₦airaland Forum

gohf:
Wait tenq are you saying that Arabic scholars changed the meaning of "al"?

You wrote a question and I quote: "So, why is the double standards in grammar?
What are your scholars trying to hide from you?"


While Google AI says Arabic didn't not originate from Aramaic, are using the basis that in old Arabic al meant God but they changed it to mean "the"

Another question then is, what is the old Arabic meaning for lah.. could you share a source and link

I did not say that.

What I have said was that the pre-Islamic name of Allah the God of the Muslims is "LAH" specifically "Deity-LAH" = "Al-LAH".

And I have proved it by using their naming convention Abdul-Lah instead of Abdul-ALLAH, Qur'an 1:1 of the Qur'an Bisimi-LAH instead of Bisimi-ALLAH , and supported it with Personal Nouns that Rhymes perfectly with Allah to check the grammatical rule.

Of course, language changes and morphs with time. But my argument is that

1. Muslim claim that Islam is the Religion of Adam, Abraham, Lot, Ismael, Israel etc.
Then, we should be able to Logically and Linguistically trace Allah's name beyond the time of Mohammed.
2. Modern Arabic has EL-, AL- and IL- equivalent in English "the". El- in Hebrew is either a noun eg Deity/God or A preposition "to".
Ha (Hebrew) is equivalent to Al- (Arabic)



Yes, modern islamic treat the name of their God ALLAH as one word BUT they seem not to know exactly what it means!
BUT
Once they try to treat Allah as two words AL- and Lah, it betrays the fact that the true name of their God is LAH!


Here is the problem!

JimRohn:
Let me make it very clear to you:

What I’m saying is that no true and just God—worthy of worship—commands blanket massacres of tribes, including women, children, and animals, as described in parts of the Bible. If your claim is that God ordered genocide, then you are the one ascribing injustice to God, not me.

Islam rejects the notion that God is unjust, ever. Allah is Al-‘Adl – The Just – and He does not command evil. The Qur’an says: “Indeed, Allah does not do injustice, [even] as much as an atom’s weight” (Surah An-Nisa 4:40).

So if you’re defending verses that describe indiscriminate slaughter of entire peoples, then yes — Islam stands firmly against that, and we have every right to question the authenticity and preservation of those texts, especially when they contradict the very nature of God’s justice and mercy.

Don’t twist the conversation. I am not projecting injustice onto God — I am rejecting your flawed, man-altered depictions of Him. If that offends you, be offended with clarity.

honesttalk21 BibleInterpreta AntiChristian TenQ CreativeOrbit gofh

Even though I could present my arguments to show that you are completely wrong, however I will NOT do that except you request.

If I get you correctly,
1. Any God that orders the extermination of a people to taking over their land can not the real God.
2. Any God that can massacre Babies, Old, Young men and women, cannot be God!

Is this your position?

gohf:
ya I know Allah isn't a name, I have stated that in a post is "Hubal Allah"? Allah seems to refer to a specific deity, why they take it has his name and reject YHVH even though they claim they serve the same God as Israel, we have seen them flatter a number of times.

As much as words can be gotten from other languages, Aramaic is not the source of Arabic combination that produced Allah, they may have turned Aramaic elaha to ilah in Arabic. Even the Aramaic original text doing use aleph and lamed El or Al to mean the or a definitive article.

It's like oke in igbo and in Yoruba having two different meaning even though they have similar spelling.

I now checked Google to confirm my understanding of Aramaic

No, the definite article "al-" in Arabic is not directly derived from Aramaic, though both languages are Semitic and share some similarities.

Muslims claim that ALLAH is the personal Name of their God.

Is Allah the personal name of the God of the Jews and Christians?

JimRohn:
Your message is filled with assumptions, misinterpretations, and a tone that demands clarity and correction. So allow me to respond directly and systematically, as a Muslim who stands firmly by the truth of the Qur’an and the finality of Islam.

1. "Who is Isa? We don’t know him!"

That is a deficiency in your own theological framework, not in the Qur’an. Isa (peace be upon him) is the Arabic name for Jesus, son of Mary—the same historical figure revered in Christianity. The difference lies in the Islamic understanding: we reject any claim of divinity assigned to him, as it contradicts the absolute oneness of God. If you claim not to "know him," then you deny your own Scriptures that speak of him.

The Arabic name of Jesus is NOT Isa BUT Yasu'a
Mark 1:1
بِدَايَةُ إِنْجِيلِ يَسُوعَ ٱلْمَسِيحِ ٱبْنِ ٱللّٰهِ

1. Can you explain why the Islam calls Jesus by a strange name Arab Christians do not call their Jesus?
2. So, again, Who is ISA?
3. What is the meaning of His name ISA and His Name Ye'shua?

JimRohn:
2. "Who is Allah? We don’t know him!"

Again, this reveals a lack of linguistic and historical awareness. "Allah" is the Arabic word for God, used by Arab Christians and Jews centuries before Islam. Even Christian Arabs today refer to God as "Allah." The Qur’an teaches pure monotheism (Tawheed), which is the same message that was originally brought by Abraham, Moses, and Jesus—before it was altered and distorted by men.

I am sure you know that Allah is GENERIC for Deity like "God" in English language. The question is which Allah or Illah?

However, the name of your God is Allah it is NOT the title of your God.
The name of the God (Illah) of the Jews is YHWH!
The name of the God (Illah) of the Christians is YHWH!
Is the name of the God (Allah) of the Muslims is YHWH?


If it is NOT, who is your Allah as we don't know him!

JimRohn:
3. "Can you answer your questions without referencing Christianity or Judaism?"

Yes. Islam does not depend on the validation of previous scriptures that were tampered with. However, the Qur’an corrects and confirms the parts of the previous revelations that were true. Our sources are independent in authenticity and superior in preservation. The Qur’an challenges mankind to produce anything like it—not one verse has been matched in 1,400 years.

So, who is Abraham: where did he come from?
Who is Moses?
Who is David?

You don't need to validate anything, you just have to be able to stand alone without referencing the God and prophet of others.

JimRohn:
4. "Who is Israel in the Qur’an?"

Israel refers to Ya'qub (Jacob, peace be upon him)—this is well established in Islamic tradition. It is neither mysterious nor ambiguous. This knowledge is from revelation, not speculation.

I challenge you to give me just one proof from the Qur'an that Israel is Ya'qub and I will recite my shahada.

Allah doesn't even know who Israel is in the Qur'an.
Did Islamic traditions take their history from Allah or from the Jews and Christians?

Shouldn't Allah introduce Isra-el before speaking about his children?

Is it untrue that Allah forgot to say who Israel is in his Qur'an?

JimRohn:
5. "What is the meaning of the names Gabriel and Ishmael?"

The meanings of names are not religious proofs. Yes, Gabriel (Jibril) means "God is my strength" and Ishmael (Isma'il) means "God will hear." These are Hebrew names, and Islam affirms the lineage of many prophets from the same Semitic background. But meanings of names have zero bearing on the truth or falsehood of belief.

I did not ask you for any proof of any thing. I asked you a simple question.

Is this a sufficient proof for you to see that IL- or EL- or AL- in their names is the title "GOD"!?



If this is true, what then would be the meaning of
Al-LAH
Al-Lat
Al-Manat

Can you see how the male of your Deity is LAH!?

JimRohn:
6. "You misquoted Qur'an 5:3..."

No misquote occurred. The verse states:

> "This day I have perfected for you your religion, completed My favor upon you, and have approved for you Islam as your religion." (Qur'an 5:3)

If you are correct, Quran 5:3 should be the last verse according to revelation in your Qur'an but is this true?
According to revelation, was this the last verse of the Qur'an?

