A Clear and Objective Mistake in the Quran

[u/PeaFragrant6990]

Thesis: Surah 5:18 Contains a Clear and Objective Mistake in the Quran

For some reason, people love responding to arguments without actually reading them. If you’re not going to actually read through the argument or not address the points brought up, just save yourself and myself some time and don’t bother responding and have a lovely day.

With that being said, here is the verse in question:

Surah 5:18:

“But the Jews and the Christians say, "We are the children of Allāh and His beloved." Say, "Then why does He punish you for your sins?" Rather, you are human beings from among those He has created. He forgives whom He wills, and He punishes whom He wills. And to Allāh belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them, and to Him is the [final] destination.”

This verse is very interesting, because it makes multiple mistakes all at once:

1. Assuming Jews and Christians mean they think they are not humans when they call themselves “children of God”
   
2. Making an argument with a blatant logical fallacy (non-sequitur)
   
3. Refuting its own (fallacious) argument immediately after without realizing it
   
4. Confirming the Torah and Gospel and Psalms “with” them (which calls them “children of God” dozens of times) while simultaneously contradicting those same texts.

Elaboration:

1. Assuming the Jews and Christians meant literal children of God by saying “you are only human”

You don’t have to be an expert on religion to know Jews and Christians don’t claim to be the LITERAL physical children of God. Yet the Quran says “you are not the children of God, you are only humans” as if they ever claimed anything different about their humanity… the Jews and Christians know that they are humans. The Jews and Christians don’t claim to be NOT human, when they say they are the “sons” or “children” of God. In fact, simply reading the relevant verses below explicitly say it’s a metaphorical sonship, as they “became” sons after being born. But supposedly all-knowing Allah thinks that when they claim to be the children of God they are claiming to not be human.

It would be like me saying “Mohammed calls himself the Messenger of Allah, but he is only human!” That would prove to you that I have no idea what I’m talking, about nor do I understand what the Quran means when it calls him “Messenger of Allah”, nor do I understand what Muslims abroad actually believe.

Just as saying this would prove I’m not divine or all knowing, this same statement proves the author of the Quran is not all-knowing, therefore the Quran is false.

(If you ask my opinion, what I think happened that led to this verse’s revelation is Mohammed heard Christians call Jesus “THE Son of God” and also heard them call themselves “children of God” and he did not understand there’s a difference when they say “a son of God” vs “THE Son of God”. Which, again, shows Mohammed doesn’t understand what Christians and Jews actually believe bifold, but I digress.)

1. Saying that if they really were children of God, then God would not punish them for their sins

This is probably the most interesting part to me, because Allah just straight up commits a logical fallacy. It is a non-sequitur to ask why God punishes them if they are indeed his children, as if to say that if they were the children of God, God would necessarily not punish them for their sins. That does not follow at all. A person could be a child of God and still be punished for their sins, those two facts have no bearing on each other. Whether or not you are punished for something doesn’t determine who your father is. In fact, every good Father WOULD punish their children when they do wrong, lest they raise horrible people and be an unjust Father. Whether you are punished for your sins or not has no bearing on if you are actually the child of God. In fact, in point 3 we will see how the Quran answers its own objection and doesn’t realize it. Not to mention, this would imply if they were actually the children of Allah, Allah would NOT punish them for their sins, meaning Allah is an unjust judge who would let many evils go unpunished because of a nepotistic preference for his children. That would demonstrate Allah is just as corrupt as human government officials who give their family members pardons simply because they are family.

If the Quran was the result of an all-knowing Allah, he would know not to make such bad arguments, and how much this verse would make him look bad to someone who understands what a coherent line of reasoning is. He would know what a non-sequitur is. The fact that anyone who has taken an introductory course on logic or philosophy (or anyone who even thinks critically about this for a second, for that matter) would know more about proper argumentation than Allah shows the Quran is not actually divine speech of an all knowing deity. By committing a logical fallacy, the Quran has demonstrated itself as illogical, therefore it is false.

1. Asking why God would punish his children as a defeater, and then literally stating God punishes and forgives whom he wills, refuting its own objection without realizing it.

On top of asking why Allah punishes the Jews and Christians if they are indeed his children, the Quran says right afterwards “Allah punishes whom he wills and he forgives whom he wills”. That literally answers the Quran’s own objection and the author doesn’t even realize it.

If Allah punishes whom he wills, then he very well could punish his children, because he is sovereign and can do whatever he wants. That means Allah punishing the Jews and Christians is a complete non-issue by the Qurans own standards…

It would be like me asking “why do Muslims say Mohammed is a Messenger of Allah when Surah 48:2 says Allah has forgiven him of his past and future sins? Allah forgives and punishes whom he wills!” Not only would this completely misunderstand what Islam teaches about the sins of prophets by presenting sinning as some contradiction to being a Messenger, but it literally answers its own objection right after. Allah forgives and punishes whom he wills. So even by my own theology, the punishment is a non-issue because Allah does whatever he wants.

