₦airaland Forum

goslowgoslow:
Gibberish nothing meaningful to say! You can continue fighting with your key board and Google.
Atheist don't believe in God yes nobody is arguing that but they still believe some form of spirit I don't know why comprehension is this difficult. After now I will block you, I don't go back and forth with children because you are so pained that now you are being rude.

Boohoo!
Facts don't lie!
Ignorance is a Biiss!

Silence is Golden!!
We wouldn't have known.... until you spoke!

goslowgoslow:
The screenshot below will help you because you obviously don't understand what being an atheist is all about. I don't want to argue with you again, you can do further research yourself. Have a good day.

I once met a Doctor of Planes and it makes sense to people like you.

Strictly speaking:
An atheist is one who considers himself as
1. Lacking a Belief
2. Doesn't believe in any Deity!

Any other definition is like defining humans with respect to vision as homosapiens with either two, one or zero eyes.


If this is your position I am sorry for you.





TO HELP YOU,
I have THREE DICTIONARIES YOU CAN CHECK OUT FOR THE DEFINITION OF ATHEIST

Webster
Oxford
Dictionary.com

goslowgoslow:
Go and read further and help yourself. You don't even know the definition of an atheist.

Unfortunately you haven't even opened your buccal cavity with any definition or knowledge.
Noise devoid of content makes a grown up adult a clown.

Did you notice how upfront I have you the definition of an Atheist and you have not even clarified your position nor corrected with your perfect definition of Atheism.

So, lets see how enlightened you are about the subject matter

1. I had defined the term Atheist and their preferred designation of "lack of belief" as illogical
2. I had stated that ORISA (Deities) are SPIRITS

Your counter please

goslowgoslow:
So you didn't read where he said that be believes in Orisa? Is Wole Soyinka greater than Orisa?

Every orisa is a SPIRIT!

Do Atheists believe in spirits?

goslowgoslow:
Another one that cannot think! Please define spirituality.

The first sentence defines a primate devoid of spirituality !

BTW
Spirituality refers to a personal sense of connection to something greater than oneself, often involving the search for meaning, purpose, and transcendence in life. It emphasizes inner experiences like peace, interconnectedness, and values beyond the material world

1 . To be spiritual, You have to depend upon SOMETHING or SOMEONE beyond the Material World for your inner experiences.

2. An Atheist is a lost individual who desire to define himself as one who lacks a belief in existence outside the physical existence or the lacks a belief in the existence of spirits.
He doesn't know that a rational human being CANNOT lack a belief in anything he has an an opinion in.

goslowgoslow:
Another one that cannot think! Please define spirituality.

Your first sentence defines who you truely are:
devoid of spirituality !


BTW
Spirituality refers to a personal sense of connection to something greater than oneself, often involving the search for meaning, purpose, and transcendence in life. It emphasizes inner experiences like peace, interconnectedness, and values beyond the material world

1 . To be spiritual, You have to depend upon SOMETHING or SOMEONE beyond the Material World for your inner experiences.

2. An Atheist is a confused individual who desire to define himself as one who lacks a belief in existence outside the physical existence or the lacks a belief in the existence of spirits.
He doesn't know that a rational human being CANNOT lack a belief in anything he has an an opinion in.

Estello:
https://applesbite.com/islamic-and-christian-god-not-my-belief-wole-soyinka/

Feigning Wisdom but landing back in deep ignorance

"An atheist with strong spiritual awareness."



Atheists NOW believes in Spirits!?

honesttalk21:
You blend weak reports, half-true claims, and outright assumptions, then build a conclusion on top of that mix. That’s not evidence; that’s confusion packaged as argument. Separate what is actually authenticated from what is merely reported, and your entire claim falls apart.

Or does this statement originate from other than you?

Alfa,
You ask why I think Khadijah's report should be taken seriously and I gave you six logical common sense points. You turn around as usual to insinuate as usual that they are weak reports, half-true claims, and outright assumptions.
My friend, this are answers to your questions.

So, now tell me which of the points 1 through 6 you disagree with to call weak reports, half-true claims, and outright assumptions. Ayam not understanding!!


Again: Items 1 through 6, which one of them is a weak report? SMH!!

Islam never get an answer for anything!
SMH!!

Again, Let me ask you:
1. According to the earlier scriptures, is Gabriel the Holy Spirit?
2. Can you give any instance where Jibril gave any scripture to anyone in the earlier scriptures

honesttalk21:
This is not engagement with the argument. Address the points raised directly. For example, explain why your Khadijah test report should not be classified as weak.

Logically Khadijah's report could not be weak for many reasons
1. Khadija believed in the general believes of the Pre-islamic Meccans: Khadija became the first Muslim after this
2. No serious Muslim will write ANYTHING he knows as UNTRUE about his beloved prophet Mohammed. Thus Ibn Ishaq, At-Tabari and al-Waqidi will not deliberately write untrue things about their prophet
3. It is dangerous for a person to write evil or bad things about Mohammed in Muslim dominated areas and survive with their lives. The fact that Ibn Ishaq, At-Tabari and al-Waqidi were not murdered by Muslims and their works still survives mean that the stories were TRUE and well known amongst the early Muslims.
4. If Mohammed met an Angel, there was no need for him to be taken before Waraqa except if the Apparition did NOT introduce himself.
5. Till today, Islamic beliefs still hold that Angels do not enter the toilets, stay in a room with dogs nor look at naked women.
6. There is NOT one single writing of scholars BEFORE Ibn Ishaq, At-Tabari and al-Waqidi that wrote ANYTHING Contrary to Khadijah's story nor the satanic verses. If there are older ISLAMIC sources that contradict the Khadijah's narrative, let us know.


