₦airaland Forum

Truthseeker10:
So is the verse saying that the son is a smaller God compared to the God that anointed him?

State exactly what you read the Bible saying my friend and add nothing.

What did you read?

Why do you find it difficult to answer my questions

1. Can anyone see God?
2. Can God be in Heaven and on Earth concurrently?
3. Who was speaking in Heb1:8 to the Son?


The first two questions are YES or NO and the third Question required the Name or Identity of the one speaking!

Truthseeker10:
So is the verse above saying that the son is an Almighty God and that same son has a God that anointed him according to Hebrews 1:9?

No sir!

The verse is not saying that the Son is AN Almighty God. Please read again!


And probably help Bookmark by answering the questions

1. Can anyone see God?
2. Can God be in Heaven and on Earth concurrently?
3. Who was speaking in Heb1:8 to the Son?


It is important!

Truthseeker10:
So can you too kindly explain the verse that you quoted?

The verse is explained in Hebrew 1:8


Heb 1:8-13:
"But to the Son he said, Your throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows.
And, You, Lord, in the beginning have laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of your hands: They shall perish; but you remain; and they all shall wax old as does a garment; And as a clothing shall you fold them up, and they shall be changed: but you are the same, and your years shall not fail. But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool?"


Do you care to explain the verse in case Hebrew 1:8 explanation is not explicit enough for you?

The interlinear is attached for your perusal!

sonmvayina:
You did not provide any scripture to back it up..

Body made from dust + breath of God (spirit of God) = a living soul.
We are a soul, we do not have a soul.

When a soul expires, the spirit goes to who gave it and the body is buried so that it can go to the earth. Like I said, we are all Gods spirit experiencing human life in multiple ways..

You seem to have a preconceived interpretation of what you think I am saying.

I never said anywhere that WE HAVE A SOUL.
The language I used is
Our Spirit
Our Soul
Our Body

1Ths 5:23:
"And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."

TenQ:
No sir!
God's Holy Spirit in us is what gives us life eternal and His image: aka our spiritual identity .
Our Soul is what gives us our personal identity
Our Body is what gives us our physical identity

Truthseeker10:
Are you teaching us here that an Almighty God has a God that anoints him?

I didn't say that o!
I only quoted the scripture for him to explain

sonmvayina:
That holy Spirit is what is within us all.
we are all God's holy Spirit experiencing life in multiple ways.
we are God's spirit+ body from earth.
when we expire, spirit goes to God
and body is buried for it to go to the earth.

all these unnecessary ignorance disguised as wisdom is sickening...

see Ecclesiastes 12:7
Psalm 104:29-31

No sir!
God's Holy Spirit in us is what gives us life eternal and His image: aka our spiritual identity .
Our Soul is what gives us our personal identity
Our Body is what gives us our physical identity

sonmvayina:
For the last time TenQ, God is not "a thing", God is "Everything" (singular). we are part of God And God is part of us.....

For free: God is the universal divine consciousness.

Where did you see or hear me call God a thing?

Everything physical and spiritual is included inside God

In God we live and move and have our existence. This is why God as the Holy Spirit is Omnipresent.

TenQ:
Normally, I shouldn't respond to your question but I feel led to answer you without using scripture.


1. You are the number one proof of God's existence. You exist and you are an intelligent and rational creature. A Building is the evidence of a Builder. A painting is the evidence of a Painter!
2. There is a scientific evidence that the universe had not being for ever, it has an age of about 13.6billion years old
3. There is a scientific evidence that time, space and matter appeared simultaneously at the origin of the universe expansion
4. There exist a scientific law of entropy that prevents you to self assemble from nothing
5. Because of entropy we know that the universe had not always existed.
6. There is a scientific law of cause and effect operating in the universe
7. Based on this, the Universe is the effect of a cause.
8. The cause must have happened before the universe, meaning that the cause CANNOT operate on any physical or chemical laws.
9. This Primary Cause is what for now we call the Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything .
10. This Cause must be Spaceless, Timeless, Matterless and Intelligent because every law of physics and chemistry came into being only after the universe came into being.

This Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything is what we Christians call God. He cannot be Seen, not touched because He operates in a Far much Higher DIMENSIONS than the physical dimensions.

We call His Dimension the Spiritual Dimension.

A Human beings is a Biological Organism with a SOFTWARE called the SOUL. He also has a Kernel Software called the SPIRIT.

With his Spirit, he knows that God exists and has given him a Conscience for good and bad/right and wrong.

God has chosen some men to act as intermediaries between Him and us humans all through the earth history. He backs them up with His power and we know them as Prophets, they tell us more about God so that each one of us can have our SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE with Him. From them we know that Humans are Spiritually Dead and are subject to decay just as the Universe is slowly dying.

So, if you are looking for God, you cannot see Him not experience Him from your physical dimension. You have to tune into your conscience. Inside God we all exist including both the physical realm and the heavenly realms


Have you read the Book Flat Land
I ask you to read it:
Flatland: It is A Romance of Many Dimensions and a satirical novella written by Edwin A. Abbott

Summary of note: A person in a 2D world will argue till tomorrow that the 3D world doesn't exist. Miracle exist in the 2D world when someone in the 3D space changes something in the 2D space.


My Questions:
1. If you think there is nothing like the Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything , bring your evidence as
It is scientifically impossible to have an infinite regress of Cause and Effect
2. The DNA is a compendium or Library of Data, Information and Instructions. Tell me if it is possible for a computer program to write itself given an infinite time to juggle alphanumeric characters to form the codes.
*Don't forget that a simultaneous existence of the information code and information decoder must also exist at the machine level.



I leave you to your conscience.


God loves you and He wants you saved!

God is NOT the sky-daddy you think, You are INSIDE Him. You Live in Him. It's like a fish saying it water and air doesn't exist.

Anniie4u:
Please o! Is this normal ?
Marrying your cousin

It is allowed in Islam although cousin marriage is not very common in Nigeria.

Cousin marriages are common in the North African, East African and Arab Muslim nations

I will stop after this as you are trying too hard to repeat yourself and be correct. Unfortunately, what is wrong cannot be made un-wrong!
LOL!!

honesttalk21:
Your attempt at mockery can't mask the fact that you've committed some fundamental errors in logic and ignored readily available information. Let's break down each of your claims:

1. We Need Mothers of Allah' to Interpret Babblings

You argue that the Qur'an is so unclear that scholars are needed to reinterpret its "babblings."

But the reality is alll ancient texts require interpretation. Even the Bible admits in 2 Peter 3:15-16 stating Paul's letters contain things hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort. Christianity has
over 45,000 different denominations, each with its own interpretations, sometimes contradictory. You should do better to address or concede.

Centuries worth of councils, creeds, and systematic theologies are dedicated to interpretation. Entire academic fields (hermeneutics, exegesis) focused solely on interpreting scripture.

If needing scholars to interpret means the text consists of unclear babblings then the Bible is equally guilty.

Furthermore, your phrase mothers of Allah is just crude blasphemy, not a legitimate argument.

Until we can understand the Qur'an without you Muslims re-interpretating Allah's words to mean something different.

honesttalk21:
2. Nothing in the verses or Qur'an states what you Say. Your argument that my explanation is made up and doesn't come from the Qur'an is untrue since what Qur'an 17:1 actually says is exalted is He who took His Servant by night from al-Masjid al-Haram to al-Masjid al-Aqsa, whose surroundings We blessed, to show him of Our signs.

This verse explicitly states:

1. Al-Masjid al-Haram which is the Sacred Mosque located in Mecca and universally understood.

Who told you that the sacred mosque is in Mecca. Does Allah have only one messenger or when did Allah named a particular mosque as the sacred mosque? The mosque is Sacred to who? Is it Moses?

honesttalk21:
2. Al-Masjid al-Aqsa is the farthest Mosque and its name is right there in the verse.

Who determined that a mosque is the farthest mosque? Was it Allah? If the mosque at Jerusalem is the farthest mosque, then your islamic claim of 124,000 Messengers of Allah is a FABRICATION

honesttalk21:
3. Whose surroundings We blessed means the area around al-Aqsa is blessed.

