₦airaland Forum

Very soon people will start burning data centres of these AI companies.
Btw, I already suspect this AI thing is a hype and would deliver far less than promised. Most investment will go to nought because expectation on AI is too theoretical to be pragmatic.

AI doctors, AI surgeons, AI nanny, AI soldiers, AI this, AI that. U can imagine some tech companies even boasted of AI teachers that will replace real human teachers in classroom.

Ordinary AI driverless car they can't fix and it's more than 10 yrs they launched self driving car. My wife has to abandon it since it's always driving her to abandoned roads, recently a self driving tesla wanted to drive the owner into the river.

No doubt AI will perform well with tasks primarily within the digital environment, require information handling, or rely on repeatable decision-making. So long as there's no complexity and those jobs are not influenced by deep human interactions. AI will excel in these areas because computers are its native environment.

Beyond that, I don't see anything AI want to change in fields of physical labour or complex human interactions. I doubt even robotic AI can impact much.

DeepSight:
+
I must say this is a thorough and interesting argument and very well put forward, also emotionally compelling. Tctrills, someone has done your homework for you.

While I thank you for this, I must juxtapose what you have written against the justice of God. God, remember, is not just said to be an emotional loving father in the human sense, but also our creator and most importantly in this context, our judge. And God is said to be perfectly just, and divine justice would simply not be perfect if there are escape loops such as one person coming to bear the consequence of another persons sin. It is written in the bible itself that we will reap what we sow, and so it is clear that in terms of divine justice, there can be no escape hatch by bringing one person to bear the consequences for another person.

Your argument will only make sense if there is another god or deity who atone for sins without shedding of blood.
If u can point to another deity or supreme being that atone for sins without any self sacrifice, then I will agree we should doubt the divine justice of God.
As far as I'm aware the only supreme being that atone for sins is the God of the bible. No other deity atone for sins.
So there's nothing to compare.
Pls understand what atonement mean before replying.

DeepSight:
Another thing you should reflect upon is that such a practice would make God a bad parent in that it would amount to a kind of cheating and therefore fail to instill the required discipline in humans.

No matter how disciplined or how hard we try, we can never please God. It's just impossible.
God himself said the best of our effort is like filthy rags. That's how he describes our righteousness.
I think the problem is man thinks too highly of himself. He believes he has what it takes to compete with other living beings sch as supernatural ones and justify this by his effort and accomplishments.
Guy I hate to describe it to u, but man is one of the most irrelevant and weakest being in our universe.
Man and earth can disappear today, and the universe will not even notice. The rest of the universe will go on for billion of years not caring of our disappearance.
Universe doesn't need us, neither do God the creator of the universe. We are the ones that need the universe and God.
Our discipline is useless to God.
Thinking otherwise is absurd.

DeepSight:
Your argument is emotionally compelling but it ends there - it only appeals to the human side of things and does not speak to the matter of justice. Furthermore, it also fails because as an analogy it does not depict your child having committed a crime which deserves punishment, it only depicts him or her in an unfortunate position of distress without any sin and in need of rescue. Such an analogy is incurably bad when we are talking about sin and conseqence.

Your argument is weak and easily broken.
Now if you tell your child not to swim in the deep side of the swimming pool, but disobeys and swam to that end and start drowning; will u say it's her fault n should face the consequences or u will instantly think of saving her despite ignoring your warnings?

This is not about whose fault or facing consequences of your action. But it's the action every loving parent will take if her child is in distress irrespective of the causation of the distress itself. Salvation first, correction and discipline can only happen when the child is saved and alive.

DeepSight:
+
Tctrills has argued that Abram was willing to do this because he knew Isaac would be resurrected. As an aside one may question the value and sacrifice of Jesus laying down his life since he knew he would be resurrected in a short three days. But I digress.

So if Jesus knew he would be brought back to live after death, then there was no human sacrifice. None.
QED.

DeepSight:
The point remains that it will forever be barbaric to ask a parent to kill his child. And in this instance what for? To make God happy? Does God drink human blood? What exactly for? What kind of God will make such a barbaric, pagan and contemptible demand? There can NEVER be anything holy or righteous about such a satanic command please.

