₦airaland Forum

advanceDNA:
U still don't get it....ur entire argument is based on looking at Jesus in the lens of your so called perfect Allah without considering why Jesus walked the earth...and that's why it is an attempt at mockery...

Jesus did not just decide to walk the earth becos he felt like.. the bible clearly gave the reason .... therefore jesus being tempted, being hungry, or wateva u are trying to use to invalidate or mock the divinity of Jesus is a prerequisite because he came to sacrifice himself for a man who has all these same flaws of being hungry, tempted etc.....it is important for him to carry the very flaws of human nature and but akos be without sin o be the perfect sacrifice (and only God is without sin)

This might be hard for your to grasp becos of ur Muslim background and that's why I initially started that both faiths/beliefs are completely different ....

See....God gets angry and punishes, God is jealous and doesn't want you to serve other God, God is a lot of things our human mind cant begin to comprehend ......will u all say this is impossible becos anger, punishment and jealousy are flaws of human being as well??

With all due respect...who are u to tell God what he can be or cannot be for wateva purpose he wants to achieve....

Thank you once again for your reply. I appreciate the time you've taken to articulate your position, and I assure you that my aim remains an honest and respectful exchange — not mockery, nor denial of your right to your beliefs. If at any point my tone suggested otherwise, I welcome the chance to clarify.

Let me begin with the heart of the matter: my argument is not based on viewing Jesus "through the lens of Allah," as you suggest. It is based on an internal theological inquiry using your own scripture, and addressing questions that have been asked by Christians themselves throughout history — from the early Church Fathers to contemporary theologians.

1. The Problem of Inconsistency, Not Possibility

You ask, "Who are you to tell God what He can or cannot be?" — and I fully agree that God is not subject to human limitations or dictates. However, theological reflection must involve asking whether particular doctrines are internally coherent.

Let me clarify: I am not claiming that God cannot do something arbitrarily. I am asking whether the Christian claim — that the eternal, all-knowing, unchanging God became a finite, tempted, limited human being — is logically and theologically consistent within your own framework.

James 1:13 says God cannot be tempted. Yet the Gospels describe Jesus being tempted by Satan (Matthew 4:1). Mark 13:32 says the Son does not know the Hour — yet God is all-knowing. Hebrews 5:7 speaks of Jesus "offering prayers with loud cries and tears to the One who could save him." These texts raise natural theological questions: If Jesus is fully God, how can He lack knowledge, be tempted, or fear death?

You suggest Jesus had to carry the "flaws of human nature" to be the perfect sacrifice. But here lies the theological paradox: If these limitations are flaws, how can the flawless God fully embody them without contradiction? And if they are not flaws, why are they treated as evidence of Jesus' humanity and not His divinity?

2. The Claim of God Becoming Human Is Not Simple Mystery — It Is a Contradiction If Taken Literally

Appealing to mystery ("God is beyond human understanding" is valid only to a point. But mystery should not be used to mask logical contradiction. Saying that Jesus is fully God and fully man — and that he was omniscient yet not knowing, immutable yet growing in wisdom (Luke 2:52), impassible yet suffering — creates a paradox that demands explanation.

Muslims do not deny God's ability — we question doctrines that seem to compromise His attributes. The Qur'an tells us God is Al-‘Aleem (All-Knowing), As-Samad (self-sufficient), and Al-Hayy (Ever-Living) — He does not become dependent, die, or lose knowledge. This is not a limitation; it is divine perfection.

3. God’s Emotions vs. Human Limitations

You mention that God gets angry, jealous, and punishes — attributes that sound "human." But there's a vital distinction here: in Islamic theology (and arguably in Biblical theology too), God’s anger or jealousy are not like ours. They do not arise from ignorance, loss of control, or imperfection. They are expressions of His justice and authority, not flaws or deficiencies.

However, hunger, ignorance of the Hour, exhaustion, fear of death — these are not moral emotions; they are ontological limitations. They signal a being who is contingent, not self-sufficient — and therefore not divine by definition. That is the core of the Muslim critique.

4. Respecting the Purpose of Jesus’ Mission Does Not Remove the Theological Tension

You say Jesus came to bear human flaws to become a sacrifice. Even if I grant this as your belief, it does not resolve the theological dilemma. The central issue is: How can God, who is perfect and independent, take on qualities that are by nature imperfect and dependent? That is not merely a narrative claim — it is a metaphysical contradiction.

And again, I am not asking this from an Islamic framework. I’m asking whether this belief is consistent within the Christian conception of God's nature as eternal, unchanging, and omniscient.

5. Honest Dialogue Requires Open Inquiry

Finally, I must respectfully note that attributing my questions to a “Muslim background” as if that disqualifies critical thinking undermines interfaith dialogue. Christians have long engaged in deep internal theological debates. I am simply continuing that tradition of inquiry from a different faith perspective, with respect and sincerity.

If there is an explanation that resolves this paradox from within Christian theology — beyond appealing to mystery or divine right — I remain open to it. But questions about theological coherence are not attacks; they are necessary steps toward understanding.

With all due respect, if you claim Jesus is fully God, then it is not unreasonable for me — or any thinking person — to ask how such a claim aligns with the attributes of God that Scripture itself affirms.

I remain open to your thoughts and appreciate your engagement.

BibleInterpreta AntiChristian TenQ CreativeOrbit gofh honesttalk21 NairaLTQ MaxInDHouse advanceDNA

QuinQ:
Again, why did founder of JW leave the "cult". Can't you see you'll always lose arguing from that angle?
Also you keep indiscriminately throwing out verses from the bible knowing no one has time to look them up. Tell us how Mathew 10:24&25 relates to the JW shunning we'er discussing

You go cRy tire!

The founder of JWs is the same person who said:

“A student is not above his teacher, nor a slave above his master. It is enough for the student to become as his teacher, and the slave as his master. If people have called the master of the house Be·elʹze·bub, how much more those of his household? Matthew 10:24-25

So when you call us CULT we are happy because Jesus said that's what you people will call us for SHUNNING evil! Matthew 5:11-12

MaxInDHouse:
You go cRy tire!

The founder of JWs is the same person who said:

“A student is not above his teacher, nor a slave above his master. It is enough for the student to become as his teacher, and the slave as his master. If people have called the master of the house Be·elʹze·bub, how much more those of his household? Matthew 10:24-25

So when you call us CULT we are happy because Jesus said that's what you people will call us for SHUNNING evil! Matthew 5:11-12

😅Poor guy doesn't even know who first adopted Adventist teachings, misinterpreted the Bible, and came up with your beliefs of today: end times , no-hell, non-divinity of Christ, etc. Who do you think came up with 1914 and Armageddon? Tell us where in the Bible Christ said there was no hell

*Verse you cited has nothing to do with shunnimg

JimRohn:
Thank
BibleInterpreta AntiChristian TenQ CreativeOrbit gofh honesttalk21 NairaLTQ MaxInDHouse advanceDNA

Hello Mr JimRohn
Repeating these names every time you make a post is spamming the topic. Yes, you can invite people to your discussions but just once and not every time you make a post.

NairaLTQ:
So, let's check.
Quran 75:37
Had he not been a sperm from semen emitted?

Tell me, is any human being a sperm OR he is a fusion of sperm and ovum? How many chromosomes do we find in a full human being and how many chromosomes are in a sperm?

Quran 75:38
then he became a clot, and then Allah made it into a living body and proportioned its parts,

Tell me, what does a sperm become in a human female womb?

Is it untrue that your prophet says that the sperm will stay for 40 days in the womb?

Sahih Muslim 2644
Hudhaifa b. Usaid reported directly from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) that he said:

When the drop of (semen) remains in the womb for forty or forty five nights, the angel comes and says: My Lord, will he be good or evil? And both these things would be written. Then the angel says: My Lord, would he be male or female? And both these things are written. And his deeds and actions, his death, his livelihood; these are also recorded. Then his document of destiny is rolled and there is no addition to nor subtraction from it.


LOL
Do you concede that Allah was the one relating the story and not Dhul Qarnyn? (Qur'an 18:83)
Did Allah say that
1. Dhul Qarnyn found the sun setting in some dark murky waters?
2. Dhul Qarnyn found a people near this dark murky water?

I guess, Dhul Qarnyn appeared to find a people there: is that true?
3. Can you show us by Google map: The wall that was constructed to prevent Yājūj and Mājūj from causing further destruction and hardship to people?.

Don you see why it is the job of your scholars to rewrite the words of Allah and his prophet to correct several blunders like this?


Initially, it Al-Samari mean the Samaritan BUT because of recent scholarship, you have to find a new culprit for it.

Tafsirs Al-Jalalayn Quran20:85
But those he supposed [to be following him] had remained behind, for He, exalted be He, said, ‘Indeed We tried your people after you, that is, after your departure from them, and the Samaritan led them astray’, so they took to worshipping the )golden) calf.



How can it be a miracle when it is a myth treated as real by Allah and Mohammed.

The earliest written version of the story comes from Christian bishop and writer Jacob of Serugh, who wrote an account of the sleepers in Syriac. The story begins in the Roman Empire around 250 CE.

The story wasn't even real. It was written to encourage Christians who were being persecuted to encourage them that bad times will end.

Now, we find a fiction entering the Book of Allah as a miracle!? Tell me, how can the story of Superman or Batman somehow become a miracle?



Let's see what Allah said:

Qur'an 4:171
"O People of the Scripture, do not exceed in your religion beyond the truth and do not follow the inclination of a people who had gone astray before and misled many and strayed from the sound way.
And [mention, O People of the Scripture], the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He cast down to Mary and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, 'Three'; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs."

Who should we believe, you or Allah?
1. Jesus is a Messenger of Allah
2. Jesus is the Word of Allah (His Word) cast down to Mary
3. Jesus is the Spirit FROM Allah

You have to redefine Spirit to mean Soul even against your prophet who calls Jesus Ruhullah!

