₦airaland Forum

doffman:
🤣🤣🤣 Omo , why you unbelievers always have difficult to answer simple question.

Must you tell story ahaahhh .

Let me give you example :

Who is my God

Allah is my God

Do you worship Allah ,

Yes , I worshipped him only .

As you can see , I answer you straight forward without any story

Now, be proud of your God and answer me clearly :


Who is your God ?

Do you worship Jesus ? Yes or no




Your question :

If Allah has a son, should the son of Allah be worshipped?

I have answered you several times in the past 🤣

Allah does not have son and no any son can be worshipped

A son that doesn’t owned by God does not exist and he did not ask us to worship any son or any person except him .

Surah Al-Mu'minun (23:91):"Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any deity [other than Him]."

This verse alone has finished you .


You can see how I answered you , Oya answer my own question nah ; no story o

Who is my God? My God is the Father.

It is only him I worship. All worship are directed to him

I pray only to the Father. All prayers are directed to him.

Now don't be ashamed of your Quran. There's a Quranic verse that directly answer my question.

Why are u ashamed of that verse? Why

If Allah has a son, should the son of Allah be worshipped. Yes or No.

I don't want any explanation. Just answer yes or No.
If Allah has a son, should the son of Allah be worshipped.

doffman:
Na you have issue with comprehension.
He was reflecting on his ignorance during pre Islamic era .

Read again :

During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she-monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys. They were all stoning it, because it had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them.


Omo, once you are Christian , you can never talk straight ahaaa

Shior

So the story is true. A monkey commited adultery and other monkeys were stoning him. Then this Muslim joined them

How did he know the monkey was being stoned for adultery. Who told him? The monkeys?

See another one. Doffman wantse.to become a Muslim so I can start believing such ludicrous statements.

Your prophet told u to eat with the right hand because Satan eats with the left hand.
Doffman is this true?
What about those who are left handed, they should be forced to eat with the right hand on top say wetin.

Doffman if I become a Muslim and left handed, will I start eating with my right hand something I'm not used to?

Or is this one pre Islamic too

doffman:
Guy ? Seriously is like you are avoiding the truth. Yiu don’t have any point again 🤣.

He has told you that facing a direction of a place to worship is not idolatery .

He said your Bible also reported a case where Daniel was facing Jerusalem during worshipping . Stop disgracing yourself nah .🤣

Everyone and evidence based research also know that Muslim do not bow to stone or worship anything apart from Allah .

Surah Al-Baqarah (2:144) explains this directional change: "So turn your face toward al-Masjid al-Haram. And wherever you [believers] are, turn your faces toward it [in prayer]."

Surah Al-Anbiya (21:98): "Indeed, you [disbelievers] and what you worship other than Allah are the fuel of Hell. You will be coming to it.


Now that we have given you proof that Muslims do not worship stone or anything apart from Allah , now, if you disagree , then show us where Allah said Muslim should worship stone oooo ?

Shioor , guy go sit down in one corner joor .

Na u guys even worshiped sculpture 🤣

U worship facing a house that has a sacred stone. U now facing the sacred stone.

The stone is nothing but will ask Allah to forgive sins of those who kissed it dearly.

Stone is not special but Muslims will kill themselves to kiss the stone.

People u see why God said do not associate my name with any sacred stone. because he knows people will eventually build legend and myth around such stones.

God told Moses do not bow before a sacred stone. Muslims argue they don't bow to a sacred stone but they venerate it to highest heavens.

Islam as a religion is not in continuity with religion of previous prophets.

It's a strange and man made religion. Muhammed led people astray by telling them to worship God in a strange way. He's a false prophet.

Deuteronomy 13
If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “ and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the Lord your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him.


Any prophet that tells people to bow before a sacred stone is a false prophet. God expressly banned bowing before a sacred stone.

SIRTee15:
if no one told u to prostate before a stone, then why do u prostate b4 a stone

why do u prostate before a house that has a sacred stone?

worship at the Lord's footstool...
is that not God's throne, who is seated on the throne?? abeg this one no be talk
did Joshua or Jacob bow before the stone? if not u no get talk. stick to the topic. if joshua and Jacob goes back to same stone or always erect stone anytime they worship God, then we can confirm association of stone with worship amongst the patriach.

I dont care what pilgrims do, people are free to worship what they fancy. The bible is the standard.


Dont tell me u dont know God dwells inside the holies of holies. because I would be so dissapinted in u if u deny it

Exodus 40
34 Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. 35 And Moses was not able to enter the tent of meeting because the cloud settled on it, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle.

Numbers 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.

If God dwells in the kabba, then its justifiable for Muslims to bow before it because Israelites did same. u get it now.

Go and read Jeremiah and books of the prophets. God repeated he desires obedience and not sacrifice. He even said he didn't commanded Israelites to sacrifice but to listen when he brought them out of Egypt

Jeremiah 7
22 For when I brought your ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices, 23 but I gave them this command: Obey me, and I will be your God and you will be my people. Walk in obedience to all I command you, that it may go well with you.

God wants obedience and not rituals or sacrifice. He wants to be obeyed the way he wants. rituals and sacrifice is secondary to God, primary thing is obedience.

Now back to obedience, why do muslims disobey God by bowing before a stone. u may deny it but actions speak louder than words.

You're treating the direction of worship as though it were the object of worship. Those are not the same thing.

The Kaaba is the qiblah, the direction Muslims face. Allah is the One worshipped. Muslims do not believe the Kaaba or the Black Stone is Allah, nor that Allah is physically housed inside either.

Since you're accusing Muslims of idolatry, the burden is to show that Muslims actually direct worship to the stone or the Kaaba. Islam's own sources identify the object of worship as Allah says, Worship Me (Qur'an 20:14), while the Kaaba is appointed as the direction of prayer (2:144). If the charge is muslims worship the stone, Islamic sources do not instruct Muslims to worship it.

Umar makes the distinction explicit. He said of the Black Stone that I know that you are a stone and can neither benefit anyone nor harm anyone. He kissed it because he saw the Prophet pbuh kiss it, not because he believed it was a deity (Sahih al-Bukhari 1597). Even reports about reward or atonement connected with touching it don't change this. Allah is the One who forgives and rewards, and the Stone has no independent power to forgive, save, harm, or benefit.

Now distinguish three things: facing an object, honoring it, and worshipping it. You have established the first, and perhaps the second. You still have to establish the third.

Your own Bible gives examples. Daniel prayed toward Jerusalem (Daniel 6:10). Solomon prayed toward the Temple while saying even the highest heaven cannot contain God (1 Kings 8:27-30). Joshua fell on his face before the Ark (Joshua 7:6). If you say Joshua was worshipping God while prostrating before a sacred object, you've conceded the distinction that prostration before a sacred object doesn't make that object the recipient of worship. Or do you say Joshua worshipped the ark?

If you answer that Joshua was legitimate because God commanded the Ark, then the test is divine command, not whether an object is involved, and your stone argument is gone. What remains is whether Muhammad was authorized, which is a different debate and the one you haven't made.

Your texts don't carry the weight you put on them. Leviticus 26:1 bans making an idol or sacred stone and bowing down to it, and Joshua at the Ark shows that bowing before a sacred object isn't banned in itself. Deuteronomy 16:22 bans setting up a sacred pillar, and Exodus 34:13 orders the destruction of the Canaanites' pillars, which belonged to a rival cult. Neither says every way of honoring something God appointed is idolatry, or the same Torah wouldn't command the Ark and the cherubim.

If you add that the Kaaba was a pagan site, that is history, not what Muslims worship now. The Bible has idols placed inside the Temple itself (2 Kings 21:4-7), and nobody concludes the Temple was pagan afterward. What matters is whom the act is directed to today.

So the question isn't, Did Muslims bow while facing something sacred? Obviously they did. It's Did they bow to that thing as a god?

Show me where Muslims are instructed to worship the Stone as a deity, address it in prayer, ask it for forgiveness or salvation, or attribute independent divine power to it. If you can't, you've shown orientation and perhaps veneration, but you have not demonstrated idolatry.

honesttalk21:
You're treating the direction of worship as though it were the object of worship. Those are not the same thing.

