₦airaland Forum

AntiChristian:
You'll only lie as usual!

Leave lying aside.
If I bring evidence from ancient Jewish authoritative text that confirms the plurality nature of God. Will U accept it or continue to argue blindly.

That's my question.

Rashduct4luv:
We believe he existed mainly because of the Qur'an and Sunnah which could have never been revealed by any human entity! Islam needs no validation from secular sources like Christianity! So Buddhism/Hinduism to be proven true their originators must have evidence from one or two secular historical sources! That's absurd!

It's important to corroborate religious claims with non religious evidence otherwise it's nothing but blind faith.
If we are not even sure Muhammed exist, how do we know the Quran is true.
The book simply copied from other books. All the story of Jesus in the Quran are from apocryphal gospel books.

Rashduct4luv:
And as regard Taoheed, which is the oneness of Allah in His Lordship, in His worship and His names and Attributes, how does this compare to Iblis?

1. Iblis once worshipped Allah in the company of the Angels!
2. Iblis was granted respite by Allah till the day of resurrection!
3. Iblis has no power of his own except whatever Allah wills.
4. Allah is omniscient, omnipotent and Omnipresent as it befits His majesty! He is not human like us nor like the Angels or Jinn! He is not comparable to any of His creations!

If Allah is truly one as Muslims claim, Can I worship the shin of Allah?

Qasim6:
Not everyone is dumb like some people that swallowed a man made doctrine that is not clearly stated in their scripture. Some of us cherish our salvation.

And no we don't need divine attributes or spooky spirit to understand scriptures, we just need our God given common sense.



Is the age of maturity mentioned in the Bible? Na the hypocrisy we dey always dey talk about be this o. Small time u go talk say we no fit defend Qur'an, we dey always run to the Bible.

If you apply common sense, u'll know the marriageable age is to come after being able to make sound judgements according to Q 4:6

And for the records, I am not saying the Tafsir is totally wrong, because at a time when most girls are married off at the early stage of puberty. They are likely to come across girls that have matured physically and mentally for marriage but are yet to see their periods.




No problem. Bring the evidence.

Ok before we start.
I need to clarify 2 things

1. Do U accept the 2nd person of the trinity as per Christian theology is the WORD OF GOD- also called God the Son/Jesus Christ.

2. Tell me the authoritative Jewish texts that U know.

I need clear answers to above because I don't want any denial once I bring the evidence.

Wainey:
[i][/i]what is the other picture, what religion is that?

African traditional religion.

NeoWanZaeed:
Another one spotted

Tell me difference between these 2
Who is the true worshipper and who is the idolater.

Qasim6:
I don't know Tafsir is now divine revelation that I have follow 100%

If you have any evidence that the Jews at some point believed in trinity you can bring them, hopefully it's not going to be some unknown document from some unknown Jewish sect that are influenced by Hellenism.

Of course, only U has divine attributes to interpret the Quran correctly.
The rest of your scholars are dumb and stupid.

Yet same Quran failed to tell us the age of maturity.
The sahih hadith tells us but of course according to Qasim, these hadiths are written by scholars deficient in knowledge so cant be trusted.

Anyway, I will bring U evidence of plurality nature of God from the ancient jewish authoritative text.

The question is will U accept it and stop disturbing Christians with your poor understanding of trinity of I bring the evidence from an authoritative text of ancient Jewish.
I need U to answer because I don't want U to stress me this afternoon.

sonmvayina:
Not just the Jews the Egyptian had Osiris, Isis and Horus....
Other people still had group of three Gods....

But the Jews had just one God who chose them....one.


The truth of the matter is that there is only 1 Creator of heaven and earth. All the others are just aspect of the God. Just like the IGBOS or yorubas...One God and plenty Orisha......

It's not about me bringing it.
If I bring g the evidence, will U accept it?
U should know by now I don't bring whack evidence.

If I bring evidence the ancient Jews believed in the plurality nature of God, will U accept it?
Yes or No?

sonmvayina:
It did not come from the Jews...that's for sure...

So should I show U?
Will U accept the evidence if I bring it here.
Right from the horses mouth....what the ancient Jews believed about the tanakh they compiled.

NeoWanZaeed:
This is 21 century. computer age. Information age. And yet, you can't use that to find out the truth.


Well,let me sum it up for you. All Religion worship human being turned into god EXCEPT ISLAM.