Can you see how Muslims have no respect for Allah's word or their prophet's word in order that they might propagate an Islam according to their corrections



God is ONE according to Christians BUT in order to sell Islam, Allah, his prophet and you Muslims must claim we mean that God is THREE.

As Christians, Jesus is our ransom from Hell Fire: but for you as Muslims, Jews and Christians are your own ransom. Does this make any sense to you that people who need to be ransomed are your own ransom.?

Thank you for your reply. Let me respond to your points one by one in a clear and respectful manner, seeking truth through sound reasoning rather than mockery or misrepresentation.

1. On the Qur’an and Embryology (Qur’an 75:37–38):

You cited Qur’an 75:37–38 and questioned the biological accuracy. Let's clarify:

> “Had he not been a sperm from semen emitted? Then he became a clot…”

This description aligns with observable embryological stages from the perspective of the human observer. The verse refers to the human origin from “sperm” (nutfah) found within semen — not to deny the ovum’s role, but to highlight the male contribution in a time when this was unknown. The Qur’an’s primary goal is not to teach cellular biology but to remind man of his humble origin as a means of spiritual reflection.

As for your reference to Sahih Muslim 2644 and the 40 days — this hadith does not state that sperm remains alone for 40 days. It refers to the entire process of formation, which early Islamic scholars (like Ibn Hajar) noted includes transitions between stages. Moreover, time estimates in prophetic hadith are not intended as precise scientific measurements but to express stages of divine decree — what modern biology calls epigenetics or genetic programming.

So no, neither the Qur’an nor the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) claimed humans are formed only from sperm nor that sperm remains unchanging for 40 days. These are interpretive misunderstandings, not scientific blunders.

2. On Dhul Qarnayn and the “Sun Setting in a Murky Spring” (Qur’an 18:86):

The verse reads:

> “Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a murky spring…”

Let’s be precise. The Arabic uses "wajada" (he found) — meaning his perception — not a literal cosmological assertion. The Qur’an is clearly describing what Dhul Qarnayn saw, not what physically happens to the sun.

Even today, we use similar expressions: “sunset over the ocean” — yet no rational person believes the sun is literally setting into water.

So this is a visual description from the human perspective, not a geophysical claim. Any insistence on literalism here is a misreading of the Arabic language and Qur’anic style.

3. On the Wall of Gog and Magog (Ya’juj and Ma’juj):

The Qur’an does not claim the wall built by Dhul Qarnayn still exists today. Rather, it describes a historic construction which will be breached “when the promise of my Lord comes to pass” (Qur’an 18:98). The Qur’an prophesies its future destruction as a sign of the End Times.

If it were still standing, it may be buried, eroded, or yet undiscovered — just like other ancient structures lost to time. Absence of current location ≠ non-existence.

History is filled with lost cities (like Troy), vanished peoples, and unexcavated ruins. This is not a flaw in scripture but a reminder of the limits of human knowledge.

4. On the Samaritan and the Golden Calf (Qur’an 20:85–88):

You quote Tafsir al-Jalalayn, but ignore the linguistic and scholarly nuance.

The Arabic word “As-Samiri” does not necessarily mean "Samaritan" of post-10th century BCE Israel. Many classical scholars interpreted “Samiri” as a proper noun, not a tribal designation. Other scholars viewed it as a title or nickname, possibly linked to magic or deviation (derived from samar, speech at night).

Islamic tradition is not bound to Biblical chronology. Even Western historians now acknowledge that Biblical dating and tribal naming are not always historically reliable. So no, this is not a “rewriting” of the Qur’an — it’s a scholarly clarification, based on context and semantics.

5. On the Story of the Sleepers of the Cave:

You argue this story is a “Christian myth” absorbed into the Qur’an.

Firstly, let’s note: the Qur’an acknowledges the story’s Christian origins — that’s why it refers to it in the context of the People of the Book and emphasizes that only God knows the true details (Qur’an 18:22).

The Qur’an does not treat it as fiction, but as an actual miracle showing God’s power over time and resurrection. Miracles, by definition, are outside natural law. You may call it legend — Islam affirms it as a miracle. Whether Jacob of Serugh wrote about it or not is irrelevant; truth is not determined by who writes first but by what actually happened.

Also, using this logic, should we dismiss the Christian Gospel because parts of it may share similarities with pre-Christian myths like dying-and-rising gods (e.g., Osiris, Tammuz)?

6. On Jesus Being the “Word” and “Spirit” of God (Qur’an 4:171):

Your reading is selective.

Yes, the Qur’an calls Jesus:

A messenger of God

His word ("Kalimatuhu" cast to Mary

A spirit from Him ("Ruhun minhu"

But this does not mean Jesus is part of God. The verse explicitly warns:

> “Do not say ‘Three’... Allah is but One God. Exalted is He above having a son.” (4:171)

In Islam, "Word" refers to God's command, as in “Be” — and it is. Jesus came into existence through God's command — not via fatherhood or divinity.

Likewise, "spirit from Him" means a created soul — not a divine being. All souls are from God in this sense:

> “Then He fashioned him and breathed into him of His spirit…” (Qur’an 32:9)

So yes, Jesus is Ruhullah — a created spirit granted by God, just as Adam was. This does not make him God or part of God.

To insist that the Qur’anic language confirms the Trinity is to impose Christian theology onto Islamic texts, which the Qur’an clearly rejects.

7. On the Christian Doctrine of Ransom and Hellfire:

You said:

> Jesus is our ransom from Hellfire. But for Muslims, Jews and Christians are your ransom?

This is an odd misrepresentation. Islam explicitly rejects the idea that someone else can be punished in our place:

> “No bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another.” (Qur’an 6:164)

As for the hadith you may be referencing — regarding people being ransomed on Judgment Day — the context is not substitutionary atonement. It is a description of relative justice on the Day of Judgment. Each person will be judged for their own deeds.

Islam does not teach that Jews or Christians are punished on behalf of Muslims. That is a misunderstanding — or worse, deliberate distortion — of Islamic eschatology.

Conclusion:

You began by accusing Muslims of "rewriting" scripture. But it is clear that:

Your arguments rest on literalism, misinterpretation, or theological projection.

The Qur’an presents concepts like embryology, prophecy, miracles, and divine nature in a metaphorical and theological language, not scientific journals.

Islam’s rejection of the Trinity is not ignorance — but insistence that God is not divisible, incarnated, or slain.

> “He neither begets nor is begotten.” (Qur’an 112:3)

Your belief in Jesus as ransom is your choice, but to Muslims, God does not require blood to forgive. He forgives whom He wills, as a Sovereign, Merciful Lord.

I appreciate your passion for your faith. But truth deserves careful reading, not ridicule. I invite you to engage Islamic texts on their own terms, not through the filter of Christian theology.

> May God guide us both toward truth and understanding.
With respect and sincerity.

JimRohn:
Thank you once again for your reply. I appreciate the time you've taken to articulate your position, and I assure you that my aim remains an honest and respectful exchange — not mockery, nor denial of your right to your beliefs. If at any point my tone suggested otherwise, I welcome the chance to clarify.

Let me begin with the heart of the matter: my argument is not based on viewing Jesus "through the lens of Allah," as you suggest. It is based on an internal theological inquiry using your own scripture, and addressing questions that have been asked by Christians themselves throughout history — from the early Church Fathers to contemporary theologians.

1. The Problem of Inconsistency, Not Possibility

You ask, "Who are you to tell God what He can or cannot be?" — and I fully agree that God is not subject to human limitations or dictates. However, theological reflection must involve asking whether particular doctrines are internally coherent.

Let me clarify: I am not claiming that God cannot do something arbitrarily. I am asking whether the Christian claim — that the eternal, all-knowing, unchanging God became a finite, tempted, limited human being — is logically and theologically consistent within your own framework.

James 1:13 says God cannot be tempted. Yet the Gospels describe Jesus being tempted by Satan (Matthew 4:1). Mark 13:32 says the Son does not know the Hour — yet God is all-knowing. Hebrews 5:7 speaks of Jesus "offering prayers with loud cries and tears to the One who could save him." These texts raise natural theological questions: If Jesus is fully God, how can He lack knowledge, be tempted, or fear death?

You suggest Jesus had to carry the "flaws of human nature" to be the perfect sacrifice. But here lies the theological paradox: If these limitations are flaws, how can the flawless God fully embody them without contradiction? And if they are not flaws, why are they treated as evidence of Jesus' humanity and not His divinity?

Did your prophet say "every son (descendant) of Adam is a sinner?

Is Jesus human?
And, is He a descendant of Adam?

This is the distinction. God came to represent us so that He can legally be our ransom from the consequences of sin which is eternity in Hell Fire.

Only YHWH in Trinity can be Finite and Infinite at the same time
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Weak and Almighty at the same time
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Somewhere and Everywhere at the same time

Admit that you do NOT understand this paradox even when explained simply because it is IMPOSSIBLE for Allah to be like YHWH

JimRohn:
2. The Claim of God Becoming Human Is Not Simple Mystery — It Is a Contradiction If Taken Literally

Appealing to mystery ("God is beyond human understanding" is valid only to a point. But mystery should not be used to mask logical contradiction. Saying that Jesus is fully God and fully man — and that he was omniscient yet not knowing, immutable yet growing in wisdom (Luke 2:52), impassible yet suffering — creates a paradox that demands explanation.

Muslims do not deny God's ability — we question doctrines that seem to compromise His attributes. The Qur'an tells us God is Al-‘Aleem (All-Knowing), As-Samad (self-sufficient), and Al-Hayy (Ever-Living) — He does not become dependent, die, or lose knowledge. This is not a limitation; it is divine perfection.

Again, from the Lens of Taoheed, the nature of YHWH is IMPOSSIBLE.