Again, Let me ask you:
1. According to the earlier scriptures, is Gabriel the Holy Spirit?
2. Can you give any instance where Jibril gave any scripture to anyone in the earlier scriptures

s

honesttalk21:
Who exactly made you the referee of how questions must be answered? You set the rule, narrow the criteria to fit your conclusion, then reject anything that doesn’t fit your script. That’s not an argument that’s control.

You asked for one case of fear without comfort you got it. Judges 13. Manoah fears after the angel departs. No comfort follows. That’s your instance, simple and direct.

On hadith weakness, your claim collapses on procedure. Classification was done internally by Imam Ahmad, al-Shafi’i, and early hadith critics on their own methodology not after Bible interaction. You’re importing a false timeline.

On Jibril, the sources already show multiple appearances: true form, human form, and recognised forms in Sahih reports. Hira doesn’t specify a form at all. Your “cave problem” is built on adding details the text never gave.

On Gabriel, your own texts refuse your distinction. Luke 1, Daniel 9, and Acts 7:53/Hebrews 2:2 all tie angels to revelation-level delivery not information only. The category breaks in your own scripture.

On Khadijah’s test, there is no sahih narration proving your claim. You are asserting certainty from weak transmission while demanding perfection from others. Do show how and why your weak claim isn't weak.

On satanic verses, preservation is not endorsement. Your own canon was also shaped by selection and exclusion through councils, unless you deny this. Apply one standard or abandon the argument.

And that’s the real issue. You’re not testing claims you’re controlling the rules of testing.

When you commit to dropping your bias and being plain and fully fair we can reasonably continue.

I believe you have said all you needed to say, the rest is repeations of your baseless assertions.

One thing is clear: you need the validation of my scripture to validate your prophet. This is why you have to force your baseless conclusions upon Manoah.

Mohammed still remain a person who was commissioned by a nameless apparition who he gave the title Holy Spirit and Jibril. Both contrary to the scriptures.

Until you show us when the apparition claimed to be Gabriel, your case is frighteningly disturbing.

Let me ask you:
1. According to the earlier scriptures, is Gabriel the Holy Spirit?
2. Can you give any instance where Jibril gave any scripture to anyone in the earlier scriptures

Repeating the same things misconceived points doesnt validate your argument. It actually defeats it.
I will respond to your arguments again

honesttalk21:
Regarding Zechariah your own biblical text separates categories. Luke 1:20 is explicit that Zechariah was judged because you did not believe. Not for fear. Fear is addressed in verse 13 where it's said do not be afraid and drops out of the narrative. What remains and what is judged is unbelief. Your own text keeps those categories separate. The argument being made against Hira collapsed them and built a case on that merger even if Zechariah' s disbelief raises other concerns.

Manoah fears after the encounter when identity becomes clear, not during it. Daniel collapses first; strength and reassurance come after. Zechariah is judged for unbelief not fear. There is no uniform instant comfort rule in your own scripture. There is a consistent pattern of human overwhelm followed by clarification or judgment. That is exactly the sequence at Hira. Fear is recorded. Commission is immediate, Iqra. The claim of no commission only terror depends entirely on ignoring the first word of the revelation itself. Restore it and the argument disappears.

On the jinn claim can you honestly apply your own standard consistently? Your scripture gives the test stating by their fruits you shall know them (Matthew 7:16). That is a serious standard and it deserves serious application rather than selective use. What came from Hira is strict monotheism, moral law, rejection of idolatry, a coherent 23-year revelation, a civilization built on the worship of one God and the pursuit of justice. Applied consistently, Matthew 7:16 asks what kind of source produces those fruits over that duration.

Now 2 Corinthians 11:14 mentioned Satan masquerading as an angel of light and is a genuine theological concern that deserves honest engagement rather than dismissal. Paul's warning is real and it should be taken seriously. The question it raises is legitimate. How do you distinguish genuine revelation from sophisticated deception? The answer your own tradition gives is the fruit test. And the fruit test is where the jinn claim collapses under its own weight. Deception in your own theological framework produces corruption, idolatry, moral disorder, and ultimately spiritual destruction. It does not produce sustained monotheism, moral elevation, legal sophistication, and civilizational coherence across 23 years and fourteen centuries. A deception that produces that outcome has failed at everything deception is supposed to accomplish. It has worked against itself at every point.

The possibility that 2 Corinthians 11:14 raises is real. The outcome Matthew 7:16 evaluates is also real. When both are applied consistently and honestly, they point in the same direction.

Your case rests on three errors.
Treating fear as disbelief contrary to your own text which separates them explicitly. Ignoring Iqra the opening commission that the entire no commission claim requires to be absent. Applying Matthew 7:16 as a framework and then not following where it leads when applied to the actual fruits of Hira.

Remove those three and the argument against Hira does not stand. You did not expose a flaw in the revelation. You misapplied your own standard and when that standard is applied honestly, it does not produce the conclusion you reached.




Keep it simple and stick to what’s actually established. There is no authentic report in Sahih al-Bukhari or Sahih Muslim where the Prophet pbuh concluded it was a jinn. What’s recorded is fear and seeking reassurance nothing more. If a sound narration says otherwise, produce it.

