₦airaland Forum

In addendum, If you think identifying 'Namus' as Gabriel is a 'Christian straw man,' then your quarrel isn't with me—it’s with the giants of Islamic scholarship:

->Ibn Hisham (The definitive biographer of the Prophet): In his Sirat Rasul Allah, he explicitly writes regarding Waraqah’s statement: 'The Namus is Jibril (Gabriel), peace be upon him, who used to come to Moses.'

->Imam Al-Nawawi: In his commentary on Sahih Muslim, he confirms that 'Namus' refers to the one entrusted with the secret(revelation), and that it is none other than Jibril.

->Ibn al-Athir: Confirms in Al-Nihayah that 'Al-Namus' is the title given to Gabriel specifically in this context.

So, are you now claiming that Ibn Hisham and Imam Al-Nawawi were 'strawmanning' Islam? 🤨 Or is it more likely that you’re just desperately throwing Syriac vocabulary at the wall to see what sticks?

You tried to be 'perspicacious,😂' but you ended up being precarious😮‍💨. You’re arguing against your own Sahih traditions and your own historians just to avoid admitting that Waraqah👀 was the one who 'diagnosed' the human "Ear's"😂 revelation—based on the fact that the people called your beloved prophet an 'Ear'🤨.

Next time you try to lecture someone on their 'ignorance,' make sure you aren't accidentally debunking your own scholars in the process. It’s embarrassing. 🥱

Cc: Qasim6, the hired👀 flawed calvary.

Gabrielshow24:
Is this the "eagle" antichristian was dependent on? 😂😂😂

Well, It’s cute that you discovered a dictionary today, but you clearly didn't read the whole entry. 😂

You’re trying to use Nomos/Namosa (meaning 'Law' or 'Torah') to distance the event from Gabriel? That’s a massive self-own. In the Syriac Christian tradition—which Waraqah, a Ebionite/Nestorian-leaning Christian, would have followed—the 'Namosa' was the revelatory force that brought the Law to Moses🤨.

Here is why your 'research' just backfired:

->Your own greatest scholars (Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham, and Al-Tabari) all explicitly identify the 'Namus' in this Hadith as Gabriel. Are you saying you’re more 'perspicacious' than the fathers of Islamic Historiography? 🤨 I know it's convenient for you guys to throw everyone 'under the bus' anytime it suits you👀. Your comrades, in times past, have done this consistently.

->If Waraqah meant 'The Law' and not a person/angel, why did he say the Namus was 'sent' to Moses just as it was being 'sent' to your prophet? You don't 'send' an abstract noun to have a conversation in a cave👀.

-> Sahih Bukhari 1:3: The context is clear. Waraqah is identifying the supernatural intermediary. In Islamic theology, who is the intermediary of revelation? Gabriel. Putting it in brackets isn't a straw man; it's called 'context for the confused.'😂 You are probably in that category at the moment🤧.

You’re playing word games with 'Nomos' to avoid the fact that your 'prophet' was diagnosed by a guy using Christian terminology for an angel he never saw🤦🏾‍♂️😮‍💨. Calling it a 'straw man' when I quote your own Sahih sources is just a desperate 'theatrical' move to hide your lack of a real rebuttal🤨.

Next time you give an 'assignment,' make sure you aren't the one who needs the remedial class. 🥱 Stay in 'deliria’s hold😂' if you like, but the facts don't lie. 👀

You sound intelligent and at the same time very slow and I don't know how you manage to pull that but I guess it's a Christian thingy. You need to work on your thought process it will help you going forward, else your arguments are always just going to be plenty talk, zero substance.

Even if Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham and Al-Tabari later identified Namus to be Jibril does that mean Jibril is what Waraqa had in mind? You should know Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham and even us today are only equating Namus to Jibril because of the benefit of hindsight. Must you be spoon feed like a toddler? there are Qur'an verses that identify the being that brought revelation to the prophet as Jibril, infact in the sirah of the prophet written by Ibn ishaq we get to know the being identified himself as Jibril on his 2nd visit.

Waraqa was only trying to make meaning of the being, as someone familiar with the Torah and story of Moses and the burning bush it's only natural for him to liken the prophet Muhammad experience to that of Moses. The Torah does not identify the being Moses saw as Gabriel so why would you think Waraqa using Namus he was referring to Gabriel?

Come on guy, you can do better.

Qasim6:
You sound intelligent and at the same time very slow and I don't know how you manage to pull that but I guess it's a Christian thingy. You need to work on your thought process it will help you going forward, else your arguments are always just going to be plenty talk, zero substance.

