NewStats: 3,264,408 , 8,183,638 topics. Date: Tuesday, 10 June 2025 at 11:06 PM 726h32

When you mis-anwer any question, you expect one to accept it as TRUTH without showing you where you were making conjectures.

Example:
1. You insisted that Jesus was created by BE when there are evidences to show that this is UNTRUE

2. In our discussion on wariduha in the Quran 19:71-72, you say the Qur'an say that you will over it (Hell)

But you know that this is completely UNTRUE.

Let me attach my response before the Nairaland bots flagged my post

JimRohn:
Thank you for your follow-up. I will respond to your claims in sequence, using logic, context, and respect. You are free to critique Islam, but mocking is not an argument — it is a substitute for one.
1. On Qur’an 75:37 and the Origin of Man

You wrote:

> “Is the human sperm? This is ancient error. The Qur’an should’ve corrected it.”

This objection misunderstands both the language and purpose of the verse. The Qur’an 75:37 does not say the human is sperm, but that he began from a sperm drop (“nutfah min maniyyin yumnā”). This is a statement of biological origin — not essence.

Even modern embryology describes the human being’s creation as beginning from the union of sperm and egg. The Qur’an’s phrasing is consistent with this and never claims sperm alone constitutes the full human — rather, it humbles the arrogant man by reminding him of his base beginnings. This is not a biological error; it is moral reflection using accurate biological reference.

To call this an “ancient error” is itself an outdated polemic — not a meaningful objection.

We know it is a scientific error that sperms become babies: my contention is that Allah should know better .

I am quoting Allah, but you don't want me to quote him but yourself and the scholars you believe.

Judge!

JimRohn:

2. On the 40 Days Hadith (Sahih Muslim 2644)
You quoted the hadith:
> “When the drop of semen remains in the womb for 40 or 45 nights…”
Your objection assumes this means sperm physically remains unchanged for 40 days. But again, this is a misunderstanding of language and genre.

The hadith does not claim that sperm survives for 40 days. It describes the first stage of embryonic development as “nutfah” — a stage, not a substance. Classical and modern scholars alike have interpreted this as referring to the embryo's initial developmental phase.

Your interpretation lacks familiarity with how both embryological and theological texts speak in stages, not microscopic permanence. If one insists on hyper-literal reading, the same issues arise in biblical embryology (e.g. Genesis 2:7 – man made from dust, breathed into directly).

Your sarcasm (“I guess my comprehension is not like Muslims”) does not mask the lack of contextual reading.

Unfortunately, quoting your prophet, this is a scientific error.
BUT
You would prefer that I quote you and the scholars you subscribe to rather than your prophet!

Please Judge this yourself.

JimRohn:

3. On Dhul Qarnayn and the Sun Setting
You ask:
> “How could there be people where the sun sets into a murky spring?”

Your confusion arises from treating a perceived event as a cosmic phenomenon. The Qur’an says:

> “Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of dark mud...” (Qur’an 18:86)

The Arabic verb “wajada” (he found) refers to Dhul Qarnayn’s experience — not an objective astronomical event. This is classical Arabic usage. Even today, in English, we say “the sun set into the sea” — without meaning it literally entered the water.

You then argue:

> “There couldn’t be people at the horizon where the sun sets.”

That’s precisely the point — it’s a visual perspective. Standing at a shoreline, one may “see” the sun dipping into the water — but the people are simply located near that westernmost point. There’s no contradiction unless you deny metaphor and perspective in all language.

If you reject such expressions, then Biblical phrases like “sun stood still” (Joshua 10:13) or “four corners of the Earth” (Revelation 7:1) must also be literal errors. But you likely interpret those metaphorically — and rightly so.

Allah says that Dhul Qarnyn reached the setting place of the sun!

You say, I should disbelieve that but believe the re-interpretations you are giving it. Doesn't this make sense to you that I choose you over Allah?

Secondly, I showed you the physical impossibility of the act of Dhul Qarnyn's perceptions.

The sun ALWAYS set in the Horizon
The Horizon is the farthest place a human can see of the earth.
At that distance, it is IMPOSSIBLE to find a people at this Horizon because, the nearer you move towards any horizon, the farther it moves away from you.

Don't you get this simple thing!?

JimRohn:

4. On the Wall of Gog and Magog
You claim:
> “If the wall was made of iron and copper, we would’ve found it via aeromagnetic tools.”
This assumes far too much:
That we know the precise location (we don’t),

That the wall remains intact (the Qur’an says it will eventually collapse — 18:98),

That it wasn’t buried, dismantled, or eroded over millennia,

That all iron or copper deposits must be detectable today (not always true — mineral surveys are not omniscient).

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Many historical sites (e.g., Sodom and Gomorrah, Ebla) were long thought mythical until archaeological discovery proved otherwise. Your argument rests not on proof, but on assumptions.

Yes, just like under Nigeria is another country of giants deep within the earth. Trust me, it's only because we have not dug deep enough, we would have found this people!
SMH!

This is how you sound.

The whole earth except the Antarctica has been mapped for aeromagnetic data. The whole earth including Nigeria had been mapped for aeromagnetic data. Any significant iron deposits would have been noted sir.

The structure is too huge to be missed as it is not a pin we are looking for but huge IRON walls (not even the weakly magnetic iron ores)

JimRohn:

5. On Surah Al-Kahf and the Sleepers of the Cave
You mockingly said:
> “Allah turned them left and right... I could say the same about Batman!”
The story of the sleepers (Qur’an 18:9–26) is not myth — it is a retelling of a well-known historical tradition, also recorded in Christian texts (e.g., the “Seven Sleepers of Ephesus”).

The Qur’an gives its version and explicitly distinguishes speculation from truth (18:22), then reminds readers that Allah alone knows their true number. This is consistent with the Qur’an’s method: recounting spiritually significant stories without indulging in trivia, while grounding them in divine authority.

Mockery about “Batman” does not disprove the narrative. It only proves a dismissive attitude toward any religious text not your own. That is not reasoned critique — it’s intellectual prejudice.

I challenge you then to show that the sleepers of the cave is a historical reality!

All I did was to show you that Allah claimed to be involved with this myth as Allah thinks that it was a real story.


I used Batman to show that talk is cheap: you did not believe me did you? Batman stories are myths, thus should you believe me when I insert myself into the myth. Judge please!

I am waiting!

JimRohn:

Final Thought
You’re welcome to reject Islam. But when you critique it, do so fairly. Interpreting every verse hyper-literally while granting your own tradition metaphorical flexibility is not logical — it’s biased.

The Qur’an repeatedly invites people to reflect:

> “Do they not reflect upon the Qur’an, or are there locks upon their hearts?” (Qur’an 47:24)

If you wish to discuss further, I’m happy to continue — but let us elevate the discussion beyond ridicule and into reason.

No problem!
I have chosen to value the words of Allah and the words of Mohammed higher than you or your scholars re-interpretations of what is clearly stated.
That seem to be my crime!

JimRohn:
Thank you for your continued engagement.
I appreciate the effort you are making to explain your position. I will respond to your main claims in the order you presented them, aiming to maintain a rational, respectful, and theological tone grounded in Islamic monotheism and logical analysis.

1. Jesus is “Human but Not Human”?
You state that Jesus is “human like us yet not human” because he did not inherit sin from Adam. But this is a contradiction in . Something cannot be both X and not-X at the same time and in the same sense.

If Jesus is fully human, he shares in human nature — which, according to Christian doctrine, includes the fallen state due to Adam’s sin. If he does not inherit this state, then he is not fully human as defined by your own theology. You cannot affirm and deny his full humanity simultaneously.

You quote Hebrews 4:15, which says Jesus was tempted in every way yet without sin. But this raises a deeper issue: if Jesus was incapable of sin due to his divine nature, was the temptation genuine? And if he could have sinned, then how can God be at risk of moral failure?

This dilemma again exposes the logical conflict in claiming Jesus is simultaneously fully God (infallible) and fully man (fallible) without division, confusion, or contradiction.

Logical truth exists differently within the physical and spiritual state.
Do you concede that It is an illogical fallacy that an animal called Al-Burak will take your prophet from the earth to the seven heavens! Doe it makes it untrue?

Your argument is abysmally feeble. From the point of view of the Trinity, these are logically possible, logically feasible and Truth at the same time.

JimRohn:

2. Paradox ≠ Truth

You say: “Whether you like it or not, it is a reality that God can be unlimited and limited without contradicting His Almightiness.”

This is not a “reality” — it is an assertion that violates the law of non-contradiction. You are simply claiming that paradox is proof of divinity. But by this standard, any incoherent doctrine could be justified as “divine mystery.”

Islam does not reduce God to logic — but Islam upholds that God is not illogical. Allah is not subject to our limitations, but He is not self-contradictory either. Being all-powerful does not mean doing what is absurd, such as creating a square circle or being infinite and finite simultaneously.

Your position exempts itself from rational inquiry by appealing to paradox. But a claim that cannot be falsified or logically examined is not proof — it is dogma.

Beings stubbornly ignorant and dogmatic doesn't suddenly make your claim and misunderstanding the truth.
Process this Logically:
-YHWH is everywhere as the Holy Spirit
-YHWH is on His throne in the Heavens
-YHWH is anywhere in Creation where His power and manifest presence is required as the Word.

Do you oppose the notion that God Himself is a PARADOX as nothing in existence is Like Him?

If you do, your argument then holds no water!

JimRohn:

3. Divine Descent and Throne Theology
You mock the Islamic concept of God descending from His Throne, suggesting an angel might "overthrow Him." This is a theological caricature.

In Islam, Allah is not spatially confined like a creature on a throne. When we say He is “above the heavens,” this affirms His transcendence — not physical location. Allah is not a body in a place, nor is He vulnerable to space or time. His Knowledge, Power, and Will encom all creation, yet He is not part of creation.

By contrast, the Christian claim that God became creation (i.e., human) makes Him subject to space, time, hunger, ignorance, and death — all of which directly contradict divine perfection.

Sorry, Allah is confined to his throne as Taoheed according to your prophet.
1. Is it untrue that Allah descend every third part of the night to the our lowest heaven to listen to the prayers of Muslims?
2. Is it untrue that Allah's throne is carried by eight mountain goats that are angels?
Do you thus concede that if these eight angels are not infinite, then Allah's throne is not infinite, thus Allah cannot be infinite but localized?

You still must do Straw man argument:
-I asked you the question: when Jibril became a perfect man, did he cease being an angel?
-If God is a Trinity as explained to you, when He incarnated (the Word becoming Human with human limitations), doesn't his make YHWH limited?

Sorry: poor argument sir!

JimRohn:

4. Misunderstanding of Islamic Sacrifice
You accuse Muslims of not understanding “sacrifice,” especially the sacrifice of Abraham (Ibrahim). But in Islam, the event of Ibrahim's willingness to sacrifice his son is preserved — not to atone for sin, but to demonstrate obedience.
The Qur’an explicitly states:

> “It is neither their meat nor their blood that reaches Allah, but your piety.” (Qur’an 22:37)

This verse dismantles the idea that blood itself is salvific. Sacrifice in Islam is symbolic of submission — not a ransom for sin. Eid al-Adha commemorates obedience, not divine death.

