In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
Peace be to you all.

Introduction:

In this post, I will be answering and refuting the individual who keeps writing posts about me and comments every second he gets trying to "refute" me and "expose" me. I am only doing this because some brothers and sisters have allowed themselves to be fooled by this dude.
I won't resort to personal attacks and baseless claims (much like he does), and I will jump straight ahead to answering his objections.

Response to the introduction:

He begins by discussing my translation of the word "ישוחח," which I interpret as "argue" or "put forth."
Firstly, in Biblical Hebrew, verb forms such as Qal and Piel (often referred to as Polel in some grammatical traditions) are distinguished by their specific diacritic markings (i.e., vowel points and consonantal diacritics). Since I believe that the Masoretes distorted the Old Testament by adding these diacritics to reach a deviant interpretation, I do not consider them at all. I read the Old Testament without any diacritics. This is something he has yet to understand, perhaps because he believes that the Old Testament was revealed with diacritic markings—I don't know.
He later argues that the ancient Christian manuscripts (such as the Codex Sinaiticus, Septuagint, etc.) must agree with my claims and not with the Masoretic renderings of the Hebrew text, a conclusion he bases on thin air. I ask: Why is that so? Can you give us one good reason for this conclusion? You can't! He says this only because he considers these Christian manuscripts as divinely revealed criteria and translations. In contrast, I (and many others) see them as ancient interpretations of the original Hebrew text, which are very erroneous. This is especially true considering that rabbis themselves claim these scholars and translators failed to understand every Hebrew idiom in the book. They took everything literally and thus deviated from the intended meaning throughout their translations. These are the translations he claims must agree with my understanding.
The Masoretes could even have been influenced by Christians and their manuscripts, leading them to render some verses erroneously, whether knowingly or unknowingly—we can't be certain. However, I believe it wasn't unknowingly, and I have very good reasons for holding this opinion.
His arguments in his objections are all flawed and fallacious.

The Original sin being denied in the OT:

Now, the word he is fixated on is "ישוחח." As he mentioned, I used a classical Hebrew dictionary to translate the word. I don't remember the exact dictionary I used, but here is a random one I will use today:

Root: שִׂיחַ (v)
1 - to put forth, mediate, muse, commune, speak, complain, ponder, sing
1 -(Qal)
1 - to complain
2 - to muse, meditate upon, study, ponder
3 - to talk, sing, speak
2 - (Polel) to meditate, consider, put forth thoughts

Source: מקור: Open Scriptures on GitHub, Creator: יוצר: Based on the work of Larry Pierce at the Online Bible
In other words, both Qal and Polel essentially mean the same thing.
This following excerpt is from my original post about this, the post he is "refuting":
Excerpt from the post in question:
_______________________
Isaiah 53:8, traditional translation:
"From imprisonment and from judgment he is taken, and his generation who shall tell? For he was cut off from the land of the living; because of the transgression of my people, a plague befell them."
The original verse (without diacritics):
מעצר וממשפט לקח ואת־דורו מי ישוחח כי נגזר מארץ חיים מפשע עמי נגע למו:
My translation:
"He was taken from arrest and trial, and as for his generation, who will argue that he was cut off from the land of the living [i.e. killed] for the sin of my people, a plague befell them."
_______________________
In this verse, God is explicitly denying the doctrine of the Original Sin, stating that those who argue, speak, put forth, or ponder that Jesus was killed for the sins of His (God's) people are cursed (or afflicted by a plague).
It is crystal clear! He is just in denial because it contradicts his Pauline doctrine. Thus, he has fixated on this specific word, insisting it is (without a shadow of a doubt) in the Polel form (because his Pauline forefathers said so), and claims that Exion has made a grave error. Incredible, indeed. What a rebuttal!
Let's see if the Polel form does anything to save him:
1. Meditate:

"He was taken from arrest and trial, and as for his generation, who will meditate that he was cut off from the land of the living [i.e. killed] for the sin of my people, a plague befell them."

The definition of "Meditate" is:

1. To plan mentally; consider,
   
2. To focus one's mind for a period of time, in silence or with the aid of chanting, for religious or spiritual purposes or as a method of relaxation.
   

I know it isn't the latter, because that is just ludicrous and silly. But guess what? They even tried to claim it is the latter, which is beyond amusing to me and any other sane person reading this.
2. Consider:

"He was taken from arrest and trial, and as for his generation, who will consider that he was cut off from the land of the living [i.e. killed] for the sin of my people, a plague befell them."

It still obliterates the doctrine of the Original sin completely.
3. Put forth thoughts:

"He was taken from arrest and trial, and as for his generation, who will put forth thoughts that he was cut off from the land of the living [i.e. killed] for the sin of my people, a plague befell them."

It still obliterates the doctrine of the Original sin completely.
This is what I have to deal with. He is correcting my interpretation by yet again confirming it and he doesn't even realize it. He refuses to accept that the Old Testament completely refutes this absurd Pauline doctrine that God sent His "son" to the earth to kill him and forgive mankind. He can't understand that the Old Testament aligns with the Quran, calling them cursed. I have explained this to him several times, but to no avail. According to him, the early Christians "meditated" about Jesus' "abode." He raises the same objection in every comment he makes on every future post I do, as if I haven't just refuted him using the Bible, dictionaries, and other sources. In one ear and out the other. The only reason I'm even writing this response is to make you guys realize how unknowledgeable this man really is about the Bible and the Hebrew language. But he is good at making it look like he knows a thing or two by using fancy words and elaborations that make no sense at all.
I believe (if I remember correctly) that he translates it as:

"By oppressive judgment he was taken away, Who could describe his abode?..."

This unusual rendering is achieved by mistranslating a word, done specifically to alter the actual meaning. Some Jewish translators render it the same way, but they at least have the decency to add a footnote saying:

"\Who could describe his abode?* Meaning of Heb. uncertain." (source: Sefaria.org)

As they usually do when they mistranslate stuff.
Who would describe Jesus abode? What?! With all due respect, but that makes no sense at all! It makes no sense contextually nor logically.
This is how another Jewish translation has it:

"From imprisonment and from judgment he is taken, and his generation who shall tell? For he was cut off from the land of the living; because of the transgression of my people, a plague befell them."

Does this look like a coherent sentence to you? Jesus is taken from imprisonment and judgement, and his generation who shall tell? Tell what? This is an incomplete sentence - just to change the actual intended message.
The original phrase is: "ואת־דורו מי ישוחח"
Let me break it down for you:

Word: ואת = "And his"
Word: ־דורו = "Generation"
Word: מי = "Who will"
Word: ישוחח = "Argue/Put forth/Talk/consideetc"

Crystal clear phrase. Even Google translates it accurately (which is very rare by the way):

"And his generation who will talk"

Take a look at some of the English translations of his Christian forefathers:
New Living Translation Unjustly condemned, he was led away. No one cared that he died without descendants...
New International Version By oppression and judgment he was taken away. Yet who of his generation protested?...
King James Bible He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation?...
Some others got the first part accurate but still misinterpreted the last part of the verse, as it claims that they are cursed. God forbid, they are the ones who are cursed, for they consider Jesus to be the cursed one:
English Standard Version By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people?
They applied the "curse/plague" to Jesus (which they translate as "stricken," even though Biblically it is generally understood to be a plague/curse) instead of applying it to those "who considered" (i.e., the Pauline Christians). The Hebrew verse uses a plural word, indicating that it was intended for those people who would put forth this claim. They all refuse to accept the fact that God is explicitly and literally stating that they are affected by a plague for their erroneous claim about Jesus.
Let's quickly refute them too:

• The word for "plague" is "נגע" (nega).
• The word for "to them" is "למו" (lamo).

"Plague" (נגע):

Hebrew classical dictionary:

Heb: נֶגַע (n-m)
1 - stroke, plague, disease, mark, plague spot
stroke, wound
stroke (metaphorical of disease)
mark (of leprosy)

Source: מקור: Open Scriptures on GitHub, Creator: יוצר: Based on the work of Larry Pierce at the Online Bible

"To them" (לָֽמוֹ):

Hebrew classical dictionary:

1 - inflected pers. pron. meaning ‘to them’ (poetically).
2 - [Formed from לְ◌ with ◌מוֹ, a suff. used only in poetry.]

Source: מקור: Klein Dictionary, Creator: יוצר: Ezra Klein
A plague to whom? TO THEM! To the people who put forth this Pauline doctrine, the ones who argued, said, or considered this absurdity. Absolutely not to the one they believed to be cut off for the sin of God's people, namely Jesus, God's prophet, Messiah, His Word, and a spirit from Him.
But this is not surprising to anyone; it is expected, because their savior Paul also considered the blessed Messiah Jesus to be a curse:

"Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree.'" (Galatians 3:13)

It bothers them that God Himself is confirming that they are the cursed ones, and He does it in the book they believe in. I am the one who exposed it, and all praise is due to God alone. It bothers this guy who is "eXpOsInG" me, and I won't mention his name because that is most likely what he wants.
He goes on to say that I quoted from a fictitious source, which is not true at all. I simply didn’t bother looking through my entire library to find a quote I mistakenly mis-referenced, mainly because the quote turned out to be quite irrelevant, and I don’t waste my time like that. Much of what he initiated his "rebuttal" with is equally misunderstood by him, and I have responded to each and every objection in my older posts (in the comment sections where he was "eXpOsInG" me). I picked the first thing and refuted it here for you just to show how ignorant he really is and how he is either living a lie or lying to others.
So, I will not bother to refute every single point of the old stuff that I’ve already conclusively answered. It's a waste of time. Let’s move on to his objections to my latest posts, because that is what this is all about in reality.