Waraqah recognised a known prophetic pattern seen with Moses and Daniel overwhelming encounter followed by revelation. That’s why he identified it.
Jibril not identifying himself doesn’t stand. In Sahih Muslim, the Prophet pbuh later states clearly that was Jibril. Direct, primary identification. Iqra means Read or Recite. Both valid. Context fits, especially with Qur'an 29:48.

The form at Hira isn’t described. That’s silence, not contradiction. And no one claims the Prophet saw God. Waraqah identified a messenger, not God. No conflict there.

I hear your points clearly. You are challenging me to look closer at my own scriptures while holding them up against the Islamic tradition. I will address each of your arguments directly, using the sources you requested to show why the distinction between Hira and Biblical revelation remains a profound theological gap.

1. Zechariah: Disbelief vs. The Nature of the Encounter
You argue that I am wrongly merging Zechariah’s "unbelief" with the "fear" experienced at Hira. I disagree. My point isn't that they are the same emotion, but that the nature of the divine response to human frailty is consistent in the Bible and different at Hira.

When Zechariah is afraid, the angel immediately says, "Do not be afraid, Zechariah" (Luke 1:13). When he doubts, he is disciplined, yes, but he is never left in a state of terrorized confusion about the source.

At Hira, Muhammad is "seized" and "squeezed" until he can bear it no more ( Sahih Bukhari 1:1:3 ). Upon returning, he says to Khadija, "I fear for myself" (laqad khashitu 'ala nafsi).

My scripture shows God’s messengers being overwhelmed by glory, but always being anchored by immediate clarity. In the Bible, God does not use physical "squeezing" to initiate revelation. If I follow Daniel 10:12, the angel says, "Do not fear... from the first day that you set your heart to understand... your words were heard." At Hira, there was no "first day" of understanding; there was a state of suicidal despair and the fear of being possessed by a jinn or being a majnun (poet/madman) (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah).

2. The "Iqra" Commission
You claim that by acknowledging "Iqra" (Read/Recite), the argument of "no commission" collapses. I must counter this: a command is not the same as a clear identity of the commander.

When God calls, He identifies: "I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham..." (Exodus 3:6).

Qur'an 96:1-5 commands him to "Read," but does not explicitly identify the speaker as Gabriel or God during that first terrifying moment in the cave.

In the Bible, the "Fruits" of a call begin with the clarity of the Caller . If I look at the Hadith, Muhammad had to be reassured by a Nestorian Christian (Waraqa ibn Nawfal) that this was the Namus (the Angel of Revelation). If the commission "Iqra" was sufficient, why did the recipient return home trembling, needing a human to tell him who had visited him?

3. The Fruit Test (Matthew 7:16)
You suggest that because Islam produced monotheism and a civilization, it passes the "Fruit Test." I apply that test honestly, but we differ on what "good fruit" looks like scripturally.

1 John 4:2-3 gives a specific test for the spirit: "Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God."

While the Qur'an honors Jesus as a prophet, it explicitly denies His crucifixion (Surah 4:157) and His Sonship (Surah 9:30) . From this alone, it is a FALSE revelation of God.

From the Bible, "good fruit" isn't just "monotheism" it is Truth. If a revelation comes 600 years later and denies the core of the Gospel (the Cross and the Resurrection), then according to
Galatians 1:8
("Even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse"

I cannot call that fruit "good," regardless of how many centuries the civilization lasts.

4. 2 Corinthians 11:14 and the "Deception" Argument
You argue that a deception wouldn't promote "moral elevation." I must respond with the perspective of my faith's warnings.

Deception, according to the Bible, isn't always "moral disorder." It is a "different gospel" (2 Corinthians 11:4). Satan doesn't always show up as a monster; he appears as an "angel of light." A deception that looks 90% like the truth is more effective than one that is 100% evil.

We see the "Satanic Verses" incident (Gharaniq) recorded by early historians like Al-Tabari and Ibn Sa'd, where it is admitted that Satan briefly put words on the Prophet's tongue.

If the source of revelation can be even momentarily mimicked or interfered with by a lesser spirit, then the "sophisticated deception" Paul warns about becomes a valid concern.

To me, the "fruit" of Hira led people away from the divinity of Christ. In my theology, there is no "moral elevation" that compensates for moving away from the Savior but a moral departure from the truth.

So, everything in islam can be proved by the Question.
Was Jesus Crucified on the Cross and the attendant questions that follow this fact!

Get it wrong, and Islam becomes just a sumptuous meal laced with a deadly poison.

WriteerNg:

---

Oga you are a liar.

You dey deceive yourself.

The date of the article does not change the fact that it happened.

Trump won the election last year, does it make that invalid because we are in another year?

Then quote the Lie if you are not the LIAR representing the Al-Makr

I appreciate that for the first time you answered ny direct questions

DeepSight:
+
Any clear and rational understanding of the concept of God must conclude that being transcendent, IT is beyond the grasp of humanity. It is incomprehensible and ineffable.

Since you only reckon with scripture, let me use scripture to land the point:

1 Timothy 6:16: "Who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen."

Isaiah 55:8–9: "'For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,' declares the Lord. 'As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.'"

Romans 11:33–34: "Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out! 'Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?'"

Job 11:7: "Can you fathom the mysteries of God? Can you probe the limits of the Almighty?"

Psalm 145:3: "Great is the Lord and most worthy of praise; his greatness no one can fathom."


+
The so called revelations are just the writings of men which include their fantasies, lies and imaginations.