Again,
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Finite and Infinite at the same time
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Weak and Almighty at the same time
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Somewhere and Everywhere at the same time

Do you admit that this above is a logical contradiction with the description of the Taoheed?
Is this a logical contradiction with the description of Trinity?

JimRohn:
3. God’s Emotions vs. Human Limitations
You mention that God gets angry, jealous, and punishes — attributes that sound "human." But there's a vital distinction here: in Islamic theology (and arguably in Biblical theology too), God’s anger or jealousy are not like ours. They do not arise from ignorance, loss of control, or imperfection. They are expressions of His justice and authority, not flaws or deficiencies.

However, hunger, ignorance of the Hour, exhaustion, fear of death — these are not moral emotions; they are ontological limitations. They signal a being who is contingent, not self-sufficient — and therefore not divine by definition. That is the core of the Muslim critique.

I have dealt with this before.
If it was possible for Allah to come down as a perfect man without violating his almightiness and sovereignty, will he come with his full attributes to us OR he will limit it to almost human-like levels.

Secondly, if the Sovereignty and Almightiness of God is not violated, what is your problem if God chose to experience Pain, Hunger, Thirst, Sadness, Weakness etc. Do you as a Muslim decide for God!?

Like it is unthinkable for a president to jump inside a latrine BUT it is NOT impossible depending on
1. The Reason/Purpose why the president entered the Latrine
2. If the president CHOSE to enter the Latrine by his own volition.

Unfortunately for you, the Bible explains why God has to come like this to us humans Islam doesn't have this concept.

JimRohn:
4. Respecting the Purpose of Jesus’ Mission Does Not Remove the Theological Tension

You say Jesus came to bear human flaws to become a sacrifice. Even if I grant this as your belief, it does not resolve the theological dilemma. The central issue is: How can God, who is perfect and independent, take on qualities that are by nature imperfect and dependent? That is not merely a narrative claim — it is a metaphysical contradiction.

And again, I am not asking this from an Islamic framework. I’m asking whether this belief is consistent within the Christian conception of God's nature as eternal, unchanging, and omniscient.

How can God, who is perfect and independent, take on qualities that are by nature imperfect and dependent?
Because, YHWH can do so without violating His Integrity as God.

You find it difficult to comprehend because you as a Muslim doesn't understand the Gravity of Sin.

You think sin is just a mere going against the will and command of God: and forgiveness is easy!

If you care , I will explain why SIN cannot go without punishment!

JimRohn:
5. Honest Dialogue Requires Open Inquiry

Finally, I must respectfully note that attributing my questions to a “Muslim background” as if that disqualifies critical thinking undermines interfaith dialogue. Christians have long engaged in deep internal theological debates. I am simply continuing that tradition of inquiry from a different faith perspective, with respect and sincerity.

If there is an explanation that resolves this paradox from within Christian theology — beyond appealing to mystery or divine right — I remain open to it. But questions about theological coherence are not attacks; they are necessary steps toward understanding.

With all due respect, if you claim Jesus is fully God, then it is not unreasonable for me — or any thinking person — to ask how such a claim aligns with the attributes of God that Scripture itself affirms.

I remain open to your thoughts and appreciate your engagement.

BibleInterpreta AntiChristian TenQ CreativeOrbit gofh honesttalk21 NairaLTQ MaxInDHouse advanceDNA

Islam doesn't know why blood is required in sacrifice even though they claim to be the religion of Abraham. This is a basic flaw in your religion

I laugh in Mandarin!

JimRohn:
Thank you for your reply. Let me respond to your points one by one in a clear and respectful manner, seeking truth through sound reasoning rather than mockery or misrepresentation.

1. On the Qur’an and Embryology (Qur’an 75:37–38):

You cited Qur’an 75:37–38 and questioned the biological accuracy. Let's clarify:

> “Had he not been a sperm from semen emitted? Then he became a clot…”

This description aligns with observable embryological stages from the perspective of the human observer. The verse refers to the human origin from “sperm” (nutfah) found within semen — not to deny the ovum’s role, but to highlight the male contribution in a time when this was unknown. The Qur’an’s primary goal is not to teach cellular biology but to remind man of his humble origin as a means of spiritual reflection.

As for your reference to Sahih Muslim 2644 and the 40 days — this hadith does not state that sperm remains alone for 40 days. It refers to the entire process of formation, which early Islamic scholars (like Ibn Hajar) noted includes transitions between stages. Moreover, time estimates in prophetic hadith are not intended as precise scientific measurements but to express stages of divine decree — what modern biology calls epigenetics or genetic programming.

So no, neither the Qur’an nor the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) claimed humans are formed only from sperm nor that sperm remains unchanging for 40 days. These are interpretive misunderstandings, not scientific blunders.

Quran 75:37
Had he not been a sperm from semen emitted?

You didn't answer the question
1. According to Allah, who is the "he" in Qur'an 75:37?
2. Is any Human beita sperm?
Quran 75:38
then he became a clot, and then Allah made it into a living body and proportioned its parts,

Tell me, what does a sperm become in a human female womb?

Is it untrue that your prophet says that the sperm will stay for 40 days in the womb?

Please respectful answer the direct questions as you are just giving me the standard islamic narrative.

JimRohn:
2. On Dhul Qarnayn and the “Sun Setting in a Murky Spring” (Qur’an 18:86):

The verse reads:

> “Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a murky spring…”

Let’s be precise. The Arabic uses "wajada" (he found) — meaning his perception — not a literal cosmological assertion. The Qur’an is clearly describing what Dhul Qarnayn saw, not what physically happens to the sun.

Even today, we use similar expressions: “sunset over the ocean” — yet no rational person believes the sun is literally setting into water.

So this is a visual description from the human perspective, not a geophysical claim. Any insistence on literalism here is a misreading of the Arabic language and Qur’anic style.

He found it is NEVER a perception. It is always a REALITY.

I said:
Do you concede that Allah was the one relating the story and not Dhul Qarnyn? (Qur'an 18:83)
Did Allah say that
1. Dhul Qarnyn found the sun setting in some dark murky waters?
2. Dhul Qarnyn found a people near this dark murky water?

I guess, Dhul Qarnyn appeared to find a people there: is that true?
3. Can you show us by Google map: The wall that was constructed to prevent Yājūj and Mājūj from causing further destruction and hardship to people?.

You will note that you cannot answer my direct questions because it is an error by Allah and his prophet Mohammed.

JimRohn:
3. On the Wall of Gog and Magog (Ya’juj and Ma’juj):

The Qur’an does not claim the wall built by Dhul Qarnayn still exists today. Rather, it describes a historic construction which will be breached “when the promise of my Lord comes to pass” (Qur’an 18:98). The Qur’an prophesies its future destruction as a sign of the End Times.

If it were still standing, it may be buried, eroded, or yet undiscovered — just like other ancient structures lost to time. Absence of current location ≠ non-existence.

History is filled with lost cities (like Troy), vanished peoples, and unexcavated ruins. This is not a flaw in scripture but a reminder of the limits of human knowledge.

I laugh is Swahili
1. What is the wall made from?
2. Do you think a wall of such a massive size would escape geological findings? For God's sake, the aeromagnetic signature would be so loud it would be seen from the other pole of the earth.

Sir, I am sorry to tell you that it is a myth. An imaginary wall that doesn't exist. But it is in your Qur'an as real.

JimRohn:
4. On the Samaritan and the Golden Calf (Qur’an 20:85–88):

You quote Tafsir al-Jalalayn, but ignore the linguistic and scholarly nuance.

The Arabic word “As-Samiri” does not necessarily mean "Samaritan" of post-10th century BCE Israel. Many classical scholars interpreted “Samiri” as a proper noun, not a tribal designation. Other scholars viewed it as a title or nickname, possibly linked to magic or deviation (derived from samar, speech at night).

Islamic tradition is not bound to Biblical chronology. Even Western historians now acknowledge that Biblical dating and tribal naming are not always historically reliable. So no, this is not a “rewriting” of the Qur’an — it’s a scholarly clarification, based on context and semantics.

So, Al-Jalalayn doesn't speak good Arabic.

Your only argument is to feign ignorance of the meaning of the word.

JimRohn:
5. On the Story of the Sleepers of the Cave:
You argue this story is a “Christian myth” absorbed into the Qur’an.
Firstly, let’s note: the Qur’an acknowledges the story’s Christian origins — that’s why it refers to it in the context of the People of the Book and emphasizes that only God knows the true details (Qur’an 18:22).

The Qur’an does not treat it as fiction, but as an actual miracle showing God’s power over time and resurrection. Miracles, by definition, are outside natural law. You may call it legend — Islam affirms it as a miracle. Whether Jacob of Serugh wrote about it or not is irrelevant; truth is not determined by who writes first but by what actually happened.

Also, using this logic, should we dismiss the Christian Gospel because parts of it may share similarities with pre-Christian myths like dying-and-rising gods (e.g., Osiris, Tammuz)?

Meaning that Allah did not know that it is a myth and not a real story.
Thus, it cannot be a miracle.

Are Batman or Spiderman or Superman stories miracles?

So sorry!
Mohammed was accused of telling myths of the ancients: his accusers were not wrong after all.

JimRohn:
6. On Jesus Being the “Word” and “Spirit” of God (Qur’an 4:171):
Your reading is selective.
Yes, the Qur’an calls Jesus:
A messenger of God
His word ("Kalimatuhu" cast to Mary
A spirit from Him ("Ruhun minhu"
But this does not mean Jesus is part of God. The verse explicitly warns:
> “Do not say ‘Three’... Allah is but One God. Exalted is He above having a son.” (4:171)

Do Christians say that Allah is a third of three?
The implication of "Kalimatuhu" and "Ruhun minhu" is massive as NOT other person or angel or jinn has these two titles.
It implies that JESUS pre-existing before He was born.