If Quran 5:3 is NOT the last verse of the Qur'an, explain why your religion still received lots of Qur'an when it was already perfected as by the revelation of the verse.

JimRohn:
This is clear and direct. If you deny it, then you deny what has been preserved word-for-word for over 14 centuries—unlike the Bible, which has over 30,000 textual variants in the New Testament manuscripts alone.

So, you believe this LIE by Islamic scholars?
Tell me,
Is Hafs Qur'an preserved word for word with the Warsh Qur'an

Are you aware that there are up to 32 different Arabic Qur'ans in existence?

Is the the Quran of Ibn Masud identical to the Uthmanic Quran?

JimRohn:
7. "It is impossible that both Christianity and Islam lead to Paradise. Do you agree?"

Yes, I agree. Truth is not relative. Two contradictory paths cannot both lead to salvation. Islam categorically rejects the divinity of Jesus, the Trinity, and salvation through crucifixion. Christianity affirms those. One must be right; the other must be wrong. Islam is the final and preserved truth, and the Qur’an is its undeniable proof.

I agree with you here. The truth is NOT relative. The fact that a Truth is difficult for you to understand doesn't change its status. A truth is not necessarily simple. But it is NOT relative.

To know the Truth, you may need to search and contrast while asking Questions.

Jn 8:32:
"And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free."
Jesus says He Himself is the WAY and the TRUTH.

John 14:6:
"Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth , and the life : no man comes to the Father, but by me."

Note:
The title deeds to a property may look good on paper, but in questioning and verifying will you find the truth and not be scammed.

Satan goes about deceiving people into falsehood and most are sincerely deceived.

For Islam to be true, it is a must to take your research to the Jewish and Christian scriptures since Allah says that he gave them his scriptures.

JimRohn:
8. "According to Qur’an 19:71-72, all Muslims will enter the Fire temporarily."

You deliberately distort the verse. The passage says:

> “And there is none of you except he will pass over it (the Hellfire); this is upon your Lord an inevitability decreed. Then We will save those who feared Allah and leave the wrongdoers within it, on their knees.” (Qur’an 19:71–72)

Passing over the Fire does not mean entering it and being punished. The verse clearly distinguishes between the righteous who are saved and the wrongdoers who remain. This "crossing over" is part of the Final Judgment. Stop misrepresenting what the verse says—especially without understanding the Arabic or classical exegesis.

Conclusion

If you truly "dislike lies," then start by rejecting misquotations, theological arrogance, and misrepresentations of Islam. I welcome sincere questions, but if your goal is provocation, know that we are not intimidated by hostile rhetoric.

Islam stands on truth, clarity, and preservation—unshaken by the distortions of man-made theology.

honesttalk21 BibleInterpreta AntiChristian TenQ CreativeOrbit gofh

I challenge you to give me the Arabic word for "pass over it" and I will convert to Islam today.

Quran 19:71
وَإِن مِّنكُمْ إِلَّا وَارِدُهَا ۚ كَانَ عَلَىٰ رَبِّكَ حَتْمًا مَّقْضِيًّا

What is the meaning of وَارِدُهَا ?


Qur'an 19:71
There is not one of you who will not go down to it (the Fire), that is a fixed Decree of your Lord

Meaning that ALL Muslims will at least first be in Hell Fire.

Quran 19:72
Then, We will save those who were cautious of Us, but the harmdoers shall be left there hobbling on their knees

After ALL you Muslims enter the Fire, THEN Allah will THEREAFTER remove the good Muslims and leave other people in the Fire

honesttalk21
TheJustPath
CreativeOrbit

In have asked the questions
1. So, who is the pre-Islamic Deity called LAH?
2. Who is Lah according to Quran 1:1 ?


For those of you who want to hide under Arabic grammar, I have for you some Arabic examples for you to deal with

Let me burst your bubbles
I have gotten you three Arabic names of people that rhymes with Allah such as
Allam (علام)
Allan (ألان)
Aaliyah / Aliyah / Aliya (عالية / علياء)

I will compose three common phrases with these names with phrase like
1. "in the name of Al-LAH"
2. "I seek refuge in Al-LAH from the accursed Satan"
3. "servant of Al-LAH "
4. "Praise be to Al-LAH"
Your duty is to verify that the same rules you use with Al-LAH is used with these three names in
a. Writing (If the prefix AL- is removed)
b. Speaking (If the prefix AL- is silent)


I will first translate these four sentences with AL-LAH and confirm how you both spell and pronounce these phrases.

Permit me to break this into three parts to avoid complications..



Translation of phrases
1. "in the name of Al-LAH"
2. "I seek refuge in Al-LAH from the accursed Satan"
3. "servant of Al-LAH "
4. "Praise be to Al-LAH"



1. "In the name of Al-LAH"
-Arabic: بِسْمِ اللّٰهِ
-Transliteration: Bismi-llāh
- Phonetics: BIS-meel-LAAH

2. "I seek refuge in Al-LAH"
- Arabic: أَعُوذُ بِاللّٰهِ
- Transliteration: A‘ūdhu bi-llāh
-Phonetics: ah-OO-dhoo bil-LAAH


3. "Servant of Al-LAH"
-Arabic: عَبْدُ اللّٰهِ
-Transliteration: ‘Abdu-llāh
-Phonetics: AB-dul-LAAH


4. "Praise be to Al-LAH"
-Arabic: اَلْحَمْدُ لِلّٰهِ
-Transliteration: Al-ḥamdu li-llāh
-Phonetics: al-HAM-doo lil-LAAH



Just verify that these are correct because I will replace Allah in the next two or three posts with replacements that RHYMES with Al-LAH and then, coach me properly about Arabic.



Here , I use Aliyah to replace Allah with the Arabic transliteration and phonetics:


1. "In the name of ʿĀliyah"
-Arabic: بِسْمِ عَالِيَةِ
-Transliteration: Bismi ʿĀliyah
-Phonetics: BIS-mee ʿAA-lee-yah

2. "I seek refuge in ʿĀliyah"
-Arabic: أَعُوذُ بِعَالِيَةِ
-Transliteration: Aʿūdhu bi-ʿĀliyah
-Phonetics: ah-OO-dhoo bee ʿAA-lee-yah

3. "Servant of ʿĀliyah"
-Arabic: عَبْدُ عَالِيَةِ
-Transliteration: ʿAbdu ʿĀliyah
-Phonetics: ʿAB-doo ʿAA-lee-yah

4. "Praise be to ʿĀliyah"
-Arabic: اَلْحَمْدُ لِعَالِيَةِ
-Transliteration: Al-ḥamdu li-ʿĀliyah
-Phonetics: al-HAM-doo lee ʿAA-lee-yah


Here , I use Alam to replace Allah with the Arabic transliteration and phonetics:


1. "In the name of ʿAlām"
-Arabic: بِسْمِ عَلَامٍ
-Transliteration: Bismi ʿAlām
-Phonetics: BIS-mee ʿa-LAAM

2. "I seek refuge in ʿAlām"
-Arabic: أَعُوذُ بِعَلَامٍ
-Transliteration: Aʿūdhu bi-ʿAlām
-Phonetics: ah-OO-dhoo bi ʿa-LAAM

3. "Servant of ʿAlām"
- Arabic: عَبْدُ عَلَامٍ
-Transliteration: ʿAbdu ʿAlām
-Phonetics: ʿAB-doo ʿa-LAAM

4. "Praise be to ʿAlām"
-Arabic: اَلْحَمْدُ لِعَلَامٍ
-Transliteration: Al-ḥamdu li-ʿAlām
-Phonetics: al-HAM-doo li ʿa-LAAM*

Here , I use Al-an to replace Allah with the Arabic transliteration and phonetics:


1. "In the name of Al-Ān"
-Arabic: بِسْمِ ألان
-Transliteration: Bismi Al-Ān*
-Phonetics: BIS-mee al-AAN*

2. "I seek refuge in Al-Ān"
- Arabic: أَعُوذُ بِألان
-Transliteration: Aʿūdhu bi Al-Ān
-Phonetics: ah-OO-dhoo bi al-AAN

3. "Servant of Al-Ān"
-Arabic: عَبْدُ ألان
-Transliteration: ʿAbdu Al-Ān
-Phonetics: ʿAB-doo al-AAN

4. "Praise be to Al-Ān"
-Arabic: اَلْحَمْدُ لِألان
-Transliteration: Al-ḥamdu li Al-Ān
-Phonetics: al-HAM-doo li al-AAN


Do you notice that the rules change only when it seems Al-LAH would be "belittled"?