The Kaaba is the qiblah, the direction Muslims face. Allah is the One worshipped. Muslims do not believe the Kaaba or the Black Stone is Allah, nor that Allah is physically housed inside either.

Since you're accusing Muslims of idolatry, the burden is to show that Muslims actually direct worship to the stone or the Kaaba. Islam's own sources identify the object of worship as Allah says, Worship Me (Qur'an 20:14), while the Kaaba is appointed as the direction of prayer (2:144). If the charge is muslims worship the stone, Islamic sources do not instruct Muslims to worship it.

Umar makes the distinction explicit. He said of the Black Stone that I know that you are a stone and can neither benefit anyone nor harm anyone. He kissed it because he saw the Prophet pbuh kiss it, not because he believed it was a deity (Sahih al-Bukhari 1597). Even reports about reward or atonement connected with touching it don't change this. Allah is the One who forgives and rewards, and the Stone has no independent power to forgive, save, harm, or benefit.

Now distinguish three things: facing an object, honoring it, and worshipping it. You have established the first, and perhaps the second. You still have to establish the third.

Your own Bible gives examples. Daniel prayed toward Jerusalem (Daniel 6:10). Solomon prayed toward the Temple while saying even the highest heaven cannot contain God (1 Kings 8:27-30). Joshua fell on his face before the Ark (Joshua 7:6). If you say Joshua was worshipping God while prostrating before a sacred object, you've conceded the distinction that prostration before a sacred object doesn't make that object the recipient of worship. Or do you say Joshua worshipped the ark?

If you answer that Joshua was legitimate because God commanded the Ark, then the test is divine command, not whether an object is involved, and your stone argument is gone. What remains is whether Muhammad was authorized, which is a different debate and the one you haven't made.

Your texts don't carry the weight you put on them. Leviticus 26:1 bans making an idol or sacred stone and bowing down to it, and Joshua at the Ark shows that bowing before a sacred object isn't banned in itself. Deuteronomy 16:22 bans setting up a sacred pillar, and Exodus 34:13 orders the destruction of the Canaanites' pillars, which belonged to a rival cult. Neither says every way of honoring something God appointed is idolatry, or the same Torah wouldn't command the Ark and the cherubim.

If you add that the Kaaba was a pagan site, that is history, not what Muslims worship now. The Bible has idols placed inside the Temple itself (2 Kings 21:4-7), and nobody concludes the Temple was pagan afterward. What matters is whom the act is directed to today.

So the question isn't, Did Muslims bow while facing something sacred? Obviously they did. It's Did they bow to that thing as a god?

Show me where Muslims are instructed to worship the Stone as a deity, address it in prayer, ask it for forgiveness or salvation, or attribute independent divine power to it. If you can't, you've shown orientation and perhaps veneration, but you have not demonstrated idolatry.

We are just going around in circle now.

I already told u the cannanites don't worship sacred stones, they worship Asherah by bowing before a stone.

But God explicitly told them to destroy any sacred stone even though cannanites don't worship them

Then God went ahead to instruct the Israelites never to erect a sacred stone in his name because he hates it.
This is one that put the nail in coffin when it comes to venerating the scared stone.

God said don't set up any sacred stone in my name. Don't do it. He hates it.

Israelites never venerate or honour any sacred stone in the name of the LORD anywhere in the bible.
There is no reference anywhere in the bible that a stone is considered sacred.
God banned Israelites from doing such.

It's not even about bowing before the sacred stone. It's about don't build it at all and associate it with me.

Joshua didn't build a sacred stone, Solomon didn't build a sacred stone, Jacob didn't build a sacred stone. No prophet of God built a sacred stone.

The first prophet of God to set up a sacred stone and associate it with God is Muhammed. That's a strange theology. And it shows he's a false prophet.


The question is why do Muslims need a sacred stone to worship Allah. Why? Something God forbids because he hates it.

And u keep projecting the hadith that says the sacred stone is nothing. Why don't u address hadiths that expressly shows the sacred stone has some level of deification to it like medium of forgiving sins, becoming a person on judgment Day, was once white then turned black.

We all know what we doing but I will leave u with the words of Jeremiah.

22 For when I brought your ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices, 23 but I gave them this command: Obey me, and I will be your God and you will be my people. Walk in obedience to all I command you, that it may go well with you.

Obedience is better than rituals or sacrifice.

doffman:
Guy ? Seriously is like you are avoiding the truth. Yiu don’t have any point again 🤣.

He has told you that facing a direction of a place to worship is not idolatery .

He said your Bible also reported a case where Daniel was facing Jerusalem during worshipping . Stop disgracing yourself nah .🤣

Everyone and evidence based research also know that Muslim do not bow to stone or worship anything apart from Allah .

Surah Al-Baqarah (2:144) explains this directional change: "So turn your face toward al-Masjid al-Haram. And wherever you [believers] are, turn your faces toward it [in prayer]."

Surah Al-Anbiya (21:98): "Indeed, you [disbelievers] and what you worship other than Allah are the fuel of Hell. You will be coming to it.


Now that we have given you proof that Muslims do not worship stone or anything apart from Allah , now, if you disagree , then show us where Allah said Muslim should worship stone oooo ?

Shioor , guy go sit down in one corner joor .

Na u guys even worshiped sculpture 🤣

I know your level of intellectual level in theology is shallow. But let me point u out the problem with the black stone.

U guys claim Islam is the religion of the old prophets but the black stone shows that's a big lie


God told Moses do not erect any sacred stone in my name because he hates it. Don't do it.
It doesn't matter if u bow before it, worship it, kiss it or touch it.
God simply said do not set up a sacred stone in my name. Do not associate my name with any sacred stone. Do t do it.

No prophet of God ever erect a SACRED STONE IN THE MAME OF THE LORD.
God already said do not do it because I hate it.

Appealing to the Koran won't help u because God didn't start giving instructions with the Koran. God also spoke to previous prophet and he clearly told them never to set up a sacred stone in his name.

Muhammed came and not only set up a sacred stone but also built a house for it, then told people to bow before it.

That's disobedience to God but if u say it's not. Then the final conclusion is Allah is not the God that spoke to Moses. Simple as that.

SIRTee15:
We are just going around in circle now.

I already told u the cannanites don't worship sacred stones, they worship Asherah by bowing before a stone.

But God explicitly told them to destroy any sacred stone even though cannanites don't worship them

Then God went ahead to instruct the Israelites never to erect a sacred stone in his name because he hates it.
This is one that put the nail in coffin when it comes to venerating the scared stone.

God said don't set up any sacred stone in my name. Don't do it. He hates it.

Israelites never venerate or honour any sacred stone in the name of the LORD anywhere in the bible.
There is no reference anywhere in the bible that a stone is considered sacred.
God banned Israelites from doing such.

It's not even about bowing before the sacred stone. It's about don't build it at all and associate it with me.

Joshua didn't build a sacred stone, Solomon didn't build a sacred stone, Jacob didn't build a sacred stone. No prophet of God built a sacred stone.

The first prophet of God to set up a sacred stone and associate it with God is Muhammed. That's a strange theology. And it shows he's a false prophet.


The question is why do Muslims need a sacred stone to worship Allah. Why? Something God forbids because he hates it.

And u keep projecting the hadith that says the sacred stone is nothing. Why don't u address hadiths that expressly shows the sacred stone has some level of deification to it like medium of forgiving sins, becoming a person on judgment Day, was once white then turned black.

We all know what we doing but I will leave u with the words of Jeremiah.

22 For when I brought your ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices, 23 but I gave them this command: Obey me, and I will be your God and you will be my people. Walk in obedience to all I command you, that it may go well with you.

Obedience is better than rituals or sacrifice.

Setting your other points aside, you maintained that the Bible contains no instances of Israelites honouring a sacred stone. That claim is contradicted by the text. Jacob took the stone he had slept on, set it up as a pillar, poured oil on it, and named the place Bethel, house of God (Gen 28:18-22). He later set up another pillar at Bethel and poured a drink offering and oil on it (Gen 35:14). Moses raised twelve pillars at Sinai beside the altar (Exod 24:4). Joshua set up a great stone at the sanctuary of the LORD as a covenant witness (Josh 24:26-27). Isaiah speaks of a pillar to the LORD in Egypt (Isa 19:19).

