NewStats: 3,260,892 , 8,172,878 topics. Date: Tuesday, 27 May 2025 at 11:49 PM 32b2u

CreativeOrbit:
Your argument is a textbook case of misrepresenting religious texts through superficial reading, devoid of scholarly context or theological depth. It's not just incorrect—it's intellectually reckless.

Everything I say is misconstrued as far as you are concerned. But do you know why?
Because I chose to stick with only TWO opinions of Islam
1. The opinion of Allah found in the Qur'an
2. The opinion of your prophet found in the hadiths

But no! These opinions don't matter to you because I must submit myself to the opinion of your Scholars who often go against one another.
At best what you are saying is that Islam is a religion created by Islamic scholars who keep on changing their arguments depending on their situation.

CreativeOrbit:

1. Allah and the Dajjal: Willful Misreading
The hadith you quoted (Jami’ at-Tirmidhi 2241) is not comparing Allah to the Dajjal—it’s doing the exact opposite. The Prophet (peace be upon him) clearly stated: “Your Lord is not one-eyed” to emphasize that the Dajjal cannot be God. This was a diagnostic refutation of the Dajjal’s false claims to divinity, not a comparison. If you can’t distinguish between a negation and an analogy, then you're not in a position to critique theology.

Unfortunately, Allah should have compared the real Messiah (a man) with the Dajjal who is false Messiah (also a man).

A simple argument of Allah should have been: Allah is NOT ever a Man and this would have settled the argument wouldn't it?


Is Allah not all wise again?

CreativeOrbit:

2. “Two Hands” – Metaphor, Not Mechanism
When Allah says, “...that which I created with My two hands” (Qur’an 38:75), this is not an anatomical statement. Islamic scholars like Imam al-Ash’ari, Imam al-Ghazali, and Ibn Taymiyyah have all addressed these types of verses. Their consensus is clear: Allah has attributes befitting His majesty, but not resembling creation in any form. The Qur’an is explicit: “Laysa kamithlihi shay’un” (There is nothing like unto Him) [Qur’an 42:11]. To take "hands" literally is to ignore 1,400 years of theological reasoning and fall into anthropomorphism—something Islam categorically rejects.

It doesn't matter what you accept or reject. What matters is what Allah says and what your prophet says about your religion.

Unfortunately,
One Hand could mean the Power of Allah just as a Finger could represent the power of Allah in creating Adam
BUT
Not TWO hands my dear because you have a lot of explanations to do in explaining why ONE hand was not sufficient (if indeed it is allegorical)

CreativeOrbit:

3. “Clothes” and “Shin” – Misunderstood Metaphors
Qur’an 68:42 says “The Day the shin will be uncovered…” This is an idiom in classical Arabic. You don’t understand the language, the context, or the exegetical tradition. Scholars like Ibn Kathir, Al-Qurtubi, and Fakhr al-Din al-Razi explain that this verse symbolizes the severity and gravity of the Day of Judgment, not a literal body part. If you're going to use Qur'anic language, the bare minimum is to understand classical Arabic idioms and metaphors. Without that, you're weaponizing ignorance.

You seem not to understand the level of your problem.
1. Allah comes to you Muslims in a Different SHAPE
2. Based on this new shape of Allah you reject him and even call him satan
3. You Muslims then had a meeting to deliberate on HOW to RECOGNISE Allah from his looks
4. Then you Muslims that Allah has a SHIN
5. The Allah Unveils his SHIN to you by which you now RECOGNISE him as Allah

Everything up till now is about recognition of the PHYSICAL SHAPE of Allah.


Sorry to disappoint your faulty scholars standard islamic narrative

CreativeOrbit:

4. The Deeper Issue: Lazy Argumentation Disguised as Critique
This isn't sincere inquiry—it’s shallow provocation. You’re treating sacred texts like a punchline, ignoring the centuries of rigorous intellectual tradition that interpreted these verses with depth, nuance, and reverence. Your rhetoric has no scholarly lineage. It’s not philosophy, not theology—just a loud opinion built on zero credibility.

Just imagine how you deny Allah and his prophet to hold onto the opinion of scholars who came several centuries after Mohammed.

Is it difficult to trust Allah and his Messenger's words?

CreativeOrbit:

5. A Word on Integrity
If you're going to critique Islam, do so with integrity. Read the tafsir. Study kalam. Learn Arabic. Then come forward with questions—not accusations. Until then, your argument is not just flawed—it’s beneath serious engagement.

You speak like 90% of Muslims have done what you are suggesting I should do.

Like I said:
I am willing to go with what Allah and his perfect prophet said. But to you, that is a lack of integrity as integrity is to reinterpret their sayings to conform to the STANDARD ISLAMIC NARRATIVE (SIN) which has lots of Holes and falsehood!

honesttalk21:


You have problems with Allah clearly stating what he is not?

As earlier stated your reference to Qur'an 38:75 doesn't mean Allah has hands like mankind. The verse refers to the power, care and honour by which Adam was created.

Where is your claim to wearing cloth? You forget or were just up to your usual mischief. Does a shin being revealed translate to it being previously clothed?

Just listen to your meaningless rattle.

According to your prophet and Allah
Angels were created from Light
Jinns were created from smokeless fire
Humans were created from mud

Tell me of the three materials the one that is more honourable.

Allah has hands. QED.
Allah stated this by himself.
AND
Allah never anywhere says how his hands look like, neither did your prophet. This your argument of not being like our hands is extremely silly.

Is my hands like your hands?
No, in many respects but yes in some respects!


A hand is a hand sir!

TheJustPath:
Your argument reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of Islamic theology and a reckless attempt to anthropomorphize the divine. Let's be clear: quoting scripture out of context and without proper scholarly grounding is not only intellectually lazy, it's dishonest.

Lets see!
LOL!

TheJustPath:

1. The Comparison to the Dajjal
The hadith in Jami’ at-Tirmidhi does not compare Allah to the Dajjal in essence or nature. It highlights a distinguishing sign to help believers identify a deceiver. The Prophet (peace be upon him) didn’t say “Allah is like a man”; he said the Dajjal’s blindness is a clear sign he is not God. If you're going to quote scripture, at least understand the point—this isn’t Allah being likened to a man, this is Allah being distinguished from one. That’s the opposite of your claim.

So you agree that all Allah needed to say is that Allah is NOT a man or Allah doesn't look like a man AND the argument is forever settled.

The Dajjal is supposed to be the false Messiah and I think the comparison should be between the real Messiah (a man and the Dajjal). Can you explain how Allah brought himself into the needless comparison?

TheJustPath:

2. "Two Hands" in Surah Saad
When Allah says "with My two hands," it is not an anatomical statement. Islamic theology has always maintained that Allah's attributes are unique and incomparable (see Qur’an 42:11: “There is nothing like unto Him.”). Classic scholars—from Imam Malik to Ibn Taymiyyah—have made it clear: affirm the attributes without likening them to creation, imagining them, or denying them. Your interpretation is a shallow literalism with zero theological depth.

Unfortunately, if the hand of Allah is a figure of speech to speak of his power, just one hand is enough. Unfortunately, Allah says his TWO hands making it literal. Allah could have even used his FINGER as a figure of speech and we would have recognised it as a figure of speech.

Too bad, your excuse falls apart because ONE hand (one power) was not enough, so Allah had to use two.

TheJustPath:

3. "Allah’s Clothes" and "The Shin"
Again, the Day the "shin is uncovered" (Qur’an 68:42) is metaphorical, not physical. Even traditional scholars who take an apparentist approach do so with the caveat that we do not comprehend the “how” (bi la kayf). These are signs of divine power and majesty, not descriptions of human traits. You're treating divine metaphors like comic-book s—which is not only ignorant but profoundly disrespectful.

You do not comprehend, YET you argue vehemently as if you do.

What prevented you Muslims from seeing the shin of Allah when he obviously came to you in a different shape from the one you know UNTIL he unveiled his SHIN to you?

TheJustPath:

4. The Real Issue: Intentional Misinterpretation
This kind of rhetoric isn’t about genuine inquiry. It’s a deliberate attempt to mock, provoke, and project modern materialism onto transcendent theology. You're not engaging with scripture—you're manipulating it to fit a shallow argument that doesn’t hold under scrutiny.

Conclusion
Islamic theology was developed over centuries by minds far more rigorous and intellectually honest than this cheap attack. If you're serious about challenging Islamic concepts, engage with the actual theological framework, not this cartoonish misrepresentation. Until then, this is not critique—this is clownery masquerading as insight.

All I do is to force you to think and reason out the deliberate lies of your scholars. The hadiths betray the cascade of lies islamic scholars have told over the centuries.

Whenever you see disturbing contradictions and problems, no matter how literal it is, your argument is to say "it doesn't say that..."

Like I said earlier:
Muslims believe more in the CONSENSUS of their Scholars OVER the Opinion of both Allah and his Messenger Mohammed. The consensus of your scholars overrule and override the Qur'an and the Hadiths.

It is not surprising anyways as even Mohammed overrules Allah sometimes AND you Muslims will follow Mohammed rather than Allah.