So, and again:
The name of your God is -LAH and the prefix like the Old Semitic languages AL- or IL- or EL- mean Deity or God exactly like
Al-LAH would mean God-LAH
Al-Manat would mean god-Manat
Al-Uzah would mean god-Uzah
Al-Lat would mean god-Lat




If you doubt this, I respectfully ask you to tell me the meaning of the following names.
Ishma-el or Isma-il
Gabri-el or Jubra-il
Isra-el or Isra-il



So, why is the double standards in grammar?
What are your scholars trying to hide from you?


Allah is definitely LAH!

We still need to ask you sir
*Abdul-LAH (the father of your prophet) instead of Abdul-ALLAH
*Bisimi-LAH (praise be to LAH) instead of Bisimi-ALLAH
*Alhamdu li-LAH (Praise be to LAH) instead of Alhamdu li-ALLAH

TenQ:
I have never met a group whose scholars LIES as if their life depends on it. Like I said, their many ways to skin a cat.

Let me burst your bubbles
I have gotten you three Arabic names of people that rhymes with Allah such as
Allam (علام)
Allan (ألان)
Aaliyah / Aliyah / Aliya (عالية / علياء)

I will compose three common phrases with these names with phrase like
1. "in the name of Al-LAH"
2. "I seek refuge in Al-LAH from the accursed Satan"
3. "servant of Al-LAH "
4. "Praise be to Al-LAH"
Your duty is to verify that the same rules you use with Al-LAH is used with these three names in
a. Writing (If the prefix AL- is removed)
b. Speaking (If the prefix AL- is silent)


I will first translate these four sentences with AL-LAH and confirm how you both spell and pronounce these phrases.

Permit me to break this into three parts to avoid complications..



Translation of phrases
1. "in the name of Al-LAH"
2. "I seek refuge in Al-LAH from the accursed Satan"
3. "servant of Al-LAH "
4. "Praise be to Al-LAH"



1. "In the name of Al-LAH"
-Arabic: بِسْمِ اللّٰهِ
-Transliteration: Bismi-llāh
- Phonetics: BIS-meel-LAAH

2. "I seek refuge in Al-LAH"
- Arabic: أَعُوذُ بِاللّٰهِ
- Transliteration: A‘ūdhu bi-llāh
-Phonetics: ah-OO-dhoo bil-LAAH


3. "Servant of Al-LAH"
-Arabic: عَبْدُ اللّٰهِ
-Transliteration: ‘Abdu-llāh
-Phonetics: AB-dul-LAAH


4. "Praise be to Al-LAH"
-Arabic: اَلْحَمْدُ لِلّٰهِ
-Transliteration: Al-ḥamdu li-llāh
-Phonetics: al-HAM-doo lil-LAAH



Just verify that these are correct because I will replace Allah in the next two or three posts with replacements that RHYMES with Al-LAH and then, coach me properly about Arabic.

Please hold on until I post my rebuttals to your Arabic grammars in the next two/three posts

Mr AntiChristian,
This is the continuation:
Here , I use Aliyah to replace Allah with the Arabic transliteration and phonetics:


1. "In the name of ʿĀliyah"
-Arabic: بِسْمِ عَالِيَةِ
-Transliteration: Bismi ʿĀliyah
-Phonetics: BIS-mee ʿAA-lee-yah

2. "I seek refuge in ʿĀliyah"
-Arabic: أَعُوذُ بِعَالِيَةِ
-Transliteration: Aʿūdhu bi-ʿĀliyah
-Phonetics: ah-OO-dhoo bee ʿAA-lee-yah

3. "Servant of ʿĀliyah"
-Arabic: عَبْدُ عَالِيَةِ
-Transliteration: ʿAbdu ʿĀliyah
-Phonetics: ʿAB-doo ʿAA-lee-yah

4. "Praise be to ʿĀliyah"
-Arabic: اَلْحَمْدُ لِعَالِيَةِ
-Transliteration: Al-ḥamdu li-ʿĀliyah
-Phonetics: al-HAM-doo lee ʿAA-lee-yah


Here , I use Alam to replace Allah with the Arabic transliteration and phonetics:


1. "In the name of ʿAlām"
-Arabic: بِسْمِ عَلَامٍ
-Transliteration: Bismi ʿAlām
-Phonetics: BIS-mee ʿa-LAAM

2. "I seek refuge in ʿAlām"
-Arabic: أَعُوذُ بِعَلَامٍ
-Transliteration: Aʿūdhu bi-ʿAlām
-Phonetics: ah-OO-dhoo bi ʿa-LAAM

3. "Servant of ʿAlām"
- Arabic: عَبْدُ عَلَامٍ
-Transliteration: ʿAbdu ʿAlām
-Phonetics: ʿAB-doo ʿa-LAAM

4. "Praise be to ʿAlām"
-Arabic: اَلْحَمْدُ لِعَلَامٍ
-Transliteration: Al-ḥamdu li-ʿAlām
-Phonetics: al-HAM-doo li ʿa-LAAM*

Here , I use Al-an to replace Allah with the Arabic transliteration and phonetics:


1. "In the name of Al-Ān"
-Arabic: بِسْمِ ألان
-Transliteration: Bismi Al-Ān*
-Phonetics: BIS-mee al-AAN*

2. "I seek refuge in Al-Ān"
- Arabic: أَعُوذُ بِألان
-Transliteration: Aʿūdhu bi Al-Ān
-Phonetics: ah-OO-dhoo bi al-AAN

3. "Servant of Al-Ān"
-Arabic: عَبْدُ ألان
-Transliteration: ʿAbdu Al-Ān
-Phonetics: ʿAB-doo al-AAN

4. "Praise be to Al-Ān"
-Arabic: اَلْحَمْدُ لِألان
-Transliteration: Al-ḥamdu li Al-Ān
-Phonetics: al-HAM-doo li al-AAN




Mr Antichristian,
Do you notice that the rules change only when it seems Al-LAH would be "belittled"?





So, and again:
The name of your God is -LAH and the prefix like the Old Semitic languages AL- or IL- or EL- mean Deity or God exactly like
Al-LAH would mean God-LAH
Al-Manat would mean god-Manat
Al-Uzah would mean god-Uzah
Al-Lat would mean god-Lat




If you doubt this, I respectfully ask you to tell me the meaning of the following names.
Ishma-el or Isma-il
Gabri-el or Jubra-il
Isra-el or Isra-il

AntiChristian:
See great bunkum! Seriously you typed a lot of Holy Spirit dog-shite here! What is this? My best argument is that you are ignrant of Arabic grammer! Even the least of it you don't know!

Is it difficult to understand that the word "Allah" changes when a preposition comes before it?

Okay i think you should learn this simple Arabic Grammar once and for all. Na so Christians dey see Demon where nothing exists!

