₦airaland Forum

Expanse2020:
Where do you want to start
First
Quran said
* The earth and heaven are once before splitting
* The universe is continuously expanding
*Iron come from sky
*There is a (imaginary)barrier between two seas (fresh water and salt water) preventing each other to mix up
* The mountains are used as a pillar to hold the earth
* The earth is spherical not flat as science proposes before they later confirmed it is spherical

Science laters confirmed It after a thousand year

Quran claimed the sperm comes from the backbone. That's all I need to know about the scientific miracles of the Quran

Kobojunkie:
If you are called an eediot by someone who does not like you, does that make you an eediot?

I don't understand!

are u denoting christian is an insult and that Paul rejected it.
christian simply means christ like- i dont see any insult in that and there's no indication the disciples hated the word christian. Peter used it in his letters.

1 Peter 4:16:
"Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name."

FYI
so Jesus followers called themselves The way
The Jews called them Nazarene
Gnetiles called them Christians

There's nothing wrong in any of the three names.

Kobojunkie:
They were referred to as Christians by Pagans, who later went on to demand the killing and exiling of all Jews(pretty much all Israelites) in the land of Judea, not long after. What has that to do with anything?

Follow the train of your own conversation.

U said earlier Paul is not a Christian now U admitting pagans called them Christian.

Kobojunkie:
Paul and the other apostles were not Christians; Christianity was sourced from the Roman attempt at hijacking the movement that belonged only to the Israelites.

As for what Paul and the apostles gained for choosing a career as followers of Jesus Christ of Israel, we are made to believe His followers would gain exactly all He, Jesus Christ of Israel, said in His Gospels that they would in this life and the one after it.

But Paul was amongst the first followers of Jesus called Christians in Antioch.

Kobojunkie:
Christianity has always been that from its very inception, a religion of give and expect.

What did Paul and the other apostles get for giving their life for the cause of the faith?

Ohyoudidnt:
Reference for this please. I know you don't expect me to just take your words for this.

samiriyyun is a transliteration from the syriac language word for samaritans- shamraye. The two words are very close phonetically.

Hebrew- shomronim
Greek/syriac- samareia/shamraye
arabic- samirah/samiriyyun

samiriyyun is not originally arabic but a loan word from syriac.

Ohyoudidnt:
Are you trying to give the impression that there wasn't any form of moulded object worship around the Israelites in Egypt before this incident?

I dont understand what u mean by above and how it's relayed to the anachronism problem of the smaritan.

honesttalk21:
I hope you read up what you posted in the image? Ehyeh is the future imperfective term but Ani is described as I or I am. However irrelevant.

Ehyeh and Ani are not the same thing. argue with scholars.

honesttalk21:
Well now you are collapsing your argument. You see nothing wrong in Jesus using a general name but fault Muhammad pbuh using similar?

when did I argue this. U guys are the ones that stole the general word for God in arabic and personalised it as the PERSONAL NAME OF YOUR GOD. and we are asking, before arabic language was created, what is the personal name of your God.

honesttalk21:
Did Prophet Muhammad pbuh say he brought a new God?

I have no business with the deity Muhammed brought. My question is what is the personal name of your God.
honesttalk what is the personal name of the God you worship, and when did he start bearing that personal name?

honesttalk21:
Clarification on Eli and El noted though your tone suggests disagreement with use of non specific or is this exact name for God.

Eli, El, Elohim, Baal are all non generic name of God in cannanite languages. They can be sued for God or any other deity, they are not personal names.

honesttalk21:
Now why is this personal name of God never used by Jesus? Does this not question the perception of this name as the personal name of God?

He did!!! Jesus mentioned the name[b] 'I AM'- Ehyeh[/b]

honesttalk21:
1. I am not aware that Waraqah read out loud the Gospel stories.

already dealt with

honesttalk21:
2.Yes the narrative is in line with what happened after the first revelation in the cave. Waraqah had left polytheism and new the Torah and Injil as he understood Hebrew language.

How did people around him got to know he was translating the gospel to arabic if he kept to himself and minded his business?

How did Khadijah got to know that the right person that could explain Muhammed's encounter was Waraqah if not that both had been talking to each other about the injil
except u want to push the conspiracy theory that Khadijah was a catholic christian so had solid knowledge of the bible.

honesttalk21:
3. Waraqah was Khadijah 's (the prophet's wife) cousin not Muhammad's pbuh

Mr Man, learn your own Hadith. Waraqah called Muhammed his nephew. Muhammed and Khadija were related via distant relatives.

Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqah bin Naufil bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, who, during the Pre-Islamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Arabic letters. He would write from the Gospel in Arabic as much as God wished him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight. Khadija said to Waraqah, "Listen to the story of your nephew, O my cousin!" Waraqah asked, "O my nephew! What have you seen?" God's Apostle described whatever he had seen.

honesttalk21:
4. You say cousin in error then Uncle? The prophet is not known to have had earlier close relations with Waraqah who passed shortly after the first revelation.

Pls come back her and chew your words and get busy reading your hadiths instead of wasting time on the bible u don't even understand.

Waraqah asked, "O my nephew! What have you seen?" God's Apostle described whatever he had seen.

honesttalk21:
In regards to context the Quraysh accused Muhammad pbuh of merely retelling tales of the ancients because they had picked up snippets of old stories from Jews and Christians, rather than having any genuine understanding of the scriptures themselves.

These accusation served as a convenient way for them to brush aside the revelation, similar to how some people today might dismiss something by saying, Oh, that’s just the same old myth recycled.

No the Qurash had strong evidence Muhammed was making up stories he heard from people of the books and they rightly accused him of plagiarism. Reason why they didn't take him serious until he brought Islam to Mecca with force.

Qurash knew Muhammed was friends with Christian slaves like Jabr and Yasar who lived in Mecca and worked in a shop near Mount Safa. "Ibn Ishaq also provides some detail, also seen in Al Tabari tafsir:

"According to my information the apostle used often to sit at al-Marwa at the booth of a young Christian called Jabr, a slave of B. al-Hadrami and they used to say "The one who teaches Muhammad most of what he brings is Jabr the Christian, slave of the B. al-Hadrami." Then God revealed in reference to their words "We well know that they say, "Only a mortal teaches him"."

THE CLAIM THAT THERE WERE NO CHRISTIANS IN MECCA DURING THE LIFETIME OF MUHAMMED IS A BIG LIE.

Both Ibn Ishaq and Al Tabri confirmed the association of Muhammed with Jabr, an ex christian who later converted to Islam. He was the most valuable source of Mohammed's rehashed Jewish, Arabic fables and pseudo-Christian suras. It is often said Muhammed comes up with his "revelation" after meeting with his friend Jabr, and surely the people noticed.

Quran 25:5
And they say: "Tales of the ancients, which he has caused to be written: and they are dictated before him morning and evening."

The connection was so strong and hard to ignore that Mohammed was forced to do some damage control by bringing up yet another sura.

Sura 16.103 We know indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him." The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign - ( this is Jabr), while this is Arabic, pure and clear.

Muhammed's defense was that since Jabr was of "a foreign tongue" (he was not an Arab by birth), he could not have taught Muhammad anything. But it does not matter if Jabr was a non-Arab, he had stayed long in Arabia to learn arabic. Besides how could Jabr be a close friend of Muhammad (if he did not understand Arabic) since Muhammad did not understand any other language?

Guy, it's not because I'm a christian that I'm saying the Quran is not from God. Even if I'm a Muslim, there's no way I would ever accept that the Quran was dictated by God. The evidence is just too glaring.

honesttalk21:
Do you have verifiable proof Waraqah ibn Nawfal read out loud bible stories in the open in then pagan Mecca?

So if Warakah wasnt reading the injil out loud, how did Khadijah know he's the right person that could help Muhammed explain his revelation. What prompted Khadijah to take Muhammed to Waraka if she had no idea of the content of the injil, how it was related to Muhammed's encounter and how Waraka can be of invaluable help.
How did Kadijah know all these if Waraka was'nt reading the injil loud.

How did the people know God was helping him to translate the injil to arabic if he wasn't telling people what he was doing, or is Aisha lying.

Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqah bin Naufil bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, who, during the Pre-Islamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Arabic letters. He would write from the Gospel in Arabic as much as God wished him to write.

Waraka was a unitarian christian, he was eager to teach Muhammed how to become a prophet, that shows he's someone who is eager share his knowledge of the injil with others.

honesttalk21:
If this were the case wouldn't the Quraysh have directly accused the Prophet pbuh of this?

They definitely accused him of forgery, but u guys said they were liars.

quran 25.5
And they say, "Legends of the former peoples which he has written down, and they are dictated to him morning and afternoon."

16.103
And We certainly know that they say, "It is only a human being who teaches the Prophet." The tongue of the one they refer to is foreign, and this Qur'an is [in] a clear Arabic language.

honesttalk21:
He is known to have been a quiet seeker, respected for his knowledge, but not an active preacher. He translated what he was able to of the Torah from Hebrew to Arabic in a society where literacy was poor.