As for the variety of sacrifices in the Mosaic law, Islam does not reject the fact that God ordained sacrifices for various purposes — purification, thanksgiving, vows, etc. What Islam rejects is the deification of sacrifice as a necessary vehicle for salvation.

If you claimed you understand sacrifice with respect to Abraham
1. Let's assume that God wanted to test if Abraham would withhold his son from Him, why did God provide a Ram for sacrifice: what does sacrifice mean to Allah?
2. Why was Allah's animal called a great Ransom? Note: From the point Abraham was deemed to have obeyed God, all that was necessary was for God to tell him that he ed the test and case closed
3. Who with evidence was the Sacrificial son of Abraham?
4. Why is there a big disconnect between the religion of Abraham, Moses and David that requires different kinds of sacrifices?

[quote author=JimRohn post=135654002]
5. Can Allah Do What YHWH Does?

You ask: Can Allah be somewhere and everywhere at the same time? Can Allah be infinite and limited at the same time?

Let’s be clear: To ask “Can Allah be infinite and limited at the same time?” is like asking, “Can Allah be perfectly wise and foolish simultaneously?” The answer is no — not because of inability, but because self-contradiction is not a valid attribute of divinity.

Islam teaches that Allah does whatever He wills — but His Will is always in harmony with His Perfection. He does not will imperfection, limitation, or error for Himself. That is not a limitation on Allah — that is the perfection of His nature.

To say that God must be “limited” in order to prove His power is a category error. Perfection does not require becoming imperfect to demonstrate greatness.

God can choose to be infinitely wise and foolish at the same time, but even God's foolishness is incredibly higher than ours.
I sometimes ago speaking to a toddler at the level of an ignorant toddler, does that make me stupid?
I playing with my 5 year old nephew (boy) doing WWW wrestling where I allowed him to throw me to the ground and beat me by knockout in a wrestling match. If you had seen the match, it would have been a wonder to you how a toddler beat up and adult in a wrestling match.

Did your prophet not say, Allah is Hidden behind the hijab (veil): why does Allah need to reduce his power for man and angels to interact with him?

Now, answer my questions;
Can Allah be somewhere and everywhere at the same time?
Can Allah be limited and unlimited in power simultaneously?
Can Allah be Just and Merciful at the same time without contradicting each other?

[quote author=JimRohn post=135654002]
6. Uniqueness Does Not Prove Truth
You conclude by saying: “Unless someone else can do what the Trinity claims, I stand on my ground.” But uniqueness alone does not prove truth. A claim must be coherent, not merely unique.

Islam also affirms that “There is nothing like unto Him” (Qur’an 42:11) — but it does not require logical contradiction to express God’s uniqueness. The One God is eternal, self-sufficient, and absolutely unique — without needing to become man or suffer death.

Final Thought

Your theology assumes the truth of the Trinity and then treats every objection as a “comprehension problem.” But I invite you to consider: if your view of God contradicts reason, and then requires suspending reason to believe, are you truly worshipping the God of Abraham — or a doctrine invented by later councils?

Islam maintains the pure monotheism of every Prophet — from Adam to Noah to Abraham to Moses to Jesus to Muhammad (peace be upon them all). Not one of them ever claimed that God became man. And not one of them taught that salvation required God's death.

The God of Islam is not limited by logic — He is exalted above contradiction.

I never said that uniqueness mean the truth, I am just asserting what you already know that God is Unique except your objective is to deny that.

I don't know you understand some little physics as
Islam is like a Physicist who is locked in the realm of Classical physics and sees Quantum physics as Illogical.

The uniqueness of YHWH makes Him an Enigma: the more you study Him, the more you see that you are unqualified.

Islam's Taoheed is an attempt to redefining the Oneness of God described as Trinity. Unfortunately, you arrived at a oneness of Allah like the oneness of created things. Unfortunately, the Taoheed fails miserably in showing that Allah is Omnipotent, Omnipresent and Omniscient! How can this limitation be the Almighty God!

JimRohn:
Thank you again for continuing this discussion. I value serious dialogue, especially when we are engaging profound matters of theology and divine nature. I will respond to your key claims in an orderly manner, aiming for clarity and mutual understanding, even in disagreement.

1. Paradox vs. Contradiction: Distinguishing Concepts

You claim, “God is paradox without resolution” and equate this with the mystery of His existence without beginning. But this is a category mistake.

There is a critical difference between a mystery (something beyond full human comprehension) and a contradiction (something that defies logic itself).

Saying “God is eternal while creation has a beginning” is a mystery, but it does not violate logic.

Saying “God is finite and infinite, limited and unlimited, dying and undying at the same time in the same nature” is a contradiction—not just mysterious, but logically incoherent.

Appealing to God’s transcendence does not give license to affirm contradictions. A contradiction is not resolved by attributing it to divine mystery—because the nature of contradiction is that it cannot be true in any realm, including the divine.

In Islamic theology, God's greatness is not defined by His ability to embody opposites, but by His absolute perfection and consistency.

> “There is nothing like unto Him” (Qur'an 42:11),
and this includes that God does not assume the nature of the created.

LOL,
Anything that violates logic but is nevertheless True is a mystery sir.
And do you deny that God is unlike Anyone or Anything in creation?

Do you agree that if God exists and Heis not visible nor measurable in any sense, this would be a logical contradiction BUT you are not an Atheist: you believe in the unseen!

Your argument falls apart!

JimRohn:

2. God’s Presence Does Not Require Incarnation

You argue that because God is “everywhere,” He can also be finite. But that does not follow.
Being omnipresent does not entail embodiment. It means God's knowledge, will, and authority extend to all of creation—without Him becoming part of creation.

In Islam, God is Al-Qayyum (The Self-Sustaining), transcendent and not subject to space, time, or matter. He does not need to “become flesh” to act within the world. He commands by will, not by incarnation.

The concept of “Word of God” (e.g., kun fayakūn) in the Qur’an signifies His creative command, not an independent divine person that becomes incarnate. Thus, the comparison to the Islamic understanding of the “Word” is not equivalent.

You got me wrong. I never said that God's Omnipresence requires incarnation because YHWH as a spirit is already Omnipresent. What I said was that YHWH can be Omnipresent and Somewhere at the same time without violation in nature. Can Allah do that?
If he is not, how can he be Almighty!

JimRohn:

3. Who Set the Legal Condition for Blood Sacrifice?

You stated that “the Law of Sin is that sin must be punished by death.” But who set this law?
If God is the lawgiver, then He is not obligated to punish sin with death. He can forgive freely, especially if repentance is sincere.

If God must punish regardless of repentance, then this portrays God as bound by an abstract law higher than Himself—which undermines His sovereignty.

From the Islamic perspective, God’s justice and mercy are not in conflict. He forgives whom He wills (Qur’an 39:53) and holds to whom He wills—with no injustice done.

Furthermore, forgiveness is not made void by mercy. The very essence of divine mercy is that the wrongdoer is shown comion when justice is due. That is not injustice; it is higher justice—because the one wronged (God) is also the forgiver.

LOL!
In every forgiveness, the forgiver pays the price.

If I slapped you BUT you decided to forgive me even though you could deal ruthlessly with me, don't you see that You bear the cost of forgiving me in of sucking in the Ridicule, Pain or Shame I have cost you!?

Again, you have shown that Islam does not understand the gravity of Sin as attacking the integrity of God by making his will and command to fail on our !

JimRohn:

4. Is Substitutionary Atonement Just?
You describe Jesus taking upon himself the sin of the world. But this raises a moral concern:
How is it just for the innocent to suffer in place of the guilty?
In human courts, we reject such substitution as unjust, even if done voluntarily.

Islamic theology strongly affirms:

> “No soul shall bear the burden of another” (Qur’an 6:164).

True justice is that each person is held able for their own actions—and true mercy is that God can forgive without needing an innocent life to be sacrificed.

First your Hadiths contradict the Qur'an on this!
Secondly,
If Jesus was human like us, he cannot justly substitute us for our sin because he himself requires atonement. This is the purpose for sacrifices for sin in the religion of Moses. The Lamb or Goat who did not commit sin pays the penalty for sin of the sinner.

If your teenage son has an accident and with your car damaged a persons vehicle BUT you as the father payed the damage, to you this substitution is unjust!?

It is a failed logic sir!

JimRohn:

5. On the “Gravity of Sin” and God's Sovereignty
You claim we Muslims do not understand the gravity of sin. On the contrary, Islam treats sin with great seriousness. Disobedience to the Creator is rebellion—but not one that renders God helpless or forces Him into self-sacrifice.

You say sin “violates the integrity of God” because it resists His command (kun fayakūn). But if God’s will is truly sovereign, then no act of the creature can undermine His divine essence. Sin harms the sinner—not God. God remains perfect and unthreatened.

To claim that God's command is “defeated” unless He punishes is to imply that His authority depends on response rather than essence—which is not true sovereignty.

You still clearly showed your lack of understanding of the gravity of Sin as to you , it is a trivial act that can be overlooked with no consequences by fiat.

God the Creator of the Universe gives the miniscule us a command: But you went ahead to commit several adulteries
AND
You think God's sovereignty has not been violated?

I laugh is Swahili! You certainly don't understand the gravity of Sin. Do that to a human king or president!

[quote author=JimRohn post=135653968]
6. Is Forgiveness Ever Free?

You conclude by saying forgiveness is “never free”—someone must pay. But this is not a universal moral truth; it is a specific theological premise of substitutionary atonement.

Forgiveness, by definition, is pardoning without demanding equivalent retribution. If God chooses to forgive out of mercy, it is not injustice, because He is the one wronged—and He is the judge.

In Islam, this is the glory of God:

> “And your Lord is the Forgiving, Full of Mercy. If He were to seize them for what they earned, He would hasten for them the punishment...” (Qur’an 18:58)

This balance of mercy and justice is not theoretical—it is divine perfection.

It is a universal Truth to assert that forgiveness is “never free”—someone must pay.

In every forgiveness, the one who is violated is the one who bears the cost of the forgiven. Mercy is the superior bearing the cost that should have accrued to the undeserving.

How this simple truth elude you is still a mystery to me.
If your teenage son broke the windscreen of your car, who bears the cost of replacement? Is it your son or you or no one?



[quote author=JimRohn post=135653968]
Conclusion:

To summarize:

Affirming that God can forgive without blood is not weakness—it is sovereignty.

Ascribing logical contradictions to God (finite/infinite, mortal/immortal simultaneously) undermines His perfection, not enhances it.

Justice does not require punishing the innocent for the guilty; it requires moral ability.

Mercy does not negate justice when the one forgiving is the very one sinned against.

I welcome continued dialogue—but only on the basis of respectful reasoning, not accusations of ignorance. If you believe the Christian model is coherent, then the task is not to say, “It’s a mystery,” but to demonstrate that it is not internally contradictory. That is a standard every theology must meet.

