you that brought up the Hadith to justify this claimed trial?

Did you remember to reconsider when the false show was busted as all a lie? You prefer to ignore those.

The Qur'an is very clear in Qur'an 18:29 and 2:256 that adherence to one religion is not compulsory.

Then
Qur'an 41:46 Whoever does good, it is to their own benefit. And whoever does evil, it is to their own loss. Your Lord is never unjust to ˹His˺ creation.

How do we reconcile this with


Sunan an-Nasa'i 4060
It was narrated from 'Ikrimah:
"Some people apostatized after accepting Islam, and 'Ali burned them with fire. Ibn 'Abbas said: 'If it had been me, I would not have burned them; the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'No one should be punished with the punishment of Allah.' If it had been me, I would have killed them; the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'Whoever changes his religion, kill him.'"

And

Mishkat al-Masabih 3936
Abu Wa’il told that Khalid b. al-Walid wrote to the people of Persia:
In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. From Khalid b. al-Walid to Rustum and Mih'an among the nobles of Persia. Peace be to those who follow the guidance. To proceed: We summon you to Islam, but if you refuse then pay the jizya in subjection feeling humbled (Cf. Al-Qur'an, 9:29). If you refuse to do that, I have with me people who love being killed in God’s path as the Persians love wine. Peace be to those who follow the guidance.

Jizyah was meant to humiliate us who are not Muslims.

How can we reconcile this with no compulsion in religion?

TenQ:
The word Ahad is used more than 80 times in the Qur'an, show me just one instance apart from
Quran 112:1 where the word mean ONE?


Echad is compound One in the Torah not numeral one as you want to convince yourself.
Gen 2:24 is an example and I have given you a screenshot of it. It is unfortunate that Mohammed was copying things he doesn't understand from the Jews and putting it in the Qur'an.

Ahad is "One of", "compound unity", "group" or "union", if it suits you to miss define it, have your way.

Why!
The Unitary Oneness of Allah is a serious Minus and not a Plus.
You seem not to know that once Allah descend to the earth at the third part of the night, his throne MUST necessarily remain EMPTY!
Sorry!

Sahih Muslim 758 e
Abu Sa'id and Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger as saying:
Allah waits till when one-third of the first part of the night is over; He descends to the lowest heaven and says: It there any supplicator of forgiveness? Is there any penitant? Is there any petitioner (for mercy and favour)? Is there any solicitor? -till it is daybreak.


Coupled with the fact that Allah is NOT a spirit: deal with it!

You really should rest your faulty arguments. Did Hebrew father/mother Arabic so that their words where sounding similar should mean the same thing?


Ahad usually translates to anyone
or someone often found in negative phrases like:

There is not one (ahad) of you who can prevent it. (Qur’an 69:47)

To address your confusion, Ahad in Arabic comes from the root أ-ح-د, which embodies the idea of oneness, indivisibility, and uniqueness. It's use in grammar in often appears in an indefinite way like someone or anyone but in a negative sense for it's occurrence in sentences.

مَا جَاءَنِي أَحَدٌ; ma ja'ani 'ahad meaning No one came to me.

In only Surah Ikhlas it means uniqueness,incomparability or Indivisibility please tell or show me it's use in reference to an entity in this way in the numerous other places it occurs in the Qur'an.

Allah is one, referred to himself as one in just one place of the Qur'an in this concept.

Allahu Akbar

TenQ:
The word Ahad is used more than 80 times in the Qur'an, show me just one instance apart from
Quran 112:1 where the word mean ONE?


Echad is compound One in the Torah not numeral one as you want to convince yourself.
Gen 2:24 is an example and I have given you a screenshot of it. It is unfortunate that Mohammed was copying things he doesn't understand from the Jews and putting it in the Qur'an.

Ahad is "One of", "compound unity", "group" or "union", if it suits you to miss define it, have your way.

Why!
The Unitary Oneness of Allah is a serious Minus and not a Plus.
You seem not to know that once Allah descend to the earth at the third part of the night, his throne MUST necessarily remain EMPTY!
Sorry!

Sahih Muslim 758 e
Abu Sa'id and Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger as saying:
Allah waits till when one-third of the first part of the night is over; He descends to the lowest heaven and says: It there any supplicator of forgiveness? Is there any penitant? Is there any petitioner (for mercy and favour)? Is there any solicitor? -till it is daybreak.


Coupled with the fact that Allah is NOT a spirit: deal with it!

Your concern should be why your Bible tells you your God is one God but not a unification of gods.

CreativeOrbit:
Your point, though passionately made, reflects a dangerously oversimplified and misinformed understanding of both Islamic theology and religious interpretation in general.

The claim that “some Muslims justify violence using the Qur’an or Hadith” does not prove that Islam promotes violence any more than extremists in any religion prove the inherent violence of that religion. If misuse of scripture were a valid argument against a faith, then no religion would stand untouched—history is full of examples where verses from the Bible, Torah, or even secular ideologies were twisted to justify atrocities.

What you call “a matter of opinion” is actually a matter of context, scholarship, and intellectual honesty. Islam has a rich and disciplined tradition of jurisprudence and interpretation—what a fringe group claims cannot override 1,400 years of mainstream theological consensus that explicitly condemns unjust violence, aggression, and the killing of innocents.

To equate extremists’ warped logic with valid theological reasoning is not only dishonest—it’s intellectually lazy. It’s like saying doctors and quacks are equal simply because they both prescribe medicine. The fact that some people twist religion for violence doesn’t indict the religion itself—it indicts those people and their motives.

If you’re truly concerned about theological interpretations that cause harm, then the responsible approach is to engage with credible scholars, understand the core message, and stop painting over 1.9 billion people with the brush of a misguided minority. Otherwise, you’re not debating—you’re just amplifying ignorance.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

I truely understand your point except that it doesn't solve our predicament.

Its like hosting in your house ten nice brothers with one of them being a thief. If the eldest of them tells you that they are peaceful, trustworthy and wouldn't steal any of your properties, would you leave your house open to them?


The issue is
1. Some part of your religion promote peace with Christians and Jews
2. Some other part of your promote hate and subjugation for Christians and Jews.

Some Muslims (like you) hold on to part 1 and either ignore part 2 or treat it as being misunderstood.
BUT
Some other Muslims take the exact opposite view to yours.