The Core Concept: Case Endings and Genitive Case
The primary mechanism behind these changes is the system of case endings in Arabic grammar. Arabic nouns have different forms depending on their grammatical function within a sentence. The three main cases are:

1. Nominative Case (الرفع - ar-rafʿ): This is the base form of a noun, typically used for the subject of a sentence. In the examples we've discussed, the original nouns (e.g., Al-Rahman, Al-Kitab) are usually in the nominative case.
2. Accusative Case (النصب - an-nasb): This case is used for the direct object of a verb.
3. Genitive Case (الجر - al-jarr): This case indicates possession, association, or the object of a preposition. This is the case that causes the changes we're observing.

How Prepositions Trigger the Genitive Case
When a noun is preceded by a preposition (like "of," "to," "in," "with," etc.), it automatically shifts into the genitive case. This shift often manifests in a few ways:

Change in Vowel Ending: The most common change is in the final vowel sound of the noun. The nominative case often ends in "-u" (pronounced as "oo", while the genitive case usually ends in "-i" (pronounced as "ee".

Loss of Nunation: Nouns in Arabic can be definite (specific, like "the book" or indefinite (general, like "a book". Indefinite nouns often have a final "-n" sound (called nunation). When a noun is in the genitive case, it often loses this nunation.
Changes to the Definite Article (Al-): The definite article "al-" (الـ), which means "the," might remain unchanged, or it might be assimilated into the following word, depending on the letters.

Examples Revisited:
Let's look at a couple of examples to illustrate these changes:

Original: Al-Kitab (الكتاب) - "The Book" (Nominative)

With Preposition: Kitābullah (كتاب الله) - "The Book of Allah" (Genitive)

Here, the noun Kitab (Book) changes to Kitabullah (Book of Allah) when combined with the name of Allah.
Original: Ar-Rahman (الرحمن) - "The Most Gracious" (Nominative)

With Preposition: Rahmatullah (رحمة الله) - "The mercy of Allah" (Genitive)

Here, the noun Rahman (Gracious) changes to Rahmatullah (Mercy of Allah) when combined with the name of Allah.

Abdullah (عبد الله) - "Servant of Allah"

Explanation: This name is a compound, with "Abd" (servant) in the genitive case because it's "servant of Allah." The "Allah" here is also in the genitive case, showing possession.
Bismillah (بسم الله) - "In the name of Allah"

Explanation: "Bi" (بِـ) is a preposition meaning "in" or "with." "Bismillah" translates to "In the name of Allah." The word "Allah" is in the genitive case because it is the object of the preposition "Bi."
Alhamdulillah (الحمد لله) - "Praise be to Allah"

Explanation: "Al-Hamdu" (الحمد) means "The praise." The preposition "Li" (لِـ) means "to" or "for." "Alhamdulillah" translates to "Praise to Allah." The word "Allah" is in the genitive case because it is the object of the preposition "Li."

Just admit that the Holy spirit failed you this time. Allah is not the same as Lah!

I have never met a group whose scholars LIES as if their life depends on it. Like I said, their many ways to skin a cat.

Let me burst your bubbles
I have gotten you three Arabic names of people that rhymes with Allah such as
Allam (علام)
Allan (ألان)
Aaliyah / Aliyah / Aliya (عالية / علياء)

I will compose three common phrases with these names with phrase like
1. "in the name of Al-LAH"
2. "I seek refuge in Al-LAH from the accursed Satan"
3. "servant of Al-LAH "
4. "Praise be to Al-LAH"
Your duty is to verify that the same rules you use with Al-LAH is used with these three names in
a. Writing (If the prefix AL- is removed)
b. Speaking (If the prefix AL- is silent)


I will first translate these four sentences with AL-LAH and confirm how you both spell and pronounce these phrases.

Permit me to break this into three parts to avoid complications..



Translation of phrases
1. "in the name of Al-LAH"
2. "I seek refuge in Al-LAH from the accursed Satan"
3. "servant of Al-LAH "
4. "Praise be to Al-LAH"



1. "In the name of Al-LAH"
-Arabic: بِسْمِ اللّٰهِ
-Transliteration: Bismi-llāh
- Phonetics: BIS-meel-LAAH

2. "I seek refuge in Al-LAH"
- Arabic: أَعُوذُ بِاللّٰهِ
- Transliteration: A‘ūdhu bi-llāh
-Phonetics: ah-OO-dhoo bil-LAAH


3. "Servant of Al-LAH"
-Arabic: عَبْدُ اللّٰهِ
-Transliteration: ‘Abdu-llāh
-Phonetics: AB-dul-LAAH


4. "Praise be to Al-LAH"
-Arabic: اَلْحَمْدُ لِلّٰهِ
-Transliteration: Al-ḥamdu li-llāh
-Phonetics: al-HAM-doo lil-LAAH



Just verify that these are correct because I will replace Allah in the next two or three posts with replacements that RHYMES with Al-LAH and then, coach me properly about Arabic.

Please hold on until I post my rebuttals to your Arabic grammars in the next post

gohf:
you're using a previous definition? Imagine if I ask you, oh are you gay because of what happened?

Have you checked AI for what I wrote?
Languages retain a lot of borrowed words which point to the sources of those words ORIGINALLY before the language morphs.

Ask any Muslim:
What is the name of the creator, they would say Allah!
Ask what is the meaning of Allah?
No Muslim knows the meaning.

The Word "God" in English Language was influenced by the German word "Gott" .
persona" via French)
English word "Common" from Latin "communis"
English word "Frequently" from Latin "frequentare"
English word "War" (from Old French "werre"

Should we throw off history because the meaning of words have changed?

What we do is to acknowledge them!


It is bad for Muslims because the Religion of Adam, Lot, Abraham, Ishmael and Jacob when NEITHER Hebrew NOR Arabic existed is ISLAM and the name of their God is ALLAH.
Thus, we can trace the name of Allah back to the Aramaic sources.
Do you agree with this?

gohf:
what is simple written there is that in Arabic al means THE

But in Hebrew el means GOD

Hebrew and Arabic are two different languages

So if you are saying that the Arabic form of El is il, is still agrees with what AI showed that ilah is God and al is the, making Allah to mean the God.

Now: In Arabic, "al-" is the definite article, meaning "the." When combined with "ilah" (meaning "god", it forms "al-ilah," which is the source of the word "Allah." So, while "al-" doesn't mean "God" on its own, it plays a crucial role in forming the Arabic word for God, which is "Allah," meaning "The God".

Maybe some use Al as a shorten form of Allah, 🤷🏾‍♂️, but names like Alisha, Aliyah even Ali doesn't mean my God like how Eli means my God in Hebrew.

Allah isn't even an Arabic form of Elohim, because they mean different things, for instance Elohim is the commonly used term which can singular as eloah and in Hebrew ah, ha (hey) is used to state a definite term, the.


I may not know Arabic as you do but I can tell you a bit about Hebrew. What I wrote here about Arabic is from Google.

The use of El-, Al- or IL- for God or Deity is very old and it is from the Aramaic sources as it influences both Hebrew and Arabic languages deeply.

Languages change with time, like
Gay used to mean Happy, but now it means an homosexual man.


Same with El- or Al- or IL-: which used to mean God or Deity BUT later became the definite Article similar to "the" in English.

You can confirm this with AI Chatbot and let me know.

honesttalk21:
You use Hebrew to interpret Arabic? Now that is genius in reverse isn't it?

The term Al-ilah (ٱلْإِلَٰه) translates to "the god" in Arabic.

Breaking it down:
"Ilah" (إِلَٰه) means god or deity, while "Al-" serves as the definite article "the."

So, when you put it all together, "al-ilah" means "the god."

