₦airaland Forum

doffman:
😀😀😀😀😀😀 there is common thing about pagans enn , they brag a lot and they know nothing.

Just see this mere Paul follower that were tutored here and had his messiah called Paul being exposed .

After he was tutored , he quickly shift focus from Paul and shift to Jesus and later back to Moses ahaaa.

Up till now he has never showed a single verse that superceded the highest verse of commandment quoted by Jesus 😀. He was busy quoting lies upon lies and lies . He is busy romancing new law founded by his leader in Christianity religion which is strange to all prophets 😀


Same pagan that claimed Jesus never preached any Christianity; and up till now he is bragging and preaching Pauline Christianity ; no be juju be that .

I repeat , I know bible then you and your pastor in combine ; so glaring .

I gave you a blow so tey you even afraid to admit your god in public again ahaa.

I will continue to talk about Paul because I know it is your religion founder and ceo nah .


Oya , open your bible and go to : Roman 7: 14:15

14 So the trouble is not with the law, for it is spiritual and good. The trouble is with me, for I am all too human, a slave to sin. 15 I don’t really understand myself, for I want to do what is right, but I don’t do it. Instead, I do what I hate.


This is your master that lost his way and perish in sins hoping Jesus 🩸 will safe him ; this is same principle of his followers .


I repeat , you will kpai in your own sin and you will account for your sin alone because nobody joined you when you are rejecting the true God and sinning against God ; na you decided to be Paul follower nah .


You have met a pagan burster that strip you naked ahaaa

🥷🗡️


Preaching …..

Quran 9:3

A declaration from Allah and His Messenger ˹is made˺ to all people on the day of the greater pilgrimage1 that Allah and His Messenger are free of the polytheists. So if you ˹pagans˺ repent, it will be better for you. But if you turn away, then know that you will have no escape from Allah. And give good news ˹O Prophet˺ to the disbelievers of a painful punishment.


From the above verse , choice is yours .

Hell 🔥 is real .


In case you want to stop being a Paul follower ?

Oya repeat after me , I bear witness that No any God except Allah and Muhammad is the last prophet of God

doffman:
😀😀 Chai just see how you are exposing yourself with lies ahaa .

Where in old statement that claimed Jesus will Kpai for your sin ?

It is so glaring you are Paul follower , you just want to stylishly push your Pauline principle towards old statement which is a no go area ahaaa. You people don cast .

This is what Moses preached :

Deuteronomy 6:4
New International Version
4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.

Moses never depend on Jesus 🩸 salvation ; same like previous prophets .

This is also what Jesus preached :
Mark 12:29-31
New International Version
29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.[a] 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’[b] 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[c] There is no commandment greater than these.”

Jesus even told people categorically that there is no any commandment greater that that , but you Pauline people refuse nah ; you went for Paul 🩸 salvation . 🤣
He even instructed you people to worship God directly and no any 🩸 salvation: read Matthew 4:10 and Luke 4: : "Worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only"

But you refuse nah , you follow Paul to worship Jesus . Shioor .


The odogwo of all prophets ( Muhammad -pbuh) even confirmed it in quran :

Quran 2:163

Your God is ˹only˺ One God. There is no god ˹worthy of worship˺ except Him—the Most Compassionate, Most Merciful.


As you can see all of them preached the same thing .


Na your master Paul who ask you to follow new law 😀 read Heb 6:1

Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God.

It is so glaring you are promoting Pauline religion not the religion of Jesus which is Islam . Argue with your left shoe nah ! 😀


And beside , You told me here Jesus never preached Christianity , then why are you lying again and preaching a non existed Christianity religion nah . No be juju be that . There is nothing you can say , you already finished yourself from the beginning . Sorry o .

You are promoting Pauline religion for sure .

In case you want to stop being a Paul follower ?

Oya repeat after me , I bear witness that No any God except Allah and Muhammad is the last prophet of God

AntiChristian:
Jesus preached and people wrote it down. Some transmitted it orally! The Qur'an wasn't transmitted by being written down but mainly by memorization!