On a serious note,
Do you think we non-muslims should stay on then side of CAUTION in dealing with you Muslims OR we assume that every Muslim will act like you?

I think this is the main problem!

honesttalk21:
Your concern should be why your Bible tells you your God is one God but not a unification of gods.

I don't blame you for your misrepresentation of the Trinity because Allah himself seems not to know what it is.

Is it untrue that Allah thinks that the Trinity is Allah, Mary and Jesus?
If Allah also thinks that Christians teach that Jesus is Allah, can you tell us according to Allah who the other gods are?

The Bible NEVER said that God is a Unification of gods. The Bible says that God is Spirit and as a Spirit, He also has embodiments of forms visible in the spirit realms and the physical realms.

Unfortunately, Allah cannot be in more than one place at a time because he has at least a SHAPE!

This is why he has to descend to the earth my dear!


Is this hadith false?

Sahih Muslim 758 e
Abu Sa'id and Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger as saying:
Allah waits till when one-third of the first part of the night is over; He descends to the lowest heaven and says: It there any supplicator of forgiveness? Is there any penitant? Is there any petitioner (for mercy and favour)? Is there any solicitor? -till it is daybreak.

honesttalk21:
You really should rest your faulty arguments. Did Hebrew father/mother Arabic so that their words where sounding similar should mean the same thing?


Ahad usually translates to anyone
or someone often found in negative phrases like:

There is not one (ahad) of you who can prevent it. (Qur’an 69:47)

To address your confusion, Ahad in Arabic comes from the root أ-ح-د, which embodies the idea of oneness, indivisibility, and uniqueness. It's use in grammar in often appears in an indefinite way like someone or anyone but in a negative sense for it's occurrence in sentences.

مَا جَاءَنِي أَحَدٌ; ma ja'ani 'ahad meaning No one came to me.

In only Surah Ikhlas it means uniqueness,incomparability or Indivisibility please tell or show me it's use in reference to an entity in this way in the numerous other places it occurs in the Qur'an.

Allah is one, referred to himself as one in just one place of the Qur'an in this concept.

Allahu Akbar

There is not one (ahad) of you who can prevent it. (Qur’an 69:47)


LOL

You didn't notice that Ahad here is NOT one but one of falsifying your argument and actually supporting mine.


Secondly, you said:
دٌ; ma ja'ani 'ahad meaning No one came to me.
You forgot that it means
No one out of many
Certainly, not isn't about Unitary One.


The challenge remains sir.
Of the over 80 times Ahad is used in the Qur'an, other than Quran 112:1 show me just one instance where the word mean ONE?


There is not one instance sir!

TenQ:
There is no compulsion in religion but yet, your prophet said


Sunan an-Nasa'i 4060
It was narrated from 'Ikrimah:
"Some people apostatized after accepting Islam, and 'Ali burned them with fire. Ibn 'Abbas said: 'If it had been me, I would not have burned them; the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'No one should be punished with the punishment of Allah.' If it had been me, I would have killed them; the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'Whoever changes his religion, kill him.'"


Is this not a contradiction?

Meaning that Islam is a matter of personal opinion of what anyone chooses to believe!

You’re quoting a hadith without context and ignoring centuries of scholarship to push a biased narrative.

The Qur’an clearly says: “There is no compulsion in religion” (2:256)—a foundational principle, not a suggestion. The hadith you mentioned (“Whoever changes his religion, kill him”) has been debated for centuries and is context-specific. It refers to treason during a time of war, not someone quietly changing their personal beliefs.

You can’t pick a single narration, strip it of context, and ignore the Qur’an, legal nuance, and scholarly interpretation just to make a point. That’s not honest inquiry—it’s deliberate misrepresentation.

If Islam truly mandated killing apostates, 1.9 billion Muslims wouldn’t be living peacefully among people of all faiths. The fact that you ignore this and cling to a militant reading says more about your intent than about Islam itself.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

CreativeOrbit:
You’re quoting a hadith without context and ignoring centuries of scholarship to push a biased narrative.

The Qur’an clearly says: “There is no compulsion in religion” (2:256)—a foundational principle, not a suggestion. The hadith you mentioned (“Whoever changes his religion, kill him”) has been debated for centuries and is context-specific. It refers to treason during a time of war, not someone quietly changing their personal beliefs.

You can’t pick a single narration, strip it of context, and ignore the Qur’an, legal nuance, and scholarly interpretation just to make a point. That’s not honest inquiry—it’s deliberate misrepresentation.

If Islam truly mandated killing apostates, 1.9 billion Muslims wouldn’t be living peacefully among people of all faiths. The fact that you ignore this and cling to a militant reading says more about your intent than about Islam itself.

Another hadith with context

Sunan an-Nasa'i 4065
It was narrated from Anas that :
'Ali came to some people of Az-Zutt, who worshipped idols, and burned them. Ibn 'Abbas said: "But the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'Whoever changes his religion, kill him.'"

Sunan an-Nasa'i 4064
It was narrated from Anas that :
Ibn 'Abbas said: "The Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'Whoever changes his religion, kill him.'"


Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2158
Abu Umamah bin Sahl bin Hunaif narrated that on the day of siege, 'Uthman bin 'Affan stood overlooking the people, and he said:
"I swear to you by Allah! You know that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) said: 'The blood of a Muslim man is not lawful, except for one of three (cases):Illegitimate sexual relations after Ihsan (having been married), or apostasy after Islam, or taking a life without right, for which he is killed.' By Allah! I have never committed illegitimate sexual relations, not during Jahiliyyah nor during Islam, and I have not committed apostasy since I gave my pledge to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w), and I have not taken a life that Allah had made unlawful. So for what do you fight me?"'


None of these hadiths mentioned anything about war or treason!

Except Apostasy is treated by Muslims as TREASON!





Is apostasy treason in Islam?

TenQ:
I truely understand your point except that it doesn't solve our predicament.

Its like hosting in your house ten nice brothers with one of them being a thief. If the eldest of them tells you that they are peaceful, trustworthy and wouldn't steal any of your properties, would you leave your house open to them?


The issue is
1. Some part of your religion promote peace with Christians and Jews
2. Some other part of your promote hate and subjugation for Christians and Jews.

Some Muslims (like you) hold on to part 1 and either ignore part 2 or treat it as being misunderstood.
BUT
Some other Muslims take the exact opposite view to yours.