Secondly , Allah says that Christians say that The Messiah is Allah.
Qur'an 5:72
They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers.

If Allah is the Messiah according to Christians, who is the second and third part of the Trinity?

Except that the Almighty Allah doesn't understand exactly the doctrine of Trinity he is condemning.

Please direct answers not preachings!

JimRohn:
In Islam, "Word" refers to God's command, as in “Be” — and it is. Jesus came into existence through God's command — not via fatherhood or divinity.

Likewise, "spirit from Him" means a created soul — not a divine being. All souls are from God in this sense:

Then the implication is that Jesus is the Kunfayakun of Allah!

See, how you rope yourself into another quagmire!

JimRohn:
> “Then He fashioned him and breathed into him of His spirit…” (Qur’an 32:9)

So yes, Jesus is Ruhullah — a created spirit granted by God, just as Adam was. This does not make him God or part of God.

To insist that the Qur’anic language confirms the Trinity is to impose Christian theology onto Islamic texts, which the Qur’an clearly rejects.

So, the only two spirits known in Islam is Jibril AND Jesus (a human being) and you don't think that your theology is wrong and incomplete!?
BTW Qur’an 32:9 is not speaking of Jesus.

Jesus Himself is a Spirit from Allah: isn't it?

JimRohn:
7. On the Christian Doctrine of Ransom and Hellfire:
You said:

> Jesus is our ransom from Hellfire. But for Muslims, Jews and Christians are your ransom?

This is an odd misrepresentation. Islam explicitly rejects the idea that someone else can be punished in our place:

> “No bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another.” (Qur’an 6:164)

As for the hadith you may be referencing — regarding people being ransomed on Judgment Day — the context is not substitutionary atonement. It is a description of relative justice on the Day of Judgment. Each person will be judged for their own deeds.

Islam does not teach that Jews or Christians are punished on behalf of Muslims. That is a misunderstanding — or worse, deliberate distortion — of Islamic eschatology.

So, this hadith is Maudu!?

Riyad as-Salihin 432
Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, "On the Day of Resurrection, Allah will deliver to every Muslim, a Jew or a Christian and say: 'This is your ransom from Hell-fire."'

I know, the hadith doesn't say that Christians and Jews will be ransom for Muslims from the fire of hell!

JimRohn:
Conclusion:
You began by accusing Muslims of "rewriting" scripture. But it is clear that:

Your arguments rest on literalism, misinterpretation, or theological projection.

The Qur’an presents concepts like embryology, prophecy, miracles, and divine nature in a metaphorical and theological language, not scientific journals.

Islam’s rejection of the Trinity is not ignorance — but insistence that God is not divisible, incarnated, or slain.

> “He neither begets nor is begotten.” (Qur’an 112:3)

Your belief in Jesus as ransom is your choice, but to Muslims, God does not require blood to forgive. He forgives whom He wills, as a Sovereign, Merciful Lord.

I appreciate your passion for your faith. But truth deserves careful reading, not ridicule. I invite you to engage Islamic texts on their own terms, not through the filter of Christian theology.

> May God guide us both toward truth and understanding.
With respect and sincerity.

Please when you read the bible, how do you read it?
You Muslims have assumed that Allah and his prophet are the worst communicators in the universe. Otherwise, tell me why you must re-interprete anything they say that you feel is problematic to mean something else

NairaLTQ:
Did your prophet say "every son (descendant) of Adam is a sinner?

Is Jesus human?
And, is He a descendant of Adam?

This is the distinction. God came to represent us so that He can legally be our ransom from the consequences of sin which is eternity in Hell Fire.

Only YHWH in Trinity can be Finite and Infinite at the same time
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Weak and Almighty at the same time
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Somewhere and Everywhere at the same time

Admit that you do NOT understand this paradox even when explained simply because it is IMPOSSIBLE for Allah to be like YHWH


Again, from the Lens of Taoheed, the nature of YHWH is IMPOSSIBLE.

Again,
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Finite and Infinite at the same time
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Weak and Almighty at the same time
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Somewhere and Everywhere at the same time

Do you admit that this above is a logical contradiction with the description of the Taoheed?
Is this a logical contradiction with the description of Trinity?



I have dealt with this before.
If it was possible for Allah to come down as a perfect man without violating his almightiness and sovereignty, will he come with his full attributes to us OR he will limit it to almost human-like levels.

Secondly, if the Sovereignty and Almightiness of God is not violated, what is your problem if God chose to experience Pain, Hunger, Thirst, Sadness, Weakness etc. Do you as a Muslim decide for God!?

Like it is unthinkable for a president to jump inside a latrine BUT it is NOT impossible depending on
1. The Reason/Purpose why the president entered the Latrine
2. If the president CHOSE to enter the Latrine by his own volition.

Unfortunately for you, the Bible explains why God has to come like this to us humans Islam doesn't have this concept.


How can God, who is perfect and independent, take on qualities that are by nature imperfect and dependent?
Because, YHWH can do so without violating His Integrity as God.

You find it difficult to comprehend because you as a Muslim doesn't understand the Gravity of Sin.

You think sin is just a mere going against the will and command of God: and forgiveness is easy!

If you care , I will explain why SIN cannot go without punishment!




Islam doesn't know why blood is required in sacrifice even though they claim to be the religion of Abraham. This is a basic flaw in your religion

I laugh in Mandarin!

Thank you for your response.
I appreciate your willingness to continue this discussion, and I take your comments seriously. I will respond point by point to ensure clarity and maintain a sincere, respectful tone.

1. Your Central Claim: A God Who is Finite and Infinite Simultaneously

You repeat that “only YHWH in Trinity can be finite and infinite, weak and almighty, somewhere and everywhere at the same time.” With respect, this is not an explanation — it is an assertion of paradox without resolution.

In logic, a contradiction is not resolved by repetition. The statement "finite and infinite at the same time" is not a mystery; it is a logical impossibility. To be finite is to be limited, and to be infinite is to be unlimited. The two cancel each other out. One cannot be both in the same respect and at the same time.

To use your analogy: if a president jumps into a latrine, we can understand that his dignity is compromised by choice, but he remains a human. But in your analogy, God becomes the latrine — i.e., God becomes that which is limited, dependent, and dying — and yet you claim He remains fully God in essence. This is not a paradox with a hidden reason; it is a contradiction in terms.

In Islamic theology, God does not cease to be God at any point. He does not diminish His perfection, nor assume imperfection. He is always Al-Qayyum (Self-Sustaining) and Al-Ahad (One, indivisible).

2. Legal Representation Requires Logical Coherence

You argue that Jesus became human in order to represent us legally before God. This raises several issues:

Who set this legal condition? If God is sovereign, why does He need to become His own sacrifice to forgive? Is He subject to an external law, or is He the lawgiver?

If God required a sacrifice to forgive, then the forgiveness is no longer grace — it is a transaction.

Furthermore, how is it just to punish the innocent (Jesus) in place of the guilty (humanity)? In Islamic theology, justice means each soul bears its own burden (Qur'an 6:164).

Islam teaches that God can forgive directly without compromising His justice or mercy. The Qur'an never minimizes sin, but it does not exaggerate it into something that makes God incapable of forgiving without blood.

3. You Claim Muslims Do Not Understand the “Gravity of Sin”

This is a theological assumption, not a rebuttal. Islam treats sin as rebellion against the Creator, deserving of consequences — but it also teaches that God is Al-Ghaffar (Oft-Forgiving) and Ar-Rahman (Most Merciful). The gravity of sin is not denied in Islam — but it is not used to limit God's mercy or necessitate His incarnation.

You say blood must be shed — but this is a religious claim, not a universal truth. In the Bible itself, we find verses such as:

> "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." (Hosea 6:6)

The Prophets often emphasized repentance over ritual slaughter. Even if sacrifices were commanded, they were never presented as God's only path to forgiveness — nor did they require the death of God Himself.

4. Jesus’ Humanity Undermines His Divinity

You asked: “Is Jesus human? Is He a descendant of Adam?” If yes — and if all descendants of Adam sin — then how can Jesus be without sin, unless He is not fully human by your own standards?

And if He is fully God, why does He not know the Hour (Mark 13:32)? Why does He pray to the Father with tears (Hebrews 5:7)? Why does He say, “I can do nothing by myself” (John 5:30)? These are not just “roles” — they are signs of dependence.

Dependence is the opposite of divinity.

5. Islam and Abrahamic Sacrifice

You claim Islam does not understand sacrifice, yet the Qur’an clearly teaches that Ibrahim (Abraham) was commanded to sacrifice — not for sin, but as a test of submission. The Qur’an emphasizes that:

> “It is neither their meat nor their blood that reaches Allah, but your piety.” (Qur’an 22:37)

In Islam, the essence of sacrifice is not blood — it is obedience. That is what God values.

Moreover, your claim that Islam is flawed because it does not adopt a blood-based salvation model is, again, circular. It presumes the Christian model is the only valid one and declares others flawed for not copying it — but this is not a proof. It is presupposition.

6. Trinity and the Problem of Category Error

You keep saying, “Only YHWH in Trinity can do this...” But that’s not evidence — it's an exemption from logic. Any contradictory doctrine can claim uniqueness. But the question remains: Is it coherent?

The doctrine of the Trinity violates the principle of identity: God is one, but also three. Jesus is God, but also not God (when he prays to the Father). These are not mysteries — they are contradictions unless you can define the terms without equivocation.

Islam upholds the pure monotheism of all prophets — including Jesus. He was the Messiah, born miraculously, but never claimed to be God. To deify the creation is, from an Islamic perspective, to blur the line between the Necessary Being and the contingent being — a philosophical error and a spiritual danger.

Final Thought

You are welcome to believe in the Trinity, the incarnation, and substitutionary atonement. But please understand: my questions are not rooted in “not understanding YHWH” — they are rooted in examining whether your claims are logically consistent within your own framework.