Even if Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham and Al-Tabari later identified Namus to be Jibril does that mean Jibril is what Waraqa had in mind? You should know Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham and even us today are only equating Namus to Jibril because of the benefit of hindsight. Must you be spoon feed like a toddler? there are Qur'an verses that identify the being that brought revelation to the prophet as Jibril, infact in the sirah of the prophet written by Ibn ishaq we get to know the being identified himself as Jibril on his 2nd visit.

Waraqa was only trying to make meaning to the being, as someone familiar with the Torah and story of Moses and the burning bush it's only natural for him to liken the prophet Muhammad experience to that of Moses. The Torah does not identify the being Moses saw as Gabriel so why would you think Waraqa using Namus he was referring to Gabriel?

Come on guy, you can do better.

This is already thrashed in previous thread. ask honesttalk your friend.

The angel that spoke to Moses is not angel gabriel but Angel of the LORD. and we all know The Angel of the LORD isn't angel gabriel.
so waraqah misled your beloved P.

Waraqah said, "This was the same one who keeps the secrets whom Allah had sent to Moses (Angel Gabriel). I wish I were young and could live up to the time when your people would turn you out." God's Apostle asked, "Will they drive me out?"

So how then do we know that angel jibril spoke to Muhammed. u said it's in the Quran, show me
show me where Quran state angel jibril SPOKE to Muhammed. that's all I'm asking
a simple verse will be sufficient.

SIRTee15:
This is already thrashed in previous thread. ask honesttalk your friend.

The angel that spoke to Moses is not angel gabriel but Angel of the LORD. and we all know The Angel of the LORD isn't angel gabriel.
so waraqah misled your beloved P.

Waraqah said, "This was the same one who keeps the secrets whom Allah had sent to Moses (Angel Gabriel). I wish I were young and could live up to the time when your people would turn you out." God's Apostle asked, "Will they drive me out?"

So how then do we know that angel jibril spoke to Muhammed. u said it's in the Quran, show me
show me where Quran state angel jibril SPOKE to Muhammed. that's all I'm asking
a simple verse will be sufficient.

It doesn't even matter if it's the Angel of the lord or Jibril that spoke with Moses even though from Islamic perspective Jibril/Angel of the lord/Holy spirit(Ruach Hakodesh) is the same being but that's not what we discussing here.

Waraqa did not identify the being as Jibril because the Torah did not identify the being Moses saw as Jibril so how could he have misled prophet Muhammad? Prophet Muhammad only got to know the name of the being as Jibril on his 2nd visit.

Say, "Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel - it is he who has brought it(Qur'an) down upon your heart by permission of Allah, confirming that which was before it and as guidance and good tidings for the believers. Q 2:97

The first 5 verses of Qur'an 96 were revealed on the first encounter.

Read! in the name of your Lord who created.
Created man from a clinging substance.
Read, and your Lord is the most Generous.
Who taught by the pen
Taught man that which he knew not Q 96 1-5

Qasim6:
You sound intelligent and at the same time very slow and I don't know how you manage to pull that but I guess it's a Christian thingy. You need to work on your thought process it will help you going forward, else your arguments are always just going to be plenty talk, zero substance.

Even if Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham and Al-Tabari later identified Namus to be Jibril does that mean Jibril is what Waraqa had in mind? You should know Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham and even us today are only equating Namus to Jibril because of the benefit of hindsight. Must you be spoon feed like a toddler? there are Qur'an verses that identify the being that brought revelation to the prophet as Jibril, infact in the sirah of the prophet written by Ibn ishaq we get to know the being identified himself as Jibril on his 2nd visit.

Waraqa was only trying to make meaning of the being, as someone familiar with the Torah and story of Moses and the burning bush it's only natural for him to liken the prophet Muhammad experience to that of Moses. The Torah does not identify the being Moses saw as Gabriel so why would you think Waraqa using Namus he was referring to Gabriel?

Come on guy, you can do better.

Wait—so your grand defense is that the very scholars who defined your religion were 'spoon-feeding🤨' us a lie by 'equating' Namus to Gabriel? 😂

That is a bold strategy! You’re essentially calling Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham, and Al-Tabari historically illiterate. If they were just 'guessing' based on hindsight, then your entire Seerah (biography of the Prophet) is just a collection of educated guesses😂. Is that really the hill you want to 'rest' on? 🤨

You said: 'The Torah does not identify the being Moses saw as Gabriel.' Exactly. That’s the point!😂

In the Torah, Moses spoke to God (the I AM) at the burning bush. He didn’t speak to a 'Namus' or an angel who squeezed👀 him until he couldn't breathe. So, if Waraqah was 'familiar with the Torah,' why did he identify a being (Gabriel) that wasn't in the Moses story?🤨

If Waraqah was strictly following the Torah, he would have said, 'This is the God of Abraham!' Instead, he used a term ('Namus') that Islamic tradition insists means Gabriel👀.