Would you like to continue this line of discussion with a focus on divine nature, or shift toward scriptural authority and interpretation?

I don't know if you agree that one of the original attributes of God is that He is JUST and MERCIFUL.

Being just required that He must punish sin and transgression. Being Merciful requires that He overlook the sin and transgression of men. God's wisdom is to institute the ordinance of sacrifice.

God provided His own Sacrificial Being perfect as a replacement for the cost of your offence. Thus, God executes justice that you as a sinner can by his mercy go free!

John 1:29:
"The next day John sees Jesus coming to him, and said, Behold the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world."

I invite you to the Messiah: for your salvation! The Messiah becomes your ransom from the punishment you deserve.


What do you think:
Is it possible to execute both total justice and total mercy on a violator of the law?
How?

jayAjoku:
wow you really believe everything the western media feeds you huh? so if they told you your father was a white man from arkansas you would believe them?

So, the western media fed me the news that the head of the western coalition is a Putin puppet!?

How you guys reason is pathetic!

Biodun556:
To those saying Russia is weak, could not defeat Ukraine. How many Russian cities look like these since the war began?

Now that Ukraine attacked Russia air bases and destroyed a lots of fighter jets. The war will become serious again.

Russia deliberately slowed down the war because because Eastern Ukraine occupied by Russia speakers has been taken from Ukraine. Also to stop millions of Ukrainian refugees continued influx to western Europe and US.

Ukrainian cities completely destroyed by the russian army
War

Which cities in Ukraine were completely destroyed by the russians?

Mariupol (Donetsk region)
Volnovakha (Donetsk region)
Sievierodonetsk (Luhansk region)
Maryinka (Donetsk region)
Soledar (Donetsk region)
Bakhmut (Donetsk region)
Air attacks on Ukrainian cities continue
Share:

According to estimates, as of the beginning of 2023, the russian army has launched about 5,000 missiles and 3,500 air strikes against Ukraine. Almost 1000 more strikes using kamikaze drones. These figures do not include shelling from artillery and multiple launch rocket systems.

Which cities in Ukraine were completely destroyed by the russians?

Settlements in Kharkiv, Kyiv, Odesa, Zaporizhzhia, Dnipro, Sumy,

Russia destroyed the cities they intend to take from Ukraine.

All the destroyed cities are no more in Ukraine but with Russia!

Russia had slowed down in the last two years because Ukraine went defensive and the loss of 1000 Russian soldiers per day with Tanks, Trucks, Artilleries is just too much for Russia

Tjra:

Voice of Ukraine but hand of the US.

This is Trump's way of getting back at Putin.

No sir!
.t
Trump is Putin's puppet!

jayAjoku:
you will just know the USA is helping ukraine covertly while ukraine is taking all the praise for their tactics

No sir!.

Trump is Putin's puppet!.

Thank God for Ukrainian drones, the war would have been over two years ago!

JimRohn:

6. On Jesus as “Word” and “Spirit” of God (Qur’an 4:171)

You claim that Jesus having the titles “Kalimatuhu” and “Ruhun minhu” implies he is divine or pre-existent.

Response:

No. The Qur’an clearly says:

> “Do not say ‘Three’ — Allah is but one God.” (Qur’an 4:171)

“Kalimatuhu” means a word from God — His command “Be” (kun) — as affirmed in Qur’an 3:59:

> “Indeed, the likeness of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam — He created him from dust, then said to him, ‘Be,’ and he was.”

I was correcting you calling Jesus a Soul rather than a Spirit in order to reduce Jesus to your own Standard Islamic narration.

JimRohn:

Adam was created by the same Word (command), yet you do not call Adam divine.

Unfortunately, Adam wasn't created by BE!
Was he?

Allah claimed that he created Adam with his two hands: is this UNTRUE?

JimRohn:

As for “Ruhun minhu” — all human souls come from God. Qur’an 32:9 says God breathed His spirit into Adam. Does that make Adam divine? No. It indicates honor — not divinity.

RUH Al-Qudus according to your Arabic would be the Holy Soul.
Is Jibril the Holy Spirit or the Holy Soul?

Muslims with twisting plain words to rebuild Islam!
Like I said:
Muslims behave like Allah and Mohammed are the worst communicators in the Universe.

Is it impossible to just hold them by their words without needing re-interpretations?

JimRohn:

Your attempt to distinguish Jesus from all others based on these titles is flawed. Titles of honor do not equate to ontological divinity. Islamic theology is precise on this point.

It is a simple question,
Show me who else in the universe have the titles according to your prophet.

Spirit of Allah and Word of Allah

JimRohn:

7. On the Hadith in Riyad as-Salihin (Hadith 432)

You quoted a hadith claiming Jews and Christians are given as ransom for Muslims. Let’s be clear:

This hadith is interpreted in light of the Qur’an, which says:

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

Islam does not teach substitutionary atonement.

Is the hadith Maudu?
Is it fabricated!?

If it is NOT, what do you want us to believe?

So that you know that the Hadith is strong, here is another

Sahih Muslim 2767 d
Abu Burda reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying:
There would come people amongst the Muslims on the Day of Resurrection with as heavy sins as a mountain, and Allah would forgive them and He would place in their stead the Jews and the Christians. (As far as I think), Abu Raub said: I do not know as to who is in doubt. Abu Burda said: I narrated it to 'Umar b. 'Abd al-'Aziz, whereupon he said: Was it your father who narrated it to you from Allah's Apostle (ﷺ)? I said: Yes.

I hail you. Here Mohammed is contradicting Allah!
I guess the verse of Qur’an 6:164 has been abrogated: isn't it?


LOL!

JimRohn:

The hadith, as scholars explained (see An-Nawawi, Ibn Hajar), refers to relative justice — meaning that those who rejected truth will face consequences, not that innocent people are punished in place of Muslims.

To use this hadith as if Islam s the Christian ransom theology is a distortion. Islam strongly rejects that anyone — even Jesus — can bear the sins of others.

Conclusion:

You asked for direct answers. I have given them.

But respectfully, your objections rest largely on:

Misreading of Arabic verbs like “wajada,”

Anachronistic projections onto Qur’anic characters,

Literalist readings of poetic or metaphorical ages,

Disregard for historical loss and archaeology,

Forcing Christian theology onto Islamic .

Islam does not need to reinterpret divine language to "correct" it — rather, it reads with both depth and context.

God’s communication is clear. It is your assumptions — about what the text must mean — that are flawed.

> “Say: He is Allah, the One. Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is begotten, and there is none comparable to Him.” (Qur’an 112)

This is Islam’s unambiguous theology. No Trinity, no divine man, no blood sacrifice.

I respect your zeal, but I invite you to approach Islamic texts without theological imposition. If you wish sincere dialogue, let’s seek understanding, not just accusation.

One need several lies to prop up Islam.
The word of Allah and his prophet are usually NOT clear so that Muslims need scholars to re-interprete them even against plain words.

If Jesus is TRUE, Muslims in deamination of Hell fire

JimRohn:

May God guide us both to truth.

No Christian who is born again will pray this kind of prayers.

Do you know why?
1. We are not slaves but sons of YHWH, so we are never afraid of going home!
2. Jesus is our own ransom from the debt of our sin and not anyone.
3. All Muslims are going to hell at least temporarily anyway

Quran 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.
Here is the Arabic if you do not like the translation above
وَإِن مِّنكُمۡ إِلَّا وَارِدُهَاۚ كَانَ عَلَىٰ رَبِّكَ حَتۡمࣰا مَّقۡضِیࣰّا

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 others in the Fire
4. Herein was the words of Jesus
John 14:6-7:
"Jesus said to him, I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no man comes to the Father, but by me. If you had known me, you should have known my Father also: and from now on you know him, and have seen him."
Mar 16:15-16:
"And he said to them, Go you into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believes not shall be damned."

Unfortunately, Allah is NOT the Father!

I will do this in two parts

JimRohn:
Thank you for your reply. I will address your objections point-by-point in a direct, logical, and respectful manner — without distortion or mockery — so that truth may be pursued sincerely and not polemically.

1. On Qur’an 75:37 – "He was a sperm from semen emitted"

You asked:
(a) Who is the “he”?
(b) Is any human a sperm?

Answer:
The “he” refers to the human being — in context, mankind’s origin. The Arabic "nutfah min maniyyin yumnā" does not say that a human is only sperm. Rather, it highlights the initial stage — the seminal fluid containing sperm — from which the human begins. It is a reference to the lowly origin of man, meant as a reminder of humility.

Of course, humans are not just sperm, but neither is anyone confused by such a biological summary. The language is not a scientific thesis; it is a condensed reference to a starting point in human development — an accurate expression for its time and audience, and still valid in its spiritual purpose.

Is it correct that the sperm became human or the human was a sperm?

No!
This was an error of the ancients who believed that the man planted his seed (sperm) like yam into the soil.

The Almighty Allah should have corrected this instead of agreeing with them.

JimRohn:

2. On Sperm Remaining for 40 Days – Hadith in Sahih Muslim 2644

You asked:
“Is it untrue that your prophet said sperm remains for 40 days?”

Answer:
This is a misreading. The hadith you refer to outlines stages of human embryonic development — 40 days as a nutfah (drop), then 40 as an ‘alaqah (clinging substance), and so on. It does not say sperm remains in the womb for 40 days. Rather, the Prophet ﷺ describes developmental phases.

Even classical Islamic scholars such as Ibn Hajar and Al-Nawawi understood this to refer to successive stages — not one static sperm cell surviving for 40 days.

This is neither a scientific blunder nor unusual — similar metaphorical or developmental language is found in all religious texts.

Tell me that your prophet is a bad communicator that needs help for people to comprehend what he means.

Sahih Muslim 2644
Hudhaifa b. Usaid reported directly from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) that he said:
When the drop of (semen) remains in the womb for forty or forty five nights, the angel comes and says: My Lord, will he be good or evil? And both these things would be written. Then the angel says: My Lord, would he be male or female? And both these things are written. And his deeds and actions, his death, his livelihood; these are also recorded. Then his document of destiny is rolled and there is no addition to nor subtraction from it.

I guess my level of comprehension is not like that of Muslims.

JimRohn:

3. On Dhul Qarnayn and the Sun Setting in a Murky Spring (Qur’an 18:86)
You stated:
> “He found it” is never a perception, always a reality.
Answer:
That is incorrect. The Arabic verb wajada (وَجَدَ) absolutely allows for perception — it can mean “he found,” as in encountered or perceived something in his experience. For example, when someone says “I found the city lively,” it reflects a personal perception, not an objective property.
Qur’an 18:86 clearly says:
> “He found it setting in a muddy spring” — this describes what Dhul Qarnayn saw from his perspective. It is not a cosmological claim about the sun literally entering water. The Qur’an is narrating his journey and what he saw, not what literally happened to the sun.

