₦airaland Forum

Reason for the Chapter
Surah Al-Fil (The Elephant), the 105th chapter of the Quran, was revealed in Mecca and references a famous historical event known as the "Year of the Elephant," which is the year Prophet Muhammad was born around 570 AD.

The chapter narrates how Allah protected the Kaaba—the sacred house in Mecca—from an invading army led by Abraha, the Abyssinian governor of Yemen. Abraha had a large army that included elephants, and he sought to destroy the Kaaba to divert the pilgrimage to his own territory.

However, before the army could destroy the Kaaba, Allah intervened by sending flocks of birds (referred to as "Ababil" that pelted the army with stones made of hard clay (referred to as "sijjil". This divine intervention destroyed Abraha's forces, making them like "straw eaten up," thus saving the Kaaba from destruction.

On the surface, this looks like one of the other tales of the ancients common in the Qur'an except one looks closer.


Problems:
1. Forty years before Mohammed, Allah was the chief DEITY of the Quraysh tribe to which Mohammed belonged
2. Forty years before Mohammed, Mohammed's father Abdullah was a servant of Allah
3. The event in Qur'an 105 took place 40 years BEFORE Mohammed became a prophet
4. Forty years before Mohammed, The Allah with three daughters named Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat was the chief DEITY of the Quarysh tribe and thus was the one in operation.
5. This Allah's objective was to prevent the destruction of the Ka'aba containing 360 IDOLS Among which was, the principal one called Hubal, the chief deity of Mecca
6. This story was well known by the Quarysh clan and the whole of Mecca as the exploit of Allah.


Question:
1. Is ANYTHING untrue in the Above writeup?
2. What is the evidence that the Allah of contemporary Muslims is different from the Allah of the pre-Islamic Arabs?
3. Why would the Allah of the contemporary Muslims protect 360 idols kept in the Ka'aba?
4. Is this story even remotely TRUE?
Why? Abraha, the Abyssinian was not a prophet nor a magician, can you explain HOW he succeeded in Bringing an Army of Elephants into the Arabian Desert? (Elephants cannot survive in deserts as they need lots of water for drinking and cooling themselves).
5. Can you explain why Allah who did NOT give Mohammed any miracles honoured the Meccan Polytheists with such miraculous deliverance?




Cc: All Muslims
Antichristian
Honesttalk21
Gaskiyamagana
Lukuluku69 ,
mhmsadyq
AbuTwins
Explore2xmore

Why are Nairaland Muslims afraid of the Truth enough to EXPUNGE this INFORMATION from Nairaland.

What are Muslims not allowed to SEE and KNOW?

Why must a religion be sustained by FALSEHOOD?

Only Islamic moderators on Nairaland can explain this

TenQ:
Reason for the Chapter
Surah Al-Fil (The Elephant), the 105th chapter of the Quran, was revealed in Mecca and references a famous historical event known as the "Year of the Elephant," which is the year Prophet Muhammad was born around 570 AD.

The chapter narrates how Allah protected the Kaaba—the sacred house in Mecca—from an invading army led by Abraha, the Abyssinian governor of Yemen. Abraha had a large army that included elephants, and he sought to destroy the Kaaba to divert the pilgrimage to his own territory.

However, before the army could destroy the Kaaba, Allah intervened by sending flocks of birds (referred to as "Ababil" that pelted the army with stones made of hard clay (referred to as "sijjil". This divine intervention destroyed Abraha's forces, making them like "straw eaten up," thus saving the Kaaba from destruction.

On the surface, this looks like one of the other tales of the ancients common in the Qur'an except one looks closer.


Problems:
1. Forty years before Mohammed, Allah was the chief DEITY of the Quraysh tribe to which Mohammed belonged
2. Forty years before Mohammed, Mohammed's father Abdullah was a servant of Allah
3. The event in Qur'an 105 took place 40 years BEFORE Mohammed became a prophet
4. Forty years before Mohammed, The Allah with three daughters named Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat was the chief DEITY of the Quarysh tribe and thus was the one in operation.
5. This Allah's objective was to prevent the destruction of the Ka'aba containing 360 IDOLS Among which was, the principal one called Hubal, the chief deity of Mecca
6. This story was well known by the Quarysh clan and the whole of Mecca as the exploit of Allah.


Question:
1. Is ANYTHING untrue in the Above writeup?
2. What is the evidence that the Allah of contemporary Muslims is different from the Allah of the pre-Islamic Arabs?
3. Why would the Allah of the contemporary Muslims protect 360 idols kept in the Ka'aba?
4. Is this story even remotely TRUE?
Why? Abraha, the Abyssinian was not a prophet nor a magician, can you explain HOW he succeeded in Bringing an Army of Elephants into the Arabian Desert? (Elephants cannot survive in deserts as they need lots of water for drinking and cooling themselves).
5. Can you explain why Allah who did NOT give Mohammed any miracles honoured the Meccan Polytheists with such miraculous deliverance?




Cc: All Muslims
Antichristian
Honesttalk21
Gaskiyamagana
Lukuluku69 ,
mhmsadyq
AbuTwins
Explore2xmore

What can we see here?
Allah, the God of the pre-Islamic Arabs is the same God of Mohammed and the Muslims.

Otherwise, explain why the acts of the Allah with THREE Daughters before Mohammed is the same Allah dictating Qur'an 105?


