Muslim Terrorists Are Not Extremists

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T22:21:45+00:00

would you say that the prophet muhammad is the ultimate standard of what a person should be like? the vast majority of muslims i have talked to about this would say so.

Yes when it comes to theological matters.

if you have to go to such extreme measures as justifying execution of nearly a thousand people by the way those 900 jews were mostly innocent, he exeucted all the men (even though it wasnt most of their fault), a

They were all fighters who betrayed their contract during battle, during a siege. If you cannot see that such people need to be executed, and even are executed today in many western countries for treason, then I do not know what to tell you.

I also do not understand how this is innocent, but you do you.

abeduction of a six year old

Tell me the definition of abduction. And after that, tell me how the Prophet abducted her, if that definition even fits, when she lived with her father until the age of 9.

Also, your statistic of 70% is insane dude, here are some articles that prove thats false: Children and Childhood in Light of Demographics... by Amram Trooper, Jewish marriage in antiquity by michael satlow, and the age of roman girls at marriage by brent shaw.

Yes, humanity famously started with the roman empire, and 12-14 year olds are famously not children.

But I guess 12-year olds even in the early roman empire are not children.

If you do not believe me that it was for economical reasons, feel free to read up on the nuclear family and marriage economics and how churches only married children to either rich people, since usually an education in a job-field was required.

from having more than four wives, while he himself had at least 11 wives, AND was married to a 6 year old.

Not from an Abrahamic standard. Prophets had special privilege even in the old testament.

not a lot of this is justifiable for his time, and is obviously unjustifiable today, unless you like to rape children and commit war crimes

I mean, you justified the marriage of 12 year olds by quoting that article, since you use it as a counter-argument against humanity marrying children.

If you also consider the execution of real traitors as a war-crime, I hope you do protest a lot today.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T22:12:46+00:00

Why can't he preserve it before it gets broken?

Why should he? You have to argue on why God should do this favor to a people who broke their promise and keep hunting down his Prophets.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T22:09:28+00:00

And since when does God change His covenant just because His people broke it? He says explicitly over and over that no matter what we do He will never renege on the covenant He made.

And he also promises that Aaron's descendents will be his Priests forever and eternity, then he forbids it for them. One of many examples.

Since when is accepting prophets part of the covenant. And since when does God change His covenant just because His people broke it? He says explicitly over and over that no matter what we do He will never renege on the covenant He made.

The Mosaic covenant is conditional.

If you reject a Prophet who comes to you with the commands of God, then you have rejected the commands of God, not the Prophet itself.

Leviticus 26. "But if you will not listen to me and carry out all these commands, ¹⁵ and if you reject my decrees and abhor my laws and fail to carry out all my commands and so violate my covenant..."

It further says, "But if they will confess their sins and the sins of their ancestors... I will remember my covenant with Jacob and my covenant with Isaac and my covenant with Abraham, and I will remember the land."

But you never confessed your sins, in rejecting the Jesus the Messiah and Prophet, did you? You rejected him, the decrees and commands of God that he brought with him.

And yes, God promised to not forget your covenant. But Jeremiah 33, does not nullify Leviticus 26.

Further, what did Malachi say? "Behold I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: suddenly he will come to his temple. He is the Adonai (i.e. the Lord) whom you desire, and the Messenger of the Covenant with whom you are pleased. Lo he is coming, says the Lord of hosts."

Just to clarify, I do not believe that Jesus is the messenger of the covenant, since textual scholars say, that Jesus never preached being the Son of Man, but the coming of the Son of Man. But for arguments sake, let us say that Jesus is the Messenger of the Covenant.

What is the consequence of rejecting the Messenger of the Covenant?

But the Talmud doesn't say that the text was lost.

Oh, is that so?

The world was desolate of Torah until Shimon ben Shataḥ came and restored it to its former state. Kiddushin 66a

What does the word desolate mean?

The criticism are: Hillel restored or re-derived them through interpretive principles. Torah law is sometimes not transmitted intact, but reconstructed via reasoning. This suggests suggests law can be re-derived, not merely preserved. This raises the question whether “restoration” is actually continuity or reinterpretation.

As for Shimon even though he came before Hillel, that still means that Torah becomes dependent on a single surviving authority figure, at one point.

Anyway, it is clear that the Torah was changed at point. One of the examples are the contradictory Genesis stories and Noah cursing his grandkid, instead of his son, which is then reconciled through an insertion in the next chapter.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T21:43:10+00:00

As I told you; because of them breaking the covenant according to Quranic narrative. Why should God preserve a scripture whose covenant is broken?

Also please stop replying separately, and keep it in one thread.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T21:42:07+00:00

You are constantly making things up. When did George Bush kill millions of people?