Really, but was eager to teach Muhammed how he could become a Prophet. That sounds like an active preacher to me.

honesttalk21:
The pagan Mecca was hostile to outside religions, how was your alleged public preaching by Waraqah accepted unless you mean there was agreement in what he publicly said and their practices?

Waraqa freely expressed his faith in Mecca and no one was hostile to him. He openly challenged those who persecuted their monotheist slaves and no one attacked him.

Bilal kept insisting, "One, one!" i.e., there was only one God. Waraqah joined, "One, one, by God, Bilal!" He then protested against the abuse, telling Umayyah and his clan: "I swear by God that if you kill him in this way, I will make his tomb a shrine." Umayyah took no notice.

The Qurash were hostile to Muhammed because he was insulting their gods, not because he was preaching monotheism. When Muhammed was actually preaching, they simply ignored him. But he didnt like the fact that he wasn't getting the attention he wanted, so he resorted to abusing their gods which led to his self induced victimisation.

When the Islamic prophet Muhammad initially spread Islam in his hometown, Mecca, he did not meet with any significant opposition from his tribesmen, the Quraysh. Rather, they were indifferent to his activities, as they did not appear to be particularly interested in devotional meetings. This was the case until Muhammad started attacking their beliefs, which caused tensions to arise.

Lewis, Bernard (2002). The Arabs in History. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

TenQ:
Yes, we Christians are not afraid to defend our faith. It's a belief with objective evidence.

I now know the Muslim Nairaland Admin that keeps deleting my posts and putting me under ban and he is no one other than sterrrrope . He knows that I know that his secret is out.

He is not a woman but a man. His admin privileges are very high as he can do and undo with the Nairaland platform. This explains why he was able to remove every post to him.

Every post he feels threatens Islam, he deletes.
Is this not cowardice?

so the cho cho guy is male.

That's taqqiyaa in action

honesttalk21:
ani ►
Lexical Summary
ani: I, me
Original Word: אֲנַי
Part of Speech: pronoun singular, common
Transliteration: aniy
Pronunciation: ah-nee
Phonetic Spelling: (an-ee')
KJV: I, (as for) me, mine, myself, we, X which, X who
NASB: Myself, alone
Word Origin: [contracted from H595 (אָנוֹכִי - myself)]

I'm not even going to waste my time with your mumbo jumbo. Experts and acholars in ancient hebrew language are saying I AM in exodus 3 is eheyeh in Hebrew. Yet u are forcing something else on me, what's your qualification of I may ask?

honesttalk21:
So the question will now return to why Jesus will use a general name for deity when calling to the uniquely named God?

because Jesus spoke Aramaic and the word for God in Aramaic is Elah.
Just like Muhammed spoke Arabic and used the Arabic word for God when calling on his deity.
Arabic Christians have been calling on Allah as God centuries b4 Muhammed was born. They never said it's the personal name of God.

honesttalk21:
Is it proper to associate Eli with Elah in Aramaic?

Eli means my God
Elah means God
Elaha means The God.
They are all Aramaic language

honesttalk21:
Do you now say Yahweh or YHVH is the unique name of God?

Yes, finally we have gotten there. YHWH is the personal name of God. I AM in whatever language U speak.
It denotes aseity and self existence. I AM THAT I AM is a name that defines who God is. He's the source of everything. Nothing comes from outside of him.
Therefore, U cannot use anything to define God. He is telling us we can only define HIM BY HIMSELF. U CANNOT USE OTHER THINGS TO Define GOD BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING OUTSIDE OF GOD THAT CAN BE USED TO DEFINE GOD.
And this goes into divine simplicity which is another topic altogether.

honesttalk21:
In regards to context the Quraysh accused Muhammad pbuh of merely retelling tales of the ancients because they had picked up snippets of old stories from Jews and Christians, rather than having any genuine understanding of the scriptures themselves.

These accusation served as a convenient way for them to brush aside the revelation, similar to how some people today might dismiss something by saying, Oh, that’s just the same old myth recycled.

.

honesttalk21:
Understand the context and who the verses referred to.

Honesttalk21 pls tell us where was Muhammed when Waraka, the Nestorian Christian used to read out loud the GOSPEL STORIES.

Aisha also said: "The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqah bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospel in Arabic.


Muhammed was an illiterate, that doesn't mean he was deaf. Muhammed could hear very well.

How come Muhammed never heard Waraqah ibn Nawfal read out Loud bible stories.