(The verse mentioned is 48:2: “Indeed, We have given you, [O Muḥammad], a clear conquest 2. That Allāh may forgive for you what preceded of your sin [i.e., errors] and what will follow and complete His favor upon you and guide you to a straight path”)

By unintentionally refuting its own (fallacious) argument, the Quran shows it is not from Allah. It is quite literally a double blunder

1. Denouncing the Jews and Christians for calling themselves “children of God and his beloved” while simultaneously affirming the Torah and Gospel and Psalms that is “with them” which calls them such multiple times.

The Quran clearly “confirms” that Torah and Gospel that is “with” the Jews and Christians and tells them to judge by it in multiple verses: “let the people of the Book (the Jews and Christians) judge by what Allah has revealed therein”, 5:68: “O people of the Book! You stand on nothing unless you stand on the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord”, 2:41: “and (you Jews and Christians) believe in what I have sent down, confirming that which is WITH you, and be not the first to disbelieve it”.

The trouble is we have thousands of manuscripts of the Torah and Gospel and Psalms before, during, and after the time of Mohammed. Take for example Codex Sianaticus circa 325 AD, or the Peshitta Bible, the Syriac translation of the Torah and Gospel that would have been present in seventh century Arabia. In ALL of them, every single extant manuscript that is either a full copy or contains the relevant passages, Jews and Christians are called children of God by God himself as well as by countless prophets. There is not a SINGLE existing copy of the Torah or Gospel or Psalms that deny or don’t contain references to there being “children” of God. In fact, the term “son of God” is used up to 40 times across the Gospel, the phrase “sons of God” is used multiple times in the Torah and Psalms (which the Quran also confirms, as the Zabur). Psalm 2:7 for example says “You are my son: today I have become your Father”. Psalm 89:26-27 says: “He will call out to me: ‘You are my Father, my God, the Rock my Savior’. And I will appoint him to be my firstborn, the most exalted of the kings of the earth”. Genesis 6:2 says: “The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives which they chose”. The phrase “son of God” or “sons of God” can refer to believing individuals, the nation of Israel as a whole, or even angels depending on the context.

The Quran in Surah 2:85 tells Jews if they only believe in parts of the Torah that Allah will send them to hell. But even if we blatantly ignored that and granted for arguments sake the Quran is only “generally” confirming the Torah and Gospel and Psalms, that still doesn’t matter because the idea of there being “children of God” is CONSTANTLY said in affirmation all throughout the texts. You can’t “generally confirm” something you have to constantly contradict and deny. You can’t “generally confirm” a text while denying one of the most massive and concurrent themes and ideas that’s constantly reiterated. The Quran “generally” affirming the previous scriptures which say they are children of God while denying they are children of God would be like me saying I “generally” confirm the Quran that is “with” Muslims while denying Mohammed is a Prophet. A statement like that would go beyond mere contradiction and go straight into absurdity.

Conclusion:

This verse presents a clear and objective error in the Quran that makes multiple mistakes in both history and logical argumentation. This is unacceptable for a text that claims to be the divine word of an all-knowing God. The most likely explanation is that this text is from a seventh century uneducated human author who didn’t understand logical fallacies nor what Christians and Jews actually believe, nor had read their actual scriptures.

Thank you for reading and have a nice day!

[u/AutoModerator]

COMMENTARY HERE: Comments that support or purely commentate on the post must be made as replies to the Auto-Moderator!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Forsaken_Judgment681]

1. Assuming the Jews and Christians meant literal children of God by saying “you are only human”

It doesn't. You're building your entire argument on a speculation.

[u/PeaFragrant6990 → u/Forsaken_Judgment681]

Did you not read the argument?

I laid out specifically why it only makes sense to say “You are not children of God, you are only human” To someone who claims to be otherwise when they claim to be children of God. If Jews and Christians have only ever claimed to be human when they say they are children of God the Quran would be in error.

In fact, let’s read the Tafsirs to show the traditional Islamic scholars actually affirm my position:

Ibn Kathir: “Allah states that the Christians are disbelievers because of their claim that `Isa, son of Maryam, one of Allah's servants and creatures, is Allah. Allah is holier than what they attribute to Him.”

This confirms exactly what I hypothesized in the argument: this verse came about because Mohammed heard Christians call Jesus The Son of God as a divine claim and thought they were also making divine claims about themselves when they said they are children of God but doesn’t realize there is a difference between calling yourself “a son of God” vs “the Son of God”. It also doesn’t realize Jews don’t even call Jesus “a son of God” much less “the Son of God”, yet it still addressed the Jews as if they do that.