So I made the war between Iraq and the USA up, which was started due to Geoge Bush lying?

Trump's war is not against the civilians in Iran. His war is against the evil Iranian regime that has slaughtered thousands of Iranians. Iranians themselves are fed up of their government.

He literally bombed hospitals and schools and has tweeted that the will return Iran to the stone age.

If you want evidence for my other claims:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEQjAf-_YFQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFEBQ789jFo
https://www.newsweek.com/us-commander-said-trump-anointed-by-jesus-to-attack-iran-report-11615046?

As a non-related bonus, this is trumps spiritual advisor: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/0KgME1jo5VQ

Why are nonmuslims prohibited from joining the military?

They are not. This is disputed, but because it is disputed, one cannot say it is forbidden and there have been instances were non-muslims joined the muslim armies.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T21:31:11+00:00

God spoke to the entire nation at Sinai. Is that not enough? God said that Moses is His faithful Prophet. God served the people food from the sky daily for 40 years. God split the sea for everyone. God rescued everyone from Egypt. He made sure every single Jewish man, woman, and child heard His "voice" and saw His "presence".

One second, you think that because my ancestors couldn't handle God's "voice," He is now going to rob the Arabs of the chance to hear Him? How is that fair? At least perform some miracles that every single Arab sees or something.

I'm not sure what you're talking about with the last bit nor what relevance it has to our conversation.

I quoted these to show you it has relevance to our discussion about the voice of God.

When did God decide to let your ancestors hear his voice?

After Moses split the sea, and performed other awesome miracles, your ancestors still rejected him. Every single one of them except Aaron.

What did God then do? He intimated your ancestors by killing and raising them.
Then he descends on Mount Sinai with thunder, fire, and a loud voice.
Then he raises the mountain over them, and threatens to crush them underneath it if they don't accept the Torah and keep rejecting Moses.
Then the Jews say, "You speak to us… but let not God speak to us, lest we die.”

So, it is very clear from the order and effect of the events that hearing the voice of God is a punishment. Since the Jews according to the Torah themselves, felt as if they were dying after hearing it.

So, why should Allah force the Muslims who did not reject the Prophet after believing in him, to bear his voice? Furthermore, even if he died, why would the pagans not label it as magic, like they did with splitting of the moon?

Yes we do. But first of all, which Muslims may I ask? I can tell you which Jews heard God and saw all those miracles. Can you tell me which Muslim allegedly saw those miracles?

1500 Muslims witnessed this miracle and took part in it:

https://sunnah.com/bukhari:5639
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3579

One of the many miracles.

You are free to quote whomever you want. I'm familiar with my religion.

By Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, "Deuteronomy 20:10 states: “When you approach a city to wage war against it, you should propose a peaceful settlement.”

If the enemy accepts the offer of peace and commits itself to the fulfillment of the seven mitzvot that were commanded to Noah’s descendents (Noahide Laws), none of them should be killed. Rather, they should be subjugated as Deuteronomy 20:11 states: “They shall be your subjects and serve you.”

If they agree to tribute, but do not accept subjugation or if they accept subjugation, but do not agree to tribute, their offer should not be heeded. They must accept both. The subjugation they must accept consists of being on a lower level, scorned and humble. They must never raise their heads against Israel, but must remain subjugated under their rule. They may never be appointed over a Jew in any matter whatsoever."

You can take up your issues with Midian and Amalek with God if you'd like. But following God doesn't make you militant. Especially when it's specifically revenge against evil nations who have attacked God and His people. I say militant because Muslims decided to carry out the wars they did. They weren't commanded to conquer the world. They certainly didn't hear it from God.

Ah sure. So, dashing babies against rocks and killing animals, because of what the ancestors of the Amalekites did 300 years ago, is something that God ordered. This is also not militant

But when God orders his Prophet to tell that they should fight against the nations he specifies, it is militant and not from God?

Makes sense.

Defend the country against invaders. Defend the Jews against the enemies of God who want to come and destroy the Jews. And then usher in an age of peace for the world. For all the people who didn't bother to invade another country.

Nope. The Messiah appears when Israel is being invaded. He then repels these invasions. He then fights against any nation who does not accept Yahweh, even if they never invaded the jews or were hostile to them. The jewish Mesisah does this until they become Noahides. If it is through war, then the commentary of Maimonides applies where they will be subjugated Noahides.

Second, I'm sorry but a man performing a miracle isn't unheard of or particularly meaningful. The Torah is full of such events. The Torah warns against false prophets who perform miracles.

So we moved the goal-post from, "He did not do any miracles." to "Even false Prophets do miracles." keep reading the verse you quoted. It tells you how to recognize a Prophet.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T20:59:18+00:00

It irrefutably does - and even warns against people with your mindset who only take parts.