If Allah says that the Qur'an is explained in DETAIL everything, how come no Muslim can read the Qur'an by themselves to understand what Allah is saying without going with the opinion of your scholars of what they mean?

honesttalk21:


You have problems with Allah clearly stating what he is not?

As earlier stated your reference to Qur'an 38:75 doesn't mean Allah has hands like mankind. The verse refers to the power, care and honour by which Adam was created.

Where is your claim to wearing cloth? You forget or were just up to your usual mischief. Does a shin being revealed translate to it being previously clothed?

A monkey has hands different from your hand.
My wives hand is different from my hand.
An octopus hands is different from our hands

Your argument is silly as the argument isn't about whether Allah's hands is EXACTLY like our hands (because it could simply be much bigger LOL).

About the shin of Allah,
What prevented you Muslims from seeing the shin of Allah when he obviously came to you in a different shape from the one you know UNTIL he unveiled his SHIN to you?

honesttalk21:


I personally haven't come across where Allah puts on clothes and wonder what use that will be.
In Islam, the essence of Allah is incredibly important. The Qur'an and Hadith highlight attributes such as mercy, power, and wisdom, but it's vital to recognize that these shouldn't be compared directly to creation. Delving into these attributes can be unnecessary and may even contradict the scriptures, which helps maintain the integrity of one's faith.

How does your scripture explain these to you?

What do we do when it was Allah himself and his prophet Mohammad comparing himself to us men?



Allah comparing himself with the Da'jaal (a man)

The difference between Allah and the Dajjal is that Allah is not blind in one eye.

Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2241
'Ibn 'Umar narrated that the Prophet(s.a.w) was asked about the Dajjal, so he said:
"Lo! Indeed your Lord is not blind in one eye, and indeed he is blind in one eye; his right eye is as if it is a floating grape."


Allah has two hands

Quran 38:75
"O Iblis! What prevented you from prostrating to that which I created with My two hands? Are you arrogant, or were you [already] among the haughty?"




Allah's clothes!?
Qur'an 68:42:
"The Day the shin will be uncovered and they are invited to prostrate but will not be able to."

honesttalk21:


You sure have gotten confused or is there an alter ego between Tenq and NairaLTQ?

Statements showing human ability to do to some degree a few things God doesn't in anyway make God similar to the created man. Is this what your thinking tells you despite numerous verses of the Qur'an clearly stating Allah is not like man and nothing can be compare to him

You forgot that Allah has eyes, he has a shin, he put on clothes, he has two hands, face, fingers etc.

The only creatures that put on clothes is usually humans.

honesttalk21:

Very clear. Iblis is a creation while Allah isn't. Despite all Iblis does or doesn't do he is not above the power of Allah.

Iblis will be we we questioned, tell who will or can question Allah?

This is not the question? I didn't ask if Iblis was created or not . I asked about the difference between the onensss of Iblis and the oneness of Allah.

Iblis is certainly one!

Can Iblis be in two places at the same time?
Can Iblis be everywhere in space and time?
Iblis can enter a house or even a toilet: can Allah enter a toilet?


Again, I ask:
What is the difference between the onensss of Iblis and the oneness of Allah.

honesttalk21:


Of what value is a backup that is misunderstood? Tell me do you really know what you talk about? Maybe if you did you will say a lot less. You the saying about devoid vessels?

Simple English from translations done by your scholars and you still complain of misunderstanding!? I certainly understand what I talk about, it is you who is embarrassed about the implications enough to desire a reinterpretation.

honesttalk21:

You choose to forget that in Exodus 33:20, God explicitly states to Moses, "You cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.?

Isaiah 59:2 states, But your iniquities have separated you from your God; your sins have hidden his face from you, so that he will not hear

So God's essence remains veiled.

Can the God of the Jews and Christians make himself seen by men while at the same time in Heaven on His Throne?
Yes!
Can Allah of the Muslims come to the earth and be seen? Can Allah enter his creations?
No!

Then we are not seeing the same thing. Btw Isaiah 59:2 is not literal!

honesttalk21:

Moses pbuh spoke with God so tell did he see God to speak with him?

The importance of this discussion amongst other things. This setting creates a truly unique backdrop for the Prophet Muhammad's pbuh's direct dialogue with Allah, highlighting a spiritual elevation that goes beyond the limits of our earthly existence. It's important to understand that this divine communication doesn't limit Allah's presence; instead, it strengthens the belief in His eternal and all-encoming essence.

Moses wanted to see God in His glory, but this is impossible. Mohammed was copying the Jews without understanding that the God of the Jews and Christians can make Himself visible on earth while still being in heaven on His Throne.

Did Abraham in the Bible see God on earth?
Yes!
Did Jacob see God here on earth?
Yes!

No one can see God in His full glory.

Mohammed went to a LOCATION to see Allah who spoken to him behind the veil. If Allah is in a location, then Allah cannot be Omnipresent

Is Al-Firdaus Al-'Ala inside paradise or above paradise?
Another evidence that Allah is NOT Omnipresent!

CreativeOrbit:
Your entire message reeks of arrogance cloaked in selective ignorance. You claim to have been “almost Muslim,” yet your arguments betray a shallow, cherry-picked engagement with Islamic texts—driven not by a pursuit of truth, but a desire to confirm your bias.

You claim “the Qur’an itself let you out of confusion,” yet ironically it that it’s only after reading it that you became confused. That’s not clarity—that’s internal contradiction. You speak of “undeniable facts,” but conveniently fail to cite a single one. Why? Because vague accusations are easier to throw than actual substance.

1. Is it untrue Allah reported that Dhul-Qarnayn found the sun setting in a pool of hot muddy waters
2. Is it untrue that Allah says that Jesus was neither crucified nor killed?
3. Is it untrue that Allah condemned those who take their monks and rabbis as Lords instead of Allah AND the Messiah?
4. Is it untrue that Allah mixed up Mariam the sister of Moses and Aaron with Mary the mother of Jesus
5. Is it untrue that Allah doesn't know the pronunciation of Abraham's name in the Qur'an?
ابرهَم (Ibrāham) Qur'an 2:124-260 or ابراهيم (Ibrāhīm) eg Qur’an 14:1,2,14
6. If the Qur'an is explained in detail, who is the person called Israel?


You will need some long grammar to resolve each of these questions.

CreativeOrbit:

Now to your two questions:

1. Why do Muslims "deny the obvious"?
Perhaps the real question is why people like you think your interpretation—often removed from context, linguistics, and scholarship—should override centuries of deeper, more informed understanding. The “obvious” isn’t always what you want it to be. You read verses without context, historical background, or even basic Arabic comprehension, then call Muslims liars when they don’t agree with your surface-level conclusions. That’s not seeking truth; that’s intellectual laziness.

1. According to Qur'an 19:71-72, will ALL Muslims at least temporarily enter the fire of hell?
2. According to Qur’an 9:31, are people expected to take Allah and the Messiah as Lords rather than their Rabbis and Monks?

Let's see how you will deny Allah for the false interpretation of your scholars

CreativeOrbit:

2. Why do Muslims refer to scholars?
Do you visit a doctor when you're ill or self-diagnose from Google? Scholars exist for a reason—to preserve nuance, expertise, and rigor. Islam is a complete system with legal, spiritual, and moral dimensions. If you think your personal opinion supersedes a thousand years of intellectual tradition, that's not a critique of Islam—it's a reflection of your ego.

1. Allah says you should do Halal Prostitution Mutah Qur'an 4:24, Mohammed and Later Uthman abrogated it.
2. Allah says you can marry and divorce pre-pubescent girls in Qur'an 65:4. But, you don't do that now. Do you? No!
3. Did Allah abrogate Qur'an 24:2?
4. Who removed Allah's revelation of breastfeeding an adult man ten times which Allah reduced to five times from the Qur'an?

These are just examples where you reject the words of Allah for the opinion of men.

CreativeOrbit:

As for Jesus: You talk about Him being a ransom, yet ignore His own words where He submitted to God (John 17:3), called God greater than Himself (John 14:28), and prayed to the One True God (Luke 22:42). Your version of Christianity hinges on Paul’s theology, not Christ’s actual teachings. Don’t project your distorted doctrine as if it’s divine truth.

John 17:1-5:
"These words spoke Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify your Son, that your Son also may glorify you: As you have given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as you have given him. And this is life eternal, that they might know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. I have glorified you on the earth: I have finished the work which you gave me to do. And now, O Father, glorify you me with your own self with the glory which I had with you before the world was."
1. Is Allah a Father in any sense? If not, Jesus isn't speaking about Allah!
2. Is it true that The same verse says Jesus will give ETERNAL life to those His Father has given Him?
3. Is it true that Jesus was before the world existed?

So, read to comprehend.

John 14:28:
"You have heard how I said to you, I go away, and come again to you. If you loved me, you would rejoice, because I said, I go to the Father: for my Father is greater than I."
Of course, the Father is greater than Jesus BECAUSE Jesus humbled Himself, coming in the form of a Servant.

Phil 2:5-8:
"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took on him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient to death, even the death of the cross."

So, if Jesus could be hungry, and feel pain, and be bounded, he is certainly lower than His Father

Common sense should tell you that of necessity, the Father must be great that his Son.