Just as today we say “the sun sets” — even though scientifically it doesn’t set — the Qur’an uses familiar language without contradicting science.

You then asked:

> Was it Allah narrating?
Did Dhul Qarnayn find the sun setting in murky water?
Were people found there?

Answer:
Yes — Allah is narrating what Dhul Qarnayn experienced. The text says he found the sun setting in a murky spring and found a people there. This is a narrative of his travel, not a declaration of astronomical fact. Confusing observation with physical truth is a hermeneutical error.

1. If he Dhul Qarnyn did NOT find the sun setting in a pool of murky waters, how can there be people near this same place where he appeared to find the sun?
2. I guess a Sea and a Pool mean different things in Arabic. Tell me how it is possible that Dhul Qarnyn appeared to see in a pool the sun. Honestly, I don't understand.

Trust me, that I've been to the seas and I've been near large lakes, I have never appeared to see the sun in any. Was this another Islamic miracle?
3. Even though Dhul Qarnyn wasn't beside the sea. Let's assume that it was the sea. The sun may set in the horizon of the sea BUT it is so far away that there could not be a people near this horizon.

You can see that all your excuses are frivolous conjectures

JimRohn:

4. On the Wall of Gog and Magog (Ya’juj and Ma’juj)
You asked:
> “Where is the wall? What is it made from? Why haven’t we found it via satellite or geological scans?”

Answer:
Firstly, the Qur’an does not say the wall would remain visible or intact until today. It only states that Dhul Qarnayn constructed a barrier using iron and molten copper between two mountains to block destructive tribes. It also says the wall will be broken when Allah wills (Qur’an 18:98).

Just as many ancient structures have been lost (e.g. Nineveh, Troy, Sodom), the absence of the wall today does not falsify its past existence. Our lack of discovery does not equate to non-existence.

You claim aeromagnetic tools would detect it. That assumes:

We know the exact location (we don’t),

That it hasn't eroded, buried, or collapsed,

That such detection methods are infallible.

That’s an unproven assumption, not a refutation.

I guess you do not have an inkling of what the aeromagnetic map is. Virtually everywhere in the world has been covered by aeroplanes carrying magnetic sensors. This is how iron deposits are discovered all over the world.

A fence/wall of that magnitude made of iron and copper is IMPOSSIBLE to miss my dear.

JimRohn:

5. On “Samiri” and the Golden Calf

You mocked the explanation that “Samiri” is not the same as “Samaritan” in post-Exilic .

Response:
The Qur’an uses the word “as-Samiri” as a proper name — not a tribal title. The error lies in assuming it must mean a post-exilic Samaritan (from centuries later). That is an anachronistic projection onto the text.

Classical scholars understood "Samiri" in various ways — possibly a deviant from the Israelites, someone practicing magic, or even someone whose name derived from "samar" (speech at night) or other linguistic roots. Qur’anic language is rich, and the tafsir tradition accommodates multiple interpretive layers.

Your comparison to Batman or Spiderman is inappropriate. The Qur’an narrates the event as a moral and spiritual lesson — with historical grounding. It is not myth-making; it is theological teaching.

Sorry please!
Itbis a fictional story, unfortunately Allah thought it was real.

Let me burst your bubbles:
If it was a fictional story that Allah was telling in
Qur'an 18:11-18
1. Verse 11, Allah claimed that he was the one who caused the people to sleep for a number of years!
2. Verse 12, Allah claimed he woke them up by himself
3. Verse 14, Allah claimed he made their mind strong
4. Verse 18, Allah described how he turned them to the right and to the left including their dog.
5. Verse 22, Allah says he alone knows their number

See how the cookies crumble:
Let me tell you a true story.
I was with Batman yesterday, he came to my house and I served him pounded yam. He eat just the bush meat with Ice-cream. We even played Chess after the Lunch.

Do you believe me?

JimRohn:

4. Jesus’ Humanity Undermines His Divinity
You asked: “Is Jesus human? Is He a descendant of Adam?” If yes — and if all descendants of Adam sin — then how can Jesus be without sin, unless He is not fully human by your own standards?

And if He is fully God, why does He not know the Hour (Mark 13:32)? Why does He pray to the Father with tears (Hebrews 5:7)? Why does He say, “I can do nothing by myself” (John 5:30)? These are not just “roles” — they are signs of dependence.

Dependence is the opposite of divinity.

1. Exactly!
By the Geneology of Adam and Eve, Jesus is NOT human, thus cannot carry the nature of sin from Adam
But Jesus was Born by a Mother, thus, He is Human like us.

Thus, Jesus represents us as Humans yet not being human.

Heb 4:15:
"For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."
Jesus as our High Priest was one who partook in everything with respect to our weaknesses as humans. He was tempted as a man like we are yet He did not commit sin.

From the point of view of the Taoheed, I can understand your frustration.
Unfortunately, from the point of view of the Trinity, whether you like it or not, it is a reality that God can be Unlimited and Limited without contradicting His Almightiness!

This is impossible with the Taoheed!
Imagine if Allah should come down from his throne above the seven heavens, his throne would be empty. If Allah makes the mistake of being limited (human), an Angel can just overthrow him.

JimRohn:

4. Jesus’ Humanity Undermines His Divinity
You asked: “Is Jesus human? Is He a descendant of Adam?” If yes — and if all descendants of Adam sin — then how can Jesus be without sin, unless He is not fully human by your own standards?

And if He is fully God, why does He not know the Hour (Mark 13:32)? Why does He pray to the Father with tears (Hebrews 5:7)? Why does He say, “I can do nothing by myself” (John 5:30)? These are not just “roles” — they are signs of dependence.
Dependence is the opposite of divinity.

Already answered as you are repeating yourself

JimRohn:

5. Islam and Abrahamic Sacrifice
You claim Islam does not understand sacrifice, yet the Qur’an clearly teaches that Ibrahim (Abraham) was commanded to sacrifice — not for sin, but as a test of submission. The Qur’an emphasizes that:

> “It is neither their meat nor their blood that reaches Allah, but your piety.” (Qur’an 22:37)

In Islam, the essence of sacrifice is not blood — it is obedience. That is what God values.

Moreover, your claim that Islam is flawed because it does not adopt a blood-based salvation model is, again, circular. It presumes the Christian model is the only valid one and declares others flawed for not copying it — but this is not a proof. It is presupposition.

Unfortunately, Islam doesn't know that there are other kinds of sacrifices ordained by God apart from SIN offering. This is your problem as not all sacrifices are for sin.

Even the sacrifice of Abraham, who provided the Ram: was it Abraham?
Who was Sacrificed: you Muslims are lost?

You claim that Islam is the Religion of Abraham, Moses , David and co, yet, you do not understand the laws that guide sacrifice and the purpose of sacrifice.
Why did God ordain several kinds of sacrifices for the children of Israel?

Why do you Muslims sacrifice (I did not say commemorate) Rams every Eid al-Adha?

You have copied a lot you don't understand sir!

JimRohn:

6. Trinity and the Problem of Category Error
You keep saying, “Only YHWH in Trinity can do this...” But that’s not evidence — it's an exemption from logic. Any contradictory doctrine can claim uniqueness. But the question remains: Is it coherent?

Can Allah do what YHWH can do?
Can Allah be somewhere and everywhere at the same time?
Can Allah be infinitely powerful and limited at the same time?

Do you know anyone else in the UNIVERSE that can do these things?

Unless you tell me someone else can you what I claimed Only YHWH in Trinity can do, then I stand on my ground!

JimRohn:

The doctrine of the Trinity violates the principle of identity: God is one, but also three. Jesus is God, but also not God (when he prays to the Father). These are not mysteries — they are contradictions unless you can define the without equivocation.

Islam upholds the pure monotheism of all prophets — including Jesus. He was the Messiah, born miraculously, but never claimed to be God. To deify the creation is, from an Islamic perspective, to blur the line between the Necessary Being and the contingent being — a philosophical error and a spiritual danger.

Final Thought

You are welcome to believe in the Trinity, the incarnation, and substitutionary atonement. But please understand: my questions are not rooted in “not understanding YHWH” — they are rooted in examining whether your claims are logically consistent within your own framework.

If your theology requires suspending logic to accept it, then anyone — Muslim or otherwise — has a right to ask whether that is a mystery worth believing in, or a contradiction that should be rejected.

Respectfully,
I await your reply.

The Trinity establishes that there is NOTHING in existence that is like YHWH.
You want a God that fits into the mold of the oneness of Objects in the world:
On this your problem of comprehension lies.

I will likely do this response in two parts

JimRohn:
Thank you for your response.
I appreciate your willingness to continue this discussion, and I take your comments seriously. I will respond point by point to ensure clarity and maintain a sincere, respectful tone.

1. Your Central Claim: A God Who is Finite and Infinite Simultaneously

You repeat that “only YHWH in Trinity can be finite and infinite, weak and almighty, somewhere and everywhere at the same time.” With respect, this is not an explanation — it is an assertion of paradox without resolution.

Because YHWH is Unlike ANYTHING or ANYONE in Creation.

Thus , His nature is Paradox without resolution.

Tell me, how it is not a paradox that everything has a beginning YET God does NOT have a beginning.
How is it NOT a paradox that God spoke everything into being. Does that even make sense that the visible things came from the spoken word of God?

Your argument holds no water.

JimRohn:

In logic, a contradiction is not resolved by repetition. The statement "finite and infinite at the same time" is not a mystery; it is a logical impossibility. To be finite is to be limited, and to be infinite is to be unlimited. The two cancel each other out. One cannot be both in the same respect and at the same time.

If the Explanation of the Trinity is true (even if you disagree) , that
1. YHWH as a Spirit is Everywhere in Space and Time (the heavens and the earth is within Him)
2. YHWH as the Father makes Himself visible and Presides over the Heavens and the Earth on His Throne surrounded by His Angels
3. YHWH as the Word (Kunfayakun) that carries the Presence of God ANYWHERE in space and Time

Can such a Being be FINITE and INFINITE at the same time?

JimRohn:

To use your analogy: if a president jumps into a latrine, we can understand that his dignity is compromised by choice, but he remains a human. But in your analogy, God becomes the latrine — i.e., God becomes that which is limited, dependent, and dying — and yet you claim He remains fully God in essence. This is not a paradox with a hidden reason; it is a contradiction in .

In Islamic theology, God does not cease to be God at any point. He does not diminish His perfection, nor assume imperfection. He is always Al-Qayyum (Self-Sustaining) and Al-Ahad (One, indivisible).

This is why Allah cannot be Finite and Infinite at the same time.
This is why Allah cannot be Somewhere and Everywhere at the same time.

It is a comprehension problem on your part because you want to box God into the mold of created things that cannot be one and two at the same time

JimRohn:

2. Legal Representation Requires Logical Coherence
You argue that Jesus became human in order to represent us legally before God. This raises several issues:

Who set this legal condition? If God is sovereign, why does He need to become His own sacrifice to forgive? Is He subject to an external law, or is He the lawgiver?