ALLAH is not human nor having anything in common with any of his creations

I don't know if Muslims worship a true God or not...I believe Allah is a pagan god.
But I'm very certain Muslims worship a stone. A stone they believe can forgive sin and will testify for or against Muslims on judgement day.

It's only madness for a black Muslim to call his ancestors idolaters because they worship stones but travel to Mecca to bow and kiss another stone.

This makes no sense.

sonmvayina:
Yes they might have....if you read Isaiah 45. They did not even know who the creator is. That's why they worshipped the gods of the people round them and God duly punished them.

So Isaiah was reminding them while they where in Babylon that God is one. There is no one beside him. No Satan or devil. Only God, he creates both light and darkness and make both peace and calamity.....

They worshipped the baals and the asherahs(the sons and daughters of Enlil) they even put up altars to them and God punished them. Because they where idols...

They really did some nasty things that time.

No, I'm not talking about Jews worshipping other gods.
I'm talking about how the ancient Jews interpreted their Tanakh.
They complied the Tanakh for you and me.
Now I want to show U their understanding of the scriptures they follow.
I want to show U where the concept of Trinity came from
Should I show U?

Qasim6:
What we can all agree as human being is trinity is not something that can be explained logically. Just like the concept of Jesus being fully man and fully God.

The reason why I am of the opinion that Christianity as a religion is 100% faith and 0% common sense because you are not going to be needing your common sense to accept Christianity, it is just going to be lot of emotional preaching like "God love us so much, he became flesh to die for our sins", "I saw Jesus in my dream" and the likes.. because the evidence of this triune God is find wanting and not clearly stated in the Bible.

If I show U the evidence that the ancient Jews believed in the concept of Trinity, will U accept it or as usual reject it like U did with your own Tafsir?

sonmvayina:
That's why it is easier to live Christianity when you start thinking for yourself..
Reason why they start the indoctrination at an early stage....
All these concept in Christianity has always caused division and argument and fighting. Just because they want to control human. So sad.

See, it is stated earlier that God is one Deuteronomy 6;4. So if they believe that why create a concept that is difficult to prove. God is the universe it self. We are all in it and it is in us....
Even the Babylonian and Sumerians understood that from the beginning. It was Philo who developed the two gods model which Justin mayter increased to 3...so much nonsense in one religion...hmmm

God is one, indivisible creator. Not 3 in one..
It is even stated that in Isaiah 41-47. There is nobody besides him.

If I bring evidence that the ancient Jews believed in the concept of trinity and plurality nature of God, will U embrace it or reject it like you did with other evidence I brought.

AntiChristian:
The concept of the Trinity—the Christian doctrine that defines God as one being in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit—has been explained through various analogies and theological frameworks. Here’s a summary of some of the best ways it has been explained, along with the corresponding impediments to each explanation:

1.Water Analogy
Explanation: Water can exist in three states: liquid, ice, and steam. Each state is fundamentally water yet manifests differently.
Impediment: This analogy leans towards modalism, suggesting that God merely changes forms rather than existing simultaneously in three persons.

2.Triangular Analogy
Explanation: A triangle has three sides and is one shape. Each side represents a person of the Trinity, unified as one entity.
Impediment: This can imply that the persons of the Trinity are merely parts of a whole, which can lead to a misunderstanding of the distinctiveness and co-equality of the three persons.

3.Roles of a Person Analogy
Explanation: A person can be a parent, a child, and a sibling simultaneously, showcasing different roles while remaining one person.
Impediment: This analogy risks falling into partialism or modalism as well, blurring the lines of individual personhood within the Trinity.

4.Sun Analogy
Explanation: The sun represents the Father, its light represents the Son, and heat represents the Holy Spirit. All are aspects of the same source.
Impediment: This analogy can imply that the Son and the Holy Spirit are not fully divine as they are merely emanations from the Father.

5. Mathematical Analogy
Explanation: Using the equation 1 + 1 + 1 = 1, this analogy emphasizes the unity of the three persons in one essence.
Impediment: It can confuse those unfamiliar with advanced mathematics and may not effectively convey the relationship between the three persons. 1+1+1= 3 not 1.

6. The Egg Analogy
The egg analogy explains the Trinity using an egg's three parts: shell, egg white, and yolk, which together form one egg. It illustrates unity and distinction. However, it risks partialism, implying each part is only a portion of God, and oversimplifies the complex relationships among the three persons.

So what is the best way to explain trinity without embracing modalism, partialism or debasing God from what He is not?