Question:
1. Is ANYTHING untrue in the Above writeup?
2. What is the evidence that the Allah of contemporary Muslims is different from the Allah of the pre-Islamic Arabs?
3. Why would the Allah of the contemporary Muslims protect 360 idols kept in the Ka'aba?
4. Is this story even remotely TRUE?
Why? Abraha, the Abyssinian was not a prophet nor a magician, can you explain HOW he succeeded in Bringing an Army of Elephants into the Arabian Desert? (Elephants cannot survive in deserts as they need lots of water for drinking and cooling themselves).
5. Can you explain why Allah who did NOT give Mohammed any miracles honoured the Meccan Polytheists with such miraculous deliverance?

TenQ:
Why are Nairaland Muslims afraid of the Truth enough to EXPUNGE this INFORMATION from Nairaland.

What are Muslims not allowed to SEE and KNOW?

Why must a religion be sustained by FALSEHOOD?

Only Islamic moderators on Nairaland can explain this

I have verified this original post several times and not one Nairaland rules was broken and NEITHER is the language offensive either to Islam, Mohammed, Allah or Muslims.

TenQ:
I have verified this original post several times and not one Nairaland rules was broken and NEITHER is the language offensive either to Islam, Mohammed, Allah or Muslims.

Have you considered that "Allah" simply means "God" in Arabic, and not name of any particular god

DoctorStanley:
Have you considered that "Allah" simply means "God" in Arabic, and not name of any particular god

For the Muslims, Allah is the principal name of their Deity.

Allah also mean DEITY or God in Arabic.

However, God is a Title and not a name. God is like the title Daddy or President or Chairman. The Question is which God are we talking about?

Is the name of the God YHWH ?
Is the name of the God Allah?

TenQ:
For the Muslims, Allah is the principal name of their Deity.

Allah also mean DEITY or God in Arabic.

However, God is a Title and not a name. God is like the title Daddy or President or Chairman. The Question is which God are we talking about?

Is the name of the God YHWH ?
Is the name of the God Allah?

YHWH is of course a proper name. Allah is NOT. It simply means God. The twist Muhammad put on it is that there is no other God but God.

honesttalk21:
Your write-up has a serious flaw:

Allah was never an idol of Quraysh. Historians and even the Qur’an (29:61, 31:25) show the Quraysh already admitted Allah was the Supreme Creator their error was adding idols like Hubal, al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat as partners. Islam came to destroy those false gods and restore pure monotheism.

So, you concur that the God of Mohammed's father Abdullah is the same God of Mohammed.

honesttalk21:
The “daughters of Allah” claim proves the opposite of your argument. The Qur’an condemns this (53:19–23), showing clearly that Allah ≠ those idols. Allah was never depicted or worshipped as a statue unlike Hubal, the Ka‘ba’s chief idol.

You seem not to get the point.
The claim of Allah having daughters was before Mohammed. This Allah was the one that protected the Ka'aba with it's 360 idols from destruction.

honesttalk21:
The Year of the Elephant (Surah al-Fil) was a known historical event, not a pagan myth. The Qur’an uses it as proof that the same Allah who protected His House then would aid His Messenger now.

I never said it was a pagan myth. If the story was true, the problem is why Allah was protecting the 360 idols in the Ka'aba.
However, the story is most likely not true because it is impossible to match an army of elephants through the desert except by miracle

honesttalk21:
Name ≠ concept. Arabs used the name “Allah” before Islam, just like Christians say “God” though the same word once described Zeus or Odin. The name remained, but Islam purified the meaning. Allah is the God of Abraham, not the corrupted version of Quraysh.

Note that according to you Muslims Allah is a NAME and not a Title or Description of God. Unlike the word God or Sky Owner or Lord of the Heavens which are descriptions of the Creator.

Do you have evidence of any of the Prophet calling the name of their God as Allah?

honesttalk21:
If “Allah” was just a pagan idol, explain why Arabic-speaking Christians before and after Islam have always called the God of the Bible “Allah.” Were they worshipping an idol too?

What is the NAME of the Allah of the Arab Christians?

honesttalk21:
You now divert to other questions haven seen your earlier games of questions defeated. It all appears to be play for you.

Play!?
No sir!
The problem is that you wish Islam is so true that you are willing to manufacture evidence to justify then indefensible

DoctorStanley:
YHWH is of course a proper name. Allah is NOT. It simply means God. The twist Muhammad put on it is that there is no other God but God.

So, we still then need to ask Muslims the Question

What is the proper NAME of their Allah?


It is like asking a child the question
"What if the name of your father?"
And then child says:
The name of my father is DADDY!

TenQ:
So, we still then need to ask Muslims the Question

What is the proper NAME of their Allah?


It is like asking a child the question
"What if the name of your father?"
And then child says:
The name of my father is DADDY!

You can also only call your dad daddy without asking his name. Which is what Muslims do. Moses, on the other hand, asked YHWH his name

TenQ:
What can we see here?
Allah, the God of the pre-Islamic Arabs is the same God of Mohammed and the Muslims.

Otherwise, explain why the acts of the Allah with THREE Daughters before Mohammed is the same Allah dictating Qur'an 105?


Question:
1. Is ANYTHING untrue in the Above writeup?
2. What is the evidence that the Allah of contemporary Muslims is different from the Allah of the pre-Islamic Arabs?
3. Why would the Allah of the contemporary Muslims protect 360 idols kept in the Ka'aba?
4. Is this story even remotely TRUE?
Why? Abraha, the Abyssinian was not a prophet nor a magician, can you explain HOW he succeeded in Bringing an Army of Elephants into the Arabian Desert? (Elephants cannot survive in deserts as they need lots of water for drinking and cooling themselves).
5. Can you explain why Allah who did NOT give Mohammed any miracles honoured the Meccan Polytheists with such miraculous deliverance?