Who set the Legal condition?
It was God Himself because the Law of Sin against God requires DEATH as payment.

Rom 6:23:
"For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

JimRohn:

If God required a sacrifice to forgive, then the forgiveness is no longer grace — it is a transaction.

Furthermore, how is it just to punish the innocent (Jesus) in place of the guilty (humanity)? In Islamic theology, justice means each soul bears its own burden (Qur'an 6:164).

Islam teaches that God can forgive directly without compromising His justice or mercy. The Qur'an never minimizes sin, but it does not exaggerate it into something that makes God incapable of forgiving without blood.

The reason Forgiveness is Grace is because
1. God is the one paying for your sin and not yourself
John 1:29:
"The next day John sees Jesus coming to him, and said, Behold the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world."
2. It is impossible for any man to pay for the consequence of his sin against God.

Like I said:
You don't understand the gravity of Sin in Islam. You think that by worship and good works your sins can be overlooked by Allah.

JimRohn:

3. You Claim Muslims Do Not Understand the “Gravity of Sin”

This is a theological assumption, not a rebuttal. Islam treats sin as rebellion against the Creator, deserving of consequences — but it also teaches that God is Al-Ghaffar (Oft-Forgiving) and Ar-Rahman (Most Merciful). The gravity of sin is not denied in Islam — but it is not used to limit God's mercy or necessitate His incarnation.

You say blood must be shed — but this is a religious claim, not a universal truth. In the Bible itself, we find verses such as:

> "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." (Hosea 6:6)

The Prophets often emphasized repentance over ritual slaughter. Even if sacrifices were commanded, they were never presented as God's only path to forgiveness — nor did they require the death of God Himself.

Hosea 6:6 is not saying that God rejects sacrifice. Prophet Hosea tell the Jews that God wants them to repent from their sins and do righteous deeds rather than covering their wickedness with sacrifices.

Even as Christians, the same law applies:
Rom 6:1-2:
"What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?"
You cannot claim that God has paid the price for the penalty for your sin and then go on committing more sins.

Like I said: You Muslims do NOT understand that gravity of Sin.

Let me explain in a way you can understand:
Sin is not just going against God's will and command.

1. Sin is a VIOLATION of the Integrity of God.
2. The integrity of God is that which makes God, God!
3. What makes God who He is is the fact that His Will is SOVEREIGN and His Command cannot go without being EXECUTED.
4. Sin is thus a violation of the "Kunfayakun" of God. God says Don't...but you do! God says be...but you say no! You go against God's will. This is sin.
5. God created some living beings and gave them the power of Volition or Free Will. In the Bible, these are Angels and Humans.
6. Free will or Volition is the power Granted by God to His creation to Say NO to Him and Resist His Will and command.
7. However, for the Kunfayakun or the Integrity of God not to be violated, God made the Law of Sin.
8. The law of sin is that ANYONE who violated the Integrity of God must DIE!
9. Death to God is not a form of Annihilation BUT a DISCONNECTION from Him eternally.
10. The place of Eternal disconnection from God is God's Refuse Dump called Hell Fire.


My Question :.
If God gave a command and a Human being violated the command such that God's command failed,
1. How can such a human being redeem himself?
2. If the human being repented and ask for forgiveness, does his actions remove the fact that God gave a command that failed because of him?
3. If God say, "I forgive you" to the sinner, does it erase the fact that God's command failed on his ?

This above is the reason for sacrifice for sin. The sin is punished at all cost. The sacrifice take upon itself the punishment of the guilty.

Do you agree that
Forgiveness is NEVER Free. Someone always pays the price and usually, it is the one who does the forgiveness!?

JimRohn:
Thank you for your reply. Let me respond to your points one by one in a clear and respectful manner, seeking truth through sound reasoning rather than mockery or misrepresentation.

1. On the Qur’an and Embryology (Qur’an 75:37–38):

You cited Qur’an 75:37–38 and questioned the biological accuracy. Let's clarify:

> “Had he not been a sperm from semen emitted? Then he became a clot…”

This description aligns with observable embryological stages from the perspective of the human observer. The verse refers to the human origin from “sperm” (nutfah) found within semen — not to deny the ovum’s role, but to highlight the male contribution in a time when this was unknown. The Qur’an’s primary goal is not to teach cellular biology but to remind man of his humble origin as a means of spiritual reflection.

As for your reference to Sahih Muslim 2644 and the 40 days — this hadith does not state that sperm remains alone for 40 days. It refers to the entire process of formation, which early Islamic scholars (like Ibn Hajar) noted includes transitions between stages. Moreover, time estimates in prophetic hadith are not intended as precise scientific measurements but to express stages of divine decree — what modern biology calls epigenetics or genetic programming.

So no, neither the Qur’an nor the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) claimed humans are formed only from sperm nor that sperm remains unchanging for 40 days. These are interpretive misunderstandings, not scientific blunders.

Quran 75:37
Had he not been a sperm from semen emitted?

You didn't answer the question
1. According to Allah, who is the "he" in Qur'an 75:37?
2. Is any Human beita sperm?
Quran 75:38
then he became a clot, and then Allah made it into a living body and proportioned its parts,

Tell me, what does a sperm become in a human female womb?

Is it untrue that your prophet says that the sperm will stay for 40 days in the womb?

Please respectful answer the direct questions as you are just giving me the standard islamic narrative.

JimRohn:

2. On Dhul Qarnayn and the “Sun Setting in a Murky Spring” (Qur’an 18:86):

The verse reads:

> “Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a murky spring…”

Let’s be precise. The Arabic uses "wajada" (he found) — meaning his perception — not a literal cosmological assertion. The Qur’an is clearly describing what Dhul Qarnayn saw, not what physically happens to the sun.

Even today, we use similar expressions: “sunset over the ocean” — yet no rational person believes the sun is literally setting into water.

So this is a visual description from the human perspective, not a geophysical claim. Any insistence on literalism here is a misreading of the Arabic language and Qur’anic style.

He found it is NEVER a perception. It is always a REALITY.

I said:
Do you concede that Allah was the one relating the story and not Dhul Qarnyn? (Qur'an 18:83)
Did Allah say that
1. Dhul Qarnyn found the sun setting in some dark murky waters?
2. Dhul Qarnyn found a people near this dark murky water?

I guess, Dhul Qarnyn appeared to find a people there: is that true?
3. Can you show us by Google map: The wall that was constructed to prevent Yājūj and Mājūj from causing further destruction and hardship to people?.

You will note that you cannot answer my direct questions because it is an error by Allah and his prophet Mohammed.

JimRohn:

3. On the Wall of Gog and Magog (Ya’juj and Ma’juj):

The Qur’an does not claim the wall built by Dhul Qarnayn still exists today. Rather, it describes a historic construction which will be breached “when the promise of my Lord comes to ” (Qur’an 18:98). The Qur’an prophesies its future destruction as a sign of the End Times.

If it were still standing, it may be buried, eroded, or yet undiscovered — just like other ancient structures lost to time. Absence of current location ≠ non-existence.

History is filled with lost cities (like Troy), vanished peoples, and unexcavated ruins. This is not a flaw in scripture but a reminder of the limits of human knowledge.

I laugh is Swahili
1. What is the wall made from?
2. Do you think a wall of such a massive size would escape geological findings? For God's sake, the aeromagnetic signature would be so loud it would be seen from the other pole of the earth.

Sir, I am sorry to tell you that it is a myth. An imaginary wall that doesn't exist. But it is in your Qur'an as real.

JimRohn:

4. On the Samaritan and the Golden Calf (Qur’an 20:85–88):

You quote Tafsir al-Jalalayn, but ignore the linguistic and scholarly nuance.

The Arabic word “As-Samiri” does not necessarily mean "Samaritan" of post-10th century BCE Israel. Many classical scholars interpreted “Samiri” as a proper noun, not a tribal designation. Other scholars viewed it as a title or nickname, possibly linked to magic or deviation (derived from samar, speech at night).

Islamic tradition is not bound to Biblical chronology. Even Western historians now acknowledge that Biblical dating and tribal naming are not always historically reliable. So no, this is not a “rewriting” of the Qur’an — it’s a scholarly clarification, based on context and semantics.

So, Al-Jalalayn doesn't speak good Arabic.

Your only argument is to feign ignorance of the meaning of the word.

JimRohn:

5. On the Story of the Sleepers of the Cave:
You argue this story is a “Christian myth” absorbed into the Qur’an.
Firstly, let’s note: the Qur’an acknowledges the story’s Christian origins — that’s why it refers to it in the context of the People of the Book and emphasizes that only God knows the true details (Qur’an 18:22).

The Qur’an does not treat it as fiction, but as an actual miracle showing God’s power over time and resurrection. Miracles, by definition, are outside natural law. You may call it legend — Islam affirms it as a miracle. Whether Jacob of Serugh wrote about it or not is irrelevant; truth is not determined by who writes first but by what actually happened.

Also, using this logic, should we dismiss the Christian Gospel because parts of it may share similarities with pre-Christian myths like dying-and-rising gods (e.g., Osiris, Tammuz)?

Meaning that Allah did not know that it is a myth and not a real story.
Thus, it cannot be a miracle.

Are Batman or Spiderman or Superman stories miracles?

So sorry!
Mohammed was accused of telling myths of the ancients: his accs were not wrong after all.

JimRohn:

6. On Jesus Being the “Word” and “Spirit” of God (Qur’an 4:171):
Your reading is selective.
Yes, the Qur’an calls Jesus:
A messenger of God
His word ("Kalimatuhu" cast to Mary
A spirit from Him ("Ruhun minhu"
But this does not mean Jesus is part of God. The verse explicitly warns:
> “Do not say ‘Three’... Allah is but One God. Exalted is He above having a son.” (4:171)

Do Christians say that Allah is a third of three?
The implication of "Kalimatuhu" and "Ruhun minhu" is massive as NOT other person or angel or jinn has these two titles.
It implies that JESUS pre-existing before He was born.

Secondly , Allah says that Christians say that The Messiah is Allah.
Qur'an 5:72
They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers.

If Allah is the Messiah according to Christians, who is the second and third part of the Trinity?

Except that the Almighty Allah doesn't understand exactly the doctrine of Trinity he is condemning.

Please direct answers not preachings!

JimRohn:

In Islam, "Word" refers to God's command, as in “Be” — and it is. Jesus came into existence through God's command — not via fatherhood or divinity.

Likewise, "spirit from Him" means a created soul — not a divine being. All souls are from God in this sense:

Then the implication is that Jesus is the Kunfayakun of Allah!

See, how you rope yourself into another quagmire!

JimRohn:

> “Then He fashioned him and breathed into him of His spirit…” (Qur’an 32:9)

So yes, Jesus is Ruhullah — a created spirit granted by God, just as Adam was. This does not make him God or part of God.

To insist that the Qur’anic language confirms the Trinity is to impose Christian theology onto Islamic texts, which the Qur’an clearly rejects.