AntiChristian what if I show you with evidence that the ancient Jews believed in the plurality of God's nature, will it end the discussion?
If I produce evidence that the ancient Jews believed God manifest in more than one person, will U be satisfied?
If I show U that the ancient Jews believed the word of God is a person with the full divinity of the God as stated in John 1, will U accept or continue to argue blindly.

Qasim6:
U have a very big mouth for someone still struggling between all those religions u listed up there.

WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT WHAT THE JEWISH PROPHETS WROTE IN THEIR BOOKS ABOUT THEIR GOD IS NOT A FABRICATION.
TELL ME THE EVIDENCE THAT MAKES YOU BELEIVE THE TANAKH IS ACTUALLY FROM THE ONLY TRUE GOD.

THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT 'IS THE QURAN FROM GOD?'. I ASKED 3 QUESTIONS AND YOU FAILED WOEFULLY TO DEFEND ANYONE. ALL U DID IS RUNNING TO THE BIBLE TO HIDE.

3 QUESTIONS ABOUT THE QURAN AND YOU COULDN'T COME UP WITH ANY CONVINCING UNAMBIGOUS CLEAR ANSWER. AND U WANT TO BELEIVE THAT BOOK IS FROM GOD.
THE 3 QUESTIONS EXPOSED THE INCONSISTENCY, HISTORICAL DISCONNECT, POOR HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE AND GLARING ERROR IN THE QURAN. THESE ARE THE REASONS YOU COULDN'T ASNWER MY QUESTIONS.
I CAN ASK ANOTHER 3 QUESTIONS AND THE OUTCOME WILL STILL BE THE SAME.

as my colleagues as advised, we should end it unless u want to tell me why u believe the tanakh is the true word of God.
I NOTICE U ARE VERY ITCHY TO JUMP TO BIBLE, SO WE CAN AS WELL MOVE TO THE BIBLE. ASK ME BIBLE QUESTIONS OR PROPHECY AND WILL REPLY U- preferably another thread.

Kingsempires:
how far you still dey argue with this Imam

My brother I just taya.
I think I will give up now that I have finally diagnosed his problem.

Qasim6:
I already showed you in your scripture where Prophet Isa clearly states He was only sent to the Israelites confirming what the Qur'an says about his mission.

So the fact that his message spread to Ephesus after he left is not his fault in any way.

So there's nothing wrong in gentiles following Jesus? There's nothing wrong in gentiles believing the gospel of Jesus?
because according to the our book U quoting, Jesus said..
Mathew 26.13
Truly I tell you, wherever this gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.”
Mathew 24.14
And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
Even Gentiles confirm Christ is the saviour of the world when he preached to them...
John 4.42
They said to the woman, “We no longer believe just because of what you said; now we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this man really is the Savior of the world.”

As u can see, Jesus made it clear his message is for the whole world and the Quran seem to validate it.

Now U still haven't answered my question, U are deflecting it. If U don't know, say I don't know.

Why did the natives of Ephesus choose to follow a prophet sent to the Jews instead of following the prophet Allah sent to them?
Qur'an called them believers despite following the prophet that wasn't sent to them , does it mean
anybody that followed Jesus is a believer according to the Qur'an even if he's a gentile.

Qasim6:
And yes if Christianity is wrong that automatically make Islam right.

Because if both are wrong that implies God has failed in his promise.

U gotta be kidding me, most absurd and ridiculous statement I have ever heard. No wonder U failed woefully to defend the Qur'an in this debate but will quickly duck to the bible because in your thinking if I can prove the bible wrong then Quran is right.

There many other ABRAHAMIC religions- what happened to Bahia faith, what happened to The Mormons, Sikhism and even judiasm- who still await the Messiah.
What about Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism and even African traditional religion. What evidence do U have that Orunmila and his divine oracle is not from God?

How do U even know the Abrahamic religion has the true God. How do U know what is written in the bible is from the Only true God.
There was monotheistic faith 1000 yrs b4 Abraham even came on stage and that deity is not God of the bible.
People had been worshipping Only One deity- monotheism for a thousand years before Abraham said he was called by YAHWEH as the only true God.
So how do U know Abraham was right and those b4 him were wrong.

I now understand your problem. Your faith is based on refuting Christianity, then adopting the next similar religion to it.
U don't even know enough about your Qur'an to defend it convincingly.
Your theological foundation is poor. Your faith is blind.

