LagosShia:

so how did you know there are differences?

two men made copies of the same books,from the same source and method and one accepts the other's.how does that imply that there is difference?

and how is there not a diffrence? heard of the Ubayy ibn kab's version?

usisky: @Tbaba . Peace.

i really do believe that you doing what u doing out of honorable intentions. We have never had any aquaintance, maybe cos u are new here. I said something here in d past and i will say it again: until the muslims realize that they have been mislead en masse, and decide to make a change to restore islam to its pristine purity- the world will never acknowledge the quran as God's word.
What MAZAJE and others say about islam is the reality as seen today .the muslims invented indefensible tales(lies: hadith & sunnah) and attributed them prophet muhammad.this is what is haunting them today.this is all due to ease of access to information, and am happy to that.

To discuss about the corruption in islam will take months. However, i see that u appear to be a sincere person as opposed to the others i had chats with before. So, i will start by inviting u to consinder the following proposition:
1)visit: www.miracleof19.org , www.masjidtucson , www.submission.org

2)after u have perused through the infos there, then we can have an open discussion.

undoubtedly,there are fabricated or fake hadiths.and there is also true and authentic hadiths.you cannot blame the muslims for the mischief of the unbelievers for clinging to the fake hadiths we muslims do not accept.the hadith books are examined and each individual hadith scrutinized to separate truth from falsehood under he light of the Quran.

i do not think the mischief of the unbelievers should be cause for us muslims to abandon hadiths in the entirety as the "Quranists" or "submitters" have done,if that is the path you are advocating here.

mkmyers45: and how is there not a diffrence? heard of the Ubayy ibn kab's version?

my friend,dont try to be smart here.i dont even want to know who Ubay Ibn Kab (ra) was.i am talking here of the standard copies made by the 3rd sunni caliph usthman and the copy made by the first Shia Imam,Imam Ali (as).you said they have differences.how did you know? Imam Ali (as) who later went on to become the 4th caliph after usthman had no objection to the copies made by usthman.

i am not denying that there are reports by ordinary men in the hadith books that claim that the Quran witnessed differences.but when the claims are examined especially in our modern day in the face of available evidence and facts,non get the chance to dent the image of the Quran as a preserved book,that remains unchanged since its revelation to the Prophet (sa).

i really dont know the desperation of christians in attributing so called versions to the Quran.the muslims of all sects (sunni or shia) have the same Quran in all continents of the world.we see no versions present as the christians have hundreds of versions of the bible.what you referred to as Ubay Ibn Kab's (ra) version was a personal copy of the Quran Ubay had since he was a scribe himself and had memorized the Quran.nontheless,usthman's copies were standardized because the copies made were complete and sent to different lands.

@Mazaje. Peace.

sir, i will foremost want to say that your erudition is unquestionable and i believe u are doing great justice to yourself and ur maker by discarding illogical ideologies. I know u are an atheist, and what u demand is proof. Yes! We all should demand clear proof before accepting anything from fellow fallible humans as ourselves. In fact, the Quran(17:36) states than anyone who accepts any information without clear proof, would have done an injustice to the greatest tool(brain) that we have. In other words, even the quran should not be accepted as God's word without a clear evidence.

mr mazaje, u have consistently clamored for an emperical evidence about God right? I swear by all that u can see and cannot see, i have such an evidence. Emperical, irrefutable and it's physical. The evidence resides in the quran. But u have to wiggle your way past all the foolishness you know as "islam".
mr mazaje, i know u cannot claim to be infallible,hence; i will safely assume u have not all the informations regarding religion as yet. I will provide the proof- but do this one thing if i may beg:

visit: www.miracleof19.org, www.submission.org, www.masjidtucson.org.

all u need to know about the truth that muhammd preached, which is only detailed in the quran u will find there. Take your time. I will use what u are able to gather from there to evaluate your sincerity as regard questing for truth. Peace

usisky: @Tbaba . Peace.

i really do believe that you doing what u doing out of honorable intentions. We have never had any aquaintance, maybe cos u are new here. I said something here in d past and i will say it again: until the muslims realize that they have been mislead en masse, and decide to make a change to restore islam to its pristine purity- the world will never acknowledge the quran as God's word.
What MAZAJE and others say about islam is the reality as seen today .the muslims invented indefensible tales(lies: hadith & sunnah) and attributed them prophet muhammad.this is what is haunting them today.this is all due to ease of access to information, and am happy to that.