So, the only two spirits known in Islam is Jibril AND Jesus (a human being) and you don't think that your theology is wrong and incomplete!?
BTW Qur’an 32:9 is not speaking of Jesus.

Jesus Himself is a Spirit from Allah: isn't it?

JimRohn:

7. On the Christian Doctrine of Ransom and Hellfire:
You said:

> Jesus is our ransom from Hellfire. But for Muslims, Jews and Christians are your ransom?

This is an odd misrepresentation. Islam explicitly rejects the idea that someone else can be punished in our place:

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

As for the hadith you may be referencing — regarding people being ransomed on Judgment Day — the context is not substitutionary atonement. It is a description of relative justice on the Day of Judgment. Each person will be judged for their own deeds.

Islam does not teach that Jews or Christians are punished on behalf of Muslims. That is a misunderstanding — or worse, deliberate distortion — of Islamic eschatology.

So, this hadith is Maudu!?

Riyad as-Salihin 432
Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, "On the Day of Resurrection, Allah will deliver to every Muslim, a Jew or a Christian and say: 'This is your ransom from Hell-fire."'

I know, the hadith doesn't say that Christians and Jews will be ransom for Muslims from the fire of hell!

JimRohn:

Conclusion:
You began by accusing Muslims of "rewriting" scripture. But it is clear that:

Your arguments rest on literalism, misinterpretation, or theological projection.

The Qur’an presents concepts like embryology, prophecy, miracles, and divine nature in a metaphorical and theological language, not scientific journals.

Islam’s rejection of the Trinity is not ignorance — but insistence that God is not divisible, incarnated, or slain.

> “He neither begets nor is begotten.” (Qur’an 112:3)

Your belief in Jesus as ransom is your choice, but to Muslims, God does not require blood to forgive. He forgives whom He wills, as a Sovereign, Merciful Lord.

I appreciate your ion for your faith. But truth deserves careful reading, not ridicule. I invite you to engage Islamic texts on their own , not through the filter of Christian theology.

> May God guide us both toward truth and understanding.
With respect and sincerity.

Please when you read the bible, how do you read it?
You Muslims have assumed that Allah and his prophet are the worst communicators in the universe. Otherwise, tell me why you must re-interprete anything they say that you feel is problematic to mean something else

JimRohn:
Thank you once again for your reply. I appreciate the time you've taken to articulate your position, and I assure you that my aim remains an honest and respectful exchange — not mockery, nor denial of your right to your beliefs. If at any point my tone suggested otherwise, I welcome the chance to clarify.

Let me begin with the heart of the matter: my argument is not based on viewing Jesus "through the lens of Allah," as you suggest. It is based on an internal theological inquiry using your own scripture, and addressing questions that have been asked by Christians themselves throughout history — from the early Church Fathers to contemporary theologians.

1. The Problem of Inconsistency, Not Possibility

You ask, "Who are you to tell God what He can or cannot be?" — and I fully agree that God is not subject to human limitations or dictates. However, theological reflection must involve asking whether particular doctrines are internally coherent.

Let me clarify: I am not claiming that God cannot do something arbitrarily. I am asking whether the Christian claim — that the eternal, all-knowing, unchanging God became a finite, tempted, limited human being — is logically and theologically consistent within your own framework.

James 1:13 says God cannot be tempted. Yet the Gospels describe Jesus being tempted by Satan (Matthew 4:1). Mark 13:32 says the Son does not know the Hour — yet God is all-knowing. Hebrews 5:7 speaks of Jesus "offering prayers with loud cries and tears to the One who could save him." These texts raise natural theological questions: If Jesus is fully God, how can He lack knowledge, be tempted, or fear death?

You suggest Jesus had to carry the "flaws of human nature" to be the perfect sacrifice. But here lies the theological paradox: If these limitations are flaws, how can the flawless God fully embody them without contradiction? And if they are not flaws, why are they treated as evidence of Jesus' humanity and not His divinity?

Did your prophet say "every son (descendant) of Adam is a sinner?

Is Jesus human?
And, is He a descendant of Adam?

This is the distinction. God came to represent us so that He can legally be our ransom from the consequences of sin which is eternity in Hell Fire.

Only YHWH in Trinity can be Finite and Infinite at the same time
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Weak and Almighty at the same time
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Somewhere and Everywhere at the same time

it that you do NOT understand this paradox even when explained simply because it is IMPOSSIBLE for Allah to be like YHWH

JimRohn:

2. The Claim of God Becoming Human Is Not Simple Mystery — It Is a Contradiction If Taken Literally

Appealing to mystery ("God is beyond human understanding" is valid only to a point. But mystery should not be used to mask logical contradiction. Saying that Jesus is fully God and fully man — and that he was omniscient yet not knowing, immutable yet growing in wisdom (Luke 2:52), imible yet suffering — creates a paradox that demands explanation.

Muslims do not deny God's ability — we question doctrines that seem to compromise His attributes. The Qur'an tells us God is Al-‘Aleem (All-Knowing), As-Samad (self-sufficient), and Al-Hayy (Ever-Living) — He does not become dependent, die, or lose knowledge. This is not a limitation; it is divine perfection.

Again, from the Lens of Taoheed, the nature of YHWH is IMPOSSIBLE.

Again,
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Finite and Infinite at the same time
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Weak and Almighty at the same time
Only YHWH in Trinity can be Somewhere and Everywhere at the same time

Do you it that this above is a logical contradiction with the description of the Taoheed?
Is this a logical contradiction with the description of Trinity?

JimRohn:

3. God’s Emotions vs. Human Limitations
You mention that God gets angry, jealous, and punishes — attributes that sound "human." But there's a vital distinction here: in Islamic theology (and arguably in Biblical theology too), God’s anger or jealousy are not like ours. They do not arise from ignorance, loss of control, or imperfection. They are expressions of His justice and authority, not flaws or deficiencies.

However, hunger, ignorance of the Hour, exhaustion, fear of death — these are not moral emotions; they are ontological limitations. They signal a being who is contingent, not self-sufficient — and therefore not divine by definition. That is the core of the Muslim critique.

I have dealt with this before.
If it was possible for Allah to come down as a perfect man without violating his almightiness and sovereignty, will he come with his full attributes to us OR he will limit it to almost human-like levels.

Secondly, if the Sovereignty and Almightiness of God is not violated, what is your problem if God chose to experience Pain, Hunger, Thirst, Sadness, Weakness etc. Do you as a Muslim decide for God!?

Like it is unthinkable for a president to jump inside a latrine BUT it is NOT impossible depending on
1. The Reason/Purpose why the president entered the Latrine
2. If the president CHOSE to enter the Latrine by his own volition.

Unfortunately for you, the Bible explains why God has to come like this to us humans Islam doesn't have this concept.

JimRohn:

4. Respecting the Purpose of Jesus’ Mission Does Not Remove the Theological Tension

You say Jesus came to bear human flaws to become a sacrifice. Even if I grant this as your belief, it does not resolve the theological dilemma. The central issue is: How can God, who is perfect and independent, take on qualities that are by nature imperfect and dependent? That is not merely a narrative claim — it is a metaphysical contradiction.

And again, I am not asking this from an Islamic framework. I’m asking whether this belief is consistent within the Christian conception of God's nature as eternal, unchanging, and omniscient.

How can God, who is perfect and independent, take on qualities that are by nature imperfect and dependent?
Because, YHWH can do so without violating His Integrity as God.

You find it difficult to comprehend because you as a Muslim doesn't understand the Gravity of Sin.

You think sin is just a mere going against the will and command of God: and forgiveness is easy!

If you care , I will explain why SIN cannot go without punishment!

JimRohn:

5. Honest Dialogue Requires Open Inquiry

Finally, I must respectfully note that attributing my questions to a “Muslim background” as if that disqualifies critical thinking undermines interfaith dialogue. Christians have long engaged in deep internal theological debates. I am simply continuing that tradition of inquiry from a different faith perspective, with respect and sincerity.

If there is an explanation that resolves this paradox from within Christian theology — beyond appealing to mystery or divine right — I remain open to it. But questions about theological coherence are not attacks; they are necessary steps toward understanding.

With all due respect, if you claim Jesus is fully God, then it is not unreasonable for me — or any thinking person — to ask how such a claim aligns with the attributes of God that Scripture itself affirms.

I remain open to your thoughts and appreciate your engagement.

BibleInterpreta AntiChristian TenQ CreativeOrbit gofh honesttalk21 NairaLTQ MaxInDHouse advanceDNA

Islam doesn't know why blood is required in sacrifice even though they claim to be the religion of Abraham. This is a basic flaw in your religion

I laugh in Mandarin!

JimRohn:
Thank
BibleInterpreta AntiChristian TenQ CreativeOrbit gofh honesttalk21 NairaLTQ MaxInDHouse advanceDNA

Hello Mr JimRohn
Repeating these names every time you make a post is spamming the topic. Yes, you can invite people to your discussions but just once and not every time you make a post.

JimRohn:

4. On scientific claims and so-called "errors" in the Qur’an:
These objections have been addressed in depth by Islamic scholars and researchers. Briefly:
The sperm and baby: The Qur’an describes embryological development in a way that correlates with observable stages — not in of modern molecular biology, but in accessible and metaphorical suitable for the audience. It is not a scientific textbook but a book of guidance.

So, let's check.
Quran 75:37
Had he not been a sperm from semen emitted?

Tell me, is any human being a sperm OR he is a fusion of sperm and ovum? How many chromosomes do we find in a full human being and how many chromosomes are in a sperm?

Quran 75:38
then he became a clot, and then Allah made it into a living body and proportioned its parts,

Tell me, what does a sperm become in a human female womb?

Is it untrue that your prophet says that the sperm will stay for 40 days in the womb?

Sahih Muslim 2644
Hudhaifa b. Usaid reported directly from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) that he said:

When the drop of (semen) remains in the womb for forty or forty five nights, the angel comes and says: My Lord, will he be good or evil? And both these things would be written. Then the angel says: My Lord, would he be male or female? And both these things are written. And his deeds and actions, his death, his livelihood; these are also recorded. Then his document of destiny is rolled and there is no addition to nor subtraction from it.

JimRohn:

Dhul Qarnayn and the sunset: The verse says he saw the sun setting in a murky spring (fi aynin hami’ah) — a description of perception, not literal cosmology. Even today, we say "the sun sets behind the mountains."

LOL
Do you concede that Allah was the one relating the story and not Dhul Qarnyn? (Qur'an 18:83)
Did Allah say that
1. Dhul Qarnyn found the sun setting in some dark murky waters?
2. Dhul Qarnyn found a people near this dark murky water?

I guess, Dhul Qarnyn appeared to find a people there: is that true?
3. Can you show us by Google map: The wall that was constructed to prevent Yājūj and Mājūj from causing further destruction and hardship to people?.

Don you see why it is the job of your scholars to rewrite the words of Allah and his prophet to correct several blunders like this?

JimRohn:

The Samaritan and the golden calf: Islamic sources use the term "Samaritan" (possibly “Samiri” referring to a transgressor, not necessarily the tribe of Samaria) — this is not a historical error but a translational or interpretive difference.