On a serious note,
Do you think we non-muslims should stay on then side of CAUTION in dealing with you Muslims OR we assume that every Muslim will act like you?

I think this is the main problem!

I see what you’re trying to say—but your analogy and reasoning are both deeply flawed, and frankly, quite dangerous.

Let’s deal with your example: if you host ten people, and one is a thief, does that justify distrusting or punishing all ten? Of course not—unless you believe in guilt by association, which is the foundation of discrimination and bigotry. By that logic, no group—religious, ethnic, or national—would be trusted, because every group has its criminals, extremists, and deviants. The real question is: do we judge people by the worst among them, or by the values they consistently uphold?

Now to your “two parts of Islam” claim. This is a gross oversimplification. Islam is not a pick-your-side ideology. The verses and teachings you’re referring to exist in historical, legal, and situational contexts. Muslims are required to interpret them with knowledge and discipline—not reckless literalism. That’s why the overwhelming majority of Muslims today live peacefully with Christians, Jews, atheists, and people of all beliefs. The existence of extremists doesn’t prove Islam is flawed—it proves that ignorance, when weaponized, exists in all communities.

You suggest that non-Muslims should “stay on the side of caution” when dealing with Muslims. But let’s be honest—what you’re proposing isn’t caution, it’s prejudice disguised as prudence. Would it be acceptable if a Muslim said, “We should all be cautious around non-Muslims, because some of them invaded our lands, colonized our people, and dropped bombs on our homes”? Of course not. That would be unjust and dehumanizing. Just like your reasoning is now.

If you want peace and coexistence, then you don’t build it by mistrusting 1.9 billion people based on the actions of a few. You build it by recognizing that good and evil are human problems—not Islamic problems, Christian problems, or Jewish problems.

The real problem isn’t Islam. It’s the insistence on judging people through the lens of fear and ignorance rather than fairness and understanding. That’s what truly needs fixing.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

CreativeOrbit:
I see what you’re trying to say—but your analogy and reasoning are both deeply flawed, and frankly, quite dangerous.

Let’s deal with your example: if you host ten people, and one is a thief, does that justify distrusting or punishing all ten? Of course not—unless you believe in guilt by association, which is the foundation of discrimination and bigotry. By that logic, no group—religious, ethnic, or national—would be trusted, because every group has its criminals, extremists, and deviants. The real question is: do we judge people by the worst among them, or by the values they consistently uphold?

Now to your “two parts of Islam” claim. This is a gross oversimplification. Islam is not a pick-your-side ideology. The verses and teachings you’re referring to exist in historical, legal, and situational contexts. Muslims are required to interpret them with knowledge and discipline—not reckless literalism. That’s why the overwhelming majority of Muslims today live peacefully with Christians, Jews, atheists, and people of all beliefs. The existence of extremists doesn’t prove Islam is flawed—it proves that ignorance, when weaponized, exists in all communities.

You suggest that non-Muslims should “stay on the side of caution” when dealing with Muslims. But let’s be honest—what you’re proposing isn’t caution, it’s prejudice disguised as prudence. Would it be acceptable if a Muslim said, “We should all be cautious around non-Muslims, because some of them invaded our lands, colonized our people, and dropped bombs on our homes”? Of course not. That would be unjust and dehumanizing. Just like your reasoning is now.

If you want peace and coexistence, then you don’t build it by mistrusting 1.9 billion people based on the actions of a few. You build it by recognizing that good and evil are human problems—not Islamic problems, Christian problems, or Jewish problems.

The real problem isn’t Islam. It’s the insistence on judging people through the lens of fear and ignorance rather than fairness and understanding. That’s what truly needs fixing.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

Once I receive a guest of these ten brothers , I will start keeping my things so that it wouldn't disappear. Yes, only One of them is a thief BUT bad things happen when the thief is with his good brothers.

Permit me please to change the topic

Why do you think Islam is the way knowing that
1. It is impossible that the way to paradise outlined in the Bible and Quran lead to the same Paradise
2. the paradise preached by Jesus is different from that preached by Mohammed
3. Islam contradicts the earlier religions of the Jews and the Christians
4. islam is incomplete without borrowing heavily from the doctrine of the Jews and Christians
5. Modern Jews still practice strict monotheism

TenQ:
Once I receive a guest of these ten brothers , I will start keeping my things so that it wouldn't disappear. Yes, only One of them is a thief BUT bad things happen when the thief is with his good brothers.

Permit me please to change the topic

Why do you think Islam is the way knowing that
1. It is impossible that the way to paradise outlined in the Bible and Quran lead to the same Paradise
2. the paradise preached by Jesus is different from that preached by Mohammed
3. Islam contradicts the earlier religions of the Jews and the Christians
4. islam is incomplete without borrowing heavily from the doctrine of the Jews and Christians
5. Modern Jews still practice strict monotheism

Your analogy is lazy and laced with dangerous prejudice. If you host ten guests and hide your valuables because one is a thief, you're not being cautious—you’re indicting them all without evidence. And if your fear is that the “good ones” won’t stop the bad one, then you’ve already decided they’re guilty by association. That’s not wisdom; that’s paranoia dressed up as logic.

Now to your religious claims—let’s unpack each one of your assertions, all of which are based on shallow assumptions and weak understanding.

1. “It is impossible that the way to paradise outlined in the Bible and Qur’an lead to the same Paradise.”
False. You're imposing your binary thinking on God. Islam acknowledges previous revelations and sees itself as a continuation—not a contradiction. The Qur’an explicitly says people of previous scriptures who believe in God and do good will be rewarded (Qur’an 2:62). If God wants to grant salvation through multiple paths, who are you to limit Him?

2. “The paradise preached by Jesus is different from that of Muhammad.”
Only if you twist both teachings out of context. Both speak of a Day of Judgment, of divine justice, of reward for righteousness and punishment for wickedness. The imagery may differ, but the core is the same: submit to God, live righteously, and hope for His mercy. Your obsession with surface-level differences ignores the unity in message.

3. “Islam contradicts Judaism and Christianity.”
Of course it does—because those religions contradict each other too. Judaism rejects Jesus as the Messiah. Christianity says salvation is through belief in Jesus’ divinity and resurrection. Islam rejects both claims, restoring monotheism to its purest form. If contradiction means Islam isn’t true, then by your logic, Christianity must be false too—for contradicting Judaism.