You accuse Paul while forgetting that Qur'an 36:13-14 says that Jesus sent His messages who were rejected, then a third was sent as reinforcement. Your islamic early commentators like Ibn ‘Abbas, Ka‘b al-Ahbar, and Wahb bin Munabbih identified the city as Antioch, ruled by a king named Antiochus, an idol-worshipper and the names of the messengers are Sham‘un (Peter), Yuhanna (John), and Bulus (Paul).

Deny this again!

CreativeOrbit:

You want to talk about lies? Start by addressing your own selective reading, misrepresentation, and smug self-certainty. Your so-called “journey to asking questions” sounds more like a crusade to justify walking away from what you never truly understood to begin with.

Unfortunately, it is you Muslims that tell the multi-cascade of lies.

It is you who need to ask questions because the questions will lead you to Jesus who would be the ransom for you on the day of judgment.

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."'

Why would Allah use a Christian or a Jew as ransom for you?

gohf:
I wish you are on clubhouse. I wonder what creativeorbit and Antichristian answers to these questions are

It is undeniable that Allah is neither Omnipresent, Omnipotent nor Omniscient. All these are consequences of their Taoheed.

honesttalk21:


It is true that Tenq doesn't genuinely ask but has fixation about what is accepted then when extensively exhausted and dismissed he starts with another line of nonsensical question.

It seems you don't know that I almost became a Muslim and recited the shahada. It was the Qur'an itself that let me out of my confusion.

Open your eyes and stop defending the undefendable. Both the Qur'an and Hadiths are lies that need further lies to defend.

I was ready to leave my faith for Islam until undeniable facts stared me in the face. I couldn't you to manufacture lies to defend Islam nor Mohammed. Thus, my journey to asking questions both about Islam and Christianity started.

Let me ask you two question:
1. Why is it that Muslims usually deny the obvious when they read the Qur'an or the Hadiths?
2. Why is it that Muslims take the Opinions of their Scholars over that of your prophet and even Allah (depending on what suits them)?


Jesus came to be the ransom for you from the fire of hell or why do you think He came to the world?
Do you think I can be a good ransom for you (as a Christian) from the fire of hell?

honesttalk21:
The saying of the Prophet (ﷺ): "Allah does not sleep" and "His veil is light, and if he were to remove it, the splendour of his face would burn all of his creation, as far as hs sght reaches".

Is this a literal statement that Allah's face would burn all his creations or allegorical statement.

Because it has implications.
If truely Mohammed went to the LOCATION where Allah is and spoke to him behind the veil, THEN Allah is surely NOT Omnipresent

Several ways to prove the same thing.

honesttalk21:

Utterly shallow understanding!


The Prophet Muḥammad pbuh mentioned that Allah created Adam in His image, and there's a hadith that even describes Adam's height. But when we talk about being created "in His image," it’s not meant to be taken literally as a physical likeness. Instead, it’s usually understood to symbolize the divine qualities that are reflected in humans, albeit in a limited and created form.

Tell us the relationship of Adam's height to Allah's attributes
AND
Tell us the relationship of Adam's Face to Allah's attributes

Why did your prophet emphasized Adam's Face and Height?

2. Mohammed said that Allah created Adam in his image and then goes on to describe Adams image in the physical of face and height.
Can you thus explain in clear how Adam is created in Allah's image?

honesttalk21:

The rejection of Jesus as the Messiah by many Jews can be attributed to several factors, primarily his lack of worldly power and the nature of his crucifixion.

This is between you and them though.

Echad stresses the oneness of God without implying plurality, shows fundamental differences in theology between Judaism and Christianity.

Indeed, Allah does not forgive associating others with Him ˹in worship˺ but forgives anything else of whoever He wills. And whoever associates others with Allah has indeed committed a grave sin.

It seems you don't know that the Jewish scholars used to believe in the duality of God known as "the two powers of heaven" which was entirely rejected at the advent of Christianity?

Let me show you just one scripture in the Torah that explains it.

Gen 19:24:
"and YHWH (on earth) rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from YHWH, from the heavens;"

They saw YHWH who comes to the earth either as a Man or an Angel or as Pillar of Cloud and Fire who is also Simultaneously on His Throne in Heaven.

Because of the Christians teaching Trinity, they rejected any of their doctrine that suggests the Triune nature of God.

Again,
Let me show you what Echad means. God says that Adam and Eve are ONE (Echad) for it means COMPOUND UNITY

Gen 2:24:
"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall to his wife: and they shall be one (ECHAD) flesh."


Unfortunately, because Allah is solitary One, he cannot be simultaneously in more than one place at a time.

1. Can Allah enter your toilet?
Can Allah enter your grave?

If he can't, he is not Omnipresent




Secondly,
2. If Christians are indeed associating partners with Allah AND Qur’an 5:72 is TRUE, can you explain who Allah thinks Christians are associating with himself?

honesttalk21:


Never mind Tenq and his silly defective interpretation

You know that I always back up any claim with your own religious sources.

Your prophet is the one interpreting your religion but you reject it for your own whimsy opinions

TheJustPath:
Let’s dismantle your pseudo-logical theatrics, point by point. You’re not asking questions in pursuit of truth—you’re setting up straw men with loaded assumptions, then pretending to be shocked when they collapse under scrutiny.

1. Your claim: If Allah is one, above the universe, not a spirit, and has a shape—then He cannot be logically omnipresent.
This is a textbook case of category error and philosophical ignorance.

Allah you needed to do was to answer the question OR falsify ANY of the premise.

Again:
The Question
1. Do you concur that if the following are TRUE that
1. Allah is one and
2. Allah is over/on top of the universe and
3. Allah is not a spirit and
4. Allah has at least a shape
then Allah CANNOT be LOGICALLY Omnipresent?

TheJustPath:

Being “above” creation does not imply spatial limitation. Allah being “over” the universe refers to transcendence—not physical location as you understand it through your human lens. You're equating divine transcendence with being “in a place.” That’s like asking where the number 7 lives. Your reasoning collapses because you don’t grasp the distinction between the created physical realm and the uncreated nature of the Divine.

Your prophet seems to disagree with you.
a. The Qur'an itself makes the claim that there are 7 earths and 7 heavens:
b. Your prophet described the seven earths in a literal manner

Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3298
Al-Hasan narrated that:
Abu Hurairah said: “Once when the Prophet of Allah was sitting with his Companions, a cloud came above them, so the Prophet of Allah said: ‘Do you know what this is?’ They said: ‘Allah and His Messenger know better.’ He said: ‘These are the clouds that are to drench the earth, which Allah [Blessed and Most High] dispatches to people who are not grateful to Him, nor supplicate to Him.’ Then he said: Do ‘ you know what is above you?’ They said: ‘Allah and His Messenger know better.’ He said: ‘Indeed it is a preserved canopy of the firmament whose surge is restrained.’ Then he said: ‘Do you know how much is between you and between it?’ They said: ‘Allah and His Messenger know better.’ He said: ‘Between you and it [is the distance] of five-hundred year.’ Then he said: ‘Do you know what is above that.’ They said: ‘Allah and His Messenger know better.’ He said: ‘Verily, above that are two Heavens, between the two of them there is a distance of five-hundred years’ – until he enumerated seven Heavens – ‘What is between each of the two Heavens is what is between the heavens and the earth.’ Then he said: ‘Do you know what is above that?’ They said: ‘Allah and His Messenger know better.’ He said: ‘Verily, above that is the Throne between it and the heavens is a distance [like] what is between two of the heavens.’ Then he said: ‘Do you know what is under you?’ They said: ‘Allah and His Messenger know better.’ He said: ‘Indeed it is the earth.’ Then he said: ‘Do you know what is under that?' They said: ‘Allah and His Messenger know better.’ He said: ‘Verily, below it is another earth, between the two of which is a distance of five-hundred years.’ Until he enumerated seven earths: ‘Between every two earths is a distance of five-hundred years.’ Then he said: ‘By the One in Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammad! If you were to send [a man] down with a rope to the lowest earth, then he would descend upon Allah.’ Then he recited: He is Al-Awwal, Al-Akhir, Az-Zahir Al-Batin, and He has knowledge over all things.”

Can you see a clear evidence you chose to ignore!? Did you see ABOVE... BELOW....!?

So, here is another EVIDENCE showing that your own prophet meant spacial locations.
Too bad with hindsight, you think it shouldn't be, but it is according to your prophet.

TheJustPath:

Omnipresence in Islamic theology doesn't mean Allah is “spread out” like gas or a spirit hovering in space. It means that His knowledge, power, and will encom every atom of existence. He is not contained within creation, yet nothing escapes His grasp. This is a coherent and well-established theological view—and far more intellectually robust than your clumsy materialistic framing.

It is NOT up to you to redefine the meaning of Omnipresence.

Omnipresence means being present everywhere at the same time. In a religious context, it refers to God's ability to be present throughout the entire universe simultaneously, with no place where God is absent.

Awareness of what is happening is NOT Omnipresence, it may be an aspect of Omniscience

Do you concur that by normal definition of the word, Allah is NOT Omnipresent?

TheJustPath:

Also, “has a shape” is an empty phrase unless you define what you mean by it. Are you claiming shape = limited? If so, prove that concept within metaphysical theology—don’t just throw it out like it’s obvious.