Satanic verses revealed to momo which he later alluded to in one of the hadiths saying he has fabricated what allah has not revealed.

DoctorStanley:
You can also only call your him daddy without asking his name. Which is what Muslims do. Moses, on the other hand, asked YHWH his name

So, the question to ask Muslims is
Is ANY of the 99 the Names of Allah YHWH?


If not, how can they say that the God of Moses, Abraham and Jacob is ALSO their God?

They👀 don't want you to post for the truth is indeed bitter.

Coder2Client:
Satanic verses revealed to momo which he later alluded to in one of the hadiths saying he has fabricated what allah has not revealed.

Wicked mods will not allow me to post.

What are they hiding in Islam?

Is this story even remotely TRUE?
Why?
Abraha, the Abyssinian was not a prophet nor a magician, can you explain HOW he succeeded in Bringing an Army of Elephants into the Arabian Desert?




Note:
Elephants cannot survive in deserts as they need lots of water for drinking and cooling themselves

TenQ:
Is this story even remotely TRUE?
Why?
Abraha, the Abyssinian was not a prophet nor a magician, can you explain HOW he succeeded in Bringing an Army of Elephants into the Arabian Desert?




Note:
Elephants cannot survive in deserts as they need lots of water for drinking and cooling themselves

That dude just copied tales left, right and center with reckless abandon.

His ’book’ has an high formulaic density to show it can't be the ’uncreated speech of Allah ’...Even his few appeals to history were awful: Confusing Saul with Gideon, Confusing Jacob for Moses(Moses meeting a man with two daughters), Placing Haman in Egypt, Samaritans in the time of Aaron 👀, Affirming Mary has Aaron's sister, Mistaking David for Solomon to say the least🤦🏾‍♂️.

honesttalk21:
A final response to you as indeed your questions/statement are unserious and far from genuine. I have no time for silly play.

tenq's claim that Allah was just a pagan idol like Hubal is fals for these reasons:

1. Allah ≠ Hubal. Even the Quraysh admitted Allah was the Creator (Qur’an 29:61). Hubal was just one stone idol among 360. They never said Hubal made the heavens.

Hubal was the visible form of Allah because The chief god in pre-Islamic Arabia was Hubal aka Allah, the Syrian god of the moon. The three daughters of Hubal were the chief goddesses of Meccan Arabian mythology: Allāt, Al-'Uzzá, and Manāt.

honesttalk21:
2. Allah did not ‘protect idols.’ Surah al-Fīl says Allah protected His House, the Ka‘bah built by Abraham as a sanctuary for monotheism. Yes, Quraysh polluted it with idols, but Muhammad pbuh later cleansed it forever. The protection was for the House, not for the idols.

But the Ka'aba had been destroyed and repaired several times before Mohammed by flood and others. It is still a claim that has no basis that Abraham built the Ka'aba.
Can you show us a number pre-Islamic evidence of this?

Is it UNTRUE that Muslims refer to Allah as the Gods of the Kaaba?

honesttalk21:
3. Pre-Islamic proof of Allah’s supremacy.
Jahili poet Labid ibn Rabia said that‘Apart from Allah, everything is vain before Islam.

Arab Christians in Najran prayed to Allah in their liturgies, and the earliest Arabic Bibles use Allah for Elohim/YHWH.

pre-Islamic proof of Allah's supremacy BUT then Allah was vain at that time!?
The name of the God of the Arab Christians is YHWH,
Is any ofnthe 99 names of the Allah of the Muslims YHWH

Elohim means God/gods and Whatever is worshipped is Elohim.

honesttalk21:
4. Hubal was never equated with Allah. Historians like W. Montgomery Watt confirm: Allah was known to the Quraysh as a high God above the idols; Hubal was never equated with Allah.

Is it UNTRUE that a sacrifice to Hubal is a sacrifice to Allah and vise-versa in pre-Islamic times?

honesttalk21:
5. The Ka‘bah’s Abrahamic link. Even Greek historian Diodorus Siculus (1st c. BC) described a sacred sanctuary in Arabia, almost certainly the Ka‘bah, tied to Abraham long before Islam.

1. There were up to seven Ka'aba in the Arabia. Including in Yemeni. This is why till today, your Ka'aba has what is called the Yemeni corner.
2. Can you trace how Abraham a shepherd carried his sheep to Mecca in the desert?
3. It is laughable that a Greek historian is the one telling the history of Abraham almost 5000 years after the event

honesttalk21:
And about your ‘Lah’ distortion that Allah comes from al-Ilah ;The God.’The lah in Bismillah or ʿAbdullah is just part of Allah’s name, not a separate deity. Even the Prophet’s father, ʿAbdullah meaning “servant of Allah bore that name before Islam, proving Allah was always understood as the Supreme God, not an idol.

Praise be to LAH

honesttalk21:
If Allah was just a pagan idol, why did pre-Islamic poets exalt Him above all idols, why do Arab Christians still pray to Him today, and why did Quraysh themselves admit Allah created the heavens and the earth? Clearly, Allah is the eternal Creator not Hubal, not ‘Lah,’ and not an idol.

Then how do you expect me to believe that ancient city walls just collapsed because people marched around them and blew trumpets? Come on. Stone doesn’t crumble from noise and footsteps. If this story is taken literally, it doesn’t add up.