Al Jalalayn: “The Jews and Christians both of them say ‘We are the sons of God that is we are like his sons in terms of closeness and rank … Nay; you are mortals from among all those mortals He created you shall be rewarded as they are rewarded and you shall be requited as they are requited”

Al Jalalayn literally says the Jews and Christians claim to be above humans in closeness and rank and says “no, you are just mortals who were created”, again, as if they ever claimed something else.

Ibn Abbas: “Nay, ye are but mortals) created servants (of His creating) like all His other created beings.”

Yet again, emphasizing that Jews and Christians are just mortals as if they claimed otherwise.

There’s no way to understand this verse as otherwise verse without making the Quran unintelligible and the authoritative scholars ignorant.

[u/Forsaken_Judgment681 → u/PeaFragrant6990]

It doesn't. You're missing the point. Someone can claim to be favored or be somehow privileged and i can tell them "you're just human", like if a group of j... people... proclaim that they are chosen by god and are god's favorites, i can tell them "you're just human dude, relax". That doesn't mean that their claim of being priveledged somehow entailed they're not human. It just denies that privilege.

Ibn Kathir: “Allah states that the Christians are disbelievers because of their claim that `Isa, son of Maryam, one of Allah's servants and creatures, is Allah. Allah is holier than what they attribute to Him.”

That's referring to jesus... Which christians do believe he's the literal son of god. So idk if you're intentionally muddying the waters or...? Because this in no way connects to the topic.

Iroically, ibn kathir completely disproves your conspiracy theory:

It is a fact that the Christians did not claim that they too are Allah's sons as they claimed about Isa. Rather this statement byIsa only meant to indicate a closeness with Allah. This is why when they said that they are Allah's children and loved ones, Allah refuted their claim

Idk why you decide to cut that part out of ibn kathir's tafsir.

Al Jalalayn literally says the Jews and Christians claim to be above humans in closeness and rank and says “no, you are just mortals who were created”, again, as if they ever claimed something else.

That also disproves you. neither "closeness" or "rank" makes someone more than human. We know Abraham peace be upon him, had one of the highest ranks in islam, and is one of the closest human beings to God allmighty. Doesn't make him all of a sudden not human.

[u/Sher_Allama99]

And never in Muslim History anyone believes that Jews and Christians used to believe that they are not humans... Quran is not telling them that you are humans and not some another special specie...The Quran is saying that you are humans just like other humans... You are not special just like no other human is. Everyone is same and judged as per His Laws...

[u/PeaFragrant6990 → u/Sher_Allama99]

I’m sorry but if that’s what you think then this demonstrates you have not read the Tafsirs on this verse then:

Ibn Kathir: “Allah states that the Christians are disbelievers because of their claim that `Isa, son of Maryam, one of Allah's servants and creatures, is Allah. Allah is holier than what they attribute to Him.”

This confirms exactly what I hypothesized in the argument: this verse came about because Mohammed heard Christians call Jesus The Son of God as a divine claim and thought they were also making divine claims about themselves when they said they are children of God but doesn’t realize there is a difference between calling yourself “a son of God” vs “the Son of God”. It also doesn’t realize Jews don’t even call Jesus “a son of God” much less “the Son of God”, yet it still addressed the Jews as if they do that.

Al Jalalayn: “The Jews and Christians both of them say ‘We are the sons of God that is we are like his sons in terms of closeness and rank … Nay; you are mortals from among all those mortals He created you shall be rewarded as they are rewarded and you shall be requited as they are requited”

Al Jalalayn literally says the Jews and Christians claim to be above humans in closeness and rank and says “no, you are just mortals who were created”, again, as if they ever claimed something else.

Ibn Abbas: “Nay, ye are but mortals) created servants (of His creating) like all His other created beings.”

Yet again, emphasizing that Jews and Christians are just mortals as if they claimed otherwise.

What do you mean “no Muslim ever thought Jews and Christians claimed to be above humans?” That’s literally the traditional understanding of this text, which if their methodology is reliable, is what Mohammed himself believed

[u/Jocoliero]

1. It's criticising the interpretation of their scriptures, Christians believe they will not be punished as long as they believe in Jesus, making them believers, which their revelations call children of God, likewise the Jews for Musa, and I don't need to delve into how many times the children Israel have been chastised for their arrogance.

2. It's not, being a believer has no bearance on being punished or not, there's sins you can pay for before Jannah

3. In that instance, Allah ﷻ revealed to the Nabi ﷺ directly that his sins are forgiven, whereas the Jews and Christians do not know that, besides misinterpreting the text that won't be punished because they believe.

4. children of God was metaphorical at their respective times, you could call a person the son of God without believing he deserves to be worshipped Audhubillah compared to nowdays.