It's like u don't get it. The relationship between God and Jesus isn't biological. Jesus is not the son of God in a biological sense rather the relationship is hypostatic.
Jesus is God in flesh, he is the visible reflection of the invisible God. They are the same BEING - they have the same ontology.

God didn't send someone to die for our sin, he did it himself. Your argument is only valid if Jesus Christ is a separate being from the Father. He's not. Jesus himself said so.

The problem here is poor knowledge of the foundational theology of the Christian faith. U need to understand our theology b4 u can critique it.

I will do my best to open your eyes the foundational knowledge of our faith. It's just that I have been very busy. But this few days I will try and keep up with u and others.

Gerrard59:
Including marketing?

Yes....see the chart below

If it's not financial pressure, then it's AI.

AI is coming for everybody's job, it's just a matter of time. And there's nothing u can do about it, simply get ready.

I don't agree slaves sellers should be compensated for selling their Kiths and kin into servitude.
Africans were willing and active participants in the slave trade. King Gezo of Dahomey boasted to Europeans he will never stop slave trade because it's an opportunity to humiliate his neighboring kingdom.

If any compensation at all, it should go to blacks living in Caribbean countries and maybe African Americans. Black Africans have no business opening their mouth demanding for reparation.

If anything, black Africans should be begging for forgiveness from Africans in diaspora for the evil did to them and then look for money and pay reparation.

Imagine selling your brothers and sisters to foreigners for mirrors, gin, necklace, gun and pepper....
What a dumb and senseless act. No wonder the continent is plagued with backwardness and poverty.

QuinQ:
Exactly, individual shame. People from other countries complain Nigerians are too loud, extroverted, and shameless

Guy rest, Nigerians get shame die. Home or abroad. We are cautious how we express ourself.

Waka with Jamaicans, u will understand what dat guy is saying.

What u should say is Nigerians are lawless. We behave anyhow where there's no rule of law.
Let them bring severe punishment for being loud and u will see how Nigerians will suddenly become the most quiet people in the world.
That's why our politicians loot like no tmrw- because they will be celebrated rather than punish. Nigerians in public office abroad fear pass anything. See as dem disgrace that one who is Alberta attorney general just because of phone call to police chief.

first thing u need to realize and acknowledge is women are hypergamous in nature. women at the same status as yourself will desire a man above your level. women above your status - financial or career or accomplishment wise will not want u bocs u are beneath them.
women below your status will naturally gravitate towards u by default. That how the dating game works.

Now, do u have the time, resources and energy to prove yourself to women above your economic and social status that u will make a good husband and they wont regret picking u?
do u have the what it takes to compete with other men for women at the same level as your socio-economic status and make them look your direction or u just go for the easy pick- ones below u?

what u need to ask yourself is what do I want in a woman I want to marry? do u want a well domesticated lady or a beautifully endowed woman or goal/career oriented woman or u looking for a woman that will give u peace of mind. what about personality- whats your preference? Lively, feminine or quiet type or u want a serious lady as wife/ do u want a socialite as a wife or more of family oriented wife.
are u looking into 50-50 wife or u prefer absolute submission and loyalty.

Look here, at the end of it all, what count is the kind of woman u will be compatible with. forget all these high flying babes, what matter is if I marry her, will I enjoy my marriage? No need marrying a woman that will end up causing u troubles and all u do is fight all day. such negative energy drains u.

There's nothing as beautiful as an enjoyable marriage. The stability and happiness it brings is unmatched. A woman that will give u that should be your preference.

DeepSight:
TcTrills, I had listed other repugnant aspects of Christian teaching as follows -

- The doctrine of the Trinity which is blasphemous

- The teaching of eternal hell fire which is barbaric

- The ritual of communion which is negatively pagan in essence, to the extent that it is said to be a representation of eating human flesh and drinking human blood

- The teaching that you must love Jesus more than you love your parents

- The doctrine of inherited sin, which casts blame on the innocent
+
Since we have tackled Trinity elsewhere with the 20 verses you decided to delete from the bible, let us address the others.

Start with eternal hell fire.

Do you believe in this?

Deepsight trust me I will answer all your questions convincingly. But first let's start with the sacrificial death of Christ as being unjust.