My answers to his objections to my latest posts:

Regarding the stone God mentions that was to be placed in the Temple of God, he says that it is saying

"Stone to a stone," or "upon a stone"

My answer:
"Stone to a stone" is not a Hebrew idiom, and neither is the word "upon" there in Hebrew. He doesn't know Hebrew, had he known Hebrew, he would never have "eXpOsEd" this because it just went to show that he doesn't know the language at all.
The Hebrew word "שום" (shum) in this context is derived from the root ש-ו-ם, which means "to place" or "to put." It appears here as an infinitive construct, which is often used to convey the act of doing something, similar to the English "-ing" form. In this sentence, "שום" is functioning as a gerund, which is a verbal noun. It translates to "placing" or "putting" in English. Therefore, "שום־אבן" means "placing a stone" or "putting a stone."
As for the next word, i.e. "stone" (אבן), in Hebrew, nouns have gender (masculine or feminine) and number (singular or plural). "אבן" is a feminine singular noun. When used in the phrase "שום־אבן" (placing a stone), "אבן" functions as the direct object of the action described by the infinitive construct "שום" (placing).
The next word is אל: This is taken as a preposition according to them, and it generally means "to" or "toward," and never "upon." It is used to indicate direction or movement towards something. While the following word is, again, a stone "אבן."
So if we're going with their interpretation, while being literal, as we should because it is not an idiom, it accurately translates to:
"Before placing a stone to a stone" or "before placing stone to stone"
Which makes very little sense, if any. Why wouldn't God say "Before placing stone upon stone" or "Stones upon stones" or "before placing a stone upon a stone"? Why did He use a singular word for "stone"? Because it is speaking about a one stone, the stone that God placed in Zion:

"So this is what the Sovereign LORD says: “See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation; the one who relies on it will never be stricken with panic." (Isaiah 28:16)

I have proven in countless posts that Zion is the ancient name for Mecca. Just look up Psalm 84, and you will see how it mentions doing the pilgrimage in Zion and also mentions "Bacca," another name for Mecca. I have proven how Harran is located in Mecca and that the oak of Bacca is located there as well, and we know according to Psalm 84 that Zion is located where Bacca is located. With this in mind, it’s easy to see what has been done to cover up this prophecy. They have misinterpreted the word "El" as "Upon" instead of "God." The definition of that word is not "Upon"; it means "To/toward" or "God."
Classical Hebrew dictionary:

Heb: אֵל (n-m)
god, god-like one, mighty one
mighty men, men of rank, mighty heroes
angels
god, false god, (demons, imaginations)
God, the one true God, Jehovah
mighty things in nature
strength, power

Source: מקור: Open Scriptures on GitHub, creator: יוצר: Based on the work of Larry Pierce at the Online Bible
And:

Heb: אֶל (prep.)
denoting motion toward or to, or direction toward, and meaning ‘to, unto, toward, into, at, by’.
[Shortened from אֱלֵי (which is preserved in poetry). cp. עֲלֵי, poetical form of עַל (= on), and עֲדֵי, poetical form of עַד (= as far as, until). Related to Arab. ’ilā (= to, toward, up to).]

Source: מקור: Klein Dictionary, Creator: יוצר: Ezra Klein
Let's see if any of these help him:

Before placing a stone to a stone?
Before placing a stone towards a stone?
Before placing a stone into a stone?
Before placing a stone unto a stone? (archaic term for "to")
Before placing a stone at a stone?
Before placing a stone by a stone?

Does any of this make any sense to you? I believe it certainly does not. Yet they have all chosen to ignore these valid definitions and instead opt for a definition that isn't there, namely: "a stone UPON a stone," just to claim that God was idiomatically saying "Before you build the temple." The temple was already built, as I will prove later below.
To get a more coherent translation, one that makes sense both contextually and linguistically, we need to consider "El" as "God":

ועתה - "And now"
שימו־נא - "consider, please"
לבבכם - "your heart"
מן־היום - "from this day"
הזה - "this"
ומעלה - "and onward"
מטרם - "before"
שום־אבן - "placing a stone"
אל־אבן - "God's stone/stone of God"
בהיכל - "in the Temple"
יהוה - "of YHWH" (YHWH)

Here, "אל־אבן" would translate to "God's stone" or "stone of God." Thus, the phrase "מטרם שום־אבן אל־אבן בהיכל יהוה" would be understood as "before placing a stone as God's stone in the temple of YHWH" or "before placing a stone, God's stone, in the temple of YHWH"
He is just in denial here as well. It is quite obvious that God is talking about placing a stone in the Temple of God, not about placing a stone towards a stone (whatever that means). Biblically, it is known that Jacob placed a stone in the House of God in Harran, which I have also proven to be located in the vicinity of Mecca, using 1st-century CE atlases by giants in geography such as Pomponius Mela, Pliny, and others.
He writes:

"More importantly, Exion ignored that “stone” in the Hebrew occurs twice. If we take אל to be God and take it as the construct state (the ‘s) then it would be “before setting stone’s God’s stone”. That doesn’t make sense hence why Exion dropped the first occurrence of אֶ֛בֶן in their translation."

Or you could simply not take "El" as a construct state. In Hebrew, a noun followed by another noun can indicate possession without needing a construct state (i.e. the equivalent of adding 's in English). This is often called "smikhut" or construct form, but it is not always necessary to explicitly form it.
In the phrase "שום־אבן אל־אבן" (placing a stone as God's stone), the context and the nouns' arrangement provide the possessive meaning without requiring additional grammatical changes. "אל־אבן" can be understood as "God's stone" even though it is not in the formal construct state. This is something he doesn't know because, well, who knows why. I have my speculations, but I will refrain from personal attacks.
He says:

"It makes perfect sense with the rest of the verse “in the temple of Yahweh.” It’s talking about before the building of the temple which involved setting stone upon stone."

Oh really? Is that why the 3rd verse literally talks about the Temple that already was in existence but was viewed as nothing in their eyes (i.e. insignificant):

"Who among you is left, who saw this house in its former glory? And as you see it now, is it not as nothing in your eyes?" (Haggai 2:3)

Explicitly contradicting your claim that it doesn't exist, but you didn't know that because you have probably never even read the entirety of the chapter to begin with. The Temple was already there. A stone was to be placed in it, God's stone, the black stone of the House of God, and not that it was to be built or built anew. This is why I even wrote the article, because the temple of God was already in existence. How you could have missed this, if you've read the chapter in it entirety, is very baffling to me.
This is why Jacob, upon waking from his prophetic dream, never built the House of God. (Yes, Jacob was a prophet, but Christian scholars throughout history didn't recognize this and thought he was merely a patriarch.) Instead, he only placed a stone as its cornerstone and named it "The House of God":

16. When Jacob woke up, he thought, “Surely the LORD is in this place, and I was unaware of it.” 17. And he was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God; this is the gate of heaven!” 18. Early the next morning, Jacob took the stone that he had placed under his head, and he set it up as a pillar. He poured oil on top of it."

Going back to Haggai 2, the 6th verse states:

"כי כה אמר יהוה צבאות עוד אחת מעט היא ואני מרעיש את־השמים ואת־הארץ ואת־הים ואת־החרבה:"

Which literally translates to:

"For thus says the Lord of Hosts: Once more, in a little while, I will shake the heavens and the earth, the sea and the dry land."

Which they have erroneously translated as:

"For so said the Lord of Hosts: [There will rise] another one, and I will shake up the heaven and the earth and the sea and the dry land [for] a little while." (source)

Lying and adding words to the Word of God to make it look like another House would be raised.
7th verse states:
Haggai 2:7

"והרעשתי את־כל־הגוים ובאו חמדת כל־הגוים ומלאתי את־הבית הזה כבוד אמר יהוה צבאות:"

Transliteration:

"Ve-hir'ashti et kol ha-goyim u-va'u chemdat kol ha-goyim u-milati et ha-bayit ha-zeh kavod amar Adonai Tzva'ot."

Not only does it confirm that the House is already in existence, but it mentioned our prophet Ahmad coming to it by using the cognate of his name, "Chemdat," which they erroneously have translated as:

"and the treasures of all the nations will be brought to this Temple."

The preposition "the" is not there before "Chemdat," while it is before "Goyim" (heathens), which makes sense because "Chemdat of all the heathens (will come)" and doesn't translate to "The treasure of all the heathens (will come)," as they have it.
Let me break it down for you:

והרעשתִי (ve-hir'ashti) - "and I will shake"
את (et) - [direct object marker, not translated]
כל (kol) - "all"
הגוים (ha-goyim) - "the heathens"
ובאו (u-va'u) - "and they will come"
חמדת (Chemdat) - "Chemdat" (proper noun)
כל (kol) - "of all"
הגוים (ha-goyim) - "the heathens"
ומלאתי (u-milati) - "and I will fill"
את (et) - [direct object marker, not translated]
הבית (ha-bayit) - "the house"
הזה (ha-zeh) - "this"
כבוד (kavod) - "glory"
אמר (amar) - "says"
יהוה (Adonai) - "Lord"
צבאות (Tzva'ot) - "of Hosts"

Result:

"And I will shake all the heathens, and they will come, Chemdat of all the heathens, and I will fill this house with glory, says the Lord of Hosts."

Explanation:

They have translated it as "the treasures of..." while the phrase "Chemdat" lacks a "The" (Ha), so it would more accurately be rendered as:

"And they will come, treasure of all the heathens, and..."

A very awkward sentence grammatically. And the dictionaries do not define חמדת (Chemdat) as "Treasure," but rather as "Desire" or "Precious." But translating this phrase in this way (if we consider it to mean "desire" or "precious"), we would make the verse even more awkward:

"And they will come, desire of all the heathens" or "And they will come, precious of all the heathens."

Because it is a singular phrase, and not plural, and as I mentioned earlier, lacks a definite preposition.
But if we consider "Chemdat" as a cognate of "Ahmad," as a proper noun referring to Ahmad the prophet (the only heathen prophet known today), it suddenly becomes a very coherent verse that makes much sense. The heathens will be shaken, and they will come. Then, He specifies by saying: Chemdat of all the heathens, and continues with the rest of the verse.
The phrase "הגוים" (ha-goyim) translates as "the heathens," which supports the interpretation that "Chemdat" is a proper noun referring to a significant heathen person anticipated to come. God is going to shake all the heathens, and they will come. Then He specifies who would come: "Chemdat of all the heathens (will come)." He then says He will fill this house, which they saw as nothing, with glory. The house already exists; Chemdat of all nations was just about to come, and God would fill this house with glory again. And, of course, the stone Jacob laid in Genesis 28—the same stone that Jesus referred to in Matthew 21:

1. Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures: 'The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone. This is from the Lord, and it is marvelous in our eyes?'