Initially, it Al-Samari mean the Samaritan BUT because of recent scholarship, you have to find a new culprit for it.

Tafsirs Al-Jalalayn Quran20:85
But those he supposed [to be following him] had remained behind, for He, exalted be He, said, ‘Indeed We tried your people after you, that is, after your departure from them, and the Samaritan led them astray’, so they took to worshipping the )golden) calf.

JimRohn:

The Sleepers of the Cave: The Qur’an does not present this as a myth but a miracle — and asks readers to reflect, not deny. It highlights God's power over time and life, not natural science.

These are interpretive matters, not self-evident errors. Disagreement does not prove falsehood.

How can it be a miracle when it is a myth treated as real by Allah and Mohammed.

The earliest written version of the story comes from Christian bishop and writer Jacob of Serugh, who wrote an of the sleepers in Syriac. The story begins in the Roman Empire around 250 CE.

The story wasn't even real. It was written to encourage Christians who were being persecuted to encourage them that bad times will end.

Now, we find a fiction entering the Book of Allah as a miracle!? Tell me, how can the story of Superman or Batman somehow become a miracle?

JimRohn:

5. On the claim of “Trinity” in Islam regarding Jesus:
This is a misunderstanding.
In Islam, Jesus is:
A created human messenger
A word (command) from God
A spirit (soul) created by God

These are not persons within a divine being. There is no Trinity in Islam — Jesus is not co-equal or co-eternal with God. The Qur’an explicitly refutes the Trinity (Qur’an 4:171; 5:73), and insists on the absolute oneness of God.

Let's see what Allah said:

Qur'an 4:171
"O People of the Scripture, do not exceed in your religion beyond the truth and do not follow the inclination of a people who had gone astray before and misled many and strayed from the sound way.
And [mention, O People of the Scripture], the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He cast down to Mary and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, 'Three'; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs."

Who should we believe, you or Allah?
1. Jesus is a Messenger of Allah
2. Jesus is the Word of Allah (His Word) cast down to Mary
3. Jesus is the Spirit FROM Allah

You have to redefine Spirit to mean Soul even against your prophet who calls Jesus Ruhullah!

Can you see how Muslims have no respect for Allah's word or their prophet's word in order that they might propagate an Islam according to their corrections

JimRohn:

To equate the Qur’anic honorifics for Jesus with Christian Trinitarian claims is to impose an external theology onto a different framework.

Conclusion:
You are free to hold your beliefs about God as per your conscience and scripture. I do not mock your doctrine — I challenge it respectfully because truth must be examined critically.

But Islam's view of God is one of absolute oneness, perfection, self-sufficiency, and transcendence — untouched by limitation, incarnation, or death.

Rather than dismissing this as “deliberate ignorance,” I invite you to consider: perhaps the reason Islam rejects the Incarnation is not because it cannot understand it, but because it sees it as a contradiction — a human attempt to explain the Divine by making Him like man.

God does not become man. He sends prophets to guide men.

May God guide us all to truth, sincerity, and mutual understanding.

With respect,
jimrohn

God is ONE according to Christians BUT in order to sell Islam, Allah, his prophet and you Muslims must claim we mean that God is THREE.

As Christians, Jesus is our ransom from Hell Fire: but for you as Muslims, Jews and Christians are your own ransom. Does this make any sense to you that people who need to be ransomed are your own ransom.?

Since my posts always receive a ban, I will break the response to this into two.
Secondly, it is not not necessary to put names every time you post. Once is enough.

JimRohn:
Dear NairaLTQ,

Thank you for your elaborate message. I will respond to your questions and objections directly, with clarity and sincerity, as you requested. However, I must also emphasize the importance of respectful dialogue in any serious theological discussion. Resorting to accusations of deliberate ignorance or deceit does not advance understanding — it only reinforces division.

1. On Jibril appearing as a man:
You asked:

> "When Jibril came to Mary as a perfect man, did he stop being an angel?"

No, Jibril (peace be upon him) did not stop being an angel. In Islamic belief, angels may assume a visible form for specific tasks (e.g., delivering messages), without ceasing to be what they are in essence. His outward appearance does not alter his essential created nature as an angel — a being created from light, fully subject to God's command. This is not incarnation in the Christian sense, where full divinity and full humanity are claimed to coexist in a single essence.

I agree, Jibril did not stop being an Angel even when he appeared as a perfect man. This is not a contradiction.
If per-chance, God appears as a perfect man on earth, does it mean he would momentarily stop being God?

JimRohn:

> "Did he have saliva, teeth, intestines?"
Islamic sources do not delve into such speculative physical details, as they are irrelevant to the purpose of revelation. The focus is on function, not anatomy. His form was recognized as a man, not as a literal transformation of substance.

This does not parallel the Christian claim that God Himself became fully human, lived as a man, was tempted, suffered, and died — while still being fully divine. The difference is qualitative and theological: angels are created beings assuming form, while in Christianity, the Creator is said to have become His own creation, which Islam considers a logical contradiction and theological error.

Have faith and trust the words of Allah in the Qur'an. If Jibril appeared as a perfect man, it means that he would have been INDISTINGUISHABLE from any human being. Meaning that whatever a human being has up to sweat glands, Jibril will have.
It means Jibril will possess every sense of touch, Taste, feel and even smell that human beings have.

If per-chance, God appears as a perfect man on earth, does it mean he would not be able to perceive smell or touch/feel or sense?

JimRohn:

2. On Jesus being “a Spirit” and “Word” from Allah:
You asked:
> "Did Jesus stop being the Word or Spirit of Allah when he became a Messenger?"

No. According to Islamic theology:

Jesus (peace be upon him) is called a “Word from Allah” (kalimatun minhu) in the Qur’an (3:45) because he was brought into existence by God's command — “Be!” — without a father, as a miraculous sign.

He is also referred to as a “Spirit from Him” (roohun minhu) meaning a special soul created by God — not that he is a part of God’s essence.

This does not imply divinity. Every human has a spirit created by God. The phrasing “from Him” in Arabic does not imply a literal part of God’s being — it denotes honor and origin, not ontology.

Good!
I did not ask if the attribute mean divinity or not. But you have answered the question.
As a full human being, Jesus would NOT stop being a Spirit from Allah and his Word cast down to Mary.

Redefining what you mean holds no water as just as you hold us by the words of the scripture, allow us to hold you by the words of the Qur'an and Hadiths.

RUH=Spirit and Nafs=Soul in Arabic.
Except your Argument is that the almighty Allah doesn't know the precise difference between Soul and Spirit.

Even then, your prophet understand this by calling the Lord Jesus Ruhullah! Please do not re-interprete what is already plain simply because the implications is horrible for you.

JimRohn:

> "If Jesus was killed, does that mean the Word and Spirit of Allah were killed?"

No. Death, in Islamic belief, does not mean annihilation of the soul or essence. The soul continues to exist in the Barzakh (intermediate realm). The physical body dies, but the Word and Spirit — being commands and created realities — remain under God’s control. Moreover, Islam holds that Jesus was not killed (Qur’an 4:157). He was raised, and will return before the end times.

You have answered your main question!
If per-chance God became a man and his physical body was killed, does it mean that God had been killed?

JimRohn:

3. On Allah’s Omnipresence:
You claim:
> “According to the Hadiths, air and water are above and below Allah. Therefore, Allah is not Omnipresent.”

Let me clarify the Islamic understanding.

Omnipresence in Islam does not mean that Allah is physically spread throughout space, like air or matter. God is not bound by time, space, or material dimensions. His knowledge, power, and control encom all things (Wa Huwa bi kulli shay’in Aleem, Qur’an 2:282).

The Hadith you cite does not deny omnipresence — it addresses the pre-creation state in a metaphorical or explanatory way for human understanding. Classical scholars understood such Hadiths in light of other verses that affirm God’s transcendence and complete knowledge.

Claiming Allah is a “subset of the universe” due to spatial references is a category error — treating the Creator as a physical object within creation, which Islamic theology strictly rejects.

In contrast, Christianity proposes that the transcendent God became a localized human being, subject to birth, hunger, ignorance, and death — which is a limitation by definition. Islam preserves God’s majesty by maintaining His absolute transcendence.

Muslims behave like Allah and his prophet are the worst communicators in the universe.
The direct words of Allah and his prophet has to be interpreted to say something other than exactly what they said.

Tell me, wouldn't it be precise to say that Nothing was above or below Allah than AIR was above and below Allah? If Allah is sandwiched between Air above and air with water below, Allah is a SUBSET of the Universe.

Do you take your religion from Allah and his prophet or from non-inspired Islamic scholars!?

Mr JimRohn
I hope the Nairaland bot isn't rigged against my posts as it gets banned almost always.

Here I just extracted my replies without context after another ban for no reason. It is no fun if after making a reply for it to get banned.





I did not compare Jibril with the incarnation of God. My objective is to ask you questions about the incarnation of Jibril for if you cannot comprehend it by answering my questions, then it is an exercise in futility for you to understand God that is far more complex.

So, please answer my questions and I hope you will be truthful
1. Jibril is an Angel, when he came to Mary as a perfect man, did he stop being an angel?
2. As a perfect man, did Jibril have saliva in his mouth and does he have teeth and intestines?

So also, In the Qur'an,
1. Jesus is a Spirit from Allah
2. Jesus is the Word of Allah cast down to Mary
Question:
A. When Jesus became a Messenger as a man on earth, did he stop being a Spirit and the Word of Allah?
B. Let's assume that the Messenger was killed, does it mean that the Spirit and the Word of Allah was killed?

Please go straight to the answers!

Pick any dictionary and define Omnipresence.
After, let's apply it to Allah and check if he is Omnipresent. Omnipresence mean being fully present everywhere in space and time. I did not misrepresent the definition.

By dictionary definition, is Allah Omnipresent?
NO!

If according to your hadith, AIR is ABOVE Allah and Water is Below Him, Allah is a subset of the Universe! Thus, he cannot be Omnipresent.
Sunan Ibn Majah 182
Waki' bin Hudus narrated that his paternal uncle Abu Razin said:
"I said: 'O Messenger of Allah, where was our Lord before He created His creation?' He said: He was above the clouds, below which was air, and above which was air and water. Then He created His Throne above the water.'"


Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3109
"Ahmad ibn Mani' reported to us, Yazid ibn Harun reported to us, Hammad ibn Salama informed us from Ya'la ibn Ata' from Wakii ibn Hudus, from his uncle Abu Razin, who said: I said, 'O Messenger of God, where was our Lord before He created His creation?' He said, 'He was in a state of nothingness (or solitude), with air below Him and air above Him, and He created His Throne upon the water.' Ahmad ibn Mani' said that Yazid ibn Harun said: 'the solitude (or state of nothingness) means there was nothing with Him.' Abu Isa said: Hammad ibn Salama reported it this way from Wakii ibn Hudus, and Sh'bah, Abu Awana, and Hisham say Wakii ibn 'udus (instead of Hudus), and that is more authentic. Abu Razin's name was Laqiit ibn Amir. And he said, 'This is a good hadith.'"