Deuteronomy 16:22 forbids Israel to erect a sacred pillar, and I'm not denying it. But now you have an interpretive problem of your own, since your Bible contains religiously significant pillars and stones and also bans one kind. Quoting the prohibition doesn't settle which cases it covers.

Isaiah 19:19 also blocks the reply that the earlier pillars were simply superseded. The same Hebrew word, matstsebah (pillar), appears in Deuteronomy 16:22 and in Isaiah's pillar to the LORD.

Joshua 24:27 shows a stone can have a religious function without being a god. It is made a witness to the covenant, and that doesn't make it the object of worship.

The burden is still yours. You said it doesn't matter whether anyone bows, kisses, or touches the stone, because the offense is setting it up. Then show why a command given to ancient Israel binds every later prophet in the same form. That is a question of authority, not of stones. Deuteronomy 13 tests whether a prophet leads people after other gods, and Muhammad pbuh taught worship of Allah alone, not of the Stone. If your position is that every Mosaic prohibition on sacred stones is permanently binding on later prophets, say so plainly and prove it.

honesttalk21:
Setting your other points aside, you maintained that the Bible contains no instances of Israelites honouring a sacred stone. That claim is contradicted by the text. Jacob took the stone he had slept on, set it up as a pillar, poured oil on it, and named the place Bethel, house of God (Gen 28:18-22). He later set up another pillar at Bethel and poured a drink offering and oil on it (Gen 35:14). Moses raised twelve pillars at Sinai beside the altar (Exod 24:4). Joshua set up a great stone at the sanctuary of the LORD as a covenant witness (Josh 24:26-27). Isaiah speaks of a pillar to the LORD in Egypt (Isa 19:19).


Deuteronomy 16:22 forbids Israel to erect a sacred pillar, and I'm not denying it. But now you have an interpretive problem of your own, since your Bible contains religiously significant pillars and stones and also bans one kind. Quoting the prohibition doesn't settle which cases it covers.

Isaiah 19:19 also blocks the reply that the earlier pillars were simply superseded. The same Hebrew word, matstsebah (pillar), appears in Deuteronomy 16:22 and in Isaiah's pillar to the LORD.

Joshua 24:27 shows a stone can have a religious function without being a god. It is made a witness to the covenant, and that doesn't make it the object of worship.

The burden is still yours. You said it doesn't matter whether anyone bows, kisses, or touches the stone, because the offense is setting it up. Then show why a command given to ancient Israel binds every later prophet in the same form. That is a question of authority, not of stones. Deuteronomy 13 tests whether a prophet leads people after other gods, and Muhammad pbuh taught worship of Allah alone, not of the Stone. If your position is that every Mosaic prohibition on sacred stones is permanently binding on later prophets, say so plainly and prove it.

Yes it's binding and none set up a deified stone

Pls go back to those verses and show me where those stones are called sacred. Or where they are venerated or deified or ahd some spiritual or supernatural importance. None
Stones set up for altars or symbolism of agreement is not the same as sacred stones.
Sacred symbolises importance or deification, something that must be treated as holy .
None of those pillars or stones received such importance. None
I will all those verses here.

Jacob called the place he met God house of God then proceed to set up and altar with stones.

When he returned back to bethel he did not return to the old stones he previously set up but built a new stone altar. That shows the place and not the stones hold importance.
We don't know if the previous stone in Genesis 26 was still there when he returned in Genesis 34 but what we know is he built a new stone altar for sacrifice. No mention was made of the previous stone altar.

Genesis 35.1
Then God said to Jacob, “Go up to Bethel and settle there, and build an altar there to God, who appeared to you when you were fleeing from your brother Esau.”

God told Jacob to return to exact place he appeared to him and build a new altar not return to the old stone pillar.
That shows the spiritual importance is the place not any stone. If the stone set up in Genesis 25 is of any relevance to God, it will be mentioned again
I beleive this settles it.

Again Moses built 12 stone pillars representing Israel 12 tribes, the stones were not erected for God.

Exodus 24.4
4 Moses then wrote down everything the Lord had said.
He got up early the next morning and built an altar at the foot of the mountain and set up twelve stone pillars representing the twelve tribes of Israel.

He went ahead and offered sacrifice on the altars and that was the end of those pillars. They were never mentioned again and the Israelites did not carry those 12 stone pillars anywhere they go. They simply abandoned them. That shows they are simply altars not sacred stones.
When Joshua needed 12 stone pillars representing Israelites again he simply built new ones in joshua 4 and they were simply for memorials and not for any form of deification.
The argument is not setting up stones but setting up sacred stones.

Joshua set up a stone as a witness btw him and Israelites. This is a common ancient near East practice of symbolising agreement. People will say the decision we made was at that pillar as evidence of the the agreement. Sometimes people write the agreement on those stones so people can see and confirm such covenant.
The stone was never mentioned again and no reference was made of the stone in future chapters.
It's not a sacred stone.

Isaiah was talking about setting up monument of remembrance in Egypt. Not a holy or sacred monument.

I think what we have now is going to the bible and showing any stone built as evidence to justify deification of the kabba. That's ridiculous.
Altars are built with stones, houses including temple of God are built with stones, ancient walls are built with stones, monuments are built with stones,
Stones are also used for memorials and Absalom built one for himself because he has no children.
Stones can also be used for writing as seen in 2 stones the 10 commandments were written on.

The argument is not setting up stone but setting up sacred stones in the name of the Lord.
God prohibited that and no prophet of God ever did that.

SIRTee15:
Yes it's binding and none set up a deified stone

Pls go back to those verses and show me where those stones are called sacred. Or where they are venerated or deified or ahd some spiritual or supernatural importance. None
Stones set up for altars or symbolism of agreement is not the same as sacred stones.
Sacred symbolises importance or deification, something that must be treated as holy .
None of those pillars or stones received such importance. None
I will all those verses here.

Jacob called the place he met God house of God then proceed to set up and altar with stones.

When he returned back to bethel he did not return to the old stones he previously set up but built a new stone altar. That shows the place and not the stones hold importance.
We don't know if the previous stone in Genesis 26 was still there when he returned in Genesis 34 but what we know is he built a new stone altar for sacrifice. No mention was made of the previous stone altar.

Genesis 35.1
Then God said to Jacob, “Go up to Bethel and settle there, and build an altar there to God, who appeared to you when you were fleeing from your brother Esau.”

God told Jacob to return to exact place he appeared to him and build a new altar not return to the old stone pillar.
That shows the spiritual importance is the place not any stone. If the stone set up in Genesis 25 is of any relevance to God, it will be mentioned again
I beleive this settles it.

Again Moses built 12 stone pillars representing Israel 12 tribes, the stones were not erected for God.

Exodus 24.4
4 Moses then wrote down everything the Lord had said.
He got up early the next morning and built an altar at the foot of the mountain and set up twelve stone pillars representing the twelve tribes of Israel.

He went ahead and offered sacrifice on the altars and that was the end of those pillars. They were never mentioned again and the Israelites did not carry those 12 stone pillars anywhere they go. They simply abandoned them. That shows they are simply altars not sacred stones.
When Joshua needed 12 stone pillars representing Israelites again he simply built new ones in joshua 4 and they were simply for memorials and not for any form of deification.
The argument is not setting up stones but setting up sacred stones.

Joshua set up a stone as a witness btw him and Israelites. This is a common ancient near East practice of symbolising agreement. People will say the decision we made was at that pillar as evidence of the the agreement. Sometimes people write the agreement on those stones so people can see and confirm such covenant.
The stone was never mentioned again and no reference was made of the stone in future chapters.
It's not a sacred stone.

Isaiah was talking about setting up monument of remembrance in Egypt. Not a holy or sacred monument.