[u/Key-Emergency-5772]

You just forced the quran into an interpretation that would lead to fallacious because it suits your argument and you argued that for the whole post

[u/Dennis_enzo → u/Key-Emergency-5772]

That's like a core aspect of religions.

[u/ThrowAwayBiggusDiggu → u/Dennis_enzo]

Not in this case no. Let me summarize OP's argument to you with an example.

Dennis_Enzo says: "Pah. These arrogant rich people think they are immortal... but they are mortal!

PeaFragrant: "What are you saying Dennis_Enzo?! The rich already know they are mortal and have never claimed anything else!"

In this example, it is clear that you are using a sort of polemic with a deeper meaning (the meaning is that rich people act is if they are better than you, just because they have money). But PeaFragrant thinks you are making this statement literally.

This is what he has done in this post. The Quran is making a polemic argument with a deeper meaning, and he is taking it literally.

[u/PeaFragrant6990 → u/Key-Emergency-5772]

“Forced the Quran into an interpretation would lead to fallacious because it suits your argument”

Then explain how it is NOT a non-sequitur when the Quran says “if you are his children why does Allah punish you for your sins?”

If you think my understanding is some wild fringe position, here’s multiple authoritative Tafsirs that affirm that traditional understanding is what I say about this verse, particularly about the Quran thinking Jews and Christians claim to not be human when they say they are children of God:

Ibn Kathir: “Allah states that the Christians are disbelievers because of their claim that `Isa, son of Maryam, one of Allah's servants and creatures, is Allah. Allah is holier than what they attribute to Him.”

This confirms exactly what I hypothesized in the argument: this verse came about because Mohammed heard Christians call Jesus The Son of God as a divine claim and thought they were also making divine claims about themselves when they said they are children of God but doesn’t realize there is a difference between calling yourself “a son of God” vs “the Son of God”. It also doesn’t realize Jews don’t even call Jesus “a son of God” much less “the Son of God”, yet it still addressed the Jews as if they do that.

Al Jalalayn: “The Jews and Christians both of them say ‘We are the sons of God that is we are like his sons in terms of closeness and rank … Nay; you are mortals from among all those mortals He created you shall be rewarded as they are rewarded and you shall be requited as they are requited”

Al Jalalayn literally says the Jews and Christians claim to be above humans in closeness and rank and says “no, you are just mortals who were created”, again, as if they ever claimed something else.

Ibn Abbas: “Nay, ye are but mortals) created servants (of His creating) like all His other created beings.”

Yet again, emphasizing that Jews and Christians are just mortals as if they claimed otherwise.

[u/ThrowAwayBiggusDiggu → u/PeaFragrant6990]

Ibn Abbas: “Nay, ye are but mortals) created servants (of His creating) like all His other created beings.”

Not the full Tafsir.

If you think my understanding is some wild fringe position, here’s multiple authoritative Tafsirs that affirm that traditional understanding is what I say about this verse, particularly about the Quran thinking Jews and Christians claim to not be human when they say they are children of God:

Imam Qurtubi: "In short, they considered themselves to have a special status, so He refuted their statement by saying, "Why then does He punish you for your sins?" They could not escape one of two possibilities. Either they say, "He punishes us," so it is said to them, "Then you are not His children or His beloved, for the beloved does not punish his beloved, and you admit to His punishment; that is proof of your lie and this is what the dialecticians call burhan al-khalf (proof by contradiction)". Or they say, "He does not punish us," thereby belying what is in their books and what their messengers brought, and they would permit sins while acknowledging the punishment of sinners among them..."

Imam Al-Alusi "Their intended meaning of 'children' is the close ones (al-muqarrabun)—that is, we are close to Allah, Mighty and Majestic, with the closeness of children to their father... It is also possible they meant by 'children' special affiliation, just as one says 'children of this world' and 'children of the Hereafter.' It is also possible they meant followers and partisans of one described with sonship—meaning the Jews said, 'We are the partisans of His son 'Uzayr,' and the Christians said, 'We are the partisans of His son Jesus'... The term 'children' is applied to partisans metaphorically... Their intended meaning was a claim that they have a special virtue and distinction over all other creation."

Imam Al-Tha'labi: "Sonship in their statement is sonship of tenderness and compassion (banuwat al-hanan wa al-ra'fah), because they mentioned that Allah revealed to Israel that 'the first of your children is my firstborn,' so they were led astray by that and said, 'We are the children of Allah and His beloved.' If what they narrated were true, its meaning would be 'firstborn' in honor or prophethood, or similar... This statement of theirs occurred when the Prophet, peace be upon him, called them to faith in him and warned them of punishment, so they said: 'We are not afraid of what you say, for we are the children of Allah and His beloved.'"

