ZethaPonderer

When discussing the Age of Aisha it is important to see the Muhammad marrying Aisha at 9 years old Hadith and find out its origin story.
 
Apparently I stumbled upon this interesting article that debunks Aisha’s canonical age being a myth,
 
http://justonereason.net/debunking-the-aisha-child-marriage-myth/
 
Most notably about the particular Hadith in Sahih Bukhari that discusses Aisha’s age with her marriage of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) the origin of that Hadith comes from an Islamic Scholar named Hisham Ibne Urwa.
 
Apparently Hisham had faulty memory when forging the Hadith. If this is true, then the Hadith of Aisha’s Canonical Age being married to Prophet Muhammad (SAW) at 9 years old is unreliable since it comes from an old man suffering from memory loss.
 
I encourage all of my brothers and sisters in faith/equal to study the life and history of Hisham ibne Urwa since he seems like key to understand the authenticity of the Aisha Age Hadiths.

Btw, I forgot to add furthermore quotes of what other statements this Sunni Muslim has made against me which I quote him the following,
Basically this is his rebuttal for why he won’t accept Ghadir Khum as not just a Mutawattir graded Hadith, but a Hadith deserving of being studied at all under Sunni Islam Theology to see if this Hadith lives up to the Quranic Exegesis.
And this last quote of his is just being stubborn and determined to live up to his expectations against Shia Muslims as the filthy Majoosi Mushrikeen Raafidas they are in their eyes.
There is a lesson I’ve learned from this Sunni Muslim, “Takfiri is far worse for the Muslim Ummah than Taqqiya”. The practice of Takfiri defeats the concept of Unity that Islam emphasizes throughout the Quran. And while I may not be among those Shias who curse the likes of the 3 Caliphs who usurped Imam Ali (عليه السلام) leadership position on top of Aisha; I do criticize such people amongst the Sahaabas that have displayed such disrespectful, disloyal actions against the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and his family given the Hadith Al-Kisa (The Cloak). Why? BECAUSE it is irrational and against Human Nature to presume 100% of the Sahaabas of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) were Faithful and Loyal to him. Some had to be Faithless.
Criticism =/= Disrespect, Slandering, or Cursing.
Not all Sahaabas of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) WERE Sahaabas of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

[Mod Note: Expand the two quotes below to see short notices about the deceased, their names, photos, a bit about who they were. Condolences.]
So far here's how I've come to dig up the information when commemorating the victims of the New Zealand Mosque Shooting,
https://www.insider.com/new-zealand-mass-shooting-victims-2019-3
https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2019/mar/21/christchurch-shooting-remembering-the-victims
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/19/world/Asia/new-zealand-shooting-victims-names.html
 
In case the links don't work, here are the names of the victims of the last two websites in quotes. The first link isn't too critical for commemoration, just an explanation for the investigation team of New Zealand for their information about the victims along with the vicinity.
The Guardian (theguardian.com) Link
 
The New York Times (nytimes.com) Link
 
May Allah have mercy upon them and upon those who not only believe in Him, but have faith in Him.

[Mod Note: Expand the two quotes below to see short notices about the deceased, their names, photos, a bit about who they were. Condolences.]
So far here's how I've come to dig up the information when commemorating the victims of the New Zealand Mosque Shooting,
https://www.insider.com/new-zealand-mass-shooting-victims-2019-3
https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2019/mar/21/christchurch-shooting-remembering-the-victims
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/19/world/Asia/new-zealand-shooting-victims-names.html
 
In case the links don't work, here are the names of the victims of the last two websites in quotes. The first link isn't too critical for commemoration, just an explanation for the investigation team of New Zealand for their information about the victims along with the vicinity.
The Guardian (theguardian.com) Link
 
The New York Times (nytimes.com) Link
 
May Allah have mercy upon them and upon those who not only believe in Him, but have faith in Him.