Since you chose to respond by my bible, you should understand that
1. My God chose men to write about Him in the Bible AND most of these were given superhuman abilities by which we could believe them. So, your claim of men's fantasies, lies and imaginations is preposterous
2. You will also agree that even though My God is infinitely everything, He had many times entered His creation to interact with men as Human or Angel etc
3. Examples include God with Adam, God with Abraham, God with Jacob, God as the Pillar of Light and Cloud, God as Jesus etc

So, it is part of the Greatness of my God that He can be Somewhere and Everywhere at the same time. He can be Finite and Infinite at the same time: there is NOTHING impossible with Him.

DeepSight:
+
I agree.


+
I agree.

No problem!

DeepSight:
+This is a pantheistic view.

No sir. My God isnt pantheistic. I told you He could be somewhere and everywhere at the same time. This is because the whole existence is within Him
Act 17:28:
"For in Him we live and move and have our being; as some of the poets among you also have said, ‘For we are His offspring.’"

We live inside God
Eph 4:6:
"One God and Father of all, Who is over all, and through all, and in you all."

God even though over us is in us

This is why God is Omnipresent : this isn't a pantheistic view, it is God's description

DeepSight:
I thought you said your God is one. How come he is also three.

Your misunderstanding about the Trinity sir. God isn't THREE, He is ONE.
Trinity is a description of the Omnipresence of ONE God Being existing Simultaneously in the Three Dimensions of Existence.

1. God's Exists in His Dimension which is the Totality of Existence as the Holy Spirit.
2. God made a Spiritual Heavenly Dimension or Universe wherein He built a realm of Existence with Angels. God as a Spirit made Himself visible in this realm as the Father who sits upon His throne.
3. The Physical universe is a subset of the Spiritual Heavenly realm. God as a Spirit made Himself visible in this realm as the Word.

Here is a limited explanation in scientific mode.
An Omnipresent Three dimensional being will equally exist to beings existing in the two dimensional space and the one dimensional space simultaneously

DeepSight:
Scripture does not teach freewill. Or rather, it teaches predestination.

Ephesians 1:4–5

"For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will."

Ephesians 1:11

"In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will."

2 Timothy 1:9

"He has saved us and called us to a holy life—not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time."

Romans 8:29–30

"For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son... And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified."

There is only ONE class of Predestination in the Bible and it stems from FOREKNOWLEDGE of God. Foreknowledge means that the Creator of TIME is NOT constrained by the flow of Time as He could see ANYTHING, ANYONE and ANY EVENT.

Rom 8:29-30:
"Because those whom He did foreknow, He also predestinated to be conformed to the image of His own Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Now whom He predestinated, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified."

Those who God Foreknew are the Ones He predestined
Rom 11:2:
"God did not repudiate His people whom He foreknew. Don’t you know what the scripture says in the account of Elijah? How he was pleading with God against Israel, saying,"


God will not reject Israel in spite of their behaviours because He already know (foreknowledge) that at the end there would be an awakening that will cause a restoration

All Predestination in the Bible is because of provision for Salvation

DeepSight:
I dont know. No one can know what God is beyond acceding that there is a source or root of all things and that is God.

So, how do you know even the limited knowledge you have of your God?

One can know ONLY that that God reveals about Himself. God revealed Himself through men whom He backed up with supernatural abilities by which we can trust their claims. This is the essence of the scripture.

BTW
Any God that doesn't relate with His creation doesn't exist. Because if He is Transcendent and a Being , He must have a Purpose and He must care about the morality of His creations.

DeepSight:
I am not sure. I know that humans interact with the spiritual and many people might call that interacting with God, but I am not sure that it is. It might be, it might not be.

Yes, God does interact with Humans.
Do you think God should care if a Human being lives a Wicked life?
Do you agree that the source of Mortality should be God?
The purpose of the gift of our Conscience is that God inputs His will in us. Our conscience warns us that we are violating devine rules.

DeepSight:
I cant tell, but my best guess is that it is self expression and to experience ITSELF.

The objective of God for creating Humans on earth is for SELECTION of "sons" who would represent His will by their Freewill. Everything was created for God's pleasure
Col 1:16:
"Because by Him were all things created, the things in heaven and the things on earth, the visible and the invisible, whether they be thrones, or lordships, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him and for Him."
Heb 2:10:
"Because it was fitting for Him, for Whom all things were created, and by Whom all things exist, in bringing many sons unto glory , to make the Author of their salvation perfect through sufferings."
Rev 4:11:
"You are worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power: for you have created all things, and for your pleasure they are and were created."

DeepSight:
I dont know and if at all God is just, we will not be able to see the big picture that IT sees to understand its justice.
What i feel sure of is that the man made God described in scripture is manifestly unjust.

Ask yourself, If God is a Being and He made creations who could choose to be good or wicked, should He not be Just?[/quote]You need to first identify if God is a BEING or NOT.
If He is a Being, then you will have logical clarity to move ahead knowing and understanding His purpose.

If God is NOT a Being, existence is purposeless

DeepSight:
+
God is ineffable. IT can no more be named than it can be seen or comprehended.

Such doesn't exist as what has no identity nor can relate with his creation cannot be God.

Such as you described is just an Idea!


I can tell you about my God based on what He has revealed about Himself
1. My God is ONE Being
2. He is the Uncaused First-Cause of Everything
3. My God is the Omnipresent Invisible Holy Spirit. The whole Universe physical and spiritual are inside Him.
4. Because my God is a Trinity, He makes Himself visible in the Spiritual Universe as the Father .
5. Because the Physical Universe is a Subset of the Spiritual Universe, My God makes Himself Visible in the Physical and Spiritual Realms as the Word
6. At a point in time, the Word became Incarnate as Human known in the Earth as Jesus Christ.
7. My God created Humans as a special kind of beings with freewill that would by their CHOICE be the expressions of His image (Sons) through their Love, Loyalty and Submission to Him.
8. Humans who reject God are given exactly what they wanted: an eternal termination of relationship with Him in a place where God's presence will NEVER EVER disturb them.