When did Allah bless the surrounding and why?
If the identity of the farthest mosque is s unknown other than by what you Muslims say, how can we be sure when and how Allah blessed it's surrounding?

honesttalk21:
4. His Servant isIdentified throughout the Qur'an as Muhammad pbuh (57:19, 18:1, 72:19).

You forget that Jibril is Allah's servant and so is Moses, Aaron, David etc. Mohammed's name was mentioned only four times in the Qur'an.
Sorry!

honesttalk21:
The Qur'an does state these things. The issue is that you want more detail than the verse provides, which isn't the same as the verse being unclear.

3. When Did Allah Bless the Surroundings of the Farthest Mosque?

Qur'an 17:1:Whose surroundings We blessed.
The verse describes an already-existing blessed state, not a specific moment when the blessing occurred.

The surrounding area (Jerusalem/Temple Mount) has been considered blessed throughout both Biblical and Islamic history.

Biblically Psalm 132:13-14: "For the LORD has chosen Zion... 'This is my resting place forever, 2 Chronicles 7:16:I have chosen and consecrated this house [Temple] so that My name may be there forever, Zechariah 2:12:The LORD will... choose Jerusalem again.

You have to come to the bible for explanation of the eloquently written book by Allah? Don't forget that you claim that the original Torah , Injeel and Zabur are lost!

The blessed land is [b]Mount Sinai my dear and it was with Moses.[/b]
Exo 19:9-13:
"And the LORD said to Moses, See, I come to you in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with you, and believe you for ever. And Moses told the words of the people to the LORD. And the LORD said to Moses, Go to the people, and sanctify them to day and to morrow, and let them wash their clothes, And be ready against the third day: for the third day the LORD will come down in the sight of all the people on mount Sinai. And you shall set bounds to the people round about, saying, Take heed to yourselves, that you go not up into the mount, or touch the border of it: whoever touches the mount shall be surely put to death: There shall not an hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether it be beast or man, it shall not live: when the trumpet sounds long, they shall come up to the mount."


The Temple of Solomon the as Blessed but not the surrounding except you will show me the verse.

So, you see how explicit the God of Moses is unlike the God of Mohammed

honesttalk21:
Islamic understanding is that the site's blessed status predates the specific mosque structure. It's the location itself that's sacred (the place where Abraham, David, Solomon, and Jesus worshipped), not dependent on whether a building existed there in 621 CE.

Your comparison to Moses on Sinai actually proves my point. Sinai became holy at a specific event, but Jerusalem's holiness spans millennia through multiple prophets and revelations.

Story story.
I gave you a scriptural evidence. I need yours from the perfectly written Qur'an.

What kind of author will name a subject without introducing it in his book?

honesttalk21:
4. What Name Is This Farthest Mosque Called in Jerusalem?

The name is given in the verse: as al-Masjid al-Aqsa (The Farthest Mosque). You're essentially asking but what's its other name?

Why would it need another name? Think of it like this: The White House has its official name (describes its characteristic: a white building). The Forbidden City by its official name (describes its characteristic: forbidden access). The Holy Land has its official name (describes it: sacred). So Al-Masjid al-Aqsa is the Farthest Place of Prostration describing its characteristic as the farthest sacred site from Mecca.

You're demanding a proper name as if the Farthest Mosque isn't a proper name.? It is.

The name of the farthest mosque is called "farthest mosque"!?
I remember In asked a boy a question!
What is the name of your daddy?
He said. "The name of my dadd is Daddy!"

You can see how sensible your answer is.

honesttalk21:
5. Any Pre-Islamic historical evidence for both Mosques?

You're asking for pre-Islamic evidence for mosques. But that's a category error. Masjid in Arabic simply means place of prostration (sujud). It doesn't exclusively mean Islamic mosque building. So, pre-Islamic "mosques" (places of prostration/worship) would include
Al-Masjid al-Haram (Mecca).

In Islamic belief, the site dates back to Abraham building the Kaaba (Genesis 16-17 timeframe). By pre-Islamic Arab sources the Kaaba existed and was venerated for centuries before Islam.

The historical evidence has Mecca as a well-known pilgrimage site in pre-Islamic Arabia.

Al-Masjid al-Aqsa (Jerusalem) has the biblical Temple Mount which is Solomon's Temple (1 Kings 6), rebuilt as the Second Temple destroyed in 70 CE.

Byzantine sources show Jerusalem was a major Christian holy site with the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, etc.

The Qur'an references this sacred site, not necessarily a physical mosque building in 621 CE.

The farthest place of prostration refers to the Temple Mount area where prophets worshipped (Abraham, David, Solomon, and Jesus in Biblical accounts).

You're essentially demanding Islamic mosque evidence pre-Islam, which is logically impossible in the exact context you demand. The site has ancient sacred history; the Islamic interpretation begins with Muhammad pbuh.

So. You don't have any evidence that a place exist in history called the farthest mosque!?
I am asking for pre-islamic historical proving that places of such names exist!
QED!

If I told you that the national mosque at Abuja is the farthest mosque, won't you ask me for evidence?

honesttalk21:
6. Identity of Servant Not Introduced by Allah

By Your argument you say Allah doesn't specify who His Servant is. But the Qur'an repeatedly identifies Muhammad pbuh as His Servant. Do you expect that chapter to refer to a different servant or prophet?

Quran 72:19 states when the Servant of Allah stood up calling upon Him..."

Quran 18:1 Praise be to Allah who revealed the Book to His Servant ...

Quran 57:9:He sends down clear verses to His Servant...

In the context of Surah 17:1:The entire Qur'an is about Muhammad pbuh's prophethood. His Servant in a passage about a night journey is universally understood to be Muhammad pbuh by both the original audience and all subsequent readers. Perharps you should feel free to boldly say who that should be if you have justifiable and verifiable proof.

Do you expect Allah to repeat Muhammad pbuh in every single verse? That's not how literature or scripture works.

Think of it like this: The U.S. Constitution refers to the President without naming Washington, Trump, Obama or Clinton every time. The context makes it clear who is being referred to.

Allah has only one servant and he is Mohamed alone!
The book of Allah is indeed eloquent!

honesttalk21:
7. Location of al-Masjid al-Haram Not Mentioned

Your argument that the Qur'an doesn't say where al-Masjid al-Haram is located but this is simply untrue. Al-Masjid al-Haram is the Sacred Mosque in Mecca. Let's be clear about this, because every early Muslim understood as Muhammad pbuh spent over 40 years living in Mecca. The Kaaba had been the central pilgrimage site for centuries. Muslims face it in prayer five times a day. The Qur'an was revealed there and makes repeated references to Mecca (48:24, 3:96).

Are you seriously suggesting that the Qur'an should spell it out like this al-Masjid al-Haram, located at coordinates X, in the city known as Mecca'?

That's not how any text from that era functions. The Bible doesn't give you Jerusalem's GPS coordinates, but we all know where it is.

The people who first heard the Qur'an knew exactly what al-Masjid al-Haram was. Your lack of understanding is your issue, not a flaw in the text.

We started with how eloquent linguistically the Qur'an is isn't it.
Allah I ask is the evidence from the Qur'an of the location. Since you say it's not true, where in the Qur'an is the location of the mosques?

honesttalk21:
8. The Claim of Inconsistent Pronoun Use which I shouldn't continue to readress going by your repeatedly inconsigruent mockery but being in this group

Take a look at Quran 17:1: Exalted is He who took His Servant by night... whose surroundings We blessed, to show him of Our signs. Indeed, He is the Hearing, the Seeing.

Here's how it breaks down: He/His in singular, third person refers to Allah.

We/Our in plural, first person also refers to Allah (a majestic plural).

him in singular object refers to the Servant Muhammad pbuh.

This is a standard feature of Semitic and applicable to regular writing and extends to the plural of majesty.

Think about this Biblical parallel in Genesis 1:26-27 which reads let Us make man in Our image (plural). So God created man in Hisown image (singular).

See the pattern? The text switches between singular and plural when referring to God within the same passage.