My reason to revive this topic is to discuss and vent so much of the cancerous hypocrisy that is happening in the West when it comes to 'Terrorism'. That and I need to let my frustration out right now. Plus, my vent might have relevance to the topic at hand.
Non-Muslims who play this card game with Muslims, "Actually if you look at the so called Muslims committing acts of Terrorism under the name of Islam e.g. ISIS and Al-Qaeda they're living up to what the Quran is all about which is violence against Kafirs till the end of times."
So what I'm essentially understanding from the Non-Muslims line of logic is that Terrorist Muslims who practice approximately 109 violent verses against Non-Muslims (without context) out of the 6236 verses of the Quran are essentially the True Followers of Islam. That's nearly 2% (Approximately 1.75%) they're following the teachings of The Quran so how does that qualify them as Muslims in anyway shape and form? If you see this argument coming out of a Non-Muslim, tell him you're just as much of a Terrorist like ISIS and Al-Qaeda to believe that they are the True Followers of Islam if they follow only 2% of the verses of the Quran and that is with zero context in mind along with weak (daeef) and unreliable Hadiths you'll be willing to quote from Sahih Bukhari and Muslim. If anything this counterargument the Non-Muslims propose actually works against them as it only shows their true colors, regardless of intention, being supporters/apologists towards ISIS and Al-Qaeda.
Non-Muslims who play the worst card game with Muslims, "Don't bother listening to any Muslim. They're all practicing the art of Taqqiyya which is deliberately lying to yourself towards Kafirs for the sake of defending Islam. Don't fool me Muslim, I know the Quran more than you."
If you see this argument coming out of a Non-Muslim, tell him that you not only disregard reality when talking about Muslims practicing Taqqiyya against Non-Muslims, but you also forget that even Non-Muslims do this too so stop making yourself an exception from us. Muslims should only practice the art of Taqqiyya when their lives are in danger of getting killed by Non-Muslims e.g. If I know I'm moving to a Hostile Non-Muslim nation and I know I'll be brutally killed for being a Muslim then I should change my name to a Hindu name such as Aarush Acharya or a White Man's name depending on my skin color e.g. Richard Hewlett while falsely renouncing my true faith openly to all Non-Muslims around me.
If anything Non-Muslims do the same thing too when looking at other Non-Muslim countries such as China and Russia. E.g. An American White Non-Muslim who wants to live in a supposedly hostile Russia for whatever reason can easily practice the Art of Taqqiyya against Hostile Non-Muslim Russians by changing his name from Andrew Smith to Vasily Kuznetsov while falsely renouncing his true faith and political identity against Hostile Non-Muslim Russians to save himself. What's to stop anyone from changing their name and falsely renouncing their true faith against the entire ignorant masses into fooling them just so you can get something out of it? At least with Muslims, the only thing they're getting out of it when doing Taqqiyya is to save themselves from Hostile Non-Muslims and nothing more than that since that is the criteria, while Non-Muslims on the other hand are more likely to turn it into a form of Hypocrisy.
There's a BIG difference between Hypocrisy and Taqqiyya.
Hypocrisy: Deliberately not being True to Yourself against others for selfish motives e.g. Money, Wealth, Power, Popularity.
Taqqiyya: Deliberately not being True to Yourself to save yourself from Hostile People who want to kill you. (Far from being a selfish motive unless you count Basic Survival Instinct to be a Selfish Motive).
I'm done. Vent over. Just want to let it out. Don't care if I get criticized for this. 

