@Coolboy_Lanre@SamuelAyodele_T you are like "I cant prove that 'saved' must mean 'saved after punishment,' I cant prove 19:71 abrogates 21:101, & I cant keep my argument consistent... so you're blocked.
@DanteT1NG@Acolyte83349490@ThoughtfulSaint see a soul can only be separated from a body if there is a human body & soul to begin with.
so why isn't christ's humanity the basis that makes death possible in the first place?
@Coolboy_Lanre@SamuelAyodele_T lol! a few tweets ago Ibn Kathir was "rubbish" and adding "interpolations" to soften the verse.
but now Ibn Kathir & Ibn Abbas are reliable authorities again.
@crusaderfidelis@ThoughtfulSaint you proved my point. youre admitting that the divinity didnt die. so death happened according to Christ's humanity. that's exactly why I'm asking what "God died" means. It was just a divine person experiencing human death.
@Coolboy_Lanre@SamuelAyodele_T brilliant! you are welcome to the position I've been defending for hours.
yes, hadith can explain the quran. thats why I was confused when hadith-based explanations of 19:71 suddenly became "interpolation."
@Coolboy_Lanre@SamuelAyodele_T super excellent. so after all that, weve gone from "it's interpolation" to "actually I only object to one specific narration." thats a much smaller argument than the one we started with
@Coolboy_Lanre@SamuelAyodele_T calling me liar while posting a screenshot that starts with "if 21:101 were referring..." is certainly a strategy.
the word "if" is working overtime in that argument. isnt it?
@Coolboy_Lanre@SamuelAyodele_T nobody denied that abrogation exists. I asked where is the evidence that 19:71 specifically abrogates 21:101?
and repeating the rule isn't the same as proving this is a case where the rule applies.
@Chippermunk123@dawahxdialogues puberty often marked the beginning of adulthood & adult responsibilities. so simply calling someone a "child" imports modern assumptions into a very different historical context.
@Chippermunk123@dawahxdialogues I didnt say "no injury equals moral." I asked what makes a particular age objectively immoral across all times & places.
if ur answer is a modern legal age, that's not an objective moral principle.
if your answer is harm, then it needs to be demonstrated
@crusaderfidelis@ThoughtfulSaint the natures are not separate. but chalcedon says the properties of each nature are preserved.
can you explain, if death belongs to the human nature & the divine nature remained immortal, how is that the divine nature dying rather than a divine person experiencing a human death?
@Coolboy_Lanre@SamuelAyodele_T very interesting. when a hadith supports your interpretation of 3:110, its evidence that hadith explain the quran. when hadith are used to explain 19:71, suddenly it's "interpolation." thats like a selective rule.