4. “Islam is incomplete without borrowing from Judaism and Christianity.”
That’s like saying physics “borrows” from arithmetic. Islam builds on earlier revelations—it doesn’t plagiarize, it fulfills. Islam explicitly honors earlier prophets (including Moses and Jesus), but it also corrects where their messages were distorted. That’s not weakness—that’s continuity. You call it borrowing; we call it revelation in stages.

5. “Modern Jews still practice strict monotheism.”
Yes—and so do Muslims. That’s precisely why Islam rejects the trinity and divine sonship of Jesus, both of which violate monotheism. Islam shares the strict monotheism of Judaism, but without racial exclusivity or rejection of later prophets. If you admire Jewish monotheism, you should appreciate Islam’s even more uncompromising stance.

In short, your arguments are riddled with contradictions, half-truths, and a stunning lack of depth. You want to discredit Islam, but your own logic collapses under scrutiny. Islam stands on 1,400 years of theological, philosophical, and moral substance. If you want to critique it, do better than recycled talking points and amateur apologetics.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

CreativeOrbit:
Your analogy is lazy and laced with dangerous prejudice. If you host ten guests and hide your valuables because one is a thief, you're not being cautious—you’re indicting them all without evidence. And if your fear is that the “good ones” won’t stop the bad one, then you’ve already decided they’re guilty by association. That’s not wisdom; that’s paranoia dressed up as logic.

Now to your religious claims—let’s unpack each one of your assertions, all of which are based on shallow assumptions and weak understanding.

But if I dont keep my things, it is certain that the thief will take it to my loss.
Is this not the reason why Muslims go to mosque with slippers and shoes they can afford to lose if stolen?
One thief among a hundred Muslims make the mosque unsafe.
This is why in church everyone keeps his phones on themselves.
Because evil people successfully hide among good people

CreativeOrbit:
1. “It is impossible that the way to paradise outlined in the Bible and Qur’an lead to the same Paradise.”
False. You're imposing your binary thinking on God. Islam acknowledges previous revelations and sees itself as a continuation—not a contradiction. The Qur’an explicitly says people of previous scriptures who believe in God and do good will be rewarded (Qur’an 2:62). If God wants to grant salvation through multiple paths, who are you to limit Him?

In christianity, salvation is only through the Messiah and it is not just by good deeds
Islam doesn't believe in this:
Meaning that
1. If Christians are right, Muslims will be candidates for Hell
2. If Muslims are right, then Christians will be candidates for Hell

Do you agree with this?
Except that Allah says that Christians, Jews and Sabians will also be in paradise!
And Allah also says that he will only accept Islam as a religion from people!

CreativeOrbit:
2. “The paradise preached by Jesus is different from that of Muhammad.”
Only if you twist both teachings out of context. Both speak of a Day of Judgment, of divine justice, of reward for righteousness and punishment for wickedness. The imagery may differ, but the core is the same: submit to God, live righteously, and hope for His mercy. Your obsession with surface-level differences ignores the unity in message.

In the paradise of Jesus, there is no marriage or marrying as Jesus said: we shall be like Angels
Mathew 22:29-30
29 Jesus answered, “You are mistaken because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. 30 In the resurrection, people will neither marry nor be given in marriage. Instead, they will be like the angels in heaven.

In Islam However, Mohammed said

Quran 36:55-57
Indeed, the people of Paradise will be busy enjoying themselves: they and their spouses shall be reclining on their couches in shady groves; therein there will be all kinds of fruits to eat, and they shall have all that they desire.
Quran 56:35-37
Indeed, We have created them - (a new) creation. So We made them virgins. Loving ones, of equal age. For the Companions of the Right.

So, you see that the description and destination of the two paradises are different

CreativeOrbit:
3. “Islam contradicts Judaism and Christianity.”
Of course it does—because those religions contradict each other too. Judaism rejects Jesus as the Messiah. Christianity says salvation is through belief in Jesus’ divinity and resurrection. Islam rejects both claims, restoring monotheism to its purest form. If contradiction means Islam isn’t true, then by your logic, Christianity must be false too—for contradicting Judaism.

I am glad you accept they Islam contradicts BOTH Judaism and Christianity

Christianity doesn't contradicts Judaism, Jesus both fulfils and completes it.

According to Islam, was Jesus not expected to make lawful some of the things made unlawful to the Jews as the Messiah?
Quran 3:50
“‘(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me.

So, it is understandable if many things are lawful to Christians.

CreativeOrbit:
4. “Islam is incomplete without borrowing from Judaism and Christianity.”
That’s like saying physics “borrows” from arithmetic. Islam builds on earlier revelations—it doesn’t plagiarize, it fulfills. Islam explicitly honors earlier prophets (including Moses and Jesus), but it also corrects where their messages were distorted. That’s not weakness—that’s continuity. You call it borrowing; we call it revelation in stages.

You analogy rightly assumes that the base Arithmetic is CORRECT, thus Physics can build on it isnt it.
So, if Islam builds and borrows from the Bible, then it shouldnt at the same time contradicts the fundermental

Then you made a blatant conclusion that Allah himself never made in the Quran
You said: "Islam explicitly honors earlier prophets (including Moses and Jesus), but it also corrects where their messages were distorted."

You may wish to tell me
i. WHAT was distorted
ii. HOW it was distorted'
iii. WHEN it was distorted
iv. WHO distorted it
This is a challenge to you failing which , all you have done is to manufacture conjectures.

CreativeOrbit:
5. “Modern Jews still practice strict monotheism.”
Yes—and so do Muslims. That’s precisely why Islam rejects the trinity and divine sonship of Jesus, both of which violate monotheism. Islam shares the strict monotheism of Judaism, but without racial exclusivity or rejection of later prophets. If you admire Jewish monotheism, you should appreciate Islam’s even more uncompromising stance.

If you reject Christianity because of your wilful ignorance of Trinity, why do you reject JUDAISM.
If it is on the basis of the Messiah, I put it to you that you don't even have a clue apart from the Christians for what the messiah aught to be. You don't know his teachings nor his mission nor his message.

Why is Jesus the Messiah?