Is your God a Being or an Idea?
Does your God interact with humans?
What is his objective for creating humans?
Is your God of Justice?

I wish you answer each ot these questions!

DeepSight:
+
You are the one who could not address my posers which were too much for you. Thats why you threw a fit.
And no, I dont believe that all existence came from nothing. I believe in an uncaused cause which I still call God.

There are many "Gods"
Your God doesn't have a name?

BlackfireX:
Just waiting for there top debaters..

Lies of many years and centuries

Will be destroyed

ALM

Unfortunately, when something is demonic in roots, common sense doesn't matter: it is like a plague of insanity

[quote author=Hussein035 post=139056642][/quote]Mr Hussain has no answer!?

DeepSight:
+
You are not serious.
Enjoy.

Since you cannot answer my questions,
A fool says in his heart that all existence came from NOTHING!

DeepSight:
+
1. Who told you I eat beef?

2. Your bible authorises the eating of beef.

3. Even among animals the killing of their own kind is rare.

4. Even among animals the killing of children by parents is an abnormality.

5. Among all creatures there exists a natural instinct of parents to protect their offspring. Why would a loving God give barbaric and evil instructions against that natural instinct.

You know in your heart it is devilish but a lifetime of indoctrination will not allow you to admit it.

I will only leave you with this question, to which I don't expect an honest answer.

Would you kill your child if so commanded?

Will you answer my direct questions and stop playing the clown!?

Lets assume you dont eat beef (which is most likely a lie).
Lets see how dirty you are:
Do you clean your toilet?
Do you wash and disinfect your toilet?

Let's see how truthful a godless person like you can be!

BlackfireX:
​بِاسْمِ الآبِ وَالاِبْنِ وَالرُّوحِ الْقُدُسِ
​Bismi l-Abi wa l-Ibni wa r-Ruhi l-Qudus



On todays lecture please I will like you to open your mind and think for yourself

We are talking about SHAHADA in Islam a very fundamental word , you can say is the first word a child speaks so is like the first word of the convert , without this words or sentence your faith is incomplete.

The Al Quran kareem is a clear book precise and detailed, A direct word of God that it is for all time, it can't be changed and forever true

Infact it is the 1st pillar of faith a very important block that all other depends upon

Which is Lai Lah ilah lah Muhammad Rosullahi
There is no god, but Allah and Muhammed is His messenger.

Now I want to ask where in the Quran can we find this verse?

Let me simplify it where in the Quran does it says that this is the 1st pillar of faith and this is it?

Let me ask like Zakir Naik ... give me (us) one unequivocal unambiguous statement in the Quran that says this ?

500k to your account of choice




Abutting
Empire
ObaofLagos
Islam
Antislam
TenQ
Gabrielshow
Husein
Omobaba
eninn
Iran
Abdul

The shahada was invented to make Mohammed the official deputy of Allah

He shares knowledge with Allah:
Only Allah and hus Messenger know...

He shares names with Allah
Just as Allah has 99 names, Mohammed also does and some of these names are Allah's names

He shares authority with Allah
The shahada is just an example: no man can become a Muslim without recital of Mohammed and Allah

Blasphemy against Allah has forgiveness but blasphemy against Mohammed doesn't have forgiveness

Even Allah and his Angels pray upon Mohammed. This is how important Mohammed is

DeepSight:
+
I am not Muslim.


+
Natural death is what you can justify in this manner, not one human being asked to kill another. Its even contradictory for God has a command against this, does he not? But aside from this, is it not innately evil to ask a parent to do that to his child?

You know the answer but your bias will not let you admit it.
It is beyond barbaric and shame on anyone who worships a God that asks them to kill their children.


+
When did I kill millions?

Are you barbaric for eating beef of all types

DeepSight:
+
So you think it's alright to ask a parent to kill his child?

Answer my questions or admit that you are dumb and ignorant at the same time.

I will like to know
1. What does Sacrifice mean in Islam?
2. Who do you sacrifice to?
3. What is the sacrifice for?
4. Why do you sacrifice Life in Islam?
Four questions: What, Who, Purpose, Why



What is death to you?

To my God, Death is homecoming back to the Source of Life.
If the owner of life recalls you back to Himself, is it barbaric?

Do you think you are also barbaric because you have in your life killed millions?

BlackfireX:
You dey look for trouble...who go answer you...

Ordinary who wrote the Quran ? No answer
Who pays for your sins? No response
Allah has a colour? No answer
Allah has an Allah? No answer
Who is Allah? No response
Allah committed the 1st shirk? No response
Where is shahada in the quran ? Problem
Quranic miracle? No evidence
Proof that Jesus is a Muslim? Insults
Jesus bow down , to whom his father , is Allah a father? No

Ok let's wait for response
All those who are reporting me and hacking my line... continue



Back to the topic .....

It is generally a big problem in Islam. So many things are imported from Christianity and Judaism without understanding the bases for them.

Till tomorrow, they do not know why
1. Allah made Jesus a co Creator of Life with Allah
2. Why Jesus was born without a father
3. Why Jesus has not died but in paradise with Allah

All they know is that Jesus is a prophet of Islam

BlackfireX:
You should have asked him ....which of the sons?