To discuss about the corruption in islam will take months. However, i see that u appear to be a sincere person as opposed to the others i had chats with before. So, i will start by inviting u to consinder the following proposition:
1)visit: www.miracleof19.org , www.masjidtucson , www.submission.org

2)after u have perused through the infos there, then we can have an open discussion.

I am not that new here:: you had a discussion with lagosboy a while back. I do not agree with many of your positions. It is my humble opinion that you are the one misled.

This is not the place to address my disagreement with Quranists/submitters; this is for non-muslims to ask questions about Islam.

We can have a detailed discussion sometime.

@Lagoshia - sallam

i understand how u feel about the hadith and sunnah. Rejecting them will create a severe dent on todays islam Right?. But the question still remains; on what basis or authority should anything be accepted as being inspired by God? All the muslims acknowledge that the quran is God's word right? What if i present to u quranic verses which discouraged acceptance of anything outside the quran as a source of religious teaching. Will u still believe the hadith was ever authirized by the prophet? I will give just one verse this will be sufficient. But before then, i will like to affirm the failure of most people to really grasp what a "God" really means. For if they really understood the weight the "God" connotation carries, they wouldn't say waht they say about God. If muhammad were to come back today,he himself will reject the hadith fabrications(25:30-31), For he himself feared the retribution he will incur if he deviated from quran(10:15).

the verse: please, i want u or tbaba to give me the best translation to the best of your knowledge of the following verse: 17:46 . When u have, then we will go further, God willing.

tbaba1234:

We do not make judgement on what part of the other scriptures are from God or not. The Quran confirms what is true about the scripture...anything not mentioned in the Quran could be true or untrue. We place our reliance on the Quran alone.

That is a very biased assumption. . .How can muslims claim that the bible is corrupt when muslims fail to provide the original version. . .That is a very silly claim

It is untrue that only the prophets in the bible have detailed stories; we have the stories of Hud and Salih fairly detailed in the Quran: Particularly salih. The Quran was speaking to an audience and its speech is related to the audience it spoke to; The stories of Jewish prophets were relevant to preaching the message to the audience... If the quran spoke about prophets from Africa or Europe:: That does not resonate with a Jew.

It is VERY true, what do you know about Hud? Which country or region was he sent to and is there any clear and established source out side the koran that corroborates the koranic story about the existence of any Hud? What are the names of his parents, was he married or not? if he was married how many wives did he have? What personal detail can you give about him from the koran compared to say Moses or Abraham?. . .Same goes for Salih

These stories were revealed way before contact with Jews and Half the Rabbis of Medina became Muslims. What does that tell you.

That is the claim of the muslims, there is no evidence for that claim. . .It is ONLY reported. . .We also have reports of a christians that said Mohammed knows nothing and he told Mohammed everything he knows about the koran and even wrote it for him. . .What does that tell you?. . . .

The use of first, second or third persons depends on the discourse.

you must understand that the Quran was not revealed in the form of a document or a book, but rather it was revealed by inspiration to Prophet Mohamed (saws) in the form of discourses over a period of 23 years; which the Noble Prophet (saws) recited and declared verbatim to his listerners.

Thus, in the course of revelation, at times it seems that Allah Subhanah is addressing mankind in the first person, most times it seems the Lord is addressing Prophet Mohamed (saws) as in a conversation or the second person, and at times it seems that the Merciful Lord is speaking in the third person, narrating the Truth of what transpired in the past or what will transpire in the future! All three modes of conversation have been utilized by the All-Knowing, All Wise Lord for his chosen last and final Message, which He revealed as the Book of Guidance to all mankind until the end of time.