CreativeOrbit:
In short, your arguments are riddled with contradictions, half-truths, and a stunning lack of depth. You want to discredit Islam, but your own logic collapses under scrutiny. Islam stands on 1,400 years of theological, philosophical, and moral substance. If you want to critique it, do better than recycled talking points and amateur apologetics.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

It seems that whatever I say, you have programmed yourself to state that my arguments are contradictions, half-truths having lack of depth.
However, NOTE:
I didnt even argue ANYTHING here, I only ASKED Questions

But since Islam is superior, can you please answer these following simple five questions

Tell me, according to your prophet or According to Allah
1. Why is Jesus the only One who is a Trinity of the Word of Allah, the Spirit from Allah and a Messenger of Allah?
2. Why according to your prophet that Jesus and Mary are the only humans that Satan did not touch at birth?
3. Why is it that Jesus is the only co-Creator of Life in the universe aside Allah. If you no anyone else tell me.
4. Why is it according to your prophet that Jesus is still alive with Allah since 2000 years ago?
5. Why was Jesus born without a human Father as it wasn't a necessary miracle in Islam?

TenQ:
But if I dont keep my things, it is certain that the thief will take it to my loss.
Is this not the reason why Muslims go to mosque with slippers and shoes they can afford to lose if stolen?
One thief among a hundred Muslims make the mosque unsafe.
This is why in church everyone keeps his phones on themselves.
Because evil people successfully hide among good people



In christianity, salvation is only through the Messiah and it is not just by good deeds
Islam doesn't believe in this:
Meaning that
1. If Christians are right, Muslims will be candidates for Hell
2. If Muslims are right, then Christians will be candidates for Hell

Do you agree with this?
Except that Allah says that Christians, Jews and Sabians will also be in paradise!
And Allah also says that he will only accept Islam as a religion from people!


In the paradise of Jesus, there is no marriage or marrying as Jesus said: we shall be like Angels
Mathew 22:29-30
29 Jesus answered, “You are mistaken because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. 30 In the resurrection, people will neither marry nor be given in marriage. Instead, they will be like the angels in heaven.

In Islam However, Mohammed said

Quran 36:55-57
Indeed, the people of Paradise will be busy enjoying themselves: they and their spouses shall be reclining on their couches in shady groves; therein there will be all kinds of fruits to eat, and they shall have all that they desire.
Quran 56:35-37
Indeed, We have created them - (a new) creation. So We made them virgins. Loving ones, of equal age. For the Companions of the Right.

So, you see that the description and destination of the two paradises are different


I am glad you accept they Islam contradicts BOTH Judaism and Christianity

Christianity doesn't contradicts Judaism, Jesus both fulfils and completes it.

According to Islam, was Jesus not expected to make lawful some of the things made unlawful to the Jews as the Messiah?
Quran 3:50
“‘(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me.

So, it is understandable if many things are lawful to Christians.


You analogy rightly assumes that the base Arithmetic is CORRECT, thus Physics can build on it isnt it.
So, if Islam builds and borrows from the Bible, then it shouldnt at the same time contradicts the fundermental

Then you made a blatant conclusion that Allah himself never made in the Quran
You said: "Islam explicitly honors earlier prophets (including Moses and Jesus), but it also corrects where their messages were distorted."

You may wish to tell me
i. WHAT was distorted
ii. HOW it was distorted'
iii. WHEN it was distorted
iv. WHO distorted it
This is a challenge to you failing which , all you have done is to manufacture conjectures.


If you reject Christianity because of your wilful ignorance of Trinity, why do you reject JUDAISM.
If it is on the basis of the Messiah, I put it to you that you don't even have a clue apart from the Christians for what the messiah aught to be. You don't know his teachings nor his mission nor his message.

Why is Jesus the Messiah?



It seems that whatever I say, you have programmed yourself to state that my arguments are contradictions, half-truths having lack of depth.
However, NOTE:
I didnt even argue ANYTHING here, I only ASKED Questions

But since Islam is superior, can you please answer these following simple five questions

Tell me, according to your prophet or According to Allah
1. Why is Jesus the only One who is a Trinity of the Word of Allah, the Spirit from Allah and a Messenger of Allah?
2. Why according to your prophet that Jesus and Mary are the only humans that Satan did not touch at birth?
3. Why is it that Jesus is the only co-Creator of Life in the universe aside Allah. If you no anyone else tell me.
4. Why is it according to your prophet that Jesus is still alive with Allah since 2000 years ago?
5. Why was Jesus born without a human Father as it wasn't a necessary miracle in Islam?

You’ve dressed a string of shallow provocations in the illusion of critical inquiry, but let’s strip the fluff and get down to logic and facts. Since you claim you're “only asking questions,” let me do the same—except I’ll attach reasoning to each, rather than rely on empty rhetoric.

1. On theft in mosques:
Your claim that theft in mosques proves a deficiency in Islam is intellectually lazy. By that logic, crimes committed by people near churches would disqualify Christianity. Or do you think every sinner outside the mosque is a perfect reflection of Islam, but Christians are exempt from judgment based on others’ actions? If a thief hiding among Muslims undermines Islam, then centuries of Christian crusades, inquisitions, child abuse scandals, and televangelist frauds should make Christianity indefensible. Be consistent.

2. On salvation and hellfire:
You present a simplistic binary: "If Christians are right, Muslims go to Hell; if Muslims are right, Christians go to Hell." That’s a false dichotomy based on theological tribalism. Islam’s stance is more nuanced. The Quran acknowledges that salvation is open to righteous Jews, Christians, and Sabians before the message of Islam was completed (Quran 2:62). After that, people are accountable based on the truth they receive. You might want to study context before quoting verses in isolation.

3. On paradise descriptions:
You mock the Islamic concept of paradise by contrasting it with a sterile, sexless existence “like angels.” You’re welcome to your interpretation, but Islam’s paradise is tailored to human desires—joy, companionship, beauty. What's illogical about that? Also, there’s no contradiction: if the afterlife is spiritual, why should physical pleasures be forbidden unless your theology demonizes the body?

4. On contradictions with Judaism:
Christianity does contradict Judaism on major theological points. The very idea of Jesus as God incarnate is blasphemous in Judaism. Judaism rejects the Trinity, the virgin birth, original sin, and salvation through faith alone. If you truly think Jesus “fulfills” the law, ask any rabbi if your theology aligns with Torah. Islam acknowledges the original messages of the Torah and Gospel, but corrects distortions added by men, which brings me to your smug "challenge."