You admit Waraqah was 'trying to make meaning' of the experience. Thank you! That’s my entire point. Your prophet didn't know who it was😂 (he thought he was possessed), and he had to go to a human Christian to get a diagnosis😂—the irony.

You claim the being identified himself as Gabriel on the second visit? Cool😮‍💨. So for the most important moment in Islamic history—the first revelation—the 'Prophet' was clueless until a man who wasn't even there 'identified' a being from a story (Moses) where that being doesn't even appear. 🤦🏾‍♂️

You’re trying to have it both ways: You want the 'benefit of hindsight' when it suits your doctrine, but you want to claim 'it’s only natural' for Waraqah to be wrong about the Torah when it doesn't.

If Waraqah was 'likening' it to Moses, he failed, because the stories don't match. If he was identifying Gabriel, he was using 'Christian Juju😂' to name a spirit he never saw🤦🏾‍♂️. Either way, your foundation is a human guess, not a divine certainty. 🥱

Maybe 'work on your thought process' before you accidentally debunk the reliability of your own scholars again. It’s getting painful to watch. 👀

Gabrielshow24:
Wait—so your grand defense is that the very scholars who defined your religion were 'spoon-feeding🤨' us a lie by 'equating' Namus to Gabriel? 😂

That is a bold strategy! You’re essentially calling Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham, and Al-Tabari historically illiterate. If they were just 'guessing' based on hindsight, then your entire Seerah (biography of the Prophet) is just a collection of educated guesses😂. Is that really the hill you want to 'rest' on? 🤨

You said: 'The Torah does not identify the being Moses saw as Gabriel.' Exactly. That’s the point!😂

In the Torah, Moses spoke to God (the I AM) at the burning bush. He didn’t speak to a 'Namus' or an angel who squeezed👀 him until he couldn't breathe. So, if Waraqah was 'familiar with the Torah,' why did he identify a being (Gabriel) that wasn't in the Moses story?🤨

If Waraqah was strictly following the Torah, he would have said, 'This is the God of Abraham!' Instead, he used a term ('Namus') that Islamic tradition insists means Gabriel👀.

You admit Waraqah was 'trying to make meaning' of the experience. Thank you! That’s my entire point. Your prophet didn't know who it was😂 (he thought he was possessed), and he had to go to a human Christian to get a diagnosis😂—the irony.

You claim the being identified himself as Gabriel on the second visit? Cool😮‍💨. So for the most important moment in Islamic history—the first revelation—the 'Prophet' was clueless until a man who wasn't even there 'identified' a being from a story (Moses) where that being doesn't even appear. 🤦🏾‍♂️

You’re trying to have it both ways: You want the 'benefit of hindsight' when it suits your doctrine, but you want to claim 'it’s only natural' for Waraqah to be wrong about the Torah when it doesn't.

If Waraqah was 'likening' it to Moses, he failed, because the stories don't match. If he was identifying Gabriel, he was using 'Christian Juju😂' to name a spirit he never saw🤦🏾‍♂️. Either way, your foundation is a human guess, not a divine certainty. 🥱

Maybe 'work on your thought process' before you accidentally debunk the reliability of your own scholars again. It’s getting painful to watch. 👀

Christians and being disingenuous - a marriage unbreakable. Once they see you squashed their nonsense argument against Islam they will just pretend to be slow rather than accept they are wrong. It's ok to be wrong at times, I will rather just move away from the argument than continue to throw tantrum that's the honourable thing to do.

Till we meet again to burst your next lie🥷.
Ire oo! 🤠

Qasim6:
Christians and being disingenuous - a marriage unbreakable. Once they see you squashed their nonsense argument against Islam they will just pretend to be slow rather than accept they are wrong. It's ok to be wrong at times, I will rather just move away from the argument than continue to throw tantrum that's the honourable thing to do.