Islam, and subsequently its active participle, Muslim, acquired a distinct meaning of "surrender" in Arabic. In other Central Semitic languages -- Hebrew and Aramaic -- the verb has more the meaning to hand something over or to complete. In Hebrew, there is no "if'aal" verb stem, rather the hiph'iil stem, in which you have של''ם appear as השלים (to complete, preform, make an end of), in Aramaic you have in some varieties a he-prefix (haphel) and in other varieties an aleph-prefix (aphel). So we find in Syriac, for example, ܐܫܠܡ meaning to deliver or hand over. So while these words do have cognates, the usage and meaning isn't the same between them (that isn't to say they have the original meaning or Arabic does, since we can't look at their ancestor to find out how it would've used the ancestor word seeing as the ancestor of these languages didn't have any records). Kafir being the active participle of kafara does have cognates in Hebrew and Aramaic, Hebrew in the Piel stem (cognate to the Arabic bab taf'iil and Aramaic pael stem) had kipper meaning to cover and of course the word Kippuur (as in Yom Kippur) is cognate with Arabic كفارة (kaffara), at least in usage as they mean the same thing. In Aramaic kfar means to deny which also has a similar conceptual meaning to the theological usage of the word in Arabic. And as for shahada, in both Hebrew and in Aramaic cognates exist, שהד (śāhēδ) and שהד or ܐܣܗܕ respectively. Though for Hebrew, I've observed the word עד is more common. And the reason for the differences between shalom and salam have to do with sound changes, in Arabic the pronunciation of sibilants (the sounds s, sh, and ś fall into) shifted around as the proto-Semitic ś was lost (yes, Arabic did lose sounds and change the pronunciation of others, e.g. s might've been more of an affricate than a sibilant, so a /ts/). So /sh/ shifted to a /s/ in Arabic, while in Hebrew and other Canaanite languages there was a shift in long /a/ to a long /o/, so the active participle shifted for example from pā'il to pō'ēl. In certain environments as well short vowels elongated as well based on stress, taking us from earlier *šalām to šālōm. There's been an excellent PhD thesis written about the development of Biblical Hebrew vowels by Benjamin Suchard, now at Leiden University, I've really breezed over complex sound changes for the sake of simplicity so if you want a full treatment of this subject, refer to him and refer to Ahmad Al Jallad (formerly at Leiden University and now I believe at Ohio) for the development of Old Arabic, also to Marijn van Putten -- the latter of which I've been in contact with for a couple of years now.
 
I had to express disappointment that whenever we Muslims engage with other classical languages this is the sort of level of discussion. I'm going to ignore mistakes he made when talking about sound mergers and just address his main argument. Biblical Hebrew managed to preserve a distinction that Arabic lost altogether by the time of the Quran, the phoneme /ś/ (Welsh double L), but it doesn't mean that for preserving it, at least in writing, that there was somehow an edge that makes it objectively better in a way than Arabic. And the ambiguities between ḥārash to till and ḥārash to be silent are still preserved in context, which is the arbitrator in any such instance and works to obviously disambiguate the various meanings Arabic words can have as well. It doesn't really speak to the quality of the language let alone whether they are capable of carrying a "linguistic miracle". And I think this is another instance showing what makes demonstrating this a silly task, we need to count how many ways Arabic is a superior language, a concept no linguist would endorse, to show how it was capable of transmitting a linguistic miracle, and we demonstrate that by counting how many rhetorical devices are in a passage. It really lacks the sort of objectively miraculous quality that one would expect.

That is pure wickedness and irrational for what these Non-Muslims are doing. Just because a particular bad apples within the Muslim Community in India spread hatred, violence and malice amongst the Hindus. Muslims are not perfect people Hindus, but this is no excuse for you Hindus to justify this right of yours to get even with the Muslims. Being an Anti-Islamist is one thing, but being an Anti-Muslim is now another matter entirely that can result in bigotry and racism from a cultural perspective. Hindus. Imagine if the headline was switched to this,
Or even better,
This discrimination against Muslims must STOP. You Non-Muslims are making FOOLS of yourselves if any of you consider this to be justifiable. This is appeal to minority fallacy. And Non-Muslims like YOU are relying deep upon this fallacy to exercise YOUR hatred and bigotry against Muslims are no different than the bad apples within the minority of Muslims exercising their violence, hatred, and malice against you. I don't give a DAMN if you're An Anti-Islamist. You have your reasons for hating on Islam. Whoop dee doo. But I do give a DAMN if you're an Anti-Muslim Bigot. No difference to being an Anti-Christian Bigot, Anti-Hindu Bigot, or an Anti-Semitic Bigot. Not all Muslims have anything against you Hindus nor with anyone.
The Meat Eating Industry of USA and how most Non-Muslims practice are filled to the brim with all kinds of worst ways of killing All kinds of Animals for their Meat. At least Kosher and Halal, are FAR less offensive than what Non-Muslims practice for their humane slaughter of Animals.