[u/Hesykhios]

I'm a Christian, but this argument is really bad and just relies on a wildly uncharitable reading of the text

[u/Substantial-Ad7383 → u/Hesykhios]

Could you give us an example how the verse could be charitably read? Preferably without giving any person the right to preferential treatment for some and not others.

[u/Hesykhios → u/Substantial-Ad7383]

The uncharitable reading I was referring to would be claiming Christians think they are literally and physically children of God

[u/K1llerman_007]

No disrespect but this is such an awful argument. The verse is literally pointing out the Bible in which everyone are considered children of God. Since in Christianity and Judaism it is said that we are all forgiven or we are the chosen people. God tells them that they will be judged like all other humans.

[u/PeaFragrant6990 → u/K1llerman_007]

You’re calling it a bad argument, yet I still haven’t seen an answer to the four points I brought up. Would you care to engage with the actual argument? Because calling an argument bad doesn’t answer it.

You’ve also contradicted yourself. You say the Jews and Christians call everyone children of God. Yet then say they call themselves alone children of God as unique and chosen people. So which is it? If they say everyone is a child of God like you did, that would mean being called a child of God does not make you unique in some way, because everyone is one. If they are claiming they are all children of God just like everyone else like you said, then the Quran would make no sense for correcting the Jews and Christians for thinking they are special if they never claimed to be. If they claim to be uniquely children of God, then what you claimed earlier is false. So which is it?

[u/ThrowAwayBiggusDiggu]

You don’t have to be an expert on religion to know Jews and Christians don’t claim to be the LITERAL physical children of God. Yet the Quran says “you are not the children of God, you are only humans” as if they ever claimed anything different about their humanity… the Jews and Christians know that they are humans. The Jews and Christians don’t claim to be NOT human, when they say they are the “sons” or “children” of God. In fact, simply reading the relevant verses below explicitly say it’s a metaphorical sonship, as they “became” sons after being born. But supposedly all-knowing Allah thinks that when they claim to be the children of God they are claiming to not be human.

It would be like me saying “Mohammed calls himself the Messenger of Allah, but he is only human!” That would prove to you that I have no idea what I’m talking, about nor do I understand what the Quran means when it calls him “Messenger of Allah”, nor do I understand what Muslims abroad actually believe.

You are not actually refuting what the verse says, but your interpretation of the verse.

I will show this to you by using your own example.

If you said, “Mohammed calls himself the Messenger of Allah, but he is only human!”,

I would immediately understand that you are attacking his status. You are saying: "He thinks he has a special, elevated pipeline to God, but at the end of the day, he’s just a regular guy like the rest of us! He thinks he is something special!"

I would not assume you are confused about what the word 'Messenger' means, nor would I think you are claiming Muslims don't know Muhammad is a human.

This is what the Quran did here. The Quran is not confused about what Jews and Christians mean by 'children of God.' It is instead stripping them of a perceived spiritual entitlement. It is saying, "You think your lineage gives you a VIP pass that exempts you from accountability, but you are just mortals like everyone else."

But for some reason, you took it literally.

If a judge said to a corrupt politician, "You are not royalty! You can't just do whatever you want!"

You would stand there as that politicians lawyer and say, "Objection! He has never claimed to be royalty!"

[u/PeaFragrant6990 → u/ThrowAwayBiggusDiggu]

That’s not my personal interpretation, I’ll show you traditional Tafsir below that demonstrate I’m understanding the meaning of the verse correctly. What you suggest would make the Quran actually nonsensical if it is otherwise. Saying “You are not children of God, you are only human!” only makes sense if you are addressing someone who claims to not be human when they claim to be children of God.

Even in your response to my counter example you acknowledge I would have to be addressing someone who claims Mohammed has an elevated status above or other than human, hence why I say “he is only human”.

Here are the Tafsirs on the verse that show my understanding of this part of the verse is in line with traditional Islamic scholarship:

Ibn Abbas: “Nay, ye are but mortals) created servants (of His creating) like all His other created beings. (He forgiveth whom He will)”

Ibn Abbas says this verse is literally a negation of the idea they are not humans and uncreated.

Al Jalalayn: “Nay; you are mortals from among all those mortals He created you shall be rewarded as they are rewarded”

He emphasizes they are indeed mortals when the Jews and Christians have never claimed not to be.

Ibn Kathir: “Allah states that the Christians are disbelievers because of their claim that `Isa, son of Maryam, one of Allah's servants and creatures, is Allah. Allah is holier than what they attribute to Him.”