Till we meet again to burst your next lie🥷.
Ire oo! 🤠

How very 'honourable' of you to run😂 away the moment your own scholars—Ibn Hisham and Al-Nawawi—were used to dismantle your 'Nomos' fan-fiction. 😂😂

You didn't 'burst😂' a single lie; you just spent time—apparently insufficient🤨—trying to explain why your Prophet needed a Christian diagnosis for a Gabriel who wasn't in the Moses story😮‍💨. That’s not a victory—it’s a theological surrender wrapped in a cowboy emoji. 🤠

Next time, bring more than a 'hindsight' defense and a bruised ego. Until then, enjoy the silence of a lost argument. Ire oo! 🥱👋🏾

Qasim6:
It doesn't even matter if it's the Angel of the lord or Jibril that spoke with Moses even though from Islamic perspective Jibril/Angel of the lord/Holy spirit(Ruach Hakodesh) is the same being but that's not what we discussing here.

Waraqah was never a Muslim, he died a unitarian christian. His understanding of the scripture is based on interpretation of the torah and gospel NOT islam.
The torah made it clear angel of the LORD is divine. angel gabriel is NOT. ANGEL GABRIEL IS NOT THE ANGEL OF THE LORD.
waraqah got it wrong and gave the wrong impression to your P. that an angel spoke to him.

Qasim6:
Waraqa did not identify the being as Jibril because the Torah did not identify the being Moses saw as Jibril so how could he have misled prophet Muhammad? Prophet Muhammad only got to know the name of the being as Jibril on his 2nd visit.

Moses did not speak to Jibril in the torah, torah identified the angel that spoke to Moses as the Angel of the LORD- a theophany in the old testament.

Qasim6:
Say, "Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel - it is he who has brought it(Qur'an) down upon your heart by permission of Allah, confirming that which was before it and as guidance and good tidings for the believers. Q 2:97

The first 5 verses of Qur'an 96 were revealed on the first encounter.

Read! in the name of your Lord who created.
Created man from a clinging substance.
Read, and your Lord is the most Generous.
Who taught by the pen
Taught man that which he knew not Q 96 1-5

ok so jibril revealed the quran to the heart of your P. it wasn't a physical encounter.
because that's what I can understand from the 1st verse. no where did it say angel jibril spoke to Muhammed.
revelation can be by trance, vision, dreams, trance, hallucinations, whatever.
Paul also received revelation but u guys rejected it claiming he never saw Jesus.

my question is clear, was there a physical encounter btw Muhammed and angel Jibril, did they speak to each other.
where is the evidence of such physical encounter.
show me where it's written that angel jibril spoke to Muhammed or Muhammed spoke to angel Jibril in the Quran.
I need a correct independent attestation that confirmed angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammed.

LordReed:
Stop kidding yourself, the dead know nothing talk less of speaking. Death is the end, you don't know anything after that.

Have you died before to know that?

AntiChristian:
Have you died before to know that?

I don't need to die, no dead person can talk much less express any sort of knowledge. Maybe you are sheltered and have never seen a dead person before. You can go to the nearest mortuary and attempt having a conversation with the dead bodies there.

Gabrielshow24:
if you haven't gained weight, then clearly medical science and global statistics are all 'Holy Spirit errors.' 😂 Brilliant logic😅! It’s like a man standing in the rain claiming the world is dry because he has an umbrella. Your personal 'small appetite'👀 doesn't magically erase the documented Ramadan health crisis in the real world🥱.

Guy, i don't want to call you a fool as you have been exhibiting a typical trait of those Paul abused in Galatians 3:1.

You brought your stats to say Ramadan is all about food and gaining weight and bla bla bla! Where you guided by the holy Spirit to say those trash?

Since you're such an expert on 'Holy Spirits' and 'Truth,' maybe you should consult your own book before you trip over your own ego🤔. You missed Surah Luqman 31:18?🤨

'And do not turn your cheek [in contempt] toward people and do not walk through the earth exultantly. Indeed, Allah does not like everyone self-deluded and boastful.'

And Paul or whoever wrote 1 Thessalonians 4:11 told you to mind your hate-filled business!

Make it your goal to live a quiet life, minding your own business and working with your hands, just as we instructed you before. What's your business with our Ramadan fast in the first place? I don't even see the relevance of the verse you quoted to me here. If you claim you have the holy spirit and it guides you aright how come you are wrong to interfer in what's not your biz?

Using your personal waistline as 'theological proof' while calling others foolish is the definition of self-deluded and boastful

🤨 I didn't use only my personal waistline! I said i know others close to me. I have kids fasting! I have a wife fasting!

And please, spare me the 'Holy Spirit' talk. If your 'spirit' can't even handle basic biology or a Spearman’s Rank correlation, maybe it’s just low blood sugar talking? 🥱
Probably, when you have eaten you will be better coherent and logical🥱.