Waraqah didn't have the book of Genesis, Numbers, Leviticus Deuteronomy and Exodus as Torah! And the Books of Paul were not the Injeel Jesus preached! That's certain!

honesttalk21:
Mr, that presentation tries to tackle several different issues all at once but really stretches itself too thin.

To start, Targums are interpretive translations rather than the Oral Torah itself or do you dispute this? They show how later Jewish communities understood the Hebrew text, often paraphrasing to steer clear of anthropomorphism. This is exactly why both Jewish and non-Jewish scholars view Targums as theological commentary instead of binding revelation. Nehemiah 8 talks about translation and explanation, not about establishing metaphysical doctrines regarding the Word as a separate entity.

Then, the Qur’anic phrase a Word from Him in reference to Jesus is functional, not ontological; it’s a creative command (Be), not a divine person. This interpretation is consistent throughout the Qur’an and fits well with Semitic idioms; trying to impose later Targumic theology onto it is a fundamental misunderstanding.

Furthermore, the scribal claims you mention (like ʿAbdullāh b. Saʿd, etc.) are widely recognized, debated, and explained in early Islamic texts themselves ironically demonstrating transparency rather than concealment. None of these claims led to an alternative Qur’an, nor did they change the received text, and the same sources also note their repentance or political motivations.

Recognizing patterns requires corroborated outcomes, not just isolated anecdotes preserved by both opponents and supporters.

So, just because there’s disagreement it doesn’t mean there’s forgery. Every major prophetic tradition including those of Moses and Jesus has faced accusations of fabrication from their contemporaries. History assesses texts based on their transmission, consistency, and impact, not merely on the existence of critics.

Strong claims need clear distinctions. When we properly separate interpretation, translation, polemic, and history, the argument loses its strength.

honesttalk21:
The claim that one of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh’s scribes left Islam and supposedly had a hand in authoring the Qur’an on a closer look just tells us that a man who left the faith made up a story after his apostasy. In reality, the Qur’an was memorized by loads of companions, recited every day in prayers, and double-checked during the Prophet’s own lifetime Q 75:17–18. In fact, it lines up with what’s mentioned in Q 16:101–102, where it’s predicted that doubters would accuse the Prophet of learning from others. If the Qur’an was just a human creation, you’d expect at least one scribe, friend, or even an enemy to come up with a different version. But that has never happened and remains something pretty remarkable when you think about it.

Some folks argue that the Qur’an clashes with historical records. But here’s the thing: the Qur’an isn’t trying to be a history textbook or an archaeological guide. Its main focus is on moral and spiritual truths, not digging up artifacts. That’s why you’ll often see phrases like, They dispute, but Allah knows best. Even among modern historians, there’s plenty of disagreement about ancient timelines. So, divine revelation doesn’t have to match up perfectly with every secular reconstruction to be valid.

There’s a popular belief that the Messiah had to die for people’s sins, but if you look at the Hebrew scriptures, you won’t find anything that says atonement requires God’s son to die. Passages like Isaiah 53, Daniel 9, and Zechariah 12 are actually poetic visions about Israel’s suffering and eventual vindication. Even traditional Jewish scholars never took these as literal predictions of crucifixion. And those Targums people sometimes reference? They’re Aramaic commentaries written centuries after Moses not the Torah itself. Judaism has always rejected the idea of a suffering, divine Messiah; that interpretation only showed up with Christianity.

According to the Qur’an, Jesus (isa عليه السلام) is called the Messiah. He’s described as a prophet born in a miraculous way, someone who healed and guided people. But the Qur’an clearly denies both his divinity and the idea that he was crucified see Q 4:157. The word Messiah in Hebrew just means anointed one basically, a chosen messenger, not a god who dies. When Mary called him al-Masih ʿIsa, it was because of an angelic message, not because she was making a claim to royalty.