I think what we have now is going to the bible and showing any stone built as evidence to justify deification of the kabba. That's ridiculous.
Altars are built with stones, houses including temple of God are built with stones, ancient walls are built with stones, monuments are built with stones,
Stones are also used for memorials and Absalom built one for himself because he has no children.
Stones can also be used for writing as seen in 2 stones the 10 commandments were written on.

The argument is not setting up stone but setting up sacred stones in the name of the Lord.
God prohibited that and no prophet of God ever did that.

Over this exchange, you have given four different tests at different times. First it was whether Muslims bow before the stone, yes or no. Then it was that kissing and touching are part of honoring it. Then it didn't matter whether anyone bows, worships, kisses, or touches, because setting it up was the offense. Now sacred means deified or treated as holy. They can't all be the rule. If worship doesn't matter, deification can't be the test, and if deification is the test, you must show Muslims deify the Black Stone. They don't. Umar said it can neither benefit nor harm, and kissed it because he saw the Prophet pbuh do so (Sahih al-Bukhari 1597). The reports about touching it, its colour, and its testifying on Judgment Day give it a religious role, and a thing can have a religious role without being a god.

You say Muhammad pbuh told people to bow before a stone. Then show where he instructed Muslims to prostrate to the Black Stone rather than to Allah. The Qur'an says to turn toward al-Masjid al-Haram (2:144). It doesn't say to worship the Stone.

You ask where those stones are called sacred. Sacred is the NIV's word. The Hebrew in Deuteronomy 16:22 is matstsebah, pillar, the same word used for Jacob's pillar at Bethel (Gen 28:18) and for Isaiah's pillar to the LORD in Egypt (Isa 19:19), which Isaiah calls a sign and witness to the LORD (19:20). Absalom's pillar (2 Sam 18:18) comes from the same root, so the word alone doesn't make a pillar forbidden. What in Deuteronomy 16:22 does?

You say Jacob's pillar was never mentioned again. God Himself mentioned it, saying I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar (Gen 31:13). Genesis 35:14 has Jacob setting up another pillar and pouring a drink offering and oil on it, so Genesis 35:1 telling him to build an altar doesn't cancel it. I grant that the Sinai pillars stood for the tribes and that nobody worshipped them. And if the Stone speaking on Judgment Day proves deification, Joshua 24:27 says his stone heard all the LORD's words and will witness against Israel, and nobody calls it a god.

Your Canaanite comparison has the same missing step. Their stones belonged to a system of gods, Asherah among them. Muslims don't identify the Stone as a deity, pray to it, or give it independent power, and one shared physical act doesn't make two theologies the same.

You say the ban is binding. Then show why a command to Israel binds every later prophet in the same form. Christians distinguish Mosaic commands that still bind from ones whose application changed, so who decides which this is, and where does Scripture say so? Deuteronomy 13 tests whether a prophet leads people to other gods, and Muhammad pbuh taught worship of Allah alone.

Facing the Kaaba doesn't prove worshipping the Stone. Kissing it doesn't prove deifying it. And Deuteronomy 16:22 binding Israel doesn't prove it binds every later prophet. Each needs its own proof, so answer this: where does the Bible establish that the Black Stone is the specific kind of pillar Deuteronomy 16:22 bans, and where does it establish that this command binds Muhammad pbuh and Muslims in the same form?

honesttalk21:
Over this exchange, you have given four different tests at different times. First it was whether Muslims bow before the stone, yes or no. Then it was that kissing and touching are part of honoring it. Then it didn't matter whether anyone bows, worships, kisses, or touches, because setting it up was the offense.

Bowing before a stone, kissing it or touching with the hope of remission of sin cleary shows deification of the black stone.
There's absolutely no way u can go around this.
Deification means to see something of some supreme worth or treating something with such extreme admiration and respect that they seem like a deity.
That's what u Muslims do to the black stone. During pilgrimage, Muslims practically fight themselves just to touch or kiss it.
The whole point is God said do not erect a sacred stone in my name. Simple. It doesn't matter what u do with it.

honesttalk21:
Now sacred means deified or treated as holy. They can't all be the rule. If worship doesn't matter, deification can't be the test, and if deification is the test, you must show Muslims deify the Black Stone.

Yes u do otherwise people would not be stepping on THEMSLEVES just to kiss it.
And let's not forget people beleive kissing the black stone forgives sin. And it will testify against those that kissed it insincerely on judgement Day.
Like I can't get my head round this, this black stone is of no importance but it has the power to mediate for remission of sin, it can stone for people's sin because that was how it became black in the first place.
I don't know in your religion. But only God has the power to forgive sin. So anything that can act as a medium for atonement is definitely not ordinary.

honesttalk21:
They don't. Umar said it can neither benefit nor harm, and kissed it because he saw the Prophet pbuh do so (Sahih al-Bukhari 1597). The reports about touching it, its colour, and its testifying on Judgment Day give it a religious role, and a thing can have a religious role without being a god.

Exactly u are coming out small small. Finally u admit the black stone has a religious role. Nobody said it's God, I never said that.
A stone having a religious role signifies spiritual importance and that is akin to what the Israelites did with Moses bronze snake.
Now God is saying I dont want u to set up a sacred stone for any religious role in my name. He hates it.
Now a stone has been set up with the purpose of forgiving sins and u expect that doesn't contradict Deuteronomy 16.22? As I said earlier, we all know what we are doing.

honesttalk21:
You say Muhammad pbuh told people to bow before a stone. Then show where he instructed Muslims to prostrate to the Black Stone rather than to Allah. The Qur'an says to turn toward al-Masjid al-Haram (2:144). It doesn't say to worship the Stone.

Muhammed told u guys to prostate to a house that has a sacred stone. What u doing is rationalisation. Something Saul did but was still punished.

honesttalk21:
You ask where those stones are called sacred. Sacred is the NIV's word. The Hebrew in Deuteronomy 16:22 is matstsebah, pillar, the same word used for Jacob's pillar at Bethel (Gen 28:18) and for Isaiah's pillar to the LORD in Egypt (Isa 19:19), which Isaiah calls a sign and witness to the LORD (19:20). Absalom's pillar (2 Sam 18:18) comes from the same root, so the word alone doesn't make a pillar forbidden. What in Deuteronomy 16:22 does?

I don't speak Hebrew and not interested in linguistic argument. God simply reminded Jacob what he did in bethel in Genesis 31.
When God told him to return to bethel, no reference was made of the previous stone. It's done and gone. If it was a sacred stone, God will send him back to the stone.
God clearly showed that was sacred is the place itself because he encountered God. The sacredness of bethel has nothing to do with the stone.
Other examples are completely irrelevant. I already explained near East people in ancient times use pillars as evidence of agreement. Joshua erected and possible wrote down the agreement on the stone. That's evidence not anything sacred.

honesttalk21:
You say Jacob's pillar was never mentioned again. God Himself mentioned it, saying I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar (Gen 31:13). Genesis 35:14 has Jacob setting up another pillar and pouring a drink offering and oil on it, so Genesis 35:1 telling him to build an altar doesn't cancel it. I grant that the Sinai pillars stood for the tribes and that nobody worshipped them. And if the Stone speaking on Judgment Day proves deification, Joshua 24:27 says his stone heard all the LORD's words and will witness against Israel, and nobody calls it a god.

Can u show me anywhere in the bible Joshua stone became personified in anyway Of course u can't because it's simply a relational language. It expresses deep meaning of words in emotional terms. Your own stone talking and personified is literal. It would practically take up an active role on judgement Day.

honesttalk21:
Your Canaanite comparison has the same missing step. Their stones belonged to a system of gods, Asherah among them. Muslims don't identify the Stone as a deity, pray to it, or give it independent power, and one shared physical act doesn't make two theologies the same.

No u wrong, pls study cannanites pantheon. They don't worship stones. They set up this stones as a means to be venerate Asherah.
Canaanite religion included standing stones/pillars. These could mark a sacred place or represent the presence or cultic significance of a deity.
Archaeology has found numerous standing stones at Canaanite/Levantine cult sites. They could function as cult symbols or sacred objects, rather than necessarily being thought of as the deity itself.