First understand what Christ did for us is self sacrifice. He died so we may live. He gave his life so we may not be destroyed forever. He said so himself.

we have multiple examples of that today.
will u call it unjust if A pregnant woman lose her life so that her baby may live. There are thousand cases of maternal death that were due to fetal morbidity. Yet no one ever said such childbirth is unjust.

There is a popular case of a Nigerian father who died while trying to rescue his daughter who was drowning in the swimming pool. This happened in a spanish resort.
The girl who was the only member of the family who could swim was drowning in the pool when the Father and her brother (both couldn't swim), jumped into the pool to rescue her. Unfortunately the 3 drowned and died.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/british-family-drowned-costa-del-sol-girl-drowns-in-pool-comfort-diya-115830341.html

Now will u call it unjust that the father and brother sacrificed their lives knowing fully well they couldn't swim to rescue the girl?
will u call such self sacrifice meaningless or unjust?

if u are called that your daughter is drowning in a beach and u can hear her calling your name for help, will u do everything within your means to rescue her or wait for the lifeguard to rescue her?
If u are told your house is on fire and u know fully well your children are at home. will u rush home and find ways to rescue them even if it will cost u your life or u will wait for the firefighter to put out the fire.
If u are told a gunman has held your kids to ransom and u are aware of a secret rescue plan, will u take the risk and rescue your kids even if it will cost u your life or u will wait for the police to sort it out?

A loving Father will do anything to rescue his children from perishing, that's because of the love he has for them.
Jesus Christ who is God in flesh knew he had what it takes to rescue humanity from eternal destruction and he never hesitated to sacrifice his life that humanity may be reedemed.
There's nothing unjust about self sacrifice. It's the ultimate prove of love. Christ giving his Life for us is the ultimate prove of his love for us.

Below are verses that made it clear that Christ mission on earth is self sacrifice.

John 10.18
No one can take my life from me. I sacrifice it voluntarily. For I have the authority to lay it down when I want to and also to take it up again. For this is what my Father has commanded.”

Matthew 26.28
This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

John 3:16
“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.”

John 10:11
“I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.”

Matthew 20:28
“Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

John 15.13
What greater than this: for a man to lay down his life for his friends.

Jesus predicted his death 3 times during his ministry

Mark 8.31
And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and be killed, and after three days rise again.

Mark 9
30 They left that place and passed through Galilee. Jesus did not want anyone to know where they were, 31 because he was teaching his disciples. He said to them, “The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men. They will kill him, and after three days he will rise.”

Mark 10
33 “We are going up to Jerusalem,” he said, “and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death and will hand him over to the Gentiles, 34 who will mock him and spit on him, flog him and kill him. Three days later he will rise.”

Throughout his ministry, Jesus reiterated his mission here on earth was to redeem mankind and rescue humanity from their own self destruction. We were dying and there was no escape, we trapped ourselves willfully. Christ knew there was no way out except his own self sacrifice. That is not unjust.

What is unjust is for u to have the power to safe someone from destruction but u deliberately held back for whatever reason, then u watch the person get destroyed. That is not only unjust but evil.

What is unjust is for your kid drowning to cry out for help and u did nothing but stood there watching her lose her life.
What is unjust is for u to refuse being a life saving donor to your own child because u are not willing to take the chance of losing your own life in the process.

God has the power to safe humanity from eternal destruction. He sent his son who has the same existence has himself who willingly self sacrificed his own life that we may be redeemed.

The prayer in the garden of Gethsemane only prove the mortal side of Jesus and that he's willing to give up his own desires to fulfil the will of his Father.
Christ knew if he gave up his life, his Father will bring it back again so he trusted the mission 100% without any doubt.

Finally have u asked yourself why Abraham was willing to kill and sacrifice Isaac when he was supposed to be the child of promise. God told Abraham he will fulfil his eternal covenant he made with Abraham via Isaac, yet God told him to sacrifice the same covenant child.
Why didn't Abraham protest? why didn't Abraham remind God Isaac cannot be killed at a young age since he's meant to be the covenant child.
FYI, Abraham was going to the mountain to kill that child, he wasn't going to hesitate.
SO why was Abraham willing to sacrifice his only covenant child if the child is the one to secure the covenant?

make she no try am with Quran sha, esp in that part of the country. the one of Deborah case never clear comot ground.
no need provoking people up and down to prove a needless point.
all religion are different. just pick the one that give u peace and move on.
If u are keen about afterlife, then follow Christ because he's the only one that guarantee u afterlife while still a mortal.

u will be surprised that some people convert to Islam because Muslims kill those that insult or mock the faith. These converts will tell u that's what they love about the religion and motivated them to become Muslims.
wacko people full everywhere.