If your theology requires suspending logic to accept it, then anyone — Muslim or otherwise — has a right to ask whether that is a mystery worth believing in, or a contradiction that should be rejected.

Respectfully,
I await your reply.

NairaLTQ:
Quran 75:37
Had he not been a sperm from semen emitted?

You didn't answer the question
1. According to Allah, who is the "he" in Qur'an 75:37?
2. Is any Human beita sperm?
Quran 75:38
then he became a clot, and then Allah made it into a living body and proportioned its parts,

Tell me, what does a sperm become in a human female womb?

Is it untrue that your prophet says that the sperm will stay for 40 days in the womb?

Please respectful answer the direct questions as you are just giving me the standard islamic narrative.



He found it is NEVER a perception. It is always a REALITY.

I said:
Do you concede that Allah was the one relating the story and not Dhul Qarnyn? (Qur'an 18:83)
Did Allah say that
1. Dhul Qarnyn found the sun setting in some dark murky waters?
2. Dhul Qarnyn found a people near this dark murky water?

I guess, Dhul Qarnyn appeared to find a people there: is that true?
3. Can you show us by Google map: The wall that was constructed to prevent Yājūj and Mājūj from causing further destruction and hardship to people?.

You will note that you cannot answer my direct questions because it is an error by Allah and his prophet Mohammed.


I laugh is Swahili
1. What is the wall made from?
2. Do you think a wall of such a massive size would escape geological findings? For God's sake, the aeromagnetic signature would be so loud it would be seen from the other pole of the earth.

Sir, I am sorry to tell you that it is a myth. An imaginary wall that doesn't exist. But it is in your Qur'an as real.


So, Al-Jalalayn doesn't speak good Arabic.

Your only argument is to feign ignorance of the meaning of the word.



Meaning that Allah did not know that it is a myth and not a real story.
Thus, it cannot be a miracle.

Are Batman or Spiderman or Superman stories miracles?

So sorry!
Mohammed was accused of telling myths of the ancients: his accusers were not wrong after all.



Do Christians say that Allah is a third of three?
The implication of "Kalimatuhu" and "Ruhun minhu" is massive as NOT other person or angel or jinn has these two titles.
It implies that JESUS pre-existing before He was born.

Secondly , Allah says that Christians say that The Messiah is Allah.
Qur'an 5:72
They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers.

If Allah is the Messiah according to Christians, who is the second and third part of the Trinity?

Except that the Almighty Allah doesn't understand exactly the doctrine of Trinity he is condemning.

Please direct answers not preachings!




Then the implication is that Jesus is the Kunfayakun of Allah!

See, how you rope yourself into another quagmire!





So, the only two spirits known in Islam is Jibril AND Jesus (a human being) and you don't think that your theology is wrong and incomplete!?
BTW Qur’an 32:9 is not speaking of Jesus.

Jesus Himself is a Spirit from Allah: isn't it?




So, this hadith is Maudu!?

Riyad as-Salihin 432
Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, "On the Day of Resurrection, Allah will deliver to every Muslim, a Jew or a Christian and say: 'This is your ransom from Hell-fire."'

I know, the hadith doesn't say that Christians and Jews will be ransom for Muslims from the fire of hell!




Please when you read the bible, how do you read it?
You Muslims have assumed that Allah and his prophet are the worst communicators in the universe. Otherwise, tell me why you must re-interprete anything they say that you feel is problematic to mean something else

Thank you for your reply. I will address your objections point-by-point in a direct, logical, and respectful manner — without distortion or mockery — so that truth may be pursued sincerely and not polemically.

1. On Qur’an 75:37 – "He was a sperm from semen emitted"

You asked:
(a) Who is the “he”?
(b) Is any human a sperm?

Answer:
The “he” refers to the human being — in context, mankind’s origin. The Arabic "nutfah min maniyyin yumnā" does not say that a human is only sperm. Rather, it highlights the initial stage — the seminal fluid containing sperm — from which the human begins. It is a reference to the lowly origin of man, meant as a reminder of humility.

Of course, humans are not just sperm, but neither is anyone confused by such a biological summary. The language is not a scientific thesis; it is a condensed reference to a starting point in human development — an accurate expression for its time and audience, and still valid in its spiritual purpose.

2. On Sperm Remaining for 40 Days – Hadith in Sahih Muslim 2644

You asked:
“Is it untrue that your prophet said sperm remains for 40 days?”

Answer:
This is a misreading. The hadith you refer to outlines stages of human embryonic development — 40 days as a nutfah (drop), then 40 as an ‘alaqah (clinging substance), and so on. It does not say sperm remains in the womb for 40 days. Rather, the Prophet ﷺ describes developmental phases.

Even classical Islamic scholars such as Ibn Hajar and Al-Nawawi understood this to refer to successive stages — not one static sperm cell surviving for 40 days.

This is neither a scientific blunder nor unusual — similar metaphorical or developmental language is found in all religious texts.

3. On Dhul Qarnayn and the Sun Setting in a Murky Spring (Qur’an 18:86)

You stated:

> “He found it” is never a perception, always a reality.

Answer:
That is incorrect. The Arabic verb wajada (وَجَدَ) absolutely allows for perception — it can mean “he found,” as in encountered or perceived something in his experience. For example, when someone says “I found the city lively,” it reflects a personal perception, not an objective property.

Qur’an 18:86 clearly says:

> “He found it setting in a muddy spring” — this describes what Dhul Qarnayn saw from his perspective. It is not a cosmological claim about the sun literally entering water. The Qur’an is narrating his journey and what he saw, not what literally happened to the sun.

Just as today we say “the sun sets” — even though scientifically it doesn’t set — the Qur’an uses familiar language without contradicting science.

You then asked:

> Was it Allah narrating?
Did Dhul Qarnayn find the sun setting in murky water?
Were people found there?

Answer:
Yes — Allah is narrating what Dhul Qarnayn experienced. The text says he found the sun setting in a murky spring and found a people there. This is a narrative of his travel, not a declaration of astronomical fact. Confusing observation with physical truth is a hermeneutical error.

4. On the Wall of Gog and Magog (Ya’juj and Ma’juj)

You asked:

> “Where is the wall? What is it made from? Why haven’t we found it via satellite or geological scans?”

Answer:
Firstly, the Qur’an does not say the wall would remain visible or intact until today. It only states that Dhul Qarnayn constructed a barrier using iron and molten copper between two mountains to block destructive tribes. It also says the wall will be broken when Allah wills (Qur’an 18:98).

Just as many ancient structures have been lost (e.g. Nineveh, Troy, Sodom), the absence of the wall today does not falsify its past existence. Our lack of discovery does not equate to non-existence.

You claim aeromagnetic tools would detect it. That assumes:

We know the exact location (we don’t),

That it hasn't eroded, buried, or collapsed,

That such detection methods are infallible.

That’s an unproven assumption, not a refutation.

5. On “Samiri” and the Golden Calf

You mocked the explanation that “Samiri” is not the same as “Samaritan” in post-Exilic terms.

Response:
The Qur’an uses the word “as-Samiri” as a proper name — not a tribal title. The error lies in assuming it must mean a post-exilic Samaritan (from centuries later). That is an anachronistic projection onto the text.

Classical scholars understood "Samiri" in various ways — possibly a deviant from the Israelites, someone practicing magic, or even someone whose name derived from "samar" (speech at night) or other linguistic roots. Qur’anic language is rich, and the tafsir tradition accommodates multiple interpretive layers.

Your comparison to Batman or Spiderman is inappropriate. The Qur’an narrates the event as a moral and spiritual lesson — with historical grounding. It is not myth-making; it is theological teaching.

6. On Jesus as “Word” and “Spirit” of God (Qur’an 4:171)

You claim that Jesus having the titles “Kalimatuhu” and “Ruhun minhu” implies he is divine or pre-existent.

Response:

No. The Qur’an clearly says:

> “Do not say ‘Three’ — Allah is but one God.” (Qur’an 4:171)

“Kalimatuhu” means a word from God — His command “Be” (kun) — as affirmed in Qur’an 3:59:

> “Indeed, the likeness of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam — He created him from dust, then said to him, ‘Be,’ and he was.”

Adam was created by the same Word (command), yet you do not call Adam divine.

As for “Ruhun minhu” — all human souls come from God. Qur’an 32:9 says God breathed His spirit into Adam. Does that make Adam divine? No. It indicates honor — not divinity.

Your attempt to distinguish Jesus from all others based on these titles is flawed. Titles of honor do not equate to ontological divinity. Islamic theology is precise on this point.

7. On the Hadith in Riyad as-Salihin (Hadith 432)

You quoted a hadith claiming Jews and Christians are given as ransom for Muslims. Let’s be clear:

This hadith is interpreted in light of the Qur’an, which says:

> “No bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another.” (Qur’an 6:164)

Islam does not teach substitutionary atonement.

The hadith, as scholars explained (see An-Nawawi, Ibn Hajar), refers to relative justice — meaning that those who rejected truth will face consequences, not that innocent people are punished in place of Muslims.

To use this hadith as if Islam supports the Christian ransom theology is a distortion. Islam strongly rejects that anyone — even Jesus — can bear the sins of others.

Conclusion:

You asked for direct answers. I have given them.

But respectfully, your objections rest largely on:

Misreading of Arabic verbs like “wajada,”

Anachronistic projections onto Qur’anic characters,

Literalist readings of poetic or metaphorical passages,

Disregard for historical loss and archaeology,

Forcing Christian theology onto Islamic terms.

Islam does not need to reinterpret divine language to "correct" it — rather, it reads with both depth and context.

God’s communication is clear. It is your assumptions — about what the text must mean — that are flawed.