If you're going to call Qur'an 17:1 unclear rambling, then you have to apply that same label to Genesis 1:26-27. Either be consistent in your criticism, or admit you're applying different rules.

Let me help Allah by rewriting the verse in a clear manner.

I will write it in two literally styles
1. The Original
Qur'an 17:1
"Exalted is He who took His Servant by night from al-Masjid al-Haram to al-Masjid al-Aqsa, whose surroundings We have blessed, to show him of Our 5 signs. Indeed, He is the Hearing, the Seeing."


2. First style: Someone speaking for Allah
Qur'anx 17:1
"Exalted is He who took His Servant by night from al-Masjid al-Haram in Mecca to al-Masjid al-Aqsa in Jerusalem, whose surroundings He has blessed, to show his servant Mohammed of his signs. Indeed, He is the Hearing, the Seeing."

All the pronouns He and His belong to Allah and the servant Mohammed was shown the signs

3. Second Style: Allah speaking
Qur'anx 17:1
"Exalted is Us who took Our Servant by night from al-Masjid al-Haram in Mecca to al-Masjid al-Aqsa in Jerusalem, whose surroundings We have blessed, to show our servant Mohammed of our signs. Indeed, We are the Hearing, the Seeing."

All the pronouns Us, We and Our belong to Allah and the servant Mohammed was shown the signs


Can you see how eloquent my corrections are compared with the original?

honesttalk21:
9. Your confusions are fully addressed.

You claim:

1. The identity of the servant isn't clear.
The Qur'an consistently identifies Muhammad pbuh as His Servant (18:1, 57:9, 72:19); it's clear from the context.

No!

honesttalk21:
2. The location/name of the farthest mosque isn't mentioned. It's named in the verse itself is al-Masjid al-Aqsa. The location is the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, a site of immense importance in the Abrahamic tradition.

No location mentioned.

honesttalk21:
3. The location/name of al-Masjid al-Haram isn't mentioned. Everyone at the time knew it; it's the Sacred Mosque in Mecca, housing the Kaaba, and it's referenced throughout the Qur'an.

No location mentioned anywhere in the Qur'an!

honesttalk21:
4. The pronouns 'He,' 'Him,' and 'His' are switched without explanation.
This is the standard Semitic plural of majesty, just like in Genesis 1:26-27. The grammar is clear in context. These aren't legitimate problems. You're simply failing to understand.

The contextthe shared knowledge of the people who first heard the Qur'an)

The genre: (an ancient religious text, not a modern instruction manual)

Semitic literary conventions: (like the plural of majesty and understanding identity from context)

It isn't. It is a messed up changes of pronouns which I have corrected for you Muslims.

honesttalk21:
10. The Mothers of Allah Insult is a sign of Weakness

Resorting to crude insults (mothers of Allah,toddler babbling) shows that you lack any real arguments.

This tactic reveals
Dishonestyusing mockery instead of engaging with the content)

Double standards: (the Bible requires interpretation too; the existence of 45,000 denominations proves that)

Ignorance: (demanding modern precision from a 7th-century text)

Every point you've tried to make has been answered:

Sorry for the apparent insults, it is because Muslims do not follow Allah or his words. Muslims follow the Islamic scholars interpretation of what Allah said.

Allah gave the Qur'an in Arabic so that Arab Muslims can understand the Qur'an BUT what we observe is that even Arab Muslims are confused about the Qur'an and so Arab Muslims need several Tafsirs also in Arabic to understand the words Allah says is easy to understand.

honesttalk21:
✓ The verse names both locations (al-Masjid al-Haram and al-Masjid al-Aqsa).

✓ The Qur'an consistently identifies the Servant as Muhammad.

✓ The surroundings are blessed (Jerusalem has a sacred history spanning thousands of years).

✓ The shifts in pronouns are standard Semitic rhetoric (also found in Genesis).

✓ People at the time understood the context (just as Bible readers understand that "the President" refers to the current officeholder).

Your mockery isn't a refutation.

You're demanding:

GPS coordinates for 7th-century locations.

Every verse to repeat obvious information.

Modern technical precision from an ancient religious text.

Standards that you don't apply to the Bible.

You're ignoring:

The context and shared knowledge of the audience the Qur'an was originally intended for.

Semitic literary conventions (which the Bible also uses).

The fact that needing interpretation applies equally to the Bible (2 Peter 3:15-16).

The confusion isn't in the Qur'an it's in your unrealistic expectations and refusal to be consistent in how you judge it.

Your babbling insult is actually a projection of your own failings. The text is clear to anyone who approaches it honestly, taking into account its literary and historical context.

I have helped you correct Quran 17:1
You were just repeating yourself without providing solid evidence from the Qur'an of my questions.

Don't forget that the subject was about the LINGUISTICALLY and ELOQUENTLY written Qur'an .

I brought Qur'an 17:1 as a test which showed that Muslims make unsubstantiated claims about the Qur'an and of Islam.

Fenrir:
None of that is evidence its belief and no more

You didn't even read this! These are logical and scientific evidences that you can easily falsify or admit it validity.
SMH!

When Emptiness is masked by loud Noises!

But have it on record that you despised the knowledge that would have saved you.

Have a nice day!

Normally, I shouldn't respond to your question but I feel led to answer you without using scripture.

Fenrir:
What proof have any of you got that any god exists?

You are all wrong until you can prove it to the entire world all at the same time, if your gods are real and all powerful what is the excuse for hiding?

1. You are the number one proof of God's existence. You exist and you are an intelligent and rational creature. A Building is the evidence of a Builder. A painting is the evidence of a Painter!
2. There is a scientific evidence that the universe had not being for ever, it has an age of about 13.6billion years old
3. There is a scientific evidence that time, space and matter appeared simultaneously at the origin of the universe expansion
4. There exist a scientific law of entropy that prevents you to self assemble from nothing
5. Because of entropy we know that the universe had not always existed.
6. There is a scientific law of cause and effect operating in the universe
7. Based on this, the Universe is the effect of a cause.
8. The cause must have happened before the universe, meaning that the cause CANNOT operate on any physical or chemical laws.
9. This Primary Cause is what for now we call the Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything .
10. This Cause must be Spaceless, Timeless, Matterless and Intelligent because every law of physics and chemistry came into being only after the universe came into being.

This Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything is what we Christians call God. He cannot be Seen, not touched because He operates in a Far much Higher DIMENSIONS than the physical dimensions.

We call His Dimension the Spiritual Dimension.

A Human beings is a Biological Organism with a SOFTWARE called the SOUL. He also has a Kernel Software called the SPIRIT.

With his Spirit, he knows that God exists and has given him a Conscience for good and bad/right and wrong.

God has chosen some men to act as intermediaries between Him and us humans all through the earth history. He backs them up with His power and we know them as Prophets, they tell us more about God so that each one of us can have our SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE with Him. From them we know that Humans are Spiritually Dead and are subject to decay just as the Universe is slowly dying.

So, if you are looking for God, you cannot see Him not experience Him from your physical dimension. You have to tune into your conscience. Inside God we all exist including both the physical realm and the heavenly realms


Have you read the Book Flat Land
I ask you to read it:
Flatland: It is A Romance of Many Dimensions and a satirical novella written by Edwin A. Abbott

Summary of note: A person in a 2D world will argue till tomorrow that the 3D world doesn't exist. Miracle exist in the 2D world when someone in the 3D space changes something in the 2D space.


My Questions:
1. If you think there is nothing like the Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything , bring your evidence as
It is scientifically impossible to have an infinite regress of Cause and Effect
2. The DNA is a compendium or Library of Data, Information and Instructions. Tell me if it is possible for a computer program to write itself given an infinite time to juggle alphanumeric characters to form the codes.
*Don't forget that a simultaneous existence of the information code and information decoder must also exist at the machine level.



I leave you to your conscience.


God loves you and He wants you saved!

God is NOT the sky-daddy you think, You are INSIDE Him. You Live in Him. It's like a fish saying it water and air doesn't exist.

honesttalk21:
That assertion simply doesn't hold up, either historically or logically.