If you look at the stories of Noah, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad pbuh, there’s a clear thread running through them all. Worship God alone and do what’s right. The Qur’an doesn’t break from that tradition it actually reaffirms it. You don’t have to toss out history to believe in revelation; you just need to see that the real purpose of revelation is to inspire moral change, not to lay out a political timeline.

The Qur’an stands on a foundation of preserved testimony, moral clarity, and a consistent line of prophets. The idea of a god who dies for sin? That’s a later human interpretation, not something you’ll find in the faith of the prophets themselves.

Abi Saleh, narrated from Ibn Abbas, recorded that:
"the Messenger of Allah invited him so that he could write him the revelation, so when the verse 23:12 ("And certainly did We create man from an extract of clay" was revealed, the Prophet called Ibn Abi al-Sarh, and dictated it to him and when the Prophet reached the end of 23:14 ("...Thus, We formed him into a new creation" Abdullâh said in amazement ("فتبارک اللّٰہ احسن الخالقین So blessed be Allah, the Best of creators!". The Prophet said:" Write these words too (i.e., فتبارک اللّٰہ احسن الخالقین "So blessed be Allah, the Best of creators!", as these words have also been revealed to me."

doffman:
😆😆😆 it is so glaring you know nothing ahaaa. You don’t even know what you are saying again .

AntiChristian:
The original Torah has been burnt and lost. The first five books of the old testament you have today are simply copies of copies of copies to infinity!

No one can truly say Moses even wrote everything! Most of it was just traditionally attributed to Moses.

So what Waraqah had wasn't your old testament nor your Bible. And he was also knowledgeable than your so called church fathers who canonised the new testament for you today!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

doffman:
SIRTee15

“


😀😀 buy wait o , why is it all Christian pagans always reason upside down . Nawa o

Allah will forgives Muslims because muslim never associated anything with God . Even if Muslim sins like drinking alcohols or or minor sins , all the sins can be forgiven by the mercy of Allah except of any person kpai as a pagan . Paganism can never be forgiven.

Oya read :

Surah An-Nisa (4:48): "Indeed, Allah does not forgive associating others with Him ˹in worship˺, but forgives anything else of whoever He wills. And whoever associates others with Allah has indeed committed a grave sin."

Or read this :

Surah An-Nisa (4:116): "Indeed, Allah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills. And he who associates others with Allah has certainly gone far astray."

As you can see Allah is a merciful God , he forgives without any 🩸 crucifixion . But when you kpai as pagan , OYO is the case . ( May Allah not let us kpai as a pagan o )










Wetin you drink ? Are you normal ahaaaaa

Paul has done something strong on you 🤷🏼‍♂️




The old scriptures has affirmed that no one will kpai for your sin , you will carry your sin by yourself .


And Jesus has told you he did not come and abolished the law , what lies and new fabricated new law of 🩸are you forcing to people to believe , I just pity you, just kpai first , you will understand .






Now , let me be soft here .
If Ezekiel carry the sin for a year , who will carry other remaining years sin nah ? Reason nah ! Must you be reason like Paul . Tuehh !🙈


I repeat those that came before Jesus , who carry their sins ?

You will surely carry your own sins and God will ask you how you used your life .




Allah is inherently just, Infact , he is the most Just, his another name is Al-Muqsit- the most just .

He balances deeds with perfect justice, holds wrongdoers accountable, and never wrongs His creation, though He also embodies mercy, creating a balance between divine justice and compassion. This is exactly why everyone will carry his or her sins . It is unjust of one person kpai for your sin .

Say, “Is it other than Allah I should desire as a lord while He is the Lord of all things? And every soul earns not [blame] except against itself, and no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another. Then to your Lord is your return, and He will inform you concerning that over which you used to differ.” (Al-An`am 6:164)

Let me give senario that will conform to our daily life .

He is very just to the extent that he allow evil makers to stay and leave for many years to see if he will seek forgiveness before death will approach him .