> “Say: He is Allah, the One. Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is begotten, and there is none comparable to Him.” (Qur’an 112)

This is Islam’s unambiguous theology. No Trinity, no divine man, no blood sacrifice.

I respect your zeal, but I invite you to approach Islamic texts without theological imposition. If you wish sincere dialogue, let’s seek understanding, not just accusation.

May God guide us both to truth.

QuinQ:
😅Poor guy doesn't even know who first adopted Adventist teachings, misinterpreted the Bible, and came up with your beliefs of today: end times , no-hell, non-divinity of Christ, etc. Who do you think came up with 1914 and Armageddon? Tell us where in the Bible Christ said there was no hell
*Verse you cited has nothing to do with shunnimg.

Jesus returned that year 1914 as a spirit King and began searching for the group that's practicing Christianity the way he established it in the first century but he couldn't find just one {Luke 18:8} that's why he chose the only group called International Bible Students Association who were ready to make adjustments in their beliefs.
So Jesus started restructuring this group until his father adopted the group as His only true worshipers on planet earth then God gave this group a new name in the year 1931:

Jehovah's Witnesses! Isaiah 65:15

So my Catholic friend no human founded Jehovah's Witnesses organization that's why the doctrine did not stop on what any of the human presidents of the group believed in their lifetime improvements continue because Jesus who is the real founder kept directing them to new lights! Proverbs 4:18

Do you know that there was a time when this group used to celebrate Christmas?
Well that's just to tell you that the real founder is not human but a mighty spirit King!

This thread has vindicated me on what i always tell all religionists on this forum:

Only Jehovah's Witnesses have the same line of thought regarding faith in God all others have contradicting doctrines.

What is the secret?

Jesus Christ said:

“Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time? Happy is that slave if his master on coming finds him doing so!  Truly I say to you, he will appoint him over all his belongings" Matthew 24:45-47

Of course Jesus appointed the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses over all obedient mankind that's why you can't find obedient people in any other religion except Jehovah's Witnesses organization.

Worshipers of the true God must accept judgement God's representatives render on certain issues that can cause dispute among God's people that alone is proof that they are believers in God as they patiently wait for God's judgement when He will set all matters straight meanwhile they maintain the peace and orderliness among God's people.

Jesus likened obedient individuals to eagles and the God's representatives to a Body which these wise once will feed on:

So in response they said to him: “Where, Lord?” He said to them: “Where the BODY is, there also the EAGLES will be gathered together" Luke 17:37

Today you can't find any single religion that's uniting people of all races and making them like one family where they have put all disparities behind them and associating as brothers and sisters except Jehovah's Witnesses! Isaiah 2:2-4; Micah 4:1-3

Back in Islam i used to think using the same language to worship is the secret because that's what God promised through one of His prophets {Zephaniah 3:9} but i later discovered that Islam is just another false religion that's blinding people.

How?

Politics and racism can only affect false religions not the true religion when God promised that His true worshipers will speak the same language what that means is they will have understanding among themselves so Satan won't have any chance of making them kill one another! Revelations 6:3-4

MaxInDHouse:
Jesus returned that year 1914 as a spirit King and began searching for the group that's practicing Christianity the way he established it in the first century but he couldn't find just one {Luke 18:8} that's why he chose the only group called International Bible Students Association who were ready to make adjustments in their beliefs.
So Jesus started restructuring this group until his father adopted the group as His only true worshipers on planet earth then God gave this group a new name in the year 1931:

Jehovah's Witnesses! Isaiah 65:15

So my Catholic friend no human founded Jehovah's Witnesses organization that's why the doctrine did not stop on what any of the human presidents of the group believed in their lifetime improvements continue because Jesus who is the real founder kept directing them to new lights! Proverbs 4:18

Do you know that there was a time when this group used to celebrate Christmas?
Well that's just to tell you that the real founder is not human but a mighty spirit King!

😂 At least you gave me a good laugh! The way you wrote it too - very funny!🤣

Please whatever you do, always credit someone for his work. Charles Russell was the one who had the courage to QUESTION teachings in his Presbyterian church when he was only 18. You were asked a simple question: who do you think came up with all the tenets of JW including 1914? Of course they had to be modified over time because they were originally from a semi-illieterate teenager!

QuinQ:
😂 At least you gave me a good laugh! The way you wrote it too - very funny!🤣
Please whatever you do, always credit someone for his work. Charles Russell was the one who had the courage to QUESTION teachings in his Presbyterian church when he was only 18. You were asked a simple question: who do you think came up with all the tenets of JW including 1914? Of course they had to be modified over time because they were originally from a semi-illieterate teenager!

Now you know the truth that it's not one human that founded the world's number one peaceful religion that has gathered people throughout the globe! Isaiah 2:2-4
This is not your Catholic Church where you people hate your fellow worshipers in other countries to the point of killing and bombing your fellow believers.

Go to Russia and Ukraine you will see how Catholics are killing Catholics at the order of just two men yet if you ask them:
"Who Is your God?"
They will say:
"Jesus is LORD" Matthew 7:21-23
Whereas Jesus commanded his own true disciples to have love among themselves just as he loved them! John 13:34-35

Of course you people worship Satan but you don't know {John 4:22} that's why you always claim you're worshiping Jesus yet only honor Jesus with your lips while your hearts are far away from him! Matthew 15:8-9

JimRohn:
You suggest Jesus had to carry the "flaws of human nature" to be the perfect sacrifice. But here lies the theological paradox: If these limitations are flaws, how can the flawless God fully embody them without contradiction? And if they are not flaws, why are they treated as evidence of Jesus' humanity and not His divinity?

I am not suggesting he had to carry these attributes..that is what the Bible explains..... drawing premise from the fact that through Adam, sin became the nature of all men......and subsequently Jesus, God performs his very act of Justice and reconciliation.

JimRohn:
2. The Claim of God Becoming Human Is Not Simple Mystery — It Is a Contradiction If Taken Literally
Muslims do not deny God's ability

this is where u expose urself and also contradict yourself.....
First u admit God is not limited and u don't doubt the ability of God...then you turn to say that it is contradictory for him to extend his nature of sinless and perfect holiness into the existence of flesh and blood in order to reconcile man to himself through sacrifice.....

JimRohn:
3. God’s Emotions vs. Human Limitations
God’s anger or jealousy are not like ours. They do not arise from ignorance, loss of control, or imperfection. They are expressions of His justice and authority, not flaws or deficiencies.

lol...here u go again claiming superiority and exposing that all you came here to do is say your Islamic version of God is better...
...first u admit that God has all these nature of jealousy and anger, but then u say it's not like the anger, jealousy nature of men......fine.

....but when Christians say Jesus died and resurrected...why don't you admit this attribute similar to that of men isnt like the death of ordinary men ....but for Justice and reconciliation of man..??
See..you have not read 5% of the bible...if u have ..u will not bring in your version of God u call Allah into this argument.... I keep telling you, they are not the same entity.....

JimRohn:
4. Respecting the Purpose of Jesus’ Mission Does Not Remove the Theological Tension

You say Jesus came to bear human flaws to become a sacrifice. Even if I grant this as your belief, it does not resolve the theological dilemma. The central issue is: [b]How can God, who is perfect and independent, take on qualities that are by nature imperfect and dependent?

u contradict yourself over and again....u claim God can do anything...and still limit him to wateva standard you can dig up......your knowledge on theology is weak....all u have is what your Islamic scholars give to you to m0ck christian faith....

JimRohn:
And again, I am not asking this from an Islamic framework. I’m asking whether this belief is consistent within the Christian conception of God's nature as eternal, unchanging, and omniscient.

u argue with limited knowledge and yes..your argument is all based on Islamic framework.....because all ur points are mentioned in comparison to Islam version of God.....
..all you are doing is cherry picking scriptures in the bible to mock and invalidate a faith you don't believe in...

U don't even understand the context of what God means when he says he changeth not..
How is God's action of reconciliation and justice means that he has change because he the mean by which he carried out his act doesn't fit into your Allah version of God?

JimRohn:
5. Honest Dialogue Requires Open Inquiry

Finally, I must respectfully note that attributing my questions to a “Muslim background” as if that disqualifies critical thinking undermines interfaith dialogue.

.in all your points u ddnt fail to compare Jesus attributes to your Allah version of God.....if u can bring where it is written in the bible that God said I cannot exist as an extension of flesh to do my will....then we can have a new dialogue..
.as for all ur claims here...u are the one putting God in a box of limitations based on your Islamic frame work.....there is nothing contradictory about the divinity of Jesus as it relates to his walk on the earth

MaxInDHouse:
Now you know the truth that it's not one human that founded the world's number one peaceful religion that has gathered people throughout the globe! Isaiah 2:2-4
This is not your Catholic Church where you people hate your fellow worshipers in other countries to the point of killing and bombing your fellow believers.

Go to Russia and Ukraine you will see how Catholics are killing Catholics at the order of just two men yet if you ask them:
"Who Is your God?"
They will say:
"Jesus is LORD" Matthew 7:21-23
Whereas Jesus commanded his own true disciples to have love among themselves just as he loved them! John 13:34-35

Of course you people worship Satan but you don't know {John 4:22} that's why you always claim you're worshiping Jesus yet only honor Jesus with your lips while your hearts are far away from him! Matthew 15:8-9

😅Funny guy, I just said it's ONE 18-year-old that had the COURAGE to question the teachings of his organization. Courage you'll never have because you'll never be able to question teachings of JW -even when you know they're obviously false.
So please give credit where credit is due. ALL the main tenets of JW that you cling to today were formulated by him including 19141!