43. Therefore, I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit."

The Kingdom of God was intended to be taken away from the Christians and given to a people who would produce its fruits, and this is what happened when Islam came.
Going back to Haggai 2, the 18th verse also confirms that the Temple already was there:

"Consider, please, your heart from this day and onward, from the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, from the day that the temple of the Lord was founded, consider your heart."

Just because God considers the two Houses (the current one they saw as insignificant and the later one) as "different" does not mean that it does not already exist physically but will be a different House.
Nevertheless, he is right about one thing regarding this chapter: it does not mention the new moon to new moon and the end of the Sabbath—that was in Isaiah 66. My mistake. But the prophecy is still valid. The new moon to new moon would come, and yes, the second phrase can be interpreted as an end (if we interpret "Shabbat" as "End"), but it is Biblically and generally interpreted as "Sabbath." A literal translation of the phrase in the 23rd verse would be:

שבת (shabbat) - "Sabbath"
בשבתו (be-shabbato) - "His Sabbath"
יבוא (yavo) - "it will come"

Let's agree that it means what the traditional translations say it means, and I don't mean hypothetically, but let's actually agree on that. However, the prophecy about the new moons (Ramadan) is still there and valid because God has not canceled the Sabbath in the Quran; it is still ongoing:
The Quran states in 2:40-42:

Verse 40: "O Children of Israel, remember My favor which I have bestowed upon you and fulfill My covenant [upon you] that I will fulfill your covenant [from Me], and fear Me."
Verse 41: "And believe in what I have sent down confirming that which is [already] with you, and be not the first to disbelieve in it. And do not exchange My signs/verses for a small price, and fear Me."
Verse 42: "And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know [it]."

The new moon to a new moon is combined with the Sabbath to Sabbath. This is a fulfilled prophecy!
I don't see easter, halloween or Christmas being mentioned here. It's Ramadan and the Sabbath, the two Covenants God has given to his worshipers, the Covenant of the Children of Israel and the Covenant of Peace, unlike the Pauline Christians who literally took all of their holidays from pagan idolaters, which I won't go into because it's not very relevant to our discussion anyways.
This marks the end of my rebuttal to his "part 1."
Thank you for reading,
/Your bro Exion.

Date: 05/31/2024

Reading time: 2 minutes, 423 words

🏛️ Politics & Government

PM claims ODIHR’s conclusion on domestic transparency law lacks legal arguments

Georgian PM Irakli Kobakhidze said the report was mirroring the opinion of the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe. The ODIHR concluded that Georgia’s newly approved law on transparency of foreign influence contained “serious deficiencies” that made it “incompatible” with international human rights standards. The Venice Commission last week “strongly recommended” the Georgian Government to repeal the legislative piece in its current form.

AgendaGe, Majority MP: OSCE/ODIHR report is prepared by Saakashvili’s lawyer, OSCE/ODIHR: Georgia’s “Transparency of Foreign Influence” Law does not comply with democratic standards, human rights, OSCE/ODIHR: Georgia’s “Transparency of Foreign Influence” Law does not comply with democratic standards, human rights, OSCE/ODIHR: Georgia’s “Transparency of Foreign Influence” Law does not comply with democratic standards, human rights

MFA of Ukraine: We condemn unfriendly statements of the PM of Georgia

It is sad to see the consistent and constant degradation of the political statements of the Prime Minister of Georgia, – this is stated in the press service of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine. Ukraine condemns Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze’s “another unfriendly statements and his distorted assessments of the current events in Ukraine”

GeorgiaToday

President not Invited to Police Day Ceremony Because of Grigoriadis’ Pardon

Georgia celebrated Police Day on May 31. President Salome Zurabishvili was conspicuously absent from the official ceremony marking the day. Interior Minister Vakhtang Gomelauri said she was not invited because she had pardoned a convict "who wanted to burn a policeman alive"

CivilGe

Lithuanian Ambassador summoned to MFA Georgia regarding statements on “Russian Law”

Lithuanian Ambassador Andrius Kalindra summoned to Georgia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Georgian Foreign Ministry says the move is not compatible with relations between the two countries. Lithuanian Foreign Minister Andrius Roth: I fully support Ambassador Peter Fischer.

GeorgiaToday

💵 Economy

Georgia’s GDP Up by 11.8% in April 2024

Georgia’s estimated real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rate amounted to 11.8% for April 2024 compared to the corresponding period of the previous year. The average real GDP growth for January-April 2024 equaled 9.0% according to the National Statistics Office of Georgia.

CivilGe, GEOSTAT: Georgia’s economy grew by 9% in January-April

Date: 05/30/2024

Reading time: 3 minutes, 725 words

🪖 Military

Ukraine Latest: Macron Says Kyiv Should Be Allowed to Use Western Weapons on Russian Military Sites

The main battlefield developments in the Russian invasion of Ukraine as of Thursday morning are as follows: The death toll in a Russian attack on a hardware superstore in the eastern Ukrainian city of Kharkiv has risen to 11, says the regional governor. Russia's naval forces destroyed two Ukrainian sea drones in the northwest of the Black Sea, as they headed for the Crimean Peninsula, Russia's Ministry of Defense said in a Google-translated Telegram post.

GeorgiaToday

🏛️ Politics & Government

Chinese Ambassador says Anaklia port project will be “turning point” for cooperation with Georgia

Chinese Ambassador to Georgia Zhou Qian said the Anaklia port project would be “a turning point” for cooperation between China and Georgia. He said the Chinese consortium is set to be announced as the Georgian Government’s private partner in the construction of the port.

AgendaGe

Georgian CSOs to Challenge Agents’ Law in Constitutional Court

Georgian civil society organizations announce they are preparing to appeal to the Constitutional Court of Georgia in the nearest future, demanding the repeal of the Foreign Agents Law. CSOs say they will use all domestic and international mechanisms to impede its implementation until the law is unconditionally repealed.

CivilGe, Lithuanian MFA Summons Georgian Ambassador Over Final Adoption of Agents’ Law

Fund Withdraws Free Dental Service Project for Oni Kids, Citing Agents’ Law

The Fair Trees Fund withdrew a project aimed at establishing a free dental clinic for children in the western Georgian town of Oni. The decision was met with public outcry and as an ominous sign of the Foreign Agents Law's harmful impact on foreign aid and projects funded by Georgia’s international partners. The NGO says it cannot take on additional financial responsibilities while even the active projects are at risk.

CivilGe

Testing Interventions by SABUKO in Iori Plateau to Achieve Conservation and Protection of Local Species

Georgia’s Kakheti region is distinguished by amazingly beautiful landscapes, rich biodiversity, and unique ecological treasures. However, sadly, this natural haven faces a significant challenge – the delicate balance between maintaining a living landscape and the looming threat of desertification. The project places a strong emphasis on the restoration of wildlife habitats and fostering collaboration with the pastoralist community.

GeorgiaToday

Parliament Adopts Amendments to Election Code

Parliament of Georgia adopted amendments to the Election code with 80 votes in favor. Changes include abolishing the CEC advisory group, which consists of a representative of the Public Defender as well as the national and international experts selected by observer organizations.

CivilGe

PM Kobakhidze Talks Controversial Topics with Media

Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze spoke to the media at the opening of a new bridge in Tbilisi. He blamed the ‘radical opposition’ for the alleged ‘hate campaign’ against the Georgian Dream members who supported the Foreign Agents Law and their families. He also said that the ruling party would not allow the “Maidan” to happen in Georgia.

CivilGe, PM: Germany should not send such ambassadors who make anti-Georgian statements, Ambassador of Georgia summoned to Lithuanian MFA for overriding of President’s veto on “Russian Law”

CoE GRECO Report: Low Level of Implementation of Anti-Corruption Recommendations

Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) published its results of the Fourth evaluation round: non-compliance procedure for its low level of implementation of its recommendations for preventing corruption in respect of MPs, judges and prosecutors. Georgia had one of the highest levels of compliance among the countries monitored.

CivilGe

🧪 Science & Technology

Supporting Georgia’s Growing E-Commerce Sector

Georgia's e-commerce market grew from 11% in 2018 to 23% in 2020. By 2025, the report predicts that online shopping will grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 52%, yielding a penetration rate of 4.7%. The biggest online shopping sector in 2020 was comprised of electronics and household appliances.

GeorgiaToday

Date: 05/29/2024

Reading time: 4 minutes, 931 words

🪖 Military

Europe is increasing its support for Ukraine

EU foreign ministers are meeting in Brussels. They will still try to overcome Hungarian resistance and provide Ukraine with military assistance it needs. At the moment, the aid package worth about 7 billion dollars has been suspended, the only opponent of which is the Prime Minister of Hungary, Viktor Orbán. Ukraine needs more air defense, including Patriot air defense systems, says Jens Stoltenberg.

EuroNewsGeorgia

🏛️ Politics & Government

Matthew Miller: GD moved the country farther away from European integration path

Matthew Miller: Georgia's leaders are choosing to forgo the steps needed to advance Georgia in the Western direction that its people want. The ruling parties actions threaten Georgia’s democratic trajectory, future economic security, EU membership, and also put the U.S.-Georgia relationship at risk.

GeorgiaToday

CSOs Announce Disobedience to Foreign Agents Law

Georgian civil society organizations issued a statement announcing their disobedience to the Foreign Agents Law, which was adopted yesterday. In the statement, the organizations pledge to defend the rights of demonstrators against the Agents Law and to protect each citizen’s vote in the upcoming parliamentary elections.

CivilGe, Response to the "foreign influence" law

Statement of the ombudsman regarding the placement of those detained at the rallies in "hostile" cells

The representatives of the Public Defender visited two detainees participating in the protests, the information about their ill-treatment was spread on May 29. The detainees are in the 8th Penitentiary Institution of Gldani. Their lawyers requested to change the cell for the defendants, to have a public defender with the defendants.