On the other hand, "Allah" (الله) is the specific name for the One Supreme God in Islam. It's not just a general term for "god"; it's the unique name for the singular, transcendent deity.


(ٱلْإِلَٰه) Is different from (الله) so your theory is totally opposite to smart.

It seems you don't know that Aramaic language is much older than and influences greatly both Arabic and Hebrew?

I am not using Hebrew to interpret Arabic o

This was why I asked you to tell me the meaning of Isra-el, Ishma-el and Gabri-el. Those are ancient Aramaic names



Your argument still bore down to
Either ,
1. Allah is NOT the name of your God as it is just a title AL-illa
OR
2. The name of your God is NOT Allah but illah or LaH

either way, it is a problem.



Do you know any prophet that called his God by the name (not title) ALLAH?

honesttalk21:
The cut and join Arabic interpretation can never help you

Why don't you speak the truth to yourself once and answer my questions.


I wish it was true that AL- or El- is solely the definite article BUT it isn't. Modern Semitic languages now use it either as a definite article equivalent to "the" in English but as a sign of RESPECT.

El- or Al- or Il means God or Deity in the Old Semitic Languages

So,
Al-LAH would mean God-LAH
Al-Manat would mean God-Manat
Al-Uzah would mean God-Uzah
Al-Lat would mean God-Lat




If you doubt this, I respectfully ask you to tell me the meaning of the following names.
Ishma-el or Isma-il
Gabri-el or Jubra-il
Isra-el or Isra-il


Just be truthful to yourself!
Peace!

gohf:
In Arabic, "lāh" is part of the word "Allāh," which is the standard Arabic word for God. It is used by Muslims, Christians, and Jews who speak Arabic. The word is thought to be derived from the Arabic article "al-" and "ʾilāh," meaning "god" or "deity," creating "al-lāh," which translates to "the God".


So while in Hebrew el means God
In Arabic al is used for definite article, meaning the. Allah is the God

I wish it was true that AL- or El- is solely the definite article BUT it isn't. Modern Semitic languages now use it either as a definite article equivalent to "the" in English but as a sign of RESPECT.

El- or Al- or Il means God or Deity in the Old Semitic Languages

So,
Al-LAH would mean God-LAH
Al-Manat would mean God-Manat
Al-Uzah would mean God-Uzah
Al-Lat would mean God-Lat




If you doubt this, I respectfully ask you to tell me the meaning of the following names.
Ishma-el or Isma-il
Gabri-el or Jubra-il
Isra-el or Isra-il


Just be truthful to yourself!
Peace!

BibleInterpreta:
What is the ultimate goal of divine commands?

Divine commands are for the ultimate long-term good and protection of man and his society!


Like,
Why is Adultery and Fornication evil?
Why should we Love God and our Neighbour?
Why should we not cover our neighbour's properties?
Why should we remember the Sabbath to keep it holy?

Etc

The purpose of Divine commands is not for the benefit of God but of man!

JimRohn:
Your barrage of rhetorical accusations and theological missteps betrays more heat than light. While you posture as if delivering a cross-examination, your actual argumentation reveals a profound misunderstanding of Islam, its epistemology, and its principles. So let me respond point by point—with clarity, directness, and without the diplomatic softening you clearly neither respect nor understand.

1. “You failed the question”—False Premise

You claim the question was whether we honor one prophet more than another. Islam is not Christianity, and unlike your framework where Christ’s elevation necessitates a demotion of others, Islam teaches prophetic hierarchy within the bounds of respect, not at the expense of any prophet's honor. Allah says:

> "These are the messengers; We have made some exceed others. Among them are those to whom Allah spoke, and He raised some of them in rank." (Qur’an 2:253)

Yes, Muhammad ﷺ is the final and greatest Prophet, but that does not entail a dishonor to Jesus, peace be upon him. Your assumption that hierarchy equals dishonor is your theological baggage, not ours. And if you are incapable of distinguishing between reverence and worship, that is your own confusion—not ours to bear.

2. “You can’t answer without referencing Christianity” — Misguided Critique

You brought up theological comparisons, so don’t recoil when we answer on those terms. Islam is the final revelation, and by definition, it clarifies and corrects what came before. That necessitates engaging with prior scriptures. Islam doesn't emerge in a vacuum—it refines and seals the Abrahamic message. Qur'an 5:48 makes this clear:

> "To you We revealed the Scripture in truth, confirming the Scripture that came before it and as a criterion over it...
If you bring Christianity into the room, don't complain when it's critically addressed.

3. “You can’t claim completeness without knowing the former books” — Strawman

You confuse the completeness of revelation with the memorization of past texts. The Qur’an affirms that the final revelation is self-contained and self-sufficient:

> "This day I have perfected for you your religion..." (Qur’an 5:3)

The Prophet ﷺ did not need to study corrupted scriptures to bring the truth. Revelation comes from the Source, not from books edited by human hands.

4. Original Sin & Human Nature in Islam — Distorted Understanding

Islam categorically rejects the doctrine of inherited sin. Every soul is born pure (fitrah) and accountable only for their own actions:

> "No bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another." (Qur’an 6:164)

We sin not because we are born evil, but because we are given free will and a lower self (nafs) to struggle against. Unlike Christian doctrine, we don’t see sin as a genetic curse but as a test.

As for the first sin—it was Iblis, not Adam. He disobeyed Allah by refusing to bow. Read Qur’an 2:34. Your question is answered by the very book you’re trying to challenge.

5. Elevation of Prophets — Clarified

Prophets are elevated in responsibility and rank, not in worship or honor that breaches the bounds of monotheism. Muhammad ﷺ is the seal of the prophets (Qur’an 33:40), but we do not set up competitions of divinity like the Trinity doctrines you are clearly more familiar with.

6. “All will be thrown into Hell” — Misquoted and Misunderstood

You are referring to a hadith or interpretation you have not understood. Yes, people will pass over Hell (Qur’an 19:71), but the righteous will be saved. Adam was forgiven. Your question about him being in Hell shows blatant ignorance of basic Qur'anic theology. Again, if you want to quote, do your homework.

7. Mary, Aisha, and Historical Honesty

You accuse Muslims of projecting modern morality into the past, but you did it first with your ridicule of Aisha’s age. The reality is, both Islamic and Christian history contain cultural norms you would never accept today. Don’t weaponize historical context when it suits you, and then call others pathetic for pointing out yours.

Also, your Bible is silent on Mary’s age, and ancient Jewish culture married young. If it troubles you now, that’s a modern problem—not a scriptural one.

8. Did Jesus Complete His Mission?

You said: “Was his mission interrupted?” Then answer this: If he was crucified (as you believe) and will return again (as Christians also believe), was the first visit sufficient or not? Islam holds he will return—not to "complete a failed mission," but to fulfill divine decree. That’s a very different paradigm. If your Christ succeeded, why is he coming back? Be consistent.

9. Do Muslims Obey Jesus?

Yes—we obey Jesus as a prophet of God, not as divine. His original message (Tawheed – worship God alone) is the same message as all prophets, including Muhammad ﷺ. The Qur’an states:

> “Say, [O Muhammad], ‘We believe in Allah and what was revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob… and what was given to Moses and Jesus...’” (Qur’an 2:136)

But we don’t obey later theological innovations falsely attributed to him by later councils and scribes. That is not "disobedience to Jesus," but obedience to the truth of Jesus.

10. Finality of Prophethood and New Nations

You cited Qur’an 16:36: "We sent a messenger to every nation..." Yes, and Muhammad ﷺ was sent to all mankind—hence, the need for no more messengers. Qur’an 34:28:

> “We have not sent you except to all of mankind, as a bringer of glad tidings and a warner.”