Your logic is flawed from the ground up because it applies corporeal mechanics to a non-corporeal Being whose attributes transcend creation. You might as well argue that mathematics can't exist because it doesn't have mass.

What is a SHAPE?
A Shape is a noun that refers to the external form, outline, or appearance of an object or figure. It describes the two-dimensional or three-dimensional configuration that distinguishes one object from another based on its contours, edges, and overall structure. Shape defines the boundaries of an object or entity

As living beings, whatever we see has a shape and things we cannot see don't have any shape.

If you can see the sun, however big it is, it implies that the sun is FINITE. If you can see an Angel, the Angel is FINITE.

This, since you Muslims will see Allah, then he must be finite and necessarily not Omnipresent ACCORDING to the hadiths of your prophet.

Do you concur that ANYTHING you can see has a Shape (whether physical or spiritual)?

Do you concur that ANYTHING that has a Shape (whether physical or spiritual) is limited?

If Allah has a shape, and he is ONE, then he is bounded in space and as such not Omnipresent!

Can you see the logical fallacy of Taoheed!?

TheJustPath:

2. Your attempt to weaponize the hadith: “Allah created Adam in His image.”

Once again, this is a linguistic and theological misfire on your part. The hadith (in Arabic: "khalaqa Allahu Adama ‘ala suratihi" has multiple scholarly interpretations, and none of them the childish literalism you’re trying to force:

The phrase “in His image” has been understood to mean Adam was created with faculties—like hearing, seeing, speaking—not that Allah has a human form. That’s basic. If you’re unfamiliar with classical exegesis, that’s on you—not the tradition.

Using your powerful logic,
Dogs, Cats, Monkeys are also created in the image of Allah! (Argument: they werr created by Allah with faculties—like hearing, seeing, speaking etc)

SMH!

So, can you please answer the question again?

2. Mohammed said that Allah created Adam in his image and then goes on to describe Adams image in the physical of face and height.
Can you thus explain in clear how Adam is created in Allah's image?

TheJustPath:

Furthermore, nothing in this hadith necessitates anthropomorphism. The Prophet himself repeatedly emphasized that “nothing is like unto Him” (laysa kamithlihi shay’ - Qur’an 42:11). That’s the interpretive rule you ignore because it ruins your weak argument.

Except your prophet was telling lies, Adam was created in the image of Allah. This necessarily, if this is true, Adam is like Allah faulting laysa kamithlihi shay

On a serious note:
Quran 42:11 is just emphasising that nothing is comparable to Allah in attributes. In other words, Allah is far Greater than anything by his attributes.
Mohammed is not speaking of the SHAPE of Allah: otherwise, Allah also has Eyes, Shin, Two hands etc.

Do you disagree with this?
If you do, you may need to explain why Allah has a throne!

TheJustPath:

Finally, your closing claim: “Your only solution was to redescribe Allah differently from how Muhammad described Him.”

No. The solution is to understand the context, language, and limits of your reasoning, which you clearly haven’t. You’re not exposing contradiction—you’re exposing your own theological illiteracy and philosophical shallowness.

Islamic theology has addressed these nuances for over 1,000 years—from Ash’aris, Maturidis, to Hanbalis. You’re not doing anything original. You’re just regurgitating failed arguments from orientalist blogs and atheist forums without even understanding the basic you’re throwing around.

If you want to critique Islamic theology, fine—but do it with intellectual integrity, not with juvenile strawmen and smug ignorance masquerading as logic.

Rich4god honesttalk21 TenQ

I am sorry that the hadiths expose the hypocrisy of Muslims as in many instances, the hadiths are the Tafsirs of the Qur'an by Mohammed himself AND you Muslims are so ashamed of them that you have to manufacture conjectures to say exactly opposite to what Mohammed means.

Do you understand Allah or the Qur'an better than Mohammed?

If not, please accept whatever Mohammed explains about Allah, the Qur'an and the unseen!

The questions were very simple.


I asked you some questions

Questions
1. Do you concur that if the following are TRUE that
1. Allah is one and
2. Allah is over/on top of the universe and
3. Allah is not a spirit and
4. Allah has at least a shape
then Allah CANNOT be LOGICALLY Omnipresent?

2. Mohammed said that Allah created Adam in his image and then goes on to describe Adams image in the physical of face and height.
Can you thus explain in clear how Adam is created in Allah's image?


Unfortunately, your only solution to this was to redescribe Allah differently from how Mohammed described him.

honesttalk21:

Wow! Is this your summation? Is it really sensible in your thinking?

Oh you are talking about physical but fail to acknowledge that some of the way you sense the existence of the almighty is in physical occurrence.
You now wrongly try to limit an undefined islamic view to physical trinity? Is your trinity physical or spiritual or have you now picked one to be? I am about tumbling over.

I am only going with the Tafsir of your prophet in the hadiths about Allah. Is it untrue that the best description of Allah should be that given by Mohammed.
Now, you seem to deny his description. What do we do now?

honesttalk21:

What is there to force. You are often trying to force things until your mumbo jumbo is clearly dismantled. You forget your earlier stance on Echad and Ahad to mean the same thing? Did you not try to force your echad interpretation unto Ahad even when not all native Jews agree with a plural unity.

Is your argument that the Jews are correct about the interpretation of their scripture? Because, if they are correct, they should have come to the conclusion that Jesus is the Messiah. Since they couldn't, your argument falls yakata to the ground.

honesttalk21:

The Hadiths as stated are to be appropriately understood and Allah is not confined or defined by space. The figurative language is to be understood as that which isn't literal.

Hadiths like this are Tafsirs of your prophet, unfortunately, you reject it.
It's your call o!
Mohammed described Allah in of space, time and location. What then do you expect? To help you to redefine the nature of Allah?

honesttalk21:

Do you have problems appreciating the manifestation of the power of the almighty in the world around you and yourself? If you don't are these manifestation the same as seeing the one who lets this manifest?

When you defined Allah in of Taoheed (onensss), you ascribe to him properties unique to physical existence. You unknowingly strip Allah of Omniscience, Omnipresence and Omnipotence without knowing.
Your only way out is to make vague every description your prophet gave Allah.

Is it true that your prophet went before Allah to receive the five daily prayers or is it allegorical?

honesttalk21:


You are your sole problem haven created your god in your own image and expectations however wrong and trying to force what really is into your contraption. It doesn't work that way. Tenq does and cannot define the almighty and his nature.

Hey yeah, tenq is too close thinking to appreciate. It isn't a reference to physical likeness but rather points to the noble qualities that Adam was endowed with by Allah,in a manner suitable for humans, and underscores his honored status among creation.

Avoid? Really? What's to avoid haven answered already or what is it with you and recurring nonsense?

Are you aware that you couldn't answer how Adam was created in Allah's image?


Your prophet obviously saw Allah as physical, otherwise, why would he relate hitting the face with Allah's image!

honesttalk21:


In all you copied to paste you failed to answer whether Allah is over and on top literally or otherwise? Nor what or how exactly the shape of Allah is.

Do you yourself not understand?

These hadiths that seem to imply a physical aspect of Allah should really be viewed through the lens of Tawḥīd and the insights of traditional Islamic scholarship.

I think you answered yourself.
Of a truth, reading the hadiths unbiased, Allah was described by Mohammad in a physical and spacial sense.

It is a problem that you as Muslims must try to reinterpret non-literarilly to solve.

honesttalk21:

To start, the Qur'an emphasizes Allah’s transcendence with the verse: “There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him...” (Surah al-Shūra 42:11). This clearly indicates that Allah exists beyond any physical limitations or attributes.

There is nothing like Allah is NOT about physical attributes otherwise, trinity wouldn't be an issue to Muslims. Taoheed is simply forcing Allah into the mold of "oneness" of physical objects.
You cannot eat your cakes and have it .
There is nothing like Amoeba is a true statement as it doesn't confer any special attributes to it .

honesttalk21:

Renowned scholars, like Imam Mālik, have warned against taking verses about Allah’s “above-ness” too literally, pointing out that such phrases are more about rank than physical form.
Additionally, when it comes to narrations about Allah appearing in various forms, these should be interpreted metaphorically

The description of Mohammed wasn't metaphoric in any sense because he linked it with the cloud and the seven earths and heavens.

honesttalk21:

Believers will recognize Allah by the Shin, not because they saw it before, but because:
*It is a distinctive sign given by Allah,

*Or because Allah gives them the insight to recognize it in that moment.

The “Shin” in this hadith is part of the unseen (ghayb) and is affirmed in Islamic texts.

It should be understood literally (without likening it to creation) or metaphorically (as a symbol of Divine Might). Either way, it emphasizes:

Allah’s uniqueness,

The special relationship believers have with Him,

And the truth of the Final Hour where realities are made manifest.
Scholars such as Imam al-Nawawī suggest that these descriptions are meant to challenge believers' faith, the believers will recognize Allah by the Shin, not because they saw it before, but because:

It is a distinctive sign given by Allah,

Or because Allah gives them the insight to recognize it in that moment. them to recognize Allah through His signs rather than through any physical representation.