How many times do I have to tell you I'm NOT a Catholic?! But I honestly would be a catholic quicker than I'd be a JW because I don't need anybody trying to culticize or brainwash me. I wish you the very best in it as It has it's good aspects like other cults. But for me, freedom of thought and expression trumps everything else

QuinQ:
😅Funny guy, I just said it's ONE 18-year-old that had the COURAGE to question the teachings of his organization. Courage you'll never have because you'll never be able to question teachings of JW -even when you know they're obviously false.
So please give credit where credit is due. ALL the main tenets of JW that you cling to today were formulated by him including 19141!

How many times do I have to tell you I'm NOT a Catholic?! But I honestly would be a catholic quicker than I'd be a JW because I don't need anybody trying to culticize or brainwash me. I wish you the very best in it as It has it's good aspects like other cults. But for me, freedom of thought and expression trumps everything else

Guy stop lying you said i should join your church: CATHOLIC!

MaxInDHouse:
Guy stop lying you said i should join your church: CATHOLIC!

Please show where I said that. Even if I were a liar, I won't be lying with things of Christ. Unless of course you consider the original church Catholic, and St. Peter the first "pope", then we're all Catholics!😃
See below

I will likely do this response in two parts

JimRohn:
Thank you for your response.
I appreciate your willingness to continue this discussion, and I take your comments seriously. I will respond point by point to ensure clarity and maintain a sincere, respectful tone.

1. Your Central Claim: A God Who is Finite and Infinite Simultaneously

You repeat that “only YHWH in Trinity can be finite and infinite, weak and almighty, somewhere and everywhere at the same time.” With respect, this is not an explanation — it is an assertion of paradox without resolution.

Because YHWH is Unlike ANYTHING or ANYONE in Creation.

Thus , His nature is Paradox without resolution.

Tell me, how it is not a paradox that everything has a beginning YET God does NOT have a beginning.
How is it NOT a paradox that God spoke everything into being. Does that even make sense that the visible things came from the spoken word of God?

Your argument holds no water.

JimRohn:
In logic, a contradiction is not resolved by repetition. The statement "finite and infinite at the same time" is not a mystery; it is a logical impossibility. To be finite is to be limited, and to be infinite is to be unlimited. The two cancel each other out. One cannot be both in the same respect and at the same time.

If the Explanation of the Trinity is true (even if you disagree) , that
1. YHWH as a Spirit is Everywhere in Space and Time (the heavens and the earth is within Him)
2. YHWH as the Father makes Himself visible and Presides over the Heavens and the Earth on His Throne surrounded by His Angels
3. YHWH as the Word (Kunfayakun) that carries the Presence of God ANYWHERE in space and Time

Can such a Being be FINITE and INFINITE at the same time?

JimRohn:
To use your analogy: if a president jumps into a latrine, we can understand that his dignity is compromised by choice, but he remains a human. But in your analogy, God becomes the latrine — i.e., God becomes that which is limited, dependent, and dying — and yet you claim He remains fully God in essence. This is not a paradox with a hidden reason; it is a contradiction in terms.

In Islamic theology, God does not cease to be God at any point. He does not diminish His perfection, nor assume imperfection. He is always Al-Qayyum (Self-Sustaining) and Al-Ahad (One, indivisible).

This is why Allah cannot be Finite and Infinite at the same time.
This is why Allah cannot be Somewhere and Everywhere at the same time.

It is a comprehension problem on your part because you want to box God into the mold of created things that cannot be one and two at the same time

JimRohn:
2. Legal Representation Requires Logical Coherence
You argue that Jesus became human in order to represent us legally before God. This raises several issues:

Who set this legal condition? If God is sovereign, why does He need to become His own sacrifice to forgive? Is He subject to an external law, or is He the lawgiver?

Who set the Legal condition?
It was God Himself because the Law of Sin against God requires DEATH as payment.

Rom 6:23:
"For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

JimRohn:
If God required a sacrifice to forgive, then the forgiveness is no longer grace — it is a transaction.

Furthermore, how is it just to punish the innocent (Jesus) in place of the guilty (humanity)? In Islamic theology, justice means each soul bears its own burden (Qur'an 6:164).

Islam teaches that God can forgive directly without compromising His justice or mercy. The Qur'an never minimizes sin, but it does not exaggerate it into something that makes God incapable of forgiving without blood.

The reason Forgiveness is Grace is because
1. God is the one paying for your sin and not yourself
John 1:29:
"The next day John sees Jesus coming to him, and said, Behold the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world."
2. It is impossible for any man to pay for the consequence of his sin against God.

Like I said:
You don't understand the gravity of Sin in Islam. You think that by worship and good works your sins can be overlooked by Allah.

JimRohn:
3. You Claim Muslims Do Not Understand the “Gravity of Sin”

This is a theological assumption, not a rebuttal. Islam treats sin as rebellion against the Creator, deserving of consequences — but it also teaches that God is Al-Ghaffar (Oft-Forgiving) and Ar-Rahman (Most Merciful). The gravity of sin is not denied in Islam — but it is not used to limit God's mercy or necessitate His incarnation.

You say blood must be shed — but this is a religious claim, not a universal truth. In the Bible itself, we find verses such as:

> "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." (Hosea 6:6)

The Prophets often emphasized repentance over ritual slaughter. Even if sacrifices were commanded, they were never presented as God's only path to forgiveness — nor did they require the death of God Himself.

Hosea 6:6 is not saying that God rejects sacrifice. Prophet Hosea tell the Jews that God wants them to repent from their sins and do righteous deeds rather than covering their wickedness with sacrifices.

Even as Christians, the same law applies:
Rom 6:1-2:
"What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?"
You cannot claim that God has paid the price for the penalty for your sin and then go on committing more sins.

Like I said: You Muslims do NOT understand that gravity of Sin.

Let me explain in a way you can understand:
Sin is not just going against God's will and command.

1. Sin is a VIOLATION of the Integrity of God.
2. The integrity of God is that which makes God, God!
3. What makes God who He is is the fact that His Will is SOVEREIGN and His Command cannot go without being EXECUTED.
4. Sin is thus a violation of the "Kunfayakun" of God. God says Don't...but you do! God says be...but you say no! You go against God's will. This is sin.
5. God created some living beings and gave them the power of Volition or Free Will. In the Bible, these are Angels and Humans.
6. Free will or Volition is the power Granted by God to His creation to Say NO to Him and Resist His Will and command.
7. However, for the Kunfayakun or the Integrity of God not to be violated, God made the Law of Sin.
8. The law of sin is that ANYONE who violated the Integrity of God must DIE!
9. Death to God is not a form of Annihilation BUT a DISCONNECTION from Him eternally.
10. The place of Eternal disconnection from God is God's Refuse Dump called Hell Fire.


My Question :.
If God gave a command and a Human being violated the command such that God's command failed,
1. How can such a human being redeem himself?
2. If the human being repented and ask for forgiveness, does his actions remove the fact that God gave a command that failed because of him?
3. If God say, "I forgive you" to the sinner, does it erase the fact that God's command failed on his account?

This above is the reason for sacrifice for sin. The sin is punished at all cost. The sacrifice take upon itself the punishment of the guilty.

Do you agree that
Forgiveness is NEVER Free. Someone always pays the price and usually, it is the one who does the forgiveness!?

QuinQ:
Please show where I said that. Even if I were a liar, I won't be lying with things of Christ. Unless of course you consider the original church Catholic, and St. Peter the first "pope", then we're all Catholics!😃 See below

Highlighted is enough!

JimRohn:
4. Jesus’ Humanity Undermines His Divinity
You asked: “Is Jesus human? Is He a descendant of Adam?” If yes — and if all descendants of Adam sin — then how can Jesus be without sin, unless He is not fully human by your own standards?

And if He is fully God, why does He not know the Hour (Mark 13:32)? Why does He pray to the Father with tears (Hebrews 5:7)? Why does He say, “I can do nothing by myself” (John 5:30)? These are not just “roles” — they are signs of dependence.

Dependence is the opposite of divinity.

1. Exactly!
By the Geneology of Adam and Eve, Jesus is NOT human, thus cannot carry the nature of sin from Adam
But Jesus was Born by a Mother, thus, He is Human like us.

Thus, Jesus represents us as Humans yet not being human.

Heb 4:15:
"For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."
Jesus as our High Priest was one who partook in everything with respect to our weaknesses as humans. He was tempted as a man like we are yet He did not commit sin.

From the point of view of the Taoheed, I can understand your frustration.
Unfortunately, from the point of view of the Trinity, whether you like it or not, it is a reality that God can be Unlimited and Limited without contradicting His Almightiness!

This is impossible with the Taoheed!
Imagine if Allah should come down from his throne above the seven heavens, his throne would be empty. If Allah makes the mistake of being limited (human), an Angel can just overthrow him.

JimRohn:
4. Jesus’ Humanity Undermines His Divinity
You asked: “Is Jesus human? Is He a descendant of Adam?” If yes — and if all descendants of Adam sin — then how can Jesus be without sin, unless He is not fully human by your own standards?

And if He is fully God, why does He not know the Hour (Mark 13:32)? Why does He pray to the Father with tears (Hebrews 5:7)? Why does He say, “I can do nothing by myself” (John 5:30)? These are not just “roles” — they are signs of dependence.
Dependence is the opposite of divinity.

Already answered as you are repeating yourself

JimRohn:
5. Islam and Abrahamic Sacrifice
You claim Islam does not understand sacrifice, yet the Qur’an clearly teaches that Ibrahim (Abraham) was commanded to sacrifice — not for sin, but as a test of submission. The Qur’an emphasizes that:

> “It is neither their meat nor their blood that reaches Allah, but your piety.” (Qur’an 22:37)

In Islam, the essence of sacrifice is not blood — it is obedience. That is what God values.

Moreover, your claim that Islam is flawed because it does not adopt a blood-based salvation model is, again, circular. It presumes the Christian model is the only valid one and declares others flawed for not copying it — but this is not a proof. It is presupposition.

Unfortunately, Islam doesn't know that there are other kinds of sacrifices ordained by God apart from SIN offering. This is your problem as not all sacrifices are for sin.

