WHY IBLIS CANNOT BE AN ANGEL...

unknownuser

PEACE RAHILA

Are you now satisfied with my analysis?

Rahila

Peace Priest Bokmei / all

No, I am not satisfied with your analysis although I was wrong about messengers being sent to the Jinn community..

You are ignoring the verses 234 , 1850 which clearly imply the Iblis was among the Malaika ordered to prostate to Adam.

We as muslims are ordered to believe in the whole of Quraan and not the verses of our choice. We should be looking of ways to reconcile our understanding of both 234 and 1649 , not citing them one against the other.. I strongly tend towards the explanation put forward by Savage Carrot that Malaika is a "Designation" which can be withdrawn.

Say ?O The God, controller/owner of control/ownership; you grant control/ownership to whom You will, and revoke control/ownership from whom You will, and value/honor whom You will, and humiliate whom You will; in Your hand is goodness, indeed You are capable of all things.

Your argument is based on 1649. You conclude from 1649, that Daabatin and Malaika do not disobey ALLAH.. so Iblis cannot be one of the Malaika .

You conclude that Daabatin are animals and do not include humans. You ignore verse 822

822 Verily! The worst of "Dawwab" with All?h are the deaf and the dumb, those who understand not (i.e. the disbelievers).

Here humans are clearly the audience and included in the Daabatin.. So 1649 would mean to include all creation on earth ( Daabatin) and all creation in the heavens ( Malaika)

Ponder on 855 too

855 Verily, The worst of "Daabatin" before All?h are those who disbelieve, - so they shall not believe.

Anyway, whether Iblis was or was not angel is not on my list of priority.

Priest Bokmei... To you, your understanding and to me, mine... Its all about choices in the end.

peace

Rahila

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Rahila,

Well said, I wish I would have done that earlier

unknownuser

PEACE RAHILA

You are ignoring the verses 234 , 1850 which clearly imply the Iblis was among the Malaika ordered to prostate to Adam.

I'm pleased you used the term "imply", because imply means to suggest/allude to, but falls short of fact/actuality...do you agree?

Allah, in reference to His ayats says

37 He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are alike and consistent in meaning...

And behold, We said to the angels "Bow down to Adam" and they bowed down. Not so Iblis he refused and was haughty He was of kafiroona.
Behold! We said to the angels, "Bow down to Adam" They bowed down except Iblis. He was one of the Jinns, and he broke the Command of his Lord. Will ye then take him and his progeny as protectors rather than Me? And they are enemies to you! Evil would be the exchange for the wrong-doers!

Now, in ayats 234 and 1850, what is fact/acutal ?

In 234, Iblis, is defined as one of the unbelievers.
In 1850, Iblis, is defined as one of the Jinn.

Now, these two things are decisive descriptions of about Iblis and not allusions. There is no ayat which decisively describes him as malaika.

We as muslims are ordered to believe in the whole of Quraan and not the verses of our choice. We should be looking of ways to reconcile our understanding of both 234 and 1649 , not citing them one against the other.. I strongly tend towards the explanation put forward by Savage Carrot that Malaika is a "Designation" which can be withdrawn.

I have not pitted the ayats against each other, on the contrary, I illustrated how they compliment each other. You and Nadia, can strongly suggest whatever you wish, that is between you and Allah, however, I strongly suggest that both of you fully embrace the following ayats, before you talk about "withdrawing things"

Say the things that my Lord hath indeed forbidden are shameful deeds, whether open or secret; sins and trespasses against truth or reason; assigning of partners to Allah, for which He hath given no authority; and saying things about Allah of which you have no knowledge.
Or have they taken for worship (other) gods besides him? Say, "Bring your convincing proof this is the Message of those with me and the Message of those before me." But most of them know not the Truth, and so turn away.

You, see, Rahila, "implying" is not decisive/convincing proof, do you see this?

Your argument is based on 1649. You conclude from 1649, that Daabatin and Malaika do not disobey ALLAH.. so Iblis cannot be one of the Malaika .

Correct.

You conclude that Daabatin are animals and do not include humans. You ignore verse 822

Incorrect. The following was my reply to Idol, when he asked did the dabbatan include humans/jinns

Posted Wed Sep 15, 2004 509 pm Post subject

PEACE IDOL

Yes and no. Yes, we are of the dabbatan, in that, we too are moving creatures, if the ayat is translated to mean moving creatures, however, humans show pride and we disobey. The dabbatan in the above ayats do neither, hence, no, we are not dabbatan in that sense.