I don't see any proliferation of preachers on tik Tok, it takes grace to have meaningful foloowership and viewers on social media.
If he sure for u, go open your own and see.

Instead what I see is proliferation of apologetic preachers all on side of religion including those antagonizing xtianity.

Unlike past waves of automation, which hit blue-collar workers hardest, AI appears to be targeting so-called "knowledge work," and the people who do it for a living may be more vulnerable than cashiers and cooks who earn far less than them. Almost three-quarters of a computer programmer's core job tasks, for instance, are already being handled by AI—not someday, but in how it's used today.

Computer programmers, customer service representatives and data entry workers face the highest AI displacement risk today, based on what AI tools can do related to their jobs, according to a new study by Anthropic.
There's been no surge yet in unemployment for the highest-exposure workers.
But hiring of workers ages 22 to 25 into AI-exposed roles has dropped by about 14% since ChatGPT launched.

Most striking about this list is that these aren't the low-skill roles policymakers have historically worried about most in discussions about automation. Workers in the most exposed occupations earn about 47% more than workers in jobs with zero AI exposure, are far more likely to hold graduate degrees—17.4% vs. 4.5% in the zero exposure group—and are 16 percentage points more likely to be female.

That's because AI is targeting knowledge work, the kind involving analysis and writing.

What This Means To You
If you work in a knowledge-based field that involves programming, finance, customer service or data, AI is already likely handling a meaningful share of tasks like yours. Your job may not disappear, but the door may be closing for those coming after you, as hiring in the most AI-exposed occupations has already started to slow among the youngest workers.

Many CEOs including Elon Musk of Tesla, J.P Morgan, Microsoft, Nvidia have all made it clear by 2030 artificial intelligence will wipe out more than 70% of high paying white collar jobs including Doctors, software Engineers, Investment bankers, Lawyers, financial analyst and most tech field jobs.


The Gap Between What AI Could Do and What It's Actually Doing
Radar chart comparing theoretical and observed AI coverage across various professions
The blue area shows the share of job tasks that AI could theoretically perform among these occupational categories. The red area shows what AI is actually doing in professional settings today, based on real Claude usage data.
Anthropic
Most AI-related automation remains theoretical, even as many, including Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, are convinced that AI will replace jobs up and down the corporate ladder, rendering many jobs obsolete.

Be like say Trump never get the memo...
China no send u and they are the ones assisting Iran with satellite intelligence of us bases in the middle east so they can be bombed.

China is now too powerful for America to stop. U can do nothing to them. Too late for that now.

donleo92:
Come again??

Do you know the Nazi war plane was actually bombing London?

The people that had an indomitable spirit were the Soviet!!!

Those guys forgot their hearts out!!

Infact they had Soviet started to use hand to hand combat against the Nazis German and they were so good at it.

Go and read you history sir!!!

Britain, were even forced to defend their homeland

Abeg make we hear word. Hitler that invaded Soviet Union and almost reached Moscow. What defeated German troops was the harsh Russian winter which Hitler underestimated.
Also for some weird reason the Russians heeded to the call of mad Stalin to resist German occupation.

No German troops set foot on the British isles, not one. Give kudos to whoever deserve it, don't be a hater.

Kemetian:
AND WHAT ABOUT THE 20 TIMES MORE PREVALENT WHITE CHRISTIAN DOMESTIC TERRORISM IN AMERICA?

YOU KNOW...THE NEO NAZIS WHO HATE PEOPLE THAT LOOK BROWN/BLACK LIKE YOU, IF INDEED YOU ARE BLACK?

What do you have to say about them?

Most of school shooters are transgenders.

nairalanda1:
For SirTee15

Yeah, you called me a cl...own for my views on taxes. So, how do we make extra money when our main source of income is oil, whose prices we do not control, and which won't be enough?

Plus how do we incentivise people to hold this government to account?