EuroNewsGeorgia

Khazaradze: Plans of Russian gov’t have been announced openly to us by stopping Anaklia project

Chinese consortium will be announced as winner of Anaklia port project tender in coming days. Leader of Lelo party: 'We will send away the Russian regime to Moscow in October'

GeorgiaToday

British-Georgian Academy’s founding partner Natia Janashia set to terminate the agreement with Georgia Capital

Natia Janashia, the partner and director of the British-Georgian Academy, cites the investor’s failure to fulfill contractual obligations as the rationale behind this decision. The Tbilisi City Court, recognizing the merit of the petition, imposed a security measure, requiring mutual agreement among partners of the school to secure the lawsuit.

GeorgiaToday

German Ambassador: Agents’ Law Bars Georgia from EU Accession Talks

The German Ambassador to Georgia Peter Fischer stressed that the European Union will not start the accession talks with Georgia as long as the Foreign Agents Law is in effect. He also reiterated the Venice Commission’s opinion on the law that this legislation goes against the fundamental rights of Georgians.

CivilGe, Parliament Overrides President’s Veto, Adopts ‘Offshore’ Law, Domestic Reactions to Presidential Veto Override, Final Adoption of Foreign Agents Law, International Reactions to Presidential Veto Override, Final Adoption of Foreign Agents Law, The opposition announces a boycott of parliamentary work, White House: Suppressing civil society is what authoritarian governments do, Austria “deeply regrets” final adoption of law on “transparency of foreign influence”, Carl Bildt: EU path of Georgia has for the time being come to an end, White House: Suppressing civil society is what authoritarian governments do, UK “extremely concerned” over veto of bill on transparency of foreign influence, Georgian President to the “Russian Law” protesters: You create a referendum, I’ll sign it, Carl Bildt: EU path of Georgia has for the time being come to an end

Kremlin-affiliates Hold Another Conference in Tbilisi

On May 24, the Kremlin-affiliated Eurasia Institute held another anti-Western conference in Tbilisi. Participants discussed their version of Georgia’s history under the Russian empire. They also adopted a resolution calling the prospect of withdrawing the Foreign Agents Law a “complete capitulation” of Georgia. The resolution also calls on the Georgian government to “openly” restore relations with Russia.

CivilGe

Chinese consortium to be announced as winner of Anaklia port project tender

A Chinese consortium — China Communications construction company Ltd, together with China harbor investment — was selected as a private investor for the construction of the new deep-water port of Anaklia. Georgia terminated the contract with the “Anaklia Development Consortium”, which was supposed to build the port, due to non-fulfillment of its obligations.

GeorgiaToday

Date: 05/28/2024

Reading time: 3 minutes, 727 words

🏛️ Politics & Government

Charles Michel: Adoption of Transparency Law Takes Georgia Away from EU

“The adoption of the law in the parliament is a step backward and takes Georgia further away from its EU path,” says the President of the European Council.

CivilGe, International Reactions to Presidential Veto Override, Final Adoption of Foreign Agents Law, HVP Borrell on Final Adoption of Agents Law: EU and Member States are Considering all Options, Josep Borrell: “Foreign influence” law does not correspond to EU values, GD expected to override President’s veto on “Russian Law,” protesters surround parliament building

Shamba: Tbilisi wanted us back for 30 years, they will want it for another 300 years

Abkhazia’s security council secretary Sergey Shamba responded to the statement of the Prime Minister of Georgia, Irakli Kobakhidze. Shamba claimed that there are many unresolved problems between the two breakaway regions. He claimed that when the time comes, we will discuss such a readiness, but we are not going to discuss issues of confederation.

GeorgiaToday

CoE Secretary General on Final Adoption of Agents Law: Free and Fair Election Environment Could Be Jeopardized

Council of Europe Secretary General Marija Pejčinović Burić expresses “deep concern” about the law’s “adverse impact on informed public debate, pluralism, and democratic checks and balances,” adding that it “could potentially jeopardize also the environment for free and fair elections” The statement stresses that with this decision the Georgian authorities gave up “an ultimate occasion” to withdraw the law.

CivilGe, HVP Borrell on Final Adoption of Agents Law: EU and Member States are Considering all Options

PM: Agents’ Law will Create a Better Basis for Ensuring Georgia’s Accession to the EU

Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze said the law “will create a better basis for ensuring Georgia’s accession to the European Union.” He said citizens of Georgia have the right to know who is financed by whom in this country, who carries the positive or negative interests of a foreign power in Georgia.

CivilGe

Protesters against Foreign Agents Law Fined

On May 20, and the court fined several activists GEL 500 (approximately USD 180) in connection with protests against the Foreign Agents Law. This is the maximum fine for the offense, according to Article 174 Prima of the Administrative Code. Those fined include Saba Skhvitaridze, Anri Gorgiladze, and Boris Chele Kurua of the opposition party.

CivilGe, Special Tasks Department Chief Admits to Battering Targeted Protesters at anti-Agents Law Demonstrations

Georgian Health Minister, US Global Health Centre Director discuss joint projects, cooperation

Georgian Health Minister Mikheil Sarjveladze is in Geneva to deliver an address at the 77th session of the World Health Organisation's annual Assembly. The meeting was held as part of the official visit to Geneva, Switzerland.

AgendaGe

Date: 05/27/2024

Reading time: 2 minutes, 458 words

🏛️ Politics & Government

Occupied Abkhazia, Tskhinvali: Kobakhidze’s statement on return of breakaway regions non-perspective

Georgia's Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze said that he wants to return Abkhazia and Tskhinvali to Georgia. The so-called ministry of foreign affairs of occupied Abkhazaria evaluated the statement of the Prime Minister of Georgia as a “populist” and non-perspective statement. They claim that any attempt by the Georgian leadership to “return Abkhaziia to Georgia is absolutely unpromising.

GeorgiaToday

EU High Representative says EU Foreign Affairs Council “exchanged views” on Georgian transparency law

Foreign Affairs Council of the European Union had “exchanged views” on the controversial Georgian law on transparency of foreign influence. The law requires registration of non-commercial legal entities and media outlets in the country as “pursuing the interests of a foreign power” if they derive more than 20 percent of their funding from abroad.

AgendaGe

President Calls for ‘Full Mobilization’ of Diaspora in October Elections

Georgian President Salome Zurabishvili called for “full mobilization” of Georgians living abroad for the October parliamentary elections. The President, along with opposition parties and civil society organizations, has called for a more active engagement of the diaspora. Calls for the Georgian government to do more to facilitate the exercise of voting rights for Georgian emigres have largely gone unanswered.

CivilGe, VP Harris to Zurabishvili: Georgian People Look to You to Champion Country’s Euro-Atlantic Future, Opposition Parties to Sign Georgian Charter Initiated by President, Opposition parties join President’s Georgian Charter, President offerspolitical parties “Georgian Charter”

Why Georgian Dream Should Not Underestimate US Sanctions

U.S. prepared to impose sanctions on members of Georgian Dream party responsible for promoting it and obstructing the country’s Euro-Atlantic integration. The sanctions are only the first stage of sanctions pressure on sub-sanctioned persons, says Vakhtang Partsvania.

CivilGe, “MEGOBARI Act” Envisages Sanctions for Undermining, Injuring Georgian Democracy

Legal Issues Committee Endorses Overriding Presidential Veto on Agents’ Law

The ruling Georgian Dream is expected to override the veto in the plenary session tomorrow, on May 28. President Salome Zurabishvili vetoed the law on May 18. If the veto is overridden, the bill becomes law.

CivilGe

Date: 05/26/2024

Reading time: 0 minutes, 89 words

🏛️ Politics & Government

Georgian Charter: President Proposes Unified Goals for Short-Term Parliament, Technical Government

President Salome Zurabishvili presented the roadmap for resolving the political crisis and returning to the path of EU integration. She said that there is no alternative to the European future for Georgia and that the Georgian society, which she knows, is waiting for concrete plans.

CivilGe

International Partners Congratulate Georgia on Independence Day

On May 26, Georgia celebrates the 106th anniversary of the declaration of the first independent democratic republic. The King of the United Kingdom, Charles III congratulated Georgia in a letter addressed to the President Zurabishvili. President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev wrote a congratulatory letter.

CivilGe

Date: 05/25/2024

Reading time: 0 minutes, 71 words

🏛️ Politics & Government

Ruling party Sec Gen says Parliament will override veto on transparency law, despite “expected US sanctions”

Georgia will override President Salome Zourabichvili's veto on law on transparency of foreign influence. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced visa restrictions for “those responsible for undermining democracy” in Georgia in connection to the transparency law.

AgendaGe

Deputy Finance Minister Resigns

The U.S. House of Representatives has announced its decision to pull back on the controversial law. The decision comes after a series of high-profile incidents in the state of Georgia, Georgia, in the past.

CivilGe

If you'd like to support this work/ get these reports emailed daily: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/newsreports

This is my 5th post in rebutting Exion’s (u/Informal_Patience821) claims regarding his new translations/interpretations of the Hebrew Oly Testament. For previous parts see:
Pt 1: https://www.reddit.com/Quraniyoon/s/aUxRazJZWs
Pt 2: https://www.reddit.com/Quraniyoon/s/lZQUc4t907
Pt 3: https://www.reddit.com/Quraniyoon/s/SQbXAqYm6E
Pt 4: https://www.reddit.com/Quraniyoon/s/I8YTbc5UHZ
There isn’t a new post from him since my part 4. However, in his most recent post he linked another of his posts from a while back where he reaffirmed the info in that older post and offered it as support for part of his most recent post. That is why I’ll be addressing that older post he linked which is https://www.reddit.com/islam/s/U8bYLSxn9h.

Eng: "Who is so blind as My servant,So deaf as the messenger I send?Who is so blind as the chosen one ("Mosselam" or "Mushelam"),So blind as GOD’s servant?" (Isaiah 42:19, translation from Sefaria . com)
) Jewish scholars have added a comment (in the part that says "Moshelam") saying "chosen Meaning of Heb. uncertain." but it really isn't uncertain at all. They fully know what this word means.