822 Verily! The worst of "Dawwab" with All?h are the deaf and the dumb, those who understand not (i.e. the disbelievers).

Here humans are clearly the audience and included in the Daabatin.. So 1649 would mean to include all creation on earth ( Daabatin) and all creation in the heavens ( Malaika)

Ponder on 855 too 855 Verily, The worst of "Daabatin" before All?h are those who disbelieve, - so they shall not believe.

While humans, are certainly of the dabbatan, in that, they are moving creatures, they are not the dabbatan which are being defined in ayats 1649-50. The dabbatan in those ayats show no pride nor do they disobey, hence, as I tried in vain to explain to Idol, they precluded by their natures from making a moral choice.

Rahila, take a moment and think about what you are saying here. If you conclude the dabbatan, as mentioned in ayats 1649-50, include humans, well, then you set up a huge contradiction, in that, Allah, says of the dabbatan and malaika in those aysts that, they do not disobey or show pride. Now, with that in mind then, how can humans/jinns, be included in that ayat, given the fact that, humans/jinns, disobey and show pride?? How do you reconcile your contradiction? Please construct a coherent/non-allusory explanation for that.

Looking forward to your reply.

unknownuser

PEACE IDOL

Well said, I wish I would have done that earlier

I'm curious...exactly what did she do that you didn't?

Rahila

Peace P.Bokmei / All

Talking of implications and allusions, can you point to me any decisive verse where it is stated that Iblis was NOT an angel. You are also "INFERING" your conclusion from verse 1649.

In 711 , ALLAH orders the Malaika to prostrate to Adam ( AH) and when Iblis refuses, ALLAh asks Iblis , "What prevented you that you didnt prostrate when I commanded YOU?" 712... This seems pretty decisive to me. ALLAH orders the Malaika to prostrate, then ALLAH specifically mentions that HE commanded Iblis to prostate and that why didnt IBLIS obey the command given earlier ( which was given to HIM).

It really cannot get any simpler and Coherent than that.

Lets summarize the debate

ALLAH orders the Malaika to prostrate , IBLIS doesnt.. 234, 711, 1850
ALLAH specifically asks Iblis why didnt you obey when I commanded YOU? 712
ALLAH states that Iblis was arrogant and of the Kafiroon. 234
ALLah states that all Malaika and Daabatin "SUBMIT" to ALLAH and are not "Arrogant" and they do what they are commanded to do. 1649, 1650
ALLAH states some of the Daabatin are Kafiroon 855
ALLAH states that some Humans and Jinn are Kafiroon and Arrogant. Numerous verses

If Daabatin do not include humans, then there is contradiction between 855 and 1649..

Rahila, take a moment and think about what you are saying here. If you conclude the dabbatan, as mentioned in ayats 1649-50, include humans, well, then you set up a huge contradiction

I agree BUT 1649 clearly states that WHATEVER is on the earth of the DAABATIN submits to ALLAH. There is no exception in 1649 .

Your reply that the Daabatin of 1649 do not include humans and the Daabatin of 855 includes human is contradictory , not complimentary at all and it is based on INFERENCE.

How do you explain this contradiction with a decisive verse?

regards

Rahila

unknownuser

PEACE RAHILA

NOT an angel. You are also "INFERING" your conclusion from verse 1649.

And when We said to the angels Make obeisance to Adam; they made obeisance but Iblis (did it not). He was of the jinn, so he transgressed the commandment of his Lord. What! would you then take him and his offspring for friends rather than Me, and they are your enemies? Evil is (this) change for the unjust.

No, I'm not inferring anything nor am I using 1649-50 exclusively to prove that. My comclusive proof is 1850, where Allah says that Iblis was of the Jinn, beings, created from a scorching wind/fire. To assume that, Iblis is of the malaika creation is to then conjecture that the malaika, are also created of a scorching wind. As Allah, does not give the basic composition of the malaika, it is forbidden for us to conjecture as to their actual basic nature.

In 711 , ALLAH orders the Malaika to prostrate to Adam ( AH) and when Iblis refuses, ALLAh asks Iblis , "What prevented you that you didnt prostrate when I commanded YOU?" 712... This seems pretty decisive to me. ALLAH orders the Malaika to prostrate, then ALLAH specifically mentions that HE commanded Iblis to prostate and that why didnt IBLIS obey the command given earlier ( which was given to HIM).