I want to emphasize again that the Word was capitalized, and recognized in other verses in the Quran,
Surah 4: 171. O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His apostles. Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah. Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.
172. Christ disdaineth nor to serve and worship Allah, nor do the angels, those nearest (to Allah.: those who disdain His worship and are arrogant, -He will gather them all together unto Himself to (answer).
173. But to those who believe and do deeds of righteousness, He will give their (due) rewards, - and more, out of His bounty: But those who are disdainful and arrogant, He will punish with a grievous penalty; Nor will they find, besides Allah, any to protect or help them.
--- Notice these words, “Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him:
I understand that words in brackets (no more than) were not in the Arabic, so it could read,
“Christ Jesus the son of Mary was an apostle of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him.”
--- This mentions the three witnesses in heaven, God, the Father Jehovah, --- The Word, --- and the Holy Spirit (from Him.)  

Leviticus 4
Hosea 6:6
Ezekiel 18
Mathew 5:17
mathew 5:19-20
Mathew 7:24-27
James 2:8-11
James 2:14-19
you have no basis for this pagan sacrifice.
John 15:10

@ZethaPonderer this is what he believes He is a seperationist-dualist. 
I’ve already established the Unitarian theology and Jesus confirms it he has not abolished it.
Mathew 5:17
Mark 12:
28One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”
29“The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ 31The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”
32“Well said, teacher,” the man replied. “You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but Him. 33To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”
If the Jesus didn’t agree with with the Jews Unitarian theology then the Jew wouldn’t say, “you are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but Him” this shows that Jesus believed in the Unitarian theology.
34When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” And from then on no one dared ask him any more questions.

IDK if you're joking. But I found that funny. Soo, Joke Post incoming. No disrespect.
So basically, you're basing your analogy on one of the worst video games ever made Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing (cuz of the funny bugs and glitches).
The trucks move faster in reverse at max speed of 12.3 Undecillion MPH (far beyond the speed of light). Is this what you mean to achieve Time Traveling to the Past? .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8X7Vj6JXPk

Time travel is absolutely real. 
All you have to do is spin around backwards in circles at the speed of light and space time will bend around you to the point that you will enter a wormhole through time.

A good similarity that I like was that Ishmael in Hebrew means 'the one that God heard' (or something like that) and in Arabic it still retains the root of the verb to hear س م ع in Isma'il

“Allah” in Hebrew is “Alahim” transliteration.  In Aramaic in Jesus dialect  it’s “Allaha” in the Dialect of Jeremiah, Ezra and Daniel it’s “Allah”. 

Muslim “Meshulam” according to Rashi, kaffur “kofer” dont know about shahaada but know “our Lord” is “Ribinu” 
 
Hanif, Abraham’s religion “hanif” continued through some of the Ishmaelites. 
 
1. It’s Isho Msheekha not “Y’shua” which is an insult to Isa ((عليه السلام)).
2. The shahada for the original Christians is highlighted in John 17:3
3Now this is eternal life: that they know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.
3. the current Jews believe their shahada is the shema “shama’a Yisroel Adonai eloheinu Adonai echad” as for the original followers of prophet Musa ((عليه السلام)) it’s unknown but since prophet Isa ((عليه السلام)) confirms the saying of shadaha it’s fair to assume that prophet Musa ((عليه السلام)) also preached the saying of the shahada.

No we have free will, having free will does not automatically make us having a “sinful nature” 
going by your ridiculous theory, jesus also has a sinful nature. Since jesus when he was tested, the incident highlighted Jesus’ infallibility meaning he can sin but wouldn’t sin because of his God consciousness. others can be like this aswell and jesus has taught how to surpass the Pharisees so people can be sinless of they put the dedication to. 
being sinless means not being guilty of committing sin. You just shot yourslef in the foot. 
Remember my refutes. Your arrogance and deliberate lies won’t prevail.
 