I think our next debate should actually be Why is the God of the Abrahamic religion the True God. What evidence do we have to prove that the God called ELOHIM OR WHO REVEALED HIMSELF AS YHWH is the Only True God.
We need to go back to the foundation first b4 all these structure we are building.

Qasim6:
The promise he made to Abraham
"and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.”

He has failed with that Individual he promised to send to the whole world.
That servant of Isaiah 42, the son of man of Daniel, the prophet like Moses of Deut 18:18, Desire of all nation of Haggai 2:7

And we both know God can't fail with his promise.

This is a waste of time. I already debunked Son of Man in Daniel, whether U accept evidence of ancient Jewish text and from Jesus own word is your business.
Unless U can bring a counter evidence, pls don't go back to that passage.

Next I will debunk the prophet like Moses. He's Jesus and can never be Muhammed.

I will also debunk the lies that the blessing of Abraham via his offspring can never be Muhammed.

But most importantly we need to establish and produce evidence that the God of the Abrahamic religion is the only True God.
Why is other deity before Abrahim and after him false even if they are monotheism.

Qasim6:
Maybe you should first explain why Jesus said He was only sent to the lost sheep of house of Israel, also making sure to warn the apostles not to go into the ways of the gentiles.

Did he forget his mission when he was making that statement? Cos I will be worried if someone that came for my salvation exclude me that way.

I'll be waiting for your beautiful spin though.

Stop deviating. ISA was sent to the people of Israel not people of Asia minor.
How come people from Ephesus are called Christians. Why are they following Messiah sent only to the Israelites according to your Qur'an?

Stop ducking to the bible. Even if Christianity is wrong, that doesn't make Islam right.

How come we are finding followers of ISA amongst gentiles.

AntiChristian:
Who are they eye witnesses? Did he mention them?

Paul did say his message is from Jesus. Didn't he meet him to proclaim message from him?

Or you are saying Paul lied and he never met Jesus at all?

Did Paul say he met Jesus physically or in revelation?
Luke said he based his memoir on eye witness account, was Paul an eye witness?

Qasim6:
Well, It's because you are not connecting the dot, that's the reason u feel I am not answering your question.

Your erroneous conclusion that we know what the apostles actually believed is because you are assuming all the books of the new testament were actually written by the authors that are ascribed to them, unfortunately out of all the 27 books therein scholars believe only 7 were correctly ascribed, the rest are likely forgeries. And all the 7 are Paul's, so not even all the books ascribed to Paul are believed to have been written by Paul.
It is not the Muslims that are saying this o, it is New testament scholars.

Ok fine. If U want to base your validity of the scriotue on evidence from NT scholars then U have to apply smart principle fully and to the Qur'an.
NT scholars unanimously agree that Jesus was crucified and that John the baptist baptised Jesus.
Do U accept their claim.

Non Muslim Quranic scholars also claim the Qur'an has myths and legends in it and that the injil and Torah mentioned in the Quran is the same as the gospel and Torah with the Christians and Jews.

Do U agree with them?

Is u disagree, why then do U want me to accept the claims of NT scholars blankly without any counterevidence.

We have the writings of the early church fathers which prove the 27 books have the correct authors ascribed to them.
Why should I believe NT scholars over church fathers?
If U insist that the authority of NT scholars override that of religious leaders, then same should apply to U.
Simple.

Qasim6:
And there are strong indications that some of these Apostles actually did write, for example the Hebrew gospel written by Matthew, the gospel written by Mark that was also described by Papias in such a way that it is different from the Mark gospel we ended up with. But these documents did not survive.

So how do we know for certainty what the Apostles believed or did not believe if we are not sure we have anything from them?

Evidence from apostolic fathers and early church leaders as far back as 90 AD confirms the authenticity of the NT.
U can bring up anyone of the NT books and will give U evidence of it's authenticity from the early church fathers.

Qasim6:
And for the Ebionites, most of what we know about them are from what the gentile Christians in around 3rd - 4th century wrote about the Ebionites of their time.

U very funny. U know nothing about the ebionites outside of what that early church fathers wrote about them. And stop lying church fathers as back as early 2nd century wrote about them.
Now when what's written about them goes with your narrative, then that's true; BUT when it's not convenient then they must be lying against ebionites.
How are U even sure ebionites ever existed, they could have made them up to counter heresy flying around.

Qasim6:
I'm sorry, I'm going to take God's word over the testimony of all the people in this world. The reason why I was referencing Psalm 91 and the Qur'an confirming it.