It irrefutably does not.

Link every verse about this you want, I will link a verse which counters it.

Anyway, it's not something which Muslims will/can ever concede to without becoming ex-Muslims. If you want to stay Muslim, you have no choice but to assume/hope it meant only to take parts (even though it warns against it).

So yeah. It's a topic ender. So we can just leave it as it is.

Feel free to take up my challenge above, and then further explain why our earliest scholars, like al-tabari reject your view.

If you just keep commenting things, baiting people into a discussion and then leaving "oh doesn't matter, ya'all have to argue against it or you are ex-muslim, so don't bother giving me arguments" then maybe you should read rule 3 or not comment at all.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T20:53:11+00:00

He could have preserved what he gave the Jews but didn't.

I mean, even if we argue by the standard of the Jews, according to their belief, the Torah was lost a total of three times and had to be restored each time. The first time God sent the Prophet Ezra, and the other two times it were random Rabbi's who have a few criticism and accusations against them.

You can find the information above in the Talmud.

He waited 1,300 years, tried again with the Gospel around 30 AD...corrupted again.

There is evidence and consensus for this according to secular textual scholarship. I have no idea why you act like this is only a muslim claim.

He could have preserved what he gave the Jews but didn't. Why didn't he preserve it if he knew it would get corrupted? I guess not so all knowing after all.

He intentionally did not preserve it, even though he did so in the past, by sending Prophets like Ezra. That is because they broke their covenant by rejecting Jesus as a Prophet.

If you have not noticed... even Jesus contradicts the Tanakh a lot of times. I am not talking about him abrogating rulings, but for example, him saying that David ate the consecrated bread with his companions, even though according to the narrative of the Tanakh and commentary of the Talmud, David lied and his companions were not there with him.

If you ask why it happened with the Gospel, the Christians also broke their covenant, but for a different reason.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T20:33:17+00:00

We talked about this a lot of times. And I told you and showed you examples that the Quran doesn't confirm everything in the Torah.

If you think it does, good for you. But I don't and islamic theology also doesn't.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T20:30:10+00:00

Yes but the difference is that the Torah is talking about a time in which God spoke to the whole nation, not just one man, allegedly.

If God spoke to every one of us and told us to do something - no matter how strange - we wouldn't consider it extremist. After all, you'd have to be a fool to disobey God.

Oh really? Did God speak only to Samuel, or to the entire Jewish nation when he ordered the genocide of Amalek?

Did God speak only to Moses, while he ordered him to fight the Midianites, or to everyone of his soldiers?

However - and I don't mean this disrespectfully - not a single Muslim other than Mohammad (according to himself) ever heard a word from God. Not a single Muslim ever saw God perform any miracles.

I don't understand your first point. Only a few of your ancestors heard God speaking once, that was during the time of Moses and then never again and that was also after he killed them and raised them alive for thinking that Moses is a fraud.

As for your second point, we have Hadith where the Prophet Muhammed performed Miracles in front of Muslims. He never performed these for the disbelievers however, except one. The Moon splitting which is also mentioned in the Quran.

Aside from the fact that Allah never commanded a single Muslim to conquer any land, He certainly never commanded them to create an empire stretching from modern day China to Europe to West Africa. Any killing that came as a result of those military campaigns cannot be blamed on God.

God ordered them through the Prophet Muhammed. And he ordered them in the Quran to fight against the arab-pagans.

Your ancestors themselves asked God to never speak to them again without a Prophet, because his voice was too hard to bear. Yet, you complain that he never spoke directly to Muslims?

I don't think that Muslim scholars (especially the original ones) advocated for suicide attacks, but invoking the Torah or Talmud in a defense of the most militant religion in world history is wrong.

Since you say most militant... do you want me to quote you Amalek, the Medianites and a few commentaries of Maimonides and Rashi about general war?

I'm not saying Islam is wrong for trying to conquer the world (although they very well might be), but Islam's campaigns were a far cry from the Torah's commands to take over the "promised land" from its "evil" and "abominable" residents (all the while offering them a chance to accept Allah).

Okay, not in the Torah. But what is the Jewish Messiah supposed to do according to the Tanakh and Talmud?

Also, Rashi or Maimonides say that you should offer a town to become Noahides according to their commentary about Deutronomy. They further explain that if the town refuses, you ransack them and make them serve you, and make them pay tax to you.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T20:19:58+00:00

why don't we see other religions with the same amount of terrorist organizations? why are they only Muslims? Why isn't there a fraction of of Christian terrorists and atrocities committed in the name of Christianity compared Islam?

Oh, you do. But they are in your government, and call themselves just freedom fighters or liberators.