There is a typo. His title for this section says Isaiah 52 but his specific citation is Isaiah 42:19. For anyone who wants to check it themselves the correct chapter is 42 not 52.
On a side note one of Exion’s response to me is saying I highlight his most minor errors and then exaggerate them. If the errors I’ve pointed out in my previous posts were like this typo that would be a viable response. A typo like this is easy to make, it’s a 1 character difference and the wrong character is right next to the right character on the keyboard. That is not at all like not realizing how Hebrew verses are numbered, copying the Hebrew verse number with the verse, not noticing the missing diacritical marks, removing the space between the verse number and first word, trying to translate the first word when it’s not a real Hebrew word, in an attempt to translate the not real word it results incorrectly spelling two Hebrew words, and then after acknowledging the mistake in your first post not fully correcting the mistake when copying the post to another subreddit. When he first blocked me that was the supposedly minor issue I kept bringing up that made him block me. That’s not a minor error, it’s a combination of several points of failure multiple of which would be hard to make, especially for someone who actually knows Hebrew. That’s nothing like the minor error in this case where he typed a 5 instead of a 4.
As for his point here the Hebrew word in question is כִּמְשֻׁלָּ֔ם. The כִּ is a preposition with מְשֻׁלָּ֔ם being the verb. The base form of the verb is שָׁלַם which means to be in a covenant of peace. This specifically is the Pual participle. Unlike the active participle I mentioned in pt 2 the Pual form is passive meaning the subject of the verb is what is being acted on by the verb. The BDB specifically lists Isaiah 42:19 as the Pual participle and cites it as meaning “one in covt. of peace”. Since it’s a passive particle the servant is the one in this covenant.
While the pronunciation sounds like the pronunciation of the word Muslim that doesn’t mean the coming prophet is being called a Muslim. Often completely different words from different languages will sound the same but it doesn’t mean they’re related. Even within the same language different words will sound the same. E.g. peace and piece sound the same but that doesn’t mean we import the meaning of piece into uses of the word peace. The word Muslim means one who submits which is a different word.

I will show you Biblical commentaries below that support this interpretation of the word.

Exion has already demonstrated he is unreliable with his citations. In pt 1 I noted his use of a fictional source, his citation of biblical verses out of context, and how in citing Haggai 2:23 he actually cited a completely different verse from a different chapter and different book. In pt 3 I noted his citation of the Septuagint didn’t match what it actually said. In pt 4 I showed how he was cherry picking translations favorable to his interpretation. There is also this discussion where 6 times in one response I had to point out how he misrepresented his sources, https://www.reddit.com/Quraniyoon/s/n4NuxwoXpH. Given this track record any citations he gives need to be thoroughly fact checked. Unfortunately he hasn’t given any page numbers so tracking down exactly where the quotes are to validate them is difficult. Also honestly I’m exhausted in trying thanks validate all his sources and finding problems. He needs to put more effort into showing the sources are real and accurately represented.

"I will make a covenant of peace with them, it will be an everlasting covenant*. I will establish them and increase their numbers, and I will put my sanctuary among them forever."
(Ezekiel 37:26)
How people can read these verse and fully know that there's a major religion stemming from descendants of Abraham ﷺ and that this religion is called "Islam" (peace/submission), and still not pur two and two together and figure out that God has fulfilled His Divine promise, it leaves me in a state of profound astonishment.

Two problems here. First someone claiming to have a message from God and calling their new religion peace doesn’t mean it’s actually from God. It shouldn’t be surprising that non Muslims don’t take Islam as a fulfillment of this prophecy even if it was represented accurately (which I’ll show it’s not). Note I’m not arguing here Islam is false as this sub isn’t the appropriate place for such a debate. I’m just explaining why someone can read this verse and even believe it without thinking Islam is the fulfillment.
The second issue is when examined in context it’s clearly not about Islam. The whole section is from Ezekiel 37:15-28. It talks about the northern and southern nations that were split being brought back into one nation, all the Jews scattered across the nations brought back into Israel, being ruled by King David again, and ends by specifically saying God will sanctify Israel. The convent is clearly being made with Israel in the context of the prophecy. Even if you believe Mohammed brought a covenant of peace from God that’s clearly not what this prophecy is speaking about.

All ancient maps (and credible history books) show us and tell us that Haran was a city located in Arabia, precisely where Mecca is located today.

This needs some support. From what I can find it’s in modern day Turkey which is north of Israel while Arabia is south of Israel. The link he pasted doesn’t work for me. Though even if it did it’s a Reddit link not an academic source so it wouldn’t be a reliable source of info.

The final "Mem" at the end is there as a grammatically called "plural of majesty" or respect, much like the words "Elohim", " Malachim", "Adonim".

I already addressed the part of כִּמְשֻׁלָּ֔ם in Isaiah 42:19. As for Songs of Solomon 5:16 it’s important to understand exactly what Exion is claiming here so I’ll use English plural to make sure it’s clear. Take the name Mohammed. Suppose there were two people with the name being referred to. We’d add an s to make it plural when referring to both, e.g. both Mohammeds are coming to the party. The em ending in Hebrew indicates plural like the English s. Exion is claiming that adding the s in some cases isn’t done to indicate a plurality but rather to majesty. He gives 3 examples but only 1 is actually a name. In that one instance the em at the end isn’t the plural ending added to a name, rather it’s part of the name. It’s like the name Jesus. It’s not that the name is Jesu and the s is added to make it plural, rather the s is just part of the name. None of these parallel Exion’s claim of taking a name and adding a plural suffix to indicate majesty.

the word before “Muhammadim” is "vekullo", it consists of the conjunction "Vav" (and) and the word "kullo," where "khulo" is a masculine singular construct.

I’ve already pointed out to Exion that he confused the construct form with pronoun suffixes in this comment, https://www.reddit.com/Quraniyoon/s/7v8uaBIljg. Also as noted in pt 1 a bunch of people, including my, explained how pronoun suffixes work. I did call it possessive suffixes in that comment and pronoun suffixes in this comment. The reason is possessive suffixes are a type of pronoun suffix, specifically when the pronoun suffix is added to a noun. However, the suffix can be added to other things as well, not just nouns, and even for some nouns it’s a special case. This is one of those cases. Here is a screenshot from my Hebrew textbook explaining it, https://imgur.com/a/k4TKPRN. With a pronoun suffix the word means “all of {pronoun}” where the specific pronoun is indicated by the specific suffix added.
Note in Songs of Solomon 5:16 the noun is after the word col. The textbook says it often appears before the noun being referred too but it doesn’t say always so it’s not a problem for this verse where it’s after. We know this case the noun is the one after since col in this case is prefixed by the vav conjunction indicating a new part of the sentence. The book also gives examples where the col is first. It’s when adding emphasis that the other noun is placed first.
The masculine singular Exion mentions (really the third person masculine singular, he left out the third person part) is referring to the pronoun suffix not the noun. It’s indicating the pronoun is singular not the noun. I.E. it’s saying all of him rather than all of them. While there is a construct form between the two nouns the pronoun suffix is not the suffix for the construct form. As my textbook notes it’s the case where the pronoun suffix is being added to the construct form but the construct form with col doesn’t require the suffix. Furthermore nothing in the section in my picture indicates the plurality of the suffix needs to match the plurality of the following noun. Exion needs to provide some source for this.

"So I sent Eliezer, and Ariel, and Semeias, and Elnathan, and Jarib, and another Elnathan, and Nathan, and Zacharias, and Mosollam, chief men*: and Joiarib, and Elnathan, wise me."
( Ezra 8:16, Douay-Rheims Bible)

So often Exion takes ordinary Hebrew words and twists them to try and make them into a name. It’s funny that when we finally have a name he twists it to make it a noun. The verse is giving a list of names with names before and after the word in question. That tells us in that case it should be taken as a name within a list of names but Exion twists it to be a noun without justification. What’s also funny is one of the commentaries he cites to support his interpretation for Isaiah 42:19 specifically lists Ezra 8:16 as a case where the word is used as a proper name. Why should we trust his source for Isaiah 42:19 but not Ezra 8:16? No reason is given, rather Exion just picks and chooses what he wants to support his argument and ignores what doesn’t.

u/Away-Jackfruit-7039, u/Additional_Doubt_243, u/glittergoddess1002
Are we living in the last days?
Yes, depending on the definition. The Bible spoke about "last days" (plural) with multiple meanings:
KJV, Gen 49:

1 And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days.

last בְּאַחֲרִ֥ית (bə·’a·ḥă·rîṯ) Preposition-b Noun - feminine singular construct Strong's 319: The last, end, the future, posterity
Strong's Hebrew: 319. אַחֲרִית (acharith) — 61 Occurrences
ESV:

Then Jacob called his sons and said, “Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you what shall happen to you in days to come.

H319 days could mean "later days."
Jeremiah prophesied the restoration of Israel and Judah in 30:

18 Thus says the LORD: Behold, I will restore the fortunes of the tents of Jacob and have compassion on his dwellings; the city shall be rebuilt on its mound, and the palace shall stand where it used to be.
24 The fierce anger of the LORD will not turn back until he has executed and accomplished the intentions of his mind. In the latter [H319] days you will understand this.

The latter days were relative to Jeremiah's day.
Joel prophesied the Day of the LORD in 2:

28 And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions. 29 Even on the male and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit.

In those future later days with respect to Joel.

30 And I will show wonders in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and columns of smoke. 31 The sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon to blood, before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes.

The first part of Joel's prophecy was fulfilled in the Pentecost. Peter called it "last days" in Act 2:

17‘In the last days, God says, I will pour out My Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams.

2Pe 3:

3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts.

The second part of Joel's prophecy is yet to come in the future last days.
Are we living in the last days?
Yes, relative to Joel's days, Peter was living in the H319-last days. Relative to our present days, there will be more H319-last days coming. It is all relative.
Are we living on the last day?
No, not yet.