Examples of when Allah addresses His slaves in the first person in the Quran:

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 22 Surah Hajj verse 5: O mankind! If ye have a doubt about the Resurrection (consider) that We created you out of dust then out of sperm then out of a leech-like clot then out a morsel of flesh partly formed and partly unformed in order that We may manifest (Our Power) to you; and We cause whom We will to rest in the wombs for an appointed term then do We bring you out as babes then (foster you) that ye may reach your age of full strength; and some of you are called to die and some are sent back to the feeblest old age so that they know nothing after having known (much). And (further) thou seest the earth barren and lifeless but when We pour down rain on it it is stirred (to life) it swells and it puts forth every kind of beautiful growth (in pairs).

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 7 Aaraaf verse 27: O ye children of Adam! Let not the Shaytaan seduce you in the same manner as he got your parents out of the garden stripping them of their raiment to expose their shame: for he and his tribe watch you from a position where ye cannot see them: We made the evil ones friends (only) to those without faith.

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 2 Baqarah verses 47-48:
47 O children of Israel! Call to mind the (special) favor which I bestowed upon You and that I preferred you to all others (for My message).
48 Then guard yourselves against a day when one soul shall not avail another, nor shall intercession be accepted for her, nor shall compensation be taken from her, nor shall anyone be helped (from outside).

Examples of when the Lord addresses the Prophet Mohamed (saws):

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 33 Surah Ahzaab verse 45: O Prophet! Truly We have sent thee as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and a Warner

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 33 Surah Ahzaab verse 28: O Prophet! Say to thy Consorts: "If it be that ye desire the life of this world and its glitter then come! I will provide for your enjoyment and set you free in a handsome manner."

Examples of when the Lord All-Mighty address mankind in the third person:

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 2 Surah Baqarah verse 255: Allah! There is no Allah but He the living the Self-subsisting Eternal. No slumber can seize Him nor sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on earth. Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth? He knoweth what (appeareth to his creatures as) before or after or behind them. Nor shall they compass aught of His knowledge except as He willeth. His throne doth extend over the heavens and the earth and He feeleth no fatigue in guarding and preserving them. For He is the Most High the Supreme (in glory).

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 59 Surah Hashr verses 22-24:
22 Allah is He than whom there is no other god, Who knows (all things) both secret and open; He Most Gracious Most Merciful.
23 Allah is He than whom there is no other god, The Sovereign, The Holy One, The Source of Peace (and Perfection), The Guardian of Faith, The Preserver of Safety, The Exalted in Might, The Irresistible, The Supreme: Glory to Allah! (High is He) above the partners they attribute to Him.
24 He is Allah, The Creator, The Evolver, The Bestower of Forms (or colors). To Him belong the Most Beautiful Names: Whatever is in the heavens and on earth doth declare His Praises and Glory: and He is the Exalted in Might, The Wise.

The All Wise, All Knowing Lord has chosen all kinds of ways to portray His Divine Message to mankind to guide them to the Straight Path; and He best Knows which is the best form of relaying His Diving Message to His slaves. As believers, we are satisfied with Allah being our Lord and with everything He does and Commands, we are satisfied with Islam being our deen, and we are satisfied with the Message He has chosen for our guidance.

The bible is not the word of god because it contains 3rd person narrative but when the 3rd person narrative is shown in the koran, muslims try to dribble their way through. . .In the same koran you find allah swearing in his name. . .There is nothing divine in the koran, it reads like any other human construct and writing. . .There is NOTHING inside it that could not be written by humans who lived at that time. . .There is nothing like allah addressing humans in 1st, 2nd or 3rd persons. . There are just the writers of the koran writing their own stories and claiming divine authorship over what is clearly a human writing. . .

tbaba1234:

We do not make judgement on what part of the other scriptures are from God or not. The Quran confirms what is true about the scripture...anything not mentioned in the Quran could be true or untrue. We place our reliance on the Quran alone.

That is a very biased assumption. . .How can muslims claim that the bible is corrupt when muslims fail to provide the original version. . .That is a very silly claim

It is untrue that only the prophets in the bible have detailed stories; we have the stories of Hud and Salih fairly detailed in the Quran: Particularly salih. The Quran was speaking to an audience and its speech is related to the audience it spoke to; The stories of Jewish prophets were relevant to preaching the message to the audience... If the quran spoke about prophets from Africa or Europe:: That does not resonate with a Jew.