In the wider ancient Near East, a deity could be represented by a cultic stone or pillar. The stone could therefore receive ritual attention—offerings, libations, anointing, etc.—because of its association with the deity.
Same thing u do to the black stone when u kiss it or touch it. Some Muslims even anoint the black stone with oil for whatever reason.

honesttalk21:
You say the ban is binding. Then show why a command to Israel binds every later prophet in the same form.

Torah law is divided into 3. Ceremonial laws, civic laws and moral laws. The moral laws are forever binding because they are from God. They are laws that revolve round obedience to God.

honesttalk21:
Christians distinguish Mosaic commands that still bind from ones whose application changed, so who decides which this is, and where does Scripture say so?

Christianity did away with the civic laws and change the ceremonial laws. The moral laws is still binding. What God hates during the time of Moses, he will still hate during the time of Muhammed.

honesttalk21:
Deuteronomy 13 tests whether a prophet leads people to other gods, and Muhammad taught worship of Allah alone.

Yeah Joseph Smith also taught to worship only God only, Mormons don't beleive in Trinity. Zoroastrianism also teach monotheism- worship of only one God.
In fact, Zoroastrianism had existed as a religion for over a thousand years before Abraham came on stage.
Muhammed preaching one God means nothing, the question is which God is he preaching.
If a God tells people never to bow before a stone and Muhammed said it's ok to bow before a stone. Then that raises serious doubt. U have not erased that doubt here.

honesttalk21:
Facing the Kaaba doesn't prove worshipping the Stone. Kissing it doesn't prove deifying it. And Deuteronomy 16:22 binding Israel doesn't prove it binds every later prophet.

Yes it does, because if God is impassion. If he hates something, he is not going to change his mind and then love it.

honesttalk21:
Each needs its own proof, so answer this: where does the Bible establish that the Black Stone is the specific kind of pillar Deuteronomy 16:22 bans, and where does it establish that this command binds Muhammad and Muslims in the same form?

Black stone is a sacred stone that God banned. Deuteronomy 16.22 is a moral law. It's forever binding. So not set up sacred stone in my name because I hate it.
Now let me show u example of a sacred pillar in the bible because all u doing is picking up stones and forcing it to mean sacred when they are clearly not.

There was a time Israelites started honoring Moses bronze snake image. They set it up in the temple and offered offerings to it. Now that's sacred, they didn't worship it anyway but they venerated it.
During the reform of Hezekiah, he smashed it to pieces.

2 kings 18.4
Hezekiah removed the high places and broke the pillars and cut down the Asherah. And he broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made, for until those days the people of Israel had made offerings to it (it was called Nehushtan).

Now this is what we mean by sacred and what Israelites did to the bronze serpent is very similar to what Muslims do with the black stone.
U can deny it but evidence is too glaring.

SIRTee15:
Bowing before a stone, kissing it or touching with the hope of remission of sin cleary shows deification of the black stone.
There's absolutely no way u can go around this.
Deification means to see something of some supreme worth or treating something with such extreme admiration and respect that they seem like a deity.
That's what u Muslims do to the black stone. During pilgrimage, Muslims practically fight themselves just to touch or kiss it.
The whole point is God said do not erect a sacred stone in my name. Simple. It doesn't matter what u do with it.


Yes u do otherwise people would not be stepping on THEMSLEVES just to kiss it.
And let's not forget people beleive kissing the black stone forgives sin. And it will testify against those that kissed it insincerely on judgement Day.
Like I can't get my head round this, this black stone is of no importance but it has the power to mediate for remission of sin, it can stone for people's sin because that was how it became black in the first place.
I don't know in your religion. But only God has the power to forgive sin. So anything that can act as a medium for atonement is definitely not ordinary.


Exactly u are coming out small small. Finally u admit the black stone has a religious role. Nobody said it's God, I never said that.
A stone having a religious role signifies spiritual importance and that is akin to what the Israelites did with Moses bronze snake.
Now God is saying I dont want u to set up a sacred stone for any religious role in my name. He hates it.
Now a stone has been set up with the purpose of forgiving sins and u expect that doesn't contradict Deuteronomy 16.22? As I said earlier, we all know what we are doing.


Muhammed told u guys to prostate to a house that has a sacred stone. What u doing is rationalisation. Something Saul did but was still punished.


I don't speak Hebrew and not interested in linguistic argument. God simply reminded Jacob what he did in bethel in Genesis 31.
When God told him to return to bethel, no reference was made of the previous stone. It's done and gone. If it was a sacred stone, God will send him back to the stone.
God clearly showed that was sacred is the place itself because he encountered God. The sacredness of bethel has nothing to do with the stone.
Other examples are completely irrelevant. I already explained near East people in ancient times use pillars as evidence of agreement. Joshua erected and possible wrote down the agreement on the stone. That's evidence not anything sacred.


Can u show me anywhere in the bible Joshua stone became personified in anyway Of course u can't because it's simply a relational language. It expresses deep meaning of words in emotional terms. Your own stone talking and personified is literal. It would practically take up an active role on judgement Day.


No u wrong, pls study cannanites pantheon. They don't worship stones. They set up this stones as a means to be venerate Asherah.
Canaanite religion included standing stones/pillars. These could mark a sacred place or represent the presence or cultic significance of a deity.
Archaeology has found numerous standing stones at Canaanite/Levantine cult sites. They could function as cult symbols or sacred objects, rather than necessarily being thought of as the deity itself.

In the wider ancient Near East, a deity could be represented by a cultic stone or pillar. The stone could therefore receive ritual attention—offerings, libations, anointing, etc.—because of its association with the deity.
Same thing u do to the black stone when u kiss it or touch it. Some Muslims even anoint the black stone with oil for whatever reason.


Torah law is divided into 3. Ceremonial laws, civic laws and moral laws. The moral laws are forever binding because they are from God. They are laws that revolve round obedience to God.



Christianity did away with the civic laws and change the ceremonial laws. The moral laws is still binding. What God hates during the time of Moses, he will still hate during the time of Muhammed.


Yeah Joseph Smith also taught to worship only God only, Mormons don't beleive in Trinity. Zoroastrianism also teach monotheism- worship of only one God.
In fact, Zoroastrianism had existed as a religion for over a thousand years before Abraham came on stage.
Muhammed preaching one God means nothing, the question is which God is he preaching.
If a God tells people never to bow before a stone and Muhammed said it's ok to bow before a stone. Then that raises serious doubt. U have not erased that doubt here.


Yes it does, because if God is impassion. If he hates something, he is not going to change his mind and then love it.



Black stone is a sacred stone that God banned. Deuteronomy 16.22 is a moral law. It's forever binding. So not set up sacred stone in my name because I hate it.
Now let me show u example of a sacred pillar in the bible because all u doing is picking up stones and forcing it to mean sacred when they are clearly not.

There was a time Israelites started honoring Moses bronze snake image. They set it up in the temple and offered offerings to it. Now that's sacred, they didn't worship it anyway but they venerated it.
During the reform of Hezekiah, he smashed it to pieces.

2 kings 18.4
Hezekiah removed the high places and broke the pillars and cut down the Asherah. And he broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made, for until those days the people of Israel had made offerings to it (it was called Nehushtan).

Now this is what we mean by sacred and what Israelites did to the bronze serpent is very similar to what Muslims do with the black stone.
U can deny it but evidence is too glaring.