It really cannot get any simpler and Coherent than that.

Sorry, but your explanation here is not definitive.

Lets summarize the debate

ALLAH orders the Malaika to prostrate , IBLIS doesnt.. 234, 711, 1850

Allah, has not defined Iblis as a malaika at this point, it is only an assumption.

ALLAH specifically asks Iblis why didnt you obey when I commanded YOU? 712

Again, Allah, has not defined Iblis as a malaika at this point, it is only an assumption.

ALLAH states that Iblis was arrogant and of the Kafiroon. 234

Allah, nows gives two definitive characteristics of Iblis...arrogant and kafir. Allah, has not given a definitive characteristic of the malaika yet.

ALLah states that all Malaika and Daabatin "SUBMIT" to ALLAH and are not "Arrogant" and they do what they are commanded to do. 1649, 1650

Allah, now gives a two definitive characteristics of the dabbatin and the malaika...they obey Allah and are not proud.

ALLAH states some of the Daabatin are Kafiroon 855

Now, here's where you problem of contradiction begins. If the dabbatin only obey Allah and and are not proud then, how can they also be disbelievers? Disbelievers disobey and are proud, that is, are dissatisfied with the truth.

ALLAH states that some Humans and Jinn are Kafiroon and Arrogant. Numerous verses

Given that, human/jinn humans are disobedient, arrogant, and disbelieve, they CANNOT be the SAME dabbatin as mentioned in 1649-50 OR a huge contradiction ensues. Please re-read what I wrote to Idol, which clears up this situation

IDOL "are humans dabbatin" ?

PREIST BOK MEI Yes and no. Yes, we are of the dabbatan, in that, we too are moving creatures, if the ayat is translated to mean moving creatures, however, humans show pride and we disobey. The dabbatan in the above ayats do neither, hence, no, we are not dabbatan in that sense.

PREIST BOK MEI Rahila, take a moment and think about what you are saying here. If you conclude the dabbatan, as mentioned in ayats 1649-50, include humans, well, then you set up a huge contradiction

I agree BUT 1649 clearly states that WHATEVER is on the earth of the DAABATIN submits to ALLAH. There is no exception in 1649 .

Your reply that the Daabatin of 1649 do not include humans and the Daabatin of 855 includes human is contradictory , not complimentary at all and it is based on INFERENCE.

Well, if there is no exception, then how do you explain the behavior of Jinn and men, because they disobey and show pride?

1649 And whatever creature that is in the heavens and that is in the earth makes obeisance to Allah (only), and the angels (too) and they do not show pride.

1650 They fear their Lord above them and do what they are commanded.

Rahila, just think for a moment...how can Allah say in one breath that..."whatever is on the earth of the dabbatin obeys ALLAH and doesn't show pride and then in the next breath describe some dabbatin as, disbelivers, disobediant, prideful? Certainly, you can see the obvious problem with your position; it is major contradiction. You cannot have it both ways.

So, how do you explain this contradiction with a decisive verse?

Anyway, consider the following

Certainly, dabbatan can choose to, for example, attack or not attack, eat or not eat , drink or not drink, however, they do not make MORAL choices and that is the key. If dabbatan could make moral choices, then, some of them must be evil. Are you saying that some of the dabbatan i.e. zebras, snails, lobsters, ameobas, cockroaches etc., are evil and or can choose to behave in an evil manner ? Is this really your position, Rahila? If the dabbatan could make moral choices, then, Allah, would have had to have sent messengers to the dabbatan in order for them to correct their behavior as He did with humankind. Has Allah, mentioned any messengers being sent to the dabbatan or malaika...I can't seem to find any such ayat...perhaps you know of one?

You have no case, Rahila.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Rahila,

There comes a time when we should turn away. Ihope you do not get caught up in this as long as I have been. The brother does not wish to see the clear truth.

Priest said
I'm curious...exactly what did she do that you didn't?

Leave you alone with your contradictions.

unknownuser

PEACE IDOL

There comes a time when we should turn away. I hope you do not get caught up in this as long as I have been. The brother does not wish to see the clear truth. Leave you alone with your contradictions.

I only hope that, if someone whom you trust and respect, comes to you and explains to you my position and you grasp it then, that you will have the honor to come here and admit your error. I will do the same.