Go grab a date, you’re getting cranky. 👀

That's the Galatians 3:1 effect again!

Anyways i have a research here https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374476552_Impact_of_fasting_on_human_health_during_Ramadan with a conclusion you will find attached. Abeg don't reply me again!

LordReed:
I don't need to die, no dead person can talk much less express any sort of knowledge. Maybe you are sheltered and have never seen a dead person before. You can go to the nearest mortuary and attempt having a conversation with the dead bodies there.

+
For me, there is a stark difference between a dead person and a dead body.

You can interact with dead persons through dreams and astral travel. I think.

LordReed:
I don't need to die, no dead person can talk much less express any sort of knowledge. Maybe you are sheltered and have never seen a dead person before. You can go to the nearest mortuary and attempt having a conversation with the dead bodies there.

I washed and buried my Dad last year!

I have also washed and buried a baby born dead some years back!

So i have experience!

At the point of death we'll all see the reality!

AntiChristian:
I washed and buried my Dad last year!

I have also washed and buried a baby born dead some years back!

So i have experience!

At the point of death we'll all see the reality!

My condolences on the passing of your dad.

You will agree with me that when you were washing his dead body he couldn't say to you wash this part or that part or the water is too cold or make any remark. He is dead and can no longer express any knowledge.

Dead people see nothing, they are dead.

DeepSight:
+
For me, there is a stark difference between a dead person and a dead body.

You can interact with dead persons through dreams and astral travel. I think.

Right. You can interact with dead persons only your head. Same way Michael Jackson is still moonwalking in my head.

LordReed:
Right. You can interact with dead persons only your head. Same way Michael Jackson is still moonwalking in my head.

+
It's possible it's in ones head.

SIRTee15:
Waraqah was never a Muslim, he died a unitarian christian. His understanding of the scripture is based on interpretation of the torah and gospel NOT islam.
The torah made it clear angel of the LORD is divine. angel gabriel is NOT. ANGEL GABRIEL IS NOT THE ANGEL OF THE LORD.
waraqah got it wrong and gave the wrong impression to your P. that an angel spoke to him.


Moses did not speak to Jibril in the torah, torah identified the angel that spoke to Moses as the Angel of the LORD- a theophany in the old testament.



ok so jibril revealed the quran to the heart of your P. it wasn't a physical encounter.
because that's what I can understand from the 1st verse. no where did it say angel jibril spoke to Muhammed.
revelation can be by trance, vision, dreams, trance, hallucinations, whatever.
Paul also received revelation but u guys rejected it claiming he never saw Jesus.

my question is clear, was there a physical encounter btw Muhammed and angel Jibril, did they speak to each other.
where is the evidence of such physical encounter.
show me where it's written that angel jibril spoke to Muhammed or Muhammed spoke to angel Jibril in the Quran.
I need a correct independent attestation that confirmed angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammed.

I thought we've been through this 'Angel of the Lord is divine'? Well, that's your own trinitarian opinion. A being—God placed his name on for a purpose and a task, that doesn't own the divine name inherently will never be God to me, not to any Muslims, not to unitarian Christians nor rightly guided Jews.

Whether Angel of the Lord is Gabriel or not is not the bone of contention here, I'm not even going to go into that argument because I know there is no connection there in the torah and I'm not reaching that conclusion based on Waraqah statement, Waraqah was a Christian with understanding of the torah and the gospel so he definitely would not have believed the being the prophet saw was Gabriel, he did not call the being Gabriel, he used the word Namus which comes from the Greek word Nomos, Syriac Namosa, it's a term Syriac Christians used to refer specifically to the divine law given to Moses, Waraqa was probably just identifying the being as a messanger that brings divine messages to previous prophets. So I don't understand where this Waraqa misled prophet Muhammad into believing the being was Gabriel coming from. The prophet did not know the name of the being as Gabriel through Waraqa.

There are parallels where the Angel of the Lord in the torah becomes Jibril in our tradition, like Hagar and the Angel of the Lord in the wilderness becomes Hajar and Jibril in our tradition. So I'm not drawing the conclusion that Angel of the Lord is Jibril from Waraqa statement.

The revelation of the Qur'an comes in different from, there are times it comes as inspiration into the heart, there are times the prophet had physical contact with Jibril like at the cave of hira, and why do you think I brought you first 5 verses of Sura 97, the prophet received those verses while in physical contact with Jibril.