Islam is not limited to Arabs or the Middle East. It is global, universal, final.

11. “What is the Gospel Muhammad taught?”

Excellent question. The Arabic word Injeel (Gospel) refers to the original revelation given to Jesus—not the later texts compiled by anonymous authors. The “good news” Muhammad ﷺ brought is the final call to monotheism and mercy. It is this:

> “Say, Indeed, my Lord has guided me to a straight path—a correct religion, the way of Abraham, inclining toward truth. And he was not of the polytheists.” (Qur’an 6:161)

And that:

> “And We have not sent you [O Muhammad], except as a mercy to the worlds.” (Qur’an 21:107)

That is the good news: that guidance has come. Final, preserved, and universal.

Final Thought:

You have misrepresented Islam, misunderstood its message, and mishandled its scriptures. If you wish to debate, bring arguments—not arrogant diatribes. We don’t need to appeal to emotional manipulation or vague allegories. Islam is clear. Its message is clear. And our response to hostility is, as always, truth spoken with strength and clarity.

> “Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best…” (Qur’an 16:125)

But if your way is aggression and contempt, then don’t be surprised when we respond not with silence, but with knowledge, clarity, and strength.

CreativeOrbit AntiChristian TenQ gohf

You make some fundamental assumptions
1. Who is ISA? For as Christians and Jews, we don't know him!
2. Who is Allah? We look in the Scriptures used by the Jews and Christians and we don't know him!

You say someone cannot answer your questions without referencing Christianity BUT can you answer yours without referencing Christianity or Judaism?

As an Example:
1. Who is Israel in the Qur'an?
2. What is the meaning of the names Gabriel and Ishmael?

You misquoted
"This day I have perfected for you your religion..." (Qur’an 5:3)
For it is completely untrue!






Please, if you have questions, throw them to me. But also be ready to answer my own questions.

It is glaring to see that it is IMPOSSIBLE that BOTH Christianity and Islam lead to paradise
Do you agree with this statement?


I dislike lies:
According to Qur'an 19:71-72 ALL Muslims will enter the fire at least temporarily . It is a decree of Allah!

JimRohn:
In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Just

Dear BibleInterpreta,

I appreciate your attempt to engage with difficult scriptural texts in a way that seeks moral and spiritual clarity. However, from an Islamic standpoint, your interpretative framework raises several significant concerns—both theological and methodological—that must be addressed directly.

1. Allegorizing Divine Commands: A Risk of Subjectivism

While your appeal to symbolic or internal interpretations may seem spiritually profound, it risks detaching divine revelation from its objective moral and historical grounding. To reinterpret explicit commands such as “destroy Amalek” or “wipe out Canaan” purely as metaphors for internal struggle may feel ethically palatable, but it represents a departure from scriptural integrity and historical accountability.

From the Islamic tradition, we are taught that revelation (wahy) is not ambiguous poetry open to limitless allegory. The Qur’an says:

> “And We have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things, and as guidance and mercy…” (Qur’an 16:89)

The Qur’an does contain metaphors, yes—but these are clear and deliberate. Legal, historical, and ethical passages are not to be spiritualized into abstraction in a way that nullifies their moral implications.

2. Rewriting Difficult History Does Not Redeem It

You say, “This isn’t a denial of history, but a shift in focus.” Respectfully, such reframing borders on revisionism. Scripture must be read with reverence, but also honesty. If there are problematic or violent directives in earlier scriptures, the answer is not to spiritualize them away, but to acknowledge the need for later, clarifying revelation—which is precisely what Islam provides.

In Islam, we do not need to reinterpret morally troubling texts beyond recognition because the Qur’an provides a consistent ethic rooted in divine justice and mercy. It prohibits transgression, clarifies rules of engagement, forbids compulsion in religion, and condemns the unjust taking of life.

> “Whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land—it is as if he had slain mankind entirely.” (Qur’an 5:32)

3. Symbolism without Shari’ah Leads to Ethical Relativism

Your statement emphasizes inner transformation—something Islam also emphasizes—but not at the expense of clear moral boundaries and real-world obligations. Without divine law (shari’ah), “internal” interpretation becomes subject to personal whims, risking the erosion of accountability and justice.

This is why Islam offers a balance: internal purification (tazkiyah) is essential, but so is upholding objective moral commands revealed by God. Symbolism alone does not build just societies; divinely revealed ethics do.

4. Justice and Revelation Must Be Anchored in Reality

While you urge not to “weaponize scripture,” the danger does not lie in taking scripture seriously, but in reading it selectively or mystically. Islam has never used its scripture to justify indiscriminate violence—because the Qur’an is self-consistent and morally cohesive. When you say the Bible should not be taken literally in certain places, the natural question arises: Who decides what is literal and what is symbolic? If that standard is subjective, then scripture ceases to be a clear guide and becomes vulnerable to manipulation or dismissal.

5. The Role of Final Revelation

Islam recognizes that previous scriptures contained both truth and alterations. The Qur’an came not to erase them, but to confirm the truth within them and correct human distortions:

> “To you We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the Scripture that came before it, and as a criterion over it...” (Qur’an 5:48)

Where previous texts leave ambiguity or open the door to moral confusion, the Qur’an brings clarity. It protects us from justifying harm not by reinterpreting past violence into metaphor, but by replacing it with a final revelation that is universal, preserved, and ethically sound.

Conclusion

Your effort to highlight inner spiritual struggle is appreciated, but it must be grounded in a theology that honors both divine justice and divine speech. Islam provides that grounding—through a final revelation that is clear, preserved, and applicable in both the soul and society.

We do not need to choose between symbolism and ethics. Islam embraces both—within the limits set by God.

وَاللَّهُ يَهْدِي مَن يَشَاءُ إِلَىٰ صِرَاطٍ مُّسْتَقِيمٍ
“And Allah guides whom He wills to a straight path.” (Qur’an 2:213)

BibleInterpreta AntiChristian TenQ CreativeOrbit gofh

I don't seem to understand you!
Are you saying that the God of the Jews and Christians is unjust by commanding the elimination of some tribes?

1. So, why would Al-LAH be out of place as this is supported by the naming convention of the daughters of Al-LAH Al-Lat, Al-Uzza and Al-Manat
2. Tell me if you know the meaning of Gabriel, Ishmael, Israel?
3. It seems you don't know that depending of the dialect and culture amongst the Arabs, AL-, IL- and EL- are synonyms

The Fear of the Truth is driving you away isn't it?

AntiChristian:
Of course. I get work to do!

Where did i mentioned ONLY the definite article AL-? Please show me?

Allah's name in whatever language Moses spoke.



Go and continue with whoever mentioned AL- with you.

I engaged your lies with Arabic grammar as regards prepositions and genitive case!

So, what was your argument of the definite article AL- with respect to Allah?
Was it a mistake from your side?



Allah's name is in what ever Language Moses spoke!?

Use your left thumb to touch your nose!
You are a person who contours lies with ease.

If Allah 's name is translatable, why don't you Muslims translate it into different languages?

BTW:
Names are not translated BUT pronounced according to the intonation of a tribe and the source from where they acquired the name of the identity.


Again,
What name did Moses call His God?

gohf:
lol I did not ignore their answers if you understood the discuss and kept track of it, you would realize that I asked them to explain which they failed to do and even ignored. If you tell me the sun is white and I ask you to explain to me why it looks yellow and you say it is white, is that me ignoring the answer or questioning the logic behind such an answer. Or are you expecting me to believe and accept whatever you all respond as an answer to my query?

just look at yourself, instead of answering the question, you are analyzing the question to strawman it, isn't that, in your words, intellectual dishonesty?
First off, I NEVER ASKED nor mentioned anything about Jesus coming as a new lawgiver. The question now is, where did you get the justification to deviate from what I asked and insinuate a betrayal or a deliberate misinterpretion if you are not making baseless accusations to an obviously simple question?