How come Muhammed was ignorant of bible tales when people around him knew them.

honesttalk21:
Thank you for your response.
I didn't include Baal in the names where my response is and wonder why you include it.

Baal simply means lord and it's a synonym for deity in Canaanites language.
Cannanite call their different gods Baal because that's the name for god.
Israelites also borrowed the word and used it when referencing God in ancient times as reflected in their early books.
Gideon is also known as Jerubaʿal, meaning "The Lord Strives", Saul's son Eshbaʿal ("The Lord is Great", and David's son Beeliada ("The Lord Knows". The name Bealiah meaning "Yahweh is Baʿal" combines both names to reflect how it's used. Baal is not the personal name of any deity but simply a derived linguistic name.

Even God confirm this when he told Jews not to call him Baal anymore but husband.

Amos 2.16
“And in that day, declares the Lord, you will call me ‘My Husband,’ and no longer will you call me ‘My Baal.’

honesttalk21:
In any case Jesus by the Bible said Eli; guess by your view this is wrong.

Aramaic name for deity is Elah. It's not a personal name. Elaha can be used for any deity. Jesus made it clear the name of his Father is I AM.
Jesus spoke Aramaic and used the common term for God in the language - Elah. That is not the personal name for God.

honesttalk21:
The Hebrew for I am that I am אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה or I am אני; Ani, and its pronunciation is distinct from the Tetragrammaton YHVH (יהוה)

I AM means ehyeh in Hebrew which sounds like YHWH when pronounced. Ani is a figment of your own imagination.

If Allah is a continuity of similar sounding Semitic words Elohim, Elah, EL, Baal; it shows Allah is a derived name which simply means god.

So u have not answered my question. What is the name of your God before even the first language was created.

I think it's unfair that Sterope's post were all deleted. I will appreciate if the mods can undelete her posts.

Let it be known we Christians are not afraid to defend our faith. It's a belief with objective evidence.

Sterope:
Did the Prophet copy the Bible?

To say the Prophet copied is the laziest argument ever.

The Qur’an’s writing is VERY DIFFERENT FROM the Bible. Few people were even scholars in his time, yet the Qur’an contains things far beyond the scope of the Bible. Access to such knowledge would have placed the Prophet at the very top of the educated elite of the world and they were very few people in that sphere and if he had copied, people would have called him out during his life and after. Do you really think the past was like today, where information is at your fingertips? . For such beautiful scholarship as the Qur'an, there should have been other works before or during his supposed scholarship with the other educated men of his time in Rome, Syria? Where are they sir?
history.

It's very easy to know people that don't read their Quran but become Muslims just for apologetic sake.

This one here said very few people in Muhammed's time had knowledge of previous scriptures...

Yet the Quran said the knowledge of the scriptures was quite common amongst Muhammed contemporary.

The people of Mecca told Muhammed they were quite familiar with stories from his so called revelation.
They told him they are tales of the ancient, he was merely repeating familiar ancient stories and they could also do likewise.

Quran 8.31
And when Our Verses (of the Quran) are recited to them, they say: "We have heard this before (the Quran); if we wish we can say the like of this. This is nothing but the tales of the ancients."

Qur’an 25:5 – “They say, ‘These are tales of the ancients which he has had written down, and they are dictated to him morning and evening.’”

Qur’an 23:83 – “We and our fathers have already been promised this before; these are nothing but tales of the ancients.”

Qur’an 27:68 – “Indeed, this has been promised to us and to our forefathers before; these are nothing but tales of the ancients.”

So the question is how come everyone around Muhammed knew the stories in the bible but ONLY Bro Muhammed was too illiterate to have heard this stories.

How come other illiterates in Muhammed's time were familiar with bible stories but you people keep saying Muhammed never heard of this stories until Bro Jubril appeared on the cave.

Illiterate means u can't read or write, not that u can't hear. Muhammed could hear, he wasn't deaf.
So how come Muhammed had to wait for Bro Jubril in the cave to hear about bible stories.

Where was Muhammad when others around him were hearing about bible stories.

And when u realise Muhammed had an uncle called Waraka, a Unitarian Christian WHO USE TO READ THE INJIL OUT LOUD AND EVEN WAS TRANSLATING THE INJIL INTO ARABIC, that should tell u something isn't right.

Aisha also said: "The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqah bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospel in Arabic.

Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqah bin Naufil bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, who, during the Pre-Islamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Arabic letters. He would write from the Gospel in Arabic as much as God wished him to write.

Madam Sterope, where was Muhammed when Waraka, the Nestorian Christian used to read out loud the GOSPEL STORIES.