It is VERY true, what do you know about Hud? Which country or region was he sent to and is there any clear and established source out side the koran that corroborates the koranic story about the existence of any Hud? What are the names of his parents, was he married or not? if he was married how many wives did he have? What personal detail can you give about him from the koran compared to say Moses or Abraham?. . .Same goes for Salih

These stories were revealed way before contact with Jews and Half the Rabbis of Medina became Muslims. What does that tell you.

That is the claim of the muslims, there is no evidence for that claim. . .It is ONLY reported. . .We also have reports of a christians that said Mohammed knows nothing and he told Mohammed everything he knows about the koran and even wrote it for him. . .What does that tell you?. . . .

The use of first, second or third persons depends on the discourse.

you must understand that the Quran was not revealed in the form of a document or a book, but rather it was revealed by inspiration to Prophet Mohamed (saws) in the form of discourses over a period of 23 years; which the Noble Prophet (saws) recited and declared verbatim to his listerners.

Thus, in the course of revelation, at times it seems that Allah Subhanah is addressing mankind in the first person, most times it seems the Lord is addressing Prophet Mohamed (saws) as in a conversation or the second person, and at times it seems that the Merciful Lord is speaking in the third person, narrating the Truth of what transpired in the past or what will transpire in the future! All three modes of conversation have been utilized by the All-Knowing, All Wise Lord for his chosen last and final Message, which He revealed as the Book of Guidance to all mankind until the end of time.

Examples of when Allah addresses His slaves in the first person in the Quran:

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 22 Surah Hajj verse 5: O mankind! If ye have a doubt about the Resurrection (consider) that We created you out of dust then out of sperm then out of a leech-like clot then out a morsel of flesh partly formed and partly unformed in order that We may manifest (Our Power) to you; and We cause whom We will to rest in the wombs for an appointed term then do We bring you out as babes then (foster you) that ye may reach your age of full strength; and some of you are called to die and some are sent back to the feeblest old age so that they know nothing after having known (much). And (further) thou seest the earth barren and lifeless but when We pour down rain on it it is stirred (to life) it swells and it puts forth every kind of beautiful growth (in pairs).

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 7 Aaraaf verse 27: O ye children of Adam! Let not the Shaytaan seduce you in the same manner as he got your parents out of the garden stripping them of their raiment to expose their shame: for he and his tribe watch you from a position where ye cannot see them: We made the evil ones friends (only) to those without faith.

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 2 Baqarah verses 47-48:
47 O children of Israel! Call to mind the (special) favor which I bestowed upon You and that I preferred you to all others (for My message).
48 Then guard yourselves against a day when one soul shall not avail another, nor shall intercession be accepted for her, nor shall compensation be taken from her, nor shall anyone be helped (from outside).

Examples of when the Lord addresses the Prophet Mohamed (saws):

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 33 Surah Ahzaab verse 45: O Prophet! Truly We have sent thee as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and a Warner

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 33 Surah Ahzaab verse 28: O Prophet! Say to thy Consorts: "If it be that ye desire the life of this world and its glitter then come! I will provide for your enjoyment and set you free in a handsome manner."

Examples of when the Lord All-Mighty address mankind in the third person:

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 2 Surah Baqarah verse 255: Allah! There is no Allah but He the living the Self-subsisting Eternal. No slumber can seize Him nor sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on earth. Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth? He knoweth what (appeareth to his creatures as) before or after or behind them. Nor shall they compass aught of His knowledge except as He willeth. His throne doth extend over the heavens and the earth and He feeleth no fatigue in guarding and preserving them. For He is the Most High the Supreme (in glory).

Allah Says in the Holy Quran Chapter 59 Surah Hashr verses 22-24:
22 Allah is He than whom there is no other god, Who knows (all things) both secret and open; He Most Gracious Most Merciful.
23 Allah is He than whom there is no other god, The Sovereign, The Holy One, The Source of Peace (and Perfection), The Guardian of Faith, The Preserver of Safety, The Exalted in Might, The Irresistible, The Supreme: Glory to Allah! (High is He) above the partners they attribute to Him.
24 He is Allah, The Creator, The Evolver, The Bestower of Forms (or colors). To Him belong the Most Beautiful Names: Whatever is in the heavens and on earth doth declare His Praises and Glory: and He is the Exalted in Might, The Wise.

