₦airaland Forum

SIRTee15:
Bring any bible scholar here that says Angel of the LORD is unknown

The Angel of the LORD is well known in the old testament. He appeared to Hagar, Abraham, Samson's parents and the Israelites.

Angel of the LORD is not just a messenger, He appears as God and speaks with the authority of God
He speaks in first person as God, He is the one who told Moses 'My name is I AM THAT I AM'

This is what Jewish Encyclopedia has to say about The Angel of the LORD....

In the earlier Biblical writings the term "Malak YHWH" (messenger of the Lord) occurs chiefly in the singular, and signifies a special self-manifestation of God (see Gen. xxxi. 11-13, where the angel of God says, "I am the God of Beth-el"; Ex. iii. 2-6, where the angel of the Lord who appeared to Moses in the flame of fire says, "I am the God of thy father"; compare Gen. xxii. 11; Judges, vi. 11-22). At times the angel clearly distinguishes himself from the Lord who sends him (see Gen. xvi. 11, xxi. 17; Num. xxii. 31; Judges, xiii. 16). Though appearing in human form (see Gen. xviii. 2 et seq., xxxii. 25; compare Hosea, xii. 5), the angel of the Lord has no individuality. Being only a temporary manifestation of God, he can never replace His presence; wherefore Moses, not satisfied with the Lord's saying "I will send an angel before thee" (Ex. xxxiii. 2), replies: "If thy presence [face] go not with me,

He's the called Metatron in ancient Jewish literature, who is a divine figure in heaven.

Waraqa got it WRONG, the Angel of the LORD that spoke to Moses is a divine figure, Angel Gabriel is not a divine figure.

He misled Muhammed into believing An Angel spoke to him.

honesttalk21:
You're mixing things up a bit. The term Angel of the LORD (mal akh YHWH) in the Hebrew Bible isn’t a personal name, and the texts don’t link him to Metatron, Gabriel, or any specific figure. That’s why the Jewish Encyclopedia you referenced mentions that he has no individuality and is merely a temporary manifestation, rather than a named angelic being.

The Bible doesn’t specify who the messenger in Exodus was. In Genesis 22 and Exodus 3, the Angel of the LORD speaks as if he were God. In other instances, the messenger makes it clear that he is distinct from God and because of this duality, both Jewish and Christian scholars view the angel of the lord as a role rather than a fixed identity.

This is precisely why no biblical scholar asserts that this figure is always the same being, or that it has to be Metatron, or that it can’t be Gabriel. Those ideas stem from later Jewish mysticism, not from the Torah. The Torah doesn’t name a single angel in the stories of Moses.

So, claiming it wasn’t Gabriel is more of an argument from silence than a biblical fact.
It’s only in later texts (like Daniel and Luke) that Gabriel is finally named as the angel of revelation so Waraqa identifying the messenger as Gabriel aligns perfectly with biblical tradition. Your images actuallyconfirm my point.

Give certain reference that Waraqah misled prophet Muhammad pbuh.

SIRTee15:
The Angel of the LORD is no individuality himself because he's a theophany.
He's a temporary manifestation of God.


Are u saying sometimes Angel Gabriel appeared manifestation of God.
Angel of the Lord is a distinct person, he's not any other angel.

Did u read where the Jewish Encyclopedia says....

In the earlier Biblical writings the term "Malak YHWH" (messenger of the Lord) occurs chiefly in the singular, and signifies a special self-manifestation of God

Is Angel Gabriel a special self manifestation of God?

Here's what ancient rabbi and Talmud have to say about The Angel of the LORD and Metatron.

Talmud Sanhedrin 38b
This passage explains that the Angel speaking from the bush is completely authorized to speak as God, because:

> “A messenger is as the one who sends him.”
(שלוחו של אדם כמותו)

Rashi was another famous rabbi who saw that there was something divine about the Angel of the Lord. His commentary on the Hebrew Scriptures is the most well known in Jewish circles even till today. Here’s his commentary on Exodus 23:20-21:


Rashi: “For My Name is within him: [This clause] is connected to the beginning of the verse: Beware of him because My Name is associated with him. Our Sages, however, said: This is [the angel] Metatron, whose name is like the name of his Master (Tractate Sanhedrin 38b). The numerical value of 431 [מֵטַטְרוֹן – Metatron] equals that of 314 [שַׁדַּי – Shaddai] – From Tikunei Zohar 66b.3

“The fact that Rashi mentions that the numerical value of Metatron is Sha-dai = 314, clearly establishes that Metatron is active in matters of Yetzira [creation], an activity requiring the attribute of Sha-dai [Almighty God]“.4

Waraqa was wrong to have told Muhammed he spoke to the same Angel who spoke to Moses.

He misled Muhammed to believe he encountered an Angel.
Subsequently went around saying he spoke to an Angel.

There's no other independent attestation that affirms Muhammed spoke to an Angel apart from Waraqah's statement.

Not even the Quran or any of his companions confirmed Muhammed spoke to Angel Gabriel.
Only Waraqa testified Muhammed spoke to an Angel and he was wrong.

honesttalk21:
The argument fails completely as soon as we distinguish between what the Torah text actually says and what later Jewish commentary added centuries afterward. The Torah never mentions the angel of the LORD in Moses’ story, it does not call him Metatron, and it does not say that this messenger cannot be Gabriel. This figure appears at times speaking with God’s authority and at times as a separate entity, which is precisely why mainstream Jewish and Christian scholars agree that his identity in Exodus is indeterminate or not specified. Rashi, the Talmud, or even the Zohar do not change anything as those are interpretations from much later times, not from Torah itself. They represent changed Jewish mystical theology, which does not mean that there is a biblical prohibition against Gabriel being that messenger. Coming with divine authority does not mean in every case that he is automatically God Himself; Exodus 23 speaks of a messenger whom God sends explicitly and not of a divine being taking over for God.