Allah mixed up alot of things

Dont mind him. They speak from total ignorance and they think it is wisdom!

DeepSight:
+
Your Yahweh also commanded Abram to kill his son as a sacrifice to him. What sort of barbaric and demonic command is that.

What is death to you?

To my God, Death is homecoming back to the Source of Life.
If the owner of life recalls you back to Himself, is it barbaric?

Do you think you are also barbaric because you have in your life killed millions?

AbuTwins:
[size=12pt][font=Lucida Sans Unicode]Hadith (Narrated by ‘Abd-Allah ibn ‘Umar):
"Each of you is a shepherd and is responsible for his flock. .....
......
[color=#000099]c) Shaving the Head and Charity

On the seventh day, it is Sunnah to shave the child’s head.
The weight of the hair in silver should be given as charity.
This act symbolizes purification and gratitude.
d) ‘Aqiqah (Sacrificial Offering)

The father is encouraged to perform ‘aqiqah by sacrificing animals.
Two sheep for a boy, one for a girl.
This is a form of gratitude and celebration of the child’s birth.

https://islamqa.info/en/answers/20064/rights-of-children-in-islam

I will like to know
1. What does Sacrifice mean in Islam?
2. Who do you sacrifice to?
3. What is the sacrifice for?
4. Why do you sacrifice Life in Islam?

Four questions: What, Who, Purpose, Why

In contrast:
Sacrifice in Christianity is giving up to God something that belongs to you
“In the Torah, God commanded sacrifices such as burnt offerings for worship, sin offerings for atonement, and peace offerings for fellowship showing that sin requires the shedding of blood. However, these sacrifices were temporary and had to be repeated. Christianity teaches that this system was fulfilled in Jesus Christ, who is the perfect and final sacrifice. Instead of humans continually offering animals, God provided the sacrifice Himself, once and for all, so that forgiveness is given to those who place their faith in Him.”

So, will the knowledgeable Muslims answer these four questions. Support with Hadiths and Qur'an verses will be appreciated.

Thanks

honesttalk21:
Your own texts answer your claim. When read in sequence, your rule does not hold.

Start with Zechariah in Gospel of Luke. The order is clear. Reassurance is given. Do not be afraid. Doubt follows. Then discipline. Because you did not believe my words. That is not immediate settled comfort. Your rule fails inside your own passage.

You wont answer my questions because it betrays your game of misinterpretation.

Was Zechariah punished for Lack of Faith or for having Fear according to the Angel?

honesttalk21:
Move to Manoah in Book of Judges. The angel departs. Manoah fears death after the encounter. No comfort is recorded during the encounter. By your own standard, this does not qualify. You cannot exclude it and keep the rule.

Did Manoah or his wife had any fear before the Angel or not?

honesttalk21:
Then Daniel in Book of Daniel. He collapses. He loses strength. He falls face down. Strength comes after. Comfort follows collapse. Not immediate. Your rule fails again.

Three cases. Same result. The rule is not in the text. It is imposed on it.

Was Daniel comforted After he collapsed or NOT?

honesttalk21:
Now return to Hira. The sequence matches established prophetic patterns:
Command. Read. Response. I cannot.
Revelation delivered.

This mirrors earlier commissions. Limitation is stated at the moment of calling. The mission proceeds. The limitation points away from self-authorship.

Sequence
1. Apparition grabs and squeezes Mohammed trice
2. Apparition commands Mohammed thrice to READ
3. Mohammed claimed he couldn't read
4. Apparition tells Mohammed to Read in the Name of your Lord
5. The Apparition neither Introduced himself NOR who he served
5. Mohammed was Afraid
6. Mohammed ran home to Khadija asking her to cover him until the terror he felt subsided
7. Mohammed thought it was a Jinn but Khadija thinks otherwise
8. To confirm, Khadija too Mohammed to her Uncle Waraqa
9. Waraqa (who wasn't there and who wasn't a prophet) said "this must be Jibril". Waraqa insisted that it was the same Angel that brought the Message to Moses and the other prophets.
10. There isnt a shred of evidence from the Bible to confirm Waraqa's claims
11. From that point on, Mohammed called this apparition Jibril.
12. Jibril never till the end of Mohammed's life introduced himself (until you can prove me wrong with evidence please)

honesttalk21:
The claim of a written text does not stand.
In Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, the encounter is described as command, inability, repetition, then recitation. No physical book appears in the core reports.
The Qur’an closes the issue. Qur'an 29:48 states he did not read or write prior. The structure remains verbal revelation.

Include tafsir. The conclusion does not change. Abul A'la Maududi discusses the range of meaning of Iqra. That is linguistic. Not a transmitted report with a chain. Ibn Kathir cites the same hadith reports. He preserves the sequence already stated. No authenticated narration introduces a physical text in the cave. So by your own method, the book claim lacks primary evidence.

On fear. Your own scriptures include it.
Daniel collapses. Gideon fears death. Fear appears at encounter. It does not cancel revelation. Applying a different rule to Hira is inconsistent.

I knew you would throw all the Tafsirs under the bus for a new PREFERRED NARRATIVE. This is exactly how islam works.

Did the Tafsirs say IQRA means READ or RECITE?

People who hate the truth cannot answer the question truthfully.

honesttalk21:
On Exodus in Book of Exodus. You cite face to face in 33:11. The same chapter states in 33:20 that no one may see God and live. The text qualifies itself. Direct encounter is mediated in a form humans can bear. That matches the structure you question at Hira.