Madam Sterope solve the islamic dilemma.

honesttalk21:
This is just natural since Arabic is a later Semitic language.

You asked what God’s name was before Arabic. Isn't this clear to you?

In Hebrew it was El, Eloah, Elohim (Genesis 1:1).
Aramaic/Syriac (the language of Jesus); Alaha. In Akkadian, Ilu is used for the supreme God.

Allah is simply the Arabic continuation of this ancient Semitic root (ʾ-L). That’s why even Arab Christians today still pray to Allah.

Note that the same root name (El, Elohim) is used in the Bible both for the true God and for false gods (Exodus 20:3, Psalm 82:1). So if you argue that Allah is invalid because pre-Islamic Arabs also misused the word, then by your own logic, Elohim is invalid too since pagans used it for Baal and other idols.

The reality is that the name predates pagan corruption. Arabs preserved it as Allah, Hebrews as El/Eloah, Aramaeans as Alaha. Islam restores it to its pure monotheistic meaning.

The problem is El, Elohim or Baal or Alaha is not the name of God. They are the linguistic word for god I'm their respective languages.
Elohim can be used for any deity, Baal is the name for deity in cannanite language.

The personal name of God is I AM THAT I AM. IN ANY LANGUAGE U SPEAK, THE NAME OF GOD IS I AM.
IN HEBREW, I AM SOUNDS LIKE YHWH.

NOW TELL US, WHAT IS THE PERSONAL NAME OF YOUR GOD. what is the name of Allah b4 the Arabic language came into existence.

Sterope:
You are one of those ones that doesn't know meaning of Allah. Which is a good pointer that you know nothing

Even AI and a simple Google search knows. It was a mistake to copy you.

Why is the name of your God derived from a created language.

What was his name b4 the Arabic language was created.

Arabic language is an off shoot of pro Semitic languages derived around 1500 BC.

What is the name of your God b4 people started speaking the Arabic language.

Since U are sounding intelligent, maybe

That girl called sterope should stop spamming this thread with emotional rantings.

This thread is for intellectual structured debates not a place to relieve yourself of your personal conflicting battles.

Stick to a topic and let's analyse it rather than jumping from pillar to post.

Ohyoudidnt:
I am not privy to this kindly share

Pre islamic Arabs call samaria al- samirah

Pre islamic Arabs call Samaritans al Samiri.

Both are transliteration from Syriac Christians Aramaic.

Now why would Allah use al Samiri as the person who built the golden calf when he knew people would confuse him with the Samaritan people.

Madam court is not social media where feminine sentiment sway judgement.
U stood in front of the judge in court but couldn't explain your situation convincingly. The judge didn't buy your emotional story and rightfully fined U.

Did U even tell the court all these story U gave us here? Since U could afford to pay the fine easily, U should be able to afford a good lawyer, did U hire one? Or U went to court thinking because U are woman, the court will judge the case using social media criteria.

Next time do better. Nobody is saying U should go and meet an unknown guy but don't be greedy, learn to respect your dignity as a woman by being honest right from the start.

And it's that ibom air girl Emerson am waiting to carry her own case to court since she thinks the whole social media is behind her.
He go shock her and her fans the way she go collect for court.

People thinking adjudication of cases in court is like on social media.

Ohyoudidnt:
No.
The Qur’an never mentions the Samaritans . It only mentions al-Samiri, an individual deceiver at the time of Musa (Moses) (Qur'an 20:85–97).

Prophet Muhammad pbuh only mentioned what was revealed to him.

what do Pre Islamic Arabs call samaritans?

Ohyoudidnt:
It more likely is irrelevant responding to your fixations.

The Qur’an speaks of al-Samiri, a deceiver in Musa’s (Moses) time.

Yes the Samaritans as a sect came much later, so they are unrelated.

The Prophet pbuh commanded truthfulness and warned against lying.

Correcting a misunderstanding is not making excuses, but fulfilling the command of Allah to speak justly and truthfully.

Did the Quran know the Samaritans came much letter?
Did Muhammed know there were no Samaritans during the time of Moses

Ohyoudidnt:
No, it seems like you're mixing things up a bit. The Qur’an didn’t repeat the mistakes of the Torah; it actually corrected them. Aaron wasn’t the one at fault; it was al-Samiri. That’s some serious quality control.

And to clarify, al-Samiri doesn’t automatically mean Samaritan. Tafsir existed long before Western critics offered alternatives.It could come from a clan called Samirah, or it might be derived from the root s-m-r, meaning watchman. That’s solid evidence, not just a guess.