5. Your challenge on distortions:
i. What was distorted?
The divinity of Jesus, the Trinity, and salvation by blood sacrifice—none of which Jesus preached.
ii. How?
Through councils, Roman influence, Hellenistic philosophy, and Pauline theology.
iii. When?
Primarily from 70 CE to 400 CE, as doctrines were debated and canonized.
iv. Who?
Early church leaders—especially Paul—who shifted the focus from Jesus' monotheistic message to a Romanized interpretation that conveniently aligned with empire.

6. You ask why Jesus is the Messiah.
Islam answers this clearly. Jesus is the Messiah because he was anointed by God, born miraculously, and given a specific mission to guide the Children of Israel. He was not sent to die for sins, nor to abolish the law, but to reaffirm monotheism. You’ve inherited a redefined Messiah molded by Greek and Roman philosophy, not the Hebrew concept.

Now to your five “simple” questions, which are designed to confuse rather than reveal truth:

1. Why is Jesus a Word and Spirit from Allah?
Because Allah created him by His Word ("Be" and supported him with the Holy Spirit (like many prophets). That doesn’t make him divine—it magnifies the power of God, not the status of the creation.

2. Why did Satan not touch Jesus and Mary?
A special favor granted by God—exceptional, not divine. If God chose to protect someone, does that elevate them to divinity? Was John the Baptist divine for being filled with the Holy Spirit from the womb (Luke 1:15)?

3. Why is Jesus a co-creator?
He’s not. He performed miracles by God's permission (Quran 5:110). There’s a massive difference between “creating” and being used by God to perform a miracle. If God let Moses part the sea, is Moses now Lord of oceans?

4. Why is Jesus alive?
Because God chose to raise him—just as He raised Enoch. Being alive doesn't make you divine; Lazarus was raised from death too—was he God?

5. Why the virgin birth?
As a sign, not a divine seal. Adam had no mother or father—was he God? Your logic collapses when you cherry-pick miracles to justify divinity.

You mistake rhetorical bombardment for depth. Islam doesn't need to borrow anything from a corrupted tradition to validate itself. It corrects, completes, and refines. So if you’re genuinely seeking truth, ask with humility. If you’re looking to score points, prepare to be answered with facts, not flattery.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

TenQ:
There is not one (ahad) of you who can prevent it. (Qur’an 69:47)


LOL

You didn't notice that Ahad here is NOT one but one of falsifying your argument and actually supporting mine.


Secondly, you said:
دٌ; ma ja'ani 'ahad meaning No one came to me.
You forgot that it means
No one out of many
Certainly, not isn't about Unitary One.


The challenge remains sir.
Of the over 80 times Ahad is used in the Qur'an, other than Quran 112:1 show me just one instance where the word mean ONE?


There is not one instance sir!

Very good of you to show proof that other uses of Ahad except the one time in reference to Allah is in negative construction.

Negation.

Glad you present the point to yourself in clear terms.

TenQ:
I don't blame you for your misrepresentation of the Trinity because Allah himself seems not to know what it is.

Is it untrue that Allah thinks that the Trinity is Allah, Mary and Jesus?
If Allah also thinks that Christians teach that Jesus is Allah, can you tell us according to Allah who the other gods are?

The Bible NEVER said that God is a Unification of gods. The Bible says that God is Spirit and as a Spirit, He also has embodiments of forms visible in the spirit realms and the physical realms.

Unfortunately, Allah cannot be in more than one place at a time because he has at least a SHAPE!

This is why he has to descend to the earth my dear!


Is this hadith false?

Sahih Muslim 758 e
Abu Sa'id and Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger as saying:
Allah waits till when one-third of the first part of the night is over; He descends to the lowest heaven and says: It there any supplicator of forgiveness? Is there any penitant? Is there any petitioner (for mercy and favour)? Is there any solicitor? -till it is daybreak.

Keep confusing yourself

CreativeOrbit:
You’ve dressed a string of shallow provocations in the illusion of critical inquiry, but let’s strip the fluff and get down to logic and facts. Since you claim you're “only asking questions,” let me do the same—except I’ll attach reasoning to each, rather than rely on empty rhetoric.

1. On theft in mosques:
Your claim that theft in mosques proves a deficiency in Islam is intellectually lazy. By that logic, crimes committed by people near churches would disqualify Christianity. Or do you think every sinner outside the mosque is a perfect reflection of Islam, but Christians are exempt from judgment based on others’ actions? If a thief hiding among Muslims undermines Islam, then centuries of Christian crusades, inquisitions, child abuse scandals, and televangelist frauds should make Christianity indefensible. Be consistent.

Can you see that your bias has made you unable to comprehend even simple conversations.
I never claimed even once that theft in mosques proves a deficiency in Islam. Check again.
Instead, I showed that even though the church and mosques are supposed to be holy places, people come there to steal. And I used footwears and phones as examples in mosques and churches.
But your bias made you see otherwise .
You need to read again and comment on exactly what I wrote not what you felt I said. The summary is that the behaviour of one or two thieves in a church or mosque make us behave with caution even though the thieves are minorities. Hence my argument is that as long as there are a few minorities of Muslims with the radical interpretation of Islam, can we as Christians take them for granted?

Cool down bro! I am not your enemy!

CreativeOrbit:
2. On salvation and hellfire:
You present a simplistic binary: "If Christians are right, Muslims go to Hell; if Muslims are right, Christians go to Hell." That’s a false dichotomy based on theological tribalism. Islam’s stance is more nuanced. The Quran acknowledges that salvation is open to righteous Jews, Christians, and Sabians before the message of Islam was completed (Quran 2:62). After that, people are accountable based on the truth they receive. You might want to study context before quoting verses in isolation.

As far as Jesus is concerned, no one gets to paradise without Him. Meaning that Muslims will go to hell because they have not received the gift from Gospel of Salvation.

On the other hand, for you Muslims, we have a contradiction
1. Allah says that Christians, Jews and Sabeans will enter paradise.
2. You Muslims say the Jews are cursed and the Christians are Mislead.
How then can the cursed and the mislead enter paradise?
3. The Sabeans worship the stars/constellations and a sect of them worship satan directly. How did Allah say these will go to paradise? Is it because they claim John the Baptist to be their prophet?