1. The Two Powers idea was hardly a mainstream Jewish belief.

Rabbinic texts, like Sanhedrin 38b, clearly denounce the concept of Two Powers in Heaven as heresy. It arose from the fringes of speculation, not from the core of Jewish thought, and it was condemned both before and after Jesus.

2. The Shema existed long before Christianity.

The LORD is one (Deuteronomy 6:4) was the defining creed of Second Temple Judaism, a daily recitation. If Jews truly believed in a divine plurality, the Shema would be meaningless and it isn't.

3. Your claim about motives is unfounded.

Modern Judaism didn't reject divine plurality to dodge any guilt related to Jesus. The rejection stems from its violation of strict monotheism, the same reason it was rejected even before Christianity came into being.

4. You're using a heresy to try and justify orthodoxy.

Using a condemned Jewish heresy to prop up Christian theology is like using Gnosticism to define Christianity. It doesn't prove anything.

5. Muhammad pbuh was clear about not introducing anything new.

The Prophet pbuh stated that he brought no new god, only the religion of Abrahamic monotheism.

So, let's address this directly:

Did Jesus ever say, I am introducing a new concept of God? Or was he redefined by later theology?

The bottom line is this:

Fringe Jewish ideas isn't mainstream Jewish belief

Heresy isn't doctrine

Rewriting history isn't a valid argument

Strict monotheism was the standard.

Islam aligns with it.

Your claim? Not so much.

Islam can definitely not survive without Strawman Argument.

A mainstream Jewish belief was Rejected for a new one that Rejected Jesus as the Messiah BUT you think this is the correct Judaism?
Are you aware that those who killed Jesus as your so-called now the mainstream Judaism?
Since you think the so-called mainstream Judaism is correct, Why don't you follow the religion of the Jews rather than Islam?

The fundamental Law of Christians is summarised in the Christ's Expanded SHEMA below:
Mar 12:29-31:
"And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. There is none other commandment greater than these."

Mr Honesttruth21, Is the above an EXPANDED SHEMA or not for Christians?

Trinity had always been about ONE God who exists simultaneously in three Dimensions
BUT
For Islam to be able to argue, they must say that Trinity is THREE Gods united as one.

When you base your argument on false premises, how can it even hold.


Mohammed's claim is baseless!
So are the claims of the Grail Message and the Eckankar! Claims mean NOTHING if the IDENTITY of their God is DIFFERENT!

Your so-called strict monotheism has boxes Allah into a box of not being Omnipresent nor Omnipotent. This is not YHWH as He is Omnipresent, Omnipotent and Omniscient.
The bottom line,
The Identity of Allah and the Identity of YHWH are completely DIFFERENT
You Muslims want assocation with YHWH by force unfortunately, it cannot happen.

As reward in paradise, the Al-Makr will give you ..,so many things seun's bots doesn't want me to talk about but which you relish.
Bottom line: Even our Paradise is Different

Must you die before knowing the truth?
Do you think God will pardon you because you assumed it was Him all along you worship?

Good luck to those who invent a God whose Taoheed is NOT different from the Taoheed of Iblis!


At least you will agree that the true God is UNLIKE ANYTHING in Creation.

honesttalk21:
That comparison simply doesn't hold up when you look at the history. Eckankar and the Grail Message are new movements, without any historical link to the past, no original communities, no line of teachings passed down, and no connection to the scriptures of Abraham before their founders came along. Their use of Jesus is just a way of looking back and doesn't have any real basis.

Islam is completely different. It comes from the same place in the Near East as the Abrahamic religions. It clearly says that Abraham, Moses, David, and Jesus were prophets. It uses the same stories and ideas that Judaism and Christianity already shared.
It appeared in an area that had some knowledge of biblical stories, not made up on its own.

Saying all claims are just claims ignores the historical background, which isn't really being honest.

As for Is the name of your God YHWH? That's mixing things up. YHWH is a specific Hebrew name that was revealed to Moses. Allah is the Arabic word for the one Creator, used by Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians for hundreds of years before Islam. Arabic Bibles still say Allah in Genesis 1:1. Different languages, but they're talking about the same thing just like God, Dieu, and Dios all refer to the same being.

If sharing Abraham, Moses, David, and Jesus isn't enough to show a connection, then Christianity itself falls apart because it's completely based on Jewish scriptures that it didn't create.

So, no, Islam isn't like Eckankar.You can only compare them if you ignore history, language, and theology all at once.

Eckankar and the Grail Message are new movements, but so is Islam at least 600years after Christianity. Secondly, Islam doesn't have any historical link to the past except what it had gleaned from the Bible just like Eckankar and Grail Message. Your only use of Jesus is to get legitimacy as we don't even know who Isa is. Arab Christians call Jesus Yesua and not Isa.

You forget that both Eckankar and Grail Message like Islam stole stories from the Bible that they adapted to their new religion?

Who told you that YHWH is a Hebrew name? It is a personal name meaning "I AM WHO I AM" (EVERYTHING THAT EXIST). Can you tell me the meaning of Allah so that we correlate the names and see if it is the same
The title of God in the Semitic languages is EL- or AL- or IL- ( depending on the dialect) , thus we have names like Gabri-El, Isma-El, El-ohim (plural form of God), El-oha (singular form of God) Isre-El etc

The surprising thing is that Allah has 99 names and not one of them is the most sacred personal name of God YHWH!
What an omission!?
This further proves that god-LAH aka Allah is ignorant of the existence of his supposed sacred Name YHWH. This may be that Mohammed is actually the pseudoname Allah!

Lame argument again, that Arab Christians use Allah in their Bible!
Allah is used as a TITLE like GOD is a title for the Creator in English.
My God's name is YHWH
Your God's name is is Allah
A Hindi God's name is could be Vishnu
A Gothics God's name is could be Atlas or Apollo

Stop generalizing!

It seems you are not aware that Christianity is based on the foundation of Judaism. We adopt their whole scripture as ours. Christianity is EXTENDED or UPGRADED Judaism.

Can we say such for Islam?
No!
The Torah, Zabur and Injeel you claim to believe in doesn't EXIST again.

honesttalk21:
This whole argument crumbles apart when you look at the language, the theology, and just plain logic.

1. The idea that Royal We means God + council is just flat-out wrong.

No respected source on language, the Bible, or history says the royal we means the person speaking plus a group acting together. It's a figure of speech, not a literal count of people.

You should validate your stand andfind even one respected grammar book or historical source that says royal we means the king and his council sharing power?


2. What you're saying accidentally leads to belief in multiple gods. If We equals Allah or God as prefer plus council, then the council is involved in divine actions (creating, deciding, commanding).

That makes them partners, which goes against Isaiah 44:24 (I created alone) and every form of belief in one God.

Do well to show clearly well how that wouldn't be.

You're accusing Islam of associating partners with God, while you're the one sneaking it into Genesis.

3. Accusing God of arrogance misunderstands what it means to be sovereign.

Using the plural form to show majesty isn't arrogant; it's how authority is expressed.

Even unimportant earthly kings use it.

God's greatness makes it even more fitting, not less.

Calling God arrogant for speaking as a ruler shows you don't understand theology, it's not a valid critique.

4. You're contradicting yourself.

When YHWH says Us that's fine.

When Allah says We that's arrogant or means partners.

It's the same literary device, but you're judging it completely differently. That's not analysis, it's just bias.

5. Yes, a council exists but it doesn't share God's divinity.

The Bible mentions a divine council (angels as servants), but not as co-authors of God's will.

Talking to them or recognizing them doesn't mean they share God's identity or power.

The bottom line is:

The royal We never meant me plus partners.

Your interpretation creates the very association of partners with God that you're accusing others of.

And you still haven't provided a single real source to prove your point.

This isn't theology, it's just trying to justify a biased opinion disguised as outrage.

1. Is Rabbinic Judaism is correct, why did you reject it for Islam?
Misrepresenting Trinity is doing you no good as God YHWH is ONE.