What can be clearer than this?
Air above Allah AND Air and Water below Allah!

The loads of scientific "mis-miracles" in the Qur'an proves that Allah is NOT Omniscient irrespective of what you Muslims want to believe.
Eg.
Does the sperm become a baby?
Did Dhul Qarnayn see the sun set in murky waters?
Did the Samaritan really make the golden calf for the children of Israel?
Did some men sleep in a cave for 300 years?

Too many errors show that the author of the Qur'an is a 7th century Arabian man!
Exactly the point.
How is it that Abraham, Adam. Moses are dead BUT your prophet spoke to them in paradise?

It makes sense to you right.

Please explain how,
Jesus according to the Qur'an is a Trinity of Spirit from Allah, Word of Allah and a Human messenger of Allah?
Note: that the only other spirit you know in Islam is Jibril . The only word of Allah you know is Jesus. A spirit is not human and neither is the word of Allah!
Also, note that Jibril is NOT the word of Allah!

Please, explain the contradiction according to your understanding.
Read the two hadiths again and prove to me that it didn't say air was above and below Allah.
Two bad for you because I perceive yours is a case of deliberate ignorance.

Your argument is like saying, how can physical universe come into being from a spoken word!

I have shown you from the scripture the nature of my God YHWH.
He is simultaneously Everywhere as a Spirit
He is simultaneously on His Throne in the Heavens
He is anywhere else as the Word (Kunfayakun) where Gods Power is to be made manifest.

You and I understand that these Attributes is IMPOSSIBLE for Allah BUT don't commit the error of Generalisation.

It's okay if you cannot understand YHWH!

All a person needs to reject Islam is the Love for the Truth.
Unfortunately, Islam is a set of cascades of lies that you Muslims will deliberately TWIST the plain interpretation of your Qur'an and Hadiths for LIES cooked up by your scholars.

The truth sets free.

I wish that you truly want to know the truth but I doubt it. Not withstanding, I will answer your questions.

JimRohn:
Thank you for your reply. Your concern for clarity is valid, and I am happy to oblige with definitions to ensure we are speaking on equal .

1. Clarifying the Question

My question is intentionally based on your own Christian theological framework, not Islamic theology. I asked:👇

> Where did Jesus explicitly teach that the Holy Spirit is God, or part of a triune Godhead?

This is a challenge directed within your own doctrine, requesting direct, unequivocal words from Jesus himself — not later theological development or church dogma.

Jesus does not explicitly teach in the Gospels that the Holy Spirit is God or part of a triune Godhead in a direct, systematic statement.

It was taken for granted as all Jews know who the Holy Spirit is as the Manifest Presence of God.

Let's look at what Jesus said about the Holy Spirit.
1. All manner of sin has forgiveness BUT the Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit has no forgiveness either in this world or in the next
Matthew
Mat 12:31-32
"Why I say to you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven to men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven to men. And whoever speaks a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whoever speaks against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come."

I don't know in Islam if sins are against God or against Angels.
Can you tell me if you know anyone who had committed sin against Jibril or any Angel before?

2. Jesus command Baptism of Believers in the Name (singular) of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit
Mat 28:19:
"Go you therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:"


Is it halal to associate the name of Jibril with Allah?

JimRohn:

2. Who Is the Holy Spirit in Christianity?
From mainstream Trinitarian doctrine, the Holy Spirit is understood as:
The third person of the Trinity
Co-equal and co-eternal with the Father and the Son
Fully divine and distinct in personhood
If this is your position, then the challenge remains:👇
Did Jesus ever state that the Holy Spirit is divine and part of a triune Godhead?
If so, please provide a direct quote from Jesus — not Paul, not creeds, not post-resurrection interpretations.

Sorry to disappoint you. The Holy Spirit is not from the New Testament BUT from the Old Testament.
And, you have no single right to limit me to what text I can or cannot quote from my bible. Do you think it makes sense if I tell you not to quote verses revealed in Medina for me?
1. The Holy Spirit was part of Creation.
Gen 1:2:
"And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters."


Job 26:13:
"By his spirit he has garnished the heavens; his hand has formed the crooked serpent."


In Islam, was Jibril part of creating the universe?

3. The Holy Spirit is directly called God
In Acts 5:3-4, Peter says that lying to the Holy Spirit is lying to God, equating the Spirit with God

Acts 5:3-4:
"But Peter said, Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? Whiles it remained, was it not your own? and after it was sold, was it not in your own power? why have you conceived this thing in your heart? you have not lied to men, but to God."

4. The Holy Spirit possesses divine attributes:
The Spirit is eternal, omnipresent (Psalm 139:7-, omniscient (1 Corinthians 2:10-11), and omnipotent, all traits unique to God.

Do you think Angel Gabriel or Jibril has any of these attributes?


5. The Holy Spirit performs divine works:
Creation (Job 33:4), giving life (John 6:63; Romans 8:11), inspiring prophecy (2 Peter 1:21), and sanctifying believers are acts of God attributed to the Spirit

Do you think Angel Gabriel or Jibril has any of these attributes?

JimRohn:

3. The Islamic View (For Clarification, Not Debate)

Since you asked: In Islam, the Holy Spirit (Rūḥ al-Qudus) refers to Jibrīl (Gabriel) — the Angel of Revelation. He is a creation of Allah, not a part of divinity. The Qur’an makes clear that:

> “Say: The Holy Spirit has brought it (the Qur’an) down from your Lord in truth…” — Qur’an 16:102

He serves God's commands and is not divine in nature.

However, let us not conflate definitions. The original question asks you to defend the doctrine of the Trinitarian Holy Spirit from the words of Jesus himself — not from Paul, church fathers, or philosophical extrapolations.

4. Conclusion

So to restate the challenge with clarity:👇

> Where did Jesus clearly and unambiguously identify the Holy Spirit as God or as a co-equal person of a triune Godhead?

Let us focus on what Jesus himself said. If your doctrine is truly grounded in his teachings, then this should be straightforward.

I look forward to your evidence-based response.

But
1. There is not a single verse of the Qur'an that calls Jibril the Holy Spirit. If there is, please show me!
2. There is a theological problem in Islam as there is a confusion of what a spirit is
A. Is it untrue that Jesus is a SPIRIT from Allah in the Qur'an and no other human being is called a spirit by Allah?
B. Is it untrue that Allah breathe of his spirit into Adam? The implication is gross. Did Allah breathe Jibril into Adam?
C. Islam doesn't even know what a Spirit is: if you know, please tell me!


You have no explanation

Mr JimRohn
Page 3

Mr JimRohn
Page 2

Mr JimRohn
As usual, after posting the post was banned with no reason. So. I have scanned it here for you.

The next three pages

Hello JimRohn :
Continuation C

Hello JimRohn :
Continuation

Hello JimRohn :

The Nairaland Placed me under ban for the posts below. So, here it is again!

JimRohn:
You quote Jesus saying, “Love God and love your neighbor,” as if that statement alone defines the full message of his mission. Let me educate you properly, because your selective quoting doesn't impress anyone who actually understands scripture—yours or mine.

Yes, Jesus (peace be upon him) taught love, mercy, and justice. So did every prophet before him—including Muhammad ﷺ. But what you conveniently leave out is that Jesus also taught obedience to God, strict monotheism, and submission to God's will—not to himself, not to a trinity, not to some fabricated atonement theology cooked up by Paul and the Church centuries later.

So when I refer to “later theological innovations falsely attributed to Jesus,” I’m talking about:

The doctrine of the Trinity (which Jesus never preached),

The idea that Jesus is God or the "Son of God" in a literal divine sense,

The atonement myth that God needed blood to forgive sins.

None of these were taught by Jesus. They were injected by councils, creeds, and corrupt theologians long after he was gone. So don't quote Jesus the Prophet and then sneak in beliefs from Paul the Innovator. That’s intellectual dishonesty.

As for your question about worship, don’t act as if Muslims have no concept of it. In Islam, worship is not just lip service or emotional sentiment. Worship (ʿibādah) means complete submission, obedience, love, reverence, and servitude to Allah alone—in belief, action, and law. It includes prayer, fasting, charity, and moral conduct—but also rejecting all false gods and partners.

You ask how God revealed that purpose to the first man? Through clear tawheed: worship your Creator alone, obey His guidance, avoid sin, and live with ability.

To Adam, God revealed the path of submission and repentance.

To Jesus, God revealed the Injīl, calling Bani Israel back to tawheed.

To Muhammad ﷺ, God revealed the Qur’an—the final, uncorrupted message, universal for all time.

You avoid the real question: if you claim to obey Jesus, then why don’t you worship the same God he worshipped? Jesus prayed to God, submitted to God, called people to God—not to himself.
Yet you worship Jesus and pretend that’s obedience?

That’s not love. That’s shirk. And no amount of sentimental cherry-picking will change that.

honesttalk21 BibleInterpreta AntiChristian TenQ CreativeOrbit gofh

Sorry,
How do you know what Jesus preached?
Do you know how Jesus described the Holy Spirit?

What is Trinity according to Allah?
What is Trinity according to Christians?




What is the difference between the Taoheed of Allah and the Taoheed of Satan?

honesttalk21:


Do Demons work for or with Satan?

Satan is one of the fallen Angels: a leader amongst them.
Demons are children of fallen angels, they must do the work of their parents shouldn't they?

honesttalk21:


Small wonders your ignorance leads to wreckless diarrhea and typically typing nonsense.

The idea that demons are actually fallen angels is strongly backed by Scripture, highlighting their rebellion against God and their connection to Satan.

For instance, in Isaiah 14:12-15, we witness Lucifer's fall as he tries to elevate himself above God, which marks the beginning of demonic forces.
Additionally, Revelation 12:7-9 illustrates a heavenly battle where Michael and his angels confront the dragon—Satan—who, along with his followers, is cast down to earth. This connection emphasizes their ongoing resistance to divine intentions.

Ephesians 6:12 further clarifies this conflict against spiritual evil, confirming that demons are indeed fallen angels standing against God's will.

You think it is honourable either by you or the s to delete posts you don't like!?

AntiChristian:
Same old lies being regurgitated! I don't know why some Christians are adept in peddling falsehood especially about it Islam.

Moon God!

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): "And the moon, We have measured for it mansions (to traverse)" [Yaa-Seen 36:39], i.e., We have made it progress through stages by which the ing of months can be measured, just as night and day are known from the sun.

Allaah says (interpretation of the meanings):
"They ask you about the new moons. Say: These are signs to mark fixed periods of time for mankind and for the pilgrimage . . ." [al-Baqarah 2:189]

"It is He Who made the sun a shining thing and the moon as a light , and measured out its (their) stages, that you might know the number of their years and the reckoning. . ." [Yoonus 10:5]

So it is clear Allah made the sun, moon and other planetary bodies known and unknown!

So, who is the pre-Islamic Deity called LAH?