The Quran only confirms the truth that’s mixed with falsehood.
Adam and nothing to do with the topic. We are talking Jesus alone. As always your never consistent.

Hi ZethaPonderer,
Question 2: If Jesus should be considered as a Son of God (which is a debated term in all 3 aspects: literal, symbolic, and metaphorical) then why can't Adam, The First Human Being Ever, be considered the Son of God regardless of the Original Sin? God created Adam directly without the need of a virgin mother. For God to not consider Prophet Adam (عليه السلام) as The Son of God is truly unfair, ungrateful, and unjust of Him within Judeo-Christian scriptures.
Response: --- This is quite an interesting question. Actually the first mention of Jesus being born to Mary, doesn’t say that He was ‘the Son of God’ but just that He would be “called” the Son of God, in Luke 1:34 Then Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?”
35 And the angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God.” --- Notice the words, He will be ‘called’ the Son of God, --- and He, Jesus, has been ‘called’ the Son of God from then till now. --- However, Jesus Christ represented God so they can both be called ‘the Son of God.’ --- And notice that it was the Holy Spirit that 'overshadowed' Mary to start the pregnancy.
--- This event is repeated twice in the Quran, and this is the account from Surah 3:
45 Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah.
--- (Notice that the Word is capitalized.) --- This means that The Word represented God, and shows that there was a relationship between the Word and Jesus Christ. --- It says in John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ---  It says in 1:3 "All things were made through Him (the Word)." --- And it says in 1:14 "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us." --- Both the Word and Christ were represented in the human body of Jesus, but neither the Word, nor Christ could be seen, --- however, the Holy Spirit could speak the wisdom of God from them through the physical Jesus. --- (See how the capitalizing of the 'Word' in the Quran correlates the former Scriptures?) 
46. "He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. And he shall be (of the company) of the righteous."
47. She said: "O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said: "Even so: Allah createth what He willeth: When He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it, 'Be,' and it is! --- (I believe that in this sense, the word 'Be' also represents the Word.)
48. "And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom, the Law and the Gospel,
49. "And (appoint him) an apostle to the Children of Israel, (with this message): "'I have come to you, with a Sign from your Lord, in that I make for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah.s leave: And I heal those born blind, and the lepers, and I quicken the dead, by Allah.s leave; and I declare to you what ye eat, and what ye store in your houses. Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe;
50. "'(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me.
51. "'It is Allah Who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him. This is a Way that is straight.'"
--- I hope you don’t mind me making comparisons to the Quran, but I see it plainly, that the Quran verifies the truth of the former Scriptures.
We will examine Adam next and see where he is called the Son of God. 

Question 1, Part 3: Christians therefore, cannot get away making such excuses for a Christian brethren not being a Christian via committing heinous crimes and sins against the Lord and amongst Mankind, if they are 100% Sinless in The Lord's Eyes and genuinely practice and preach the teachings of Prophet Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام) regardless of their sinful, wicked nature. If I sinned and never repented throughout my Life towards God committing heinous crimes and spreading evil, I should be punished and brought to justice in Hell for all eternity due to my stubborn and rigid nature.
Response: --- As I said, no one becomes sinless by becoming a Christian. They follow the example of Jesus and identify with the teaching of Christ, as I quoted from this passage.
Colossians 3:1 “If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. 
2 Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth. 3 For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.
--- If we change our mind to study and follow the teaching of righteousness, we turn away from the dead interests of the world.
 4 When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory.”
--- This is the assurance of salvation, when we follow the teaching of the Gospel, and of Christ.
5 “Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. 6 Because of these things the wrath of God is coming upon the sons of disobedience, 7 in which you yourselves once walked when you lived in them.”
--- Notice that in saying “Therefore put to death (or deaden) the things on earth, --- it implies that it is YOU that has to put these things off. --- Therefore, YOU ‘put off’ the things listed in the verses above, so you can’t continue in the immoralities of the world and think that you are right in the sight of God.
8 “But now you yourselves are to put off all these: anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy language out of your mouth. 9 Do not lie to one another, since you have put off the old man with his deeds, 10 and have put on the new man who is renewed in knowledge according to the image of Him who created him.” 
--- Now notice how personal it gets to say, “Now YOU YOURSELVES are to put off all of these:” --- And it list the things that we were guilty of in the old life
--- This is what it means to be “In Christ,” --- As Christians we still fail and make mistakes, --- but we come quickly back to the Lord and ask forgiveness, and continue on. (We are still sinners but saved by God’s grace.)
--- When you say in your last sentence, ‘the unrepentant sinners should be punished,’ it gives this contrast of the righteous and the wicked, who will not make it into heaven, in Revelation 21:7 He who overcomes ]shall inherit all things, and I will be his God and he shall be My son. 8 But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