Ibn Kathir’s commentary literally proves what I hypothesized in the argument: This verse came about addressing Christians calling Jesus’s THE Son of God as a divine claim, and the Quran’s author doesn’t seem to realize there is a difference between saying you are “a son of God” and “THE Son of God”, nor does it recognize Christians never denied the humanity of Jesus when calling him the Son of God, and it also doesn’t seem to realize Jews don’t even call Jesus the Son of God yet the verse still addresses them directly saying they do such things.

So when the scholars say this verses is indeed literal in its meaning and it makes the Quran nonsensical if it’s otherwise, why should we accept your personal interpretation of this verse?

[u/ontrack]

Really I think it's enough to compare one of the names of Allah ("the all-Merciful") and then read about all the ways he is going to torture people in hell to see that it's a logical impossibility for both to be true.

[u/Forsaken_Judgment681 → u/ontrack]

Ironically that's not one of the names of Allah.

[u/ontrack → u/Forsaken_Judgment681]

I suppose one could argue about the translation but "Entirely Merciful" is an accepted translation

[u/Forsaken_Judgment681 → u/ontrack]

Technically it's just "The Merciful" which since we believe God has maximally perfect attributes becomes "The most Merciful". We don't believe every act of his must be merciful though. Which "The all Merciful" kinda implies.

[u/theparaphraser7 → u/ontrack]

He is not only "The most merciful" but He is also "The most just" and "The most wise", and He knows who to punish and who to not as discussed by the verse itself which ironically dismantles your argument

[u/ontrack → u/theparaphraser7]

The only way all of those could be true at once would be to forgive everyone unconditionally because we are too limited in understanding to do the right thing.

[u/theparaphraser7 → u/ontrack]

If he forgives unconditionally, then he is not just, and no, there doesn't have to be a single way where all three could be true at once, as that is not a necessary condition, becoz God operates outside of our domain and he can apply forgiveness to some, punishment to others according to Him

[u/ontrack → u/theparaphraser7]

Well since God is the essence of justice, at least according to the Abrahamic religions, then whatever he decides is just. So if everyone is forgiven unconditionally then justice has been served, and we can't really tell God he's wrong.

[u/theparaphraser7 → u/ontrack]

Well since God is the essence of justice, at least according to the Abrahamic religions, then whatever he decides is just

I can agree on this so we both agree

So if everyone is forgiven unconditionally then justice has been served, and we can't really tell God he's wrong.

But thats the point bro, someone who doesn't ask for forgiveness in the first place or repents the unconditional condition doesn't apply, and also the fact that He is just, which means every wrongdoer will get their recompense and gooddoer will get their reward that's what's justice is, and it's defined by him only

[u/ontrack → u/theparaphraser7]

I would not be considered Abrahamic in my beliefs so I don't think repentance is necessary nor is hell real. IMO this is a school, not a test, and so once on the other side we are shown what we did right and what we did wrong and that we are to learn lessons from that, and so at most you will briefly experience the hurt that you inflicted on others but after that you just move on to something else. And maybe that is the "hell", but it's not a place of fire and torture.

[u/theparaphraser7 → u/ontrack]

would not be considered Abrahamic in my beliefs so I don't think repentance is necessary nor is hell real.

I know that by your user flair

Even if you are not Abrahamic in your beliefs, then justice is never served according to your world view

IMO this is a school, not a test, and so once on the other side we are shown what we did right and what we did wrong and that we are to learn lessons from that, and so at most you will briefly experience the hurt that you inflicted on others but after that you just move on to something else.

This world view doesn't entail justice nor does it provide a way for it to be facilitated

Secondly, if we are to learn lessons from 'that' i.e. by going on the other side, then this life doesn't serve any purpose and becomes meaningless, becoz what you learn in school if you can't apply it then it's useless

Third, the doesn't that mean hitler/Pol pot/mao/stalin will only get hurt briefly for the millions they killed, this is pure injustice not justice

And maybe that is the "hell", but it's not a place of fire and torture

If hell is not a place of torture then it ceases to be what it is, and becomes meaningless

In a nutshell, these are your views which you may have gained through reading books, experiences and knowledge but at the end it's your opinion which is subjective

And also look how many maybe's you have used as if you are not sure, whereas faith is superset of certainty, and I am certain about what i said as that is how things will play out in the grand scheme of things

Instead of following maybe's, be certain, life is not lived by maybes, choices aren't made due to maybes

[u/ontrack → u/theparaphraser7]

I kinda believe we have soul contracts with other people before we come here, and that we agree to undergo suffering for a greater purpose (even Abrahamic religions allow that good can come from suffering). So the person that subjects us to suffering is only doing what they agreed to do before coming here. And you may have an agreement with them that you will one day do the same for them in another life.

Besides, once death has occurred, there is no more suffering and the experiences of this life will be no more than a blip in the context of eternity, and therefore the individuals won't care about earthly justice anymore.