Allah has eyes, hands, shape and shin that would be seen by people as clear as they see the moon convey that Allah is bound in space and time.
It is a problem of Taoheed that cannot be resolved without refusing sense and logic.

honesttalk21:

Furthermore the statement that Allah created Adam in His image speaks to the completeness of Adam’s creation, not a physical likeness.

If this is true, what then is complete with a persons face with respect to the look of Adam?
Even animals were created complete in their physical likeness.

It seems you don't have any answer to this.

honesttalk21:

As Imam ʿAlī Zayn al-ʿĀbidīn notes, Allah's essence is beyond what humans can fully grasp. In conclusion, we understand these hadiths within a framework that honors Allah’s uniqueness and transcendence, steering clear of interpretations that might lead to anthropomorphism, which aligns with our core belief in Tawḥīd.

In other words, you intend to avoid the problem created by your doctrine under ignorance.


The Hadiths are very very clear from Mohammed. Allah is localised in space, he has a body with shapes. Because Allah is singular, this makes him
Not Omnipresent nor Omnipotent not Omniscient.

These are necessary conclusion from the doctrine of Taoheed

honesttalk21:


Allah is over and on top literally or otherwise?
Clarity required

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.'"

Sunan Ibn Majah 193
It was narrated that 'Abbas bin 'Abdul-Mutallib said:
"I was in Batha with a group of people, among them whom was the Messenger of Allah. A cloud ed over him, and he looked at it and said: 'What do you call this?' They said: 'Sahab (a cloud).' He said: 'And Muzn (rain cloud).' They said: 'And Muzn.' He said: 'And 'Anan (clouds).' Abu Bakr said: "They said: 'And 'Anan.'" He said: 'How much (distance) do you think there is between you and the heavens?' They said: 'We do not know.' He said: 'Between you and it is seventy-one, or seventy-two, or seventy-three years, and there is a similar distance between it and the heaven above it (and so on)' until he counted seven heavens. 'Then above the seventh heaven there is a sea, between whose top and bottom is a distance like that between one heaven and another. Then above that there are eight mountain goats. The distance between their hooves and their knees is like the distance between one heaven and the next. Then on their backs is the Throne, and the distance between the top and the bottom of the Throne is like the distance between one heaven and another. Then Allah is above that, the Blessed and Exalted."


Mishkat al-Masabih 5726
Al- `Abbas b. `Abd al-Muttalib asserted that he was sitting in al Batha'[*] with a company among whom God's messenger was sitting when a cloud ed. They looked at it and God's messenger asked, "What do you call this?" and received the reply "Clouds (sahab)." He said, "And rain-clouds (muzn)," to which they agreed. He said, "And clouds (`aman)," to which they agreed. He asked, "Do you know the distance between heaven and earth?" and when they replied that they did not, he said, "The distance between them is seventy-one, seventy-two, or seventy-three years, the heaven which is above it is at a similar distance (going on till he counted seven heavens). Above the seventh heaven there is a sea the distance between whose surface and bottom is like that between one heaven and the next. Above that there are eight mountain goats the distance between whose hoofs and haunches is like that between one heaven and the next. On their backs is the Throne the extent of which from top to bottom is like the distance between one heaven and the next. Then God is above that."

honesttalk21:

What sort of shape does Allah have please explain?

Allah comes in Another shape other than the one you Muslims know of his shape.

Sahih al-Bukhari 7439
Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri:
We said, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! Shall we see our Lord on the Day of Resurrection?" He said, "Do you have any difficulty in seeing the sun and the moon when the sky is clear?" We said, "No." He said, "So you will have no difficulty in seeing your Lord on that Day as you have no difficulty in seeing the sun and the moon (in a clear sky)." The Prophet then said, "Somebody will then announce, 'Let every nation follow what they used to worship.' So the companions of the cross will go with their cross, and the idolators (will go) with their idols, and the companions of every god (false deities) (will go) with their god, till there remain those who used to worship Allah, both the obedient ones and the mischievous ones, and some of the people of the Scripture. Then Hell will be presented to them as if it were a mirage. Then it will be said to the Jews, "What did you use to worship?' They will reply, 'We used to worship Ezra, the son of Allah.' It will be said to them, 'You are liars, for Allah has neither a wife nor a son. What do you want (now)?' They will reply, 'We want You to provide us with water.' Then it will be said to them 'Drink,' and they will fall down in Hell (instead). Then it will be said to the Christians, 'What did you use to worship?'

They will reply, 'We used to worship Messiah, the son of Allah.' It will be said, 'You are liars, for Allah has neither a wife nor a son. What: do you want (now)?' They will say, 'We want You to provide us with water.' It will be said to them, 'Drink,' and they will fall down in Hell (instead). When there remain only those who used to worship Allah (Alone), both the obedient ones and the mischievous ones, it will be said to them, 'What keeps you here when all the people have gone?' They will say, 'We parted with them (in the world) when we were in greater need of them than we are today, we heard the call of one proclaiming, 'Let every nation follow what they used to worship,' and now we are waiting for our Lord.' Then the Almighty will come to them in a shape other than the one which they saw the first time, and He will say, 'I am your Lord,' and they will say, 'You are not our Lord.' And none will speak: to Him then but the Prophets, and then it will be said to them, 'Do you know any sign by which you can recognize Him?' They will say. 'The Shin,' and so Allah will then uncover His Shin whereupon every believer will prostrate before Him and there will remain those who used to prostrate before Him just for showing off and for gaining good reputation........



Muslims will recognise Allah by his shin!

honesttalk21:

Allah created Adam in his image sounds more like what Christianity says.

Sahih Muslim 2612 e
This hadith has been transmitted on the authority of Abu Huraira and in the hadith transmitted on the authority of Ibn Hatim Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) is reported to have said:
When any one of you fights with his brother, he should avoid his face for Allah created Adam in His own image.

Mishkat al-Masabih 3525
He reported God’s Messenger as saying, “When any of you fights he must avoid the face, for God created Adam in His own image.”


Sahih Muslim 2841
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying:
Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, created Adam in His image with His length of sixty cubits, and as He created him He told him to greet that group, and that was a party of angels sitting there, and listen to the response that they give him, for it would form his greeting and that of his offspring. He then went away and said: Peace be upon you! They (the angels) said: May there be peace upon you and the Mercy of Allah, and they made an addition of" Mercy of Allah". So he who would get into Paradise would get in the form of Adam, his length being sixty cubits, then the people who followed him continued to diminish in size up to this day.





I asked questions again

Questions
1. Do you concur that if the following are TRUE that
1. Allah is one and
2. Allah is over/on top of the universe and
3. Allah is not a spirit and
4. Allah has at least a shape
then Allah CANNOT be LOGICALLY Omnipresent?

2. Mohammed said that Allah created Adam in his image and then goes on to describe Adams image in the physical of face and height.
Can you thus explain in clear how Adam is created in Allah's image?

TheJustPath:
First of all, don’t mistake your limited understanding for intellectual superiority. I am a scholar—and unlike you, I don’t hide behind selective interpretations or use disagreement among scholars as an excuse to push lazy generalizations.

Yes, Islamic scholars differ on many issues—because Islam encourages ijtihad (independent reasoning) within the bounds of its jurisprudential tradition. But don’t twist that legitimate diversity into a blank cheque for distortion. The existence of scholarly debate doesn't automatically validate your take, especially when it’s rooted in shallow readings or bias.

You’re not just “stating the position of a chunk of scholars.” You’re cherry-picking views that fit your narrative while dismissing the rigorous methodologies that real scholarship demands. That’s not opinion—that’s intellectual dishonesty.

And your smug little “are you even a scholar?” jab? Laughable. If you need to question credentials every time you’re out-argued, you’ve already lost the argument. I don’t have to be loud to be right—I have facts, context, and depth. You just have ego.

So next time, come with knowledge, not arrogance. Because when it comes to serious discourse, posturing won’t save you—substance will. And clearly, you’re running low on that.

So,

If you are what you claim, then from the Arabic explain Qur'an 9:31

Lukgaf:
FACTS ABOUT UD'HIYAH (ILEYA SACRIFICE) - Sanusi Lafiagi

1. Only the following categories animals are valid: Camel, cow, sheep, goat.

2. The age at which each of the animals above becomes eligible for sacrifice is as follows:
a. Camel: 5 years
b. Cow: 2 years
c. Sheep: 6 months
d. Goat: 1 year

3. The number of persons who can sacrifice the above animals is:

a. Camel: 7 persons
b. Cow: 7 persons
c. Ram: 1 person
d. Goat: 1 person

4. The defects that render an animal invalid for sacrifice are:

a. An obvious defect in (one or both of) its eyes such as if it's blind in the eye, or there's an obvious blurriness

b. An obvious illness that affects its activity

c. Obvious lameness that affects its movement

d. Emaciation that leaves no marrow in its bones.

5. A woman can slau.ghter her own sacrifice by herself, even if she were menstruating or experiencing post natal bleeding. Gender and purity are not a condition for its validity.

6. One can take a loan to buy an animal for sacrifice so long as it is not an interest based loan, and he intends to pay it back.

7. It is permitted to delegate another to do the slau.ghtering on one's behalf.

8. The sacrifice commences immediately after the conclusion of 'īd Salāt on the 10th of Dhul Hijjah and ends after sunset on the 13th.