Do you agree with these definitions or do you separate sex and gender (completely)?
“Typically” = not necessarily,… not always having the capacity to produce x gametes.
woman noun wom·​an ˈwu̇-mən especially Southern ˈwō- or ˈwə- plural women ˈwi-mən 1 a: an adult female person
womankind noun wom·​an·​kind ˈwu̇-mən-ˌkīnd singular or plural in construction : female human beings : women especially as distinguished from men
🔽
female noun 1 a: a female person : a woman or a girl b: an individual of the sex that is typically capable of bearing young or producing eggs
femaleness noun fe·​male·​ness ˈfē-ˌmāl-nəs : the qualities (as of form, physiology, or behavior) that distinguish an individual that produces large usually immobile gametes from one that produces spermatozoa or spermatozoids
man noun ˈman in compounds ˌman, or mən plural men ˈmen in compounds ˌmen, or mən 1 a (1) : an individual human especially : an adult male human
🔽
male noun plural males 1 a: a male person : a man or a boy b: an individual of the sex that is typically capable of producing small, usually motile gametes (such as sperm or spermatozoa) which fertilize the eggs of a female

Classy Fridays are for asking questions about or discussing your class; each week focuses on a different class. No question is too small, so ask away.
This week is Rogues.

rogue
ruːʒ
noun
noun: rouge

a red powder or cream used as a cosmetic for colouring the cheeks or lips. "she wore patches of rouge on her cheeks"

1. short for jeweller's rouge.

verb
verb: rouge; 3rd person present: rouges; past tense: rouged; past participle: rouged; gerund or present participle: rouging

colour with rouge. "her brightly rouged cheeks" archaic apply rouge to one's cheeks. "she rouged regularly now"

adjective
adjective: rouge

(of wine) red.

Origin late Middle English (denoting the colour red): from French, ‘red’, from Latin rubeus . The cosmetic term dates from the mid 18th century.
Rouge
ruːʒ
noun
noun: rouge; plural noun: rouges
(in Canadian football) a single point awarded when the receiving team fails to run a kick out of its own end zone.
Origin
late 19th century: of unknown origin.

You can also discuss your class in our class channels on our Discord.

https://te.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%B0%85%E0%B0%B0%E0%B0%AC%E0%B1%8D%E0%B0%AC%E0%B1%80_%E0%B0%AD%E0%B0%BE%E0%B0%B7
This is the part that I wrote, about Arabic grammar:

నామవాచకం

అరబ్బీ భాషలో పుల్లింగమూ, స్త్రీలింగమూ, రెండు లింగాలు ఉంటాయి. ప్రతి నామవాచకానికి ఈ రెండింట్లో ఒకటి ఉంటుంది. జీవితం ఉన్న ప్రాణుల గురించి మాట్లాడేటప్పుడు పుల్లింగం మగతనాన్ని సూచిస్తుది, స్త్రీలింగం ఆడతనాన్ని సూచిస్తుంది, కానీ వస్తువుల గురించి మాట్లాడేటప్పుడు పదలింగానికీ నిజమైన లింగానికీ సంబంధం లేదు.

భగ్న బహువచనం

అరబ్బీ భాషలో చాలా నామవాచకాలకు "భగ్న బహువచనాలు" ఉంటాయి. అంటే ఇలాంటి పదాలకు బహువచనం సూచించడానికి చివరికి ఒక ప్రత్యయం చేర్చడానికి బదులు ఆ పదాల్లో అచ్చులు మార్చాలి. షుమారు 50% నామవాచకాలకు భగ్న బహువచనం ఉంటుంది.
I want to clean up the section about noun gender: Would it be correct to write something like "అరబ్బీలో ప్రతి పదానికి పల్లింగం, స్త్రీలింగాల్లో ఒక లింగం ఉంటుంది" or "అరబ్బీలో ప్రతి పదానికి పల్లింగం, స్త్రీలింగాల రెండింట్లో ఒక లింగం ఉంటుంది"? I don't really like having the first two sentences be separate.
The word "భగ్న బహువచనం" is a calque from "broken plural" in English, and basically refers to Arabic plurals that form a plural by changing the vowels in the word instead of adding a suffix. (Similar to how we say "foot, feet" in English instead of "foots".) Does the explanation of it in Telugu make sense?

📚 Master the art of plurals with our comprehensive guide on Plurals of Nouns! 🖊️
From adding ‘s’ to changing ‘y’ to ‘ies’, we’ve got all the rules you need to navigate the tricky waters of English plurals. Whether it’s roofs or leaves, heroes or potatoes, our resource has you covered. Perfect for students, teachers, and grammar enthusiasts!
👉 Dive into the details: Mastering Plurals

GrammarRules #PluralsOfNouns #EnglishGrammar #LanguageLearning #ELATeachers #GrammarTips #SpellingBee #TeachingResources #EducationalContent #ELAFreeResources

Subject-verb agreement with quantifiers

Learning aim: practice using subject-verb agreement with quantifiers (20–25 minutes)
A collective noun is a noun that refers to a group of things taken as a whole. There are many different collective nouns for different groups of things, such as people, animals, and objects.
People: crowd, team, committee, audience, tribe, crew, family
Animals: herd (cattle, sheep, goats), flock (birds), pack (wolves, dogs), gaggle (geese), school (fish), pride (lions), pod (whales, dolphins), colony (ants, bees), murder (crows)
Places: archipelago (islands), constellation (stars)
Things: bunch (flowers, grapes), bunch (keys), fleet (ships), set (dishes)
Collective nouns can be singular or plural. When a collective noun is singular, it takes a singular verb. For example, "The team is playing well." When a collective noun is plural, it takes a plural verb. For example, "The crowd were cheering loudly."
Using collective nouns can help to make your writing more interesting and varied. It can also help to create a more vivid picture in the reader's mind.

Singular Pronoun
When a collective noun refers to a single unit, even though it represents multiple individuals, we use a singular pronoun. This emphasizes the group acting as a whole.
"My baseball team has a lot of great players on it."
It refers to the team as a single unit
Plural Pronoun
When the collective noun emphasizes the individual members of the group, a plural pronoun is used. This highlights the separate identities within the group.
"My baseball team is great. They are all my friends."
They refers to the individual players within the team
Understanding this distinction helps make your writing grammatically correct and clear about how you're referring to the collective noun.
https://youtu.be/ew2DngM9N2Y

In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
Salam to everyone!
First, read part 1 and part 2 of this series before you read this part, because it is crucial if you want to understand everything.

Introduction:

As we approach the culmination of this chapter, the pieces of the puzzle are falling into place, and it is increasingly evident that this chapter is, as I initially suspected, a prophecy of the early Islamic era. The subsequent verses elucidate the subject matter with great clarity, focusing on a prophet, his dominion, and the sacred Covenant of Peace, along with all associated matters.
The individual responsible for shattering the unity of the Muslim community and violating the sacred Covenant is none other than Mu'awiyah, the manipulator. Mu'awiyah is a man who insidiously ascended to power, akin to a serpent, employing a deceitful strategy that involved falsehoods, massacres, and other nefarious tactics that only a corrupt and ruthless criminal would utilize. This will become abundantly clear as we delve deeper into this chapter.

Disclaimer: My stalker here on Reddit and my response...

As you are likely aware, there is an individual who has developed an unhealthy fixation with my posts and is persistently attempting to "expose" me and my articles, a situation that I find rather amusing. I have chosen to block this individual and totally ignore him due to his propensity for dishonesty, his relentless harassment of me in response to every post I make, and his penchant for highlighting even the most minor of errors that I may inadvertently commit, which he then exaggerates to an unwarranted degree.
Despite my numerous attempts to refute his claims, I have reached the end of my patience with him, as he continues to regurgitate the same arguments and refuses to acknowledge the limitations of his own understanding.
In this next section (part 3), the absurdity of individuals like him will become increasingly apparent, as it will be revealed that my initial assertions were, in fact, totally correct. I offer my heartfelt gratitude to God alone for guiding me towards this remarkable discovery and allowing me to share it with all of you.
To those of you who have commented in support of this individual and his baseless claims about me, I implore you to fear God! This person is not a Muslim and is deliberately spreading falsehoods against me and our Faith, yet you are choosing to side with him against your own brother in faith. I want to make you aware of the gravity of this.
However, there is no need to worry, as I believe that after reading this part of the series, you will humbly recognize how easily you can be deceived by individuals like him and never let it happen again. I extend my forgiveness to you, as you are still my brothers and sisters in Islam. Nonetheless, I strongly encourage you to bear this in mind as you move forward and to exercise greater discernment. The enemies of God will invariably resort to lies and fabrications in an attempt to undermine our faith and its true adherents. Their objective is to hinder the progress of Truth and to create obstacles in its path. It is crucial that we remain vigilant and steadfast in the face of such tactics.

Part 3, The End stages of the 1st Fitnah (Trial):

Verse 21:

"The next to come to power will be a despicable man who is not in line for royal succession. He will slip in when least expected and take over the kingdom by flattery and intrigue."

Interpretation:

• "The next to come to power": This phrase refers to Mu'awiyah, who managed to persuade Hasan to relinquish the Caliphate to him, thus becoming "The king of the north" in place of 'Ali, whereas he had previously been "king of the south."
• "A despicable man who is not in line for royal succession": Mu'awiyah was not a direct descendant of the Prophet Muhammad's family, unlike 'Ali. The fact that this chapter explicitly continues the narrative in this manner by mentioning specific details such as royal succession in leadership further supports the argument that it pertains to the early Islamic era, which was marked by numerous trials and tribulations related to leadership. Mu'awiyah was a highly reprehensible individual who ruthlessly seized power by taking the lives of countless believers. It is noteworthy that Sunnis regard him as a righteous man, despite the historical evidence that suggests otherwise and paints a picture of a man who was, in fact, highly despicable. They rely on their Hadiths, treating them as divine revelations, disregarding the fact that they could have been concocted by the adherents of Mu'awiyah in his support.
• "Slip in when least expected and take over the kingdom by flattery and intrigue": Mu'awiyah employed political scheming, deception, and strategic marriages to consolidate his power, ultimately becoming the first Umayyad Caliph in 661 AD.

Verse 22:

"With the force of a flood they shall be swept away from before him and be broken, and also the leader of the covenant."

Interpretation:

• "With the force of a flood": Symbolizes a powerful and overwhelming military force.
• "They shall be swept away from before him and be broken": Refers to their defeat to his schemes and/or campaigns.
• "also the leader of the covenant": This is Hasan, 'Ali's son, who was considered a rightful successor of the covenant that prophet Muhammad was given by God, the 'Covenant of Peace.' Hassan abdicated the caliphate to Mu'awiyah under a peace treaty and certain promises, promises that Mu'awiyah never fulfilled. It is very obvious that he was just a power-horny lunatic who lied and murdered his way to the top and thereby ruined both the Muslim reputation, the Holy Covenant of Peace and the Muslim unity as a whole.

The Covenant of Peace: God says in the Quran:

"Wherewith God guides all who seek His good pleasure to ways of the Peace (Subula as-Salam)" (5:15)

Why is God calling His ways as "ways of the Peace"? Just eight verses earlier, God says:

"And remember the blessing of God upon you and His Covenant by which He bound you when you said, 'We hear and we obey.' And fear God. Indeed, God is All-Knowing of what is in the hearts." (5:7)

Read more about our Covenant with God, the Covenant of Peace, here:
Link: Islam and Muslims in the Bible: You need to read these verses in Hebrew!!
This is an issue that has unfortunately been concealed from the Ummah, and I believe that individuals like Mu'awiyah are responsible for this. The reasons behind this will become increasingly apparent as we progress through the chapter. I plan to delve into this topic further in a future post on this subreddit, but for now, let us continue with our interpretation of the chapter.
Verse 23:

"And after the league is made with him he shall act deceitfully, for he shall come up and become strong with a small number of people."

Interpretation:

• "After the league is made with him": Refers to the peace treaty between Hasan and Mu'awiyah.
• "He shall act deceitfully": Mu'awiyah promising things and agreeing to peace treaties that he later broke, consolidating power in a deceitful manner. Perhaps even making himself bigger than he actually was by way of utilizing war tactics in a proficient manner.
• "Become strong with a small number of people": Mu'awiyah’s initial consolidation of power with loyal supporters in Syria, particularly the Banu Kalb tribe. His following was small compared to the vastness of the Ummah of the Muslims, but he grew to become great gradually by gaining more and more support. How he did this is made clear in the next verse.

Verse 24:

"He shall enter peaceably even into the richest places of the province; and he shall do what his fathers have not done, nor his forefathers: he shall disperse among them the plunder, spoil, and riches; and he shall devise his plans against the strongholds, but only for a time."

Interpretation:

• "Enter peaceably even into the richest places of the province": Mu'awiyah’s strategic and peaceful occupation of prosperous areas.
• "He shall do what his fathers have not done": ...
• "Disperse among them the plunder, spoil, and riches": Distributing wealth to gain loyalty and support. In fact, Sunnis claim that Ibn Umar said that "Muawiyah was the most generous person after Prophet" (Source)
• "Devise his plans against the strongholds, but only for a time": Strategic planning against remaining strongholds of opposition, but for a limited time.

Verse 25:

"He shall stir up his power and his courage against the king of the South with a great army; and the king of the South shall be stirred up to battle with a very great and mighty army; but he shall not stand, for they shall devise plans against him."

Interpretation:

• "He shall stir up his power and his courage against the king of the South": Mu'awiyah is now the king of the north, as I've explained earlier, because he took over that position (see verse: 21), so he is now waging war against the king of the south, namely Hasan, son of Ali, who was the king of the South, based in Mecca.
• "But he shall not stand": Indicates the ultimate failure of Hassan when he gave up the Caliphate.
• "They shall devise plans against him": The successful strategies of Mu'awiyah in convincing Hassan to give up the Caliphate to him, he did this as a result of deceitful planning they made, they even made his own supporters betray him, which the next verse speaks about.

Verse 26:

"Yes, those who eat of the portion of his delicacies shall destroy him; his army shall be swept away, and many shall fall down slain."

Interpretation:

• Hasan’s forces were plagued by internal divisions and a lack of unified support. The promises and bribes led to significant desertions from Hasan’s ranks. Notable commanders and influential figures abandoned Hasan, further weakening his military strength and morale. There were also plots against Hasan’s life from within his own camp. For instance, it is reported that some of his own supporters attempted to assassinate him, hoping that his death would force a settlement with Mu'awiyah or for their own gain.

Verse 27:

"Both these kings' hearts shall be bent on evil, and they shall speak lies at the same table; but it shall not prosper, for the end will still be at the appointed time."

Interpretation:

• "The two kings": Refers to Hasan ibn Ali and Mu'awiyah during their negotiations.
• "Hearts bent on evil": Indicates mutual distrust and ulterior motives.
• "Sit at the same table and lie to each other": During negotiations, both parties made deceptive promises.
• "To no avail, because an end will still come at the appointed time": The deceit did not change the ultimate predetermined outcomes.

Verse 28:

"While returning to his land with great riches, his heart shall be moved against the holy covenant; so he shall do damage and return to his own land."

Interpretation:

• "King of the North": Mu'awiyah, who ruled from Syria.
• "Return to his land with great wealth": Mu'awiyah’s accumulation of wealth and resources.
• "Heart set against the holy covenant": Mu'awiyah’s actions undermined the principles of Islamic unity.
• "Take action against it and then return to his own country": Mu'awiyah’s policies further divided the Muslim community before he returned to Damascus.

Verse 29:

"At the time appointed he shall return and come toward the south; but it shall not be as the former, or as the latter."

Interpretation:

• "he shall return and come toward the south": He will leave his base in Syria and return to Mecca in South.
• "but it shall not be as the former, or as the latter.": Implying that things will not be as they used to be and that the unity of the kingdom would be shattered and weakened.

Verse 30:

"Ships of the western coastlands will oppose him, and he will lose heart. Then he will turn back and vent his fury against the holy covenant. He will return and show favor to those who forsake the holy covenant."

Interpretation:

• "Ships of the western coastlands": This phrase refers to the Byzantine navy. The verse describes the end stages of the 'Siege of Constantinople' that took place in 655 CE, when Mu'awiyah was not necessarily defeated but was significantly weakened at sea by the Byzantine emperor. This forced Mu'awiyah to retreat back to his own territory.
• "He will lose heart": Reflects Mu'awiyah’s loss of morale and strategic position, and not a loss per say.
• "Turn back and vent his fury against the holy covenant": After retreating, Mu'awiyah directed his frustrations against the Muslim community, further undermining Islamic unity.
• "Show favor to those who forsake the holy covenant": Mu'awiyah rewarded those who supported his political maneuvers, even if it meant forsaking Islamic principles.

Historical Context and accuracy in my interpretation:

This verse is yet another piece of evidence that supports my interpretation, making it almost irrefutable at this point. It fits too well with the historical context and cannot possibly be referring to anything else.
Battle of the Masts (655 AD): This pivotal naval battle saw Byzantine Emperor Constans II leading a fleet against the Muslim forces off the coast of Lycia. Mu'awiyah's attempts to solidify control over the Mediterranean faced substantial Byzantine opposition, which led to a retreat back to Syria (Wikipedia)​.
Merrill & Baker write:

"The battle was part of the earliest campaign by Mu'awiya, the governor of Syria, to reach Constantinople and is considered to be "the first decisive conflict of Islam on the deep""

Source: Ridpath, John Clark. Ridpath's Ual History, Merrill & Baker, Vol. 12, New York, p. 483.
Shaun O'Sullivan writes:

"The siege was unsuccessful, however, due to a fierce storm that sank the ships with war machines aboard, an event the Romans attributed to divine intervention. The land force led by Muawiyah in Chalcedon, having lost their artillery and siege engines, returned to Syria thereafter."

Source: O'Sullivan, Shaun (2004-01-01). "Sebeos' account of an Arab attack on Constantinople in 654
It is truly remarkable how detailed this prophecy is and how it perfectly aligns with the events of early Islamic history. I have never before encountered a prophecy that has been so thoroughly fulfilled. The verse even specifies that "He will lose heart" rather than stating that he will lose the battle against them, which, according to historical accounts, is precisely what happened. Mu'awiyah's motivation and will to continue waned.

• "Show regard for those who forsake the holy covenant": This portion of the verse provides further evidence that the Mighty king mentioned in verses 3-4 was, in fact, sent by God, as indicated by the reference to the "Holy Covenant." Jewish rabbis, Christian scholars, and translators have attempted to claim that this chapter is about Alexander the Great, Antiochus Magnus, and others, but this verse confidently refutes that interpretation. It is clear that the prophecy pertains to a prophet or messenger of God who brought forth a Holy Covenant, rather than mere ancient kings and rulers. The only individual in history (after the Covenant with the Jews) who brought a Holy Covenant from God was the Prophet Muhammad. The new covenant is the Covenant of Peace, which is the essence of Islam. The Arabic term for Islam, "Sin-Lam-Mim," has "Salam" (Peace) as one of its definitions.

Verse 31:

"And strong ones stand up out of him, and have defiled the sanctuary, the stronghold, and have turned aside the continual [sacrifice], and appointed the desolating abomination."

Interpretation:
This above is from the "Literal Standard Version," and they have added the word [sacrifice] but it is not there in the Hebrew verse. The verse is simply saying:

"(they have) turned aside the continual"

It is a continual/continuity (something done constantly) they turned aside in the sanctuary, i.e. the Kaaba, as you shall now see:

Mu'awiyah the innovator:

A Sunni Imam called Shafi’i quotes from (allegedly) Zuhri in book “al- Um” that he said:

Ibn Hazm writes in the book “al- Mahalli” that: “the Umayyads innovated going late for prayer of Eid, preferring oration to prayer and saying Adhan and Iqamah (declaration of standing for prayer) for prayer of Eid."

Source: al- Mahalli, vol. 5, p. 82.
Mu'awiyah and his deviant supporters "turned aside" the 'îd prayer and preferred the oration (i.e. Khutbah, preaching) so they could brainwash the Muslim community while having them all gathered.

• The definition of the word ''îd":

The word "Eid" comes from the Arabic root ع و د (ʿ-w-d),
Ibn al-A’rabi stated:

"Because it returns every year with renewed joy, the origin of which is the oud."

Source: Al-Barakatī, al-Taʿrīfāt al-Fiqhīya
"Oud" carries the meaning of "to return" and "to recur," and "continuance":

Root: عود
A 1 عَادَ إِلَيْهِ, (S, A, O, TA,) and لَهُ, and فِيهِ, (TA,) aor. ـُ (S, O,) inf. n. عَوْدٌ and عَوْدَــةٌ, (S, O, K, TA,) which latter is also an inf. n. of un., (TA,) and مَعَادٌ, (K, TA,) He, or it, returned to it, (S, A, O, K, * TA,) namely, a thing: (TA:) or, accord. to some, the verb is differently used with فِى and with other preps.: (MF, TA:) [with فى it seems generally to imply some degree of continuance, in addition to the simple meaning of the verb alone:] one says, عاد الكَلْبُ فِى قَيْئِهِ The dog returned to his vomit: (Msb in art. رجع:) and عاد لَهُ بَعْدَ مَا كَانَ أَعْرَضَ عَنْهُ [He returned to it after he had turned away from it]

Source: Arabic-English Lexicon by Edward William Lane (d. 1876)
I am truly at a loss for words. I cannot adequately express my awe and fascination with this entire prophecy. It is simply breathtaking. All I can say is, "Wow!" I am profoundly grateful to God for guiding us to Islam and for urging us to follow the Quran alone, and for protecting us from what verse 4 stated in this Chapter.
Mu'awiyah and his followers introduced numerous innovations, one of which was prioritizing the oration over the prayer during 'Îd. This verse emphasizes this particular innovation because it is of the utmost importance in the eyes of God that we, at the very least, perform the rituals of His religion without neglecting them. It should not be necessary for Him to delineate the etiquettes of these rituals in the Quran for us to collectively remember and perform them in His praise, adoration, and submission. And that such an early Caliph did this to His faith is beyond an abomination.
Let us proceed.
Verse 32:

"He shall seduce with flattery those who violate the covenant, but the people who know their God shall stand firm and take action."

Interpretation:

• "those who violate the covenant,": Supporters and descendants of Mu'awiyah.
• "He shall seduce with flattery": Mu'awiyah’s use of political maneuvering, distributal of booty to gain support.
• "the people who know their God shall stand firm and take action": Refers to those who remain faithful to the covenant, the real Muslims.

Verse 33:

"And those of the people who understand shall instruct many; yet for many days they shall fall by sword and flame, by captivity and plundering."

Verse 34:

"Now when they fall, they shall be aided with a little help; but many shall join with them by intrigue."

Verse 35:

"And some of those of understanding shall fall, to refine them, purify them, and make them white, until the time of the end; because it is still for the appointed time."

Interpretations:

• "Some of those of understanding shall fall": Leaders and scholars facing hardship and possibly executions.
• "To refine them, purify them, and make them white": Trials serving as a purification process.
• "Until the time of the end": These events leading up to a significant conclusion.
• "Because it is still for the appointed time": The final outcome is predetermined and will occur at the designated time.

This section reflects the trials and tribulations faced by leaders and followers who stayed true to their faith, despite facing severe persecution. The interpretation suggests a narrative of enduring faith and eventual vindication aligned with early Islamic history, particularly in the struggles and eventual success of the Umayyad Caliphate and the continued resistance by the descendants of prophet Muhammad.
It is no secret that Muawiyah massacred the Muslims to reach the top. That he unalived scholars who spoke against his actions and his dominion is a given.

Mu'awiyah is portrayed as the "Dajjal":

Verse 36:

“Then the king will do as he pleases, and he will exalt and magnify himself above every god and will speak astonishing things against the God of gods; and he will succeed until the indignation is finished, for that which is decreed will be done.

Interpretation:
He is being described as Sunni Hadiths describe Dajjal.
Do you understand now why I am convinced that the Sunni Hadiths have been transmitted to us by the enemies of God, most likely rabbis and Christian monks? They took notice of this prophecy and manipulated the Sunnis into believing that a "Dajjal" would emerge in the End Times, coinciding with the return of "Jesus" (despite the fact that God has not even mentioned Jesus' return). They deliberately fostered this belief in the return of Jesus and linked it to the appearance of this Dajjal for a specific purpose. Their objective was to prevent Muslims from connecting the dots and realizing that this chapter is, in fact, referring to Mu'awiyah.
There's even Sunni Hadiths saying that the Dajjal would appear in the time of the companions, ironic enough.

He will not regard any Gods, prophet Muhammad or women:

Verse 37:

"He will show no regard for the gods of his ancestors or for the one desired by women, nor will he regard any god, but will exalt himself above them all."

Interpretation:
This verse has been mistranslated by all of them. The Hebrew verse states:

"ועל־אלהי אבתיו לא יבין ועל־חמדת נשים ועל־כל־אלוה לא יבין כי על־כל יתגדל:"

They have rendered "ועל־חמדת נשים" as "The one desired by women" while "חמדת" (HEMDAT) is a proper name in Hebrew, in addition to being a noun (based on context). "Hemdat" (חמדת) is a Hebrew male first name (attestation) that is cognate with Mohammed/Ahmed. They have added the word "by" to make it "by women" while it is not even there in the Hebrew.
"Hemdat" here is of course referring to our prophet. He would not regard any God, not regard our prophet Ahmad/Muhammad, not regard women, and would exalt himself above all, just like the Dajjal is described in Sunni narrations:
The verse is actually literally saying:

"He will show no regard for the gods of his ancestors, Hemdat, women, nor any other god, but will exalt himself above all."

The word נָשִׁ֛ים (nā·šîm) in Hebrew simply means "women" in the plural form. The phrase "Hemdat Nashim" should not be combined, and even if it were, it would not translate to "Desired one by women." Hemdat is to be taken as a proper name in this instance.
This marks the end of part 3, and the remaining portion of this chapter consists of general statements. I am unsure if I will create a part 4, but we shall see.
Thank you for taking the time to read this, and please consider sharing it and liking it. May God bless you.
/ By your brother, Exion.

I'm still learning too, so if I've made any mistakes, just let me know in the comments!
To speak about something happening now, you can use either of the below sentence structures. They come from different dialects of Te Reo Māori. They're both equally understood and mean the same thing:
Kei te + verb + pronoun.
Or
E + verb + ana + pronoun.
..............
Verbs:
Hiahia = want
Haere = go
Kai = eat
Inu = drink
..............
Pronouns:
Ahau = I
Koe = you
..............
Put them together:
Kei te hiahia ahau.
E hiahia ana ahau.
I’m wanting.
..............
Kei te haere ahau.
E haere ana ahau.
I’m going.
..............
Kei te kai koe.
E kai ana koe.
You’re eating.
..............
You can just change the tone a little or add a question mark to make it a question:
Kei te inu koe?
E inu ana koe?
Are you drinking?
..............
From here, we’ll just use ‘kei te’ to make it simple. But the same sentence structures can be used with ‘e… ana…’ as well.
..............
Add on some extra words:
Kei te + verb + pronoun + i + this/these/that/those.
These words with a ‘t’ are singular, without a ‘t’ are plural.
This = tēnei
These = ēnei
That (near someone you’re talking to) = tēnā
Those (near someone you’re talking to) = ēnā
That (away from you and the person you’re talking to) = tērā
Those (away from you and the person you’re talking to) = ērā
..............
Put it together:
Kei te hiahia ahau i tēnei.
I’m wanting this.
Kei te kai koe i tēnā?
Are you eating that?
Kei te inu ahau i ēnā.
I’m drinking those.
..............
Add more to the sentence:
Kei te + verb + pronoun + i + te/ngā + noun.
Te = the (singular)
Ngā = the (plural)
In Te Reo Māori, you don’t add an ‘s’ on the end of a word to make it plural, instead you change the words before it.
Kei te hiahia ahau i te motokā.
I’m wanting the car.
Kei te hiahia koe i ngā kurī?
Are you wanting the dogs?
Kei te kai koe i te kai?
Are you eating the food?
..............
Add some more to the sentence:
Kei te + verb + pronoun + ki te + noun.
Kei te haere ahau ki te kura.
I’m going to the school.
Kei te haere koe ki te whare?
Are you going to the house?
..............
Add some more:
Kei te + verb + pronoun + ki te + verb.
Kei te hiahia ahau ki te kai.
I’m wanting to eat.
Vs
Kei te hiahia ahau i te kai.
I’m wanting the food.
Kei te hiahia koe ki te haere?
Are you wanting to go?
Kei te hiahia ahau ki te inu.
I’m wanting to drink.
..............
Add some more:
Kei te + verb + pronoun + ki te + verb + ki te/ngā + noun.
Kei te hiahia ahau ki te oma ki te kura.
I’m wanting to run to the school.
Kei te hiahia koe ki te hīkoi ki te motokā?
Are you wanting to walk to the car?
Kei te hiahia koe ki te taraiwa ki te toa?
Are you wanting to drive to the store?
..............
Change the tenses – past and future. All that is needed is to change ‘kei te’ to the below words. Everything else stays the same:
Past = kei te -> i
I hiahia ahau ki te haere ki te toa.
I wanted to go to the store.
I kai ahau i tēnei.
I ate this.
Future = kei te -> ka
Ka haere ahau ki te kura.
I will go to the school.
Ka inu koe i tērā?
Will you drink that (away from both you and the one you’re speaking to)?

I've got a situation with my genitives and other case markers. It marks both the object possessed and the possessor. This was fine for simple sentences like "He saw the man's pencil" since objects with less relative agency don't get marked in relation to the verb, you only mark the reverse (so like if the man's pencil was somehow looking at him).
However, clearly there are scenarios where you might need to mark it. Like, "He saw the man's friend", that's two humans so you need a marker to know who is looking at who and they're both going to fall on friend.
Are there any languages that have a double-marked genitive that would end up "competing" with another case? I can see this also conflicting with my instrumental and locative in some situations as well. I also have a noun ending that is a pseudo-plural that could end up stacking with any of these.
I was also going to have my "and" append to the last listed item but it might conflict as well, though, I think "I saw cats.ACC dogs.and" could work just as well for that.
The verbs are not at all agglutinative (fusional/synthetic) so it feels weird to have agglutinative nouns but I am not entirely sure how else. Other than to come up with set of genitive case fusions (Gen-Loc, Gen-Acc, Gen-Instr).