Your claim that
The Quran acknowledges that salvation is open to righteous Jews, Christians, and Sabians before the message of Islam was completed (Quran 2:62). is complete falsehood as Allah nor your prophet never said that.

Do I have to remind you that the condition of Quran 2:62 are
a. Belief in God
b. Belief in the last day
c. Doing righteous deeds

I challenge you to give me where Allah says the condition is before the message of Islam was concluded.

It seems you forgot that Islam was the religion of Adam, Abraham, Moses and Jesus! LOL!

CreativeOrbit:
3. On paradise descriptions:
You mock the Islamic concept of paradise by contrasting it with a sterile, sexless existence “like angels.” You’re welcome to your interpretation, but Islam’s paradise is tailored to human desires—joy, companionship, beauty. What's illogical about that? Also, there’s no contradiction: if the afterlife is spiritual, why should physical pleasures be forbidden unless your theology demonizes the body?

You just buttress my point.
The paradise of Jesus is DIFFERENT from the paradise of Mohammed.

It's not the same place.

If the Paradise of Jesus is NOT your paradise, you may have some rethinking to do o.

Your paradise seems to be a place of debauchery: your scholars say that nothing is sin in your paradise.

Your paradise seems more like a Temptation rather than reward for obedience to the God of the heavens and the earth.

CreativeOrbit:
4. On contradictions with Judaism:
Christianity does contradict Judaism on major theological points. The very idea of Jesus as God incarnate is blasphemous in Judaism. Judaism rejects the Trinity, the virgin birth, original sin, and salvation through faith alone. If you truly think Jesus “fulfills” the law, ask any rabbi if your theology aligns with Torah. Islam acknowledges the original messages of the Torah and Gospel, but corrects distortions added by men, which brings me to your smug "challenge."

There is n contradiction between the Torah and the Gospels, what exist is a REJECTION by the modern Jews of the message of the Gospel. You forget that the Tanakh is the Old Testament of the Christians. LOL!!

What is the original message of the Torah and Injeel?
Do you have them or you have manufactured conjectures as usual?

Unfortunately, it is worse that this as it seems that you know better than Allah.

If the Torah, Injeel, Zabur and others not mentioned by name in the Qur'an are the words of Allah and non can change Allah's words, tell me if you aren't going against your God!

Secondly, Allah asked us Christians to judge by what he has revealed in our Injeel: Is Allah asking us to judge by that which is corrupted?

DidnI not remind you that even in the Qur'an, Jesus made lawful things made unlawful for the children of Israel?

Allah would be wrong or ignorant if indeed the Torah and the Gospel are corrupted or you know better than Allah as your God NEVER claimed your insinuations about our scripture

Who is wrong then between Allah and you?

CreativeOrbit:
5. Your challenge on distortions:
i. What was distorted?
The divinity of Jesus, the Trinity, and salvation by blood sacrifice—none of which Jesus preached.
ii. How?
Through councils, Roman influence, Hellenistic philosophy, and Pauline theology.
iii. When?
Primarily from 70 CE to 400 CE, as doctrines were debated and canonized.
iv. Who?
Early church leaders—especially Paul—who shifted the focus from Jesus' monotheistic message to a Romanized interpretation that conveniently aligned with empire.

Are you aware that if you are correct, then Allah would be either Ignorant or Wrong because Allah attests to our scripture. Your prophet also attests to our scripture 600AD.

Was your your prophet telling lies when he said he believes in the Torah and the one who sent it or was that Taqqiya?


See how you conjectures scattered like a pack of cards! LOL!!

CreativeOrbit:
6. You ask why Jesus is the Messiah.
Islam answers this clearly. Jesus is the Messiah because he was anointed by God, born miraculously, and given a specific mission to guide the Children of Israel. He was not sent to die for sins, nor to abolish the law, but to reaffirm monotheism. You’ve inherited a redefined Messiah molded by Greek and Roman philosophy, not the Hebrew concept.

Talk is cheap!
You are manufacturing conjectures again
Can you show me exactly where Allah or your prophet said anything about what the Messiah is for his prophecy is all about the Torah you claimed has been corrupted.

CreativeOrbit:
Now to your five “simple” questions, which are designed to confuse rather than reveal truth:

1. Why is Jesus a Word and Spirit from Allah?
Because Allah created him by His Word ("Be" and supported him with the Holy Spirit (like many prophets). That doesn’t make him divine—it magnifies the power of God, not the status of the creation.

But Jesus wasn't created by the word be!
Have you forgotten that Jibril was Sent to BLOW into the Farjaha of Mary!?
You forgot that Jesus was a spirit from Allah cast down to Mary?

Do you know any man who bears the title of a Spirit from Allah and his Word apart from Jesus?

Don't just repeat your scholars consensus, give me evidence from Allah or your prophet!

You seem to forget that in your deen, there are just two spirits. One is Jibril and the other is Jesus (even though you don't even know what a spirit is)

CreativeOrbit:
2. Why did Satan not touch Jesus and Mary?
A special favor granted by God—exceptional, not divine. If God chose to protect someone, does that elevate them to divinity? Was John the Baptist divine for being filled with the Holy Spirit from the womb (Luke 1:15)?

Why are you muddling two different things
1. Are you saying that John the Baptist was filled with Jibril from the womb?
2. Let me remind you of the significance according to your prophet.

You didn't answer the question!
Why was it that only Jesus and Mary satan did not touch at birth?

CreativeOrbit:
3. Why is Jesus a co-creator?
He’s not. He performed miracles by God's permission (Quran 5:110). There’s a massive difference between “creating” and being used by God to perform a miracle. If God let Moses part the sea, is Moses now Lord of oceans?

Is it untrue that just as Allah molded clay into Adam, Jesus moulded clay into a bird?
Is it untrue that just as Allah breathe into the moulded clay of Adam, Jesus breathe into the moulded clay of the bird?
Is it untrue that just as Adam came to life, the clay bird came to life?

Have you forgotten that Allah gave a challenge about gods who cannot even create a fly?


Qur'an 22:73
Those on whom, besides Allah, ye call, cannot create (even) a fly, if they all met together for the purpose! and if the fly should snatch away anything from them, they would have no power to release it from the fly. Feeble are those who petition and those whom they petition!