Waraqa’s statement was not about the personal name of the angel; he recognized the type of prophetic experience. Revelation in Scripture comes routinely through God’s messenger, and later Scriptures have Gabriel as the named angel of revelation. The Torah never identifies who that messenger is in Moses’ encounter; therefore, claiming it could not be Gabriel is an argument from silence rather than a fact based on Scripture.

honesttalk21:
Also, only Waraqa reportedly recognized Muhammad pbuh’s encounter with an angel? The Qur’an states revelation came through His messenger and then names Gabriel thereafter while all early Muslims transmitted this. Waraqa merely noticed first.
Qur’an 2:97
Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel—HE is the one who brought it (the Qur’an) down to your heart by Allah’s permission…

This is explicit and cannot be dismissed.
The Qur’an confirms (1) revelation, (2) the messenger, and (3) Gabriel by name.
Qur’an 16:102; Say: The Holy Spirit has brought it down from your Lord in truth…
Qur’an 26:193
The Holy Spirit (Ruh al-Qudus) is identified in multiple Hadiths as Gabriel.
Brought down by the trustworthy spirit
understood as Gabriel by unanimous Muslim scholarship.
None of these come from Waraqa.
Sahih Hadith Explicitly Identify Gabriel in S.Bukhari 1:1
The famous hadith of the first revelation describes the angel who appeared to Muhammad pbuh in the cave and this narration is transmitted by Aisha, not Waraqa.
Numerous companions transmitted Muhammad’s statements about Gabriel.

Umar ibn al-Khattab (Hadith of Gabriel),Anas ibn Malik, Abu Hurayrah, Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman
These are separate, independent chains not a single testimony from Waraqa.

Multiple companions witnessed Gabriel in human form.

Then this was not a private conversation between Muhammad and Waraqa.

This objection fails on every count: the Torah does not name the angel, later mystical interpretations do not supersede the plain text, nothing excludes Gabriel from that role, and Waraqa’s identification fits how biblical revelation actually works not selective readings based on later traditions. You don't have any convincing proof that Waraqah misled prophet Muhammad pbuh and it only stands as your preference till you prove otherwise.

SIRTee15:
There's no explicit text in the Quran that says Muhammed spoke to an angel. None.
All u doing is exegesis which is funny because u wouldn't allow me to do same with the bible.

All u doing is relying on Hadith interpretation to explain what a in the Quran.
For something as an independent attestation, I would expect a clear cut verse in the Quran that states Angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammed.
But there's none.

None of Muhammed companion or wives independently verified that an Angel spoke to Muhammed. All they did is relay what Muhammed told them. That's not independent.

The companions didn't witness Gabriel in human form. They saw someone with Muhammed they don't know, when they asked him Muhammed told them it was Angel Gabriel.
That's not independent. It's still Muhammed telling people he spoke to Angel Gabriel.
A believe he got from waraqah who misled him.

SIRTee15:
U are just clutching at straws. First u came here and said no Jewish or Christian scholar identified the Angel of the Lord as distinct.
When I brought evidence from ancient rabbi scholars, u changed mouth and started saying Jewish scholars work don't count.

I brought u clear cut evidence on how the Torah itself describe the Angel of the Lord.

Hagar called him God Almighty, she saw the Angel of the Lord and exclaimed I have seen the God Almighty and called him the ever Living one that sees me.

Genesis 16
7 The angel of the LORD found Hagar near a spring in the desert; it was the spring that is beside the road to Shur. 8 And he said, “Hagar, slave of Sarai, where have you come from, and where are you going?”......

13 She gave this name to YHWH who spoke to her : “You are the God who sees me,” for she said, “I have now seen the One who sees me.” 14 That is why the well was called Beer Lahai Roi[d]; it is still there, between Kadesh and Bered.




God himself said in Exodus 23 he will put his name in the Angel which means the angel can be called God Almighty (which is exactly what patriarch and ancient Israelites did when they encountered The Angel of the LORD) and God also gave him the power to forgive sin.

That's divinity my friend. The Angel of the Lord is a divine agent as per the Torah itself.

The targum- ancient translation of the hebrew Bible to Aramaic in post exilic period calls the Angel of the LORD the word of God.

Targum Onkelos — Genesis 22:11
“And the Word of the LORD called to him from heaven and said,
‘Abraham, Abraham!’ And he said, ‘Here I am.’”


Hebrew text- Exodus 3.2-4
There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. 3 So Moses thought, “I will go over and see this strange sight—why the bush does not burn up.”

4 When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush, “Moses! Moses!”



Targum Neofiti — Exodus 3:2
“And the Word of the LORD appeared to him
in the flame of fire from the midst of the bush…”

Exodus 3:4 (Neofiti)
“And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look,
the Word of the LORD called to him from the midst of the bush and said, ‘Moses! Moses!’”......


Hebrew Text (Exodus 23:20–23, summary)

“Behold, I send an angel before you to guard you on the way and bring you to the place I have prepared.

Targum Onkelos — Exodus 23:20
“Behold, I send the Word of the LORD before you to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place that I have prepared.”


As u can see, in the Targum, the Angel of the Lord is substituted for the word of God.

Guess who's the word of God in the New Testament?

Angel Gabriel was never worshipped, or called God in the scripture. NEVER.
ANGEL GABRIEL IS NEVER SEEN AS A DIVINE PERSON IN THE SCRIPTURES.

THE ANGEL OF THE LORD IS FULLY IDENTIFIED AS A DISTINCT PERSON IN THE TORAH AND HE IS NOT ANGEL GABRIEL.

WARAQAH MADE A SERIOUS BLUNDER TELLING MUHAMMED THAT THE ANGEL THAT SPOKE TO HIM IS THR SAME THAT SPOKE TO MOSES.

THAT ERROR MISLED MUHAMMED TO THINK HE SPOKE TO AN ANGEL.

I REPEAT, WARAQAH IS THE ONLY INDEPENDENT ATTESTATION WE HAVE TO DECLARE MUHAMMED SPOKE TO AN ANGEL AND HE WAS WRONG.

THE QURAN NEVER SAID EXPLICITLY THAT MUHAMMED SPOKE TO ANGEL GABRIEL.
J

honesttalk21:
The Angel of the LORD in the Hebrew Bible beautifully illustrates the ancient Jewish concept of shaliach, or agency. This means that a messenger speaks fully in the name and authority of the one who sent them. That’s why you’ll see the text switch between phrases like the angel spoke and God spoke without suggesting there are multiple divine beings involved. When figures like Hagar or Moses meet this angel, they’re hearing God’s words delivered through His chosen representative. It’s important to note that no one ever worships, sacrifices to, or prays to this angel as this clearly shows that he was seen as a created messenger, not a deity. The Targums refer to Memra (Word) as a respectful way to avoid anthropomorphism, rather than indicating a second divine person. This is backed up by the same Jewish communities who strictly adhered to monotheism and recited the Shema daily: The LORD is One. Later on, Christian interpretations retroactively associated Word with Jesus, but this theological shift doesn’t align with the original Jewish understanding of these texts. The Torah itself doesn’t teach that the Angel of the LORD is a separate divine being so reaching that conclusion requires bringing in ideas that are not part of ancient Israelite theology.