2. The claim of Omnipotence, Omnipresence and Omniscience of Allah is a mere Claim that fails miserably when put to the test

a. If you claim that Allah is Omnipresent, can he enter your Toilet without ceasing to be Almighty?

b. If you claim that Allah is Omniscient, was the destiny of the boy killed by Al-Khidr to die young or to cause fitna to his parents when he grows up?

c. If you claim that Allah is Omnipotent, can he have a begotten without having a female consort AND can Allah enter your room without ceasing to be Almighty.

I don't need long grammar of "it's beneath his majesty to do a thing." Tell us if it is a possibility for Allah or not. And don't tell me that Allahs presence is by his knowledge as this is not the definition of Omnipresence.


3. YHWH, the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David etc had ALWAYS referred to Himself as a Father to many of His Creations. It had never caused a problem until Muslims arrived with Islam.
So, you have a different God unknown to the prophets of old.

Do you know any of the old prophets that call God by the NAME Allah?


4. In the Bible, Arrogance what what chased satan out of heaven. Iblis is the chief of the arrogant ones.
I hope you will open your eyes because you have adopted the God of Mohammed as your God knowing that he is the Al-Makr at the same time.



5. Even the angels in the bible marveled why God created the insignificant humans and raised him up to Himself. Because your worship is NOT needed nor required by God.
It is Iblis that creates a parallel government to God's so that he can receive human worship.
Thus, Iblis desires your worship in every form like Allah

Humans worship God in appreciation of His Goodness and Awesomeness to them:
God Created Humans to be His Children
Have you ever heard of a parent who gave birth to children in order that they may greet them every morning!?[/i]
This is the logic of Islam!



6. In the Bible, God did Create EVERYTHING Alone [b]with no input from Any Angels.
BUT not so in Islam.
Who breathes the soul into foetus before they are Born. Is it Allah or his Angels?
Tell me the the name of the person who breathe into the Farhjaha of Mary? Was it Allah or Jibril (although Allah said he did it).
You won't answer these questions.

So, I was correct about Allah and his council as the so-called Royal WE



7. Sorry, YHWH is a Trinity thus He could use US or OUR for Himself.
But Allah is not a Trinity according to you Muslims, therefore , when Allah says WE , US, OURSELF he refers to himself and his council probably Angels or the Houris.

Let me prove it for you with a Question
Qur'an 21:17
"If We intended to take a pastime (wife or children), We surely would have taken it from Us—if We were to do."

Other Translations because Muslims tell lies a lot in their translations
Muhsin Khan
Had We intended to take a pastime (i.e. a wife or a son, etc.), We could surely have taken it from Us, if We were going to do (that).

Pickthall
If We had wished to find a pastime, We could have found it in Our presence – if We ever did.

Dr. Ghali
If We had taken to Us a diversion, We would indeed have taken it to Us from very close to Us, in case We are performing (that).

Abdel Haleem
If We had wished for a pastime, We could have found it within Us- if We had wished for any such thing.


a. Tell me, who are the US in Quran 21:17 as the US is definitely not Allah alone.
b. Is it true that some of your scholars speculated that these are probably Angels or Houri ?

honesttalk21:
This objection is flawed in several ways: linguistically, geographically, and logically.

Doesn't al-Masjid al-Aqsa have a name? Yes, it does. The Qur'an specifically refers to it as al-Masjid al-Aqsa (Qur'an 17:1). The term Aqsa serves as a descriptor, similar to how terms like Holy Land or Forbidden City carry significance.

If I'm in Jerusalem, is it still the farthest mosque? This is a misunderstanding. The term farthest is relative to Mecca, which is the central point of Islamic worship. Words like nearest, farthest, higher, and lower are always relative rather than absolute. Your argument would also undermine phrases like the far west or the Near East.

Why not China or Africa—aren't they farther? You're applying modern geography to a 7th-century Arabic context. Aqsa does not imply the farthest point on Earth. It refers to the farthest known sacred site from Mecca within the religious geography of that time.

124,000 prophets prove Muslims are lying. This is a non sequitur. The existence of many prophets does not imply that each one established a permanent sanctuary or that every prayer location is designated as a masjid. The idea that farthest mosque must be the absolute farthest on Earth would absurdly suggest that every prophet in the Bible founded a cathedral.

So none of them established prayer? This presents a false choice. Islam teaches that all prophets engaged in prayer, but not all established named, lasting sanctuaries for communal rituals.

The main misunderstanding is you are conflating a place of prostration (anywhere prayer is performed) with a specific sacred site that has historical and theological significance. Al-Masjid al-Aqsa fits the latter description.

There is no contradiction or deception, nor is there a linguistic issue. The confusion arises from repeated category errors,anachronisms, and overly literal interpretations.The text itself is clear, while the misunderstanding seems to stem from external sources.

You can see that we cannot depend upon Allah to speak clearly and we need the mothers of Allah to reinterpret the babblings to make some sense.

This is what you have done as there is nothing in the verse or the whole Qur'an that states what you have just said.

It is obviously a fabrication to defend the Qur'an rather than a statement of what Allah said plainly in the Qur'an.

When did Allah bless the surrounding of the farthest mosque? We know for Moses that Mount Sinai was made Holy in his time for the children of Israel.

Since you admit that the farthest mosque is relative only to Mecca, please what name is this farthest Mosque called in Jerusalem.

Any pre-islamic historical evidence will do for both of these mosques.

So, we have a verse where
1. The identity of the servant was not introduced by Allah
2. The location of the farthest mosque nor it's name was not mentioned (even in the past verses)
3. Nowhere was the location of al-Masjid al-Haram mentioned in the Qur'an nor it's proper name.
4. He, Him and His changed within a verse with no proper labelling

Of course, the Mothers of Allah will help us resolve this babblings from the toddler


SMH!

honesttalk21:
This claim is simply incorrect and it’s not just an issue with Arabic.

Pronouns aren’t tied to the speaker’s identity.
In every language, pronouns change depending on who is being talked about, not who is doing the talking. A narrator might say He, then quote God saying We, and then refer back to Him that’s just basic grammar, not confusion.

This is typical Semitic rhetoric, not just Islamic Arabic. The Hebrew Bible does the same thing. God speaks in the first person (I, the LORD). Is referred to in the third person (He said…). Uses plural majesty (Let us make man Genesis 1:26). If this makes the Qur’an illogical, then the Bible is illogical too.

We doesn’t mean multiple beings.
The plural of majesty is found in Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic, Persian, Latin, and English (We are not amused). It signifies authority and grandeur, not a count of individuals.

Him referring to the servant is clear in context. When the Qur’an mentions His servant (ʿabdihi), the grammar clearly differentiates between God (the Speaker / Possessor) and the servant (the object of action). There’s no confusion unless you deliberately ignore the syntax.

Your outrage shows selective reading. You accept pronoun shifts in the Bible without a second thought, but label them as confusion in the Qur’an. That’s not linguistic analysis it’s bias.

Nothing means everything. Nothing is confused. The language is precise, contextual, and typical for Semitic texts. The issue isn’t with Arabic. It’s the assumption that an unfamiliar style equals incoherence.

If you choose to contend further address directly the errors stated here.

Check again Qur'an 17:1

Qur'an 17:1
"Exalted is He 1 who took His 2 Servant by night from al-Masjid al-Haram to al-Masjid al-Aqsa, whose surroundings We 3 have blessed, to show him 4 of Our 5 signs. Indeed, He 6 is the Hearing, the Seeing."

Six pronouns in one verse!?
1. It is clear that a Narrator or Someone is speaking about a He, Him and His let's assume that it is Allah according to the claims of Muslims

So, we expect by normal rules of language that the Narrator is referring to a THIRD PARTY!

2. We can assume that this same person speaking is the one who calls himself We and Our

Interpretation of this verse will require the Mother of Allah (Islamic scholars) to tell us what Allah really means. SMH!

Applying the rule, we have a confused unintelligible meaningless statement.

decatalyst:
Jubilating when the war is still on?


They need to get the comedian out in order to end the war.