The All Wise, All Knowing Lord has chosen all kinds of ways to portray His Divine Message to mankind to guide them to the Straight Path; and He best Knows which is the best form of relaying His Diving Message to His slaves. As believers, we are satisfied with Allah being our Lord and with everything He does and Commands, we are satisfied with Islam being our deen, and we are satisfied with the Message He has chosen for our guidance.

The bible is not the word of god because it contains 3rd person narrative but when the 3rd person narrative is shown in the koran, muslims try to dribble their way through. . .In the same koran you find allah swearing in his name. . .There is nothing divine in the koran, it reads like any other human construct and writing. . .There is NOTHING inside it that could not be written by humans who lived at that time. . .There is nothing like allah addressing humans in 1st, 2nd or 3rd persons. . There are just the writers of the koran writing their own stories and claiming divine authorship over what is clearly a human writing. . .

usisky: @Lagoshia - sallam

i understand how u feel about the hadith and sunnah. Rejecting them will create a severe dent on todays islam Right?. But the question still remains; on what basis or authority should anything be accepted as being inspired by God? All the muslims acknowledge that the quran is God's word right? What if i present to u quranic verses which discouraged acceptance of anything outside the quran as a source of religious teaching. Will u still believe the hadith was ever authirized by the prophet? I will give just one verse this will be sufficient. But before then, i will like to affirm the failure of most people to really grasp what a "God" really means. For if they really understood the weight the "God" connotation carries, they wouldn't say waht they say about God. If muhammad were to come back today,he himself will reject the hadith fabrications(25:30-31), For he himself feared the retribution he will incur if he deviated from quran(10:15).

the verse: please, i want u or tbaba to give me the best translation to the best of your knowledge of the following verse: 17:46 . When u have, then we will go further, God willing.

wassalam!
the first condition to be fulfilled when examining a hadith is that it must not contradict the Quran.

now please go on and show us which verse of the Quran tells us to reject hadith in the entirety.

Holy Quran 17:46
And We have placed over their hearts coverings, lest they understand it, and in their ears deafness. And when you mention your Lord alone in the Qur'an, they turn back in aversion.

LagosShia:

my friend,dont try to be smart here.i dont even want to know who Ubay Ibn Kab (ra) was.i am talking here of the standard copies made by the 3rd sunni caliph usthman and the copy made by the first Shia Imam,Imam Ali (as).you said they have differences.how did you know? Imam Ali (as) who later went on to become the 4th caliph after usthman had no objection to the copies made by usthman.

i am not denying that there are reports by ordinary men in the hadith books that claim that the Quran witnessed differences.but when the claims are examined especially in our modern day in the face of available evidence and facts,non get the chance to dent the image of the Quran as a preserved book,that remains unchanged since its revelation to the Prophet (sa).

So we are to just discarded the claims or the clearly false hadith?

mazaje:

That is a very biased assumption. . .How can muslims claim that the bible is corrupt when muslims fail to provide the original version. . .That is a very silly claim



It is VERY true, what do you know about Hud? Which country or region was he sent to and is there any clear and established source out side the koran that corroborates the koranic story about the existence of any Hud? What are the names of his parents, was he married or not? if he was married how many wives did he have? What personal detail can you give about him from the koran compared to say Moses or Abraham?. . .Same goes for Salih




That is the claim of the muslims, there is no evidence for that claim. . .It is ONLY reported. . .We also have reports of a christians that said Mohammed knows nothing and he told Mohammed everything he knows about the koran and even wrote it for him. . .What does that tell you?. . . .