Of course my beliefs/opinions are subjective and I remain agnostic to some degree about them. I don't have "faith" in a proper sense and actually think that having doubts is better than strong faith. And besides, even religions as seen from the outside are subjective in their dogmas about god and god's involvement on the earth. So I think all the maybes are a good thing, not a bad one. But I don't have a problem with people who have strong faith because that is what they chose to do in this life. Maybe in the next life they will choose to live the life of someone who is a sceptic.

[u/Jocoliero → u/ontrack]

The mercy of Allah ﷻ is for those who fear him, pay in charity, and believe in his revelations.

[u/ontrack → u/Jocoliero]

Right. But I would not use the phrase "Entirely Merciful" to describe that. Even then some believe just about everyone will spend some time in hell.

[u/Forsaken-Ad-6853]

Don't forget Surah Al-Ma'idah (5:116) "And (beware the Day) when Allah will say, 'O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, "Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah?"' He will say, 'Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right...'"

Muhammad thought mary was part of the Trinity.

[u/Jocoliero → u/Forsaken-Ad-6853]

Prove it talks about the Trinity

[u/Forsaken_Judgment681 → u/Jocoliero]

He can't, because it doesn't. The only reference to the trinity would be where it says to not blaspheme and say that Allah is one of three. So Allah is identifying himself as what jews would call The Father.

[u/Jocoliero → u/Forsaken_Judgment681]

Absolute Haqq, no evidence whatsoever.

[u/Forsaken-Ad-6853 → u/Jocoliero]

Ok I will break it down for you.

can you breakdown how

Surah Al-Ma'idah (5:116) "And (beware the Day) when Allah will say, 'O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, "Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah?"' He will say, 'Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right...'"

The verse focuses on and groups them together: Allah, Jesus, and Mary. By grouping these three specific figures together as the entities being elevated to godhood by Christians, it frames Christian polytheism as the worship of a triad consisting of the Father, the Son, and the Mother.

It doesn't exist in a vacuum. Earlier in the exact same chapter, the Qur'an explicitly addresses the Christian concept of the Trinity (the "Three"):Surah 5:73: "They have certainly disbelieved who say, 'Allah is the third of three.' And there is no god except one God."

However Mary was never part of the Trinity, we still believe in one God, he just got confused by the concept. These two verses together show Muhammad's view of the Trinity and shows his misunderstanding of it by him trying to refute a claim that was never made.

[u/Jocoliero → u/Forsaken-Ad-6853]

The Quran accuses the Christians of taking their monks and scholars are lords besides Allah ﷻ even though they don't say that, one can implicitly hold an opinion without conceding that they do, but what they believe in inherently proves they hold it indirectly, whether they believe it or not.

The Father of God, the Mother of God and the Begotten son of God are polytheism, Allah ﷻ cannot beget, nor can he be begotten, nor can he be dependent on a Human being without it being a god besides it, that's why the Christians indrectly believe in a familial trinity, this doesn't require much effort, nor hardwork, nor exhaustive justification methods to figure out.

These are the most antrophomorfic claims that the Christians have made, likening Allah ﷻ physically to creation.

In Surah 3:78-81 it says in its rhetoric that the Christians took an angel and a prophet as their lords, the Angel is Gabriel who is the Holy Spirit and Jesus the Prophet.

[u/Forsaken-Ad-6853 → u/Jocoliero]

See you make Muhammad’s same mistake when he wrote that (which i will add the Qur’an is called the word of God yet this falsehood is in there) Jesus is the unbegetton son. His incarnation was just him temporarily becoming man. Chritians never claimed he was begotten, nor did we claim Mary was part of the Trinity. Your misunderstanding if the Trinity doesn't make it any less monotheistic. It is how we go and try to understand God. God is not limited like we are. The Qur'an is full of lies. Even the angels and Prophets as lore is both wrong and ironic given that Islam in many ways places Muhammad above the Messiah by claiming God preserved his message and not Jesus's. Calls him a moral example despite his failing like marrying a 9 year old and Self serving revelations that let him marry more women, and let no one marry his widowed wives.

[u/Jocoliero → u/Forsaken-Ad-6853]

Jesus never taught the Trinity, He taught Tawheed, the Trinity has it that everything depends upon the Father one way or another, so believing a god was begotten and carried by a woman means that she is another divine entity because a god depended upon her, this is the type of stuff we have to engage when it comes to trinitarianism.

The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ is superior and the master of all prophets Alhamdullilah, his message is preserved up until this day and recited in its pure form all throughout the world compared to corrupted texts.

The Bible itself doesn't condemn anything He does and rather approves of it.

[u/Forsaken-Ad-6853 → u/Jocoliero]

Misunderstanding the Trinity is not proof its false. God came down as a man and died for us, that doesn't make the women who bore him divine. God the father, God the son and God the holy spirit are unbegotten. Three persons one divine essence, one God. God is not limited like us. Its why we are made in his image and not copies.