Why is Jesus the only co-creator of life with Allah?

CreativeOrbit:
4. Why is Jesus alive?
Because God chose to raise him—just as He raised Enoch. Being alive doesn't make you divine; Lazarus was raised from death too—was he God?

According to Islam, Jesus did NOT die. He is ALIVE with Allah. Do you know anyone in Islam like this?

Prophets are supposed to be in the graves doing salat but Jesus is different. He is with Allah!

The Question is why?

CreativeOrbit:
5. Why the virgin birth?
As a sign, not a divine seal. Adam had no mother or father—was he God? Your logic collapses when you cherry-pick miracles to justify divinity.

LOL!
How is Jesus being born from a virgin a sign? A sign to who? Who were the witnesses for it to be a sign?

Why was it even necessary that Jesus comes through a virgin?

I asked you to give theological answers from Islam to my questions but all you were doing was to negate divine nature of Jesus. Unfortunately, my questions wasn't to prove the devine nature of Jesus, NO! It was to make you see the uniqueness of Jesus who you depreciated for your prophet Mohammed!

CreativeOrbit:
You mistake rhetorical bombardment for depth. Islam doesn't need to borrow anything from a corrupted tradition to validate itself. It corrects, completes, and refines. So if you’re genuinely seeking truth, ask with humility. If you’re looking to score points, prepare to be answered with facts, not flattery.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

When you don't have answers, come to the people of the book to show you rather than cooking up conjectures.
Unfortunately, you won't.

This same Jesus that Allah invested everything he gave no other human being was the same one Allah destroyed his ministry by creating Christianity.

Allah deceived the Jews that they killed Jesus
Allah deceived the Romans that they killed Jesus
At the same time
Allah deceived the Apostles of Jesus that Jesus was crucified and died.
Allah then deceived Mary the mother of Jesus that Jesus was crucified and died


Allah followed up this deception with the Disciples burying Jesus
And Allah showed them Jesus resurrecting on the third day and showing Himself to the disciples
Allah showed Jesus going up to heaven in the presence of all his disciples in Galilee.

Allah then waited for 630 years to tell the Christians that ALL was an Elaborate LIE

Tell me, is this your God?

honesttalk21:
Very good of you to show proof that other uses of Ahad except the one time in reference to Allah is in negative construction.

Negation.

Glad you present the point to yourself in clear terms.

Meaning that Muslim scholars redefined Ahad to mean something else because it faults their theology of Allah!

Too bad!

One Ahad out of over 80 Ahads in the Qur'an had a different meaning!
SMH!

honesttalk21:
Keep confusing yourself

You are lost again!
Islam doesn't have answers to basic simple theological questions


Is it untrue that Allah thinks that the Trinity is Allah, Mary and Jesus?
If Allah also thinks that Christians teach that Jesus is Allah, can you tell us according to Allah who the other gods are?



Isn't untrue that Allah descend to the lowest heaven?

Does this not mean that he is not omnipresent?

TenQ:
You are lost again!
Islam doesn't have answers to basic simple theological questions


Is it untrue that Allah thinks that the Trinity is Allah, Mary and Jesus?
If Allah also thinks that Christians teach that Jesus is Allah, can you tell us according to Allah who the other gods are?



Isn't untrue that Allah descend to the lowest heaven?

Does this not mean that he is not omnipresent?

Definitely you are.

You gave a clear example of the use of Ahad in a negation and are unable to provide any other entity described as Ahad except Allah in the Qur'an.

How can you go so to turn logic illogical?

In your desperation as always haven been knocked down and out with superior intellectual arguments you run to bring other garbage.

Can you not do and finish with one discussion before running to another? Oh you have short circuit to a chaotic position and now try to fire all non shots.

To answer you please first bring in clear unambiguous terms

1. Where Allah specifically defined trinity

2. Do you know what figuratives and metaphors are?

TenQ:
Meaning that Muslim scholars redefined Ahad to mean something else because it faults their theology of Allah!

Too bad!

One Ahad out of over 80 Ahads in the Qur'an had a different meaning!
SMH!

Of course you claim to understand Arabic and Hebrew better than native Arabians and Jews.

Context and word meaning in Semitic language. Read and learn to know about it

honesttalk21:
Definitely you are.

You gave a clear example of the use of Ahad in a negation and are unable to provide any other entity described as Ahad except Allah in the Qur'an.

How can you go so to turn logic illogical?

In your desperation as always haven been knocked down and out with superior intellectual arguments you run to bring other garbage.

Can you not do and finish with one discussion before running to another? Oh you have short circuit to a chaotic position and now try to fire all non shots.

To answer you please first bring in clear unambiguous terms

1. Where Allah specifically defined trinity

2. Do you know what figuratives and metaphors are?



Of course you claim to understand Arabic and Hebrew better than native Arabians and Jews.

Context and word meaning in Semitic language. Read and learn to know about it

I don't even understand what you mean by example in negation: which you have assumed to be unitary one.
Have I not shown you clearly that Ahad is NEVER defined as Unitary ONE in the Quran?
This is sufficient for me.

Your questions.
1. Allah (generic) never defined anything in the Bible . The word Trinity doesn't even exist in the Bible. Trinity is a word we use to describe the complexity of our God YHWH who from the scriptures is
a. One Being
b. Exists simultaneously as the persons of the Infinite Invisible Holy Spirit, the Father and the Word
c. He is unlike Anyone or Anything in creation because His nature makes Him Omnipotent, Omnipresent and Omniscient.
d. The nearest to my God in description is us limited humans for we were created as a Trinity with a Body, Soul and Spirit: three persons but one being. For we were created in His image.

Thus unlike your Allah who is on top of creation, the whole Creation of the Spiritual Universe and the Physical Universe is completely Inside and within my God YHWH.
2. Yes, I do. Jesus used a lot of parables, figuratives and metaphors in teaching. Is Ahad a metaphor or a parable?


Questions
1. Do you concur that if the following are TRUE that
1. Allah is one and
2. Allah is over/on top of the universe and
3. Allah is not a spirit and
4. Allah has at least a shape
then Allah CANNOT be LOGICALLY Omnipresent?
2. Mohammed said that Allah created Adam in his image and then goes on to describe Adams image in the physical terms of face and height.
Can you thus explain in clear terms how Adam is created in Allah's image?