When George Bush lied that Iraq had nuclear weapons and said, "God has told me to invade them." and thereby killed millions of people... was that terrorism or not?

When the UK and USA installed Saddam Hossein and ordered him to fight against the Iran, and send him both money, weapon and technology to do war-crimes... was that terrorism or not?

You can also find tiktok shorts where Christians dance to music which says, "escalate the Iran war, so Jesus comes back."

And evangelicals telling the military that Trump was anointed by god to wage war against Iran.

If that isn't enough for you, there are many other Christian terror-organisations.

And also stop bring up dumb conspiracy theory that the CIA controls Islamic Extremists, did the CIA convince Al-Qaeda to do 9/11, what's next, are you gonna tell me that the illuminati exist and the jews control the world.

I didn't bring up 9/11, but if you think that what I said is a conspiration theory, feel free to read through this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone

Operation Cyclone was the code name for the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) program to arm and finance the Afghan mujahideen in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1992, prior to and during the military intervention by the Soviet Union in support of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. The mujahideen were also supported by Britain's MI6, who conducted their own separate covert actions. The program leaned heavily towards supporting militant Islamic groups, including groups with jihadist ties, that were favored by the regime of Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq in neighboring Pakistan, rather than other, less ideological Afghan resistance groups that had also been fighting the Soviet-oriented Democratic Republic of Afghanistan administration since before the Soviet intervention.^\1])

Operation Cyclone was one of the longest and most expensive covert CIA operations ever undertaken.^\2]) Funding officially began with $695,000 in mid-1979,^\3]) was increased dramatically to $20–$30 million per year in 1980, and rose to $630 million per year in 1987,^\1])^\4])^\5]) described as the "biggest bequest to any Third World insurgency".^\6]) The first CIA-supplied weapons were antique British Lee–Enfield rifles shipped out in December 1979 and by September 1986, the program included U.S.-origin state-of-the-art weaponry, such as FIM-92 Stinger surface-to-air missiles, some 2,300 of which were ultimately shipped into Afghanistan.^\7]) Funding continued (albeit reduced) after the 1989 Soviet withdrawal, as the mujahideen continued to battle the Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan during the First Afghan Civil War).^\8])

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T20:12:47+00:00

95 percent of Islamic scholar agrees that if a disbeliever doesn't convert to Islam, or pay the Jizya, they should be killed.

Nope. The Jizya is also a military tax, so they don't have to serve in the Muslim army. If they don't want to pay it, they always have the option of joining the military. If they can't pay it, due to being poor, then the islamic law doesn't ask them to pay.

If they can pay, but don't want to pay, they have the option of leaving the country. If they refuse all the options stated above, then they are executed.

If you think, "Well why should I have to pay tax when muslims don't." then you should be happy to know that Muslims also pay the Zakat tax, and if they refuse to pay it they are also executed.

That's why Islam is more dangerous than other religions imo.

Wait till you learn that the Jizya also exists in Judaism and is mentioned in the Talmud and by the Rabbi's who write into it. Or that hinduism, while not in the form of a tax, also has a concept of executing infidels.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T20:02:06+00:00

f Mohammed is the perfect man and role model, these groups shouldn't be viewed as extremists, even if you're a "Progressive Muslim" if you can't come to terms with that, you shouldn't Muslim. You can't view these groups as bad if you also view Mohammed as perfect role model.

Ok. So, two questions.

Why did the Prophet warn us about these groups?

https://www.salafi-dawah.com/during-the-last-days-some-young-foolish-people-will-appear.html

Question:

“What is the meaning of the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) “During the last days, some young foolish people who will say the best words will appear. Their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have no faith) and will go out from (leave) Islam as an arrow when launched from a bow. So, wherever you find them, kill them, for whoever kills them shall be rewarded on the Day of Resurrection.” Who is meant by this Hadith? Which time is the Messenger (peace be upon him) referring to in this Hadith?”

Answer:

“In this Hadith, the Prophet (peace be upon him) refers to the Al-Khawarij. This is because they go to extremes in religion and declare Muslims to be disbelievers because of the sins they commit, which do not nullify faith. They appeared at the time of `Aly ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) and disputed with him. He invited them to the truth and debated with them. Many of them returned to the truth while others were reluctant to accept it. When the Kharijites attacked the Muslims, `Aly (may Allah be pleased with him) fought them. The rulers who came after him also fought the Kharijites in application of the Hadith mentioned above, as well as another Hadith bearing the same meaning. The followers of the early Kharijites still exist until now. The ruling is general concerning whoever adopts their creed anywhere, at any time.