Peace-

Rahila

Peace P.Bokmei / All

If the dabbatin only obey Allah and and are not proud then, how can they also be disbelievers? Disbelievers disobey and are proud, that is, are dissatisfied with the truth.

Do you deny 855 then..? Which clearly states that some Daabatin ARE Kafiroon.

You also do not have a case..

If Daabatin do not inlude animals and animals cannot make moral choices then how come some of them are Kafiroon. A contradiction arises with 855.

And if Daabatin do include humans, then Humans do disobey ALLAH. so again a contradiction with 1649.

This is a no win situation..

The problem

All Daabatin submit to ALLAH, they are not arrogant and they follow ALLAH's orders but still some of them are Kafiroon.

I believe the key is accepting all verses and not ignoring 855 as you did. There must be some thing that the Daabatin do ( while still submitting to ALLAH, not being arrogant , carrying out ALLAH's commands) which renders them Kafiroon.

Quote

ALLAH orders the Malaika to prostrate , IBLIS doesnt.. 234, 711, 1850

Allah, has not defined Iblis as a malaika at this point, it is only an assumption.

Quote
2. ALLAH specifically asks Iblis why didnt you obey when I commanded YOU? 712

Again, Allah, has not defined Iblis as a malaika at this point, it is only an assumption

I would call it Logical deduction rather than assumption. ALLAH orders malaika to prostrate in 711 and when IBLIS refuses, ALLAH asks IBLIS why didnt you obey me when I commanded YOU in 712.

What is decisive here? That IBLIS WAS among the Malaika ordered to prostrate as the Malaika were the only one who were given the order to prostrate. IBLIS was also a JINN. No where in the Quraan , it is stated that being a JINN and a Malaika is mutually exclusive.

In response to your earlier questions, You do not seem to realize what a lot of people have said is that they believe that Malaika is not a species like a human and Jinn , but Malaika is a Designation like a Mu'min. For a Mu'min is a Human being or Jinn who has Iman.. And they are of different species ( now like Dhulqarnain , you may be beleive that the Jinn are also homo sapien sapiens) since one is made of clay and one from smokeless flame ( from a decisive verse)

No, I'm not inferring anything nor am I using 1649-50 exclusively to prove that. My comclusive proof is 1850, where Allah says that Iblis was of the Jinn, beings, created from a scorching wind/fire. To assume that, Iblis is of the malaika creation is to then conjecture that the malaika, are also created of a scorching wind. As Allah, does not give the basic composition of the malaika, it is forbidden for us to conjecture as to their actual basic nature.

It is forbidden for us to conjecture about the composition of Malaika but it is allowed to conjecture about whether Daabatin can or cannot make moral choices? Not a very consistent approach.

No one is actually building up a case here about whether Iblis was or was not an Angel . What I see here in this thread is that most of the people are pointing out the irony in your arguments that while you accuse other people of conjecturing , you are basing your own arguments on nothing but conjecture..

Example..

Animals cannot make moral choices
.. Not backed up by any decisive verse so it is an assumption too.

You also cannot have it both ways.

Idolfree wrote

Peace be upon you Rahila,

There comes a time when we should turn away. Ihope you do not get caught up in this as long as I have been. The brother does not wish to see the clear truth.

I agree.. As I stated earlier that whether Iblis was or was not an angel is not high on my list of priorities. So, unless any body brings up any new verses that are relevant, there is no point in continuing to take this argument furthur.

One thing to think about

Humans in their ego think that they should have all the answers but the fact is that we dont because the knowledge that we were given was very little.

366
Behold! you are they who disputed about that of which you had knowledge; why then do you dispute about that of which you have no knowledge? And Allah knows while you do not know.

1785
And they ask you about Ar-Rooh. Say The Rooh is one of the commands of my Lord, and you are not given aught of knowledge but a little.

May ALLAH increase us all in Knowledge...

my regards to you ,Priest Bokmei . Although, your arguments failed to prove that Iblis was not an angel, it did provide me with food for thought for other things.

Rahila

unknownuser

PEACE RAHILA

Do you deny 855 then..? Which clearly states that some Daabatin ARE Kafiroon.

O.k., tell me then, and if you answer with yes, prove it. Can the following things be kafirs
a centipede
an earthworm
a tapeworm
an ameoba
a ladybug
Can anything being of the animal kingdom, excluding the human being, be a kafir? If yes, please give one example in the history of the earth where this has happened.

