₦airaland Forum

sagenaija:
[size=6pt][/size]
(a) A simple question for you: are the 'WEAK' hadiths rejected in Islam?

(b) The fact that islamic scholars DIFFER in points of view about authentic, weak or fabricated should show you that Islam's inability to come up with a clear position.  It also means that ANY Moslem can pick and choose which one he wants at any point in time.

(c) If like you said "there were variations in the opinions of the scholars" then which one do we accept and on what basis?

(d) Still on the Koran; the Koran itself is based on the narrations of people. That is why you have VERSIONS that labelled "ACCORDING TO" so and so.

(e) The onus is therefore on you to prove that no SINGLE change has taken place.

(f) If you now attempt to redefine what "change"

(g) Why can Moslems not read the "UNCHANGED" Koran the way it was revealed?

(h) To EMBELLISH means there is an addition; don't you get it?

I'm holding you to your claims!

(a) Whether weak narrations are rejected or not is of no use here, what is of use to this discussion is that narration used in support of your claim is fabricated, hence, I didn't take it.


(b) A clear position on what?
Does difference in point of view in any way an advantage to this discussion?


(c) By opinion we mean the four existing famous schools of thought.

Difference in the opinion of these schools of thought is not differences in the fundamental of Shariah but an exploration if possible options and choosing of preference in Shariah owing to their geographical location, way of analysing references and the recipients; In Islam, marriage in compulsory but this does not encompasses everybody depending on ttheindividual in question.


(d) Narrations! This says volume about your little or not knowledge about the subject of this discussion

And since the dawn of this discussion I don't remember mentioning dot and jot. have you now gone to saying what I said not?


(e) The unceasing questions calling for the establishment (from you to me) that diatrical marks is not a change to the Quran is as a result of nothing but your meagre knowledge on the subject of discussion. A person who reads Arabic would surely relate.

If there had ever been a concealment of fact that diatrical marks you referred to as "jot and dots" was in the Quran right from the inception and you people later find out, then we would have to say that we are hidding something in order to prove that no change has ever happened to it. Of course we are quit learned and well informed of the invention of diatrical marks and its incorporation before we said it is not a change.

If fact remains that diatrical marks was to preserve the Quran from being wrongly recited by the unskilled non-Arabs and Arabs whose dialects were corrupted and if it was a development in the way of writing Arabic language, then it is senseless to deem it a change. having said this, to establish your claim, I challenge you to prove otherwise; (a) that invention of diatrical mark was not to preserve wrong recitation from the non-Arabs (b) that placement of diatrical marks means removal of words or necessitate it


(f) You are the one trying to redefine the meaning and I'm still expecting what change means.


(g) That's because the contemporary Arabic reader are also unskilled just as the the non-Arabs were; an experience which birthed diatrical marks

You shocked me, at this point you don't know what diatrical marks for? , do you have comprehensive issue?


(h) "Embellish the Quran with your sweet voices" said Prophet Muhammed
painting is a form of embellishment to your room, now tell me, is painting your room a removal of some of the blocks that hold it? you will answer NO because it is only a beautification.

sagenaija:
[size=6pt]
Can you make your comments more orderly please!!!
I hope your BOOK'S contradictions is not beginning to affect your coordination.

Lols... If you are a christian and you are talking about contradiction, this your comment is waiting to be modified

[quote author=AntiChristian post=90548945]Who is Yasir Qadri being mentioned in the post?

Yasir Qadhi is a Pakistani-American Muslim preacher calling to falsehood!

If you are accepting this from just one person then Odumeje is a rep of Jesus on Earth!
And we should believe Jesus really drank Baba Adeboye's tea too!

Is it true that Muhammed prayed to Allah 70 times a day asking for the forgiveness of sins?

[quote author=madegreatbygrace post=91622095][/quote]Yeah, true! 70 or more times!

quote author=AntiChristian post=91623607]

Yeah, true! 70 or more times!

That made him a sinner, right?

I am surprised that the moderators arevyetvto shift the thread to Muslim section and lock it.

Christian are banned from discussion Koran issues even in general section
yet they must swear allegiance if they are to ask questions in Islamic group. wierd

madegreatbygrace:
[





That made him a sinner, right?

Yeah! As all (including Jesus) have Sinned and come short of the glory of God!

quote author=AntiChristian post=91625857]

Yeah! As all (including Jesus) have Sinned and come short of the glory of God!

Show me in the Bible where Jesus is said to be sinful.

I'll show you two scriptures where He's said to be sinless.

“For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”
‭‭II Corinthians‬ ‭5:21‬ ‭NKJV‬‬



“For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭4:15‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

madegreatbygrace:
Show me in the Bible where Jesus is said to be sinful.

I'll show you two scriptures where He's said to be sinless.

“For He made Him who knew no sin [/b]to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”
‭‭II Corinthians‬ ‭5:21‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

“For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, [b]yet without sin.”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭4:15‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

Same Paul allegedly said in Romans 3:23

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

Can you point to where Jesus himself called himself sinless?

quote author=AntiChristian post=91628158]

Same Paul allegedly said in Romans 3:23

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

Can you point to where Jesus himself called himself sinless?

You believe Jesus Christ is a prophet, right?

Can you point to where Jesus called Himself a prophet in the Bible?

While you're at that, it may also interest you to know that your Quaran affirms the sinlessness of Jesus.

Quaran 19:19 -......(The angel said I am only a Messenger from your Lord, [to announce] to you the gift of a righteous son." - Hilal- Khan

-( He said) Gabriel said to her I am only a messenger of thy Lord, that I may bestow on thee) that Allah may bestow on you (a faultless son) a righteous son.- Tafsir Ibn Abbass


Even your Muhammad, who is supposedly a model for humanity, is not given such honour in your Quaran.

madegreatbygrace:
You believe Jesus Christ is a prophet, right?

Can you point to where Jesus called Himself a prophet in the Bible?

Jesus never called himself a prophet but he did what Prophets does! People believed he was a prophet.

Point me to where Jesus claim he was God.

quote author=AntiChristian post=91629588]

Jesus never called himself a prophet but he did what Prophets does! People believed he was a prophet.

Point me to where Jesus claim he was God.

Lol. Abdull, Just listen to yourself. So you agree Jesus never called Himself a prophet but He did what prophets do.

Then I can safely say that although Jesus didn't unequivocally say He was the Son of God, He did and still does only what God does!

As a former Muslim that practised Islam for 29 years, that speak and understand Arabic, all that's said here about Qur'an by OP is true.

Even some years ago when I was still a Muslim, I detected some variations (though minor) in a number of Quranic texts I read. Though I dismissed them then as I didn't consider such as important.

It was a few years later that I read Qur'an and haadith critically, applying a test of logic to them, that I later learned of some other versions of Qur'an.

The discovery opened my eyes to the fact that Islam was and is a lie.

Only ignorant or delusional Muslims don't know that many versions of Qur'an were destroyed in an effort to standardize it, which was done by the Uthman caliphate many years after Muhammad's death.

Those that know the history of Islam and Muhammad know these things.

Both Qur'an and Bible were written by men to rule over other people. Nothing is divine about any of the two books.

That's the plain truth.

Just by comparing the separate lives of The Lord Jesus Christ and Muhammed, and what they achieved, it's easy to identify the religion of peace.

It's also easy to identify the false religion and the false prophet.

The one that claims to come from God must reflect the heart of God.

Let's examine Muhammed's resume, and to be candid, it is not impressive by all standards.

* Muhammad was convinced at a time that he was demon-possessed and tried repeatedly to commit suicide .

* He admittedly delivered revelations from the devil and complained that he was a victim of a magic spell that gave him delusional thoughts and false beliefs.

* He supported his religion by robbing people

* He started a war with Mecca when he had the chance to live in peace in Medina.

* He had people assassinated for criticizing his religion.

* Beheaded hundreds of Jews for trying to defend themselves.

* Ordered his followers to execute anyone who leaves his religion.

* Commanded his followers to violently subjugate the entire world.

*Tortured people for money.

* Bought,owned, sold and traded black African slaves and claimed satan looked like a black man.

* Had sex with a pre-pubescent 9-year-old.

* Had at least nine wives at a time when his own revelations only allowed four.

*Married the wife of his son after causing the divorce by lusting after her.

* Had sex with his slave girls.

*Broke the promise he made to his wife that he would stop having sex with his slave girls after he got caught by his wife Hafsa.

* Allowed his followers to rape their female captives .

* Took the most beautiful captives to his own tent.

* Told his followers they could beat their wives to subjection.

* Declared that women are stupid and that their testimony is unreliable.

* Promoted idolatry’s pagan practices like kissing a black stone and bowing down to the Kaaba, Plagiarised, forged and passed them off as revelations from God.

* Portrayed God as deceptive and Jesus as a complete failure and has kept a lot of people from knowing the true God than any other false prophets in history.


By contrast, Jesus boasts of a very impressive CV.

* Jesus created the universe, sustains the universe, laid aside his glory so that he could enter creation as a human being, to suffer for our sakes.

* With respect to His human nature, He was born of a virgin, fulfilled many Old Testament prophecies, and miraculously fed thousands of people on more than one occasion.

* Walked on water, and could calm storms simply by speaking.

* Healed the sick, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons, raised the dead, made the lame walk, gave sight to the blind and hearing to the deaf.

* He gave hope to the oppressed, confronted and rebuked their oppressors.

* Broke down the barriers that kept people divided by their race, class and gender.

* Ordered His followers to love everyone including their enemies.

* Commanded His followers not to use violence in His name.

* Endured torture and death for our sins.

* Told the father to forgive those those who crucified Him.

* Rose from the dead and gave us His righteousness so that we can know God.

Who wouldn’t love and desire a saviour like this?

Why Muslims don't want the QIRA'AT DATES KNOWN
By: Jay Smith

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4vC4rDI8UU
Was there only one (1) codified Koran by Uthman or do we have seven (7) or ten (10) different versions? - call them recitations, dialects or whatever.

If Uthman canonised the Koran, why and how did Hafs come up with his own?

How come hundreds of years after Mohamed is when a FRESH seven (7) or ten (10) version are coming up?

Where is the justification for those who claim that the Koran was ALREADY CODIFIED during the time of Mohamed?

If that was the case why did all these other men come up with their own which have no link to Mohamed?

Maybe Empiree can help out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFiOigU8SPk

Empiree and co.; Why doesn't this bother you?

sagenaija:
https://youtu...be/nFiOigU8SPk

Emp.iree and co.; Why doesn't this bother you?

first, my question is, why attacked the prophet everytime a Muslim says something contrary to your (christians) views?. Mr. Wood clearly said he will keep attacking our prophet by calling him false Prophet.


Now, he also said Yasir Qadhi said preservation of Qur'an should not be discourse in public. Although I have not heard this statement directly from Yasir himself but question is what is it to hide when we have already discussed this over and over and it is even all over the internet?.

It is not Yasir Qadhi that would tell us what is or what is not. There are variances in pronunciations in the middle East and around the world and they still mean the same thing. What Yasir Qadhi said is understandable but he didn't properly phrase himself.

Keep searching for different Qur'ans. You will never find one until Jesus come. Keep searching buddy.

Qur'an is One. The same question was asked for Dr shabir Ali by a Muslim American who was not familiar with other qirat. He went to Morocco some day and he was worried what he witnessed when the people were writing Qur'an and he compared to what he has. There was a slight textual differences that still mean the same thing but he was confused. When he returned to the State he asked Dr. Shabir Ali and he explained to him.

Common now. This is a very simple physics. Stop embarrassing yourself upandan. In Nigeria alone Alfas also use different qirat especially elders. We are used to it but your mental capacity can't seem to comprehend.


You don't even have Jesus Christ in your Bible and if you do his name was not even Jesus which means anytime you guys invoke Jesus name you are wasting your time. That's why Bible says:


"In Jesus name infidels rely on"

Empiree:
first, my question is, why attacked the prophet everytime a Muslim says something contrary to your (christians) views?. Mr. Wood clearly said he will keep attacking our prophet by calling him false Prophet.

Now, he also said Yasir Qadhi said preservation of Qur'an should not be discourse in public. Although I have not heard this statement directly from Yasir himself but question is what is it to hide when we have already discussed this over and over and it is even all over the internet?.

It is not Yasir Qadhi that would tell us what is or what is not. There are variances in pronunciations in the middle East and around the world and they still mean the same thing. What Yasir Qadhi said is understandable but he didn't properly phrase himself.

Keep searching for different Qur'ans. You will never find one until Jesus come. Keep searching buddy.

Qur'an is One. The same question was asked for Dr shabir Ali by a Muslim American who was not familiar with other qirat. He went to Morocco some day and he was worried what he witnessed when the people were writing Qur'an and he compared to what he has. There was a slight textual differences that still mean the same thing but he was confused. When he returned to the State he asked Dr. Shabir Ali and he explained to him.

Common now. This is a very simple physics. Stop embarrassing yourself upandan. In Nigeria alone Alfas also use different qirat especially elders. We are used to it but your mental capacity can't seem to comprehend.

You don't even have Jesus Christ in your Bible and if you do his name was not even Jesus which means anytime you guys invoke Jesus name you are wasting your time. That's why Bible says:

"In Jesus name infidels rely on"

You will deny even your prophet in order to hold on to any claim you make at any point in time.

Now you admit that there are variances in "pronunciation". How come all the added diacritical markings can't make pronounciation similar? You also agree there's slight textual differences and different qirat. You're moving closer to the truth. You'll hopefully soon come to see what some of us have been telling you that the variances go way beyond that into differences in words, sentences and meaning.

Hatun of DCCI has already found thirty plus DIFFERENT Korans. So, why do I need to search any longer?

I'm curious about this your new findings about Jesus Christ. Please enlighten me more.

sagenaija:
[size=6pt][/size]
You will deny even your prophet in order to hold on to any claim you make at any point in time.

Now you admit that there are variances in "pronunciation". How come all the added diacritical markings can't make pronounciation similar? You also agree there's slight textual differences and different qirat. You're moving closer to the truth. You'll hopefully soon come to see what some of us have been telling you that the variances go way beyond that into differences in words, sentences and meaning.

you proved my point again that you do not have mental capacity to digest and understand.

Let me highlight few of your confusion.

If you write down GOOGLE which is correct spelling, American pronounce it like 'GUGU'. But nigerians pronounce it like 'GÓGÙ'. Yet it is the same word in its correct text in the dictionary, GOOGLE. You grabbed the point?.

So in Arab countries they have different dialects. I know that of Saudi Arabia and UAE. Sometimes UAE pronounce "ka" as "ga". Ka is written in the Qur'an for instance in sura kahf but Saudi Arabia reciter pronounces ka as written in the Qur'an. UAE reciter who pronounces ga instead ka still doesn't change what's in the Qur'an. This is textual variances I'm talking about as pronunciation.

It is really annoying saying this over and over again. This is probably why Yasir freaked out and said not to talk about it again. I remembered discussing this same topic on this platform 5 to 6 yrs ago on this platform. You can see how annoying it is discussing and trying hard to explain how honey tastes from sugar.

Hatun of DCCI has already found thirty plus DIFFERENT Korans. So, why do I need to search any longer?

Audio discovery where are they?. It is over 1400yrs already buddy.

I'm curious about this your new findings about Jesus Christ. Please enlighten me more.

it is because you aren't paying attention. I discussed this not long ago. Letter J doesn't exist in semantic language. Jesus language which is Aramaic doesn't have letter J.


Letter J only came into existence 600 yrs ago. Jesus existed hundreds of years before that. So how come his name is Jesus when J didn't exist?.

In the Qur'an his name is Isa. Hebrew is Yashua. So Jesus is out of it. The word Jesus in the Bible belongs to other people. There are several other Jesuses in the Bible and Jesus Christ that you know doesn't exist in your Bible.

So in International Standard Version you read


In his name (Jesus) DISBELIEVERS hope


Which means anyone who says "in Jesus name I pray" is unbeliever. Majority of CHRISTIANs say this.

Empiree:
you proved my point again that you do not have mental capacity to digest and understand.

Let me highlight few of your confusion.

If you write down GOOGLE which is correct spelling, American pronounce it like 'GUGU'. But nigerians pronounce it like 'GÓGÙ'. Yet it is the same word in its correct text in the dictionary, GOOGLE. You grabbed the point?.

So in Arab countries they have different dialects. I know that of Saudi Arabia and UAE. Sometimes UAE pronounce "ka" as "ga". Ka is written in the Qur'an for instance in sura kahf but Saudi Arabia reciter pronounces ka as written in the Qur'an. UAE reciter who pronounces ga instead ka still doesn't change what's in the Qur'an. This is textual variances I'm talking about as pronunciation.

It is really annoying saying this over and over again. This is probably why Yasir freaked out and said not to talk about it again. I remembered discussing this same topic on this platform 5 to 6 yrs ago on this platform. You can see how annoying it is discussing and trying hard to explain how honey tastes from sugar.

Audio discovery where are they?. It is over 1400yrs already buddy.

it is because you aren't paying attention. I discussed this not long ago. Letter J doesn't exist in semantic language. Jesus language which is Aramaic doesn't have letter J.

Letter J only came into existence 600 yrs ago. Jesus existed hundreds of years before that. So how come his name is Jesus when J didn't exist?.

In the Qur'an his name is Isa. Hebrew is Yashua..

Lol! First you argue up there about "ka" and "ga" and now you come talking about letter "J" not being in Aramaic. If in a particular language - Arabic - a word can start with either "k" or "g" are you now saying that a word translated FROM ONE LANGUAGE TO ANOTHER is wrong simply because a letter in one language is not used in the other or a letter in one language has changed over time? Think man, think.

Maybe we can say then that if Mohamed was spelt or pronounced differently during his time from how it is done today then he never existed. So, for example, If during his time it was "Mahmad" and today it is "muhamad" or "mohamed" or "mahomet" then the changes in the spelling means the man never existed.

What a brilliant display of Islamic wisdom. Congratulations! Should we give you a standing ovation?

Again, what you are saying is that if, for example, a word in French is translated to English and a letter or vowel changes then that change renders the translated word void.

And even If the language has changed over time it does not matter? So, if 600 years ago English used "thou" and "thine" and so on, if today they are changed to "you" and "yours" then the current rendition is rendered incorrect because, according to you, particular letters used now were never in use at the time a document in reference was made. Whao!

Yet according to you, the diacritical marks ADDED to the Koran does not mean the Koran Uthman used is different from the one we find today. The additional items, to you, are not really new introductions to the Koran; they are just a necessary INPUT.

To close: the name Jesus Christ, in whatever FORM it is rendered, refers to a MAN who at a point in history was born of a virgin as the SAVIOUR of the ENTIRE world, after his baptism by John the Baptist had years of ministry in Israel, eventually WENT TO THE CROSS under Pontius Pilate to be crucified for the sins of mankind, being dead he ROSE from the dead on the third day and later ASCENDED to heaven to sit on majesty on high. As long as that is the FOCAL POINT when that name is referenced it remains efficacious in whatever language or sign-language it is expressed.

sagenaija:
[size=6pt][/size]
Lol! First you argue up there about "ka" and "ga" and now you come talking about letter "J" not being in Aramaic. If in a particular language - Arabic - a word can start with either "k" or "g" are you now saying that a word translated FROM ONE LANGUAGE TO ANOTHER is wrong simply because a letter in one language is not used in the other or a letter in one language has changed over time? Think man, think.

smh... This is transliteration so that you could understand the phonetic not arabic text. This is the arabic text ک. There is no letter J in aramaic language

Maybe we can say then that if Mohamed was spelt or pronounced differently during his time from how it is done today then he never existed. So, for example, If during his time it was "Mahmad" and today it is "muhamad" or "mohamed" or "mahomet" then the changes in the spelling means the man never existed.

This is even far better because all different dictions you provided are very rhyme compared to Jesus. His name in Hebrew is Yeshua. Jesus is not close to Yeshua at all. Pay attention to letter Y and letter J. But M uhammad, M ahmad, m ohamed, m ahomet. All first letters are the same. Even today, there are many muslims bearing Muhammad. But no christian can name their child Jesus. Spanish people that name their child Jesus do not pronounce letter J. Letter J is silent. Pronunciation sounds "Esus" but text is written "Jesus". Just like saying wrath but letter W is silent.

Again, what you are saying is that if, for example, a word in French is translated to English and a letter or vowel changes then that change renders the translated word void.

No. Jesus is a complete different given name of Yahshua. Disbelievers from Rome gave him that name Jesus.

And even If the language has changed over time it does not matter? So, if 600 years ago English used "thou" and "thine" and so on, if today they are changed to "you" and "yours" then the current rendition is rendered incorrect because, according to you, particular letters used now were never in use at the time a document in reference was made. Whao!

It has nothing to do with this as i said above. The name "Jesus" was suggested by unbelievers.

Yet according to you, the diacritical marks ADDED to the Koran does not mean the Koran Uthman used is different from the one we find today. The additional items, to you, are not really new introductions to the Koran; they are just a necessary INPUT.

smh...this is different thing entirely.

To close: the name Jesus Christ, in whatever FORM it is rendered, refers to a MAN who at a point in history was born of a virgin as the SAVIOUR of the ENTIRE world, after his baptism by John the Baptist had years of ministry in Israel, eventually WENT TO THE CROSS under Pontius Pilate to be crucified for the sins of mankind, being dead he ROSE from the dead on the third day and later ASCENDED to heaven to sit on majesty on high. As long as that is the FOCAL POINT when that name is referenced it remains efficacious in whatever language or sign-language it is expressed.

Lol...okay then. Go to Israel and speak to the people about their coming Messiah. They will tell you he is Yashua. They dont recognize "Jesus" LOL

Empiree:
smh... This is transliteration so that you could understand the phonetic not arabic text. This is the arabic text ک. There is no letter J in aramaic language

This is even far better because all different dictions you provided are very rhyme compared to Jesus. His name in Hebrew is Yeshua. Jesus is not close to Yeshua at all. Pay attention to letter Y and letter J. But M uhammad, M ahmad, m ohamed, m ahomet. All first letters are the same. Even today, there are many muslims bearing Muhammad. But no christian can name their child Jesus. Spanish people that name their child Jesus do not pronounce letter J. Letter J is silent. Pronunciation sounds "Esus" but text is written "Jesus". Just like saying wrath but letter W is silent.

No. Jesus is a complete different given name of Yahshua. Disbelievers from Rome gave him that name Jesus.

It has nothing to do with this as i said above. The name "Jesus" was suggested by unbelievers.

smh...this is different thing entirely.

Lol...okay then. Go to Israel and speak to the people about their coming Messiah. They will tell you he is Yashua. They dont recognize "Jesus" LOL

Let me make it simple for you: Was there a man in history who was born of a virgin called Mary?

If the issue is whether somebody -irrespective of how the name is spelt or pronounced - existed or not in history then that question is relevant.

The Koran talks about Dhul-Qarnayn also transliterated as Zul-Qarnain or Zulqarnain said be a reference to Alexander III of Macedon (356–323 BC), popularly known as Alexander the Great. However the name is spelt or pronounced the key issue is it points at a PARTICULAR MAN in history who can be identified with SPECIFIC things.

You guys say Allah has 99 names?
So why can't we call our God by as many different names as we please?
If some want to call him iesous, and others choose messiah and still others say Jesus or Christos or Master, we know that we are pointing at the same Lord and God who made it possible for us to have an eternal RELATIONSHIP with him.

sagenaija:
[size=6pt][/size]


The Koran talks about Dhul-Qarnayn also transliterated as Zul-Qarnain or Zulqarnain said be a reference to Alexander III of Macedon (356–323 BC), popularly known as Alexander the Great. However the name is spelt or pronounced the key issue is it points at a PARTICULAR MAN in history who can be identified with SPECIFIC things.

Awful Zul-Qarnain is Alexander the Great who told you that?.

Zul-Qarnain was a muslim who had faith in Allah. Alexander the Great was a kafir. So how you do correlate your jagbajantis?. It is Western non muslim scholars who imported the idea and very few scholars of islam bought the idea. So Alexander the Great was a Greek polytheism. Try harder next time buddy. Jesus christ that you know doesn't exist in your bible. I will keep saying this.

Empiree:
Awful Zul-Qarnain is Alexander the Great who told you that?.

Zul-Qarnain was a muslim who had faith in Allah. Alexander the Great was a kafir. So how you do correlate your jagbajantis?. It is Western non muslim scholars who imported the idea and very few scholars of islam bought the idea. So Alexander the Great was a Greek polytheism. Try harder next time buddy. Jesus christ that you know doesn't exist in your bible. I will keep saying this.

You always end up missing the point.

However a name is spelt or pronounced it is the historical figure it points to that matters.

You didn't write the Bible, did you? Sorry, Jesus of Nazareth existed. Don't think that by discrediting him you'll justify your staying in Islam. He's coming back to judge the world including you. There is no other name under heaven saved. No alternative.

We have our assurance in him. Do you?

Which Divine Law he will use to judge the world?. New Testament?

sagenaija:
[size=6pt][/size]
You always end up missing the point.

However a name is spelt or pronounced it is the historical figure it points to that matters.

You didn't write the Bible, did you? Sorry, Jesus of Nazareth existed. Don't think that by discrediting him you'll justify your staying in Islam. He's coming back to judge the world including you. There is no other name under heaven saved. No alternative.

We have our assurance in him. Do you?

Empiree:
Which Divine Law he will use to judge the world?. New Testament?

The Final Judgement

"And I saw a great white throne and Him who was seated upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them [for this heaven and earth are passing away]. And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the Book of Life; and the dead were judged according to what they had done as written in the books [that is, everything done while on earth]."
Revelation 20:11‭-‬12 AMP

"And if anyone’s name was not found written in the Book of Life, he was hurled into the lake of fire."
Revelation 20:15 AMP

He who believes and trusts in the Son and accepts Him [as Savior] has eternal life [that is, already possesses it]; but he who does not believe the Son and chooses to reject Him, [disobeying Him and denying Him as Savior] will not see [eternal] life, but [instead] the wrath of God hangs over him continually .”
John 3:36 AMP

Empiree, I hope this answers your question.

Which Book is it?

sagenaija:
The Final Judgement

"And I saw a great white throne and Him who was seated upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them [for this heaven and earth are passing away]. And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the Book of Life; and the dead were judged according to what they had done as written in the books [that is, everything done while on earth]."
Revelation 20:11‭-‬12 AMP

"And if anyone’s name was not found written in the Book of Life, he was hurled into the lake of fire."
Revelation 20:15 AMP

He who believes and trusts in the Son and accepts Him [as Savior] has eternal life [that is, already possesses it]; but he who does not believe the Son and chooses to reject Him, [disobeying Him and denying Him as Savior] will not see [eternal] life, but [instead] the wrath of God hangs over him continually .”
John 3:36 AMP

Emp.iree, I hope this answers your question.

Empiree:
Which Book is it?

The book of life.

sagenaija:
The book of life.

that's written in the heavens?. Which one is book of life again?. I thought Jesus was given or preached the gospel, no?.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdNOeHjfWXU

Empiree:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdNOeHjfWXU

Empiree, still problems with the "PRESERVATION"!! Changes! Changes! Changed!

"Older form of the Arabic script" @5.14
"Requires some basic training to read it" @ 5.38
"Transcribed into modern fonts" @6.26
"It was written without dots" @ 6.58
"Carbon dating puts age between 649 to 675 @8.01
"Carbon 14 tests have been called into question " @8.39 & 9.16
"Goes back to the time of the companions of the prophet" @9.17

I have given you the time in the video that the statements in quote were made. So I'm not making them up.

Note:
1. There are differences in fonts so it had to be transcribed into modern fonts. So, a change from old fonts into modern fonts.
2. It was almost 2 decades to 4 or 5 decades after Mohamed's death.
3. Carbon 14 dating has been found NOT to be as accurate as previously thought. Ink cannot be carbon dated. Material used for the writing which was carbon dated could have been produced decades before the writing was done on it.
4. Not a copy of ANY Koran at the time of Mohamed. Only alluded to it as being at time of the "companions of the prophet".

So, do you still claim "perfect preservation"?