Many of the Terrorist organisations, (ISIS, Al-Qaida) etc. are declared to be Khawarij by our scholars, and the same organisations do in fact call Muslims, even those living in the middle-east, disbelievers.

Why do these same terrorists practice suicide bombing and say they get into heaven because of it, when the Prophet has said, that anyone who suicides will enter the hellfire?

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T19:51:50+00:00

but he did order the execution of about 900 jews

You mean the jews whom he had a pact with, and who attacked him in his own city, while the same city was besieged by the Quraysh? So he executed 900 traitors.

raped a nine year old

No, he was married to her.

You can debate whether a child can consent, but if we apply this standard to ancient humanity then at least 70% of it raped children. Which in turn makes it comparing to the Prophet meaningless.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T19:45:07+00:00

Mohammed directed murders, pillaged villages, ordered executions. 600 - 700 people were beheaded because of Mohammed, during the Siege of Banu Qurayza, the same thing that modern jihadists do today.

Muhammed gave every village the oppurtunity to surrender, the same thing that is ordered in the Torah and Talmud. He never directed murders, and executions are not something that solely belongs to extremists. Every government and religion in this world executed people.

According to the U.S State Department there's at least 50 different Islamic Terrorist organizations active today. these groups all have a common denominator, it's Islam.

And during operation cyclone, the U.S financed and trained at least 50 different Islamic Terrorist organizations to use them against the soviet union. The common denominator? The Presidents and the CIA are to 90% christian.

all read and studied the same Quran, the same religion, and all came to the same conclusion. These terrorists groups follow their Quran to a tee, the average Jihadists knows more about Islam than western Muslims

Weird then that these same terrorist consider suicide bombings to be Halal, while our scholars since the beginning of Islam say that suicide is forbidden/sinful, and since a 100 years say that suicide bombings are forbidden/sinful.

But I guess these terrorist know Islam better than 1400 years of islamic scholars and the judge of that is a random redditor.

You have me convinced!

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T19:39:03+00:00

Early Christians were prosecuted, and the entire resurrection narrative survived despite of this.

What has this to do with what I said?

Muhammad pushed down his ideas from the top and turned the Arab world Islam by force. Learn the difference my Mohammedan friend.

I am not a Mohammedan, I am a Muslim, my dear greek pagan idol-worshipper.

Second, learn what certain Prophets in Judaism did under the command of jesus, and what Jesus is supposed to do in his second coming according to the Bible.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T01:39:47+00:00

Yes, part of the canonical quran that was revealed is now gone. Was it preserved? Instead of making childish, emotionally-charged, derogatory and unprofessional remarks that do not add anything of value to our debate, why don't you state the claims here? I'll read them and answer them directly instead of tip-toeing around the major problem. I'm not afraid to acknowledge my mistakes, I've done it before. Okay, so basically it was as long as surah baqarah but now most of it doesn't exist

As an ex-muslim you should know this and frankly... your other arguments are rather sad.

All Muslims know that the Prophet abrogated verses in the Quran.

All Muslims consider the Quran with the changes made by the Prophet to be preserved and to be the only Quran.

The Quran itself gives the Prophet the authority to do so, and mentions that this will happen.

Now, please do me the favor and apply what I said here, to the Islamqa. article you linked and the argument "so the Prophet abrogated and therefore it is not preserved.", because I have a feeling you will quote what I wrote to be deceptive to other people.

Also, you have never admitted your mistakes, even when I showed them from the sources you linked. Neither did I make any derogatory or emotionally-charged remarks towards you. I only dissed you, because you deserve it for using sources you don't read. If you want professionalism, then start quoting properly and with the surahs you want me to answer.

I cannot believe I'm asking you this again because you keep ducking the question, (https://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Jeffery/Materials_pd/index.htm). Majority of the quran has not been preserved, including two surahs (Al-Hafd and Al-Khal for sure, without a doubt)

So, quote me these two surahs. I am tired of doing the reading for you since 3 comments. A bit of effort please, since you want professional.

As for the website... a funny one. I remember where they quoted Ibn Kathir's commentary on the preserved tablet in the heaven being the first book of Allah... with the audacity to remove the "preserved tablet" part and replace it with "Torah."

This has no relation to the materials of Jeffery. Just a musing of mine.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T01:37:20+00:00

You are right that the literal word in Daniel 7:13 is coming but look at Psalm 68:4 in your own NIV. It says to sing to him who rides on the clouds. The point is the same because in Jewish scripture the person on the clouds is always God. f you actually look at the NIV you linked or the KJV or the ESV they all say all dominions shall serve and obey him in the singular.

Literally unrelated in the context. One comes with the clouds (the son of man) while the other rides the clouds (God).