If Daabatin do not inlude animals and animals cannot make moral choices then how come some of them are Kafiroon. A contradiction arises with 855.

I'm not saying that the animals are not included as dabbatin, of course they are where did you get that from? The animals are dabbatin, however, of the non-human dabbatin, as with the maliaka, DO NOT MAKE MORAL DECISIONS, hence, 1649-50, is referring to non-human dabbatin.

And if Daabatin do include humans, then Humans do disobey ALLAH. so again a contradiction with 1649.

If you and Idol, would but stop defending your pride and fear of losing this debate, you will see that, at 1649-50, Allah, is distinguishing between the human dabbatin, the animal which shows pride and disobeys, from the animals which, by their very created natures, have no pride nor have the capacity to disobey. If they had pride and could disobey, thus being able to make a moral decision, then, Allah, would have had to have sent them messengers to guide them away from evil. Do you have any ayat where Allah sends messengers to the dabbatin...yes or no? Given that, dabbatin do not disobey or show pride, then, obviously, they have absolutely no need of messenger. What is so difficult about thes concepts?

On the contrary, it is a win win situation..

The problem All Daabatin submit to ALLAH, they are not arrogant and they follow ALLAH's orders but still some of them are Kafiroon.

I believe the key is accepting all verses and not ignoring 855 as you did. There must be some thing that the Daabatin do ( while still submitting to ALLAH, not being arrogant , carrying out ALLAH's commands) which renders them Kafiroon.

Well, what is that "something" then? Do you see, Rahila, you don't know what you are talking about and are only conjecturing and guessing. As I said, if you would but get past your pride and fear of losing this debate, then, the answer to your above question, clearly manifest itself, that is, while the dabbatin include humans the dabbatin mentioned at 1649-50, is only referring to the non-human dabbatin. Ayat 855, then, is referring to the human dabbatin! Nothing else makes any sense.

RAHILA 1. ALLAH orders the Malaika to prostrate , IBLIS doesnt.. 234, 711, 1850

PREIST Allah, has not defined Iblis as a malaika at this point, it is only an assumption.

RAHILA 2. ALLAH specifically asks Iblis why didnt you obey when I commanded YOU? 712

PREIST Again, Allah, has not defined Iblis as a malaika at this point, it is only an assumption

I would call it Logical deduction rather than assumption
.

There isn't anything wrong with logical deduction, however, logically, it appears as if the sunrises in the east and sets in the west, but is that true? Logical deduction is only as good as it factual inputs.

ALLAH orders malaika to prostrate in 711 and when IBLIS refuses, ALLAH asks IBLIS why didnt you obey me when I commanded YOU in 712.

What is decisive here? That IBLIS WAS among the Malaika ordered to prostrate as the Malaika were the only one who were given the order to prostrate. IBLIS was also a JINN.

This is what you wrote the other day

"You are ignoring the verses 234 , 1850 which clearly imply the Iblis was among the Malaika ordered to prostate to Adam ".

Just so that you know, "clearly imply", is an oxymoron.

Main Entry OXYMORON a combination of contradictory or incongruous words (as cruel kindness); broadly something (as a concept) that is made up of contradictory or incongruous elements.

Anyway

Main Entry EXPLICIT fully revealed or expressed without vagueness, implication, or ambiguity leaving no question as to meaning or intent unambiguous in expression.

Do you see in ayat 234 or 712 or any other ayat for that matter, where Allah EXPLICITLY defines/labels Iblis as a malaika? YES or NO?
Do you find any ayat where Allah, EXPLICITLY, defines/labels Iblis as a Jinn? YES or NO?

No where in the Quraan , it is stated that being a JINN and a Malaika is mutually exclusive.

Well, now, once again, you are extrapolating

Main Entry EXTRAPOLATE to project, extend, or expand (known data or experience) into an area not known or experienced so as to arrive at a usually conjectural knowledge of the unknown area.

Main Entry CONJECTURE supposition inference from defective or presumptive evidence b a conclusion deduced by surmise or guesswork.

Allah, in 1850, clearly/explicitly defines Iblis, as a Jinn. Nowhere, does Allah, clearly/explicitly, define/label Iblis, as a malaika. Am I correct here, yes or no?