9. The meat should be divided into three (unequal) parts:

a. A part is to be consumed by the owner
b. A part is to be given in charity to the poor and the needy
c. A part is to be given as gifts to friends, relatives, etc

10. It is Sunnah for whoever intends to sacrifice an animal for this purpose to refrain from cutting his nails and hair immediately the crescent of Dhul Hijjah is sighted.

Allāh knows best.

By Sanusi Lafiagi

Islam is the religion of all the prophets before it, yet Islam doesn't obey the laws of these prophets

Particularly, Moses

Leviticus 11:4
“The camel, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is ceremonially unclean for you.”

Why is Carmel meat halal for muslims?

honesttalk21:


Allah indeed in clearly distinct from whatever gods you may put up. He is singularly unique and absolute.

Echad and Ahad both symbolize the idea of oneness, but they carry distinct meanings within different theological contexts. The similarity in how they sound is not enough reason to absolutely equate them.

I don't see a point in engaging your what ifs as indeed at end they are just the whims of your thinking. More so as you make statements you may need to adequately define however I regret to say it will be not worthy use of my time.

I reckon we are done on the non similarity of your concept of the oneness of God and the absolute singularity of Allah.

I hear you. Forget about Ehad or Ahad as it has been over flogged.



I asked you some questions

Questions
1. Do you concur that if the following are TRUE that
1. Allah is one and
2. Allah is over/on top of the universe and
3. Allah is not a spirit and
4. Allah has at least a shape
then Allah CANNOT be LOGICALLY Omnipresent?
2. Mohammed said that Allah created Adam in his image and then goes on to describe Adams image in the physical of face and height.
Can you thus explain in clear how Adam is created in Allah's image?

TheJustPath:
First of all, don’t mistake your limited understanding for intellectual superiority. I am a scholar—and unlike you, I don’t hide behind selective interpretations or use disagreement among scholars as an excuse to push lazy generalizations.

Yes, Islamic scholars differ on many issues—because Islam encourages ijtihad (independent reasoning) within the bounds of its jurisprudential tradition. But don’t twist that legitimate diversity into a blank cheque for distortion. The existence of scholarly debate doesn't automatically validate your take, especially when it’s rooted in shallow readings or bias.

You’re not just “stating the position of a chunk of scholars.” You’re cherry-picking views that fit your narrative while dismissing the rigorous methodologies that real scholarship demands. That’s not opinion—that’s intellectual dishonesty.

And your smug little “are you even a scholar?” jab? Laughable. If you need to question credentials every time you’re out-argued, you’ve already lost the argument. I don’t have to be loud to be right—I have facts, context, and depth. You just have ego.

So next time, come with knowledge, not arrogance. Because when it comes to serious discourse, posturing won’t save you—substance will. And clearly, you’re running low on that.

Here yourself again.

Islamic scholars differ in OPINIONS about this but your opinion is the correct one
AND
Someone like you who take the Opinions of your own scholars different from you are arrogant!?

Listen to yourself speak.


You claim to be a scholar and I laughed in Mandarin. So, you are in the same class as Al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir and Ibn Abbas the cousin of your prophet!?


If you are, then from the Arabic explain Qur'an 9:31

TheJustPath:
Your argument collapses under the weight of its own inconsistency. First, you appeal to scholarly disagreement as if it nullifies my position, but then proceed to affirm your own based on another set of scholars. That’s not rigorous argumentation—it’s selective bias masquerading as principle. If scholarly disagreement disqualifies a view, then yours is equally disqualified. You can’t have it both ways.

You mentioned Ibn Abbas disagreed with Ali. Yes—welcome to Islamic legal tradition, where scholarly debate is not a flaw but a feature. But disagreement does not imply equivalence of positions. The strength of a position is measured by its dalil (evidence), not by how many people held it. The classical jurists—Imam Malik, Abu Hanifa, al-Shafi’i, Ibn Taymiyyah, and others—did not treat every opinion as equal, and neither should we.

Your invocation of “no compulsion in religion” (Qur’an 2:256) is a textbook example of decontextualization. That verse addresses initial acceptance of faith, not the legal consequences of public apostasy, which is treated distinctly in classical fiqh across all major madhhabs. Even modern reformist scholars like Fazlur Rahman or Abdullah Saeed—whom you likely lean on—acknowledge this, while advocating for reinterpretation based on maqasid al-shari‘ah (higher objectives of law), not on denial of historical precedent.

So let’s be clear: I’m not 'ripping hadiths out of context.’ I’m engaging with centuries of scholarly tradition that you’re oversimplifying or ignoring. If your argument is that certain rulings may be unsuitable for modern, secular contexts—fine, make that argument. But don’t pretend your stance is the singular enlightened interpretation while dismissing the rest as ignorant. That’s not critical thinking—that’s intellectual arrogance..

My argument is that whatever you want me to believe about Islam contrary to my understanding is just your OPINION as even your scholars disagree over these things.

So, how dare you claim I am wrong when I am simply stating the position of a chunk of your scholars.

I want to believe that you are not a scholar are you!?

honesttalk21:


You should have said so in the first place.

Now Negation gives us a way to convey that something is missing, to deny a statement, or to reject a proposition.

In those verses outside Surah 112 is this not the case in regards to the use of Ahad?

Some Christians interpret Echad in a way to the idea of the Trinity as a unified plurality, traditional Jewish and Islamic beliefs emphasize a strictly indivisible notion of divine oneness, viewing Trinitarianism quite differently.

The term Echad is a Hebrew word commonly translated as one

Let me show you how Echad is used: not as singular one but compound one!

Like

Gen 2:21-24:
"And YHWH God causes a deep sleep to fall on the man, and he sleeps, and He takes one of his ribs, and closes up flesh in its stead. And YHWH God builds up the rib which He has taken out of the man into a woman, and brings her to the man; and the man says, “This at last! Bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh!” For this is called Woman, for this has been taken from Man; therefore a man leaves his father and his mother, and has cleaved to his wife, and they have become one flesh."



The two of Adam and Eve shall become ONE (Ehad) Flesh


Deu 6:4:
"Hear, O Israel: Our God YHWH— YHWH [is] one!"

The ONE is a compound One not Unitary One!



I asked you some questions

Questions
1. Do you concur that if the following are TRUE that
1. Allah is one and
2. Allah is over/on top of the universe and
3. Allah is not a spirit and
4. Allah has at least a shape
then Allah CANNOT be LOGICALLY Omnipresent?
2. Mohammed said that Allah created Adam in his image and then goes on to describe Adams image in the physical of face and height.
Can you thus explain in clear how Adam is created in Allah's image?

Gabrielshow24:
😂 How can someone be this ignorant? He just can't help it!

It has become a compulsive nature to always shoot himself in the leg 🤣!

He fell into a pot of TRUTH!

Just watch how he will try to clean himself up for lies

achorladey:



Abi, whatever way the person chose to die. Die na die

More like running into a cul de sac

Janosky:

1. Refer to my screenshot evidence:
Your question was "Prince of Princes & King of kings, which title is higher.
I responded that "ONLY Jehovah bears both titles - Prince of Princes & King of kings".
A fact confirmed by your fellow Trinitarians.
Screenshot.

*2
Revelation 19:13-16, the title King of kings and Lord of Lords refer to Jesus Christ. Compare John 17:7.
Prince of Princes was not ascribed to Jesus in these verses..
*3
1 Timothy 6:13-15 reference Jehovah God, the only Sovereign.Compare Matthew 11:25. The ONLY Sovereign is not Jesus.
*4
Revelation 17:14 reference Jesus Christ.
Compare John 17:7

I am satisfied that both titles are for YHWH alone!

You have made my case!
What else?
Behold the LAMB!

honesttalk21:


Definitely you are.

You gave a clear example of the use of Ahad in a negation and are unable to provide any other entity described as Ahad except Allah in the Qur'an.

How can you go so to turn logic illogical?

In your desperation as always haven been knocked down and out with superior intellectual arguments you run to bring other garbage.

Can you not do and finish with one discussion before running to another? Oh you have short circuit to a chaotic position and now try to fire all non shots.

To answer you please first bring in clear unambiguous

1. Where Allah specifically defined trinity

2. Do you know what figuratives and metaphors are?



Of course you claim to understand Arabic and Hebrew better than native Arabians and Jews.

Context and word meaning in Semitic language. Read and learn to know about it

I don't even understand what you mean by example in negation: which you have assumed to be unitary one.
Have I not shown you clearly that Ahad is NEVER defined as Unitary ONE in the Quran?
This is sufficient for me.

Your questions.
1. Allah (generic) never defined anything in the Bible . The word Trinity doesn't even exist in the Bible. Trinity is a word we use to describe the complexity of our God YHWH who from the scriptures is
a. One Being
b. Exists simultaneously as the persons of the Infinite Invisible Holy Spirit, the Father and the Word
c. He is unlike Anyone or Anything in creation because His nature makes Him Omnipotent, Omnipresent and Omniscient.
d. The nearest to my God in description is us limited humans for we were created as a Trinity with a Body, Soul and Spirit: three persons but one being. For we were created in His image.