Do you disagree with the statement that:
No one including Angels can see God in His full glory and Live.

honesttalk21:
On identification. Waraqah ibn Nawfal identifies the being as the same messenger sent to Moses. He is trained in your scriptural tradition. He does not suggest a jinn. He affirms continuity.This identification is reinforced by further encounters with Jibril beyond the cave.

If you are correct,
Then it should be easy to find the scriptural backing Waraqa used to arrive at this conclusion because he violates the scripture.

honesttalk21:
After the pause of revelation, the Prophet sees the angel filling the horizon. Overwhelming presence, then clear command. Revelation resumes.

In the hadith of Jibril in Sahih Muslim, the angel appears in human form, questions the Prophet before companions, then departs. The Prophet states plainly that this was Jibril teaching the religion. Qur'an 53:5–10 describes repeated encounters with the one of mighty power at the horizon, then drawing near.

Then question was:
When Mohammed first encountered the Apparition he later called Jibril
1. Was he in his usual form that looks like the handsome Dihyah al-Kalbi OR
2. His true self.

honesttalk21:
Aisha bint Abi Bakr reports multiple sightings of Jibril in his true form in the strongest hadith collections.


Across all of this, the pattern is consistent. Initial fear may occur. Clarity follows. Identification becomes explicit. Revelation remains coherent over time

Your proposed rule requires no fear and instant settled comfort. Your own texts do not meet that standard. The Islamic sources do not claim it either.

Talk is cheap: your evidence please

honesttalk21:
Once sequence, sources, and context are restored across Zechariah, Manoah, Daniel, Exodus, Hira, tafsir, and later encounters with Jibril, the argument does not stand. The rule collapses under your own texts, and the identification of Jibril is supported by repeated, consistent, and independently reported encounters.

Fake UNTRUE speech

WriteerNg:

---

Dey deceive yourself.

Is this the Lie I told? May 29, 2025?

I still challenge you to state the lie or lies I told in this post otherwise, you are the Liar who adopted to follow a liar to hell fire according to Qur'an 19:71-72

honesttalk21:
Regarding Zechariah you quoted Luke 1:20, because you did not believe. This is correct but you ignored what came first: fear not. Comfort was already given, yet he still hesitated, then discipline followed. That means your own verse proves comfort does not automatically settle the recipient. The punishment was for unbelief after reassurance. Your rule is broken by your own evidence.

Sometimes , I wonder at the intelligence of the fellow behind the keyboard.
Muslims and misrepresentation is 5&6
You said:
Comfort was already given, yet he still hesitated, then discipline followed.

1. Was this above what happened?
2. Did the Angel accuse him of hesitation?
3. Did the Angel accuse him of Fear?

4. What exactly di the angel accuse him of?

I trust as usual, you wouldnt answer the questions.

honesttalk21:
Pertaining to Iqra. The prophet pbuh saying
I cannot read/recite is not rejection. It reflects no prior content at the moment of command. Then the content is given. This is the same pattern in your own scripture. Moses says he cannot speak, Jeremiah says he cannot speak, yet both are commissioned. Iqra means recite or proclaim, not read a physical book. Your no book point misunderstands the command itself.

On Waraqah, when he heard the account immediately he said it was the same messenger of Moses. No hesitation, no suggestion of a jinn. That is early recognition from someone grounded in the previous revelation tradition. The question you keep avoiding is simple; why didn’t he say it was a jinn?

A person can recite only things that are in his memory

But let me help you to throw your scholars under the bus as they all seem to agree that IQRA mean READ and not recite.

Why do muslims choose lies and stick with it?



Tafsir Quran 96.1 Abbas - Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs
And from his narration on the authority of Ibn 'Abbas that he said regarding the interpretation of Allah's saying (Read): '(Read) He says: Read, O Muhammad, the Qur'an; this is the first revelation that Gabriel brought down: (In the name of thy Lord) by the command of your Lord (Who createth) the created beings,

Tafsir Quran 96.1-5 Kathir - Ibn Al Kathir
The Beginning of the Prophethood of Muhammad and the First of the Qur'an revealed
Imam Ahmad recorded that `A'ishah said: The first thing that began happening with the Messenger of Allah from the revelation was dreams that he would see in his sleep that would come true. He would not see any dream except that it would come true just like the (clearness of) the daybreak in the morning. Then seclusion became beloved to him. So, he used to go to the cave of Hira' and devote himself to worship there for a number of nights, and he would bring provisions for that. Then he would return to Khadijah and replenish his provisions for a similar number of nights. This continued until the revelation suddenly came to him while he was in the cave of Hira'. The angel came to him while he was in the cave and said, [b]"Read!'' The Messen- ger of Allah said,[/b]
(I replied: "I am not one who reads.) Then he said, "So he (the angel) seized me and pressed me until I could no longer bear it. Then he released me and said: `Read!' So I replied: `I am not one who reads.' So, he pressed me a second time until I could no longer bear it. Then he released me and said:
(Read in the Name of your Lord who has created.) until he reached the Ayah,
(That which he knew not. )'' So he returned with them (those Ayat) and with his heart trembling until he came (home) to Khadijah, and he said,
(Wrap me up, wrap me up!) So they wrapped him up until his fear went away. After that he told Khadijah everything that had happened (and said),
(I fear that something may happen to me.) Khadijah replied, "Never! By Allah, Allah will never disgrace you. You keep good relations with your relatives, you speak the truth, you help the poor and the destitute, you serve your guests generously, and you help the deserving, calamity afflicted people.'' Khadijah then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqah bin Nawfal bin Asad bin `Abdul-`Uzza bin Qusay, who, during the period of ignorance became a Christian and used to scribe the Scriptures in Arabic. He would write from the Injil in Hebrew as much as Allah willed for him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight. Khadijah said to him, "O my cousin! Listen to the story of your nephew.'' Waraqah asked, "O my nephew! What have you seen'' Allah's Messenger described what he saw. Waraqah said, "This is An-Namus whom Allah had sent to Musa. I wish I was young and could live until the time when your people would drive you out.'' Allah's Messenger asked,
Tafsir Quran 96.1-5 Maududi - Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi - Tafhim al-Qur'an
As we have explained in the Introduction, when the Angel said to the Holy Prophet, "Read", the latter replied, "I cannot read!"" This indicates that the Angel had presented these words of the Revelation before him in the written form and had asked him to read them. For if the Angel had meant that he should repeat what he recited, he should not have replied, saying "I cannot read!"
"Read in the name of your Lord": Bismillah and read. This shows that the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) even before the coming down of this Revelation regarded and acknowledged Allah alone as his Lord. That is why there was no need to ask who his Lord was, but it was said: "Read in the name of your Lord."
Only the word khalaqa (created) 'has been used absolutely, and the object of creation has not been mentioned, This automatically gives the meaning: "Read in the name of the Lord, Who is the Creator, Who created the whole universe and everything in it."