Let's start with who wrote the book of Psalm?

Qasim6:
That's a beautiful preaching Pastor Sirtee, unfortunately today is not sunday you can wait till tomorrow.

I flatly denied our Books you say? Can I just bring the writings of any of the early church fathers to you then impose it on you? because that's exactly what you are doing with the Tafsir
And which difficult questions did I avoid?

How come Allah didn't know anything about Gene cloning?
Why should Allah dependent on a spouse to have a Son?

The problem is we don't regard early church fathers as authority. But the Tafsir is regarded as authority in Islam.
We Christians believe in Trinity and deity of Christ because it's in the scriptures and the early Jewish sect confirmed it. Not because some 360 old men raised their hands and voted Yes in a church building in the 4th century.
Nobody in Christianity cares about Nicene creed. It's irrelevant to our belief. If whatever they believe didn't come from the scripture we will reject it.
There were numerous councils by church fathers in that period including praying for saints, purgatory etc majority of Christians rejected it because it's not in the bible.

Qasim6:
And I really don't think all these your stories and preaching is necessary.

By the statement
"I and the Father are one"
Was Jesus claiming to be God?

If He was, were the Jews right to have accused him of blasphemy based on the fact that this is a man in front of them claiming to be God?

Did U read my text at all. Did U comprehend it.
It's one thing to understand and reject but it's another thing not to understand at all.
Did U understand my text because if U do, U won't be asking this question again.

Jesus told the Jews that the scriptures say they are gods, elevated to a status just below Elohim and they sit in assembly of God's judgement.
And above is not blasphemy because it's in the scripture.

So how then is it blasphemy for the Son of God to claim higher authority? How is it blasphemy for the Son of God to be one with his Father when mere men are just below Elohim in authority.

The divinity in the Father is the same divinity in Jesus Christ.
Col 2.9
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

That's the message, whether they got it or not is up to them.

[

Qasim6:
It is plainly there in Psalm 91 that nothing will happen to him that he will not even dash his foot against a stone. But somehow you want us to believe that same person was beaten, nailed to a cross and pierced with a spear. and because u don't want the Bible to explain the Bible to you, you will rather cling to a problematic Isaiah 53.



Qur'an is just confirming that God kept his promise to the Messiah.

Those prophecies are not in there for decorations hope you know?

That is not my question.
Stop answering what I didn't ask U.
Did Allah inform the ebionites and Jesus inner circle that Jesus didn't die thus issue of resssurection is a fallacy.
How did ebionites come about believing in the resssurection of Jesus if it never happened.
Did Allah reveal to the true Muslims that Jesus never died and this could t have resurrected.
If the bible points towards Allah saving ISA, then why did his companions erroneously thought he died and resurrected.
Where did they get that knowledge from?
This is my question.

Qasim6:
No, the passage is not vague, you are only pretending as if you don't understand what was going on there.

The passage Jesus was directing them to was psalm 82:6
“I said, ‘You are “gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.’

And he was telling them he is only claiming to be son of God.
Your God was denying to be God.

Ok let me debate U on this...let me show U we Christians don't shy from our scriptures.
There are clear explicit passages in the gospel where Jesus defined Son of God but of course Qasim will reject it.
But to show that we Christians can defend all verses in our scriptures standing alone without ducking to other verses to safe face, I will take U on it.
All U ve done so far in this debate is either avoid difficult questions, deflect it or flatly denied your books.

Ok
Is Jesus claiming to be Son of God just like the Jews? The answer is No.

Psalm 82 refers to mortal sinful men as gods. That shows how elevated Man is in God's presence.

The psalmist have this to say about mere Man...
Psalm 8
what is mankind that you are mindful of them,
human beings that you care for them?

5 You have made them a little lower than Elohim
and crowned them with glory and honor.
6 You made them rulers over the works of your hands;
you put everything under their feet: all flocks and herds,



Man is suppose to dominate here on earth, everything should be under our control here on earth.
because we are made in the image of God, we are suppose to reign supreme on earth just like God reign supreme in heaven and the universe. Bible says we will even judge angels.

1 Corinthians 6
Do you not know that we shall judge the angels? How much more, then, the things of this life!

Man is a powerful being, he's not ordinary; and that's what Jesus is pointing out for the Jews...they are mortal men but are highly placed in the hierarchy of authority.
Psalm 82.1 says ..
God presides in the great assembly;
he renders judgment among the “gods”:

The ""gods" in that verse is Man if he knows what he's doing.