God-Allah is Vishnu to the Indians
God-Allah is Allah to the Arab Muslims
God-Allah is YHWH to the Arab Christians

To you is Vishnu your Allah?


So, the IDENTITY of your God/Allah matters

Gabrielshow24:
That dude just copied tales left, right and center with reckless abandon.

His ’book’ has an high formulaic density to show it can't be the ’uncreated speech of Allah ’...Even his few appeals to history were awful: Confusing Saul with Gideon, Confusing Jacob for Moses(Moses meeting a man with two daughters), Placing Haman in Egypt, Samaritans in the time of Aaron 👀, Affirming Mary has Aaron's sister, Mistaking David for Solomon to say the least🤦🏾‍♂️.

Islam is a UNIFICATION of multiple Deities and multiple religions into ONE!

Every history of Islam starts with Mohammed who cannot even be verified in history!


The errors as you have pointed out are so massive that the Qur'an CANNOT be from God.

Yet, Muslims will argue till tomorrow defending the indefensible.

SMH!!

Gabrielshow24:
That dude just copied tales left, right and center with reckless abandon.

His ’book’ has an high formulaic density to show it can't be the ’uncreated speech of Allah ’...Even his few appeals to history were awful: Confusing Saul with Gideon, Confusing Jacob for Moses(Moses meeting a man with two daughters), Placing Haman in Egypt, Samaritans in the time of Aaron 👀, Affirming Mary has Aaron's sister, Mistaking David for Solomon to say the least🤦🏾‍♂️.

Aha! You quickly jump on this opportunity to display clowning at the circus.

Many shallow critics often claim that the Qur’an mixes history, but the real confusion seems to stem from their arguments. Take Gideon’s drinking test (Judges 7) and Saul’s test at the river (Qur’an 2:249) wrongly as these are two distinct events. It was Moses who encountered Shuʿayb’s daughters in Midian, not Jacob with Rachel.

The name Haman actually refers to a well-known Egyptian priestly title, rather than the Persian antagonist (Most probably, the word “Haman” as used in the Qur’an is not a proper name at all but the Arabicized echo of the compound designation Ha-Amen given to every high priest of the Egyptian god Amon).

In your later adventures look into the opinion that the Book of Esther is often viewed by scholars like Adele Berlin as a historical novella rather than a straightforward account of history. Pointing that its character Haman is more of a fictional villain.
In contrast, the Qur’an situates Haman in Pharaoh’s Egypt, where it makes sense for someone like him to be in charge of grand projects. Instead of being a mistake, this placement is actually more logical. It seems the biblical text borrowed the name but got it mixed up, while the Qur’an keeps the more believable version of events. The real confusion appears to stem from the Bible, not the Qur’an.

The Qur’an mentions a figure named As-Samiri,which is different from the Samaritan sect. When Mary is referred to as the sister of Aaron, it aligns with Semitic naming traditions similar to how Elizabeth is called the daughter of Aaron in Luke. Plus, the Qur’an never mixes up David and Solomon.

Regarding the Year of the Elephant (around 570 AD), history backs it up. The Byzantine envoy Nonnosus (circa 530 AD) noted large herds of elephants near Aksum (Photius, Bibliotheca cod. 3). Archaeologists have found elephant images in South Arabian rock art (Beech et al., The Lost Large Mammals of Arabia, 2020). Christian inscriptions from Yemen also support Abraha’s campaigns, which align with the Qur’an (Robin, Les inscriptions d’Abraha, 1982).

The elephants likely used were African forest elephants (Loxodonta cyclotis) or smaller savanna elephants that the Aksumites imported from East Africa. These elephants weren’t native to Arabia; they were transported across the Red Sea from Ethiopia ,a completely plausible scenario, given that Aksum controlled both sides of the sea.

As for the concern about water in the desert, the elephants brought on campaigns didn’t roam freely in Arabia. Much like war horses or camels, they were managed and supplied by the armies. Abraha’s troops were seasoned in long-distance travel, equipped with logistical support, water carriers, and fodder, just as Roman and Persian armies had done with elephants centuries before. Thus, their presence in Yemen and even central Arabia is historically believable.

The Qur’an’s narrative about the elephant aligns well with the history, ecology, and regional politics of the 6th century. The real mistakes lie in the superficial criticisms, not in the scripture.

Ohyoudidnt:
Aha! You quickly jump on this opportunity to display clowning at the circus.

Many shallow critics often claim that the Qur’an mixes history, but the real confusion seems to stem from their arguments. Take Gideon’s drinking test (Judges 7) and Saul’s test at the river (Qur’an 2:249) wrongly as these are two distinct events. It was Moses who encountered Shuʿayb’s daughters in Midian, not Jacob with Rachel.

The name Haman actually refers to a well-known Egyptian priestly title, rather than the Persian antagonist (Most probably, the word “Haman” as used in the Qur’an is not a proper name at all but the Arabicized echo of the compound designation Ha-Amen given to every high priest of the Egyptian god Amon).

In your later adventures look into the opinion that the Book of Esther is often viewed by scholars like Adele Berlin as a historical novella rather than a straightforward account of history. Pointing that its character Haman is more of a fictional villain.
In contrast, the Qur’an situates Haman in Pharaoh’s Egypt, where it makes sense for someone like him to be in charge of grand projects. Instead of being a mistake, this placement is actually more logical. It seems the biblical text borrowed the name but got it mixed up, while the Qur’an keeps the more believable version of events. The real confusion appears to stem from the Bible, not the Qur’an.