You mean they need to surrender Ukraine to Putin so that the war can end!?

honesttalk21:
Qur’an 4:82 and contradictions presents the
verse which challenges critics to find abundant, irreconcilable contradiction, not superficial sequence questions. Your examples rely on rigid modern chronology, ignoring standard Semitic narrative style exactly the same issue seen in Genesis 1 vs. 2 and Gospel resurrection accounts. Apply your standard consistently or abandon it.

Of course, we have to format our brains and reprogram it Islamically to understand the Qur'an and be able to reconcile the contradictions.

Like the sun setting I'm murky waters
Like the confused destiny of the boy killed by Al-Khidr
Like Mohammed's name found written in both the Torah and Injeel
Like Adam created by BE but he also used his hands and clay and claimed that man was created from sperm
Like Solomon died standing for almost a year with no one discovering it.
Like Hail coming from mountains in the sky
Like Jesus was created by BE but we found out someone was blowing into the Farhjaha of Mary
Etc etc...

The list is endless

honesttalk21:
The Bible says as much, actually. Even Scripture acknowledges it can be tough to grasp (2 Peter 3:16). The sheer number of Christian denominations, each with its own spin on things, proves that interpretation is just part of the deal. Exploring different viewpoints doesn't mean everything's a jumbled mess; it's more about getting into the nitty-gritty of language, history, and background and that goes for any holy book.

Tell me if Mohammed was telling lies that you Muslims will be in 73 sects !?

Sunan Abu Dawood (Hadith 4579), Sunan Ibn Majah (3992), and Al-Mustadrak states:
"The Jews split into 71 or 72 sects, the Christians similarly, and my ummah will split into 73 sects—all in the Fire except one," i

Was Mohammed speaking the truth or he lied?

honesttalk21:
To say that ahad simply means one of a group is just not right, linguistically speaking. When the Quran uses ahad, it's talking about absolute uniqueness. Think about Surah 112 - it clearly says no to partners, no to dividing things up, no to offspring, and no to anything being equal to God. That's a stricter form of monotheism than what you find in Trinitarian theology. It's really similar to the Hebrew word echad in the Shema.

Find me a non Qur'an Arabic that uses Ahad as strictly or uniquely ONE! Only in Islamic Arabic do we find such!
Can you form a non islamic sentence with the word Taoheed and let's check the meaning?
SMH!

Allah will say something BUT Muslims know better!

honesttalk21:
The hadith you're quoting makes no mention of any written material,no scrolls, books, or scripts are involved. Gabriel commands "iqra'," and Muhammad pbuh responds, I am not a qari'."Then, Gabriel recites orally, and Muhammad repeats it.

This actually lines up with the Islamic understanding. Iqra in this instance means to receive and proclaim something orally, not to read from a written text. The English translation of read can be a bit misleading. Your point actually highlights how consistent the idea of oral revelation is!

The confusion arises in the ENGLISH translation, not in the Arabic. In Arabic, iqra can mean:

* Reading (from a text)

* Reciting (orally)

* Proclaiming (announcing)

Muhammad pbuh's reply, I am not a qari' means I am not someone who reads/recites, showing his feeling of being unable or unprepared to make a prophetic proclamation.

The angel then reveals the verses orally, which Muhammad repeats. This is oral transmission - the usual meaning of "iqra'" in this context.

So, you are stating categorically that either you prophet was telling lies or he didn't know what happened to him in the cave.

Are you aware that your prophet thought he had seen a Jinn rather than an Angel!?
It took Waraqa who wasn't a witness to tell your prophet that this Jinn was an Angel called Jibril!?

honesttalk21:
The claim that Ishmael learned Arabic at 14 comes from later historical reports, not the Qur’an. It means learning a specific dialect, not inventing a language. Progenitor ≠ language inventor. Semitic languages develop over generations this is linguistically uncontroversial.

This account is drawn from later historical sources like Ibn Kathir and al-Tabari, not the Qur'an itself. It's a historical narrative, not a divinely binding revelation, and the authenticity of its chains of transmission is questionable.

Learning a dialect is not the same as inventing a whole new language. The story says Ishmael picked up the dialect of the Jurhum tribe, not that he was speechless before. He probably already spoke a Semitic language and then adopted the local Arabic dialect as he integrated and married into the community.

Being a progenitor doesn't automatically make you a language creator. Just because he's an ancestor of Arabic-speaking people doesn't mean he had to invent the language. His descendants gradually became Arabic speakers over generations and is a perfectly normal process of linguistic transmission.

There's no contradiction with the Bible here. Being that specifically Genesis doesn't say what language Ishmael spoke. Arabic, Hebrew, and Aramaic all share Semitic origins, so the evolution of language presents no problem.

Your objection hinges on historical reports outside the Qur'an that are themselves debated, and it doesn't understand how languages and cultures evolve over time.

So, it was a lie as usual?
What is true in Islam?

Did Christians write these islamic historic books for you or Muslim scholars!?

honesttalk21:
Islam is in continuity with the Abrahamic tradition, just as Christianity builds or follows strongly on the Hebrew Bible. Demanding Muslims avoid biblical references while Christians freely rely on Jewish scripture is arbitrary. Shared figures justify shared sources.

Ask the Grail Message and the Eckankar, they also claim to follow the teachings of Jesus too.

Yours is just a claim too. Is the name of your God YHWH?

Sorry

honesttalk21:
You’re applying a double standard and misrepresenting theology, language, and history.
Two Powers in Heaven and Divine Plurality

Regarding that Two Powers in Heaven idea, mainstream Judaism flat-out rejected it as heresy (look it up in Sanhedrin 38b). It goes against the very core of the Shema: The LORD is one (Deut 6:4). So, dragging up a Jewish heresy to prop up Christian theology or bash Islamic monotheism? That's just not honest.

So you know that the ancient Jews before and at Jesus time believed in Devine plurality!?
That was my argument. Modern Judaism reject it because it will make them like they killed their Messiah.
Sorry

honesttalk21:
And this idea that royal we means God plus His council? It totally undermines your own point. If Let us make man (Gen 1:26) means God + angels, suddenly angels are partners in creation. That flies in the face of Isaiah 44:24 (I created alone). Neither Jewish nor Christian theology puts angels in the role of co-creators.

All three traditions acknowledge the plural of majesty:
Judaism: they use a royal or deliberative plural.
Christianity: they interpret it through the Trinity. Though challenging.
Islam: they recognize it as the plural of majesty (pluralis majestatis).

You're okay with this when it's YHWH's Us, but you reject it for Allah's We? It's the same literary device, but you're drawing completely different conclusions. You can't have it both ways.

God, the Divine Council, and the Royal We: A Clearer Perspective

The idea that the royal We signifies God plus His council is fundamentally flawed.

1. Understanding the Royal We

The royal we (pluralis majestatis) functions as a figure of speech, not a mathematical equation. It's used to amplify authority, emphasize sovereignty, and convey a sense of importance, not to indicate shared responsibility. When a monarch declares, We decree, it doesn't suddenly make the council co-rulers. The power remains with the individual, even if advisors are present.

For instance, where Queen Victoria says We are not amused, no one assumes her advisors were collectively feeling unamused alongside her.

Why God + council doesn't work theologically is clear in if Let us make man (Gen 1:26) means God and His council working in unison, we're forced to draw one of three problematic conclusions:

1. Angels participated in creation, which contradicts Isaiah 44:24: I, the LORD, made all things alone."

2. The council was merely observing, making it pointless to address them directly.

3. It's a rhetorical expression of majesty, which actually supports the Islamic interpretation.

Only the third option allows us to maintain a belief in one God.

Except you believe in devine Plurality, Royal we is Allah and his council. There is no two ways about it.

God is too great to address Himself as WE only to feel BIG.

Only an ARROGANT personality will do that and the last time I checked, Allah is the Arrogant.

honesttalk21:
Biblical Texts Explicitly Deny Council Participation. The Hebrew Bible is unambiguous in Isaiah 44:24 that God alone created everything, Isaiah 45:5-7 clearly says there is no god besides Me, Job 38:4-7 shows Angels witnessed creation; they didn't carry it out.