Even the sacrifice of Abraham, who provided the Ram: was it Abraham?
Who was Sacrificed: you Muslims are lost?

You claim that Islam is the Religion of Abraham, Moses , David and co, yet, you do not understand the laws that guide sacrifice and the purpose of sacrifice.
Why did God ordain several kinds of sacrifices for the children of Israel?

Why do you Muslims sacrifice (I did not say commemorate) Rams every Eid al-Adha?

You have copied a lot you don't understand sir!

JimRohn:
6. Trinity and the Problem of Category Error
You keep saying, “Only YHWH in Trinity can do this...” But that’s not evidence — it's an exemption from logic. Any contradictory doctrine can claim uniqueness. But the question remains: Is it coherent?

Can Allah do what YHWH can do?
Can Allah be somewhere and everywhere at the same time?
Can Allah be infinitely powerful and limited at the same time?

Do you know anyone else in the UNIVERSE that can do these things?

Unless you tell me someone else can you what I claimed Only YHWH in Trinity can do, then I stand on my ground!

JimRohn:
The doctrine of the Trinity violates the principle of identity: God is one, but also three. Jesus is God, but also not God (when he prays to the Father). These are not mysteries — they are contradictions unless you can define the terms without equivocation.

Islam upholds the pure monotheism of all prophets — including Jesus. He was the Messiah, born miraculously, but never claimed to be God. To deify the creation is, from an Islamic perspective, to blur the line between the Necessary Being and the contingent being — a philosophical error and a spiritual danger.

Final Thought

You are welcome to believe in the Trinity, the incarnation, and substitutionary atonement. But please understand: my questions are not rooted in “not understanding YHWH” — they are rooted in examining whether your claims are logically consistent within your own framework.

If your theology requires suspending logic to accept it, then anyone — Muslim or otherwise — has a right to ask whether that is a mystery worth believing in, or a contradiction that should be rejected.

Respectfully,
I await your reply.

The Trinity establishes that there is NOTHING in existence that is like YHWH.
You want a God that fits into the mold of the oneness of Objects in the world:
On this your problem of comprehension lies.

MaxInDHouse:
Highlighted is enough!

Highlighted what? What are you talking about??
Why would anyone lie about his Church, even if paid to do so - talkless on a meaningless faceless forum!
I am NOT Catholic! Get that into your skull

QuinQ:
Highlighted what? What are you talking about??
Why would anyone lie about his Church, even if paid to do so - talkless on a meaningless faceless forum!
I am NOT Catholic! Get that into your skull

Stop lying you are a Catholic!

MaxIntheHouse2:
Stop lying you are a Catholic!

You the one lying - you're NOT JW!
Fake JW!😆

QuinQ:
You the one lying - you're NOT JW!
Fake JW!😆

So why calling me JW all these while nah?

MaxIntheHouse2:
So why calling me JW all these while nah?

Just to homour you. Now you know, I was not deceived for one second😅

QuinQ:
Just to homour you. Now you know, I was not deceived for one second😅

Chai, see shamelessness!

I will do this in two parts

JimRohn:
Thank you for your reply. I will address your objections point-by-point in a direct, logical, and respectful manner — without distortion or mockery — so that truth may be pursued sincerely and not polemically.

1. On Qur’an 75:37 – "He was a sperm from semen emitted"

You asked:
(a) Who is the “he”?
(b) Is any human a sperm?

Answer:
The “he” refers to the human being — in context, mankind’s origin. The Arabic "nutfah min maniyyin yumnā" does not say that a human is only sperm. Rather, it highlights the initial stage — the seminal fluid containing sperm — from which the human begins. It is a reference to the lowly origin of man, meant as a reminder of humility.

Of course, humans are not just sperm, but neither is anyone confused by such a biological summary. The language is not a scientific thesis; it is a condensed reference to a starting point in human development — an accurate expression for its time and audience, and still valid in its spiritual purpose.

Is it correct that the sperm became human or the human was a sperm?

No!
This was an error of the ancients who believed that the man planted his seed (sperm) like yam into the soil.

The Almighty Allah should have corrected this instead of agreeing with them.

JimRohn:
2. On Sperm Remaining for 40 Days – Hadith in Sahih Muslim 2644

You asked:
“Is it untrue that your prophet said sperm remains for 40 days?”

Answer:
This is a misreading. The hadith you refer to outlines stages of human embryonic development — 40 days as a nutfah (drop), then 40 as an ‘alaqah (clinging substance), and so on. It does not say sperm remains in the womb for 40 days. Rather, the Prophet ﷺ describes developmental phases.

Even classical Islamic scholars such as Ibn Hajar and Al-Nawawi understood this to refer to successive stages — not one static sperm cell surviving for 40 days.

This is neither a scientific blunder nor unusual — similar metaphorical or developmental language is found in all religious texts.

Tell me that your prophet is a bad communicator that needs help for people to comprehend what he means.

Sahih Muslim 2644
Hudhaifa b. Usaid reported directly from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) that he said:
When the drop of (semen) remains in the womb for forty or forty five nights, the angel comes and says: My Lord, will he be good or evil? And both these things would be written. Then the angel says: My Lord, would he be male or female? And both these things are written. And his deeds and actions, his death, his livelihood; these are also recorded. Then his document of destiny is rolled and there is no addition to nor subtraction from it.

I guess my level of comprehension is not like that of Muslims.

JimRohn:
3. On Dhul Qarnayn and the Sun Setting in a Murky Spring (Qur’an 18:86)
You stated:
> “He found it” is never a perception, always a reality.
Answer:
That is incorrect. The Arabic verb wajada (وَجَدَ) absolutely allows for perception — it can mean “he found,” as in encountered or perceived something in his experience. For example, when someone says “I found the city lively,” it reflects a personal perception, not an objective property.
Qur’an 18:86 clearly says:
> “He found it setting in a muddy spring” — this describes what Dhul Qarnayn saw from his perspective. It is not a cosmological claim about the sun literally entering water. The Qur’an is narrating his journey and what he saw, not what literally happened to the sun.

Just as today we say “the sun sets” — even though scientifically it doesn’t set — the Qur’an uses familiar language without contradicting science.

You then asked:

> Was it Allah narrating?
Did Dhul Qarnayn find the sun setting in murky water?
Were people found there?

Answer:
Yes — Allah is narrating what Dhul Qarnayn experienced. The text says he found the sun setting in a murky spring and found a people there. This is a narrative of his travel, not a declaration of astronomical fact. Confusing observation with physical truth is a hermeneutical error.

1. If he Dhul Qarnyn did NOT find the sun setting in a pool of murky waters, how can there be people near this same place where he appeared to find the sun?
2. I guess a Sea and a Pool mean different things in Arabic. Tell me how it is possible that Dhul Qarnyn appeared to see in a pool the sun. Honestly, I don't understand.

Trust me, that I've been to the seas and I've been near large lakes, I have never appeared to see the sun in any. Was this another Islamic miracle?
3. Even though Dhul Qarnyn wasn't beside the sea. Let's assume that it was the sea. The sun may set in the horizon of the sea BUT it is so far away that there could not be a people near this horizon.

You can see that all your excuses are frivolous conjectures

JimRohn:
4. On the Wall of Gog and Magog (Ya’juj and Ma’juj)
You asked:
> “Where is the wall? What is it made from? Why haven’t we found it via satellite or geological scans?”

Answer:
Firstly, the Qur’an does not say the wall would remain visible or intact until today. It only states that Dhul Qarnayn constructed a barrier using iron and molten copper between two mountains to block destructive tribes. It also says the wall will be broken when Allah wills (Qur’an 18:98).

Just as many ancient structures have been lost (e.g. Nineveh, Troy, Sodom), the absence of the wall today does not falsify its past existence. Our lack of discovery does not equate to non-existence.

You claim aeromagnetic tools would detect it. That assumes:

We know the exact location (we don’t),

That it hasn't eroded, buried, or collapsed,

That such detection methods are infallible.

That’s an unproven assumption, not a refutation.

I guess you do not have an inkling of what the aeromagnetic map is. Virtually everywhere in the world has been covered by aeroplanes carrying magnetic sensors. This is how iron deposits are discovered all over the world.

A fence/wall of that magnitude made of iron and copper is IMPOSSIBLE to miss my dear.

JimRohn:
5. On “Samiri” and the Golden Calf

You mocked the explanation that “Samiri” is not the same as “Samaritan” in post-Exilic terms.

Response:
The Qur’an uses the word “as-Samiri” as a proper name — not a tribal title. The error lies in assuming it must mean a post-exilic Samaritan (from centuries later). That is an anachronistic projection onto the text.

Classical scholars understood "Samiri" in various ways — possibly a deviant from the Israelites, someone practicing magic, or even someone whose name derived from "samar" (speech at night) or other linguistic roots. Qur’anic language is rich, and the tafsir tradition accommodates multiple interpretive layers.

Your comparison to Batman or Spiderman is inappropriate. The Qur’an narrates the event as a moral and spiritual lesson — with historical grounding. It is not myth-making; it is theological teaching.

Sorry please!
Itbis a fictional story, unfortunately Allah thought it was real.

Let me burst your bubbles:
If it was a fictional story that Allah was telling in
Qur'an 18:11-18
1. Verse 11, Allah claimed that he was the one who caused the people to sleep for a number of years!
2. Verse 12, Allah claimed he woke them up by himself
3. Verse 14, Allah claimed he made their mind strong
4. Verse 18, Allah described how he turned them to the right and to the left including their dog.
5. Verse 22, Allah says he alone knows their number

See how the cookies crumble:
Let me tell you a true story.
I was with Batman yesterday, he came to my house and I served him pounded yam. He eat just the bush meat with Ice-cream. We even played Chess after the Lunch.

Do you believe me?