Hi ZethaPonderer,
Question 1, Part 2:
Quote: Do you have any idea how broken, illogical, and borderline unfair this spiritual perspective sounds in theory? You could be the most evil and despicable person that ever lived in the History of Mankind and still be considered 100% Sinless as long as you genuinely acknowledge and put your faith in Prophet Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام) as your Lord and Savior. This makes the whole point of taking responsibility for your actions based on your sins on top of begging God for Forgiveness completely pointless, null, superfluous, and void which is unfair because you genuinely accepted Prophet Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام) as your Lord and Savior which is the true Ultimatum of what it really means to be Christian.
Response: --- The term ‘100% sinless’ is not possible because no one becomes ‘sinless’ by changing their habits or attitudes, since we have a ‘sin nature.’ --- The ‘conversion experience’ teaches us to live a more righteous life in our sinful body, as we ‘put off’ the sinful habits we have been following. --- Your perspective is inaccurate because no one can be a vile person and a true believer at the same time. --- God deals in truthfulness and when Jesus said in John 14:6 “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and no one comes to the Father, except through Me,” it means just that. --- To become a believer in Jesus, means that you want to follow Him.
--- I would like to show you what I learned in the Quran in Surah 5:46 "And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was ‘guidance and light,’ and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a ‘guidance and an admonition’ to those who fear Allah.
47. Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel."
--- You see, the guidance and light, or ‘enlightenment’ comes from the indwelling Holy Spirit when one is ‘born again,’ or ‘born of the Spirit.’
As I wrote above in John 3:3 “Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot ‘see’ the kingdom of God.”
Bud Jesus said again in 3:5 “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot ‘enter’ the kingdom of God.”
Verse 3 says, ‘Unless one is born again, he cannot see (perceive, or understand) the kingdom of God on earth.
But verse 5 says ‘unless one is ‘born of the Spirit’ he cannot ‘enter’ the kingdom of God. --- so this is the deeper commitment to have the guidance of the Holy Spirit in your life, as you live through it, and then to have the assurance of ‘eternal life’ when your life ends on earth.

lol nice desperate attempt. Go read “trinitarian fantasies” how I refute this flawd argument.
Trinitarian:
“Is Allah a Father?”
Quick footnote: the trinitarian was referring to the “Muslim” God.
Reply 
Monotheist:
“the term “the Father” in the OT is attributed to God due to God’s actions that are being manifested the expression of this attributes is “The nourisher” “The sustainer” “The One who disciplines” an example of this attribute being manifested is in Deuteronomy 8:5 “You shall know in your heart, that just as a man chastises his son, so does the Lord, your God, chastise you.”
jesus never called God “the Father” this was added to the gospel(s) due Paul’s interpretation of Christ being prominent obviously because of his terrorist attacks and persecution to the original followers of Christ thus when the gosepls were written it has a influence on Paulline elements which are Hellenistic. The epistles of Paul predate all four gospels it is obvious that they would be influenced by them and the gospels were written amongst the Gentiles, which Paul did a really good job of deceiving, the Gentiles took advantage of this to mix their pagan beliefs with truth thus the Greek methodology of “the Father” who is in heaven and “the Son were added. 
Jesus always called God “Allaha” “
 