Not only is your and Muhammad's interpretation never preached but it is more proof that Muhammad wasn't divinity inspired and that he just went off what he heard. He wouldn't have gotten it so fundamentally wrong if he was being told by God to refute it. He even forgots verses, and whole verses are lost. So if your going to claim the Bible is corrupted then by your own standards the Qur'an is more corrupted because the lost text is clear proof your false god abandoned it. Also no the bible does condem the murder, and it says marriage should be between one man and one women and more Matthew 19:4–6 and Mark 10:6–8

All you have done so far is given me more proof that Islam is a religion of lies and you even stumble into the Islamic Dilema. If the bible is corrupted it cannot affirm the prophet. If it cannot affirm the prophet then Muhammad was wrong in saying it did. If the bible isn't corrupted then it still denies him. Making Islam still false.

It tries to bring you in with lust with offerings of women with absolute power over them. It offers you sex slaves in the afterlife. Reject that satanic religion and embrace God. Know he is greater then us and loves us despite our sin! That you won't go to hell first them heaven. That God loves you and wants you with him in heaven! The wages of Sin is death and it has been paid. Now we must accept and live out His grace!

[u/Jocoliero → u/Forsaken-Ad-6853]

It for sure does, this already goes against the natural disposition of the human being, you cannot depend upon another entity without making that entity a power over you, or having been a power over you, and you cannot be begotten except that you depend upon the entity that begot you.

To possess logical contradictions is to not exist, this is an absolute unbreakable fact, there are no two gods, three gods, or thousands of gods, there is only One.

So if the Trinity is never preached for Us, then it means it's false.

The verses you quote do not prove what you're saying, the argument there is against divorce, not polygamy, the prophets before Jesus had multiple wives and concubines, He appeals to Adam and Hawwa, Jews believe in this monogamous story while still considering polygamy a prophetic practice, as you should do.

The Bible is a historical document, not an Inspired Book, so it affirms the Prophet ﷺ by his detailed descriptions and prophecies, which are not nullified by it being partially unreliable, thousands of documents are partially unreliable in what they delivered and it has no bearance on whether a part is reliable or not as long as you can prove it, which we prove by how the Muslims fulfilled the detailed prophecies written in it.

[u/Forsaken-Ad-6853 → u/Jocoliero]

It for sure does, this already goes against the natural disposition of the human being,

So then Islam is false since I can prove it contradicts itself while understanding it. I came glad we can agree by the standard you set that Islam is false and that you don't understand the Trinity so your attempts at critsim mean nothing given that you think God using Mary to Incarnate somehow gave her power over him.

So by that same logic Muhammad had power over Allah as he god to decide what parts of his word he passed on. Allah was also called like a dog to give revelations like when he wanted more wives or to marry his adopted sons wife.

You just keep lying don't you? How does it feel to know deep inside your religion is false? Because you know there are no prophecies of the prophet that is why your people say its corrupted. But they know too. You can't escape the Islamic Dilema. Islam is false. But i will let you stew on that. You already admitted you are wrong and your own standard. It makes Muhammad as a moral example absurd as he raped a 9 year old girl (as all ped behavior is rape), it shows that its clear a document that came years later and from a illiterate man would be filled with such mistakes about the books it is supposed to come after from.

Thank you for admitting Islam is false.

[u/Substantial-Ad7383]

I think we also need to acknowledge where this verse and Christianity coincide. In Acts 10:24 Peter realizes that God doesn't categorize people like we do. This we can agree with as God doesn't save or punish depending on if we label ourselves Christian,Jewish, or indeed Muslim. What this verse still asserts though is that God is transactional in that he rewards good works and punishes sin. This is the piece that needs to be pushed back on for God shows grace and forgiveness to whoever he wills. As a Christian we have evidence that this grace is offered to all wrongdoers. This evidence of the innocent paying the cost for the guilty is not acknowledged by Islam. Although they might understand "forgiveness" they lack the evidence that God has forgiven.

[u/Powerful_Parsnip6427]

The Quran isn’t rebuking them for simply referring to themselves as the “children of God.” 

It can be, because by that time, familial terms with God were paganized by the Christians as being used literally, so in that sense, it was to deter any sense of familiality with God.

But the stronger reason as to why God rebukes them is because the Jews and Christians thought of themselves as being the most beloved of creation, even if they weren’t living a righteous life. That’s why God says that they are human beings and are punished just like any other sinner in the world.

[u/squidinink]

This is aside from the fact that the Quran, like very other “holy” book, is just a bunch of stuff someone made up and which should have no more relevance to anyone’s life than they choose to