Man should be responsible before God to judge on his behalf. Man is meant to make right and sound judgement just like God would if He were in their place. In this sense we are called "gods."


However due to the fallen state of Man, the sons of God in psalm 82 didn't judge right, they were wicked and oppressive- that can't be Jesus
The sons of God in the chapter walked in darkness, know nothing and understand nothing - that cannot be Jesus.
They were condemned and told they will die like mortals- both bible and Quran agree Jesus is alive.

Thus Jesus cannot be lumped amongst the sons of God in psalm 82 and Jesus will never use such despicable attributes to describe himself.
The sons of God in Psalm 82 were the Jews, not Jesus Christ.

Jesus then made His point: "If the Scripture calls mere sinful men 'gods- with all those powerful attributes' (and the Scripture cannot be broken), then how can I be wrong to call Myself 'God'? If men are called 'gods' in Psalm 82:6, then how can it be blasphemy for the SON OF GOD to be called 'God'?"
Notice what Jesus says about Himself in John 10:36:
He is the One that God the Father has sanctified (set apart in a very special way). Jesus Christ is the Unique One. There is no One like Him!
He is the One whom God has sent into the world. He came from God!
He claimed to be the Son of God (John 10:36). And the Jews knew that when a person claimed to be the Son of God He was claiming to be equal with God.

John 5.17
In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.” 18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

Quite lengthy but I hope even U will learn one or two things about who you are as a Man and not just slave slave the Qur'an wants to turn everybody into...
You are not a slave, U are a powerful being.

That's why most times when U quote the scripture, I just ignore it because it's so obvious U don't know what U taking about.

AntiChristian:
Paul said he saw and spoke to Jesus as a bright light on the way from Damascus!

Jesus didn't meet Paul but Paul said he met him!

We are both saying the same thing.
Paul never met Christ when Christ was alive.
But Luke said he documented accounts of eye witnesses.
So how can Luke depend on Paul to write his gospel when Paul wasn't an eye witness.

Qasim6:
You can call me whatever you like, I'm not just going to swallow any Tafsir thrown at me like a zombie.

I believe the best way to understand the Qur'an is using the Qur'an to explain the Qur'an then the Hadith then Tafsirs.

Why I'm not even suprised you are calling me Tafsir rejector, u swallowed a man-made doctrine formed over 300 years after Jesus.
Na, I don't do blind faith.

Why not bring a Tafsir that agrees with U. Or U mean none of your scholars agree with your pattern of reasoning.
If that's the case, then that's very serious....

U better don't bring the hadith up...or U just going to make things worse for your Allah and his Qur'an!!!

The most intelligent Muslim after Muhammed himself.

Anyway back to story of the men in the cave.
Why are they following Jesus in the first place?

I thought Jesus was only sent to the Israelites.
And the Qur'an confirms a prophet is only sent to his own people in their own language, and only Muhammed is sent to the whole world.
Then why are natives of Ephesus following Jesus?
Are they not suppose to follow the prophet Allah sent to them in Ephesus or Ancient minor.
Why did they ignore their own prophet Allah sent to them in their own language and followed a prophet sent only to the Jews.

Qasim6:
The Ebionites could have picked that up from anywhere.
Qur'an does not say a crucifixion did not take place, what Qur'an is saying is Jesus was not the one on the cross and those who differ over it are in doubt about it, that they have no certain knowledge of what happened but they were just following conjectures. And with the disparities among the gospels it is evidently clear that the writers were not eye witness to the crucifixion.



So a crucifixion did happen, but God saved him from the crucifixion just as psalm 91 prophesied.

Believing or not believing in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ for Christians before the coming of Prophet Muhammad is not what takes one out of the fold of true faith.

What we can deduce even from the pages of the new testament is that Jesus inner circle continue to follow the law which shouldn't have been the case if following the law would have meant Christ died in vain. So they did not believe in the vicarious atonement hogwash and that also reflected on the Ebionites.

For the son of God, the evidence is there in John 10. He used the term to counter the accusation of blasphemy.

What about resssurection? Who told the Ebionites that Jesus resurrected. Where did the belief come from?
Did Allah convey his message to the inner circle that he saved ISA or he waited for 600 yrs to correct the confusion he himself created.