U know it's actually funny that you as a Christian you are asking for independent attestation, but don't worry I'll give you one mutawatir hadith, the hadith is known as hadith of Jibril. A mutawatir hadith is a narration that's narrated by so many people at every level of chain of transmission such that it becomes illogical to believe they have all agreed on lie.
—Some companions were sitting with the prophet and unknown man just walked in with a physical characteristics that defied the logic of a desert traveler, his clothes all white, no sweat, and his hair all black, he sat across the prophet and started asking the prophet series of questions, after he left the prophet told the companions he was Jibril and he was asking the questions in other to teach the companions about their faith. The unknown man appeared out of nowhere, not member of the community, with no sign of travel and never to be seen again.

And on why we don't believe Paul—extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You can not start preaching substitutional atonement doctrine of blood sacrifice for salvation such that the disciples Jesus handpicked himself that walked with him, ate with him were in disagreement. Why should I that's living over 2000yrs after believe him?

Qasim6:
I thought we've been through this 'Angel of the Lord is divine'? Well, that's your own trinitarian opinion. A being—God placed his name on for a purpose and a task, that doesn't own the divine name inherently will never be God to me, not to any Muslims, not to unitarian Christians nor rightly guided Jews.

I'm yet to reply u in the previous thread because I want us to look at a specific challenge to understand what ancient Jews believe about the nature of God in the Torah. Do they Believe God is ONE OR ONE IN UNITY. WHAT DO THEY UNDERSTAND BY ECHAD.
when I have time I will reply.

Angel of the Lord is definitely divine. ancient rabbi said so, modern scholars including Bart Erhman said so, Hagar called Him God Almighty- she said I HAVE SEEN THE ALMIGHTY YHWH when she encountered angel of the Lord.
Targum called the angel of the Lord the word of God.
I dont know what other prove u need.

Qasim6:
Whether Angel of the Lord is Gabriel or not is not the bone of contention here, I'm not even going to go into that argument because I know there is no connection there in the torah and I'm not reaching that conclusion based on Waraqah statement, Waraqah was a Christian with understanding of the torah and the gospel so he definitely would not have believed the being the prophet saw was Gabriel, he did not call the being Gabriel, he used the word Namus which comes from the Greek word Nomos, Syriac Namosa, it's a term Syriac Christians used to refer specifically to the divine law given to Moses, Waraqa was probably just identifying the being as a messanger that brings divine messages to previous prophets. So I don't understand where this Waraqa misled prophet Muhammad into believing the being was Gabriel coming from. The prophet did not know the name of the being as Gabriel through Waraqa.

I never said waraqah told Muhammed Jibril spoke to him, follow the line of argument. The bone of contention is did Waraqah tell Muhammed he spoke to an angel.

back to the argument
so the hadith Bukhari was wrong to say Waraqah told Muhammed he spoke to an angel? is that what u are saying?

Aisha also said: "The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqah bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospel in Arabic. Waraqah asked (the Prophet), 'What do you see?' When he told him, Waraqah said, 'That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly.'"

so are u saying waraqah never mentioned angel? I thought namus meant angel of revelation? but u are now saying namus meant divine law.
when the word namus is used in ancient times, how is used? is it used for angels or divine law
if waraqah never mentioned angel and namus doesn't mean angel, then u are right that he did not mislead Muhammed into believing he spoke to an angel.

Qasim6:
There are parallels where the Angel of the Lord in the torah becomes Jibril in our tradition, like Hagar and the Angel of the Lord in the wilderness becomes Hajar and Jibril in our tradition. So I'm not drawing the conclusion that Angel of the Lord is Jibril from Waraqa statement.

The revelation of the Qur'an comes in different from, there are times it comes as inspiration into the heart, there are times the prophet had physical contact with Jibril like at the cave of hira, and why do you think I brought you first 5 verses of Sura 97, the prophet received those verses while in physical contact with Jibril.

If Muhammed actually spoke to Jibril, Quran should state it explicitly just like in the bible.

Luke 1
26 In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”

why is something like this too hard to find in the Quran- angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammed. why??

failure to produce this points to evidence of Quran being a composite book that was developed over time with progressive development of the stories as it passed hands and minds of theologians.
It shows the idea that Muhammed physically spoke to angel Gabriel was a later development, it was added later on to elevate the relevance of the revelation. That is why Quran which is one of the very early source of knowledge about Islamic faith didn't mention it explicitly. And that's why the hadiths couldnt get an ancient narration stating anyone could independently confirm Muhammed spoke to angel Jibril.