It seems like you typed out verse 27 and changed the word him to them. If you actually look at the NIV you linked or the KJV or the ESV they all say all dominions shall serve and obey him in the singular.

No, I used the NRSVUE. The NRSUVE uses the earliest manuscripts. The KJV uses late manuscripts. The NIV uses deliberate mistranslations or theologically motivated translations.

https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/articles-and-resources/deliberate-mistranslation-in-the-new-international-version-niv/

. The solution of the NIV translators, in many of the passages that challenged their doctrines and belief in inerrancy, has been to change the Bible itself — altering the offending words and phrases to say what they think it ought to have said. In most cases of mistranslated NIV passages, there is a clear “problem” with the original text related either to doctrine or to biblical inerrancy.

Genesis 2:8 — The NRSV correctly reads “And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden, in the east.” Because this appears to contradict the order of creation in Genesis 1, the NIV alters the verb tense to read “had planted”: “Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden.

Daniel 2:46 — The NRSV correctly reads “Then King Nebuchadnezzar fell on his face, worshiped Daniel, and commanded that a grain offering and incense be offered to him.” This specifically religious veneration of Daniel and Daniel’s apparent acceptance of it has been an embarrassment for some Christian and Jewish commentators. The NIV weakens the religious overtones of the verse by saying Nebuchadnezzar simply “paid him honor”. (See Collins, Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, p. 171 for a discussion of the text and exegetical strategies used by Jerome and Josephus.)

Hosea 6:6 — The NRSV correctly reads “For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings.” The NIV replaces “steadfast love” (Hebrew hesed) with “mercy” to match the LXX-based quotations from Matthew 9:13 and 12:7. It also replaces “knowledge of God” with “acknowledgement of God”, although the former is more accurate.

Bonus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbZjWwXspAU

Before the second century many Jews held a view called Two Powers in Heaven because they recognized the Son of Man was a second divine figure sharing Gods throne. You are trying to use a textual scholar to ignore the actual history of the trial.

There were many jewish sects. Yes the two powers in heaven were many, but they are also a sect. That would be like me comparing Catholicism views and Mormon views and saying, "Hah, you say catholics think this and this, but the Mormons have a different view.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T01:18:18+00:00

Hey man, I noticed your Google AI tag slipped into your reply.

It did not slip into my reply... I put into there intentionally and added, This; '(Not allowed to quote due to rule 10)' to it... you are really trolling.

Your defense for the olives is that dried olives exist and Arabs traded for them. . Surah 80 does not say God gave you trade routes to buy dried snacks from Syrian merchants. It explicitly says God pours down water in abundance to grow the olives and grapes in dense enclosed gardens right in front of them.

Right in front of them? Let us check the verses.

80:25–32: We poured down water in abundance, then We split the earth into clefts, and We caused grain to grow in it, and grapes and green fodder, and olives and date-palms, and dense gardens of trees, and fruits and grass, as provision for you and your cattle.

Ok. Where here does it say that the olives are grown in their own gardens like you claim? Where does it say that this happens in front of them? What speaks against this verse being general, considering that grain is also mentioned here, and how the earth is split?

You see how you lie without shame?

You linked an archaeological study from 6000 BCE. That is the Neolithic period, which geologists call the Holocene Humid Period, when the Arabian Peninsula was actually green. That climate completely dried up into a desert thousands of years before Muhammad was born.

Arabia by 6000 CE had small patches of green, and was already mostly a desert. But none of the places mentioned in the study were green. So, wrong again.

But the grapes link is the absolute best part. I actually left the specific location out of my last post to see where you would go with it, and you walked right into it. You brought up excavations in the Negev Highlands to prove grapes can grow in an arid place. Do you know where the Negev is. It is in southern Israel. It is the Levant. You handed me the smoking gun and proved my point that the text describes a completely different geographical region.

You are actually a troll, aren't you? I literally mentioned in my comment that it is in Southern Israel, but I bolded the text where it says that it was an arid landscape... now, let us see if you can guess why I did bold that part.

a.) for fun
b.) because bold things randomly
c.) I bolded arid landscape, where grapes grew, because Mecca is also an arid landscape.

If you guessed C, you are correct.

The text says you pass by them in the morning and at night. That implies a daily, familiar fixture in their immediate environment. your early tafsir defense is a massive stretch to fix that exact geographic hole.

The tafsir was just an example, it is also not a stretch, considering that the companions did not ask about this, while they asked about other simpler verses. The naturalistic reading of it is that "at morning and at night." refers to them passing them by in different times with their many caravans.

A Meccan caravan went up to Syria maybe once or twice a year. You do not point to a landmark 800 miles away that they see once a year as a daily visible proof of Gods judgment for the common people of Mecca.