I mean , you want your government to keep borrowing and borrowing ? (And yeah,we have to fight corruption, that;s a given, but the money is not enough).

You don't want to answer those questions, so you called me a cl...own. Because you can't hold a decent discussion with people that disagree with you.

Rather mature of you and those that joined you.

Good morning, and have a good day.

ok let's have a matured debate over this matter and let me show u how your opinion is very flawed?
are u ready?

DatNiggaDaz:


Where is that data boi @kemetian aka Rossik aka Nairalanda1 aka Kushites. He likes to give excuses for the fake certificate holder using factors like population, revenue and recently they are blaming Iran fornthe rapid increase in petrol prices.

Here is India with almost over 4 times the Population of Nigeria with no crude oil.

i dont think rossik/kemetian is nairalanda1.

that nairalanda1 is a clo....wn who thinks increasing revenue and taxing people to death will solve Nigerians problem. funny thing is he resides in uk. let him come and tell us how uk people are responding to the labour govt policy of increasing taxes.
or is it not because of tax tax tax and more tax u find thousands of british people running to dubai in droves.
Yet he will come here and tell us APC should replicate a failed model of increasing tax to generate revenue.

rossik is just a deluded afrocentrist who thinks the black race invented and created everything. I'm afrocentrist myself but dont believe in any afrocentricity supremacist agenda.

funkmrflexx:
I've been married for 3 years now with 2 kids, I try my best to take care of my family but the economy has become very bad so it's no longer possible to take care of a family of 4 on just 1 income.
When I had money, I setup a business for my wife because I want her to be engaged and also she can support with whatever she has from the business, but after a year the business crumbled with no results to show (she gave many excuses on why she can't continue the business), even after that I've tried engaging her on other endeavors but she's not always serious.

Now she does nothing, she just presses phone and play games all day long, all the responsibilities are on me, basically everything from school fees, feeding, house rent to buying a cube of Maggi.

I've tried talking to her several times but she will pretend to be serious and goes back to default settings, I'm tired and its really talking a tole on me, sometimes I just get angry at her for no reason and I don't even want to come home.

It's not the fact the she's staying home that's the issue, its the fact the she's not showing any effort to try and do something. I'm tired because all the money I make is being used for feeding and running the house, I can't even save or even think about buying properties

First it's insulting to say your wife added no value to your life. She gave u 2 kids that bears YOUR NAME. THAT PRESERVES YOUR LEGACY.
She just doesn't sit down at home doing nothing, she is raising your kids, keeping the house clean, cooking you good home made meals and satisfying your urge at night at your beckon. That is something and u dont pay her for it, do you?
forcing her to do business when she has no entrepreneurial skills or background history in business acumen shows it's your fault not hers. She may be well adapted to routine desk job rather than commerce. ask her first how she wants to add extra income to the house not just pushing your ways on her.

Finally, whether u like it or not. It's your duty to provide for your home. THAT IS YOUR GOD GIVING RIGHT DUTY AS A MAN TO PROVIDE FOR YOUR HOME OTHERWISE U ARE WORSE THAN AN INFIDEL- NA BIBLE TALK AM.
Being a man isnt about attending to the needs of your testosterone urge or packing 5 shoulders up and down. What makes u a man is your ability to take care of yourself, another man's daughter and your kids.
whatever your wife brings in is just an adjuvant, u are not expected to rely on it.

I think it's high time we really need to change the orientation of our men in southern Nigeria, because I dont understand how u cant feed your family and the next thing that comes to your mind is to blame your wife....instead of u to DOUBLE YOUR HUSTLE AND KEEP GRINDING.

come to uk, south asian men dont even allow their wives to work, yet na dem get property pass even more than africans that both couple work.
Men better learn to work hard, disruptive AI is coming that will wipe out more than half of all jobs in labour market. At that time, a man will even be lucky to get job not to talk a house wife.

Iran should stop unnecessary propaganda, there's no way 220 American soldiers will die and won't be all over the news.

But I have to give it to them for their swift response. I think us and Israel underestimated Iranian capabilities.

The fact that Iranian response was targeted hit makes it even more impressive.