On another note, the two Philistines argument is really just midrash gymnastics with no archaeological support. If you can twist Genesis with rabbinic rewrites, don’t be surprised when Muslims interpret al-Samiri with a bit more linguistic nuance.

The Philistines in the Bible are a dead-end anachronism. In obvious contrast, the Qur’an’s Samiri presents a mystery with several valid interpretations. That’s a significant difference.

The Bible’s Philistines are a proven historical error, the Qur’an’s Samiri is an open linguistic puzzle. Know the difference before crying‘blunder.

So in summary this is your response.
U admit the word as samiri means samaritan in arabic language, but insist the as samiri in the Quran is not the same as the samaritan.
u believe the as samiri mentioned in the Quran mean something else but u have no idea what it could be.
u not sure if the as samiri is the name of a person, place, land or people. u dont know and u have no idea how to guess.
so u summarised the samiri as a mystery and a linguistic puzzle.

Interesting.

Ohyoudidnt by now u know the truth. Quran couldnt have been written by God, its impossible for God to have written that book.
Personally, I believe 99% of educated Muslims know within them that Allah didn't dictate the Quran, they are just too afraid, embarrased or ashamed to admit it.

Ohyoudidnt:
No, it seems like you're mixing things up a bit. The Qur’an didn’t repeat the mistakes of the Torah; it actually corrected them. Aaron wasn’t the one at fault; it was al-Samiri. That’s some serious quality control.

Yeah I should be believe the above statement because your Quran says so. a book filled with historical blunders and theological inconsistency.
Let me ask u a question?
Who should I believe to tell the story of the Yorubas accurately. The native Yoruba historian in Ile ife who is also an ifa priest or an illiterate Sudanese man who never visited any Yorubaland but claimed God has revealed to him the true story of the Yorubas. Who should I go to If I want to learn the ancient story of the Yorubas.

Ohyoudidnt:
And to clarify, al-Samiri doesn’t automatically mean Samaritan. Tafsir existed long before Western critics offered alternatives.It could come from a clan called Samirah, or it might be derived from the root s-m-r, meaning watchman. That’s solid evidence, not just a guess.

samirah a solid guess? based on what? what clan is samirah, where are they from? who are they? what ancient land are they linked to?
what's the archeological or historical evidence for this samirah as a people or land?
Oh, it's just a guess and because it's in the tafsir- a solid guess!!!!!very interesting

well I can also guess that the first king ever to be crowned is Oduduwa in ile ife because the yoruba ifa oracle said so. solid guess, I should think.
u think above is ridiculous? That's exactly how u sound.

and dont even dare attempt the watchman definition for as- samiri because u would only expose your Quran more. The Samaritans defined their names as watchman. The question is samaritans are watchman of what? what are they watching over? when did they become watchman?

Ohyoudidnt:
On another note, the two Philistines argument is really just midrash gymnastics with no archaeological support. If you can twist Genesis with rabbinic rewrites, don’t be surprised when Muslims interpret al-Samiri with a bit more linguistic nuance.

Really! so all of a sudden theological exegesis means nothing but historical evidence is valid and thrumbs theological claims because u are now attacking the bible.
earlier u rejected western historical anachronism claim for samaritan in the Quran but now u are hyperventilating and supporitng over the same western anachronism claim in the bible.
According to u, academic scholars are wrong when they claimed Quranic mention of as-samiri is anachronism, but they are correct with the anachronism of philistine mention in genesis.
this is the most extreme form of cognitive dissonance I have ever seen.

U guys dont need this, look at what u are doing to yourself just because Quran must always be right and can never be wrong. In the course of defending the Quran, objectivity must be thrown out and falsehood embraced if that's what is needed to save the Quran.
A faith that lacks objectivity cannot be a true religion and its followers are best described as blind adherents.

Ohyoudidnt:
The Philistines in the Bible are a dead-end anachronism. In obvious contrast, the Qur’an’s Samiri presents a mystery with several valid interpretations. That’s a significant difference.

Obviously your brain didnt tell u that the author of Genesis wrote at a time the philistine already occupied the Land.
according to historians, the philistines arrived in canaan around 12th century BC which is around the time of the exodus. Moses wrote the Torah at a time the philistines were already in the Land. He employed familiar geographic or ethnic names for earlier periods so readers can identify the region or people group.

Ohyoudidnt:
The Bible’s Philistines are a proven historical error, the Qur’an’s Samiri is an open linguistic puzzle. Know the difference before crying‘blunder.

so that means Quran is not a clear book but a mystery that leaves more confusion than answers.

funny enough, there's internal evidence in the bible itself that destroys the anachronism claim of the historians something Quran couldnt do.
Yes, the midrash insists the philistines in Genesis is different from the later sea people of the coastal lands and they could well be right.