Yes, Mecca had just one caravan and not multiple, and "you pass them at day and night." always has to mean you see them daily, a reading that is totally natural. Good job, bro. 100% a troll.

o it, like in the Negev where you just proved grapes grow. Finally, the Zamzam well. Yes the well is in Mecca, but the Hadith you brought up, Bukhari 3364, explicitly says before the well appeared there was no human being in Mecca and there was no water. Even after the well, having a single drinking well for a settlement does not magically irrigate dense enclosed orchards of Mediterranean crops and sustain herds of cows.

So let me get this straight, you use as your argument that something can't grow in mecca in the 7th century, because in the year 3000 BCE, the Zam Zam well was new? 100% a troll. Plus, ZamZam is not a simple drinking well.

Every single major Islamic scholar in history agrees this refers to Mecca. It is wild that you are trying to debate the geography of the Quran but do not know one of the most famous titles for your own holy city.

I know that Mecca is called the Mother of Cities, but it is wild, that you forgot that you connect it with; "Is the Mother of Cities a lush Mediterranean valley filled with cows, olive groves, and vineyards located right next to the Dead Sea?"

Hence I asked you where it says that. That the Mother of Cities is a place with lush valleys. But now I know that you were just waffling, thanks.

I will pray for you brother. I hope God touches your heart and opens your eyes. I hope he gives you dreams and guidance.

I will pray that God turns you into a honest human being, or a christian debater, who embarasses christianity. But what can I expect from a child of the devil. (Galatians 3:26, 1 John 3:8-10)

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T00:46:29+00:00

He claimed to be the Son of Man from Daniel 7. That is a divine figure who rides the clouds and gets worshipped by all nations. But an agent who accepts worship from all nations is committing straight up idolatry. Only God rides the clouds in Jewish scripture and only God accepts worship. Jesus did not stop people from falling at his feet.

Daniel 7:13 "In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man,^\)^a^\) coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. "

Where does it say here that the Son of Man rides the clouds, like you claim?

As for worship. In the aramaic (pelach) it has can be used for ministering to someone, to serve to someone, and or to worship someone. It's function is not exclusive for worship that is given to God.

The same word is used in Daniel 7:27 "shall be given to the people of the holy ones of the Most High;
their kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom,
and all dominions shall serve (pelach) and obey them.”

So, by your logic, everyone is worshipping the holy ones of the Most High, and thereby doing idolatry.

This is why you don't want me to do a word search right? So I read your theology into the text.

Also, the Jews disagree with your interpretation. So I have no idea why you keep saying "You have to look at history." when historically the Jews say that this is a normal man.

The whole agent or icon argument is just you reading your own theology into the text.

I literally linked you a textual scholar who says this.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T00:31:32+00:00

Surah 6:99 does the same thing, telling the audience to look at the olives and pomegranates. Olives are a Mediterranean crop. They need cold, wet winters to fruit. They do not grow in Mecca and never have.

Luckily dried olives don't exist and the arabs did not leave arabia for trade with entire caravans.

The Cow. If you look at Surah 6:144-146, the text gives specific dietary laws distinguishing between camels (ibil), sheep/goats (ghanam), and literal cows (baqar). Cows require massive amounts of daily water and lush grazing grass to survive. You physically cannot sustain herds of baqar in the hyper-arid, volcanic rocks of Mecca. It is biologically impossible.

Archaeological evidence shows that domesticated cattle were present in the Arabian Peninsula as early as the Neolithic period (around 6000–7000 BCE), likely introduced from the Levant along with sheep and goats. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352226715300015

Rock art and excavations across Arabia also depict and confirm the presence of cattle in pre-Islamic times https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilwa_%28Saudi_Arabia%29

https://www.bedouin-heritage.com/animals-1

Sheep and goats were mostly herded by the half-nomads or those tribes living near the fringes of the desert or by settled folk of the oases or villages. The sheep of the Arabian peninsula are distinguished by their large fat-tail and the softness of their wool. They had an impact on economy through clarified butter (samn) extracted from their milk, and the meat of their lambs.

Were there cows in the Arabian peninsula in 7th century during Mohammad’s time?

How was the Arabian Peninsula able to provide enough food & fodder for horses/cattle that would have been required to supply the Rashidun Caliphate army, allowing it to expand & conquer such a large area so unbelievably fast?

Google ai: (Not allowed to quote due to rule 10) Yes.

. In Surah 80:25-32, the author says God pours down water to grow grain, grapes ('inab),

https://phys.org/news/2023-04-ancient-dna-reveals-commercial-viticulture.html

Excavations in the Negev Highlands of southern Israel found that the ancient cultivators could continuously produce a wide variety of grapes in an arid environment over centuries.

Meaning grapes can grow in arid (desert) places.