Qasim6:
I thought we've been through this 'Angel of the Lord is divine'? Well, that's your own trinitarian opinion. A being—God placed his name on for a purpose and a task, that doesn't own the divine name inherently will never be God to me, not to any Muslims, not to unitarian Christians nor rightly guided Jews.

I'm yet to reply u in the previous thread because I want us to look at a specific challenge to understand what ancient Jews believe about the nature of God in the Torah. Do they Believe God is ONE OR ONE IN UNITY. WHAT DO THEY UNDERSTAND BY ECHAD.
when I have time I will reply.

Angel of the Lord is definitely divine. ancient rabbi said so, modern scholars including Bart Erhman said so, Hagar called Him God Almighty- she said I HAVE SEEN THE ALMIGHTY YHWH when she encountered angel of the Lord.
Targum called the angel of the Lord the word of God.
I dont know what other prove u need.

Qasim6:
Whether Angel of the Lord is Gabriel or not is not the bone of contention here, I'm not even going to go into that argument because I know there is no connection there in the torah and I'm not reaching that conclusion based on Waraqah statement, Waraqah was a Christian with understanding of the torah and the gospel so he definitely would not have believed the being the prophet saw was Gabriel, he did not call the being Gabriel, he used the word Namus which comes from the Greek word Nomos, Syriac Namosa, it's a term Syriac Christians used to refer specifically to the divine law given to Moses, Waraqa was probably just identifying the being as a messanger that brings divine messages to previous prophets. So I don't understand where this Waraqa misled prophet Muhammad into believing the being was Gabriel coming from. The prophet did not know the name of the being as Gabriel through Waraqa.

I never said waraqah told Muhammed Jibril spoke to him, follow the line of argument. The bone of contention is did Waraqah tell Muhammed he spoke to an angel.

back to the argument
so the hadith Bukhari was wrong to say Waraqah told Muhammed he spoke to an angel? is that what u are saying?

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. Waraqah asked (the Prophet), 'What do you see?' When he told him, Waraqah said, 'That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly.'"

so are u saying waraqah never mentioned angel? I thought namus meant angel of revelation? but u are now saying namus meant divine law.
when the word namus is used in ancient times, how is used? is it used for angels or divine law
if waraqah never mentioned angel and namus doesn't mean angel, then u are right that he did not mislead Muhammed into believing he spoke to an angel.

Qasim6:
There are parallels where the Angel of the Lord in the torah becomes Jibril in our tradition, like Hagar and the Angel of the Lord in the wilderness becomes Hajar and Jibril in our tradition. So I'm not drawing the conclusion that Angel of the Lord is Jibril from Waraqa statement.

The revelation of the Qur'an comes in different from, there are times it comes as inspiration into the heart, there are times the prophet had physical contact with Jibril like at the cave of hira, and why do you think I brought you first 5 verses of Sura 97, the prophet received those verses while in physical contact with Jibril.

If Muhammed actually spoke to Jibril, Quran should state it explicitly just like in the bible.

Luke 1
26 In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”

why is something like this too hard to find in the Quran- angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammed. why??

failure to produce this points to evidence of Quran being a composite book that was developed over time with progressive development of the stories as it passed hands and minds of theologians.
It shows the idea that Muhammed physically spoke to angel Gabriel was a later development, it was added later on to elevate the relevance of the revelation. That is why Quran which is one of the very early source of knowledge about Islamic faith didn't mention it explicitly. And that's why the hadiths couldnt get an ancient narration stating anyone could independently confirm Muhammed spoke to angel Jibril.

Qasim6:
U know it's actually funny that you as a Christian you are asking for independent attestation, but don't worry I'll give you one mutawatir hadith, the hadith is known as hadith of Jibril. A mutawatir hadith is a narration that's narrated by so many people at every level of chain of transmission such that it becomes illogical to believe they have all agreed on lie.
—Some companions were sitting with the prophet and unknown man just walked in with a physical characteristics that defied the logic of a desert traveler, his clothes all white, no sweat, and his hair all black, he sat across the prophet and started asking the prophet series of questions, after he left the prophet told the companions he was Jibril and he was asking the questions in other to teach the companions about their faith. The unknown man appeared out of nowhere, not member of the community, with no sign of travel and never to be seen again.

sorry but this is not independent attestation. This is still Muhammed telling people he spoke to angel Jibril. I want an independent confirmation where someone or the Quran[ which is supposed the word of Allah] said I can confirm Muhammed spoke to angel Gabriel. That is what I want NOT Muhammed telling people he spoke to Jibril.
The man being unknown or a stranger is irrelevant.