One who is wise and has understanding would have realize where and when I asked, based on Jesus using the Quran to judge would Muhammad follow him. Can't keep repeating the same logical question based on your fellows interpretation and have you here call it a misunderstanding of Islamic eschatology, blame it on those who brought about the misunderstanding and leave the innocent question alone if you cannot understand nor answer it.

Now Jesus who will rule by the law given to Muhammad, will Muhammad submit to Jesus ruling, based on what you have said? You can twist and avoid the question but it should be simple enough for you to answer.

Let me add this as well, Jesus following the Quran does that make him a follower of Muhammad who was used to bring the Quran or a follower of Allah.

This thing should be simple enough, Allah sends Muhammad with a message then appoints someone else to judge with that message. Are you saying Muhammad is equal to Allah or above the one who will judge others with the Quran?



TenQ gohf AntiChristian CreativeOrbit

Mr JimRohn,
According to Allah, who is ISA?
Since ISA is a prophet, who was he sent to?
What is the meaning of his name?


Very simple questions that should be backed up with the Qur'an of Allah!

honesttalk21:
Incomplete education is worse than illiteracy.

Allah is unique and a word not a compound word Al and lah. No if compounding it will be al - ilah not Allah which isn't a composite of Al and lah in the ksense you speak

So, why do you say

Abdul-LAH (the father of your prophet)
Bisimi-LAH (praise be to LAH)
Alhamdu li-LAH (Praise be to LAH)


This is supported by the naming convention of the daughters of Al-LAH Al-Lat, Al-Uzza and Al-Manat
So, why would Al-LAH be out of place?.




1. Tell me if you know the meaning of Gabriel, Ishmael, Israel?
2. What is the meaning of Allah?
3. Which other prophet called his God by the Name Allah?

AntiChristian:
See great bunkum! Seriously you typed a lot of Holy Spirit dog-shite here! What is this? My best argument is that you are ignrant of Arabic grammer! Even the least of it you don't know!

Is it difficult to understand that the word "Allah" changes when a preposition comes before it?

Okay i think you should learn this simple Arabic Grammar once and for all. Na so Christians dey see Demon where nothing exists!

The Core Concept: Case Endings and Genitive Case
The primary mechanism behind these changes is the system of case endings in Arabic grammar. Arabic nouns have different forms depending on their grammatical function within a sentence. The three main cases are:

1. Nominative Case (الرفع - ar-rafʿ): This is the base form of a noun, typically used for the subject of a sentence. In the examples we've discussed, the original nouns (e.g., Al-Rahman, Al-Kitab) are usually in the nominative case.
2. Accusative Case (النصب - an-nasb): This case is used for the direct object of a verb.
3. Genitive Case (الجر - al-jarr): This case indicates possession, association, or the object of a preposition. This is the case that causes the changes we're observing.

How Prepositions Trigger the Genitive Case
When a noun is preceded by a preposition (like "of," "to," "in," "with," etc.), it automatically shifts into the genitive case. This shift often manifests in a few ways:

Change in Vowel Ending: The most common change is in the final vowel sound of the noun. The nominative case often ends in "-u" (pronounced as "oo", while the genitive case usually ends in "-i" (pronounced as "ee".

Loss of Nunation: Nouns in Arabic can be definite (specific, like "the book" or indefinite (general, like "a book". Indefinite nouns often have a final "-n" sound (called nunation). When a noun is in the genitive case, it often loses this nunation.
Changes to the Definite Article (Al-): The definite article "al-" (الـ), which means "the," might remain unchanged, or it might be assimilated into the following word, depending on the letters.

Examples Revisited:
Let's look at a couple of examples to illustrate these changes:

Original: Al-Kitab (الكتاب) - "The Book" (Nominative)

With Preposition: Kitābullah (كتاب الله) - "The Book of Allah" (Genitive)

Here, the noun Kitab (Book) changes to Kitabullah (Book of Allah) when combined with the name of Allah.
Original: Ar-Rahman (الرحمن) - "The Most Gracious" (Nominative)

With Preposition: Rahmatullah (رحمة الله) - "The mercy of Allah" (Genitive)

Here, the noun Rahman (Gracious) changes to Rahmatullah (Mercy of Allah) when combined with the name of Allah.

Abdullah (عبد الله) - "Servant of Allah"

Explanation: This name is a compound, with "Abd" (servant) in the genitive case because it's "servant of Allah." The "Allah" here is also in the genitive case, showing possession.
Bismillah (بسم الله) - "In the name of Allah"

Explanation: "Bi" (بِـ) is a preposition meaning "in" or "with." "Bismillah" translates to "In the name of Allah." The word "Allah" is in the genitive case because it is the object of the preposition "Bi."
Alhamdulillah (الحمد لله) - "Praise be to Allah"

Explanation: "Al-Hamdu" (الحمد) means "The praise." The preposition "Li" (لِـ) means "to" or "for." "Alhamdulillah" translates to "Praise to Allah." The word "Allah" is in the genitive case because it is the object of the preposition "Li."

Just admit that the Holy spirit failed you this time. Allah is not the same as Lah!

Repeating the same standard islamic narrative doesn't make it right.
Deliberately I have avoided using AL- as a definite article equivalent to "the"

But since you went there, it makes your case worse
1. Al-LAH will be equivalent to "the"- LAH still making LAH the name of your God
2. This is supported by the naming convention of the daughters of Al-LAH Al-Lat, Al-Uzza and Al-Manat
So, why would Al-LAH be out of place?.
3. Tell me if you know the meaning of Gabriel, Ishmael, Israel?
4. It seems you don't know that depending of the dialect and culture amongst the Arabs, AL-, IL- and EL- are synonyms

honesttalk21:
The question is where did these demons come from?

Is Satan a demon or head demon?

According to your Bible was he an angel?

Did he have a following amongst the angels that rebelled against almighty God with him

Feigning dumbness doesn't help your case.

Satan is NOT a Demon.
The Angels that were cast out of God's heaven are not demons. They are principalities, powers, and spiritual forces of wickedness in the high places.

Demons are spirits of Nephillims!

gohf:
this should be their biggest opportunity to win over heretics and atheists, but I am not sure they would be able to win over a level head person with basic logical reasoning with their contradictions which lead to more confusions that they are refusing to face. They should be seeing the benefits of being able to properly answer unbelievers and explain why they believe but their responses lack cognitive explanations.

I agree with you.
They cannot intellectually defend islamic claims so they have to resort to asserting their beliefs as if affirmation proves their position.

AntiChristian:
There's nothing like Lah in Qur'an 1:1 or even Qur'an 1:2 if you understand Arabic simulation.

This just shows how extremely ignorant you are in your claims.

"Bismi-llahi" means "In (the) name (of) Allah".

This "Bi-smi" has a preposition that also affect the word "Allah" when joined to it.

Bismi + Allah = Bismillahi!

Alhamdu + li + Allah = Alhamdulillah.

Only the first Hamzatul wasl is dropped as a result of the prepositions in both cases!

No LAH anywhere but Allah assimilated in grammatical functions!

We still need to ask you sir
Abdul-LAH (the father of your prophet)
Bisimi-LAH (praise be to LAH)
Alhamdu li-LAH (Praise be to LAH)


Your best argument is just to admit that LAH and ALLAH is the same thing.

Just to tease you as I know that you will hide under Arabic grammar. I have a sentence for you


Arabic Aliah is a name of a person just as Allah is a name of your God. Notice that we did not remove the AL before the name Aliah to make a sentence.