The Qur’an mentions a figure named As-Samiri,which is different from the Samaritan sect. When Mary is referred to as the sister of Aaron, it aligns with Semitic naming traditions similar to how Elizabeth is called the daughter of Aaron in Luke. Plus, the Qur’an never mixes up David and Solomon.

Regarding the Year of the Elephant (around 570 AD), history backs it up. The Byzantine envoy Nonnosus (circa 530 AD) noted large herds of elephants near Aksum (Photius, Bibliotheca cod. 3). Archaeologists have found elephant images in South Arabian rock art (Beech et al., The Lost Large Mammals of Arabia, 2020). Christian inscriptions from Yemen also support Abraha’s campaigns, which align with the Qur’an (Robin, Les inscriptions d’Abraha, 1982).

The elephants likely used were African forest elephants (Loxodonta cyclotis) or smaller savanna elephants that the Aksumites imported from East Africa. These elephants weren’t native to Arabia; they were transported across the Red Sea from Ethiopia ,a completely plausible scenario, given that Aksum controlled both sides of the sea.

As for the concern about water in the desert, the elephants brought on campaigns didn’t roam freely in Arabia. Much like war horses or camels, they were managed and supplied by the armies. Abraha’s troops were seasoned in long-distance travel, equipped with logistical support, water carriers, and fodder, just as Roman and Persian armies had done with elephants centuries before. Thus, their presence in Yemen and even central Arabia is historically believable.

The Qur’an’s narrative about the elephant aligns well with the history, ecology, and regional politics of the 6th century. The real mistakes lie in the superficial criticisms, not in the scripture.

Let me quote from reddit since it's very obvious you stole your reply from there. Here is a simple rebuttal at least from a linguist🥱:

Linguistically, however, there are a few obvious problems. First, the title is correctly transliterated as ḥm nṯr tpj n jmn.“Chief (or first) servant of Amun”. Thus, it’s clear that /ḥ/ should have entered Arabic as ح and not as /h/ as in هامان (Hāmān). Second, the /m/ of ḥm is, for no reason in particular, dropped in this Arabized version. At least, no explanation is provided. Third, there is the problem of the structure of the word, as the name of the deity Amun is reconstructed by Egyptologists as /jaˈmaːnuw/ and /ʔaˈmaːnəʔ/. Thus, Egyptian Amun is a three-syllable word with one long vowel and ending with /w/ or a glottal stop. It’s not obvious at all why an “Arabized version” should result in Quranic Hāmān with two long vowels. A further point is that Hāmān, can’t, to my knowledge, be derived phonotactically from Arabic itself, as one proposal goes. In other words, Hāmān, is foreign to Arabic. Fourth, it’s also not very clear, not to say mystifying, why only one morphological component of a nominal phrase, that is, ḥm for ḥm nṯr tpj n jmn would be used as the nomen regens of a new construct state and no explanation is offered of why this should have happened or why this should be considered a particularly Arabized form of the title. Finally, to my knowledge, neither the specific proposed title ḥm Jmn, “servant of Amun”, nor ḥm + deity name, is found in ancient Egypt nor is documentation for any such title provided. Thus, Imho this is a completely absurd argument & methodology: If the Quran wished to demonstrate awareness of “secrets” of ancient Egypt, why did the author render /ḥ/ with /h/, drop the /m/ of "ḥm" for no reason in particular and choose a non-existent Egyptian title and syntax? [url]https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicQuran/comments/151lhgc/h%C4%81m%C4%81n_arabized_version_of_hamamanah%C4%81amen/[/url]

Let me now, add my own reply. We all know the scheme behind all this. You are basically looking for similar words that you can allude to inorder to avoid the inherent error in your book. The term Haman is foreign to Arabic and your other claim Ha-Amen has been refuted by the citation above.

Samiri or as samiri which is typically translated as “the Samaritan“ cannot be at the time of Moses so as a result, your scholars are forced to look for alternatives because obviously it's the arabic form of an Hebrew word🤧. Your scholars continue to posit, shamir, shonmonrin among others (along with their meanings)as possible fits for such an ambiguous verse in a revelation meant to “explain all things“🥱. Either way, you have exhibited a flaw of your book.

If Elizabeth, like you say is called daughter of Aaron then why call her extended relative “sister of Aaron“🤦🏾‍♂️. It became even more specific by assuming the Father of Moses gave birth to her—Mary, daughter of Imran🥱. This doesn't align with semitic naming conventions 🤦🏾‍♂️.They would rather use daughter of ’...’ than sister of ’...’.; either way, your book failed miserably in understanding ancient ’semitic naming convention’🥱—these are also the ’uncreated words of Allah’😮‍💨

The Quran likewise conflated the parable of Nathan the prophet and presented a skewed narrative 😮‍💨.

Islam itself is a lie

Gabrielshow24:
Let me quote from reddit since it's very obvious you stole your reply from there. Here is a simple rebuttal at least from a linguist🥱:

Linguistically, however, there are a few obvious problems. First, the title is correctly transliterated as ḥm nṯr tpj n jmn.“Chief (or first) servant of Amun”. Thus, it’s clear that /ḥ/ should have entered Arabic as ح and not as /h/ as in هامان (Hāmān). Second, the /m/ of ḥm is, for no reason in particular, dropped in this Arabized version. At least, no explanation is provided. Third, there is the problem of the structure of the word, as the name of the deity Amun is reconstructed by Egyptologists as /jaˈmaːnuw/ and /ʔaˈmaːnəʔ/. Thus, Egyptian Amun is a three-syllable word with one long vowel and ending with /w/ or a glottal stop. It’s not obvious at all why an “Arabized version” should result in Quranic Hāmān with two long vowels. A further point is that Hāmān, can’t, to my knowledge, be derived phonotactically from Arabic itself, as one proposal goes. In other words, Hāmān, is foreign to Arabic. Fourth, it’s also not very clear, not to say mystifying, why only one morphological component of a nominal phrase, that is, ḥm for ḥm nṯr tpj n jmn would be used as the nomen regens of a new construct state and no explanation is offered of why this should have happened or why this should be considered a particularly Arabized form of the title. Finally, to my knowledge, neither the specific proposed title ḥm Jmn, “servant of Amun”, nor ḥm + deity name, is found in ancient Egypt nor is documentation for any such title provided. Thus, Imho this is a completely absurd argument & methodology: If the Quran wished to demonstrate awareness of “secrets” of ancient Egypt, why did the author render /ḥ/ with /h/, drop the /m/ of "ḥm" for no reason in particular and choose a non-existent Egyptian title and syntax? [url]https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicQuran/comments/151lhgc/h%C4%81m%C4%81n_arabized_version_of_hamamanah%C4%81amen/[/url]

Let me now, add my own reply. We all know the scheme behind all this. You are basically looking for similar words that you can allude to inorder to avoid the inherent error in your book. The term Haman is foreign to Arabic and your other claim Ha-Amen has been refuted by the citation above.

Samiri or as samiri which is typically translated as “the Samaritan“ cannot be at the time of Moses so as a result, your scholars are forced to look for alternatives because obviously it's the arabic form of an Hebrew word🤧. Your scholars continue to posit, shamir, shonmonrin among others (along with their meanings)as possible fits for such an ambiguous verse in a revelation meant to “explain all things“🥱. Either way, you have exhibited a flaw of your book.

If Elizabeth, like you say is called daughter of Aaron then why call her extended relative “sister of Aaron“🤦🏾‍♂️. It became even more specific by assuming the Father of Moses gave birth to her—Mary, daughter of Imran🥱. This doesn't align with semitic naming conventions 🤦🏾‍♂️.They would rather use daughter of ’...’ than sister of ’...’.; either way, your book failed miserably in understanding ancient ’semitic naming convention’🥱—these are also the ’uncreated words of Allah’😮‍💨

The Quran likewise conflated the parable of Nathan the prophet and presented a skewed narrative 😮‍💨.

Emoji Gabrielshow24.

Your objections fall apart when we take a closer look at the language and history involved. Samiri actually points to a tribal connection, not Samaria, and it echoes Jewish stories about a misleading figure during the Exodus. The mention of Mary, the sister of Aaron, is a Semitic expression of respect, rather than a genealogical error. Instead of indicating confusion, these verses highlight how deeply the Qur’an is rooted in Semitic expressions and traditions that aren’t found in Christian texts but have been preserved among the Israelites.

Your coincidental happening on a Reddit post deludes you of the fact that there actually exist reliable reference.

See a few below.

Qur’an 20:85–95; 19:28; 3:35–36

Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer ch. 45

Sahih Muslim 2135 clearly showing your notice about Mary is very far from new.

1 Chronicles 23:21–22

Ohyoudidnt:
Emoji Gabrielshow24.

Your objections fall apart when we take a closer look at the language and history involved. Samiri actually points to a tribal connection, not Samaria, and it echoes Jewish stories about a misleading figure during the Exodus. The mention of Mary, the sister of Aaron, is a Semitic expression of respect, rather than a genealogical error. Instead of indicating confusion, these verses highlight how deeply the Qur’an is rooted in Semitic expressions and traditions that aren’t found in Christian texts but have been preserved among the Israelites.

Your coincidental happening on a Reddit post deludes you of the fact that there actually exist reliable reference.

See a few below.

Qur’an 20:85–95; 19:28; 3:35–36

Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer ch. 45

Sahih Muslim 2135 clearly showing your notice about Mary is very far from new.

1 Chronicles 23:21–22

Any person can see you didn't refute anything, just reiterating whatsoever I said🥱.

I have expostulated using these point above. Your scholars are just looking for ’jewish connection’ or as you put it ’tribal connection’🤧.

Your stance falls apart as Mary's genealogy was specific 😂, she along with Moses had Imran(amram in Hebrew) as Father, a double connection 😅—This must be Allah's ’mangekyo sharingan’ at work.
😮‍💨, such ’symbolism’ falls apart🥱.

Let's examine your claims, according to an hadith, when speaking about the wives of the Prophet, Ibn Hisham says: "Not of the Arab women was Safiyah." Aisha considered Safiyah inferior because of her Jewish background, whereupon Muhammad comforted her and counseled her: "So say, my father was Aaron and my Uncle, Moses.""

Even here, we see that Muhammad himself called Safiyia after the pious Jews of old👀. But, note, Muhammad did not say, "So say, my "BROTHER" was Aaron...". Muhammad knew enough that it would have been the wrong idiom to use😂— It would have been confusing.

If Muhammad knew the proper idiom to be used was "daughter", why did he call Mary Aaron's sister unless he meant that she was his literal sister 🥱? Why would he use a confusing idiom? The evidence shows he was familiar with the proper idiom to be used.. Muhammad meant that Mary was Aaron's literal sister. Otherwise he would have used the correct idiom—one that he was familiar with. Also, in the Hadith of Bukhari, volume 6 # 499, Muhammad refers to the descendants of Adam as "sons", not brothers. 🥱.

As an addendum, In Sahih Muslim, the Hadith related by Mughirah ibn Shu'bah, #5326, says:
"When I came to Najran, they (the Christians of Najran) asked me: You read "Sister of Harun", (i.e. Mary), in the Qur'an, whereas Moses was born well before Jesus. When I came back to Allah's Messenger I asked him about that, and he said: "The (people of the old age) used to give names (to their persons) after the names of Apostle and pious persons who had gone before them."" [Sahih Muslim, translated by Abdul Siddiqi]

When Muhammad was confronted with the mistake of confusing Mary as the sister of Aaron he said that Mary was called the "sister of Aaron" because Aaron was a pious person and Mary was called after Aaron. This meant that the use of the idiom "sister of Aaron" was not literal, but metaphorical. He also added that this manner of using the idiom, "sister of Aaron", was done by the pious people of the "old age"🤕, i.e. people who lived during Mary's time. Those people called their fellow citizens after pious persons who had lived earlier😮‍💨.

This ’manner of idiom’ took both the christians of najran and even ’The Arabic Muslim’— who came to Najran, and spoke with the Christians— aback as they understood it as literal👀— His use of a ’non-existent idiom’ model is ludicrous 😮‍💨. Had they known the custom that Muhammad said existed, of people calling other people "brother" or "sister" of ancient pious people, like possibly, "sister of Moses", "brother of David", "sister of Abraham", "brother of Isaac", they would have understood what the Quran was saying and raised no objection. But both the idiom, and the model in which it is used, were foreign to them🤷.

This error stems from the fact that the Arabic term for Mary and Miriam is the same😂.

Gabrielshow24:
Any person can see you didn't refute anything, just reiterating whatsoever I said🥱.

I have expostulated using these point above. Your scholars are just looking for ’jewish connection’ or as you put it ’tribal connection’🤧.

Your stance falls apart as Mary's genealogy was specific 😂, she along with Moses had Imran(amram in Hebrew) as Father, a double connection 😅—This must be Allah's ’mangekyo sharingan’ at work.
😮‍💨, such ’symbolism’ falls apart🥱.

Let's examine your claims, according to an hadith, when speaking about the wives of the Prophet, Ibn Hisham says: "Not of the Arab women was Safiyah." Aisha considered Safiyah inferior because of her Jewish background, whereupon Muhammad comforted her and counseled her: "So say, my father was Aaron and my Uncle, Moses.""

Even here, we see that Muhammad himself called Safiyia after the pious Jews of old👀. But, note, Muhammad did not say, "So say, my "BROTHER" was Aaron...". Muhammad knew enough that it would have been the wrong idiom to use😂— It would have been confusing.

If Muhammad knew the proper idiom to be used was "daughter", why did he call Mary Aaron's sister unless he meant that she was his literal sister 🥱? Why would he use a confusing idiom? The evidence shows he was familiar with the proper idiom to be used.. Muhammad meant that Mary was Aaron's literal sister. Otherwise he would have used the correct idiom—one that he was familiar with. Also, in the Hadith of Bukhari, volume 6 # 499, Muhammad refers to the descendants of Adam as "sons", not brothers. 🥱.

As an addendum, In Sahih Muslim, the Hadith related by Mughirah ibn Shu'bah, #5326, says:
"When I came to Najran, they (the Christians of Najran) asked me: You read "Sister of Harun", (i.e. Mary), in the Qur'an, whereas Moses was born well before Jesus. When I came back to Allah's Messenger I asked him about that, and he said: "The (people of the old age) used to give names (to their persons) after the names of Apostle and pious persons who had gone before them."" [Sahih Muslim, translated by Abdul Siddiqi]

When Muhammad was confronted with the mistake of confusing Mary as the sister of Aaron he said that Mary was called the "sister of Aaron" because Aaron was a pious person and Mary was called after Aaron. This meant that the use of the idiom "sister of Aaron" was not literal, but metaphorical. He also added that this manner of using the idiom, "sister of Aaron", was done by the pious people of the "old age"🤕, i.e. people who lived during Mary's time. Those people called their fellow citizens after pious persons who had lived earlier😮‍💨.

This ’manner of idiom’ took both the christians of najran and even ’The Arabic Muslim’— who came to Najran, and spoke with the Christians— aback as they understood it as literal👀— His use of a ’non-existent idiom’ model is ludicrous 😮‍💨. Had they known the custom that Muhammad said existed, of people calling other people "brother" or "sister" of ancient pious people, like possibly, "sister of Moses", "brother of David", "sister of Abraham", "brother of Isaac", they would have understood what the Quran was saying and raised no objection. But both the idiom, and the model in which it is used, were foreign to them🤷.

This error stems from the fact that the Arabic term for Mary and Miriam is the same😂.

When the Qur’an refers to Mary as the sister of Aaron, it’s not an error; it’s actually a Semitic expression. In both Hebrew and Arabic, terms like brother, sister, or son often signify an honorific or tribal relationship rather than a direct family tie.

The Prophet pbuh clarified this when he was asked about it, explaining that people were often named after prophets and virtuous figures from the past (Sahih Muslim 5326).

He even told Safiyyah to say, My father was Aaron and my uncle was Moses, using this same honorific approach rather than a genealogical one. The Bible also employs this style, as seen in phrases like sons of Belial in 1 Sam. 2:12 and daughters of Jerusalem in Song 2:7, which aren’t meant to be taken literally. Additionally, Jewish midrash reflects this tradition of connecting figures to Amram, Aaron, and Moses. So instead of being a source of confusion, the Qur’an is actually preserving an Israelite idiom and continuity that has been lost by others.

Got another emoji riddled refutation and erroneous linking to Reddit?

Ohyoudidnt:
When the Qur’an refers to Mary as the sister of Aaron, it’s not an error; it’s actually a Semitic expression. In both Hebrew and Arabic, terms like brother, sister, or son often signify an honorific or tribal relationship rather than a direct family tie.

The Prophet pbuh clarified this when he was asked about it, explaining that people were often named after prophets and virtuous figures from the past (Sahih Muslim 5326).

He even told Safiyyah to say, My father was Aaron and my uncle was Moses, using this same honorific approach rather than a genealogical one. The Bible also employs this style, as seen in phrases like sons of Belial in 1 Sam. 2:12 and daughters of Jerusalem in Song 2:7, which aren’t meant to be taken literally. Additionally, Jewish midrash reflects this tradition of connecting figures to Amram, Aaron, and Moses. So instead of being a source of confusion, the Qur’an is actually preserving an Israelite idiom and continuity that has been lost by others.

Got another emoji riddled refutation and erroneous linking to Reddit?

Mary is NOT related to Aaron sir

Aaron is from the tribe of Levi
Mary is from the Tribe of Judah

It is not a Semitic tradition to call a spade a spoon.
This is another lie from momo...it is untrue!

Ohyoudidnt:
When the Qur’an refers to Mary as the sister of Aaron, it’s not an error; it’s actually a Semitic expression. In both Hebrew and Arabic, terms like brother, sister, or son often signify an honorific or tribal relationship rather than a direct family tie.

The Prophet pbuh clarified this when he was asked about it, explaining that people were often named after prophets and virtuous figures from the past (Sahih Muslim 5326).

He even told Safiyyah to say, My father was Aaron and my uncle was Moses, using this same honorific approach rather than a genealogical one. The Bible also employs this style, as seen in phrases like sons of Belial in 1 Sam. 2:12 and daughters of Jerusalem in Song 2:7, which aren’t meant to be taken literally. Additionally, Jewish midrash reflects this tradition of connecting figures to Amram, Aaron, and Moses. So instead of being a source of confusion, the Qur’an is actually preserving an Israelite idiom and continuity that has been lost by others.

Got another emoji riddled refutation and erroneous linking to Reddit?

Tell me another lie🥱. In all your examples, not one used ’brothers of belial’, ’sisters of Jerusalem’ etc.,😮‍💨 because the proper context would have been ’daughter of Aaron’—if it were used for her relative why not for her🤷? Notwithstanding, Mo seemed to get it right with saffiyah but with Mary, he got it all wrong. He even asserted she was a daughter of amram(literally🥱).Thus, any appeal to ’symbolism’ is wrong and far-fetched. No contemporary history of Jews and christians called someone ’brother of david’, ’sister of Aaron’, ’brother of Moses’ except in the literal sense—Their ’idioms’ were either literal(direct progeny or descending from) or metaphorical🥱 where Daughters of Jerusalem meant “female descendants of Jerusalem “, I wonder why the Jewish writers didn't use, ’sister of Jerusalem 🤷’? Even the metaphorical allusion, “sons of belial“ wasn't depicted as ’brothers of belial’🥱.

The Christians of najran and Mughira all assumed it was literal, they were all bewildered by such a non-existent idiom. Furthermore, Mary, as a matter of fact, wasn't from the tribe of Levi😅. Your prophet's claim is an allusion found in the protoevangelium of James, copied by your prophet among other apocryphal books such as the Syriac gospel, infancy Gospel of Thomas etc.

Pls, tell me more lies🥱

Ohyoudidnt:
Emoji Gabrielshow24.

Your objections fall apart when we take a closer look at the language and history involved. Samiri actually points to a tribal connection, not Samaria, and it echoes Jewish stories about a misleading figure during the Exodus. The mention of Mary, the sister of Aaron, is a Semitic expression of respect, rather than a genealogical error. Instead of indicating confusion, these verses highlight how deeply the Qur’an is rooted in Semitic expressions and traditions that aren’t found in Christian texts but have been preserved among the Israelites.

Your coincidental happening on a Reddit post deludes you of the fact that there actually exist reliable reference.

See a few below.

Qur’an 20:85–95; 19:28; 3:35–36

Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer ch. 45

Sahih Muslim 2135 clearly showing your notice about Mary is very far from new.

1 Chronicles 23:21–22

Let me ask u a question.

what is samaritan called in arabic?
what is the arabic word for samaria?

Is this story even remotely TRUE?
Why?
Abraha, the Abyssinian was not a prophet nor a magician, can you explain HOW he succeeded in Bringing an Army of Elephants into the Arabian Desert?




Note:
Elephants cannot survive in deserts as they need lots of water for drinking and cooling themselves

Also
An adult elephant typically needs to drink between 100 to 200 liters (about 25 to 50 gallons) of water per day for drinking in cool regions and double the amount in hot climates. They also need to drink 2 to 3 times a day.

Cc: All Muslims
Antichristian
Honesttalk21
Gaskiyamagana
Lukuluku69 ,
mhmsadyq
AbuTwins
Explore2xmore


Isn't this tales of the ancients indeed?