The divine council in Scripture offers advice?, observes events, carries out commands
ever creates anything, never shares divine power therefore, interpreting Genesis 1:26 as a collaborative creative act directly opposes scripture.

The Common Ground Between Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Theology is seen in all three traditions reject the notion of angels as co-creators.

Judaism interprets the plural as royal language or internal deliberation.

Christianity sees it as a conversation within the Trinity (not with angels).

Islam understands it as a plural of majesty.

None of them claim God and the council created together.

So, invoking a council doesn't explain the plural form; it introduces a theological inconsistency.


You're exposing the double standard when YHWH uses us, it's considered a metaphor, an expression of majesty, or a mystery. However, when Allah uses We, it's often interpreted as implying partners and polytheism (shirk).

It's the same linguistic device, yet it receives opposite interpretations.

If Allah's We suggests partners, then so should Genesis 1:26. If Genesis 1:26 is simply rhetorical majesty, then so is the Qur'an. You have to apply the same standard across the board.

The God + council explanation doesn't reflect how the royal plural is actually used. If it does that implies that angels are co-creators and contradicts Isaiah 44:24.

Is rejected by Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. So it ultimately collapses into the plural-of-majesty explanation anyway.

The royal We never suggests shared divinity or shared action. Using it to criticize Islamic monotheism while excusing it in the Bible is a clear case of making exceptions for one's own beliefs.

Just rhetoric grammar explaining what is NOT.
YHWH is not mate will Allah. There is no double standard: YHWH is a Devine Plurality and Allah is NOT.


Is Allah Omnipresent? NO!
YHWH is Omnipresent!

Is Allah Omniscient? NO!
YHWH is Omniscient!

Is Allah Omnipotent? NO!
YHWH is Omnipotent!

Is Allah a Father? NO!
YHWH is the Father!

It is you who seek the elevation of Allah to the status of YHWH so, keep your Lane. Have you ever heard a Christian speaking about a Royal We about YHWH?

Only an imposter will inflate himself to look bigger than he truly is. It is no wonder that Allah craves worship of both jinn and human Qur'an 51:56

honesttalk21
https://youtube.com/shorts/uA8-noqWHeQ?si=8D8r7BNE2GpYJW_i



https://m.youtube.com/shorts/uA8-noqWHeQ

honesttalk21:
You're judging Islam by standards that even Christianity struggles to meet. Let's try using the same yardstick for both.

1. Complexity of Trinity vs. Tawheed. You dismiss Islamic monotheism as simplistic, yet you defend the Trinity - a concept of three persons in one God that took 400 years and countless church councils to hammer out, and is still considered a mystery. If the need for theological explanation is a deal-breaker, the Trinity falters first.

Sorry! Even the early Jews spoke about the Two Powers of Heaven (Duality of God) before Christianity. This they retracted only to deny the Trinity and there are scriptures to support this.
YHWH is complex and not singular like Allah.
It makes logical sense for YHWH to use the pronoun US for Himself. But does it make sense in Islam for Allah to use US or WE or OUR SELF .

Royal WE is the king with his Council. Are you associating partners with Allah?

honesttalk21:
2. Historical claims about Abraham. You demand non-biblical evidence for Islamic claims about Abraham, but you don't have any yourself. Archaeological proof of Abraham is absent from both our religious texts. Plus, you've misread Genesis. Ishmael was 14 when Isaac was born, not when he started learning Arabic. The Bible says nothing about his language skills. You're arguing against points the text never makes.

My argument is simple. Find your own sources rather than perching on the account of the Bible.
I did not misread Genesis at all.
Your Islamic sources say that Ishmael was 14 year old when he learned to speak Arabic. Must I teach you your own religion? Check!

My question: If Ismael learnt Arabic at 14, how could he be the progenitor of the Arabs?

This are the kind of things you see when a religion is based on cascades of lies and fabrications

honesttalk21:
3. Iqra - Reading vs. Reciting. In the 7th century, a time of oral tradition, reading and reciting weren't separate things. Reading meant reciting aloud. The Arabic root "qara'a" covers both, just as the Hebrew "qara" does in your Bible. You're imposing modern ideas of literacy onto ancient oral contexts. Even your prophet's apostles weren't literate. Acts 4:13 calls Peter and John uneducated, yet they received revelation.

Your prophet said IQRA was about reading. Are you claiming that he lied?

Here is a Hadith to prove to you that IQRA means READ and not RECITE.
Will you throw Mohammed under the bus after this evidence?

Sahih al-Bukhari 4953
Narrated Aisha:
(the wife of the Prophet) The commencement (of the Divine Inspiration) to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was in the form of true dreams in his sleep, for he never had a dream but it turned out to be true and clear as the bright daylight. Then he began to like seclusions, so he used to go in seclusion in the cave of Hira where he used to worship Allah continuously for many nights before going back to his family to take the necessary provision (of food) for the stay. He come back to (his wife) Khadija again to take his provision (of food) likewise, till one day he received the Guidance while he was in the cave of Hira. An Angel came to him and asked him to read. Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) replied, "I do not know how to read." The Prophet (ﷺ) added, "Then the Angel held me (forcibly) and pressed me so hard that I felt distressed. Then he released me and again asked me to read, and I replied, ' I do not know how to read.' Thereupon he held me again and pressed me for the second time till I felt distressed. He then released me and asked me to read, but again I replied. 'I do not know how to read.' Thereupon he held me for the third time and pressed me till I got distressed, and then he released me and said, 'Read, in the Name of your Lord Who has created (all that exists), has created man out of a clot, Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous. Who has taught (the writing) by the pen, has taught man that which he knew not." (96.1-5).
...........




Tell me your prophet is ignorant and misinformed about the event in the cave

honesttalk21:
4. Quranic interpretation. You claim the need to interpret the Quran proves it's not clearly divine. Yet Christianity has over 45,000 denominations precisely because the Bible needs interpretation. The word "Trinity" isn't even in your Scripture, and it required centuries of reinterpretation using Greek philosophy. If needing interpretation means poor communication, your God communicated even worse.

Stop this lame argument in 2026. Is the Taoheed in the Qur'an? You think Islam with all your books of interpretations don't have sects you don't even consider as Muslims. It's so bad that you don't even agree on the interpretations of your scholars. Lame argument!

But at least EVERYONE can pick up the Bible and Read to comprehend for himself in his own language and based on his own reasoning without intermediaries.

Unfortunately for you, Allah's words has to be treated like the words of a babbling toddler whose mother (your scholars) have to interpret the incoherent babblings into something that sounds meaningful.

Allah will say something plainly BUT as Muslims, your Allah is the voice of your scholars or the voice of Mohammed. SMH!

honesttalk21:
5. The real point is that for 1,400 years, native Arabic speakers - including Christian Arabs, Jews, and pagans who opposed Islam - never raised these linguistic issues because they understood the language and literary conventions. Your criticisms show a lack of familiarity with Arabic, not flaws in the Quran.

Apply your own standards to Christianity first. Does the Bible explicitly teach the Trinity? No. Does it need interpretation? Yes. Do Christians disagree on that interpretation? Constantly. Does archaeological evidence confirm all biblical claims? No.

Either interpretive complexity disqualifies both traditions, or neither. Pick one standard and stick to it.

Your arguments are like boomerangs, hitting Christianity harder than Islam. They depend on double standards, historical inaccuracies, and a shaky grasp of language, all while defending a faith that faces the same, or even greater, challenges in interpretation.

Boohoo!
The confluence of jargons in the Qur'an should tell anyone that this cannot be from God.

Quran 4:82 is the most powerful verse in the Qur'an. It gives us an objective proof of the source of the Qur'an. Only one contradiction is enough to disprove Allah but several exist that Muslims choose to reinterpret.

Qur'an 4:82
"Do they not then reflect upon the Qur'an? If it had been from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction (ikhtilāfan kathīran)."

Muslims have been struggling to fix these Inconsistencies to no avail till date instead of admitting that this book could not have been from God.

Your Quran teach Taoheed (a UNIFICATION) and Ahad(ONE OF a group/many) proving that Islam is paganism REBRANDED under a Unified Front called Allah. You practice several rebranded Pre-islamic Religious rituals.