Muslims are very funny. U people will accuse Christians of using vague passages to explain trinity or deity of Christ and demand explicit verses where these doctrines are defined but here U are desperately holding into a vague passage to explain Son of God; when we have clear explicit passages where Jesus himself defined Son of GOD- but of course those passages must be corrupt according to Muslims.

I brought one already and here's another
John 5.23
That all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.
John 3.16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life

But of course the above are corrupt verses according to Qasim.

Now to John 10. The vague passage

Jesus said I and Father are one.
The ignorant Jews concluded that was blasphemy because he was claiming to be God
Jesus referred them to their scriptures where they were called gods- God made man in his image. The spirit of man is the image of God. So every human has a reflection of God in them.
And above is not blasphemy.
Now Jesus asked them that If above is true and it's not blasphemy how much more the Person God set apart as his very own and sent into the world? v36
What does the highlighted mean- John 3.16, Luke 22.60, Mark 14.16

Qasim6:
Alaye you have used the fact that Jesus called a 12 years old talitha to counter the claim that Mary was around 12 when she became pregnant in our past discussion. Your argument then was Elizabeth called her woman. When we know in ancient Israel girls get betrothed around 12 and usually get married in a year or 2 after their betrothal.

Qur'an 64:5 used the word women and not girls, and we know there is marriageable age which have to do with having sound judgement and able to manage wealth. so I don't understand where this your 'it can't be from God' is coming from.
And I also don't understand why you are lecturing me on why prepubertal sex is evil. U can shove your lecture down your throat.

So if the Qur'an claim to be eternal it should not cater for divorce of matured women that are not seeing their periods abi wat are you talking about?

Until U are scholastic enough to write your own Tafsir, U can shove your opinion down your throat.
Tafsir rejector.

Deal with this....if it's choking U, feel free to spit it out but FACT REMAIN FACT. TAFSIR REMAIN TAFSIR.
upon which another man asked: “O Messenger of Allah! What about the waiting period of those who do not have menstruation because they are too young?” (along with those who have it not) because of young age, their waiting period is three months


The evidence I brought clearly showed puberty in ancient Jewish girl is defined as 14 yrs.
Within 1-2 yrs they get married, which makes perfect sense.
The source is from Sanhedrin text itself- the ancient rabbinical codification on laws and custom.

U can move the ancient Jewish puberty to 6 if that makes U feel better and helps validate Quran, but here we dealing with facts not mere opinion.

Qasim6:
Suddenly, girls below age 15 that have reached puberty fall into your category of women in the ancient world.

At least we can both agree now that reaching puberty was the thin line between a girl and a woman in the ancient/mediaeval times. And we can stop our anachronistic judgemental of people of the past.

Guy the argument here is prepubertal sex!!!
I agree things of the past should be left to the past.
But Quran claim to be eternal and that's the problem.
That's why it can't be from God. At least that surah on divorce can't be from God.
Prepubertal sex is evil.

Now let me explain why prepubertal sex is evil.

The woman is only ready for sexual intercourse when the vaginal wall has received enough estrogen to help relax the muscles and keep the environment moist, this will allow for adequate expansion and elasticity during penetrations.
Now surge of estrogen comes from the ovary with the onset of puberty.
Without the actions of this hormone, sex will be very painful to a girl, the vaginal wall may bruise or even bleed.

Same reason some menopausal women also have painful sex cos the aged ovary has stopped producing estrogen.

God in his infinite wisdom will never approve such painful action on a child just because an adult wants to derive pleasure.

Qasim6:
Ok

And do you think what they were doing giving out "matured women" in marriage before age 15 at the start of their puberty in ancient Israel was wrong

👍👍👍👍
This is what I want, bring evidence so we can learn.
If I reject it, I will bring my own counter evidence.
This is the strength of argument, not just rejecting because it doesn't suit your narrative.

15 is not too young get married in ancient civilization.
Most 15 yr old girls in the west already have boyfriends and some are even having sex.

However prepubertal marriage is not allowed in Jewish antiquity irrespective of circumstances.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10435-marriage-laws

Qasim6:
Then tell us the age of these women or what we should look for na with Bible passage you are using as reference

If a woman completed puberty lets say at age 10, are they ready for marriage?

No girl complete puberty at 10 except she has precocious puberty and that's a medical condition.

Qasim6:
Your problem is you are thinking you are having a got ya moment with Q 64:5 but you have nothing.
Sexual intercourse is not permissible with prepubescent girls in Islam. So rest!