Trinitarian3:
“And in Islam, Allah is said to have ninety-nine names, one of them being "The Loving." "But how could Allah be loving in eternity? Before he created there was nothing else in existence that he could love (and the title does not refer to self-centered love but love for others). The only option is that Allah eternally loves his creation. But that in itself raises an enormous problem: if Allah needs his creation to be who he is in himself ("loving"), then Allah is dependent on his own creation, and one of the cardinal beliefs of Islam is that Allah is dependent on nothing." (Delighting in the Trinity pg. 40 Michael Reeves)”
“I would ask how God could be called Father if He did not eternally have a Son?”
“and prophets referred to God as Father but this would mean that God would be dependent on creating a people to call Him Father if He did not have a Son before the creation of the world”
Reply 
Monotheist:
“These 99 names are attributes given to God due to His actions that are manifested. God is Omniscient and perfect so God has always had the best qualities.” 
‘I would ask how God could be called Father if He did not eternally have a Son?’
“That’s dualism, use ur brain pay attention to what you’re saying. 
The term “the Father” has been added by Paul the imposter in the gospel(s). 
Paul’s epistles predate all 4 Gospels so it is obvious that all four would be influenced by Pauline elements which are Hellenistic.
Btw Mr Michael reeves embarrassed himself big time on the 99 names and how  were they attributed to God and he certainly didnt read the sermons of imam Ali that literally destroy his baseless argument.”
‘and prophets referred to God as Father but this would mean that God would be dependent on creating a people to call Him Father if He did not have a Son before the creation of the world’
“The term “the Father” is an expression used in the OT meaning “the Nourisher” “the sustainer” “the One who disciplines” 
this attribute is given to God due to His actions being manifested.  Here is a example. 
 Deuteronomy 8:5 “5You shall know in your heart, that just as a man chastises his son, so does the Lord, your God, chastise you.”
God was not imperfect and then became perfect once the heavens and the earth exisited that’s blasphemy and nullifies God being Omniscient, God always has had the best qualities Before anything was created.”
 
 
Nowhere near close to Unitariansim. 
That’s shows Modalism and also trithism.
if you ask the Son, what are you he says “God” and if you ask the Father what are you he says “God”, if you ask the Holy Spirit what are you he will say “God”. Now  you say they are distinct but they all claim to be God now the fact they are DISTINCT and claim to be God shows that their are three Gods. 
If God has three personalities that still shows Modalism because He is acting like a certain personality at one point and then a another at a another point of time and also another at a another time. In short God is taking the modes of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
the Father is God himself and the Son is Jesus... so when you say God has three personalities you’re showing Modalism since at one point He is acting as Jesus then at another acting as Himself(I.e the Father)  then another acting as the Holy Spirit, you can see that He is switching(i.e taking mode) between the three which is Modalism. 
I think your the one who doesn’t know what Modalism is. Islam has no Modalism. God’s qualities display God’s personality, for example God is merciful, compassionate, the wise, the creator, the Just etc. 
How do you say His Omniscient if your implying He was once ignorant of these qualities? Didn’t God create you out of mercy ? All Abrahamic religions agree on that. This is sufficient proof that God had these qualities before He created, otherwise how would He create the heavens and the earth out of mercy if He didn’t create anything before it out of mercy ? If He created something out of mercy before it than the question arises what did He create before that ? You will end up being in a loop which is problematic. This shows that God has always had these qualities. If we go the opposite it would show that God didn’t have any of these qualities until He created and God was not perfect(I.e ignorant) until He created.
Furthermore, isn’t His creation a manifestation of his qualities? If His creation is a manifestation of His qualities than that means God has always had these qualities before He created otherwise how would He create anything in the likeness of His qualities if He didn’t have these qualities? (The essence of Allah thread) 
 
“He was Lord before there was anything to be Lord
of. And He was God before there was anything to be
God of.
He was knowing before there was anything to be known.
He was hearing before there was anything to be
heard.” 
(From the sermon of Imam Ali, from the essence of Allah thread.)
 