Qasim6:
U know it's actually funny that you as a Christian you are asking for independent attestation, but don't worry I'll give you one mutawatir hadith, the hadith is known as hadith of Jibril. A mutawatir hadith is a narration that's narrated by so many people at every level of chain of transmission such that it becomes illogical to believe they have all agreed on lie.
—Some companions were sitting with the prophet and unknown man just walked in with a physical characteristics that defied the logic of a desert traveler, his clothes all white, no sweat, and his hair all black, he sat across the prophet and started asking the prophet series of questions, after he left the prophet told the companions he was Jibril and he was asking the questions in other to teach the companions about their faith. The unknown man appeared out of nowhere, not member of the community, with no sign of travel and never to be seen again.

sorry but this is not independent attestation. This is still Muhammed telling people he spoke to angel Jibril. I want an independent confirmation where someone or the Quran[ which is supposed the word of Allah] said I can confirm Muhammed spoke to angel Gabriel. That is what I want NOT Muhammed telling people he spoke to Jibril.
The man being unknown or a stranger is irrelevant.

Qasim6:
And on why we don't believe Paul—extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You can not start preaching substitutional atonement doctrine of blood sacrifice for salvation such that the disciples Jesus handpicked himself that walked with him, ate with him were in disagreement. Why should I that's living over 2000yrs after believe him?

no problem, but I sha know that I will rather believe someone who said he received a revelation and submitted the revelation b4 the apostles for scrutiny and approval b4 preaching it, rather than someone who said he received a revelation and nobody could actually confirm he spoke to this divine person yet refused to have his revelation scrutinised.

AntiChristian:
Guy, i don't want to call you a fool as you have been exhibiting a typical trait of those Paul abused in Galatians 3:1.

You brought your stats to say Ramadan is all about food and gaining weight and bla bla bla! Where you guided by the holy Spirit to say those trash?

And Paul or whoever wrote 1 Thessalonians 4:11 told you to mind your hate-filled business!

Make it your goal to live a quiet life, minding your own business and working with your hands, just as we instructed you before. What's your business with our Ramadan fast in the first place? I don't even see the relevance of the verse you quoted to me here. If you claim you have the holy spirit and it guides you aright how come you are wrong to interfer in what's not your biz?

🤨 I didn't use only my personal waistline! I said i know others close to me. I have kids fasting! I have a wife fasting!

That's the Galatians 3:1 effect again!

Anyways i have a research here https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374476552_Impact_of_fasting_on_human_health_during_Ramadan with a conclusion you will find attached. Abeg don't reply me again!

I love how you’ve pivoted from 'It’s none of your business' to 'Let me show you this research paper.' If it’s not my business, why are you working so hard to convince me? 🤨

Let’s look at your 'Research' vs. Reality:
The paper you linked discusses the potential health benefits of fasting. Nobody is arguing that fasting is bad for you🤦🏾‍♂️. The argument was about the observed reality of weight gain due to overeating at night.

You’re basically sending me a manual on how a car should run to prove yours isn't currently in a ditch👀. Meanwhile, medical journals in the Middle East are filled with data on the 'Ramadan Weight Gain' and the 'Iftar Sugar Crash.' But I guess your 'personal waistline' and your immediate family are a larger sample size than entire medical populations? 🥱

It’s hilarious that you’re quoting 1 Thessalonians 4:11 to tell me to be quiet, while you spend your day on an open forum attacking Christian 'theatrics' and 'dancing😂 Does that verse only apply to people who disagree with you? Or is your 'quiet life' only for the hours you’re too hungry to type🤨?

And Galatians 3:1? My friend, read the next two verses! Paul is asking if they received the Spirit by 'works of the law' or by 'believing what they heard.' Using that verse to defend a ritualistic fast is the ultimate self-own🤧. You are literally the 'Galatian' in this scenario, obsessed with the ritual while missing the point. 🤦🏾‍♂️

You told me not to reply again, yet you’re the one who keeps coming back with 'research🤷', you clearly haven't reconciled with the actual statistics. If you want a quiet life, stop posting on public forums. Otherwise, expect your 'compound ignorance' to be corrected.

Go enjoy your '12 PM empty stomach'—the hunger is clearly making you see contradictions where there are only facts. 👋🏾🤠

SIRTee15:
I'm yet to reply u in the previous thread because I want us to look at a specific challenge to understand what ancient Jews believe about the nature of God in the Torah. Do they Believe God is ONE OR ONE IN UNITY. WHAT DO THEY UNDERSTAND BY ECHAD.
when I have time I will reply.

Alright, I'll be looking forward to that.