"كل الثناء يعود إلى علياء على عملها الممتاز."
Pronunciation:
Kul ath-thanaa' ya'ud ila 'Aliaa 'ala 'amalihā al-mumtāz.

gohf:
Sir I can pick up a number of points from what you wrote

1. Some modern day Muslims are trying to change the meaning and interpretation of their own text.

This could mean that you are telling us that the original meaning and usage of this text, especially the term Jihad, is being redefine to mean something which it is not. If this is true couldn't there be a genuine intention to them correcting it's meaning and usage. Which could also state that they admit that they believe that their earlier practitioners of their texts were wrong.

Islam is being modernised daily by islamic scholars.
The problem Muslims scholars are facing now is the INTERNET because it keeps record of their religious sources. It is now difficult for them to deceive people as usual.

What people don't realise is that no Muslim take the Qur'an or Hadith at their face value. They rely on the opinion of their own scholars for interpretation and understanding.

Just go to www.sunnah.com and search for Jihad, it would be plain to you that 95% of the time, Jihad is in the context of WAR, KILLING and FIGHTING.

Modern scholar want to portray Islam as peaceful BUT it is only because they lack the political dominance and power to impose SHARIAH.

gohf:
2. Could we also infer that apart from it not fostering peace, there's a possibility that even if the war nature isn't popularly practice the intimidation and subtly discrimination is still in practice as a form of Jihad by those in power able to do so. As we can't be counting those unable to win a war nor rich enough, can we say that if Muslims are the ruling class, the wealthy they would enforce jihad or would they abolish it with their power

Muslims are peaceful ONLY when they lack the political power and population to enforce Islam on others.QED!

In Islam, Deception (Taqqiya) is NORMAL as they believe that Islam is perpetually at war AND as long as the LIE was to defend Allah, Mohammed and Islam, it is justified.

This is why Muslim scholars tell lies to their followers.
Muslim scholars tell another kind of lies to Christians and Jews
AND the Followers believe both LIES without question

Quran 5:101
"O believers! Do not ask about any matter which, if made clear to you, may disturb you. But if you inquire about what is being revealed in the Quran, it will be made clear to you. Allah has forgiven what was done ˹in the past˺."

They are forbidden to ask necessary questions about the Qur'an and Hadiths.

honesttalk21:
The same diarrhea or what? Rather than spewing your vomit why not tell how my summation that fallen angels are demons? You do not have the capacity for that?


Luke 8:2 "and also some women who had been cured of evil spirits and diseases: Mary (called Magdalene) from whom seven demons had come out"

Matt 8:28-28
When he arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes, two demon-possessed men coming from the tombs met him. They were so violent that no one could pass that way.

29 "What do you want with us, Son of God?" they shouted. "Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?

Mr know it all or too much tenq please tell what the origin of demons is?
Maybe you can have gohf help if you're too lazy or incapable of doing the research yourself.

Does the creation story in the Bible address it? Quit the childish haughtiness and say.

Did I not ask you some basic questions you avoided like a plague? Instead of you answering the questions, either you or your admin friend thinks it is honourable to delete my responses.

1. Do Jinn in Islam possess some people?
2. Do demons in Christianity possess people?
Now,
3. Do you have ANY evidence that Angels can possess people in Islam?
4. Do you have ANY evidence that Angels can possess people in Christianity?


Again:
There is no explicit scripture linking demons to fallen angels. If you know one, let me know.
Here is the origin of Demons:
1. The hybrid offspring between Fallen Angels and Human women are Nephillims. Genesis 6:1-4
2. During the Flood of Noah, God killed of everything man, woman, animals and Nephillims on the earth. Genesis 7:21-23
3. The Spirit/Souls of Humans went to Sheol the of the dead. 1Peter 3:18-20 shows Jesus offering them salvation
4. The angels that committed the atrocities were arrested and imprisoned with everlasting chains Jude 1:6 , 2Peter 2:4
5. The Spirits of Nephillims (Human/Angel Hybrid) dispossessed of their bodies remained on the Earth. Thus, they crave Living bodies to possess like diseases!
6. Jesus thus called them Unclean Spirits who go roaming about the earth looking for rest. Matthew 12:43-45
7. Fallen Angels on the other hands do NOT need human or animal bodies for their complete nature as they are complete by themselves. However, they become principalities, powers over nations and spiritual wickedness in the high places. Ephesians 6:12. Christians do not wrestle with demons, we cast them out

So, Fallen Angels are NOT demons. Fallen Angels remain powerful principalities that influence evil in Nations. They never have to live in any human or animal bodies as they are complete by themselves in creation. Demons are like diseases and infections who need a living being to express themselves as they used to be with a body before God killed them off the earth



According to Islam, Allah created the Jinn
1. If Jinn are demons, could it be that the original source of demons is Allah?
2. Since Islamic Jinn can be Muslims or Christians etc. Did Allah send prophets to the Jinn and which prophets did Allah send?
3. Is there any prophet other than Mohammed who thinks that Demons/Jinn are created by God from smokeless fire?
4. If satan's offence was that he did NOT prostrate to Adam, what was the offence of the other Jinn that they were sent out of paradise?
5. Is it true that the Islamic paradise is in heaven (as Moses thinks that paradise was on earth)?

Unlike you, I answer direct questions
I am patiently waiting for you to AVOID answering any of my questions as usual.

You have two sets of questions: part one at the beginning of this post and part two at the end.

gohf:
Lol they will remove and block tire till they close down this thread

Don't mind them.

Since they removed the swearing to Islamic sections, I've noticed that. Initially I thought it was the Nairaland SpamBots until I saw that even screenshots were also deleted.

This can only only be humans behind the removals

gohf:
This is a response to someone's post that anything Jihad is evil, is this response supposed to be a form of justification for Jihad?

Tenq what's your take on this

This is Islamic Taqqiya (deception)

Jihad simply means holy war/struggle.
It is enjoined for Muslims to wage jihad on all non-muslims. Because in Islam, there are only two divides.
1. Dar al-Islam ("house or abode of Islam" or "house of peace": This refers to lands under Muslim rule where Islamic law (Sharia) prevails and Muslims live in peace and security. It includes both Muslims and non-Muslims (dhimmis) who are protected under Muslim governance.
2. Dar al-Harb ("house or abode of war": This denotes lands not under Muslim rule or Sharia law, considered enemy territories where, classically, a state of conflict or war could exist until they accept Muslim sovereignty or peace treaties.

Muslims should kill idolaters if they refuse to become Muslims. They don't have a choice

Christians and Jews must convert to Islam or pay the Jizyah (humiliation tax) and live as a second class citizen if they will not convert to Islam.

This is Jihad as defined by Allah even though modern Muslims will want to redefine Jihad to mean means "struggle" or "striving" in the path of Allah and it is defined as encompasses multiple dimensions such as struggle (establishing Islam) with a Muslim's Wealth, Money, Position , Verbal, Intellectual and real warfare.

Qur'an 9:41
So go out, no matter whether you are lightly or heavily armed, and struggle in God’s way with your possessions and your lives: this is better for you, if you only knew.

The hadiths also primarily define Jihad in terms of WAR and WARFARE!

gohf:
ah several months ago was my first reaction but on reading it, I couldn't help but laugh and understand why honesttalk was provoked but has he answered how the demon was caught and tied and if it's something only that man could or others in Muslim do it as well

Don't mind Muslims.

Their default state is that Mohammed and their Scholars cannot be wrong. On that they base all their faith and salvation .

Unfortunately, the man is a chronic pathological liar easy to decode! Unfortunately, because of the default state of Muslims, they make excuses for his lies and fabrications.

Only Mohammed as usual saw the Afreet.
Allah hu Akbar!