Hi ZethaPonderer,
Question 1. If Prophet Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام) truly died for Humanity's Sins then ALL of Humanity shouldn't Sin regardless of their beliefs. Period. Yet the vast majority of Humanity, including Christians who genuinely practice and preach the teachings of Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام) through the Bible, Sin regardless. 
Spiritually speaking, if you acknowledge and put your faith in Prophet Jesus/Isa (عليه السلام) as your Lord and Savior, you're virtually 100% guaranteed Sinless, similar to achieving salvation, in the eyes of God despite your tendencies and capabilities of Sinning afterwards.
Response: --- This is a misleading concept that one can say, “I believe in Jesus Christ as my Savior and Lord,” --- and then live in sinfulness. --- The idea is to be “Saved from Sin” not “Saved in Sin.”
A person can have faith in God and still live in the world, because we are all sinners. The Scripture says, “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” --- The term associated with accepting Jesus as our Savior is being, “In Christ,’ or “taking on the nature of Christ.” --- When one is dedicated and yielded to the Lord, then it is the Lord that gives the Holy Spirit to indwell him. --- God does not give the Holy Spirit to those who are not sincere, even though they might act like a Christian.
John 3:1 There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. 2 This man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.” 3 Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
 --- So this ‘new birth’ is the coming in of the Holy Spirit to give ‘enlightenment’ to the believer. --- There are also some who have started out as Christians but turned back to their sinful ways, and Jesus said again in Matthew 7:
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
--- But this is written to show what is expected of one who truly follows God will.
Colossians 3:1 “If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. 2 Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth. 3 For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. 4 When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory.”
5 “Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. 6 Because of these things the wrath of God is coming upon the sons of disobedience, 7 in which you yourselves once walked when you lived in them.”
8 “But now you yourselves are to put off all these: anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy language out of your mouth. 9 Do not lie to one another, since you have put off the old man with his deeds, 10 and have put on the new man who is renewed in knowledge according to the image of Him who created him.” 
--- This is what it means to be “In Christ,” --- As Christians we still fail and make mistakes, --- but we come quickly back to the Lord and ask forgiveness, and continue on. (We are still sinners, but saved by God’s grace.)

Hi  ZethaPonderer,
After this preliminary statement, I will systematically go through your questions. I think you can understand from what I say that I am NOT a Trinitarian, so I agree with you on some points.
--- The first attempt at the teaching in the Roman Catholic Church that led to this faulty doctrine was simply to say that Jesus Christ was of ‘the same substance as God,’ in these words:
Quote from the Nicene Creed: "We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God,] Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; (...)
(And at the end they added): “And [we believe] in the Holy Ghost." --- (So there were only two, not three, in their first statement.)
It was the devil’s manipulation to use the weaker Christian leaders to accept the proposed document, which the Emperor Constantine promoted, because who in those days opposed a Roman Emperor and lived?
--- Arian said “There was a time when Christ was not.” --- He didn’t say Jesus Christ, but He said Christ.
Most Christians use Jesus Christ as though they were first and last names. --- But Arian would know, just like we all know, that Jesus was born on earth and therefore was human, born in a flesh and blood body, and therefore would have the DNA of His mother Mary. --- Jesus was born on earth, but Christ came down from heaven to indwell the body of Jesus.
--- Look at some verses that say this plainly; --- Hebrews 10:5 Therefore, when He (Christ) came into the world, He said: “Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me.
6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure.
7 Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come— in the volume of the book it is written of Me— to do Your will, O God.’ ”
--- So it was God’s plan of redemption to send Christ into the world to indwell Jesus whose name means Savior, --- and Christ, whose name means Messiah.
Jesus was not of any divine nature because it says this in Hebrews 2:9  "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone."
--- In the Nicene Creed it says, ‘begotten, not made,’ --- but in Hebrews it says, ‘But we see Jesus, who was ‘made’ a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death. --- Christ was a Spiritual Being that came down from heaven to indwell a body of flesh and blood so that ‘blood' could be shed for the remission of sin.
--- Again in John 3:17 “For God did not send His Son (Christ) into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.” --- The first thing to understand is that Jesus and Christ were two different Beings.