The evidence is rooted in the genealogy consideration mentioned in Genesis 10

Genesis 10:13-14 states that the Philistines descended from Mizraim:
“And Mizraim was the father of the Ludites, Anamites, Lehabites, Naphtuhites, Pathrusites, Kasluhites (from whom the Philistines came), and the Caphtorites.” (Genesis 10:13-14)
This genealogical note implies that some branch of people/Canaanites known by the same root name-“Philistines”-existed well before the major influx of Aegean-related Sea Peoples in the Iron Age. The text ties them to local parent groups (Kasluhites and Caphtorites), suggesting that “Philistines” could apply to an earlier group inhabiting the region- Abimelech, king of the philistines, which later merged with or was supplanted by the larger or more famous wave of Philistines.
The biblical record demonstrates consistency within its own narrative by referring to Philistines in the patriarchal period (Genesis 21, 26) and also describing them under the term “uncircumcised Philistines” in the era of the Judges and early monarchy.

So the septuagint and the midrash could be correct to differentiate the two philistines because there is internal evidence in the bible to support this.

Quran woefully failed to provide any explanation whatsover to this as-samiri mystery that could explain its anachronism both within or outside the bible. And that's why its now called a sophisticated mystery and solid guess at best.

Ohyoudidnt:
The argument that the Qur’an is incorrect for mentioning a Samiri during the Exodus is built on a misunderstanding. The Arabic term al-Sāmiri isn’t the same as the later term Samaritan,”which is linked to Samaria and came about centuries afterward. In Semitic languages, nisbah names (like al-Miṣri, meaning the Egyptian) can refer to a tribe, a region, or even a descriptive title not just a nation state that developed later
Biblical texts also use names that are retrojected. For instance, Abraham is described as encountering Philistines (Gen. 21:32–34), even though the Philistines didn’t actually settle in Canaan until much later. If we were to reject the Qur’an for this reason, we’d have to apply the same logic to the Torah.

It's like u guys don't understand your religion.
Quran is meant to be the quality control over previous scriptures according to Muslims. If the Torah makes a mistake of placing wrong people in inappropriate historical settings, should the Quran repeat such mistakes or should the Quran corrects such mistakes.

But U are here telling me because the Quran repeats the mistake of the Torah, then such error should be overlooked in the Quran.

Isn't that the reason we say Torah was written by Men. And that's why we say the Quran was also written by Men.

Ohyoudidnt:
In truth, al-Samiri might simply refer to a tribal or regional identity that would have been recognizable to the audience of the Qur’an, rather than being an anachronism.

This is nothing but a conjecture, a mere guess. An attempt to cover up the historical blunder in your Quran. It's your duty to bring evidence that as-samiri can be applied to specific things apart from Samaritans. Give us the names of those things.
U didn't bring any but simply assumed as-samiri could mean other things.

Ohyoudidnt:
Therefore, the accusation of poor historical knowledge falls apart. It’s a misinterpretation of Arabic usage and a double standard when it comes to scripture.

U simply can't save the Quran from this. Anachronism cannot work for as- Samiri because it creates more problem than it solves.
Whether as Samiri is the name of a person, land or tribe is irrelevant. The question is what is the meaning of that name, what is the etymology of as samiri, where did that name come from?
All research ever done by both islamic and non Islamic scholars have traced the name as Samiri to Samaritans.
There's nothing to indicate an alternative or contradicts it.

Ohyoudidnt:
Indeed Samaritans in Arabic is As-Samiri. However The Qur’an tells the story of As-Samiri, who was a contemporary of Musa who's actions led the Israelites off course. It shouldn't be confused with the Samaritans who came about much later as a distinct sect. The resemblance in their names is purely coincidental.

Really as per the highlighted. The problem with the Quran is it was written with poor knowledge of historical context and that's forcing U Muslims to disregard historical reality.

What does Samaritan mean? Can we have a Samaritan without Samaria.
What is the root word of Samaritan?

There is no way a Samaritan will be present during that exodus journey. It just doesn't make sense.

It's like saying when Mungo Park came to west Africa, he met someone who is a Nigerian.

Even Samaritans definition of their own name still makes it illogical for a Samiri to be present in that Israelites journey.

U guys should just give it up, Quran wasn't dictated by God. It's impossible for God to have revealed the Quan
Embrace the reality and free yourself from cognitive dissonance.

honesttalk21:
When it comes to theological truth, Islamic theology makes a clear distinction between conceptual truth and subjective opinion.