Thus unlike your Allah who is on top of creation, the whole Creation of the Spiritual Universe and the Physical Universe is completely Inside and within my God YHWH.
2. Yes, I do. Jesus used a lot of parables, figuratives and metaphors in teaching. Is Ahad a metaphor or a parable?


Questions
1. Do you concur that if the following are TRUE that
1. Allah is one and
2. Allah is over/on top of the universe and
3. Allah is not a spirit and
4. Allah has at least a shape
then Allah CANNOT be LOGICALLY Omnipresent?
2. Mohammed said that Allah created Adam in his image and then goes on to describe Adams image in the physical of face and height.
Can you thus explain in clear how Adam is created in Allah's image?

TheJustPath:
Your attempt at a gotcha moment falls flat due to a shallow and cherry-picked understanding of Islamic jurisprudence and hadith sciences.

First, "There is no compulsion in religion" (Qur’an 2:256) is an unequivocal verse from the Qur’an itself — the highest source of authority in Islam. It refers to the individual's freedom to accept or reject faith without coercion. This is the cornerstone of Islamic belief regarding conversion.

Now let’s deal with the hadith you referenced (Sunan an-Nasa’i 4060). You parade this hadith around without understanding its context, classification, or jurisprudential scope. The ruling “Whoever changes his religion, kill him” refers not to a simple change of belief in a private setting, but to active political treason during wartime — a rebellion that posed an existential threat to the Muslim community. Apostasy in early Islam was often tied to sedition, espionage, or betrayal of the state — not personal disbelief.

Let me make this clearer for you: apostasy punishable by death was never about someone quietly changing their religion — it was about publicly defecting in a way that endangered the early Muslim state, which was under siege and fragile. Every legal system in history — including yours — has had capital punishment for treason. This is no different.

Even scholars have disagreed over the interpretation of this hadith. Ibn Abbas disagreed with Ali. Many classical and modern scholars also restrict or reject the use of this hadith as a basis for punishment in today's context, especially in non-theocratic, pluralistic societies.

So no, this doesn’t contradict “no compulsion in religion” unless you insist on ripping hadiths out of context and interpreting Islamic law through your own ignorance. If you're going to critique Islam, at least do the homework first.

Hear yourself

Even scholars have disagreed over the interpretation of this hadith. Ibn Abbas disagreed with Ali. Many classical and modern scholars also restrict or reject the use of this hadith as a basis for punishment in today's context, especially in non-theocratic, pluralistic societies.

BUT then,

So no, this doesn’t contradict “no compulsion in religion” unless you insist on ripping hadiths out of context and interpreting Islamic law through your own ignorance.


Meaning that there is no CONSENSUS about this hadith in Islam as your Learned Scholars disagree about it.

All you did was to chose the set of scholars that align with your views!


I align with your other set of scholars and the plain reading of the Hadith!

honesttalk21:


Keep confusing yourself

You are lost again!
Islam doesn't have answers to basic simple theological questions


Is it untrue that Allah thinks that the Trinity is Allah, Mary and Jesus?
If Allah also thinks that Christians teach that Jesus is Allah, can you tell us according to Allah who the other gods are?



Isn't untrue that Allah descend to the lowest heaven?

Does this not mean that he is not omnipresent?

honesttalk21:


Very good of you to show proof that other uses of Ahad except the one time in reference to Allah is in negative construction.

Negation.

Glad you present the point to yourself in clear .

Meaning that Muslim scholars redefined Ahad to mean something else because it faults their theology of Allah!

Too bad!

One Ahad out of over 80 Ahads in the Qur'an had a different meaning!
SMH!

CreativeOrbit:
You’ve dressed a string of shallow provocations in the illusion of critical inquiry, but let’s strip the fluff and get down to logic and facts. Since you claim you're “only asking questions,” let me do the same—except I’ll attach reasoning to each, rather than rely on empty rhetoric.

1. On theft in mosques:
Your claim that theft in mosques proves a deficiency in Islam is intellectually lazy. By that logic, crimes committed by people near churches would disqualify Christianity. Or do you think every sinner outside the mosque is a perfect reflection of Islam, but Christians are exempt from judgment based on others’ actions? If a thief hiding among Muslims undermines Islam, then centuries of Christian crusades, inquisitions, child abuse scandals, and televangelist frauds should make Christianity indefensible. Be consistent.

Can you see that your bias has made you unable to comprehend even simple conversations.
I never claimed even once that theft in mosques proves a deficiency in Islam. Check again.
Instead, I showed that even though the church and mosques are supposed to be holy places, people come there to steal. And I used footwears and phones as examples in mosques and churches.
But your bias made you see otherwise .
You need to read again and comment on exactly what I wrote not what you felt I said. The summary is that the behaviour of one or two thieves in a church or mosque make us behave with caution even though the thieves are minorities. Hence my argument is that as long as there are a few minorities of Muslims with the radical interpretation of Islam, can we as Christians take them for granted?

Cool down bro! I am not your enemy!

CreativeOrbit:

2. On salvation and hellfire:
You present a simplistic binary: "If Christians are right, Muslims go to Hell; if Muslims are right, Christians go to Hell." That’s a false dichotomy based on theological tribalism. Islam’s stance is more nuanced. The Quran acknowledges that salvation is open to righteous Jews, Christians, and Sabians before the message of Islam was completed (Quran 2:62). After that, people are able based on the truth they receive. You might want to study context before quoting verses in isolation.

As far as Jesus is concerned, no one gets to paradise without Him. Meaning that Muslims will go to hell because they have not received the gift from Gospel of Salvation.

On the other hand, for you Muslims, we have a contradiction
1. Allah says that Christians, Jews and Sabeans will enter paradise.
2. You Muslims say the Jews are cursed and the Christians are Mislead.
How then can the cursed and the mislead enter paradise?
3. The Sabeans worship the stars/constellations and a sect of them worship satan directly. How did Allah say these will go to paradise? Is it because they claim John the Baptist to be their prophet?

Your claim that
The Quran acknowledges that salvation is open to righteous Jews, Christians, and Sabians before the message of Islam was completed (Quran 2:62). is complete falsehood as Allah nor your prophet never said that.

Do I have to remind you that the condition of Quran 2:62 are
a. Belief in God
b. Belief in the last day
c. Doing righteous deeds

I challenge you to give me where Allah says the condition is before the message of Islam was concluded.

It seems you forgot that Islam was the religion of Adam, Abraham, Moses and Jesus! LOL!

CreativeOrbit:

3. On paradise descriptions:
You mock the Islamic concept of paradise by contrasting it with a sterile, sexless existence “like angels.” You’re welcome to your interpretation, but Islam’s paradise is tailored to human desires—joy, companionship, beauty. What's illogical about that? Also, there’s no contradiction: if the afterlife is spiritual, why should physical pleasures be forbidden unless your theology demonizes the body?

You just buttress my point.
The paradise of Jesus is DIFFERENT from the paradise of Mohammed.

It's not the same place.

If the Paradise of Jesus is NOT your paradise, you may have some rethinking to do o.

Your paradise seems to be a place of debauchery: your scholars say that nothing is sin in your paradise.

Your paradise seems more like a Temptation rather than reward for obedience to the God of the heavens and the earth.

CreativeOrbit:

4. On contradictions with Judaism:
Christianity does contradict Judaism on major theological points. The very idea of Jesus as God incarnate is blasphemous in Judaism. Judaism rejects the Trinity, the virgin birth, original sin, and salvation through faith alone. If you truly think Jesus “fulfills” the law, ask any rabbi if your theology aligns with Torah. Islam acknowledges the original messages of the Torah and Gospel, but corrects distortions added by men, which brings me to your smug "challenge."

There is n contradiction between the Torah and the Gospels, what exist is a REJECTION by the modern Jews of the message of the Gospel. You forget that the Tanakh is the Old Testament of the Christians. LOL!!

What is the original message of the Torah and Injeel?
Do you have them or you have manufactured conjectures as usual?

Unfortunately, it is worse that this as it seems that you know better than Allah.

If the Torah, Injeel, Zabur and others not mentioned by name in the Qur'an are the words of Allah and non can change Allah's words, tell me if you aren't going against your God!

Secondly, Allah asked us Christians to judge by what he has revealed in our Injeel: Is Allah asking us to judge by that which is corrupted?

DidnI not remind you that even in the Qur'an, Jesus made lawful things made unlawful for the children of Israel?

Allah would be wrong or ignorant if indeed the Torah and the Gospel are corrupted or you know better than Allah as your God NEVER claimed your insinuations about our scripture

Who is wrong then between Allah and you?

CreativeOrbit:

5. Your challenge on distortions:
i. What was distorted?
The divinity of Jesus, the Trinity, and salvation by blood sacrifice—none of which Jesus preached.
ii. How?
Through councils, Roman influence, Hellenistic philosophy, and Pauline theology.
iii. When?
Primarily from 70 CE to 400 CE, as doctrines were debated and canonized.
iv. Who?
Early church leaders—especially Paul—who shifted the focus from Jesus' monotheistic message to a Romanized interpretation that conveniently aligned with empire.

Are you aware that if you are correct, then Allah would be either Ignorant or Wrong because Allah attests to our scripture. Your prophet also attests to our scripture 600AD.