SIRTee15:
Now u ate beginning to deny evidence.

Hagar didn't say she heard from God, Hagar said she saw God.
HAGAR SAW THE ANGEL OF THE LORD BUT ANNOUNCED AND REJOICED SHE SAW GOD.

That's the point.

I'm not here to debate Angel of the Lord is God. I'm here to tell u that Angel of the Lord is DIVINE.
Whether he's a theophany, Metatron, another person is irrelevant.
The point here is TORAH MAKES IT CLEAR HE'S DIVINE.

AND THE ANCIENT ISRAELITES HAD THE SAME BELIEF.

THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT TONS OF EVIDENCE TO SHOW U THEIR BELIEF.

U are yet to produce just one evidence supporting your claim of who is the Angel of the Lord.
You argue this Angel is anonymous, bring one scholar work that says Angel of the Lord is anonymous. Just one.

Here's what the beloved Muslim atheist scholar, Sheik Bart Erhman has to say about the Angel of the LORD


“In a number of passages of the Hebrew Bible, the angel of the Lord is not clearly distinct from the Lord himself. The angel appears, but the one the person encounters is actually God.”


“This angel can speak as God, bearing God’s authority, using the first-person ‘I’ as if he were God. The angel can be addressed as God, and can in fact be called God.”

“Some Jews held the view that God had a principal angel who was so exalted that he could be called by God’s own name, could sit on God’s throne, could exercise God’s own authority, and could in some sense be considered a second divine figure.”

“In Exodus 23 God tells Moses that he is sending his angel before Israel, and then says that ‘my name is in him.’
In other words, this angel bears God’s own name and represents God’s own authority.

“Some Jews could speak of a principal angelic being who was, in a sense, a second God—not in opposition to God, but representing God in a special way.”


“This understanding of a highly exalted angelic being provided the conceptual categories that some of Jesus’ followers used when they came to believe he had been made divine.”


“Later Jewish texts speak of Metatron as an exalted angel who bears God’s name, sits on God’s throne, and functions as God’s chief agent.
Earlier Jews also held to exalted-angel traditions, and these traditions formed part of the matrix from which early Christology emerged.”


“Some early Christians came to think of Jesus himself as this kind of exalted angel—one who existed before the world, who created the world, who appeared to people in the past, and who could rightly be called God.”

Now let's see what u have to say about this....

If the word of God is depicted for anthropomorphism, why is he presented as a person.

And why do we still have the word of God acting as God in heaven where there should be no anthropomorphism.

Targum neofiti

Genesis 1

1 From the beginning with wisdom the Memra of the Lord created and perfected the heavens and the earth. 2 And the earth was waste and unformed, desolate of man and beast, empty of plant cultivation and of trees, and darkness was spread over the face of the abyss; and a spirit of mercy from before the Lord was blowing over the surface of the waters. 3 And the Memra of the Lord said: “Let there be light” and there was light according to the decree of his Memra. 4 And it was manifest before the Lord that the light was good; and the Memra of the Lord separated the light from the darkness. 5 And the Memra of the Lord called the light daytime and the darkness he called night. And there was evening and there was morning: (in) the order of the work of creation, first day. 6




So according to the Targum, it's actually the word of God who created heaven and earth.
THE WORD OF GOD IS A DIVINE PERSON IN HEAVEN

Now u know where John 1.1 was coming from?

And guess who is the word of God in the new testament

The Angel of the LORD is a divine agent ....it's so obvious.

WARAQAH WAS WRONG WHEN HE SAID THE SAME ANGEL THAT SPOKE TO MOSES SPOKE TO MUHAMMED.

THAT WAS A DANGEROUS SUBMISSION THAT MISLED MUHAMMED.
MUHAMMED LATER DEVELOPED SUBSEQUENT REVELATION CLAIMING AN ANGEL SPOKE TO HIM.

honesttalk21:
Your assertions collapse under scrutiny of the texts themselves. The Word of God as a divine person is your imposition, not the literal sense. John 1:1 serves as a late theological prologue as God's Word is never presented, in the Torah or the early prophets, as a second divine person. It simply denotes God's command or decree. The Jews reject your interpretation, showing that this idea did not derive from the original text. The Angel of the LORD acting in divine authority does not make him God; the Hebrew principle of agency teaches that the messenger bears the name and authority of the sender. Even Christian scholars differ on whether this angel is to be understood as God Himself; thus it cannot serve as a universal model for determining every angelic encounter thereafter. There is no evidence that Waraqah misled the Prophe Muhammad pbuh. Waraqah recognized like any learned Jew or Christian would that revelation must begin with an angelic encounter. You have provided not one historical proof but only speculation. The Qur'an states explicitly that revelation comes via an angelic messenger (2:97; 16:102; 26:193-194). This is not something developed later on but rather is consistently attested to from the very beginning as the primary description of revelation itself. Yes, companions did see Gabriel when he came in human form and taught Islam openly; these are mass-transmitted reports. Not seeing his true form does not invalidate the encounter. Biblical angels also came down looking like regular men! You ask from Islam what your own scripture does not fulfill. The essential difference is that Islam says God → Gabriel → Revelation Christianity says The Word is a divine person; a concept utterly foreign to all previous prophets! One system fits with earlier revelation while another posits an entirely new theological entity; that is where the actual dispute lies!.

SIRTee15:
Now u just rejecting objective evidence up and down without producing any rebuttal with evidence.
This is what we call blind faith.

If word of God as a person is foreign to all prophets, then explain why the Targum said The word of God is actually the one who created heaven and earth.


Targum neofiti

Genesis 1

3 And the Memra of the Lord said: “Let there be light ” and there was light according to the decree of his Memra. 4 And it was manifest before the Lord that the light was good; and the Memra of the Lord separated the light from the darkness.

Explain why the Targum will write the word of God is the one that declared 'Let there be light' of the word of God is not personified.

Show one person, just one person that affirms independently that Muhammed spoke to Angel Gabriel.

Just as WARAQAH erroneously misled Muhammed by telling him Angel Gabriel spoke to him.

Pls I need quote like one below otherwise let's all it a day.