While personal faith can vary from person to person, the Qur’an lays out specifics about God (Allah) that focus on His attributes, oneness, and divinity. Claims that are both internally consistent and rationally sound. So, in Islam, the definition of Allah isn’t just a matter of personal interpretation; it’s rooted in a solid theological and philosophical framework.

In the context of polytheistic tribes, Allah was often viewed as the supreme god above a host of lesser deities, though He wasn’t typically worshiped as an idol.

Arabic speakers likely borrowed the term from earlier Semitic languages, with linguists tracing it back to al-ilah, which literally means the God. This is similar to the Hebrew Eloah or the Aramaic Elah.

The existence of the term before Islam highlights linguistic continuity rather than theological accuracy. Islam took this established term and infused it with a clear, objective meaning, defining Allah in a way that is monotheistic, rational, and consistent.

Ok now that U admitted Arab speakers borrowed the word allah from ancient Semitic languages, can U tell me the name of your God b4 people started speaking Arabic.

Ohyoudidnt:
Emoji Gabrielshow24.

Your objections fall apart when we take a closer look at the language and history involved. Samiri actually points to a tribal connection, not Samaria, and it echoes Jewish stories about a misleading figure during the Exodus. The mention of Mary, the sister of Aaron, is a Semitic expression of respect, rather than a genealogical error. Instead of indicating confusion, these verses highlight how deeply the Qur’an is rooted in Semitic expressions and traditions that aren’t found in Christian texts but have been preserved among the Israelites.

Your coincidental happening on a Reddit post deludes you of the fact that there actually exist reliable reference.

See a few below.

Qur’an 20:85–95; 19:28; 3:35–36

Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer ch. 45

Sahih Muslim 2135 clearly showing your notice about Mary is very far from new.

1 Chronicles 23:21–22

Let me ask u a question.

what is samaritan called in arabic?
what is the arabic word for samaria?

honesttalk21:
Got you! Been a while.

Stating that Allah is not unique by being referred to as al-ilah misses the point. Etymology reveals only the language's origin, not theological truth. The word God, like the Greek equivalent of Theos, has its roots in pagan beliefs, but it is used to refer to the authentic God in Scripture.

Islam regards Allah as more than just a mere word, but rather an attribute consisting of absolute unity, self-sufficiency, everlasting knowledge and unparalleled power. The Qur'an repeatedly states that no one can attain His essence or authority (Qur’an 112:1-4). Despite the use of language as an attribute, divine uniqueness cannot be negated; the question at hand is whether the attributes and essence described are truly unique.

Everyone has theological truth which is mostly subjective.
Islamic definition of Allah can only be objective if the name Allah originated within the islamic theology. Unfortunately, it's not, thus islamic definition of Allah only makes sense within it's faith.

Arabic speakers had been calling the name Allah b4 Muhammed was born.

So tell us what is the root meaning of the word Allah amongst native Arabic speakers b4 existence of Muhammed and Islam.
When they mentioned the word Allah, what do they mean? Where did they get that word from?
What we fis

honesttalk21:
You see how you contradict yourself. Did you not say moderators or the bots can read normally placed pictures before? A claim in defense of skewing your previous pictures sideways.


Your write-up has a serious flaw:

Allah was never an idol of Quraysh. Historians and even the Qur’an (29:61, 31:25) show the Quraysh already admitted Allah was the Supreme Creator their error was adding idols like Hubal, al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat as partners. Islam came to destroy those false gods and restore pure monotheism.


The “daughters of Allah” claim proves the opposite of your argument. The Qur’an condemns this (53:19–23), showing clearly that Allah ≠ those idols. Allah was never depicted or worshipped as a statue unlike Hubal, the Ka‘ba’s chief idol.


The Year of the Elephant (Surah al-Fil) was a known historical event, not a pagan myth. The Qur’an uses it as proof that the same Allah who protected His House then would aid His Messenger now.


Name ≠ concept. Arabs used the name “Allah” before Islam, just like Christians say “God” though the same word once described Zeus or Odin. The name remained, but Islam purified the meaning. Allah is the God of Abraham, not the corrupted version of Quraysh.

If “Allah” was just a pagan idol, explain why Arabic-speaking Christians before and after Islam have always called the God of the Bible “Allah.” Were they worshipping an idol too?

You now divert to other questions haven seen your earlier games of questions defeated. It all appears to be play for you.

Let's start from the beginning
Can U tell us the etymology of the word 'Allah'