SIRTee15:
I never said waraqah told Muhammed Jibril spoke to him, follow the line of argument. The bone of contention is did Waraqah tell Muhammed he spoke to an angel.

back to the argument
so the hadith Bukhari was wrong to say Waraqah told Muhammed he spoke to an angel? is that what u are saying?

Aisha also said: "The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqah bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospel in Arabic. Waraqah asked (the Prophet), 'What do you see?' When he told him, Waraqah said, 'That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly.'"

so are u saying waraqah never mentioned angel? I thought namus meant angel of revelation? but u are now saying namus meant divine law.
when the word namus is used in ancient times, how is used? is it used for angels or divine law
if waraqah never mentioned angel and namus doesn't mean angel, then u are right that he did not mislead Muhammed into believing he spoke to an angel.

Your argument before is as though Waraqa did not have adequate knowledge of the scripture, he erroneously told the prophet he saw Angel Gabriel and the prophet just ran with it.

We will never be able to tell what Waraqa meant by Namus because the word is not Arabic, it's a loan word. the word for angel in Arabic is malak but looking at how the word was understood by Syriac Christians as the divine law given to Moses, one can say maybe he meant same law that was sent to Moses or bringer of divine law sent to Moses. My point is Prophet Muhammad did not get to know the being was Gabriel through Waraqa, he knew that from subsequent visitation. So Aisha, Ibn Hisham, Ibn Ishaq equating Namus as Gabriel were only doing that because of the benefit of hindsight. Even if you want to argue Malak YHWH or what Moses experienced by the burning bush is different from Gabriel it still proves nothing.

SIRTee15:
If Muhammed actually spoke to Jibril, Quran should state it explicitly just like in the bible.

Luke 1
26 In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”

why is something like this too hard to find in the Quran- angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammed. why??

You are making a mistake comparing Qur'an with the reported narrations we have in the gospels; the gospels are best compared with the hadith and they don't even come close to mutawatir hadith in the methodology used in compilation.
If you want verses in the Qur'an that indicates the Qur'an was brought by angel Gabriel these are all you will get

Say, "Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel - it is he who has brought it [Qur'an] down upon your heart by permission of Allah, confirming that which was before it and as guidance and good tidings for the believers." Qur'an 2:97


And when We substitute a verse in place of a verse - and Allah is most knowing of what He sends down - they say, "You are but an inventor." But most of them do not know.

Say, "The Holy Spirit (Gabriel) has brought it down from your Lord in truth to make firm those who believe and as guidance and good tidings to the Muslims." Qur'an 16 101-2

If you want reported speech you can only get that from hadith, like the example I gave but apparently that is not good enough for you but Luke or whosoever that wrote Luke that we don't know from whom he collected his information, the methodology he used to sieve truth from falsehood 'wow the effing standard'. Na why una matter dey tire me most times. You Christians would want to hold the validity, preservation of our scripture to an unreasonable standard when you can only hope and dream your new testament have the standard we have.

SIRTee15:
failure to produce this points to evidence of Quran being a composite book that was developed over time with progressive development of the stories as it passed hands and minds of theologians.
It shows the idea that Muhammed physically spoke to angel Gabriel was a later development, it was added later on to elevate the relevance of the revelation. That is why Quran which is one of the very early source of knowledge about Islamic faith didn't mention it explicitly. And that's why the hadiths couldnt get an ancient narration stating anyone could independently confirm Muhammed spoke to angel Jibril.

Lol! O ga ju, Ibo la tun jasi bayi!!
If you are going to push the agenda "progressive development of the Qur'an" after the prophet passed away, then you will have to demonstrate that early Muslims believed something otherwise about the source of the Qur'an.
We can assemble the whole of Qur'an in manuscript from within the first century of Islam, and the manuscripts are not coming from a single location but from all over Islamic world—Yemen, Egypt, Damascus... unlike some people that can only produce something in the size of a credit card within their own first century.

SIRTee15:
no problem, but I sha know that I will rather believe someone who said he received a revelation and submitted the revelation b4 the apostles for scrutiny and approval b4 preaching it, rather than someone who said he received a revelation and nobody could actually confirm he spoke to this divine person yet refused to have his revelation scrutinised.

Your favourite apostle telling us he received revelation, that he submitted the revelation to the apostles, and still him telling us the apostles approved the revelation and with that scuffle we can see between him and the Jerusalem church in his letters is good enough as independent attestation—Yeah, I got you bro.
And what exactly do you mean by the prophet refused to have his revelation scrutinised?