Was your your prophet telling lies when he said he believes in the Torah and the one who sent it or was that Taqqiya?


See how you conjectures scattered like a pack of cards! LOL!!

CreativeOrbit:

6. You ask why Jesus is the Messiah.
Islam answers this clearly. Jesus is the Messiah because he was anointed by God, born miraculously, and given a specific mission to guide the Children of Israel. He was not sent to die for sins, nor to abolish the law, but to reaffirm monotheism. You’ve inherited a redefined Messiah molded by Greek and Roman philosophy, not the Hebrew concept.

Talk is cheap!
You are manufacturing conjectures again
Can you show me exactly where Allah or your prophet said anything about what the Messiah is for his prophecy is all about the Torah you claimed has been corrupted.

CreativeOrbit:

Now to your five “simple” questions, which are designed to confuse rather than reveal truth:

1. Why is Jesus a Word and Spirit from Allah?
Because Allah created him by His Word ("Be" and ed him with the Holy Spirit (like many prophets). That doesn’t make him divine—it magnifies the power of God, not the status of the creation.

But Jesus wasn't created by the word be!
Have you forgotten that Jibril was Sent to BLOW into the Farjaha of Mary!?
You forgot that Jesus was a spirit from Allah cast down to Mary?

Do you know any man who bears the title of a Spirit from Allah and his Word apart from Jesus?

Don't just repeat your scholars consensus, give me evidence from Allah or your prophet!

You seem to forget that in your deen, there are just two spirits. One is Jibril and the other is Jesus (even though you don't even know what a spirit is)

CreativeOrbit:

2. Why did Satan not touch Jesus and Mary?
A special favor granted by God—exceptional, not divine. If God chose to protect someone, does that elevate them to divinity? Was John the Baptist divine for being filled with the Holy Spirit from the womb (Luke 1:15)?

Why are you muddling two different things
1. Are you saying that John the Baptist was filled with Jibril from the womb?
2. Let me remind you of the significance according to your prophet.

You didn't answer the question!
Why was it that only Jesus and Mary satan did not touch at birth?

CreativeOrbit:

3. Why is Jesus a co-creator?
He’s not. He performed miracles by God's permission (Quran 5:110). There’s a massive difference between “creating” and being used by God to perform a miracle. If God let Moses part the sea, is Moses now Lord of oceans?

Is it untrue that just as Allah molded clay into Adam, Jesus moulded clay into a bird?
Is it untrue that just as Allah breathe into the moulded clay of Adam, Jesus breathe into the moulded clay of the bird?
Is it untrue that just as Adam came to life, the clay bird came to life?

Have you forgotten that Allah gave a challenge about gods who cannot even create a fly?


Qur'an 22:73
Those on whom, besides Allah, ye call, cannot create (even) a fly, if they all met together for the purpose! and if the fly should snatch away anything from them, they would have no power to release it from the fly. Feeble are those who petition and those whom they petition!


Why is Jesus the only co-creator of life with Allah?

CreativeOrbit:

4. Why is Jesus alive?
Because God chose to raise him—just as He raised Enoch. Being alive doesn't make you divine; Lazarus was raised from death too—was he God?

According to Islam, Jesus did NOT die. He is ALIVE with Allah. Do you know anyone in Islam like this?

Prophets are supposed to be in the graves doing salat but Jesus is different. He is with Allah!

The Question is why?

CreativeOrbit:

5. Why the virgin birth?
As a sign, not a divine seal. Adam had no mother or father—was he God? Your logic collapses when you cherry-pick miracles to justify divinity.

LOL!
How is Jesus being born from a virgin a sign? A sign to who? Who were the witnesses for it to be a sign?

Why was it even necessary that Jesus comes through a virgin?

I asked you to give theological answers from Islam to my questions but all you were doing was to negate divine nature of Jesus. Unfortunately, my questions wasn't to prove the devine nature of Jesus, NO! It was to make you see the uniqueness of Jesus who you depreciated for your prophet Mohammed!

CreativeOrbit:

You mistake rhetorical bombardment for depth. Islam doesn't need to borrow anything from a corrupted tradition to validate itself. It corrects, completes, and refines. So if you’re genuinely seeking truth, ask with humility. If you’re looking to score points, prepare to be answered with facts, not flattery.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

When you don't have answers, come to the people of the book to show you rather than cooking up conjectures.
Unfortunately, you won't.

This same Jesus that Allah invested everything he gave no other human being was the same one Allah destroyed his ministry by creating Christianity.

Allah deceived the Jews that they killed Jesus
Allah deceived the Romans that they killed Jesus
At the same time
Allah deceived the Apostles of Jesus that Jesus was crucified and died.
Allah then deceived Mary the mother of Jesus that Jesus was crucified and died


Allah followed up this deception with the Disciples burying Jesus
And Allah showed them Jesus resurrecting on the third day and showing Himself to the disciples
Allah showed Jesus going up to heaven in the presence of all his disciples in Galilee.

Allah then waited for 630 years to tell the Christians that ALL was an Elaborate LIE

Tell me, is this your God?

CreativeOrbit:
Your analogy is as flawed as it is offensive. Comparing Muslims to rabid dogs reveals more about your prejudice than it does about Islam. Let’s be clear: fear rooted in past trauma doesn't justify bigotry or ignorant generalizations. If "being bitten before" makes you see every Muslim as a threat, then you’re not being vigilant—you’re being irrational and hateful.

You throw around "disturbing" quotes without context, hoping they’ll scare people into accepting your narrative. Let’s examine the hadith you quoted.

Why are you this aggressive?
I never ever compared Muslims to rabid dogs.
My illustrations is that probably one in 1000 dogs is rabid. However, a person who has been bitten by just one rabid dog will be weary of all dogs rabid or not.
It is like most snakes are no lt venomous, but we don't take chances around ANY snake. We treat all snakes as venomous until we have enough information specific to that snake.

So, I don't know if you chose to be aggressive about everything I said.

CreativeOrbit:

Mishkat al-Masabih 4053 – “I will expel the Jews and Christians from Arabia.”
Yes, that hadith exists. And yes, the Prophet was speaking in the context of a region, a specific time, and a set of political-religious dynamics. Arabia was not a secular democracy. It was a fragile, emerging polity surrounded by enemies. That statement reflected the need to consolidate a unified base in a volatile land—not a blanket call for global expulsion of non-Muslims.

Context matters. You conveniently leave out that Jews and Christians lived peacefully under Islamic rule for centuries—often with more rights than they had under Christian empires. In fact, when Jews were expelled from Europe, they found sanctuary in Muslim lands. So spare us the cherry-picked fear-mongering. If this hadith justified mass expulsions, history would be soaked in Jewish and Christian blood under Islamic rule—but it’s not. Your logic collapses under historical evidence.

Yes, the Jews and Christians lived peacefully with the Arabs until the coming of prophet Mohammad.
Don't forget that the Christians kept him safe from the Meccans when he was small in power and influence before the hijrah.

However, even count the number of Christians still remaining in Arabia now. Till now, there is a big signboard that says non-muslims cannot enter Medina.

CreativeOrbit:

Now to your smug question:
“Should Muslims today follow this Sunnah?”

Umar followed this campaign.
Most Muslim leaders followed this campaign.
Otherwise tell me what Muslims are doing at Jerusalem by occupying the land for several years and building their holy mosque their?

If you Muslims dye your beards, put on dress to conform to Mohammed, you even urinate like him. Why wouldn't you follow his Sunah?

CreativeOrbit:

No. Because Islamic jurisprudence does not operate on isolated hadiths without context, nor does it universally apply every single political instruction from 7th-century Arabia to 21st-century pluralistic societies. You're parroting a Wahhabi-level interpretation and projecting it as the Islamic standard. That’s either ignorance or intellectual dishonesty.

Aren't the wahabi's Muslims?
Are they not using the same Quran, Hadiths, Tafsir etc. So, how are they getting different interpretations from you?

I parrot nothing other than what your Quran , Hadith and Tafsirs say.

CreativeOrbit:


If you're so obsessed with texts that seem “dangerous,” let’s play fair:

Should Christians today follow Jesus when he says, “I have not come to bring peace but a sword” (Matthew 10:34)?

Yes!
If you read it carefully, you will see that it is the Christians that would be killed because of Him and not the other way round.

CreativeOrbit:

Should we fear Christianity because it justified inquisitions, crusades, colonization, and genocides—all with Biblical backing?

If Muslims had your logic, they’d conclude the Bible is a terrorist manual. But we don't. Because that would be stupid.

Your fear isn’t based on Islamic teachings. It’s based on your own refusal to study them beyond hate blogs and cherry-picked narrations. If your survival depends on ignorance, you’re not in danger from Islam—you’re in danger from your own willful blindness.

So next time, bring arguments—not cheap analogies and historical amnesia.

gohf AntiChristian TenQ

Crusades cannot be ed by ANY teaching of Jesus Christ. Meaning that the crusaders acted outside the teachings of Christ

Unfortunately, we cannot say the same about Mohammed

anythingoes23:
Now, this quran age confirms "Islam is religion of war " not of peace.

We are told to ignore the threats until they spring their war on us!