Qasim6:
And on why we don't believe Paul—extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You can not start preaching substitutional atonement doctrine of blood sacrifice for salvation such that the disciples Jesus handpicked himself that walked with him, ate with him were in disagreement. Why should I that's living over 2000yrs after believe him?

no problem, but I sha know that I will rather believe someone who said he received a revelation and submitted the revelation b4 the apostles for scrutiny and approval b4 preaching it, rather than someone who said he received a revelation and nobody could actually confirm he spoke to this divine person yet refused to have his revelation scrutinised.

MatrixReloaded:
That is for her parents.
No man or woman dares touch my child, he will spend his days in confinement.

u would do nothing- na command schools we dey talk
during my time, they will even beat parents that come to complain join.
People that used to discipline children in the presence of their parents.

people already warned u- if u dont want your child to be flogged, dont send them to military schools.
They are not great schools anyway, so I dont know what your threat is about. If your child ends up there, it's because your socio-economic status is low and that's what u should work on first.

Qasim6:
It doesn't even matter if it's the Angel of the lord or Jibril that spoke with Moses even though from Islamic perspective Jibril/Angel of the lord/Holy spirit(Ruach Hakodesh) is the same being but that's not what we discussing here.

Waraqah was never a Muslim, he died a unitarian christian. His understanding of the scripture is based on interpretation of the torah and gospel NOT islam.
The torah made it clear angel of the LORD is divine. angel gabriel is NOT. ANGEL GABRIEL IS NOT THE ANGEL OF THE LORD.
waraqah got it wrong and gave the wrong impression to your P. that an angel spoke to him.

Qasim6:
Waraqa did not identify the being as Jibril because the Torah did not identify the being Moses saw as Jibril so how could he have misled prophet Muhammad? Prophet Muhammad only got to know the name of the being as Jibril on his 2nd visit.

Moses did not speak to Jibril in the torah, torah identified the angel that spoke to Moses as the Angel of the LORD- a theophany in the old testament.

Qasim6:
Say, "Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel - it is he who has brought it(Qur'an) down upon your heart by permission of Allah, confirming that which was before it and as guidance and good tidings for the believers. Q 2:97

The first 5 verses of Qur'an 96 were revealed on the first encounter.

Read! in the name of your Lord who created.
Created man from a clinging substance.
Read, and your Lord is the most Generous.
Who taught by the pen
Taught man that which he knew not Q 96 1-5

ok so jibril revealed the quran to the heart of your P. it wasn't a physical encounter.
because that's what I can understand from the 1st verse. no where did it say angel jibril spoke to Muhammed.
revelation can be by trance, vision, dreams, trance, hallucinations, whatever.
Paul also received revelation but u guys rejected it claiming he never saw Jesus.

my question is clear, was there a physical encounter btw Muhammed and angel Jibril, did they speak to each other.
where is the evidence of such physical encounter.
show me where it's written that angel jibril spoke to Muhammed or Muhammed spoke to angel Jibril in the Quran.
I need a correct independent attestation that confirmed angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammed.

another episode of the story that never happened. always watch on twitters

Qasim6:
You sound intelligent and at the same time very slow and I don't know how you manage to pull that but I guess it's a Christian thingy. You need to work on your thought process it will help you going forward, else your arguments are always just going to be plenty talk, zero substance.

Even if Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham and Al-Tabari later identified Namus to be Jibril does that mean Jibril is what Waraqa had in mind? You should know Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Hisham and even us today are only equating Namus to Jibril because of the benefit of hindsight. Must you be spoon feed like a toddler? there are Qur'an verses that identify the being that brought revelation to the prophet as Jibril, infact in the sirah of the prophet written by Ibn ishaq we get to know the being identified himself as Jibril on his 2nd visit.

Waraqa was only trying to make meaning to the being, as someone familiar with the Torah and story of Moses and the burning bush it's only natural for him to liken the prophet Muhammad experience to that of Moses. The Torah does not identify the being Moses saw as Gabriel so why would you think Waraqa using Namus he was referring to Gabriel?