Look at the pattern. Your test keeps shifting. First it was bowing, then kissing and touching, then you said it doesn't matter whether anyone bows, worships, kisses, or touches, because the offense is setting up a sacred stone. Then it was deification, and now you concede nobody calls it God but say any religious role is enough.
If the test is a religious role, your bronze-serpent analogy doesn't prove it. 2 Kings 18:4 says Israel was burning incense to the serpent, which is very different from Muslims kissing the Stone while affirming it can neither benefit nor harm. The same verse says Hezekiah smashed the sacred stones, but they are listed with the high places and Asherah poles, the pagan cult he was purging, consistent with Exodus 34:13. That shows pillars associated with idol worship were destroyed. It does not show that Jacob's pillar or Isaiah's pillar to the LORD fall under the same ban. And the serpent, the one object there that God Himself commanded, was broken only after Israel burned incense to it.
You can't say it doesn't matter what people do with a stone and then say what Muslims do with it proves deification. If a stone can witness without being a god (Josh 24:27), testimony can't prove deification. You called those examples irrelevant and Isaiah's pillar a mere monument, yet Isaiah calls it a sign and witness to the LORD (19:20), and the Hebrew word for it, matstsebah, is the same word as in Deuteronomy 16:22.
You say Isaiah's pillar, Jacob's pillar, and Joshua's stone are irrelevant because they aren't sacred stones. Fine. Then a pillar set up for the LORD is not automatically banned, so your rule that God hates any pillar in His name is wrong, and you must show what makes the Black Stone the banned kind. If you say they are sacred and do contradict Deuteronomy 16:22, then your own Bible contradicts itself, and you can't use one verse against Muhammad pbuh while ignoring the rest. Pick one.
So where does your Bible establish that the Black Stone is the pillar Deuteronomy 16:22 bans, and where does it establish that this command binds Muhammad pbuh and Muslims in the same form?

honesttalk21:
Look at the pattern. Your test keeps shifting. First it was bowing, then kissing and touching, then you said it doesn't matter whether anyone bows, worships, kisses, or touches, because the offense is setting up a sacred stone. Then it was deification, and now you concede nobody calls it God but say any religious role is enough.
If the test is a religious role, your bronze-serpent analogy doesn't prove it. 2 Kings 18:4 says Israel was burning incense to the serpent, which is very different from Muslims kissing the Stone while affirming it can neither benefit nor harm. The same verse says Hezekiah smashed the sacred stones, but they are listed with the high places and Asherah poles, the pagan cult he was purging, consistent with Exodus 34:13. That shows pillars associated with idol worship were destroyed. It does not show that Jacob's pillar or Isaiah's pillar to the LORD fall under the same ban. And the serpent, the one object there that God Himself commanded, was broken only after Israel burned incense to it.
You can't say it doesn't matter what people do with a stone and then say what Muslims do with it proves deification. If a stone can witness without being a god (Josh 24:27), testimony can't prove deification. You called those examples irrelevant and Isaiah's pillar a mere monument, yet Isaiah calls it a sign and witness to the LORD (19:20), and the Hebrew word for it, matstsebah, is the same word as in Deuteronomy 16:22.
You say Isaiah's pillar, Jacob's pillar, and Joshua's stone are irrelevant because they aren't sacred stones. Fine. Then a pillar set up for the LORD is not automatically banned, so your rule that God hates any pillar in His name is wrong, and you must show what makes the Black Stone the banned kind. If you say they are sacred and do contradict Deuteronomy 16:22, then your own Bible contradicts itself, and you can't use one verse against Muhammad pbuh while ignoring the rest. Pick one.
So where does your Bible establish that the Black Stone is the pillar Deuteronomy 16:22 bans, and where does it establish that this command binds Muhammad pbuh and Muslims in the same form?

I think we done here.
For u to come here and say black stone has no benefit shows u are ashamed of that stone.
The stone forgives sin, the black stone forgives sin
I've seen people praying to the black stone. Why would they do that if it has no benefit.

Common man. What I discover.here is your Islamic theology has been heavily influenced by Judeo-Christian tradition and values and subsequently modified how u understand your religion.
U know if the black stone has any form of deification or veneration, it's idolatry and contradicts deut 16.22; that's why u fighting tooth and nail to prove the black stone is just sacred in name and not in value.
But that's not true.
I spoke to doffman here and he said he will fight to kiss the stone when he goes for Hajj. That is someone who doesn't care about Judeo-Christian tradition but u do and that is the problem here.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DbhphvesbQL/?stkn=MXJsaWx2NDQ3cm55eQ==

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DcgmjKJOHaw/?stkn=MWRtaXdvdzI1bTNneQ==

The bronze snake is not related to Asherah in anyway. It's always been in the temple since tje days of king Asa and Jehoshaphat 2 righteous kings.
But the veneration commenced later as a divine image. Something God hates and had it demolished.

SIRTee15:
Who is my God? My God is the Father.

It is only him I worship. All worship are directed to him

I pray only to the Father. All prayers are directed to him.

Now don't be ashamed of your Quran. There's a Quranic verse that directly answer my question.

Why are u ashamed of that verse? Why

If Allah has a son, should the son of Allah be worshipped. Yes or No.

I don't want any explanation. Just answer yes or No.
If Allah has a son, should the son of Allah be worshipped.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Ahaaaaa. I said it , you will not bend keh .

Omo, just see the way this one is disgracing himself and stylishly avoiding my question ahaaa.

Oti danran seh . Ask me from your colleagues, I have exposed their yansh and I will do it to you also .

I must expose you seh :

I asked you these :

Who is your God ?

You said you God is your father .

What is the name of your father nah 🤣🤣

Or your father don’t have name ?

You must tell us the actual name of your God as I mentioned my God name as Allah 🤣



You did not answer this with yes or no 🤣

I asked again :

Do you worship Jesus ? Yes or no

SIRTee15:
So the story is true. A monkey commited adultery and other monkeys were stoning him. Then this Muslim joined them

How did he know the monkey was being stoned for adultery. Who told him? The monkeys?

See another one. Doffman wantse.to become a Muslim so I can start believing such ludicrous statements.

Your prophet told u to eat with the right hand because Satan eats with the left hand.
Doffman is this true?
What about those who are left handed, they should be forced to eat with the right hand on top say wetin.

Doffman if I become a Muslim and left handed, will I start eating with my right hand something I'm not used to?

Or is this one pre Islamic too

🤣🤣guy , it is so glaring you don’t know anything . Leave the story nah. Must you lie ahaaa

During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she-monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys. They were all stoning it, because it had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them.

Is this act , a current practice in Islam or during pre-Islamic ?


Answer that first ?

Catching liar like you is my hobby 🤣

SIRTee15:
U worship facing a house that has a sacred stone. U now facing the sacred stone.

The stone is nothing but will ask Allah to forgive sins of those who kissed it dearly.

Stone is not special but Muslims will kill themselves to kiss the stone.

People u see why God said do not associate my name with any sacred stone. because he knows people will eventually build legend and myth around such stones.

God told Moses do not bow before a sacred stone. Muslims argue they don't bow to a sacred stone but they venerate it to highest heavens.

Islam as a religion is not in continuity with religion of previous prophets.

It's a strange and man made religion. Muhammed led people astray by telling them to worship God in a strange way. He's a false prophet.

Deuteronomy 13
If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “ and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the Lord your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him.


Any prophet that tells people to bow before a sacred stone is a false prophet. God expressly banned bowing before a sacred stone.

Trash , Shioor.

You said this :


U worship facing a house that has a sacred stone. U now facing the sacred stone.

The verse said face the direction of house of God , does it say face the stone ? 🤣

Na you unbeliever want to make us like you guys that boy to Jesu stature . You don’t cast .
You guys do have cross and stature in your houses and church .

Just continue disgracing yourself .

Even your cross Dey Temu , go buy 🤣

IslamVIRGINS:
Repeat yourself

You will be fine 🤣

doffman:
This tiny one will repeat till eternity 🤣🤣

Just stay like that . Na me God use to put you to that mode ahaa

A question was asked but your imam muted as he couldn't give answer to it

WILL YOUR 100 WIFES GIVE BIRTH IN JANAH?

dofman:
You will be fine 🤣

I want to be sure you won't mute like your imam

A question was asked but your imam muted as he couldn't give answer to it

WILL YOUR 100 WIFES GIVE BIRTH IN JANAH?

doffman:
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Ahaaaaa. I said it , you will not bend keh .

Omo, just see the way this one is disgracing himself and stylishly avoiding my question ahaaa.

Oti danran seh . Ask me from your colleagues, I have exposed their yansh and I will do it to you also .

I must expose you seh :

I asked you these :

Who is your God ?

You said you God is your father .

What is the name of your father nah 🤣🤣

Or your father don’t have name ?

You must tell us the actual name of your God as I mentioned my God name as Allah 🤣



You did not answer this with yes or no 🤣

I asked again :

Do you worship Jesus ? Yes or no

The name of my God is YHWH, God Almighty.

That is the name of my God. He's also called Father in nominal designate.

Now answer my question. this is a dialogue not a monologue.

answer my question first, then I will answer your next question.

If Allah has a Son, should the Son of Allah be worshipped.

The answer is in your quran. answer it and I will respond to your next question.

If Allah has a Son, should he be worshipped.

Yes or No.

I dont want any exegesis. Just answer

dont be ashamed of your koran, The YES OR NO answer is screaming out in your koran.

dofman:
Trash , Shioor.

You said this :


U worship facing a house that has a sacred stone. U now facing the sacred stone.

The verse said face the direction of house of God , does it say face the stone ? 🤣

Na you unbeliever want to make us like you guys that boy to Jesu stature . You don’t cast .
You guys do have cross and stature in your houses and church .

Just continue disgracing yourself .

Even your cross Dey Temu , go buy 🤣

Your pictures are meaningless to me.

exodus 20
4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me.

So anyone bowing to a wooden cross, image of Jesus or bowing before a stone will all end up in eternal damnation.


Deut 16
22 and do not erect a sacred stone, for these the Lord your God hates.

God told Moses do not erect a sacred stone in the land in my name because I hate it.

See what Muslims are doing.....why do Muslims disobey God's commandment.

Why??

doffman:
🤣🤣guy , it is so glaring you don’t know anything . Leave the story nah. Must you lie ahaaa

During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she-monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys. They were all stoning it, because it had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them.

Is this act , a current practice in Islam or during pre-Islamic ?


Answer that first ?

Catching liar like you is my hobby 🤣

answer my question my friend.

Why did your Prophet say satan eats with the left hand, or is that one also pre-islamic too

doffman:
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Ahaaaaa. I said it , you will not bend keh .

Omo, just see the way this one is disgracing himself and stylishly avoiding my question ahaaa.

Oti danran seh . Ask me from your colleagues, I have exposed their yansh and I will do it to you also .

I must expose you seh :

I asked you these :

Who is your God ?

You said you God is your father .

What is the name of your father nah 🤣🤣

Or your father don’t have name ?

You must tell us the actual name of your God as I mentioned my God name as Allah 🤣



You did not answer this with yes or no 🤣

I asked again :

Do you worship Jesus ? Yes or no

the question doffman has refused to answer- If Allah has a Son, should the Son of Allah be worshipped


So let's answer the question for doffman because if we give him 1000 years he will never answer it.

now let's go to surah 43.81

Say: "If (Allah) Most Gracious had a son, I would be the first to worship (him.)"

Say, [O Muhammad], "If the Most Merciful had a son, then I would be the first of [his] worshippers."

doffman here is the answer u forcefully refused to answer.

If Allah has a son, should he be worshipped. According to surah 43.81, the answer is YES, THE SON OF ALLAH SHOULD BE WORSHIPPED


NO BE ME TALK AM, NA YOUR KORAN TALK AM.

Say (O Muhammad): If the Beneficent One hath a son, then, I shall be first among the worshippers.

doffman, Muhammed is telling u if he had known Allah has a Son, he will be the first to worship the Son of God. That's what Muhammed is saying.


Muhammed made it clear that if he knew God has a Son, he will jump the queue to make sure He is the first person to worship him day and night.
Muhammed is telling u he will bow at the throne of the Son of God and worship him if he knew about the Son of God.

doffman why cant u be like Muhammed who said he will be the first person to prostate flat in front of Jesus, hold his feet and worship him if he knew he is indeed the Son of God.

doffman listen to what Muhammed is telling u, listen and listen well. had muhammed realise Jesus is Son of God, he will never hesitate to worship Jesus.

Muhammed is telling u The day he gets to know Jesus is the Son of God, that same day (not the next day) he will bow at his feet and worship him.

doffman, this is the answer u refused to answer because u are ashamed of the answer. see your life in public.

so my next question will be

Did Jesus say he's the Son of God?
YES OR NO.

ANSWER MY QUESTION THEN I WILL TELL U IF I WORSHIP JESUS OR NOT.

That's only fair. u ask one question, then I ask mine next.

SIRTee15:
I think we done here.
For u to come here and say black stone has no benefit shows u are ashamed of that stone.
The stone forgives sin, the black stone forgives sin
I've seen people praying to the black stone. Why would they do that if it has no benefit.

Common man. What I discover.here is your Islamic theology has been heavily influenced by Judeo-Christian tradition and values and subsequently modified how u understand your religion.
U know if the black stone has any form of deification or veneration, it's idolatry and contradicts deut 16.22; that's why u fighting tooth and nail to prove the black stone is just sacred in name and not in value.
But that's not true.
I spoke to doffman here and he said he will fight to kiss the stone when he goes for Hajj. That is someone who doesn't care about Judeo-Christian tradition but u do and that is the problem here.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DbhphvesbQL/?stkn=MXJsaWx2NDQ3cm55eQ==

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DcgmjKJOHaw/?stkn=MWRtaXdvdzI1bTNneQ==

The bronze snake is not related to Asherah in anyway. It's always been in the temple since tje days of king Asa and Jehoshaphat 2 righteous kings.
But the veneration commenced later as a divine image. Something God hates and had it demolished.

You keep collapsing religious significance, kissing, forgiveness and worship into one. They aren't interchangeable. The reports say touching the corners expiates sins, but that reward belongs to a prescribed Hajj/ʿUmrah act, not the Stone as an independent power. Allah forgives and is the only one able to. Umar ibn al-Khatta Companion of the Prophet pbuh; may Allah be pleased with him, kissed it while saying it can neither benefit nor harm (Bukhari 1597). That's an early Muslim position from someone who saw the Prophet pbuh do it, so calling it later Judeo-Christian influence is false. I even wonder about the obsession with a misrepresented act and claimed reward. Saying I am ashamed of the Stone is simply a personal attack, not an argument. I have no reason to be ashamed of what authentic Islam teaches. If you claim believers' practice proves deification, show the authentic text making kissing mandatory or failure to touch it a theological failure. You said any veneration is idolatry, so Jacob pouring oil on a pillar and Joshua falling before the Ark would be idolatry too. If someone prays to the Stone, that contradicts tawhid; his practice doesn't redefine Islam. Where does your Bible identify the Black Stone as the pillar banned in Deut 16:22, and where does it say that command binds Muhammad pbuh and Muslims?

honesttalk21:
You keep collapsing religious significance, kissing, forgiveness and worship into one. They aren't interchangeable. The reports say touching the corners expiates sins, but that reward belongs to a prescribed Hajj/ʿUmrah act, not the Stone as an independent power. Allah forgives and is the only one able to. Umar ibn al-Khatta Companion of the Prophet pbuh; may Allah be pleased with him, kissed it while saying it can neither benefit nor harm (Bukhari 1597). That's an early Muslim position from someone who saw the Prophet pbuh do it, so calling it later Judeo-Christian influence is false. I even wonder about the obsession with a misrepresented act and claimed reward. Saying I am ashamed of the Stone is simply a personal attack, not an argument. I have no reason to be ashamed of what authentic Islam teaches. If you claim believers' practice proves deification, show the authentic text making kissing mandatory or failure to touch it a theological failure. You said any veneration is idolatry, so Jacob pouring oil on a pillar and Joshua falling before the Ark would be idolatry too. If someone prays to the Stone, that contradicts tawhid; his practice doesn't redefine Islam. Where does your Bible identify the Black Stone as the pillar banned in Deut 16:22, and where does it say that command binds Muhammad pbuh and Muslims?

THE TORAH PRECEDES ISLAM. SO THERE'S NO WAY IT WOULD TALK ABOUT BLACK STONE WHICH PROBABLY NEVER EXISTED AT THE TIME OF MOSES ACCORDING TO THIS HADITH BELOW.

OK lets call it a day. maybe another time I will bring it up. It's my favourite topic and I like discussing it because it shows Muhammed brought a strange religion.

This hadith makes me wonder when pre-Islamic arabs decide to stick with the black stone as the permanent sacred stone.
and the idea that the black stone is nothing but a stone with no value is not supported by the words of Muhammed himself.

SIRTee15:
THE TORAH PRECEDES ISLAM. SO THERE'S NO WAY IT WOULD TALK ABOUT BLACK STONE WHICH PROBABLY NEVER EXISTED AT THE TIME OF MOSES ACCORDING TO THIS HADITH BELOW.

OK lets call it a day. maybe another time I will bring it up. It's my favourite topic and I like discussing it because it shows Muhammed brought a strange religion.

This hadith makes me wonder when pre-Islamic arabs decide to stick with the black stone as the permanent sacred stone.
and the idea that the black stone is nothing but a stone with no value is not supported by the words of Muhammed himself.

Yes the Torah predates Islam but that doesn't prove your conclusion. Islam does not claim the Torah must mention the Black Stone. And your Bukhari citation doesn't say what you think. The “we worshipped stones” report in Bukhari 4376 speaks generally of stones; it never identifies the Black Stone. So it cannot prove when the Black Stone became sacred or that it originated in paganism.
Tirmidhi 961 likewise doesn't make the Stone divine. Testifying on Judgment Day is not divinity; the Qur’an says people's own limbs will testify too (24:24).
And Umar explicitly said of the Stone: “you are a stone and can neither benefit nor harm anyone” (Bukhari 1597).

So the evidence distinguishes sacred ritual significance from worship. Your argument conflates the two.

honesttalk21:
Yes the Torah predates Islam but that doesn't prove your conclusion. Islam does not claim the Torah must mention the Black Stone. And your Bukhari citation doesn't say what you think. The “we worshipped stones” report in Bukhari 4376 speaks generally of stones; it never identifies the Black Stone. So it cannot prove when the Black Stone became sacred or that it originated in paganism.
Tirmidhi 961 likewise doesn't make the Stone divine. Testifying on Judgment Day is not divinity; the Qur’an says people's own limbs will testify too (24:24).
And Umar explicitly said of the Stone: “you are a stone and can neither benefit nor harm anyone” (Bukhari 1597).

So the evidence distinguishes sacred ritual significance from worship. Your argument conflates the two.

Let me ask u a question what does a sacred stone mean?

SIRTee15:
Let me ask u a question what does a sacred stone mean?

You defined sacred on Oct 4, 10:27pm: importance or deification, something that must be treated as holy. Deification? You said nobody said it's God. Holy? In that same post you list altars, the Temple's stones and the two tablets of the Ten Commandments as ordinary stones, yet God commanded all three and they were treated as holy, so holiness alone can't be the problem banned. Nasa'i 2919 gives the same sin-erasing to the Yemeni corner, which has no Black Stone, so the reward follows the rite, not the stone. You are still unable to answer: where does the Bible name the Black Stone as the Deut 16:22 pillar, and where is a Muslim told to prostrate to it?

honesttalk21:
You defined sacred on Oct 4, 10:27pm: importance or deification, something that must be treated as holy. Deification? You said nobody said it's God. Holy? In that same post you list altars, the Temple's stones and the two tablets of the Ten Commandments as ordinary stones, yet God commanded all three and they were treated as holy, so holiness alone can't be the problem banned. Nasa'i 2919 gives the same sin-erasing to the Yemeni corner, which has no Black Stone, so the reward follows the rite, not the stone. You are still unable to answer: where does the Bible name the Black Stone as the Deut 16:22 pillar, and where is a Muslim told to prostrate to it?

Forget my definition because u keep deflecting Avery example I bring.
So I want to work from your paradigm.
Define what should be considered sacred stone according to Deuteronomy 16.22

Is Yemeni corner not another stone in the kabba that if one touch it remove sin.
We still saying the same thing.
Define what should be considered a sacred stone.
because I don't understand how merely touching a stone leads to removal of sin. Pls make it make sense

SIRTee15:
Forget my definition because u keep deflecting Avery example I bring.
So I want to work from your paradigm.
Define what should be considered sacred stone according to Deuteronomy 16.22

Is Yemeni corner not another stone in the kabba that if one touch it remove sin.
We still saying the same thing.
Define what should be considered a sacred stone.
because I don't understand how merely touching a stone leads to removal of sin. Pls make it make sense

You previously said we were done, yet you reopened the issue. So let’s settle all 3 claims: sacred, deified, or worshipped. Deut. 16:22 must establish which category it forbids. If sacred means religious significance, your Bible contains religiously significant stones. If deified means treated as a deity, show Muslims believe the Black Stone is a deity or independently forgives sins. If worshipped means directing worship to it, show where Islam commands worship or prostration to the Stone. Touching it proves none of these by itself.

SIRTee15:
the question doffman has refused to answer- If Allah has a Son, should the Son of Allah be worshipped


So let's answer the question for doffman because if we give him 1000 years he will never answer it.

now let's go to surah 43.81

Say: "If (Allah) Most Gracious had a son, I would be the first to worship (him.)"

Say, [O Muhammad], "If the Most Merciful had a son, then I would be the first of [his] worshippers."

doffman here is the answer u forcefully refused to answer.

If Allah has a son, should he be worshipped. According to surah 43.81, the answer is YES, THE SON OF ALLAH SHOULD BE WORSHIPPED


NO BE ME TALK AM, NA YOUR KORAN TALK AM.

Say (O Muhammad): If the Beneficent One hath a son, then, I shall be first among the worshippers.

doffman, Muhammed is telling u if he had known Allah has a Son, he will be the first to worship the Son of God. That's what Muhammed is saying.


Muhammed made it clear that if he knew God has a Son, he will jump the queue to make sure He is the first person to worship him day and night.
Muhammed is telling u he will bow at the throne of the Son of God and worship him if he knew about the Son of God.

doffman why cant u be like Muhammed who said he will be the first person to prostate flat in front of Jesus, hold his feet and worship him if he knew he is indeed the Son of God.

doffman listen to what Muhammed is telling u, listen and listen well. had muhammed realise Jesus is Son of God, he will never hesitate to worship Jesus.

Muhammed is telling u The day he gets to know Jesus is the Son of God, that same day (not the next day) he will bow at his feet and worship him.

doffman, this is the answer u refused to answer because u are ashamed of the answer. see your life in public.

so my next question will be

Did Jesus say he's the Son of God?
YES OR NO.

ANSWER MY QUESTION THEN I WILL TELL U IF I WORSHIP JESUS OR NOT.

That's only fair. u ask one question, then I ask mine next.

🤣🤣🤣 guy stop running away nah . Why are you avoiding the initial question ? Ahaaaa

You can’t quickly run and throw me another question while you ran away from my own question .

You must answer it seh and I must exposed your Yansh as I did to your fellow unbeliever :

Who is your God ?

You said you God is your father .

What is the name of your father nah 🤣🤣

Or your father don’t have name ?

You must tell us the actual name of your God as I mentioned my God name as Allah 🤣



You did not answer this with yes or no 🤣

I asked again :

Do you worship Jesus ? Yes or no

These questions is really giving you tough of time to answer because you already know that you cant say the truth nah 🤣

You must answer o .


Omo , it is so glaring you also lack comprehension; I tought you said are English teacher that undertands words ahaaaa.

You brought this :


If Allah has a son, should he be worshipped. According to surah 43.81, the answer is YES, THE SON OF ALLAH SHOULD BE WORSHIPPED



In your missionary English , does that mean Allah has a son ? 🤣🤣🤣

Yes or no ?

Shioor tuehhh


Allah has told you long blank that he did not has a son and he said we should worship him alone , so you want us to believe the God or you unbeliever that doesn’t even know his God ? 🤣🤣🤣

Guy answer my question and stop running away .

It has been long you used to be running away . This time , I will catch once and for all .

Oya answer my own question o

SIRTee15:
answer my question my friend.

Why did your Prophet say satan eats with the left hand, or is that one also pre-islamic too

See him again 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

He has run away again from the question ahaaaa

So you can’t defend your claim ahaaaa.

No be you brought this :

During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she-monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys. They were all stoning it, because it had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them.

Is this act , a current practice in Islam or during pre-Islamic ?

I told you nah , you will be finished ✔️

You don’t know anything . Tuehhh