Are these tafsirs WRONG?

Your response will determine whether this conversation will continue or not

honesttalk21:
There is no clear text where Muhammad concludes it was a jinn. That is your insertion. The narration you rely on about testing is not from the strongest sources you demand elsewhere. Seeking confirmation does not invalidate an experience. Your own prophets do the same. So your claim remains assertion without proof unless you can validate your source which you can't and haven't as it's false.

Is is true that
1. According to Ibn Ishaq, the Prophet said: "I thought, 'Woe is me—poet or possessed—Never shall Quraysh say this of me!'".
2. According to Al-Tabari in Tarikh al-Tabari where your Prophet says: "I thought, 'Woe is me—poet or possessed—Never shall Quraysh say this of me!'"
3. According to Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, in his commentary on Bukhari, provides further context to the fear Muhammad felt about being "possessed".

honesttalk21:
On angels and comfort. You keep repeating that angels always bring comfort. Yet the verse you quote contains discipline after reassurance. You cannot maintain that absolute claim while using that verse. It contradicts it.

Your entire argument depends on the idea that angelic encounters must immediately settle the person. Your own citation shows that is not true. Once that falls, everything built on it falls with it. The answers have been given. What is missing is your engagement with them, not their existence.

1. Is it true that Terror and Fear greeted your prophet when he me the apparition?
2. Is it true that the fear did not subside until after the apparition was gone?
3. Is it true that the apparition who appeared to Mohammed NEVER introduced himself?

Case closed

gaskiyamagana:
From being a topnotch religion liar, now international politic liar.

I challenge you to state the lie or lies I told in this post otherwise, you are the Liar who adopted to follow a liar to hell fire according to Qur'an 19:71-72

For your reference

TenQ:
Something is not adding up here.

Either the Russian Generals and Soldiers are grossly incompetent OR Russian's are not claiming there dead soldiers corpse to prevent paying compensation to the families.

At this claimed rate, Russia should have checkmated Ukraine two years ago.





BTW:
In the last two months, Ukraine captured more lands from Russia as Russia has been on a losing streak.

Again, I challenge you to bring out the lie you LIED that I spoke.

Again, let me spoon feed you with the truth even though you will definitely vomit it as usual

honesttalk21:
When the truth is rejected for lies. Those who refuse truth make lies into that.

Your Own Words, Your Own Collapse

You quoted Luke 1:20: because you did not believe my words…
Good. Now read it properly.

Fear not was already given. Comfort came first. Then disbelief. Then discipline. So your own verse proves comfort was present and still did not prevent hesitation. That destroys your angels ALWAYS bring settling comfort rule.

The angel said to Zachariah
because you did not believe my words
BUT
your claim is that the angel said
because you feared my words

SMH!!

honesttalk21:
Iqra/read/recite/proclaim.
I cannot read = human limitation, not rejection. Same pattern as Moses and Jeremiah.
Iqra means recite/proclaim, not read a physical book.Your no book point misses the command entirely.

Muslims with lies of misrepresenting even their own books
Was Mohammed so dumb that he cannot RECITE?

What does it mean to RECITE?
Why did Mohammed say that he cannot RECITE?

honesttalk21:
Waraqah is still ignored.
He heard the account and said this is the Namus of Moses.Not jinn. Not confusion.
Your own tradition’s scholar confirmed continuity and you keep avoiding it.

Where did Waraqa get his information from?
BTW: Waraqa is not a Christian scholar!

honesttalk21:
Jinn claim of yours.
No text says he concluded it was a jinn
Your Aisha test isn’t from your demanded standard sources. Seeking confirmation isn't a false encounter. So it remains:

Assertion without evidence

So, tell me how Khadija determined that the apparition was not a Jinn?

honesttalk21:
Despite clearly answers to your Five questions you insist no answers are provided.
You just represent same questions. Reworded an or recycled.
When answers are given you refuse to engage.

Repeating them doesn’t strengthen your case. It just exposes the faulty,false, fake pattern.

It is impossible speaking sense to one who is determined to follow a lie

Mr honesttalk,
Your argument collapses on multiple factual and logical grounds. Your claims misrepresent Islamic sources, ignore context, and recycle unproven assertions without engaging evidence.