Waraqah said, 'That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine

honesttalk21:
You keep saying objective evidence, but none of your points withstand even the most basic scrutiny. First, the Targums using Memra (Word) does not mean a second divine person.

honesttalk21:
Jewish scholars are unanimous in stating that Memra is simply a paraphrase, a respectful way of saying, God acted, and not an actually existing literal being. If the Memra were a real divine person, Judaism would be binitarian; it never was.

honesttalk21:
Second, the Targums never say the Memra is Gabriel; they do not even connect it to the Angel of the LORD nor teach your theology, that is you reading later Christian ideas back into older Jewish texts.

honesttalk21:
Third, your claim that Waraqah misled the Prophet pbuh has zero evidence; no Jewish, Christian, or Muslim source ever says that. It is just your personal assumption. Fourth, Islam does have multiple attestations of Gabriel’s presence far more than what the Bible offers for Moses or Abraham. The public Hadith of Gabriel was witnessed and narrated by many companions like Umar, Ibn Abbas, and others which is more independent testimony than any angel encounter in the entire Old Testament! You are asking for something from Islam which even the Bible itself cannot meet! Your entire argument rests on assumptions, selective reading, and forcing Christian theology into Jewish texts that never taught it. I have given evidence of the Quran itself and Hadith which for your own reason you don't see or evidently counter.

honesttalk21:
Then you have a fundamental problem as Waraqah only said that is the same angel whom Allah sent to Moses. He did not say Gabriel spoke to you,this was Gabriel, or even the name Jibril. Don't you see how you destroy your arguments?

SIRTee15:
@ honesttalk21

This is a very interesting article written by Sheik Bart Erhman, Muslims favourite bible scholar about this 2 powers in heaven belief by 2nd temple Jews.
The clown doffman has disowned him, Qasim has chosen to stay silent. I dont know how u will react.

This was published by Paul Williams, a supposed ex 'born again christian' who converted to Islam, and now a popular Muslim apologetic.

Bart Ehrman – Two Powers in Heaven
By paulwilliamsbloggingtheologycom on September 9, 2016


(Published on 8 Sept 2016)
‘Rabbinical scholar Alan Segal produced what is still the major work on the idea of Two Powers in Heaven in Jewish thought. Segal argued that the Two Powers idea was not deemed heretical in Jewish theology until the 2nd century a.d. He carefully traced the roots of the teaching back into the 2nd Temple era (ca. 200 b.c.). Segal was able to establish that the idea’s antecedents were in the Hebrew Bible, specifically passages like Daniel 7:9ff., Exodus 23:20-23, and Exodus 15:3. However, he was unable to discern any coherent religious framework from which these passages and others were conceptually derived. Persian dualism was unacceptable as an explanation since neither of the Two Powers in heaven were evil. Segal speculated that the divine warrior imagery of the broader ancient near east likely had some relationship.

The ancient Israelite knew two Yahwehs—one invisible, a spirit, the other visible, often in human form. The two Yahwehs at times appear together in the text, at times being distinguished, at other times not.

Early Judaism understood this portrayal and its rationale. There was no sense of a violation of monotheism since either figure was indeed Yahweh. There was no 2nd distinct god running the affairs of the cosmos.

During the 2nd Temple period, Jewish theologians and writers speculated on an identity for the 2nd Yahweh. Guesses ranged from divinized humans from the stories of the Hebrew Bible to exalted angels. These speculations were not considered unorthodox.

That acceptance changed when certain Jews, the early Christians, connected Jesus with this orthodox Jewish idea. This explains why these Jews, the first converts to following Jesus the Christ, could simultaneously worship the God of Israel and Jesus, and yet refuse to acknowledge any other god. Jesus was the incarnate 2nd Yahweh. In response, as Segal’s work demonstrated, Judaism pronounced the Two Powers teaching a heresy sometime in the 2nd century AD.’

SIRTee15:
Now I have no choice but to treat you like a primary school pupil because u are recalcitrant in rejecting clear cut evidence.

according to the Targum, who created the heaven and the earth?

Targum neofiti
Genesis 1
3 And [i] the Memra of the Lord said: “Let there be light ” and there was light according to the decree of his Memra. 4 And it was manifest before the Lord that the light was good; and the Memra of the Lord separated the light from the darkness.[/i]


Yes, ancient Jewish were binitarian. They believe in 2 powers in heaven. I will post the evidence in my next post from your beloved scholar Sheik Bart Erhman.


are u blind, didn't u see where I brought targum passages where the Angel of the Lord was substituted for word of God.

Now read again, the hebrew text and the targum translation of the same text.

Hebrew text- Exodus 3.2
There[b] the angel of the Lord appeared to him [/b] in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. 3 So Moses thought, “I will go over and see this strange sight—why the bush does not burn up.”

Targum Neofiti — Exodus 3:2
“And the Word of the LORD appeared to him in the flame of fire from the midst of the bush…”

Hebrew text. Exodus 3.4
4 When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush , “Moses! Moses!”
Exodus 3:4 (Neofiti)
“And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to look,
the Word of the LORD called to him from the midst of the bush and said, ‘Moses! Moses!’”......


Hebrew Text Exodus 23:20
“Behold, I send an angel before you to guard you on the way and bring you to the place I have prepared.
Targum Onkelos — Exodus 23:20
“Behold, I send the Word of the LORD before you to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place that I have prepared.”

Now was the Angel of the Lord substituted for word of God in the Targum? Yes or No



All am asking for is simple. The Quran is the miracle of Islam. It should clear on how it was delivered leaving no room for ambiguity.

simply show me where the Quran wrote that 'Angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammed OR Muhammed spoke to Angel Gabriel'

If Waraqah can erroneously tell Muhammed in clear sentence that an angel spoke to him, the Ultimate Quran shouldn't falter.
Show me a clear verse where the Quran said angel Gabriel and Muhammed spoke to each other.



The angel that spoke to Moses in the bible is angel of the LORD. Waraqah is a christian, he gets his information from the bible- ANGEL GABRIEL NEVER SPOKE TO MOSES IN THE BIBLE.
BUT WARAQAH TOLD MUHAMMED THE SAME ANGEL THAT SPOKE TO MOSES SPOKE TO HIM. and u muslims insists the angel was Gabriel.

u see the problem now,

honesttalk21:
Let's start with clarifying the misconceptions about Memra, Angelology, and Scriptural Interpretation. In misreading the Targums on the Role of Memra, It is crucial to distinguish between what ancient texts actually state and the conclusions later interpreters may draw. The Targums occasionally employ the term Memra (meaning Word) as a reverential expression for God's actions. However, this linguistic choice does not imply that Jewish tradition ever endorsed belief in a second, independent divine person known as the Word. Perharps you should show irrefutably otherwise if you still stay convicted so.

What the texts actually say is Memra is Divine Action: The Targums describe the Memra as speaking, creating, and acting. Yet, these are simply ways of articulating God's own actions, not those of a distinct being.

There is no Replacement of Yahweh or God as the use of Memra does not substitute Yahweh with another deity. Rather, it serves to paraphrase anthropomorphic descriptions of God, making them more accessible without introducing a second divine figure.

Historically in Jewish worship practices and to this day, Jews have never venerated the Memra as a separate person within the Godhead.

Regarding the "Two Powers" hypothesisl; while there was a brief period of speculation about two powers in heaven, this idea was ultimately rejected within mainstream Judaism. Importantly, it never equated the Angel of the Lord with Gabriel.

There seems a pull to faulty logical progression as your argument appears to rest on a series of assumptions that are not substantiated by the primary sources such as that the Memra represents a separate divine person,therefore, that Memra is equivalent to the Angel of the Lord and consequently, that Gabriel cannot serve as God's messenger. None of these claims are explicitly supported by the Torah, the Targums, rabbinic literature, or historical scholarship.

Coming to the person Waraqah, it is important to clarify what the historical record actually indicates. Waraqah never explicitly named "Gabriel" in his recognition of Muhammad pbuh 's prophetic experience; a point you have acknowledged yourself. So understanding the pattern of revelation and
recognition of prophetic encounter,Waraqah identified the pattern that a messenger delivers divine words, and a prophet receives them. This mirrors the established structure of revelation in both Jewish and Christian traditions.

In Christian and Jewish Traditions; Christians had referred to this angel as "Gabriel" centuries before the advent of Islam, while Jewish texts do not assign a specific name to the angelic messenger in the Torah. Waraqah was not providing an angelic genealogy; he was recognizing the type of spiritual encounter.
This understanding is entirely consistent with the Qur’an’s own testimony. In Qur’an 2:97 Gabriel is explicitly named as the bringer of revelation. In Qur’an 16:102 the Ruh al-Qudus (Holy Spirit) is described as the agent who delivered the message. Qur’an 26:193–194 the "Trustworthy Spirit" is said to have brought the revelation to the Prophet pbuh’s heart. These verses collectively affirm that an angelic messenger was responsible for transmitting revelation, directly addressing the question of agency.

You employ double standards in scriptural demands and you have asked for explicit evidence asking to show you where Gabriel spoke to Muhammad pbuh yet this standard is not met by the Bible itself. For instance, nowhere does Moses state that the Angel who spoke to me was named X. Despite this, Christian tradition infers, interprets, and explains such matters. It is inconsistent to accept interpretive traditions for one scripture while demanding unattainable explicitness from another.

Ultimately, your argument falters because the Qur’an clearly affirms that revelation was delivered by an angel, while Waraqah never claimed it was Gabriel by name. The objections you raise are based on assumptions not found in the texts themselves. Furthermore, the companions of the Prophet pbuh witnessed Gabriel in human form, as documented in the well-attested Hadith of Jibril, transmitted through multiple reliable chains.
In parallel, the Bible never explicitly equates the Angel of the Lord with Jesus or God, nor does it present the Memra as a separate divine hypostasis. These are later theological interpretations, not direct statements of the scriptural texts.

Careful reading of the sources reveals that many of the conclusions drawn in your argument are not supported by the primary texts. Both the Qur’an and the Bible require interpretation, but that process must be grounded in what the texts actually say not in assumptions or later doctrinal developments.

SIRTee15:
Honest talk, I've never seen such level of evidence denial in my life.
Despite all evidence I brought, u had the effontery to say I brought nothing.

I showed u where Targum substituted Angel of the Lord for word of God
I showed u evidence from Jewish rabbi, Talmud, modern scholars, Torah itself and finally evidence from Bart Erhman.
Yet u said I brought nothing.

I will show u where the word of God and God appears in same verse as 2 distinct persons.

Targum neofiti
3 And the Memra of the Lord said: “Let there be light” and there was light according to the decree of his Memra. 4 And it was manifest before the Lord that the light was good; and the Memra of the Lord separated the light from the darkness.

Here's what Jewish Encyclopedia has to say about personification of the word of the Lord in the Targum.

Personification of the Word.
—In Apocryphal and Rabbinical Literature:
While in the Book of Jubilees, xii. 22, the word of God is sent through the angel to Abraham, in other cases it becomes more and more a personified agency : "By the word of God exist His works" (Ecclus. [Sirach] xlii. 15);


In the Targum the Memra figures constantly as the manifestation of the divine power, or as God's messenger in place of God Himself, wherever the predicate is not in conformity with the dignity or the spirituality of the Deity.

U are pushing a dangerous theological trend here by saying the word of God is just an action.
Since it was substituted for Angel of the Lord in the Targum, what u are implying is that the Angel of the Lord is same as the Father - God Almighty.

This is incorrect because in the book of Zechariah, the Angel of the Lord actually spoke to the Father. So Angel of the Lord is not the Father.

There's a reason the ancient Jewish deliberately substituted the word of the Lord for Angel of God in the Targum, that's to discourage the idea that there's another being who is divine in heaven.

They had no such problem with the personification of the word of God because the word is not another being even if it appears or present as divine.

Removing the personified entity of the word of God automatically makes the Angel of the Lord another God which is clear heresy.

Finally just like Muhammed's own first cousin Ubaydullah used to say to Muhammed's Muslim companions when he reverted back to Christianity in Ethiopia

'We see clearly, but your eyes are only half open', i.e. 'We see, but you are only trying to see and cannot see yet.'


He was a Christian who followed Muhammed and converted to islam. During the persecution era, he escaped to Abyssinia with other companions, while there he reverted to Christianity and died a Christian.

I hope the truth finally touch your heart.
Bye.

This is a very interesting article written by Sheik Bart Erhman, Muslims favourite bible scholar about this 2 powers in heaven belief by 2nd temple Jews.
The clown doffman has disowned him, Qasim has chosen to stay silent. I dont know how u will react.

This was published by Paul Williams, a supposed ex 'born again christian' who converted to Islam, and now a popular Muslim apologetic.

Bart Ehrman – Two Powers in Heaven
By paulwilliamsbloggingtheologycom on September 9, 2016


(Published on 8 Sept 2016)
‘Rabbinical scholar Alan Segal produced what is still the major work on the idea of Two Powers in Heaven in Jewish thought. Segal argued that the Two Powers idea was not deemed heretical in Jewish theology until the 2nd century a.d. He carefully traced the roots of the teaching back into the 2nd Temple era (ca. 200 b.c.). Segal was able to establish that the idea’s antecedents were in the Hebrew Bible, specifically passages like Daniel 7:9ff., Exodus 23:20-23, and Exodus 15:3. However, he was unable to discern any coherent religious framework from which these passages and others were conceptually derived. Persian dualism was unacceptable as an explanation since neither of the Two Powers in heaven were evil. Segal speculated that the divine warrior imagery of the broader ancient near east likely had some relationship.

honesttalk21:
See the overlooked context of the Targum.

honesttalk21:
You have cited Targum Neofiti on Genesis 1:3-4, yet overlooked a crucial scholarly consensus that Memra appears throughout the Targums not as a separate person, but as a linguistic device. The Targumim Aramaic paraphrases of Hebrew Scripture were crafted to make the text accessible to ordinary Jews while steering clear of crude anthropomorphisms. Where the Hebrew reads "God said" or "God descended," the Targum substitutes "the Memra of the Lord" to maintain divine transcendence. This is a deliberate exegetical strategy, not an endorsement of Trinitarian doctrine.

honesttalk21:
Ironically, the Jewish Encyclopedia passage you referenced directly contradicts your conclusion. It states that Memra is used "in place of God Himself" when direct attribution would be inappropriate clearly identifying Memra as a substitute, not a separate being.

honesttalk21:
The text further describes Memra as a personified agency and God's messenger, underscoring its role as a literary tool for agency or representation, not as an ontologically distinct entity.

honesttalk21:
If the Targumic authors truly believed Memra was a second divine person, why did they continue to recite the Shema Yisrael ("Hear O Israel, the LORD our God, the LORD is One" twice daily? The contradiction is impossible to ignore.

honesttalk21:
The Two Persons in One Verse Argument Falls Apart as your assertion that Genesis 1:3-4 reveals two persons does not withstand scrutiny.
The Memra of the LORD said let there be light, The Memra of the LORD separated the light is classic Targumic paraphrase, systematically replacing every divine action with Memra to avoid attributing physical traits to God. By your reasoning, the repeated mention of Memra would imply multiple divine persons an obviously flawed conclusion.

honesttalk21:
The reality is clear Memra is a grammatical convention, not a tally of persons.

honesttalk21:
You suggest that equating the Angel of the LORD with the Father is problematic, referencing Zechariah as evidence of distinctness. However, this misreads the Jewish tradition. In some contexts, the "Angel of the LORD" is a created angel and in others, it is a theophanic manifestation of God communicating through an agent. The distinction is not about multiple divine beings, but about contextual representation.

honesttalk21:
Zechariah 1:12-13, where the Angel addresses the LORD, actually supports the Jewish and Islamic understanding that the Angel is an intermediary, not a divine person. If the Angel were God, the passage would depict God conversing with Himself which is a notion that only makes sense if one presupposes later Christian theological developments.
The real theological risk lies not in Islamic monotheism, but in retroactively imposing New Testament concepts onto Jewish texts. The historical record is unambiguous:
No Second Temple Jewish group interpreted Memra as a second divine person. The Targumists were staunchly monotheistic.
Philo, Josephus, and the Dead Sea Scrolls all affirm absolute divine unity. Medieval Jewish authorities; Rashi, Maimonides, Ibn Ezra unanimously reject any notion of plural deity.

honesttalk21:
The Qur'an addresses precisely this issue: "They have certainly disbelieved who say, 'Allah is the third of three.' And there is no god except one God" (5:73). To claim that Jewish paraphrasing techniques secretly encode Trinitarian theology is to disregard two millennia of Jewish interpretation and consensus.

honesttalk21:
The Burden of Proof Remains If Memra were genuinely regarded as a distinct divine person, we must ask:
Why is there no record of Jewish worship directed toward Memra?

honesttalk21:
Why are there no prayers or sacrifices offered to Memra?

honesttalk21:
Why did no rabbi ever suggest that the Shema conflicts with Memra theology?

honesttalk21:
The answer is straightforward: your interpretation is foreign to both the text and its historical context. Far from being a threat, Islam’s emphasis on pure monotheism highlights the risks of fragmenting divine unity through speculative reinterpretation.

SIRTeee15:
ok so what we doing now is going around in circle. I bring evidence, u either reject it or reinterpret it your own way.
so what I'm going do now is answer your questions and I WANT U TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS.
FORGET THE EVIDENCE because THEY MEAN NOTHING TO U.
JUST ANSWER MY QUESTIONS.


targum is a form of midrash- It's the translation of the hebrew bible to aramaic with exegesis of the tanakh included. Midrash is a method of interpreting biblical texts in Judaism, focusing on uncovering deeper meanings and insights from the Torah and other scriptures.

Targum wasn't written because ancient Jews were worried about anthropormorphism. Targum is a necessity because post exilic Jews could no longer speak hebrew and their native tongue had become aramaic.

ok if the memra of the Lord is used for place of God himself. why was it used for the angel of the Lord.
PLS ANSWER THE QUESTION- WHY IS AN ANGEL SUBSTITUTED FOR MEMRA IN THE TARGUM IF THE MEMRA IS ONLY MEANT TO REPALCE GOD.

Now that u have finally admitted that the memra of the Lord is personified and is a messenger, the question is can a non living entity act as a messenger. Do we have example in the Tanakh where a non living entity acts as a messenger?


That's because God and his word is ONE. Did u read that Bart Erhman post I sent?
shema is the reason they had to exchange agency like angel of the LORD and figure like a man in book of ezekiel for memra. They wanted to avoid any conflict of shema.




This is ridiculous to say the least. so if I mention honesttalk21 2ce in a sentence or 20 times in a paragraph, does that mean I'm saying there are multiple persons of honestalk21?
It's well known globally and in all theology that God created heaven and earth. If memra was to avoid anthropomorphsim, why then should we substitute God again in heaven. Heaven is the dwelling place of God, what's the need for anthropomorphism in heaven?
why is targum replacing God for his word again in heaven where there is no anthropomorphism?


check my coming post on figure like a man in ezekiel. I will tag u


Honesttalk are u now saying u believe in theophany? are u saying the angel of the Lord is a theophany?
That means he's not another being but a manifestation of God in another reality- which we call person.
I never knew Muslims even believe in theophany


I already brought u Rashi's thought on angel of the Lord- He linked him to metatron, a divine being in heaven. But u rejecte him, why are now mentioning him again. Someone that disagreed with u.

I brought evidence from Alan Segal, a renowned modern Jewish scholar, u rejected it. Everything u know about 2nd temple judiasm came from him. He was the one who established the 2 powers in heaven believe during 2nd temple judiasm.

In his book How Jesus became God, Bart Erhman confirmed angel of the Lord is divine according to ancient jews. I brought the quote here, u glossed over it and insisted Bart Erhman never said that.

I laugh when u write dead sea scroll. u obviously don't know anything about the contents of the books in dead sea scroll.
Go and read 1 Enoch, 2 Enoch, 4 Ezra; those books were the one that promoted the concept of a 2nd divine figure in heaven sitted on a throne during the 2nd temple period. Most scholars believe those books lay the foundation of christian theology.
I wont bother bringing them here because u will call them mystical or whatever.


pls dont quote the quran if u are not ready to show me where it says angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammed.

memra or angel of the Lord is not another God.

because he's not another God.

The memra itself is a solution to avoid contradiction in the shema.


All your question comes down to your poor understanding of how the word God is used in the bible.

LET ME ASK U A QUESTION. DURING THE FIRST TEMPLE PERIOD AND DURING THE TIME OF MOSES
WAS GOD PHYSICALLY PRESENT IN THE HOLY OF HOLY IN THE TABERNACLE.
IF GOD ISN'T PHYSICALLY PRESENT, THEN WHO IS VOICE SPEAKING BEHIND THE ARK OF GOD IN BETWEEN THE CHERUBIMS.

Number 7.89
When Moses entered the tent of meeting to speak with the LORD, he heard the voice speaking to him from between the two cherubim above the atonement cover on the ark of the covenant law. In this way the LORD spoke to him.

pls answer all my questions. and finally answer this question u have been avoiding

WHY DID HAGAR ANNOUNCED SHE SAW GOD WHEN SHE SAW THE ANGEL OF THE LORD.
WHY DID SHE SUBSTITUTE THE WORD GOD FOR THE ANGEL OF THE LORD.
SHE SAW AN ANGEL NOT THE FATHER, THEN WHY DID SHE REJOICED AND ANNOUNCED SHE SAW GOD ALMIGHTY.

honesttalk21:
The Targum refers to the Aramaic translation and paraphrase of the Hebrew Bible. Unlike the Midrash, which is primarily interpretive commentary, the Targum serves both as a translation and as an explanatory tool, often incorporating interpretive elements directly into the text. Its emergence was largely a response to the linguistic realities following the Babylonian Exile, when Aramaic became the everyday language for many Jews. As a result, the Targum provided accessible scripture and clarification for communities no longer fluent in Hebrew. While avoiding anthropomorphic descriptions of God was one motivation, it was by no means the sole reason for the Targum’s development.

The term memra meaning the word,“agency,” or manifestation of YHWH serves as a theological and linguistic device within the Targum. When the Hebrew text presents the Angel of the LORD, the Targum sometimes substitutes memra to emphasize that this figure represents God’s operative presence. This choice highlights divine agency in the narrative, but it does not suggest a belief in multiple deities. Rather, it is a deliberate translation and theological strategy.

On non-living agents as messengers in the Tanakh, the Hebrew Bible frequently personifies divine attributes, allowing them to function as active agents.

The word of YHWH (Dabar/Memra) described as going forth and accomplishing God’s will (see Isaiah 55:11).
Wisdom (Chokhmah) in Proverbs, where wisdom is personified, speaking and acting as an agent (Proverbs 8 ) .

These are poetic devices, not indications of separate created beings. They allow non-personified aspects of God’s agency to act within the narrative framework.

There is no contradiction between the Shema’s declaration of God’s oneness and the use of memra in the Targum. In fact, the introduction of memra serves to uphold strict monotheism by avoiding literal, corporeal descriptions of God. This approach enables the Targum to convey divine action without attributing physical form to YHWH.

Repetition of Memra is not a statement on divine multiplicity. The frequent appearance of memra in Targumic texts is a matter of grammatical and ideological convention. Repetition of this term does not imply the existence of multiple divine persons; rather, it consistently personifies a single mode of divine action across various contexts.

Use of Memra in Heavenly contexts.
The Targum employs memra in heavenly scenes for the same reason it does elsewhere to avoid language that could suggest God possesses a physical form, even in celestial imagery. This reflects a consistent interpretive policy, not an assertion that memra is a separate deity.

The Angel of the LORD: Theophany or Created Angel?
The identity of the Angel of the LORD varies by context. In some passages, the angel functions as a theophany, speaking as God Himself. In others, particularly in later prophetic texts, the angel is depicted as a distinct being who converses with God. Ancient interpreters recognized these differences and debated their implications; there is no single, uniform interpretation.

Speaking from Between the Cherubim:Divine Presence in the Holy of Holies
Biblical texts describe the space between the cherubim in the Holy of Holies as the locus of God’s manifested presence in what later tradition calls the Shekinah. Classical Jewish interpretation maintains that God remains transcendent and is not physically localized, even as He communicates from this sacred space, whether directly or through intermediaries.

Second-Temple Literature and Exalted Heavenly Figures
Certain Second-Temple texts, such as 1 Enoch and some mystical or rabbinic writings, introduce exalted heavenly figures like Metatron. While these traditions reflect a diversity of thought, they are later or more sectarian developments. Their existence does not imply that the Targums universally endorse belief in a second deity.

Hagar’s Encounter: Seeing God and Angelic Theophany
When Hagar claims to have seen God after encountering the Angel, the narrative presents the angelic appearance as a theophany. The angel’s words and actions manifest God’s knowledge and authority. In such cases, ancient audiences understood the messenger as embodying God’s presence, not as a separate deity.

Akir2025:
This one is Just Typing Long Epistle to defend Lies .

honesttalk21:
The Targum refers to the Aramaic translation and paraphrase of the Hebrew Bible. Unlike the Midrash, which is primarily interpretive commentary, the Targum serves both as a translation and as an explanatory tool, often incorporating interpretive elements directly into the text. Its emergence was largely a response to the linguistic realities following the Babylonian Exile, when Aramaic became the everyday language for many Jews. As a result, the Targum provided accessible scripture and clarification for communities no longer fluent in Hebrew. While avoiding anthropomorphic descriptions of God was one motivation, it was by no means the sole reason for the Targum’s development.

The term memra meaning the word,“agency,” or manifestation of YHWH serves as a theological and linguistic device within the Targum. When the Hebrew text presents the Angel of the LORD, the Targum sometimes substitutes memra to emphasize that this figure represents God’s operative presence. This choice highlights divine agency in the narrative, but it does not suggest a belief in multiple deities. Rather, it is a deliberate translation and theological strategy.

On non-living agents as messengers in the Tanakh, the Hebrew Bible frequently personifies divine attributes, allowing them to function as active agents.

The word of YHWH (Dabar/Memra) described as going forth and accomplishing God’s will (see Isaiah 55:11).
Wisdom (Chokhmah) in Proverbs, where wisdom is personified, speaking and acting as an agent (Proverbs 8 ) .

These are poetic devices, not indications of separate created beings. They allow non-personified aspects of God’s agency to act within the narrative framework.

There is no contradiction between the Shema’s declaration of God’s oneness and the use of memra in the Targum. In fact, the introduction of memra serves to uphold strict monotheism by avoiding literal, corporeal descriptions of God. This approach enables the Targum to convey divine action without attributing physical form to YHWH.

Repetition of Memra is not a statement on divine multiplicity. The frequent appearance of memra in Targumic texts is a matter of grammatical and ideological convention. Repetition of this term does not imply the existence of multiple divine persons; rather, it consistently personifies a single mode of divine action across various contexts.

Use of Memra in Heavenly contexts.
The Targum employs memra in heavenly scenes for the same reason it does elsewhere to avoid language that could suggest God possesses a physical form, even in celestial imagery. This reflects a consistent interpretive policy, not an assertion that memra is a separate deity.

The Angel of the LORD: Theophany or Created Angel?
The identity of the Angel of the LORD varies by context. In some passages, the angel functions as a theophany, speaking as God Himself. In others, particularly in later prophetic texts, the angel is depicted as a distinct being who converses with God. Ancient interpreters recognized these differences and debated their implications; there is no single, uniform interpretation.

Speaking from Between the Cherubim:Divine Presence in the Holy of Holies
Biblical texts describe the space between the cherubim in the Holy of Holies as the locus of God’s manifested presence in what later tradition calls the Shekinah. Classical Jewish interpretation maintains that God remains transcendent and is not physically localized, even as He communicates from this sacred space, whether directly or through intermediaries.

Second-Temple Literature and Exalted Heavenly Figures
Certain Second-Temple texts, such as 1 Enoch and some mystical or rabbinic writings, introduce exalted heavenly figures like Metatron. While these traditions reflect a diversity of thought, they are later or more sectarian developments. Their existence does not imply that the Targums universally endorse belief in a second deity.

Hagar’s Encounter: Seeing God and Angelic Theophany
When Hagar claims to have seen God after encountering the Angel, the narrative presents the angelic appearance as a theophany. The angel’s words and actions manifest God’s knowledge and authority. In such cases, ancient audiences understood the messenger as embodying God’s presence, not as a separate deity.

SIRTee15:
AntiChristian do u agree with what your Muslim colleague wrote here.

He seems to believe in theophany- visible Manifestation of God in form of his creation.

SIRTee15:
AntiChristian do u agree with what your Muslim colleague wrote here.

He seems to believe in theophany- visible Manifestation of God in form of his creation.

U see the thing is a honest Muslim will eventually Islam. U cannot be a honest and sincere person and remain in Islam. It's not possible.

Theophany is against the theology of Islam. U can't accept theophany and say u are a Muslim...maybe heretic one


Besides if u finally admit there's theophany in the old testament, why can't be theophany also in the new testament.

Besides the wisdom of God is also the word of God. Knowing that will have saved u all the long epistle.

Anyway what brought us here remain unresolved.

WARAQAH was wrong when he said the same Angel that spoke to Moses spoke to Muhammed.
Angel Gabriel didn't speak to Moses in the scriptures.
WARAQAH misled Muhammed into believing he saw an Angel. Unfortunately he's the only INDEPENDENT ATTESTATION WE HAVE THAT CONFIRMED AN ANGEL SPOKE TO MUHAMMED - BUT HE WAS WRONG.

honesttalk21:
Slow down SIRTee15. My recognizing theophany as a biblical idea doesn’t mean it aligns with Islamic beliefs. Muslims clearly reject the notion of God taking on a physical form or appearing as part of creation. However, they do believe in angels as created messengers who convey God’s messages. These are fundamentally different claims. The manifestation of God's power is all around yet no one sees the almighty and he doesn't take the form of what he created to interact with the created.

Word and Wisdom language in Jewish texts is functional and poetic, not proof of a second divine person. This is precisely why post-Temple Judaism rejected binitarian readings.

You are still fixated on Waraqah exactly saying Angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammad which he didn't do.

AntiChristian:
Waraqah Ibn Nufal was a Christian who believed in the Prophet Muhammad as a Prophet like the prophets before him Jesus and others.
And he was right. You should condemn your Paul for misleading you about the Jesus he never met on earth!

AntiChristian:
Waraqah Ibn Nufal was a Christian who believed in the Prophet Muhammad as a Prophet like the prophets before him Jesus and others.
And he was right. You should condemn your Paul for misleading you about the Jesus he never met on earth!

SIRTee15:
Why did HAgar say she saw God when instead she saw the Angel of the Lord.

She gave this name to YHWH who spoke to her....

Angel of the Lord spoke to her not the Father but she believed she spoke to God. She also said she saw YHWH.

REMEMBER THE PERSON WHO SAID 'IF U HAVE SEEN ME, U HAVE SEEN THE FATHER.

SIRTee15:
WARAQAH told Muhammed the Angel that spoke to him is the same Angel that spoke to Moses.
According to Muslims, the Angel that spoke to Muhammed was angel Gabriel.

WARAQAH was wrong. Angel Gabriel didn't speak to Moses in the bible. The angel that spoke to Moses is Angel of the LORD who is a divine agent.

WARAQAH misled Muhammed by telling him be spoke the Angel that spoke to Moses.

AntiChristian:
Who told you Waraqah had a copy of your Bible? Isn't it elementary that the Bible (Even Old testament and new testament) are not the Torah and Injeel? Or which translation of your Bible do you think Waraqah had back then?

When responding to me please activate your supercharged holy spirit. I wouldn't like to be responding to a toddler with phone!