Balwanka

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@__LM22__ @Sneak0o Yes, “Father” in this sense means the Creator and Sustainer.

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@NuriSunnah Even if you separate pre-650 and post-650, it is still the same companion-based transmission network.

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@NuriSunnah Even if you insist on strict dating, it doesn’t help. Pre-650 would imply early stability during the companions’ lifetime, and post-650 would still reflect the same companion-based transmission immediately after. 🤷

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@btbsoco Eternal speech ≠ physical copies. That's basic knowledge. 🤦

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@MuslimAcademic @KhalilAndani I can claim that the Qur’an was altered after the Prophet’s time because it had some “Chinese saying,” but that would be nothing more than an empty assertion. The fact that the Qur’an comes from companions who heard and lived with the Prophet shows we have the Qur’an he recited.

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@samwellsg When Prophet Muhammad preached in Mecca and Medina, there was no English-speaking audience. Yet over 1,400 years later, you are mentioning Allah in English online, showing that people are now hearing about Allah in every corner of the world. 🤷

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@WDowsing19771 @JaiNDoC_RL You may win the war, but we win the hearts. 🤷

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@John112512 @LibanG987 If the original claim is “no academic takes it seriously, therefore it’s not serious,” then yes, that is a weak argument.
But flipping it into “imams can’t answer it, therefore it is serious” is the same faulty reasoning in reverse.

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@ayyo_arob @JaiNDoC_RL If anything, dismissing a valid argument just because it comes from outside your tradition is closer to confirmation bias than what you’re accusing me of.

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@John112512 @LibanG987 That doesn’t prove the dilemma is true at all. It just shows that not every imam is trained in debate. Present the dilemma itself and defend it, not commentary about who can answer it. 🤷

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@ayyo_arob @JaiNDoC_RL That’s not cherry-picking, that’s called thinking. You take what’s true, reject what isn’t, and judge each claim on its own merit. 🤷

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@Jamiiiid28 @ayyo_arob @JaiNDoC_RL Yes!

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@ayyo_arob @JaiNDoC_RL I see what you're saying, but from our perspective, some of the rabbi’s criticism of Christian theology is actually in line with Islamic critique of deification of Jesus. That doesn’t mean agreement with his Jewish theology about Jesus, which we obviously reject.

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@ayyo_arob @JaiNDoC_RL I’ve never seen him say he hates Jesus. Of course, as Muslims we disagree with his views on Jesus, since he speaks from a different religious tradition.

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@JaiNDoC_RL Giving someone a platform isn’t the same as endorsing everything they believe. By that standard, any conversation equals agreement, which is absurd.

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@John112512 @LibanG987 Some layman Muslims having doubts is one thing, and the argument itself actually holding water is another thing. The last time I checked, the argument does not hold water at all; it is a complete joke. 🤷

[Balwanka @Twitmindful]

@CCanuck4 The key point is that, Jesus was shocked by the claim that he taught people to worship him or that he was divine. This matches historical view that he did not present himself as God. The Quran’s message is to worship the God of Jesus alone and avoid religious excess.