Sorry!

Boomark:
Ignorance and delusions is when you cannpt raise a single finger against any of my posts but you are busy boasting. Don't you that you are alone and on your own.

Try your beautiful explanation against what I have written if you are not afraid.

Answer my questions, then your errors will be made glaring far all to see. But fear will not allow you. If your argument are based on false premises, how can the arguments stand?

Whenever you overcome your fright, answer the questions
1. Can anyone see God?
2. Can God be in Heaven and on Earth concurrently?


Your God is not different from the God of the Muslims.

honesttalk21:
Equating Islam with movements like Eckankar is a false comparison. Islam doesn't independently invent Abraham; it inherits him from the Genesis tradition already recognized by Judaism and Christianity. If the absence of contemporary archaeological records before Abraham invalidates Islam, it first invalidates Judaism, as Abraham himself lacks independent archaeological support outside of Genesis. The earliest extra-biblical references to Abraham appear centuries after his supposed lifetime in 2nd millennium BCE sources.

Present extra-biblical archaeological proof for Abraham in Genesis before using his absence as a critique. Otherwise, you're applying a standard to Islam you don't apply to the Bible a textbook case of special pleading.

Your confusion about "iqra'" reveals a lack of familiarity with both Arabic and oral cultures. In Arabic, iqra means to recite, proclaim, or receive orally; it doesn't require a written text. Illiteracy isn't a cognitive defect, nor does it prevent oral reception. This reflects standard Semitic oral culture, where memorization and oral transmission were primary. You claim you can't recite what you haven't memorized, but you're confusing two meanings of recite:

1. Reciting from memory (reproducing previously learned material).

2. Receiving and repeating orally (hearing instruction and proclaiming it).

When the angel commanded iqra, Muhammad, peace be upon him, wasn't being asked to reproduce memorized text; he was being commanded to receive and proclaim revelation orally. This is how oral instruction works: the teacher speaks, the student repeats. Toddlers in kindergarten don't recite from prior memorization; they repeat what's taught to them orally in real-time. Your own example disproves your point.

Muhammad, peace be upon him's, I cannot iqra expressed an inability/unreadiness to receive and proclaim prophetic revelation, not a cognitive defect. This mirrors Moses' I am slow of speech (Exodus 4:10) and Jeremiah's I don't know how to speak (Jeremiah 1:6)- prophetic hesitation, not mental deficiency.

Demonstrate from Arabic usage that iqra requires a physical text. You can't, because it doesn't.

In your claim, why does Allah teach by the pen if you learn from recitation? The pen is useless! You practice a false dichotomy. Writing preserves revelation; recitation transmits it. Oral cultures employed both without contradiction. The historical reality is that every oral society that developed writing adopted it enthusiastically precisely because writing complements oral transmission by preserving what's recited.

Vedas: orally transmitted for centuries, eventually written down.

Homer's epics: orally composed, later transcribed.

Qur'an: orally revealed to Muhammad, peace be upon him, written down by scribes during his lifetime, compiled into a standardized text afterward.

If recitation renders writing useless, explain why no oral culture in history ever refused writing once available? Your logic would make all historical literacy efforts pointless.

Quran 96:4-5 - who taught by the pen, taught humanity what they didn't know- emphasizes that God enables human knowledge preservation through writing; it doesn't contradict oral revelation to one prophet. You're creating a problem that doesn't exist. Where did Adam keep text of what God taught him about the names of animals before asking the angels?

Your objection, classifying six pronouns in one verse as confused and unintelligible, applies equally to the Hebrew Bible. Established Semitic rhetoric includes the plural of majesty (We/Our for God) and third-person narration (He/His when describing God's actions), shifting between perspectives for emphasis.

Genesis 1:26: Then God said, Let *us* make mankind in *our* image... (plural).

Genesis 1:27: So God created mankind in *His* own image (singular).

Isaiah 6:8: Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, 'Whom shall *I* send? And who will go for *Us*?'" (singular and plural in the same sentence).

If Quran 17:1's pronoun shifts make it unintelligible, then Genesis and Isaiah are equally unintelligible. Apply your standard consistently, or admit you're holding different scriptures to different criteria. Your claim that it's not standard in any culture is demonstrably false; it's standard Semitic rhetoric found throughout the Hebrew Bible, which predates the Qur'an by over a millennium.

Again, regarding Al-Masjid al-Aqsa, your questions What's its name? Farthest relative to where? Where's its location? are answered:

1. Al-Masjid al-Aqsa is the name and is the farthest place of prostration. In Qur'anic usage, "masjid" is defined by function (prostration), not architecture. The phrase identifies the site by its characteristic (farthest from Mecca) and sacred function (place of prostration). The Western Wall identifies a location by direction and function; it doesn't require a personal name like "Bob's Wall."

2. Farthest relative to Mecca, the starting point of the journey in the verse itself (from al-Masjid al-Haram [Mecca] to al-Masjid al-Aqsa).

3. The location is Jerusalem, specifically the Temple Mount area, a site sacred in Abrahamic tradition, where prophets worshiped, and which Muslims identify with the Isra journey.

In Islamic teaching, the entire Earth is a valid place of worship (masjid). Qur'an 7:29 and the hadith Sahih Bukhari state, The Earth has been made a mosque for me. Demanding a named architectural structure misunderstands Islamic theology, as sacred space is universal, not confined to buildings.

Your claim that Allah introduced a place with no location is factually wrong. The location (Jerusalem/Temple Mount) is identified by its geographic relationship to Mecca and its sacred history.

You claim that in Islam, you have over 124,000 messengers, but the fact is this number does NOT appear in the Qur'an. The Qur'an states messengers were sent to all peoples (Quran 16:36: We sent a messenger to every community) but never quantifies them. The 124,000 figure comes from a hadith classified specifically as a weak/disputed narration, not the Qur'an itself. Provide a Qur'anic verse stating 124,000 prophets before using it as a critique. Is your aversion to Islam so strong that you're leaning on unreliable sources? You're bringing in stuff from outside the Quran and then using it to bash the Quran itself? that's a classic strawman argument.

You ask if I'm saying none of them had a place to pray (a mosque). In Islam, the whole earth is a place of prayer. Wherever the prophets bowed down to God became a masjid (a place of prostration) because of what it was used for, not because they built and named a special building.

Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus all prostrated to God wherever they happened to be. Islam doesn't need huge buildings or designated sanctuaries. It all fits together theologically; it's not a contradiction.

You're convinced the book is full of errors and couldn't have been written by a native Arabic speaker, but the funny thing is, every single problem you've pointed out comes from:

1. Misunderstanding the words (iqra' doesn't have to mean written text)

2. Creating a false choice (oral vs. written tradition)

3. Not knowing Semitic writing styles (pronoun changes happen in the Hebrew Bible too)

4. Mixing up categories (masjid is about function, not architecture)

5. Attacking a hadith number that isn't even in the Quran (strawman again!)

6. Holding Islam to a higher standard than the Bible

When your arguments depend on misunderstanding Arabic, Semitic literary customs, and Islamic theology, the real joke is on you, not the Quran.

For 1,400 years, native Arabic speakers - even those who hated Islam - didn't bring up these issues because they understood the language and the way it was written back then. Your confusion just proves that modern readers who try to apply outside ideas end up creating problems where there aren't any.

Stop comparing the babblings of the Twitch the Bible.
1. God in the Bible is a Trinity, Taoheed is not. This, Allah speaking unintelligently have to be explained in another way.
2. My argument is that apart from the Bible you have no historical claim to Abraham. And I asked, Ishmael was 14 year old when he learned Arabic, how could he be the progenitor of the Arabs.
3.I gave you a hadith of your prophet where he himself admitted that IQRA means READ and not RECITE. But you have made your prophet a liar and you know more than him. Continue with your self delusion.
4. Your last argument is laughable. Allah is supposed to be the direct origin of the Qur'an: unfortunately, what you have simply said is that Allah is the WORST communicator of his mind to mankind.
We have to reinterpret the Qur'an for it to make sense.