He is very just to the extent that he allow evil people do many evil for so many years before he will catch them ,

He is so merciful and just to the extent that he gave us good health to think and discover the truth by ourselves . Scriptures are there ; ours is to close the door of the emotion and open the door to embrace the truth . He gives us free access to unlimited Oxygen without daily subscription; he gives us everything to be comfortable and we people are spoiling it . So how God is not a just God ? Dey play !

We should blame ourselves if we reject that him nah .

Now , reason, why will he gave other prophets other salvation method and gave Jesus alone 🩸 salvation ? No be juju be that ?🤔

He is a just God that gave a clear monotheism teaching to all prophets to teach people and to warn people against his anger . Anyway , those that fall to any satanic trick should blame himself o . 🤷🏼‍♂️ read this ;

Deuteronomy 7:9-12
"Therefore know that the LORD your God, He is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and mercy for a thousand generations with those who love Him and keep His commandments; and He repays those who hate Him to their face, to destroy them. He will not be slack with him who hates Him; He will repay him to his face. Therefore you shall keep the commandment, the statutes, and the judgments which I command you today, to observe them. “

As you can see , no excuse . Is either you follow the laid down commandment or choose Paul as a friend . Choice is yours o .

Muslims with sins will be also be punished . For example a fornicator Muslim is a sinful Muslim but not a pagan . And if Allah wish , he can even forgive as long such person has never converted to pagan .


E. g quran 24:2 prescribes one hundred lashes for both male and female fornicators.
Al-Isra 17:32 warns against approaching unlawful sexual intercourse, calling it an immorality. And so on like that .

And if such Muslim repent and stop repeating the sin , he or she will be forgiven .

Read : Surah Az-Zumar (39:53): "Say, 'O My servants who have transgressed against themselves [by sinning], do not despair of the mercy of Allah. Indeed, Allah forgives all sins. Indeed, it is He who is the Forgiving, the Merciful.'"


As long as you are Muslim and not a pagan , you will be forgiven if you seek the forgiveness of such sin , if you did not , you will reap the punishment for such sin . This is severe warning ro drunkard or fornicators Muslims .everyone will carry his or her sins .

But for paganism , no forgiveness after kpai . The only option is to seek for forgiveness before the kpai .

Read : Surah An-Nisa (4:48): "Indeed, Allah does not forgive associating others with Him ˹in worship˺, but forgives anything else of whoever He wills. And whoever associates others with Allah has indeed committed a grave sin."



Preaching …..


The only salvation to heaven is to never be a pagan o .

Choosing to be in heaven is a choice . Choice is yours .

In case you want to repent ?

Oya repeat after me , I bear witness that No any God except Allah and Muhammad is the last prophet of God

honesttalk21:
Your objection is based on a misunderstanding and false premises. Islam does not claim that a Muslim’s sins are transferred to Jews or Christians as a way to balance morality. The hadith employs figurative language rather than suggesting any sort of literal space swapping or transferring of punishment. Each individual is responsible for their own sins and this is a clear principle in the Qur’an (Qur’an 6:164; 53:38).

Everyone is accountable for their own disbelief or wrongdoings. When Allah forgives a believer, it means the punishment is lifted, not passed on to someone else. A disbeliever faces consequences for their own actions, not for the sins of others. There’s no double jeopardy, no increase in anyone’s punishment, and certainly no injustice.

Regarding the idea of saying shahada after mass murder, Islam clearly states that the rights of victims remain intact, regardless of conversion. Allah may forgive personal transgressions, but human wrongs still demand restitution and justice (Qur’an 4:93; authentic hadith on qisas and mazalim).

Your analogy about a robber misses the mark because Islam completely rejects the concept of vicarious punishment. While Christianity embraces substitution, Islam firmly denies it. In Islam, forgiveness means the punishment is lifted it doesn’t get transferred to someone else.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

honesttalk21:
In haste a clear explanations are lost or there's zero communication. Be a little more patient please.

The hadith found in Sahih Muslim 2767 doesn’t imply that Jews or Christians are punished for the sins of Muslims. It actually conveys a different message altogether. In Islamic theology, a sin consists of two parts: the act itself and the punishment that the sinner would face. When Allah forgives a Muslim, that sin is completely erased, the punishment associated with it is nullified, not passed on to someone else. There’s no principle in Islam stating that every sin must still be punished. Allah has the power to forgive without imposing any punishment; He forgives whom He wills. (Qur’an 5:18).

So, what’s the real meaning of the hadith?
It indicates that the spot in Hell that the forgiven Muslim would have occupied is left vacant. The hadith refers to this as his place. That space is then filled by those who genuinely deserve Hell due to their own disbelief. This is why traditional scholars have emphasized that the hadith isn’t about transferring punishment or vicarious guilt. No sin shifts from one individual to another. Each person is judged based on their own actions (Qur’an 6:164).

Thus, the forgiven Muslim’s sin carries no lingering punishment it’s completely wiped clean. Where the Jew or Christian mentioned enters Hell it's solely because of their own actions, not because they are bearing the consequences for someone else.

The hadith speaks to allocation, not substitution, which is why it aligns with the principles of Islamic justice. Thanks

honesttalk21:
Will a Muslim Be Punished for His Sins? Yes if Allah wills. This is addressed directly in the Qur’an. The sacred text leaves no room for ambiguity; Whoever does an atom’s weight of evil will see it. (Qur’an 99: This verse underscores a fundamental principle that every individual is responsible for his or her own actions. While Allah possesses the ultimate authority to punish or to forgive, no sin simply disappears without due cause or justice. Each deed, no matter how small, is accounted for. Yet, the possibility of forgiveness remains, reflecting the balance between divine justice and mercy.

Does Islam Teach That Others Bear Muslims’ Sins? No and this is a common misconception, but the answer is unequivocal; Islam does not teach that anyone can bear the sins of another. The Qur’an affirms this principle repeatedly, declaring, No soul bears the burden of another.” (6:164, 17:15, 35:18, among others) This foundational rule is woven throughout Islamic scripture, emphasizing personal responsibility.

Some may reference a hadith that mentions a Jew or Christian being a release from Hell for a Muslim. However, this does not imply a transfer of sin. The Arabic term فِكَاكُكَ (fikakuka) translates to your release, not your ransom through another’s suffering. It signifies that, through Allah’s forgiveness, a person is spared from punishment, and another occupies the place that would have been theirs not because their sins have been transferred, but because the other is accountable for his own rejection of truth.

In Islam, a Muslim who has committed sins as vast as mountains might face punishment in Hell for those sins, depending on Allah's will. It's important to understand that Islam does not teach that these sins can be passed on to others. Some believers who have sinned may find themselves in Hell temporarily for purification, while others might receive complete forgiveness through Allah’s mercy.

Ultimately, salvation in Islam is a result of Allah’s mercy, not the suffering of another. Each individual faces the consequences of his or her own choices.

Some may wonder whether this approach is fair. The answer is clear; there is no injustice in this system. The disbeliever is punished solely for his own disbelief, not for the sins of others. The Muslim, if forgiven, is granted mercy without infringing upon anyone’s rights. What changes is the occupant of a place in Hell, not the moral responsibility attached to each soul.


Contrast this with the Christian doctrine of substitutionary atonement, where one man (Jesus) is believed to bear the sins of others. In Islam, forgiveness and punishment are dispensed by Allah alone, in accordance with His perfect justice and boundless mercy.

The Core Teachings are Justice, Mercy, and Accountability. By personal accountability every individual is responsible for his or her own actions. Allah judges with absolute fairness; no guilt is ever transferred.
Forgiveness is always possible in boundless mercy but never at the expense of justice.

Islam’s message is both profound and reassuring: Allah is Al-‘Adl (The Just). He is never unjust, and He never transfers guilt from one soul to another. In this system, every person stands before their Creator, accountable for their own deeds, yet always within reach of divine mercy.

doffman:
Maybe , help her to quote the verse out here and let me tutored you as I tutored her previously . You are engaging someone that know bible than you and your pastor in combine . 🤣 no wuruwuru to answer .

😀😀 in summary , you can never help her ahaaaa.

May be copy it out and send it to your pastor to help you out ahhaaa

Show me from your bible , a single verse where Jesus told you that your man made bible is the book of your religion and you should follow it. After all; you guys preached from it nah ?

🥷

honesttalk21:
You are mixing two completely different concepts and calling them the same. The hadith is not describing propitiation, substitutionary atonement, or a righteous man taking punishment for sinners. It is describing compensation and reallocation on the Day of Judgment based on each person’s own deeds.

The text says each person has a place in Paradise and a place in Hell.
This simply means every human has two potential destinies, and the one you don’t occupy becomes empty. When a believer’s Hell-place is left empty, it is given to a disbeliever not as a punishment for the believer’s sins, but because the disbeliever filled his own record with actions deserving Hell.Nobody is punished for another’s sins.
The Qur’an repeatedly states No soul bears the burden of another. (Q 6:164, 17:15, 35:18)

Why this is not substitution like in Christian theology are:

1. The Muslim is not punished.
In Christianity, Jesus is punished. In Islam the Muslim is not. If no punishment is placed on the innocent, there is no propitiation, no substitution.

2. The disbeliever is punished only for his deeds. The hadith does not say he suffers for Muslim sins. It says he deserves it because of his kufr.No transfer of guilt.No innocent man dying. No righteous person carrying sin. Nothing like Christian atonement.

3. The place in Hell is not a punishment quota, it’s a vacated spot. A seat in a stadium is not an injury. A place in Hell is not a sin-transfer. It is simply an opening that someone else who already earned Hell occupies.
So your courtroom analogy collapses. In Islam the rapist doesn’t get punished for the robber. The robber doesn’t get punished for the rapist. Each man receives his own due, and no one swaps sins.

Meanwhile Christianity explicitly teaches substitutionary punishment. The innocent Jesus is crushed for other people’s sins (Isaiah 53 as interpreted). Their sins are placed on him. He suffers the penalty meant for them.
That is exactly the thing the Qur’an denies and the hadith does not support. And your own evidence proves the point. Ezekiel does not die for Israel. He simply acts out a symbolic sign no transfer of sin, no punishment inflicted.

So the reason you should not call Allah unjust is simple. Islam does not teach innocent suffering, sin transfer, or God punishing one person for another’s crimes. Christianity does. Islamic theology is internally consistent;
Your deeds, your judgment, your destination.

No innocent man pays your bill. No righteous prophet is executed for others. No sin is transferred. And no hadith contradicts the Qur’an’s fundamental rule.

That is justice.

dofman:
😀😀😀 see this pagan o .

I have bursted your lies about the Hadith you wanted to twist . Na by force to be pagan like you Pauline people thinking jesus has carried your sins ahaaa. Dey play .

Quran made it clear that everyone will carry his or her sin , na pagan like you will never agreed to console your paganism ; we do not care nah. Afterall , you are Paul follower nah; so no hassle at all .

If not because you are clown and daft , if you claimed jesus kpai for your sin , why are you into sin again nah ? , who kpai for those before Jesus came or they were all in hell 🔥 , reason nah you are finished in that religion .

dofman:
Oya open your bible and go to Deuteronomy 24:16: which States that parents should not be executed for the sins of their children, nor children for the sins of their parents; each person is to die for their own sin.

dofman:
Then why Jesus will be executed for your sin nah 🤣?

dofman:
That verse above closely affirmed you will carry your own sin . And Jesus has made it clearer that he did not come to abolished the law ; na you decided to follow your master Paul new law nah; you will know score , just kpai first . Lobatan .

dofman:
Now , pagan , how can your god kpai for you nah ; reason nah , Paul who brought your fake religion has finished you completely ahaaaa

Preaching…..

Allah will punished pagans because they did not follow what the prophets preached to them .

Paul is your master and you have admitted . Jesus never preached Christianity , you are only here to preach Pauline religion 😀

Are you ready to stop being a Paul follower ?

Oya repeat after me , I bear witness that No any God except Allah and Muhammad is the last prophet of God

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

dofman:
This pagan never stop lying 😀😀😀 you will carry your own sun seh , you din alone and you must face God alone for it .

Has the Hadith you quoted ever told you Jews and Christian will carry the sins for Muslims ahaaa. Nawa o ; no wonder Paul see you people well and trick you well ; must you lie ?

The meaning of this hadeeth is the same as the hadeeth narrated by Abu Hurayrah: “For each person there is a place in Paradise and a place in Hell.” When the believer enters Paradise, his place in Hell is taken over by the kaafir( pagan ) because he deserves that because of his kufr(paganism)

The Hadith (Sahih Muslim 2767d) means that on the Day of Resurrection, some Muslims with immense sins will be forgiven by Allah's mercy, and the Jews and Christians who are destined for Hell due to their disbelief and rejection of the Prophet Muhammad's message will occupy the places in Hell that the sinful Muslims might otherwise have filled.

Quran has explained it , you will carry your own sin :
And no bearer of burdens shall bear another’s burden” [Faatir 35:18]

It is your act and belief that will dictate your destination of either paradise or 🔥 . This is exactly why I am preaching to you now before you kpai .

I just pity you , if you don’t want to fill a place of hell 🔥 of someone , you must worship only one God and become a Muslim. That Hadith has even nailed you further . The paradise is for all people who do not associate any gods with God . Be wise o and you are warned .


Back to my point .


Open your bible and read Mark 12:29-31
New International Version :

29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.[a] 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’[b] 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[c] There is no commandment greater than these.”


As you can see , there is no any commandment greater than worshiping only one God .

Now , ask your self , if you kpai today in this your current paganism , where are you going ? 😀. Hell 🔥 straight !
This is so glaring .

Preaching ….,,

The only commandment to enter paradise is to worship only one God .

Are you ready to stop being a Paul follower ?

Oya repeat after me , I bear witness that No any God except Allah and Muhammad is the last prophet of God

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

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

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

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

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

Multiple companions witnessed Gabriel in human form.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Give certain reference that Waraqah misled prophet Muhammad pbuh.

honesttalk21:
The whole objection is based on something the Bible never actually states which is that the angel of the lord who appeared to Moses couldn’t possibly be Gabriel. In the Hebrew Bible, “Angel of the LORD” isn’t a personal name; it’s more of a title for God’s messenger acting with divine authority. Scholars from both Christian and Jewish backgrounds, along with academic researchers, all point out that this figure isn’t named anywhere in Exodus. The text simply doesn’t specify who the messenger was.

Since the Torah doesn’t name any angels in the stories of Moses, saying Gabriel never spoke to Moses is really just an argument from silence, not a fact found in the Bible. Later texts, like those in Daniel and Luke, do mention Gabriel, but that doesn’t rule out his earlier missions; it just means that the earlier books don’t name any angels at all. Some Jewish commentary even suggests that Gabriel had additional missions that aren’t explicitly mentioned in the Torah. So, the idea that Gabriel could not be the messenger to Moses isn’t accepted in Judaism, Christianity, or by historians.

Waraqa wasn’t doing a verse-by-verse analysis; he was recognizing the type of encounter. What he meant was that the messenger who came to Muhammad is the same heavenly figure who historically brings revelation from God to His prophets. This aligns perfectly with how biblical revelation operates. God sends His word through His chosen angel, and the prophetic experiences are notably similar across different traditions.

So, the claim that Waraqa got it wrong just doesn’t hold up. The Bible doesn’t contradict him, it doesn’t name the angel, and there’s nothing in scripture or scholarship that makes his recognition impossible. This objection is based on a selective interpretatio not on the actual text.