You see, this is your fear. Once you admit that the dabbatin mentioned in ayay 1649-50, are non-human dabbatin, then, your must relinquish your hold on Iblis as being one of the malaika. Why?, because Allah says of both the dabbatin and the malaika, hence, they are grouped together in two respects

A. they do not disobey Allah.

B. they show no pride.

Once you accept that, then, Iblis...cannot be a malaika...but a human.

There is no refuting this...none. To continue to not accept the arguement which I have put forth, Rahila, will only take you further and further into the realms of extrapolation and conjecture of which Allah forbids us to do.

In response to your earlier questions, You do not seem to realize what a lot of people have said is that they believe that Malaika is not a species like a human and Jinn , but Malaika is a Designation like a Mu'min. For a Mu'min is a Human being or Jinn who has Iman.. And they are of different species ( now like Dhulqarnain , you may be beleive that the Jinn are also homo sapien sapiens) since one is made of clay and one from smokeless flame ( from a decisive verse)

People can say what they want, however, 1649-50 makes it very clear that, the dabbatin and malaika, are definite distinct creations from humans or homo sapien sapiens.

It is forbidden for us to conjecture about the composition of Malaika but it is allowed to conjecture about whether Daabatin can or cannot make moral choices? Not a very consistent approach.

There is no conjecture as to whether the non-human dabbatin can make a moral choice or not...they cannot. Now, if I'm incorrect, then please give an example of such a thing happening in the annals of recorded history.

No one is actually building up a case here about whether Iblis was or was not an Angel . What I see here in this thread is that most of the people are pointing out the irony in your arguments that while you accuse other people of conjecturing , you are basing your own arguments on nothing but conjecture..

Yeah, right, please. There is no irony in my arguements. It is pride and fear which makes some...deluded in regard to my positions.

Example.. Quote Animals cannot make moral choices .. Not backed up by any decisive verse so it is an assumption too. You also cannot have it both ways.

With a little comprehension and use of your Allah given intellect, ayats 1649-50, completely dispell any notion that animals can make a moral choice, meaning, they, by their very created natures, cannot not disobey Allah nor do they instinctually possess the faculty of pride. If they did, in fact, possess these abilities, then, Allah would have had to have sent them messengers with good news and warnings in order to guide them as He did with the human dabbatin. Has Allah done this in regard to the non-human dabbatin, yes or no? Can you comprehend this "small" detail, Rahila?

my regards to you ,Priest Bokmei . Although, your arguments failed to prove that Iblis was not an angel, it did provide me with food for thought for other things.

On the contrary, Rahila, my arguements have certainly convinced you...it is just a matter of your pride now in regaed to admitting it.

Peace to you.

unknownuser

Peace all,

After studying and reasoning with, all the verses of the Quran pertaining to angels, spirits, jinns, humans, creatures, souls, etc., my understanding that Iblis (satan) couldn't have possibly been an angel. He was of the jinn. Other than the ones already mentioned in previous posts above, a few of the several verses I support based on RK's interpretations are

Recall that your Lord said to the angels, "I am placing a representative (a temporary god) on Earth." They said, "Will You place therein one who will spread evil therein and shed blood, while we (the angels) sing Your praises, glorify You, and uphold Your absolute authority?" He said, "I know what you do not know."

Your Lord said to the angels, "I am creating a human being from aged mud, like the potter's clay. "Once I perfect him, and blow into him from My spirit, you shall fall prostrate before him." The angels fell prostrate; all of them.

He sends down the angels with the revelations, carrying His commands?

GOD chooses from among the angels messengers, as well as from among the people. GOD is Hearer, Seer.

Your Lord said to the angels, "I am creating a human being from clay. "Once I design him, and blow into him from My spirit, you shall fall prostrate before him." The angels fell prostrate, all of them.

?Guarding it are stern and powerful angels who never disobey GOD; they do whatever they are commanded to do.

Ofcourse, there are inumerous other verses that support my understanding. Besides, no where in the Quran do we find that Iblis was an angel but we do find that he was of the jinn (self explanatory).

Point to ponder in majority of the verses, jinns and humans are mentioned alongside.

GOD BLESS.

unknownuser

PEACE DANISH

Besides, no where in the Quran do we find that Iblis was an angel but we do find that he was of the jinn (self explanatory).

You'd think so...wouldn't you?

Idris

peace Danish,