Come on guy, you can do better.

This is already thrashed in previous thread. ask honesttalk your friend.

The angel that spoke to Moses is not angel gabriel but Angel of the LORD. and we all know The Angel of the LORD isn't angel gabriel.
so waraqah misled your beloved P.

Waraqah said, "This was the same one who keeps the secrets whom Allah had sent to Moses (Angel Gabriel). I wish I were young and could live up to the time when your people would turn you out." God's Apostle asked, "Will they drive me out?"

So how then do we know that angel jibril spoke to Muhammed. u said it's in the Quran, show me
show me where Quran state angel jibril SPOKE to Muhammed. that's all I'm asking
a simple verse will be sufficient.

Qasim6:
Maybe because it's a command from our Lord and not hunger competition with Christians. If Una own is not to eat and drink anything for 100 days or whatever then you should keep to it. Eating sahur is a blessing from our Lord and we will gladly take it.
To each his own.



This is a joke right?
There are several verses of the Qur'an that identifies the angel as Gabriel/Ruh al-Qudus.

Show me the verses

The quranic verse that state angel Jibril spoke to Muhammed OR Muhammed spoke to angel Jibril. any which one is fine by me.

RealityKings1:
They actually arrested mossad agents. It's all over the news

What news. All news that mentioned it traced the source to Tucker Carlson.

No news agency carried it, not even al jazeera

abeg, fasting for islam no be am. How can u eat breakfast, skip lunch, eat dinner and then claim he's fasting.
anyway to each his own.

My own is how did Muhammed know he's a prophet. Who told Muhammed he's a prophet.

Can someone tell me how Muhammed got to know the person speaking to him is Angel Jirbil

Mirasteel:
God doesn't have a son.

Says who?

So is Jesus lying?

Lasveg:
To defend the existence of an imaginary being, you have to come up with all kinds of ridiculous stuffs.

Imagine calling a Harvard physicist ridiculous. Ordinary WAEC level mathematics u struggle to pass.

Nairaland pseudo atheists about to have some serious headache, they won't sleep well tonight.

HARVARD SCIENTIST CLAIMS 'GOD IS REAL': REVEALS MATHEMATICAL FORMULA THAT COULD PROVE IT.

Harvard astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon has suggested that a mathematical formula could prove God's existence. By examining cosmic constants and the fine-tuning argument, the theory posits that the universe's precise laws suggest intentional design rather than chance. This claim has ignited debates between scientific and theological communities about the existence of a higher intelligence.



In a groundbreaking revelation that blurs the lines between science and faith, Harvard astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon has claimed that a mathematical formula could be the ultimate proof of God's existence. Appearing on the Tucker Carlson Network, the renowned scientist suggested that the secrets of the universe may not just be written in the stars — but in the very fabric of mathematics itself.

The Divine Equation
At the heart of Dr. Soon's theory is the "fine-tuning argument" — the idea that the universe's physical laws are so perfectly calibrated to support life that it couldn't have happened by chance. The formula, first proposed by Cambridge mathematician Paul Dirac, highlights how certain cosmic constants align with breathtaking precision — a phenomenon that has puzzled scientists for decades.


"God is a Mathematician"
Dr. Soon echoed Dirac's own words from 1963, where the mathematician speculated that the universe's perfect balance of physical laws could only be the work of a higher intelligence. "One could perhaps describe the situation by saying that God is a mathematician of a very high order," Dirac famously wrote — a sentiment that Dr. Soon passionately revived during the podcast.


While many scientists have historically shied away from linking science to religion, Dr. Soon argues that the harmony between math and the universe points to intentional design. "God has given us this light, to follow the light and do the best that we can," he said, suggesting that the very equations governing our universe could be the fingerprints of a divine creator.

A Controversial Revelation
Naturally, the claim has sparked heated debates in both scientific and theological circles. Critics argue that the fine-tuning argument still lacks concrete evidence, while believers have hailed Dr. Soon's theory as a rare meeting point between science and spirituality.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/harvard-scientist-claims-god-is-real-reveals-mathematical-formula-that-could-prove-it/articleshow/118766145.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst