do you have a copy of this quran any where in the world.all the copies of the quran existing indefferent part of world are same and one {yeman,china,india,america so any where}which is the same as the uthuman,Then what is the use of your fake video
and the man speaking in german says it is amasingly preserved
I am always amazed when Muslims claim that Arabic is superior to all other languages.
How can you measure this ? simply by number of words, English is by far the richest language... many English expressions (especially in technology/informatics) are not even translated anymore, but simply taken over by other languages....
if it's variety which counts, all languages have many different words in the sectors which are relevant for them
@rzadan so you say... one day, one day, you will know.... its as if you have been dreaming.... when people will be asked, how long did your life last? And they'll answer, "maybe a day or so", for the events of that day, will last long enough for you to feel that LIFE was just a day or less...
at that point the believers were tested and severely shaken. When the hypocrites and people with sickness in their hearts said, "What Allah and His Messenger promised us was mere delusion."(Surat al-Ahzab, 11-12)
ya sure it is this like reading crappy man made hadiths of satan bukhari that he was their at the time of last messenger but his date of birth says other wise
quran is the same
our quran comes from mecca not yemen
this was an Attempt to create some thing like a quran but thy can not do it
1 - the fact that one book happend to have some erased stuff does not mean everything is bad.. (it could be of human error)
2 - if they were seeking truth they would have acknowladged that there r near 10 versions of the same quran in diffrent accents, which explains SOME words having diffrent meanings..
u know i'm not a troll, but when u present material (that is clearly bias) as facts it shows ur integrity (or lack of)
@falcondadas Different accents don't prove that they explain different meanings. The words were the same but their accent was different. For example in British English the word Flower is pronounced differently as compared to the American English. The issue was that non Arabs seeing the different accents of Quran were being confused and making mistakes in "correctly reciting it which changed the meaning of the words". To prevent this fitnah Caliph Usman made the Quraishi Accent the standard
@sipraomer version of Quran. In other words the meanings do not change in reciting the Quran in other accents of Arabic language. However wrongly reciting it will change the meanings which is wrong.
I present the facts from authentic sources. If some how you mis understand my point then it doesn't have to do with my integrity but with your understanding.
"...Allah's Apostle then said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way." Allah" Apostle added, "The Quran has been revealed to be recited in several different ways, so recite of it that which is easier for you.""
Seriously to consider; where do these allegedly reported inconsistencies come from? Was there something like a much richer background from which the Quran was later derived?
"...The Prophet said, "O Hisham, recite!" So he recited in the same way as I heard him recite it before. On that Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way." Then Allah's Apostle said, "Recite, O 'Umar!" So I recited it as he had taught me..."
"...He replied, "Allah's Apostle taught it to me." I said, "You are telling a lie; By Allah! Allah's Apostle taught me (in a different way) this very Surah which I have heard you reciting." So I took him, leading him to Allah's Apostle and said, "O Allah's Apostle! I heard this person reciting Surat-al-Furqan in a way that you did not teach me, and you have taught me Surat-al-Furqan..."
I heard Hisham bin Hakim bin Hizam reciting Surat-al-Furqan during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle, and I listened to his recitation and noticed that he recited it in several ways which Allah's Apostle had not taught me. So I was on the point of attacking him in the prayer, but I waited till he finished his prayer, and then I seized him by the collar and said, "Who taught you this Surah which I have heard you reciting?"..."
"... if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him.""
Seriously to consider, are there "revealed" verses that never made it into the Quran?
1/2
Bukhari 8.82.816:
"'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse,..."
Time's up! haha....earlier you claimed that you know enough Arabic to be able to tell that memorisers of the Qur'an were not reciting properly and were merely babbling mistakes, yet when I asked you a simple question about a simple sentence with 3 simple words in Arabic you can't even give a simple answer. You are nothing but a fraud. It's time for my bed. Good night fraudulent detractor.
One of the claims made by the video is that "individual words" can have up to 30 different meanings because there were no diacritical marks. This is not something new! Muslim scholars have long known this which is why the skeletal text is correctly read with the recitation that is memorised. Even with tashkeel or the vowel points there can be multiple meanings e.g. 51:47 "bi aydin". Literally this can be either bi quwwah or bi yadayn. Both meanings however are still correct!
@sunnimanhaj Why is it that both meanings are acceptable? It is because Ayd in Arabic does literally mean either power or hands. In Arabic 'hands' can be understood metaphorically(isti'arah/majaz) as quwwatun. (Refer to Lisan al-arab, Taj al-'arus etc.)
Yet how do you know what meaning applies to the "revelation"? What if the "revelation" is supposed to be exclusively relating to one meaning only? Obviously this one guy was so enraged that he almost beat the other guy up. Why would he do that if the point of contention was only minor and irrelevant? Of course he wouldnt react that way. It was all about a perceived change of meaning - clearly indicating more "textual" variability.
@Wrath0fKhan We know that both meanings are acceptable as they are related to each other. In Arabic 'hand' is equated with 'power'. So Aydin in 51:47 means both hands and power. What Muslim scholars would have understood is that God has revealed both meanings. That is the amazing nature of the Qur'an. The words can have multiple meanings which is why the Qur'an is described by the scholars as 'al bahr' which is 'wasee' jiddan'.
@Wrath0fKhan No, it is the standard mainstream position to not take certain attributes of God literally. Usually, what is done is that we simply take the words as they are or if necessary then metaphorical(majaz) interpretation is given as I have already mentioned. Both are valid froma religious and linguistic standpoint. Afterall, the Qur'an itself testifies that it has been revealed in Arabic(referring to the language). So within the parameters of the Qur'an ta'weel is feasible.
Shooting yourself in the leg? That is, you cant apply both meanings, yet you claimed you could. (Even not making assumptions about "Allahs Hands" leads to this contradiction.) Bust again.
@Wrath0fKhan "What if the "revelation" is supposed to be exclusively relating to one meaning only?" Who told you that the wahy can have only singular meanings to the words therein? As usual rather than honestly assessing the texts you approach it with a priori presumptions.
"'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse,..."
"if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him.""
What? I said if, not has. And I asked you how you would know. You even dont get that one right.
"a priori presumptions"
Its people like you who are coming with a priori presumptions. You simply presume that these fairy tales are real. I presume that they have to be tested first. The tests are indicating that they are pretty much internally inconsistent and inconsistent with reality, too.
Quran is the most confused and desorganised book ever written. After being a muslim for 56 years I did not find one single good teaching in qouran which was nor known then or have not been said by other religions. I challange any muslim to show me one such and I would repent from apostacy. By the way , in case you dont know , looting , murdering , raping , rading and pedophily are not good teachings so do not bring them forward as an exemple.
I'm sure this diatribe is deemed all too charming by aspiring revisionist of 'Islam', but there are just a couple of things to consider before setting out to change the Muslim world. 1. variant readings, (or rather multiple readings) of the Qur'an have been recognised and commented on by Muslim scholars since the time of the Prophet. (M. Azami, The Hisotry of the Qur'anic Text, p.5). Also...(cont.)
2. Contrary to the commentator of this video “...not even Putin claims to have uncovered differences in the order of verses in his manuscripts.”(ibid.) This doesn't deter the commentator from claiming that “Words had been changed, verses and whole chapters rearranged.” But in Putin's letter to al-Qadi Isma'il al-Aqwa he states:... (cont.)
@CCSF1999 #correction: should read: Puin not Putin as in: "not even Puin claims to have uncovered differences..." or as in "But in Puin's letter to al-Qadi Isma'il..."
“...these Yemeni Qur'anic fragments do not differ from those found in museums and libraries elsewhere, with the exception of details that do not touch the Qur'an itself, but are rather differences in the way words are spelled. This phenomenon is well-known, even in the Qur'an published in Cairo in which is written: Ibrhim vs Ibrhm; Quran vs Qrn; Simahum vs Simhum.”In the oldest Yemeni Qur'anic fragments, for example, the phenomenon of not writing the vowel alif is rather common."(ibid. p.12)
At most, there is warrant to claim that Ch. 26 is followed by Ch. 37. But this is of no consequence, since unlike order of verses, order of chapters doen't affect meaning of the Qur'an.
lol....the absence of tashkeel(diacritical marks) in the earliest authographs of the scribes is nothing new. The fallacy of the orientalist is to assume that the Qur'an's quality of preservation is equivalent to Biblical texts. Unlike the Bible the Qur'an is preserved via memorisation and writing. The memorisation fills in the gaps(absence of diacritical marks) of the words in written manuscripts.
@Wrath0fKhan lol we have them today. Millions of Muslims today have memorised the Qur'an from beginning to end and I know dozens personally at my university. Manuscripts of the Qur'an go back much closer to the time of their source compared to the New Testmanet manuscripts. The earliest surviving material of the NT is p52 which contains few words from four verses of John 18. That's dated to 125 to 150 CE. Most of the others manuscripts date more than 200 years after Jesus. Do you reject the NT?
@Wrath0fKhan More than 20% of the global Muslim population does speak Arabic. That's millions. One does not have to actually know the Arabic language to be able to read and memorise the Qur'an. The Qur'anic memorisers that I mentioned include those who do not know Arabic as a language.There is no doubt that millions of Muslims memorise the Qur'an from beginning to end. If that's possible today with all our modern distractions, logically it would be more possible 1400 years ago.
Again, vast majority of Muslims, more than 3/4th dont even speak Arabic. Those who do are indeed in millions, yet from this simply does not follow there are millions of Muslims who have memorized the Quran. (There is no evidence of this taking place.)
"possible today, logically possible 1400 years ago"
No. Why? Because back then there were no millions of Muslims. Because my original argument is based on traditional Islamic texts showing the likely problems they suffered.
@Wrath0fKhan Yes, there is evidence of this as I have already cited one reference from non-Muslim scholars who have attested that the Qur'an is the most memorised Qur'an. Further more, in most Muslim countries there are annual competitions for memorisers of the Qur'an. In addition, many Islamic universities like al-Azhar make it obligatory for their students to memorise the whole of the Qur'an before being allowed to graduate.
Not a relevant one, since it didnt address my point at all.
"before being allowed to graduate"
Ive seen some of those people, they barely can do so and often many mistakes, barely babbling. Only a small handful can do it properly. Yet all of this has nothing to do with my original argument.
@Wrath0fKhan Do you know Arabic yourself? Can you actually read the Qur'an? I don't know which people you have heard but I have lived in Muslim communities most of my life and had the pleasure of knowing hundreds of Qur'anic memorisers who are not native Arabic speakers and yet they recite the Qur'an better than me and I myself started learning the Qur'an at age 5.
@Wrath0fKhan There are also thousands of schools around the world whose main concern is to assist students to memorise the whole of the Qur'an. One such school is Darul Qur'an in Selangor, Malaysia. Many of the students there are my friends. It is also known historically that the scholars of Islam memorise the Qur'an at a very young age(usually below 10). One of the primary criteria to be a mujtahid in fiqh/shari'ah is to have memorised the Qur'an as stated by Imam al-Suyuti etc.
"There are also thousands of schools ... stated by Imam al-Suyuti"
So what? So there are thousands of people who memorize the Quran. Ive never disputed this claim. Ive disputed the "genesis" of the Quranic text before it was "codified."
None of your references, arguments, etc. addresses my original argument.
@Wrath0fKhan If you concede that there are thousands who have memorised the Qur'an then it is only reasonable to conclude that the Qur'an's mode of preservation is not merely in the written form but through memory.
You still dont get it... Its not "memory" its many "memories." It only becomes a "memory" after "codification". This is the most likely scenario based on the we have.
@Wrath0fKhan No, you are not being consistent with your methodology. You appeal to Bukhari when it suits you, but it is the same Bukhari that narrates the incident of over 70 memorisers of the Qur'an having been slain which became the impetus for compiling the Qur'an(an incident prior to the so called codification process).
@Wrath0fKhan Further more, you like A. Jeffrey rely on all these narrations that mention variant readings which came to you via chains of transmission(asanid) which is the very process that you have discarded earlier. Try to be consistent and perhaps you'll be taken somewhat more seriously.
Not discarded! Not at all! This process only shows us that its not very reliable. And criteria just like the criterion of dissimilarity will serve us here very well.
"consistent"
My approach is very consistent here and makes lot of sense, too.
@Wrath0fKhan In fact, traditionally, it was not only obligatory for scholars to memorise the Qur'an but they were also instructed to memorise books of hadith and books of scholars like the al-umm of imam al-shafi'i. It is common knowledge among students of Islam that in order for a person to be a mujtahid besides memorising the Qur'an he too has to have memorised more than 400 000 narrations as stated by Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal and others.
@Wrath0fKhan Yes, back then there were no millions of Muslims, but its community was larger than any other faith group at its inception. It is narrated from Abu Zar'ah al-Razi that by the time the prophet s.a.w. passed away there were over 120 000 companions.(al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi, fi sharh taqrib al-rawi(3rd ed.), vol. 2, p. 214. Beirut: Darul Kutub)
@Wrath0fKhan The Canadian convert and scholar of Islam Ingrid Mattson has written a book on the Qur'an wherein she includes Reem Osman's complete chain of transmission of her ijaza in Qur'anic memorisation. Reem Osman is today a memoriser of the Qur'an after having sat with scholars of the Qur'an who themselves are memorisers of the Qur'an. Most of my professors are themselves memorisers of the Qur'an. So your assumptions are nothing but your own fairy tales.
@Wrath0fKhan On the contrary, Dr. Ingrid Mattson's bookhas been accepted widely by Western academics as Andrew Rippin says about it, "The author has been entirely successful in accomplishing her aims: she has written an academically based, well documented introduction to the Qur'an which will find wide readership."
@Wrath0fKhan “…it has now almost certainly become the most widely read and memorised book in the world. ...Muslims who memorise its contents in their entirety are given the honourable title al-hafiz.” (Chris Horrie, Peter Chippindale. What is Islam?(1997). London, England: Virgin Publishing Ltd. p. 18)
@Wrath0fKhan Yes, it does. Because you were questioning the ability to memorise by Muslims by saying that most Muslims are non-Arabic speakers which I have proven to be a false argument. Being unable to speak Arabic does not impede the ability of a person to memorise the Qur'an.
Im questioning the claim of some "pristine revelation". After the Quran was codified from a cocktail of multiple ancient texts, recent stories, ect., its rather obvious that it stayed pretty much preserved. And im not disputing that at all. So your whole straw man structure crumbles.
@Wrath0fKhan "After the Quran was codified from a cocktail of multiple ancient texts, recent stories, ect" The borrowing theories have long been abandoned by the vast majority of academia. Wake up and get out of the Christian propaganda of Luxenburg and the lot. "After the Quran was codified from a cocktail of multiple ancient texts, recent stories, ect., its rather obvious that it stayed pretty much preserved". Thank you.
I didnt mention Christianity or Luxember one single time. Its you who keeps bringing those terms in.
"stayed preserved"
Since it was codified. Not before that, as the internal evidence indicates. And thats the key point. And no amount of fallacies, equivocation, distraction will help you here.
@Wrath0fKhan The claim is factual as only a handful of scholars actually believe that Muhammad borrowed stories from previous cultures and civilisations to put together the Qur'an. I have refuted you on your silly claim that Muhammad didn't exist and hardly any serious scholar doubts his sincerity and credibility. Usually, only conservative biased Christians accuse Muhammad of faking his way through.
@Wrath0fKhan No, it is your false belief(based on ignorance) as you yourself have never attended university that most scholars believe that the Qur'an borrows material from previous sources. The borrowing theories are old and altogether refuted by M.M. Azami and others.
@Wrath0fKhan What do you mean by more probable? Do you know what the probability of your existence is? If you ask any qualified mathematician he will tell you that according to probability you shouldn't exist. This is stated by Dr. Lennox in his debate with his atheist colleague at Oxford, Dr. Peter Atkins.
@Wrath0fKhan Simply saying it is plain nonsense does not make it so. According to the theory of probability the universe shouldn't be the way it is. It is more probable that the universe is non-biophilic, but reality opposes the odds. This is common knowledge among cosmologists. Go learn something at college for a change.
"according to the theory of probability the universe shouldnt be the way it is"
What? Who told you that nonsense?
"more probable that the universe in non-biophilic"
What? How would you know that? Can you account for the processes "deciding" this? No, you cant. So you cant make such claims either. You are discrediting yourself again.
"college for a change"
Would do you good, indeed. Start with natural sciences.
He may be a brilliant mathematician, yet he is very "fringe" when the reality check knocks on the door. He has no "operative" explanation for the mechanism in question either, so he cant really claim what he does.
@Wrath0fKhan What exactly did Roger Penrose claim? Let's see if you actually know what you're talking about or you're simply dismissing for the sake of dismissing without actually having firsthand knowledge of what Penrose actually did and said. AND I AM WAITING FOR YOUR RESPONSE TO MY ARABIC QUESTIONS.
That depends what you think of. Is it his claim about the "initial state" of the universe? So what? How does it arise? What is he comparing the initial state to? Was it a one time occasion? Are there many of such? If so how many? If many, how does it change the "probability"?
@Wrath0fKhan Enough of this nonsense...Earlier you claimed that you know enough Arabic to know that whoever that is that you heard were babbling and not reciting properly. Answer my questions that I posed to you in Arabic. You are clearly present at the moment as we are exchanging words rapidly so I will give you 10 minutes to produce a response in Arabic. If you can't then the discussion will end with the conclusion that you're a fraud like Robert Morey.
@Wrath0fKhan Lennox is a crackpot? If he's a crackpot then you must be a complete idiot since he is number one a professor of mathematics at one of the top universities in the world, speaks fluent German, French, Russian and Spanish, and is recognised as a fellow scientist by fundamentalist atheists like Peter Atkins and Dawkins.
@Wrath0fKhan Actually, he did an excellent job debating Atkins and Dawkins. In fact, non-biased observers note that both atheists' positions were demolished as per the question of God's existence.
@Wrath0fKhan Revelation is only less believable than a materialistic proposition if you come with the presumption that God does not exist or that God is an impersonal being that does not actively participate in creation. Neither of which has been proven in our exchange. Once again you come with your a priori presumptions thinking that you have proven something.
Sure... Just like all the material that seems to copy Jewish and Christian scriptures. We know these dont come from "God" but were invented by the people. So what have you. Copying what comes from people and claiming it comes in the form of revelation from Allah. Thats just ridiculous.
@Wrath0fKhan That "seems to copy"? Just because things appear similar that does not necessitate the conclusion that the latter copied from the former. Did you know that Hinduism teaches that God is one? Hinduism predates Christianity by thousands of years. Can you name at least 5 out of countless scholars who have identified the origin of Christianity to Hinduism? No. Just because there are similarities in terminology and ideas that does not mean that one is copied from the other.
Practically it does. Because its the most likely explanation.
"One God"
This is yet another false analogy of yours. Its rather simple to come up with a fairy tale about one "God". Its much harder come up with a similar fairy tale text, where even the verses seem to be copied one to one.
@Wrath0fKhan No, it is only a likely explanation if one has the baggage of presumptions that you have. In order for you to have a valid point you need to first establish your presumptions which you haven't and you can't.
@Wrath0fKhan lol calling them best methods does not make them so. You haven't proven your presumptions yet and so they remain nothing but your mere fantasies.
No... The record of these methods does make them so.
"you havent proven your presumptions"
I dont need to do that. The record of these "presumptions" does it for me. And we can test this approach, too. Even the Quran asks you to. Hadith Qudsi 35 suggests the same. Lets go!
@Wrath0fKhan No, it is not simple to come up with a fairy tale about one God if you're utterly surrounded by polytheism. A novel idea is much harder to come up with than something that complements the norm. It only appears simple to you because you're thinking of our day today wherein monotheism is commonplace which it was not thousands of years ago.
Yes, it is. We "see" this over and over again. And you are missing the point again, because this is not about some general ideas, but rather about about a "copycat job."
@Wrath0fKhan You have admitted that "Its much harder come up with a similar fairy tale text". Be honest and don't change your words later. You have not dared claim that it is impossible. Until and unless you can actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt that replication without plagiarism or borrowing is possible then you have failed in your attempt to disprove the Qur'an.
@Wrath0fKhan No, any reasonable observer will be able to conclude that you have failed and shot yourself in the foot. You were only able to make the modest assessment that it is "very difficult" to make similar stories without actually copying from another. That means that though it is hard it is not impossible. If it is not impossible then to conclude that Muhammad must have copied because it simply looks somewhat similar is ridiculous.
It doesnt have to be impossible at all. Its has to be least likely only. And you have crossed that barrier repeatedly. "You" are not "operative." Thats the point.
@Wrath0fKhan Can you tell me from which culture or book did Muhammad s.a.w. plagiarise the story of the city of Iram(which was only discovered very recently) from?
"being unable to speak Arabic does not impede the ability of a person to memorise the Quran"
You are missing the point again. There were no "millions of people" back then. Maybe a couple hundred, later a couple thousand. Only in current times there are millions of people. About the year 1000 CE the Mediterranean population started even massively to decline, recovering much, much later. As well, only a small "%" of population is able to "do so" (obviously for several reasons).
@Wrath0fKhan No, it is you who is missing the point. I did not claim that millions of people 1400 years ago memorised the Qur'an. Rather I made the logical argument that if people today are able to memorise it despite the demands and distractions of the modern world it is even more easier and commonplace to memorise the Qur'an 1400 years ago when there were less distractions while taking into consideration the deep zeal that they had for Islam.
@Wrath0fKhan The internal Qur'anic and Hadith evidence exposed me? Exposed me how exactly? I have disproven every single weak claim that you have put forward.
@Wrath0fKhan It is an irrefutable fact that there were numerous fuqaha and mujtahideen of the faith whose responsibility was to memorise the Qur'an from beginning to end. If they didn't they would not have been categorised as mujtahideen and fuqaha' as that is the primary criterion to be either one. I have also stated that within traditional circles memorising books of fiqh and hundreds of thousands of ahadith was commonplace.
Rather; it is an irrefutable fact that the internal textual evidence is hinting at serious problems which most likely occurred during the "revelation" of the Quran and that it only became stabilized after codification.
"memorizing common place"
Many texts, many fairy tales, lots of memorizing --- codification process --- Quran --- less variation --- text stabilization, etc.
@Wrath0fKhan Refer to the Adrian Brockett's testimony on the preservation of the Qur'an(Andrew Rippin. Approaches of the History of Interpretation of the Qur’an(1988). Oxford: Clarendon Press)
Even this has nothing to do with my original argument. Nothing at all because no one seriously disputes that the Quran was "preserved" after it was compiled into a "book."
@Wrath0fKhan “Through complex process, the recitations that had been revealed in verses and chapters became over time a book. After the death of the Prophet Muhammad, ‘Ali, his close relative and supporter, worked with others to compile them into a written text. Then twenty years later, during the rule of ‘Uthman, the third Caliph or Successor to Muhammad (after Abu Bakr and ‘Umar but before ‘Ali),
@sunnimanhaj all extant versions were arranged into one ‘standard’ version. This version persists substantially unchanged to the present day.” (Bruce Lawrence. The Qur’an, A Biography(2006). Great Britain: Atlantis Books. p. 6)
I heard Hisham bin Hakim bin Hizam reciting Surat-al-Furqan during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle, and I listened to his recitation and noticed that he recited it in several ways which Allah's Apostle had not taught me. So I was on the point of attacking him in the prayer, but I waited till he finished his prayer, and then I seized him by the collar and said, "Who taught you this Surah which I have heard you reciting?"..."
He replied, "Allah's Apostle taught it to me." I said, "You are telling a lie; By Allah! Allah's Apostle taught me (in a different way) this very Surah which I have heard you reciting." So I took him, leading him to Allah's Apostle and said, "O Allah's Apostle! I heard this person reciting Surat-al-Furqan in a way that you did not teach me, and you have taught me Surat-al-Furqan."
The Prophet said, "O Hisham, recite!" So he recited in the same way as I heard him recite it before. On that Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way." Then Allah's Apostle said, "Recite, O 'Umar!" So I recited it as he had taught me.
Allah's Apostle then said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way." Allah" Apostle added, "The Quran has been revealed to be recited in several different ways, so recite of it that which is easier for you."
@Wrath0fKhan the hadith from Bukhari proves our position. It is well known that the Qur'an is recited in several different ways(10 notable ways). This is due to the fact that there are several different modes(dialects) of speaking Arabic. Even now the different ways of recitations abound. All of these have been fully explained by M.M. Azami in his excellent treatment of the subject in 'The History of the Qur'anic Text'.
@Wrath0fKhan No, the problem is you don't understand Arabic and you do not know the nature of the revelation of the Qur'an. This is an old issue which has been dealt with by both orientalists and Muslim scholars such as M.M. Azami and Mufti Taqi Uthmani. No serious historian can accept it? Is Bernard Lewis a serious historian? What about William Muir? These are orientalist non-Muslim historians and they all agree the Qur'an is generally intact.
@Wrath0fKhan You have also conveniently ignored the fact that I cited a couple of non-Muslim schlars among many who affirm that the Qur'anic text has remained intact since the time of the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.
@Wrath0fKhan There is no solid evidence that the Prophet s.a.w. existed? Is there solid evidence that aristotle existed? Can you name one archeological find dated to within the 1st century of his life to prove his existence? No, you cannot. Yet no historian doubts he existed. Even Michael Cook, Patricia Crone's colleague does not doubt that Muhammad s.a.w. existed and she too has modified her position and accepts without reservation the existence of the man, Muhammad s.a.w.
@Wrath0fKhan The problem with your method of assessment is that you're trying to use 'higher criticism' to discard the Qur'an without taking into consideration the fact that the major method of Quranic preservation is memorisation unlike any other ancient book including the Bible that are solely based on written records.
The problem with your method is that you are a "traditionalist" who adheres to "orthodoxy." This implies you rely on the least credible institutions just like alleged divine revelation. Anything, even space aliens are more likely.
@Wrath0fKhan The problem with your method is that you use extremely liberal means to disqualify the Qur'an. I have proven that the Qur'an is preserved via memorisation and even through writing despite some/or many scribal mistakes which is common even today after the printing press revolution. I have not touched on the validity of divine revelation at all. That's a complete red herring to avoid the issues.
No... Im extremely "conservative." Yet its not "conservative" in the theological sense of meaning, but rather in the "methodological naturalism" meaning.
"scribal mistakes"
I even didnt mention those once. Not a single time.
@Wrath0fKhan Nevertheless it is worth noting even though you didn't mention it as it is one of the things often misunderstood by critics of the Qur'an.
@Wrath0fKhan You can never prove that it is impossible for the Muslims to have passed down the Qur'an completely from one generation to the next successively through memorisation. I have proven that this method is viable and is indeed historically attested.
Of course I cant prove that. All I need to do is to show what the problems are. And these come straight from the tradition. Islam cant be taken seriously anymore.
"I have proven that this method is viable"
No... You only will prove some viability if you could demonstrate some specific "spiritual claims." Otherwise all you most likely have are fairy tales based on some historic background.
@Wrath0fKhan No, you are compounding and conflating the issue of divine revelation or stories of miracles with the issue of Quranic preservation. They are separate issues and both of them you have clearly failed to grasp. I have demonstrated how the Qur'an is preserved and even non-Muslim critics of the Qur'an like William Muir, Bernard Lewis etc. admit that the Qur'an has been meticulously preserved.
@Wrath0fKhan Islam can't be taken seriously anymore? And whose view is that? Name 15 scholars with the necessary qualifications who have said or alluded to this claim you've made. I trust you will be hardpressed to find even 5 names, yet there are virtually thousands of non-Muslim scholars of Islam and they all take Islam seriously even though they don't believe in it.
No Western scholar "is allowed" to prefer "revelation" to "methodological naturalism." Thats because "revelation" is the least "credible institution" (used for deriving useful knowledge).
@Wrath0fKhan That is false. There are thousands of non-naturlistic scholars who prefer revelation. You only have to go to Princeton Theological Seminary, Yale, Cambridge, Oxford etc. to find innumerable western scholars who are ALLOWED to believe in revelation as utilise it to understand their respective religious texts. Is Professor John Lennox a qualified western scholar? He's a top mathematician and he vehemently defends the Christian belief in revelation at Oxford lol.
After the Q was codified it rather becomes stable. No one seriously disputes that. The origin is disputed. The cocktail of ancient and (back then) contemporary texts making it into the Q is rather obvious.
Just imagine how ambiguous thous stories must have been, any one could have read it the way he would wanted. Our minds are extremely unreliable when it comes to stirring information, especially detailed inf. This with the text ambiguity meant that even the Muslim scullers would not have the original meaning! Add to this the fact that before it was written down it was passed along orally, which undermines the credibility of the Qur'an
The Christian belief is not that men were "inspired" by God, but that the scripture was inspired by God. "All scripture is inspired (theopnestos) by God." "Inspired" is a misnomer, however. Theopneustos has no "in" in it. Expired would be more accurate. The expression pictures God breathing out the Word. Obviously to picture men coming out of God's mouth (men being theopneustos) is ridiculous.
The word θεόπνευστος θε-ό-πνευ-στ-ος means God-breathed. θε = God, o = connecting vowel, πνευ = breathe. θεόπνευστος is the word traditionally rendered "inspired." Men are not θεόπνευστος; the scripture is θεόπνευστος. .
do you have a copy of this quran any where in the world.all the copies of the quran existing indefferent part of world are same and one {yeman,china,india,america so any where}which is the same as the uthuman,Then what is the use of your fake video
and the man speaking in german says it is amasingly preserved
6162thruth 1 week ago
why all the fuss ?
Islam is just one of many man-made religions
and not even the best one...
glyyype 2 weeks ago
STOP ISLAM ! JESUS CHRIST FOR EVER !!!!!
2012near 1 month ago
I am always amazed when Muslims claim that Arabic is superior to all other languages.
How can you measure this ? simply by number of words, English is by far the richest language... many English expressions (especially in technology/informatics) are not even translated anymore, but simply taken over by other languages....
if it's variety which counts, all languages have many different words in the sectors which are relevant for them
Inuits for snow, Arabs for camels....
glyyype 1 month ago
Not only the quran is written by a man , but by an evil man.
rzadan 1 month ago
@rzadan so you say... one day, one day, you will know.... its as if you have been dreaming.... when people will be asked, how long did your life last? And they'll answer, "maybe a day or so", for the events of that day, will last long enough for you to feel that LIFE was just a day or less...
MrsRania75 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
at that point the believers were tested and severely shaken. When the hypocrites and people with sickness in their hearts said, "What Allah and His Messenger promised us was mere delusion."(Surat al-Ahzab, 11-12)
crappyhadith1 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
quran is recited 24/7 in mecca mosque if live stream there
day an night
The sole mission of the messenger is to deliver the message (16:35).
our last messenger delivered it simple
The Prophet Muhammad, as a good example, did not accept and follow any other source besides the Quran (5:48-49; 6:114; 10:15).
[56:78] In a protected book.
God revealed the Quran to Muhammad, His messenger and last prophet (27:6)
crappyhadith1 2 months ago
ya sure it is this like reading crappy man made hadiths of satan bukhari that he was their at the time of last messenger but his date of birth says other wise
quran is the same
our quran comes from mecca not yemen
this was an Attempt to create some thing like a quran but thy can not do it
so they gave up
crappyhadith1 2 months ago
1 - the fact that one book happend to have some erased stuff does not mean everything is bad.. (it could be of human error)
2 - if they were seeking truth they would have acknowladged that there r near 10 versions of the same quran in diffrent accents, which explains SOME words having diffrent meanings..
u know i'm not a troll, but when u present material (that is clearly bias) as facts it shows ur integrity (or lack of)
falcondadas 2 months ago
@falcondadas Different accents don't prove that they explain different meanings. The words were the same but their accent was different. For example in British English the word Flower is pronounced differently as compared to the American English. The issue was that non Arabs seeing the different accents of Quran were being confused and making mistakes in "correctly reciting it which changed the meaning of the words". To prevent this fitnah Caliph Usman made the Quraishi Accent the standard
sipraomer 2 months ago
@sipraomer version of Quran. In other words the meanings do not change in reciting the Quran in other accents of Arabic language. However wrongly reciting it will change the meanings which is wrong.
I present the facts from authentic sources. If some how you mis understand my point then it doesn't have to do with my integrity but with your understanding.
sipraomer 2 months ago
4/4
"...Allah's Apostle then said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way." Allah" Apostle added, "The Quran has been revealed to be recited in several different ways, so recite of it that which is easier for you.""
Seriously to consider; where do these allegedly reported inconsistencies come from? Was there something like a much richer background from which the Quran was later derived?
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
3/4
"...The Prophet said, "O Hisham, recite!" So he recited in the same way as I heard him recite it before. On that Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way." Then Allah's Apostle said, "Recite, O 'Umar!" So I recited it as he had taught me..."
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
2/4
"...He replied, "Allah's Apostle taught it to me." I said, "You are telling a lie; By Allah! Allah's Apostle taught me (in a different way) this very Surah which I have heard you reciting." So I took him, leading him to Allah's Apostle and said, "O Allah's Apostle! I heard this person reciting Surat-al-Furqan in a way that you did not teach me, and you have taught me Surat-al-Furqan..."
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
1/4
Bukhari 6.61.561:
"Narrated Umar bin Khattab:
I heard Hisham bin Hakim bin Hizam reciting Surat-al-Furqan during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle, and I listened to his recitation and noticed that he recited it in several ways which Allah's Apostle had not taught me. So I was on the point of attacking him in the prayer, but I waited till he finished his prayer, and then I seized him by the collar and said, "Who taught you this Surah which I have heard you reciting?"..."
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
2/2
"... if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him.""
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
Seriously to consider, are there "revealed" verses that never made it into the Quran?
1/2
Bukhari 8.82.816:
"'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse,..."
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago 2
Time's up! haha....earlier you claimed that you know enough Arabic to be able to tell that memorisers of the Qur'an were not reciting properly and were merely babbling mistakes, yet when I asked you a simple question about a simple sentence with 3 simple words in Arabic you can't even give a simple answer. You are nothing but a fraud. It's time for my bed. Good night fraudulent detractor.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
One of the claims made by the video is that "individual words" can have up to 30 different meanings because there were no diacritical marks. This is not something new! Muslim scholars have long known this which is why the skeletal text is correctly read with the recitation that is memorised. Even with tashkeel or the vowel points there can be multiple meanings e.g. 51:47 "bi aydin". Literally this can be either bi quwwah or bi yadayn. Both meanings however are still correct!
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj Why is it that both meanings are acceptable? It is because Ayd in Arabic does literally mean either power or hands. In Arabic 'hands' can be understood metaphorically(isti'arah/majaz) as quwwatun. (Refer to Lisan al-arab, Taj al-'arus etc.)
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@s
"both meanings however are still correct"
Yet how do you know what meaning applies to the "revelation"? What if the "revelation" is supposed to be exclusively relating to one meaning only? Obviously this one guy was so enraged that he almost beat the other guy up. Why would he do that if the point of contention was only minor and irrelevant? Of course he wouldnt react that way. It was all about a perceived change of meaning - clearly indicating more "textual" variability.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan We know that both meanings are acceptable as they are related to each other. In Arabic 'hand' is equated with 'power'. So Aydin in 51:47 means both hands and power. What Muslim scholars would have understood is that God has revealed both meanings. That is the amazing nature of the Qur'an. The words can have multiple meanings which is why the Qur'an is described by the scholars as 'al bahr' which is 'wasee' jiddan'.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"both meanings"
So your "God" has a "pair of hands" then. Yes? lol
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan No, it is the standard mainstream position to not take certain attributes of God literally. Usually, what is done is that we simply take the words as they are or if necessary then metaphorical(majaz) interpretation is given as I have already mentioned. Both are valid froma religious and linguistic standpoint. Afterall, the Qur'an itself testifies that it has been revealed in Arabic(referring to the language). So within the parameters of the Qur'an ta'weel is feasible.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
Shooting yourself in the leg? That is, you cant apply both meanings, yet you claimed you could. (Even not making assumptions about "Allahs Hands" leads to this contradiction.) Bust again.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan "What if the "revelation" is supposed to be exclusively relating to one meaning only?" Who told you that the wahy can have only singular meanings to the words therein? As usual rather than honestly assessing the texts you approach it with a priori presumptions.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
Here is more "funny dissimilarity":
1/2
Bukhari 8.82.816:
"'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse,..."
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
2/2
"if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him.""
You are bust...
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"Who told you"
What? I said if, not has. And I asked you how you would know. You even dont get that one right.
"a priori presumptions"
Its people like you who are coming with a priori presumptions. You simply presume that these fairy tales are real. I presume that they have to be tested first. The tests are indicating that they are pretty much internally inconsistent and inconsistent with reality, too.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
Quran is the most confused and desorganised book ever written. After being a muslim for 56 years I did not find one single good teaching in qouran which was nor known then or have not been said by other religions. I challange any muslim to show me one such and I would repent from apostacy. By the way , in case you dont know , looting , murdering , raping , rading and pedophily are not good teachings so do not bring them forward as an exemple.
rzadan 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm sure this diatribe is deemed all too charming by aspiring revisionist of 'Islam', but there are just a couple of things to consider before setting out to change the Muslim world. 1. variant readings, (or rather multiple readings) of the Qur'an have been recognised and commented on by Muslim scholars since the time of the Prophet. (M. Azami, The Hisotry of the Qur'anic Text, p.5). Also...(cont.)
CCSF1999 2 months ago
Comment removed
CCSF1999 2 months ago
2. Contrary to the commentator of this video “...not even Putin claims to have uncovered differences in the order of verses in his manuscripts.”(ibid.) This doesn't deter the commentator from claiming that “Words had been changed, verses and whole chapters rearranged.” But in Putin's letter to al-Qadi Isma'il al-Aqwa he states:... (cont.)
CCSF1999 2 months ago
@CCSF1999 #correction: should read: Puin not Putin as in: "not even Puin claims to have uncovered differences..." or as in "But in Puin's letter to al-Qadi Isma'il..."
CCSF1999 2 months ago
“...these Yemeni Qur'anic fragments do not differ from those found in museums and libraries elsewhere, with the exception of details that do not touch the Qur'an itself, but are rather differences in the way words are spelled. This phenomenon is well-known, even in the Qur'an published in Cairo in which is written: Ibrhim vs Ibrhm; Quran vs Qrn; Simahum vs Simhum.”In the oldest Yemeni Qur'anic fragments, for example, the phenomenon of not writing the vowel alif is rather common."(ibid. p.12)
CCSF1999 2 months ago
At most, there is warrant to claim that Ch. 26 is followed by Ch. 37. But this is of no consequence, since unlike order of verses, order of chapters doen't affect meaning of the Qur'an.
CCSF1999 2 months ago
Comment removed
CCSF1999 2 months ago
Comment removed
CCSF1999 2 months ago
Comment removed
CCSF1999 2 months ago
Comment removed
CCSF1999 2 months ago
Does anyone know where I can watch the full documentary this is taken from? Where Tariq Ramadan isn't cut off at the end... Thank you!
reipreston 3 months ago
lol....the absence of tashkeel(diacritical marks) in the earliest authographs of the scribes is nothing new. The fallacy of the orientalist is to assume that the Qur'an's quality of preservation is equivalent to Biblical texts. Unlike the Bible the Qur'an is preserved via memorisation and writing. The memorisation fills in the gaps(absence of diacritical marks) of the words in written manuscripts.
sunnimanhaj 3 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"preserved via memorisation and writing"
Produce the memorization and the writing. Its simple as that.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan lol we have them today. Millions of Muslims today have memorised the Qur'an from beginning to end and I know dozens personally at my university. Manuscripts of the Qur'an go back much closer to the time of their source compared to the New Testmanet manuscripts. The earliest surviving material of the NT is p52 which contains few words from four verses of John 18. That's dated to 125 to 150 CE. Most of the others manuscripts date more than 200 years after Jesus. Do you reject the NT?
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"millions of Muslims today have memorised the Quran"
Vast majority of Muslims (about 3/4ths) dont even speak Arabic.
"compared to the NT manuscripts"
My original argument had nothing to do with NT manuscripts at all. It was entirely based on traditional Muslim texts.
"do you reject the NT"
For the most part, indeed. Thats because none of those "spiritual claims" can be replicated. Same demonstrably applies to Islam.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago 4
@Wrath0fKhan More than 20% of the global Muslim population does speak Arabic. That's millions. One does not have to actually know the Arabic language to be able to read and memorise the Qur'an. The Qur'anic memorisers that I mentioned include those who do not know Arabic as a language.There is no doubt that millions of Muslims memorise the Qur'an from beginning to end. If that's possible today with all our modern distractions, logically it would be more possible 1400 years ago.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@s
Again, vast majority of Muslims, more than 3/4th dont even speak Arabic. Those who do are indeed in millions, yet from this simply does not follow there are millions of Muslims who have memorized the Quran. (There is no evidence of this taking place.)
"possible today, logically possible 1400 years ago"
No. Why? Because back then there were no millions of Muslims. Because my original argument is based on traditional Islamic texts showing the likely problems they suffered.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Yes, there is evidence of this as I have already cited one reference from non-Muslim scholars who have attested that the Qur'an is the most memorised Qur'an. Further more, in most Muslim countries there are annual competitions for memorisers of the Qur'an. In addition, many Islamic universities like al-Azhar make it obligatory for their students to memorise the whole of the Qur'an before being allowed to graduate.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"yes there is evidence"
No, there is not.
"I have already cited one"
Not a relevant one, since it didnt address my point at all.
"before being allowed to graduate"
Ive seen some of those people, they barely can do so and often many mistakes, barely babbling. Only a small handful can do it properly. Yet all of this has nothing to do with my original argument.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Do you know Arabic yourself? Can you actually read the Qur'an? I don't know which people you have heard but I have lived in Muslim communities most of my life and had the pleasure of knowing hundreds of Qur'anic memorisers who are not native Arabic speakers and yet they recite the Qur'an better than me and I myself started learning the Qur'an at age 5.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"do you know Arabic yourself"
I know enough Arabic to tell when one is babbling, being unable to coherently to recite, etc.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan tayyib. ma ma'na hadhihi jumlah?: man jadda wajad
ishrah hadhihi jumlah bil lughatul arabiyyah...tafaddhal
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan There are also thousands of schools around the world whose main concern is to assist students to memorise the whole of the Qur'an. One such school is Darul Qur'an in Selangor, Malaysia. Many of the students there are my friends. It is also known historically that the scholars of Islam memorise the Qur'an at a very young age(usually below 10). One of the primary criteria to be a mujtahid in fiqh/shari'ah is to have memorised the Qur'an as stated by Imam al-Suyuti etc.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"There are also thousands of schools ... stated by Imam al-Suyuti"
So what? So there are thousands of people who memorize the Quran. Ive never disputed this claim. Ive disputed the "genesis" of the Quranic text before it was "codified."
None of your references, arguments, etc. addresses my original argument.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan If you concede that there are thousands who have memorised the Qur'an then it is only reasonable to conclude that the Qur'an's mode of preservation is not merely in the written form but through memory.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"but through memory"
You still dont get it... Its not "memory" its many "memories." It only becomes a "memory" after "codification". This is the most likely scenario based on the we have.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan No, you are not being consistent with your methodology. You appeal to Bukhari when it suits you, but it is the same Bukhari that narrates the incident of over 70 memorisers of the Qur'an having been slain which became the impetus for compiling the Qur'an(an incident prior to the so called codification process).
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"70 memorisers"
This story has again nothing to do with my position. So my "appeal" prevails.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Further more, you like A. Jeffrey rely on all these narrations that mention variant readings which came to you via chains of transmission(asanid) which is the very process that you have discarded earlier. Try to be consistent and perhaps you'll be taken somewhat more seriously.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"process that you have discarded earlier"
Not discarded! Not at all! This process only shows us that its not very reliable. And criteria just like the criterion of dissimilarity will serve us here very well.
"consistent"
My approach is very consistent here and makes lot of sense, too.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan In fact, traditionally, it was not only obligatory for scholars to memorise the Qur'an but they were also instructed to memorise books of hadith and books of scholars like the al-umm of imam al-shafi'i. It is common knowledge among students of Islam that in order for a person to be a mujtahid besides memorising the Qur'an he too has to have memorised more than 400 000 narrations as stated by Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal and others.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Yes, back then there were no millions of Muslims, but its community was larger than any other faith group at its inception. It is narrated from Abu Zar'ah al-Razi that by the time the prophet s.a.w. passed away there were over 120 000 companions.(al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi, fi sharh taqrib al-rawi(3rd ed.), vol. 2, p. 214. Beirut: Darul Kutub)
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan The Canadian convert and scholar of Islam Ingrid Mattson has written a book on the Qur'an wherein she includes Reem Osman's complete chain of transmission of her ijaza in Qur'anic memorisation. Reem Osman is today a memoriser of the Qur'an after having sat with scholars of the Qur'an who themselves are memorisers of the Qur'an. Most of my professors are themselves memorisers of the Qur'an. So your assumptions are nothing but your own fairy tales.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"complete chain of transmission"
No serious historian can accept these claims based on available evidence (and or lack thereof).
"your assumptions are nothing but your own fairy tales"
What assumptions? Everything I said is retrievable in one way or another. You are just denying reality.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan On the contrary, Dr. Ingrid Mattson's bookhas been accepted widely by Western academics as Andrew Rippin says about it, "The author has been entirely successful in accomplishing her aims: she has written an academically based, well documented introduction to the Qur'an which will find wide readership."
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan “…it has now almost certainly become the most widely read and memorised book in the world. ...Muslims who memorise its contents in their entirety are given the honourable title al-hafiz.” (Chris Horrie, Peter Chippindale. What is Islam?(1997). London, England: Virgin Publishing Ltd. p. 18)
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"al-hafiz"
This is well known and has absolutely nothing to do with my original argument which entirely relies on traditional Muslim texts.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Yes, it does. Because you were questioning the ability to memorise by Muslims by saying that most Muslims are non-Arabic speakers which I have proven to be a false argument. Being unable to speak Arabic does not impede the ability of a person to memorise the Qur'an.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"yes it does"
No...
"you were questioning the ability to memorise"
Im questioning the claim of some "pristine revelation". After the Quran was codified from a cocktail of multiple ancient texts, recent stories, ect., its rather obvious that it stayed pretty much preserved. And im not disputing that at all. So your whole straw man structure crumbles.
"proven to be a false argument"
Not at all. Why? Because its a fact.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan "After the Quran was codified from a cocktail of multiple ancient texts, recent stories, ect" The borrowing theories have long been abandoned by the vast majority of academia. Wake up and get out of the Christian propaganda of Luxenburg and the lot. "After the Quran was codified from a cocktail of multiple ancient texts, recent stories, ect., its rather obvious that it stayed pretty much preserved". Thank you.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"abandoned by the vast majority of academia"
This is claim of yours is non-factual.
"Christian propaganda of Luxemberg"
I didnt mention Christianity or Luxember one single time. Its you who keeps bringing those terms in.
"stayed preserved"
Since it was codified. Not before that, as the internal evidence indicates. And thats the key point. And no amount of fallacies, equivocation, distraction will help you here.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Please provide 5 internal evidence that proves whatever point you're trying to prove.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan The claim is factual as only a handful of scholars actually believe that Muhammad borrowed stories from previous cultures and civilisations to put together the Qur'an. I have refuted you on your silly claim that Muhammad didn't exist and hardly any serious scholar doubts his sincerity and credibility. Usually, only conservative biased Christians accuse Muhammad of faking his way through.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
Comment removed
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"only a handful of scholars actually believe"
That is; vast majority of modern "Western" scholars do so. Otherwise they would make fools out of themselves, just as you do out of yourself.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan No, it is your false belief(based on ignorance) as you yourself have never attended university that most scholars believe that the Qur'an borrows material from previous sources. The borrowing theories are old and altogether refuted by M.M. Azami and others.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"based on ignorance"
Indeed. See Hadith Qudsi 35 and experience your ignorance the next morning. Lets add in some frequency, too.
Least credible institution, that is.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"borrows"
Most likely it does, because any other explanation is much more probable than revelation. This simply logically and demonstrably follows.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan What do you mean by more probable? Do you know what the probability of your existence is? If you ask any qualified mathematician he will tell you that according to probability you shouldn't exist. This is stated by Dr. Lennox in his debate with his atheist colleague at Oxford, Dr. Peter Atkins.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"What do you mean by more probable"
Look up some lecture about the Bayes Theorem and learn something.
"according to probability you shouldnt exist"
Thats plain nonsense.
"Lennox"
Lennox is demonstrably a crackpot.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Simply saying it is plain nonsense does not make it so. According to the theory of probability the universe shouldn't be the way it is. It is more probable that the universe is non-biophilic, but reality opposes the odds. This is common knowledge among cosmologists. Go learn something at college for a change.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"according to the theory of probability the universe shouldnt be the way it is"
What? Who told you that nonsense?
"more probable that the universe in non-biophilic"
What? How would you know that? Can you account for the processes "deciding" this? No, you cant. So you cant make such claims either. You are discrediting yourself again.
"college for a change"
Would do you good, indeed. Start with natural sciences.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Who told me that? Roger Penrose did. Is he a crackpot too? haha
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"Roger Penrose did - Is he a crackpot too"
He may be a brilliant mathematician, yet he is very "fringe" when the reality check knocks on the door. He has no "operative" explanation for the mechanism in question either, so he cant really claim what he does.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan What exactly did Roger Penrose claim? Let's see if you actually know what you're talking about or you're simply dismissing for the sake of dismissing without actually having firsthand knowledge of what Penrose actually did and said. AND I AM WAITING FOR YOUR RESPONSE TO MY ARABIC QUESTIONS.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"What exactly did Roger Penrose claim"
That depends what you think of. Is it his claim about the "initial state" of the universe? So what? How does it arise? What is he comparing the initial state to? Was it a one time occasion? Are there many of such? If so how many? If many, how does it change the "probability"?
"waiting"
See HQ 35. Let us test this!
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago 2
@Wrath0fKhan Enough of this nonsense...Earlier you claimed that you know enough Arabic to know that whoever that is that you heard were babbling and not reciting properly. Answer my questions that I posed to you in Arabic. You are clearly present at the moment as we are exchanging words rapidly so I will give you 10 minutes to produce a response in Arabic. If you can't then the discussion will end with the conclusion that you're a fraud like Robert Morey.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"fraud"
See Hadith Qudsi 35.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Lennox is a crackpot? If he's a crackpot then you must be a complete idiot since he is number one a professor of mathematics at one of the top universities in the world, speaks fluent German, French, Russian and Spanish, and is recognised as a fellow scientist by fundamentalist atheists like Peter Atkins and Dawkins.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"Lennox is a crackpot?"
When it comes to revelation, he surely is one.
"speaks fluent German, French..."
And? He still cant demonstrate the validity of revelation. Neither can he demonstrate the existence of his Personal God.
"fellow scientist"
Well, technically he is a mathematician. His "theistic views" are non-demonstrable which is a heavy contradiction by itself.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Actually, he did an excellent job debating Atkins and Dawkins. In fact, non-biased observers note that both atheists' positions were demolished as per the question of God's existence.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"debating"
LOL
"atheists positions were demolished"
LOL
"God" is demonstrable by definition. "God" cant be demonstrated. "God" does not exist.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan you have 4 more minutes to reply to my Arabic questions.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"4 more minutes"
What then? Are you going to die? See HQ 35. Problem solved!
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan tayyib. ma ma'na hadhihi jumlah?: man jadda wajad
ishrah hadhihi jumlah bil lughah al arabiyyah...tafaddhal :D
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Revelation is only less believable than a materialistic proposition if you come with the presumption that God does not exist or that God is an impersonal being that does not actively participate in creation. Neither of which has been proven in our exchange. Once again you come with your a priori presumptions thinking that you have proven something.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"not actively participate in creation"
Since you cant demonstrate this, and "your" position actually claims that it is demonstrable, yet in fact is not, you are bust again.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"borrowed stories"
Sure... Just like all the material that seems to copy Jewish and Christian scriptures. We know these dont come from "God" but were invented by the people. So what have you. Copying what comes from people and claiming it comes in the form of revelation from Allah. Thats just ridiculous.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan That "seems to copy"? Just because things appear similar that does not necessitate the conclusion that the latter copied from the former. Did you know that Hinduism teaches that God is one? Hinduism predates Christianity by thousands of years. Can you name at least 5 out of countless scholars who have identified the origin of Christianity to Hinduism? No. Just because there are similarities in terminology and ideas that does not mean that one is copied from the other.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"does not necessitate"
Practically it does. Because its the most likely explanation.
"One God"
This is yet another false analogy of yours. Its rather simple to come up with a fairy tale about one "God". Its much harder come up with a similar fairy tale text, where even the verses seem to be copied one to one.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan No, it is only a likely explanation if one has the baggage of presumptions that you have. In order for you to have a valid point you need to first establish your presumptions which you haven't and you can't.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"baggage of presumptions"
Your presumptions are baggage. Mine are based on the "best methods" that lead to demonstrable, operative results.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan lol calling them best methods does not make them so. You haven't proven your presumptions yet and so they remain nothing but your mere fantasies.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"calling them best methods does not make them so"
No... The record of these methods does make them so.
"you havent proven your presumptions"
I dont need to do that. The record of these "presumptions" does it for me. And we can test this approach, too. Even the Quran asks you to. Hadith Qudsi 35 suggests the same. Lets go!
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan No, it is not simple to come up with a fairy tale about one God if you're utterly surrounded by polytheism. A novel idea is much harder to come up with than something that complements the norm. It only appears simple to you because you're thinking of our day today wherein monotheism is commonplace which it was not thousands of years ago.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"no simple"
Yes, it is. We "see" this over and over again. And you are missing the point again, because this is not about some general ideas, but rather about about a "copycat job."
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan You have admitted that "Its much harder come up with a similar fairy tale text". Be honest and don't change your words later. You have not dared claim that it is impossible. Until and unless you can actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt that replication without plagiarism or borrowing is possible then you have failed in your attempt to disprove the Qur'an.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"much harder come up with similar"
Of course! Because the "copy cat job" is a much plausible explanation.
"replication without plagiarism or borrowing is possible then"
What? Thats exactly it... Replication with plagiarism, borrowing - copy cat job - you have there. LOL
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan No, any reasonable observer will be able to conclude that you have failed and shot yourself in the foot. You were only able to make the modest assessment that it is "very difficult" to make similar stories without actually copying from another. That means that though it is hard it is not impossible. If it is not impossible then to conclude that Muhammad must have copied because it simply looks somewhat similar is ridiculous.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"not impossible"
It doesnt have to be impossible at all. Its has to be least likely only. And you have crossed that barrier repeatedly. "You" are not "operative." Thats the point.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Which verse in the Qur'an seems to have been copied "ONE TO ONE" from a verse in the Bible? Please provide at least one example.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Wrath0fKhan Can you tell me from which culture or book did Muhammad s.a.w. plagiarise the story of the city of Iram(which was only discovered very recently) from?
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@s
"being unable to speak Arabic does not impede the ability of a person to memorise the Quran"
You are missing the point again. There were no "millions of people" back then. Maybe a couple hundred, later a couple thousand. Only in current times there are millions of people. About the year 1000 CE the Mediterranean population started even massively to decline, recovering much, much later. As well, only a small "%" of population is able to "do so" (obviously for several reasons).
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan No, it is you who is missing the point. I did not claim that millions of people 1400 years ago memorised the Qur'an. Rather I made the logical argument that if people today are able to memorise it despite the demands and distractions of the modern world it is even more easier and commonplace to memorise the Qur'an 1400 years ago when there were less distractions while taking into consideration the deep zeal that they had for Islam.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
That kind of argument cant be uphold anymore. The internal Quranic and Hadith evidence exposed you several times already.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan The internal Qur'anic and Hadith evidence exposed me? Exposed me how exactly? I have disproven every single weak claim that you have put forward.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"exposed me how exactly"
Exposed you as a crackpot who prefers to rely on the least credible "institution."
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan It is an irrefutable fact that there were numerous fuqaha and mujtahideen of the faith whose responsibility was to memorise the Qur'an from beginning to end. If they didn't they would not have been categorised as mujtahideen and fuqaha' as that is the primary criterion to be either one. I have also stated that within traditional circles memorising books of fiqh and hundreds of thousands of ahadith was commonplace.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"irrefutable fact that"
Rather; it is an irrefutable fact that the internal textual evidence is hinting at serious problems which most likely occurred during the "revelation" of the Quran and that it only became stabilized after codification.
"memorizing common place"
Many texts, many fairy tales, lots of memorizing --- codification process --- Quran --- less variation --- text stabilization, etc.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan It is evident that you have never read M. M. Azami's critique on all the miserable third grade contentions that you favour.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"miserable third grade"
Riiiiight... That comes from people who believe that fairy tales are true.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Refer to the Adrian Brockett's testimony on the preservation of the Qur'an(Andrew Rippin. Approaches of the History of Interpretation of the Qur’an(1988). Oxford: Clarendon Press)
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"Adrian Brocketts testimony"
Even this has nothing to do with my original argument. Nothing at all because no one seriously disputes that the Quran was "preserved" after it was compiled into a "book."
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan “Through complex process, the recitations that had been revealed in verses and chapters became over time a book. After the death of the Prophet Muhammad, ‘Ali, his close relative and supporter, worked with others to compile them into a written text. Then twenty years later, during the rule of ‘Uthman, the third Caliph or Successor to Muhammad (after Abu Bakr and ‘Umar but before ‘Ali),
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj all extant versions were arranged into one ‘standard’ version. This version persists substantially unchanged to the present day.” (Bruce Lawrence. The Qur’an, A Biography(2006). Great Britain: Atlantis Books. p. 6)
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sun
1/4
Bukhari 6.61.561:
"Narrated Umar bin Khattab:
I heard Hisham bin Hakim bin Hizam reciting Surat-al-Furqan during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle, and I listened to his recitation and noticed that he recited it in several ways which Allah's Apostle had not taught me. So I was on the point of attacking him in the prayer, but I waited till he finished his prayer, and then I seized him by the collar and said, "Who taught you this Surah which I have heard you reciting?"..."
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
2/4
He replied, "Allah's Apostle taught it to me." I said, "You are telling a lie; By Allah! Allah's Apostle taught me (in a different way) this very Surah which I have heard you reciting." So I took him, leading him to Allah's Apostle and said, "O Allah's Apostle! I heard this person reciting Surat-al-Furqan in a way that you did not teach me, and you have taught me Surat-al-Furqan."
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
3/4
The Prophet said, "O Hisham, recite!" So he recited in the same way as I heard him recite it before. On that Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way." Then Allah's Apostle said, "Recite, O 'Umar!" So I recited it as he had taught me.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
4/4
Allah's Apostle then said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way." Allah" Apostle added, "The Quran has been revealed to be recited in several different ways, so recite of it that which is easier for you."
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan the hadith from Bukhari proves our position. It is well known that the Qur'an is recited in several different ways(10 notable ways). This is due to the fact that there are several different modes(dialects) of speaking Arabic. Even now the different ways of recitations abound. All of these have been fully explained by M.M. Azami in his excellent treatment of the subject in 'The History of the Qur'anic Text'.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"Bukhari proves our position"
On the contrary, it hints at certain problems that were likely there before it came to the codification of the Quran.
"modes (dialects) of speaking Arabic"
This is rather evidence of different texts, not dialects, making it into the "revelation."
"fully explained by MM Azami"
No... No serious historian can accept such traditional, self-justifying babbling.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan No, the problem is you don't understand Arabic and you do not know the nature of the revelation of the Qur'an. This is an old issue which has been dealt with by both orientalists and Muslim scholars such as M.M. Azami and Mufti Taqi Uthmani. No serious historian can accept it? Is Bernard Lewis a serious historian? What about William Muir? These are orientalist non-Muslim historians and they all agree the Qur'an is generally intact.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan You have also conveniently ignored the fact that I cited a couple of non-Muslim schlars among many who affirm that the Qur'anic text has remained intact since the time of the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"ignored fact that I cited"
Your references did not address my point.
"intact since the time of the Prophet Muhammad"
There is no solid evidence for the existence of the Prophet, not to speak of a Quran that remained intact.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan There is no solid evidence that the Prophet s.a.w. existed? Is there solid evidence that aristotle existed? Can you name one archeological find dated to within the 1st century of his life to prove his existence? No, you cannot. Yet no historian doubts he existed. Even Michael Cook, Patricia Crone's colleague does not doubt that Muhammad s.a.w. existed and she too has modified her position and accepts without reservation the existence of the man, Muhammad s.a.w.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan The problem with your method of assessment is that you're trying to use 'higher criticism' to discard the Qur'an without taking into consideration the fact that the major method of Quranic preservation is memorisation unlike any other ancient book including the Bible that are solely based on written records.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"problem with your method"
The problem with your method is that you are a "traditionalist" who adheres to "orthodoxy." This implies you rely on the least credible institutions just like alleged divine revelation. Anything, even space aliens are more likely.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan The problem with your method is that you use extremely liberal means to disqualify the Qur'an. I have proven that the Qur'an is preserved via memorisation and even through writing despite some/or many scribal mistakes which is common even today after the printing press revolution. I have not touched on the validity of divine revelation at all. That's a complete red herring to avoid the issues.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"extremely liberal"
No... Im extremely "conservative." Yet its not "conservative" in the theological sense of meaning, but rather in the "methodological naturalism" meaning.
"scribal mistakes"
I even didnt mention those once. Not a single time.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Nevertheless it is worth noting even though you didn't mention it as it is one of the things often misunderstood by critics of the Qur'an.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan You can never prove that it is impossible for the Muslims to have passed down the Qur'an completely from one generation to the next successively through memorisation. I have proven that this method is viable and is indeed historically attested.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"never prove"
Of course I cant prove that. All I need to do is to show what the problems are. And these come straight from the tradition. Islam cant be taken seriously anymore.
"I have proven that this method is viable"
No... You only will prove some viability if you could demonstrate some specific "spiritual claims." Otherwise all you most likely have are fairy tales based on some historic background.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan No, you are compounding and conflating the issue of divine revelation or stories of miracles with the issue of Quranic preservation. They are separate issues and both of them you have clearly failed to grasp. I have demonstrated how the Qur'an is preserved and even non-Muslim critics of the Qur'an like William Muir, Bernard Lewis etc. admit that the Qur'an has been meticulously preserved.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"conflating the issue"
You still dont get it. There evidently were multiple fairy tale stories based on some historic background. Only some of those made it into the Quran.
"Quran is preserved"
After it was "codified, it remained preserved. No one doubts this.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Islam can't be taken seriously anymore? And whose view is that? Name 15 scholars with the necessary qualifications who have said or alluded to this claim you've made. I trust you will be hardpressed to find even 5 names, yet there are virtually thousands of non-Muslim scholars of Islam and they all take Islam seriously even though they don't believe in it.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"cant be taken seriously anymore?"
Yea...
"scholars"
No Western scholar "is allowed" to prefer "revelation" to "methodological naturalism." Thats because "revelation" is the least "credible institution" (used for deriving useful knowledge).
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan That is false. There are thousands of non-naturlistic scholars who prefer revelation. You only have to go to Princeton Theological Seminary, Yale, Cambridge, Oxford etc. to find innumerable western scholars who are ALLOWED to believe in revelation as utilise it to understand their respective religious texts. Is Professor John Lennox a qualified western scholar? He's a top mathematician and he vehemently defends the Christian belief in revelation at Oxford lol.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"thousands of non-naturlistic scholars who prefer revelation"
That are not "scholars". That are crackpots.
"John Lennox a qualified western scholar"
As a mathematician, yes. As a scholar in "operative revelation"? No. So he is a crackpot, too.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan Clearly, you have never attended tertiary education. That is sad.
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"Quranic preservation"
After the Q was codified it rather becomes stable. No one seriously disputes that. The origin is disputed. The cocktail of ancient and (back then) contemporary texts making it into the Q is rather obvious.
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
@Wrath0fKhan By the way, have you actually read Prof. M. M. Azami's book in which he responds to basically all of Puin's points?
sunnimanhaj 2 months ago
@sunnimanhaj
"recitations that had been revealed"
Doesnt really make sense. It doesnt make sense because revelation is the "least credible institution" a person can rely on.
"Ali and co"
See my original argument (again).
Wrath0fKhan 2 months ago
Just imagine how ambiguous thous stories must have been, any one could have read it the way he would wanted. Our minds are extremely unreliable when it comes to stirring information, especially detailed inf. This with the text ambiguity meant that even the Muslim scullers would not have the original meaning! Add to this the fact that before it was written down it was passed along orally, which undermines the credibility of the Qur'an
tigerclaw1000 3 months ago
propaganda
jacinchr 5 months ago
You can see he is lying , just look at his face haha. Allah gave this bastard such a face, so we can see that he is lying. Allahu Akbar !!!!!!
ShadowmasterGamesmer 5 months ago
in the name in the father the son ! all christians suck my dick ! ALL-LLAHU ekber !
malyboy100 6 months ago
@malyboy100 you're not christian as you'd like us to believe so please get out and shut your mouth
LovemyNokia1 5 months ago
LoL christian shit ! ! fuck christian religion ! ALL-LLAHU ekber !
malyboy100 6 months ago
The Christian belief is not that men were "inspired" by God, but that the scripture was inspired by God. "All scripture is inspired (theopnestos) by God." "Inspired" is a misnomer, however. Theopneustos has no "in" in it. Expired would be more accurate. The expression pictures God breathing out the Word. Obviously to picture men coming out of God's mouth (men being theopneustos) is ridiculous.
Thunkful2 7 months ago
2 Tim 3:16
πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπνευστος = all scripture [is] God-breathed καὶ ὠφέλιμος πρὸς διδασκαλίαν, πρὸς ἐλεγμόν, πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσιν, πρὸς παιδείαν τὴν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ.
θεόπνευστος = theopneustos.
The word θεόπνευστος θε-ό-πνευ-στ-ος means God-breathed. θε = God, o = connecting vowel, πνευ = breathe. θεόπνευστος is the word traditionally rendered "inspired." Men are not θεόπνευστος; the scripture is θεόπνευστος. .
Thunkful2 7 months ago