Yinmu🥱🥱🥱
Be lying to yourself.
As if U better than Ibn Kathir, Ibn Abbas's and Jalalayn who all confirmed the verse is about prepubertal girls who are yet to menstruate.
If U like, reject the writings in your tafsir, it's your cup of tea.
Ancient Jews cannot be trusted.
Bible scholars cannot be trusted
Dead sea scrolls cannot be trusted.
Now it's your tafsir that's corrupted and should be rejected.
Your case is irredeemable.

Qasim6:
The word used in the verse is Nisa which means women and not girls, so that verse is referring to women that have matured in age and physicality but for some reason are not seeing their periods

Now this is getting more confusing...
This is not I will never understand about islam.
The Qur'an says Allah has brought a clear book for guidance but if anything I've learnt today is that the Qur'an is not clear even to Muslims.

According to Qasim, the verse is talking about matured girls who are yet to menstruate
According to honesttalk and antiChristian the verse is talking about young girls but they haven't had sex and iddah mean reconciliation.
According to the Tafsir, the verse is about young girls who are yet to menstruate and waiting for 3 months to be sure they are not pregnant.

So the question is who should I believe. Qasim who amongst U 3 is correct ?

Qasim6:
If we are to take your meaning that the verse is referring to prepubescent girls what that would mean is there won't be minimum age of marriage/intercourse. But we know from Qur'an 4:6 that there is minimum age of marriage/intercourse

Q4:6 Test the orphans until they reach a marriageable age. Then if you feel they are capable of sound judgment, return their wealth to them. And do not consume it wastefully and hastily before they grow up. If the guardian is well-off, they should not take compensation; but if the guardian is poor, let them take a reasonable provision. When you give orphans back their property, call in witnesses. And sufficient is Allah as a Reckoner.

This verse is literarily telling us there is a marriageable age/intercourse age and that age is when one is capable of sound judgement and that age also coincide with when one is able to some extent manage wealth.[/quote]What U quote up there is talking about mental competence. It has nothing to do with sexual intercourse in prepubertal age.

Test the intelligence of all orphans until they reach marriageable age( which we don't know).
Then if they are competent- give them their wealth.
This has nothing to do with prepubertal sex and divorce.
U could reach the age of marriage and not be competent enough to manage your wealth- and this can be at any age anyway.
And above is what my question is all about. Are there females who had reached the age of marriage according to the Qur'an but are not mentally and physically competent enough to handle the responsibility. That's what we are trying to investiagte in surah 65.4

I can bring the Tafsir of surah 4.6 if U want me to.....provided U don't reject it like you have done for Tafsir on divorce.

Qasim6:
I checked proverbs 31. It doesn't seems to answer my question. I can only find therein quality of a good wife.

My question is what is the Objective morality of God in Christainity concerning marriageable age for girls? and what has it been over the centuries?

Guy, girls don't get married in the bible. U have to be a woman to be married.

Woman means someone who has completed puberty.

honesttalk21:
On the contrary I am too stupid to be in any way associated with intelligence.

You provided a screenshot of the summary of divorce by Talaq (pronouncements of the husband).

It presents description of iddah after divorce.

You however did not consider that even in unconsumated marriages for however short or long the couples will have seen some degree of one another's aura.
Even if the marriage was not consummated didn't the couple have even the most limited physical contact that should ideally not be except for marital couples?

Islam considers divorce a last resort after all attempts at reconciliation have been exhausted.

The iddah provides another period for possible reconciliation not just certainty of pregnancy.

This isn't compulsory for an unconsumated marriage. Patience is a great virtue in addressing our affairs.

Now; amongst other things the iddah is one of the means to reconciliation.

Despite what you think you know or see sometimes wrongly practiced Islam neither encourages prepubescent sex or marriage.

So iddah is for reconciliation...hmmm
Tell me, then why do widows practice iddah?

Qasim6:
Where did u get the Idea that I am using their beliefs to validate Islam from?

I'm just showing you these are first century Christians that scholars believed held a view about Jesus that would have been closer to what the Original apostles that walk with him during his ministries held

They literally believed your God is a mere man. That is your problem not mine.

You are not answering my question.
Just forget it.

I also noticed U carefully avoided the prepubertal question.
That's fine by me.
Better be silent than open your mouth and make an embarrassment of yourself.
Your colleagues have started redefining iddah here....
I find that very dishonest.

U will never see a Christian redefine 1 Samuel 15 even if we deem it very uncomfortable.