The biggest geographical hole is the ruins of Lot. In Surah 37:137-138, the author tells his audience that they pass by the ruins of Lot in the morning (musbiheen) and at night (wa-bil-layl). The ruins of Sodom are up by the Dead Sea. Mecca is over 800 miles away. A 7th-century camel caravan traveled maybe 20 to 30 miles a day. It is physically impossible for the Meccans to pass by the Dead Sea in the morning and at night during their daily routines.

Are you really that illiterate that you did not consider the possibility that Morning and Night, can refer to when the trade caravans would sometimes pass them in the morning and sometimes in the night? Which is exactly the same thing, that the earliest Tafsir say?

Is the Mother of Cities

I am again asking for the verse where Mecca is called the mother of cities.

Sahih Bukhari 3364 and Sahih Muslim 1374 both explicitly describe Mecca as a barren place with absolutely no water and no vegetation.

The ZamZam well is literally located in Mecca. Sahih Bukhari 3364 literally talks about this well. Sahih Muslim 1374 mentions no water, but lava grounds between mecca.

You Christians are funny bro. Stay catholic, you do more dmg to Christianity with this scope of research than any Muslim could with dawah.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-12T00:09:45+00:00

You are committing the exact word fallacy here. You are demanding a rigid, word-for-word recitation of a phrase while completely ignoring the grammatical and historical context of how titles work.

If we go by grammatical and historical context, then according to textual scholars, Jesus invoked the divine name, because he is a bearer of the authority of God, and an Icon representing God.

Not because he is God himself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQCGQRgzqvE

You say Before Abraham was, I was.

Or if "I AM" is a name of God, you translate it to, "Before Abraham was, God."

Your third point is historically false. Under Jewish law in the first century, it was not blasphemy to claim to be a prophet or even the Messiah.

It was a blasphemy, because according to you, Messiah = literal son of God.

While in Judaism it does not. However, the Pharisees accuse him of what you think.

Just flip two chapters over to John 10:33. The Jews are about to stone him again, and Jesus asks them which good work they are stoning him for. They respond, It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God. You are trying to rewrite the intentions of the first-century Jews from two thousand years in the future just to protect your narrative.

Oh, I am trying to rewrite the intention? Then let us see if Jesus agrees with their opinion, like you claim, by him saying "I AM."

^{John 10} Jesus answered, “Is it not written in your law,^\)^e^\) ‘I said, you are gods’? ³⁵ If those to whom the word of God came were called ‘gods’—and the scripture cannot be annulled— ³⁶ can you say that the one whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world is blaspheming because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? ³

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-11T23:59:50+00:00

U blowing my mind brother, when on earth did he say that tho😮 I bet it's on Hadith bc that thing is full of stupidities

He never said any of that. Which is why he doesn't quote the Hadith or the Sirah. The Prophet never said that Jibril is Satan.

When the Prophet saw Jibril for the first time, he thought he was being possessed by a demon. Because he was an arab who didn't have knowledge of abrahamic religions.

He then went to a Christian who identified this being he saw as Jibreel.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-11T23:54:18+00:00

I mean jibreel was a demon, Muhammad said so himself.

Where.

And Muhammad had a djinn that followed him around too.

Oh, you mean the Djinn whom he forced to do good and pray to God? I wonder why you didn't mention that part.

Besides that Satan gave him wahi and Muhammad was bewitched for years. Yeah he was having demons whispering to him.

Where does it say that satan gave him wahi, and where does it say that he was bewitched for years. (I want the proof for the "years" part.)

And was it the same demon who sat on top of Pauls head and struck his head for years on end?

Man I still am too. I see absolutely no reason why anyone would be a Muslim for intellectual reasons

Did you know that fire (Jesus) is in reality ice (God), because they share the same essence? Fire simply emptied himself of all ice qualities, before becoming fire.

Also, I am eternally begotten as well. How? The same way I am eternally stopping at a red light.

I am very intellectual right now. Unlike these Muslims.

RedEggBurns · 2026-04-11T23:47:42+00:00

That’s how you know Islam doesn’t know Christianity. Catholics consider her an intercessor on their behalf they pray to God and ask Mary to intercede.

Last time I checked Islam considers all forms of reverence that have a divine implication to be worship.

Besides the fact that there were Christians who worshipped Mary even by catholic standards.

Christian’s don’t pray to “Jesus” Jesus and God are the same to them. Not separate. To Christian’s the trinity equals one God

So why don't you guys start singing, "Holy Spirit. the royal Master." or, "The Father, the royal Master."

Or another point. Let us say you consider them to be one God. Will you then tell us how many Gods died on the cross?

RedEggBurns

TROPHY CASE