The bible is not the word of god because it contains 3rd person narrative but when the 3rd person narrative is shown in the koran, muslims try to dribble their way through. . .In the same koran you find allah swearing in his name. . .There is nothing divine in the koran, it reads like any other human construct and writing. . .There is NOTHING inside it that could not be written by humans who lived at that time. . .There is nothing like allah addressing humans in 1st, 2nd or 3rd persons. . There are just the writers of the koran writing their own stories and claiming divine authorship over what is clearly a human writing. . .

please examine the so called 3rd person narratives in the Quran and compare with the 3rd person narratives in the bible.

the difference is simple: the Quran as a whole is one book brought by one man from one source:Allah!whatever is in it he claims to be from that Source and it is with the knowledge of that source.

now when the 3rd party narratives are taken into account,we see that those third parties clearly go against recognizting a bible author to whom a particular bible book is attributed.for instance:take the verse when Moses' age is said to be mentioned after his death.you or anyone cannot claim that that verse was put in their with the foreknowledge of Moses or his permission.in the Quran,all verses are revelations from Allah,and by His permission and knowledge.

@tbaba.

oh my! It appears u've already made up ur mind. That's never good for any healthy discussion. Quranist/submitter right? Have u ever come in contact or related with any "submitter(muslim in arabic)"?. If not, i will be the first. The stage is set, we shall both put our understanding of quran to test by discussing the most basic and fundamental quranic concepts. Game?
PS: please uderstand that my intentions are sincere.

LagosShia: i really dont know the desperation of christians in attributing so called versions to the Quran.the muslims of all sects (sunni or shia) have the same Quran in all continents of the world.we see no versions present as the christians have hundreds of versions of the bible.what you referred to as Ubay Ibn Kab's (ra) version was a personal copy of the Quran Ubay had since he was a scribe himself and had memorized the Quran.nontheless,usthman's copies were standardized because the copies made were complete and sent to different lands.

So before usthman they was no complete copy? how then was there an AVQ?

mkmyers45: So we are to just discarded the claims or the clearly false hadith?

not at all! you can hang them round your neck and even worship the false hadiths!!!

usisky: @Lagoshia - sallam

i understand how u feel about the hadith and sunnah. Rejecting them will create a severe dent on todays islam Right?. But the question still remains; on what basis or authority should anything be accepted as being inspired by God? All the muslims acknowledge that the quran is God's word right? What if i present to u quranic verses which discouraged acceptance of anything outside the quran as a source of religious teaching. Will u still believe the hadith was ever authirized by the prophet? I will give just one verse this will be sufficient. But before then, i will like to affirm the failure of most people to really grasp what a "God" really means. For if they really understood the weight the "God" connotation carries, they wouldn't say waht they say about God. If muhammad were to come back today,he himself will reject the hadith fabrications(25:30-31), For he himself feared the retribution he will incur if he deviated from quran(10:15).

the verse: please, i want u or tbaba to give me the best translation to the best of your knowledge of the following verse: 17:46 . When u have, then we will go further, God willing.

Men, im luving your posts

mkmyers45: So before usthman they was no complete copy? how then was there an AVQ?

mumu,i have a book for instance that contains some surahs of the Quran that i recite often.does that translate to the total absense of a complete Quran with 114 surahs?

@lagoshia
thanks in all sincerity.
u have given ur translation of 17:36. I am uncertain as to whose translation that is. However, i know it's not Ali or Pickhtall cos i have them both. Now, i need tbaba to give me his own translation.
if i may ask, lagoshia- do u know arabic? I want to demonstrate something to both of u,hence my asking.

usisky: @Mazaje. I swear by all that u can see and cannot see, i have such an evidence.

Mr man, guide yourself before you try to guide others, muslims are not meant to swear by anything other than Allah. Any muslim who swears by other than Allah is committing shirk(disbelief).

usisky: @lagoshia
thanks in all sincerity.
u have given ur translation of 17:36. I am uncertain as to whose translation that is. However, i know it's not Ali or Pickhtall cos i have them both. Now, i need tbaba to give me his own translation.
if i may ask, lagoshia- do u know arabic? I want to demonstrate something to both of u,hence my asking.

i know arabic.so please go ahead and demonstrate and also dont forget to show us where in the Quran we are told to reject the hadiths of the Prophet (sa) be it true or false since hadith compilations contain both.

@Usisky: How do you determine the starting time for fasting, if you do reject all hadith, considering that Allah says in the Quran about the time, using black and white threads indicating the time?

Are you going to get 2 very thin or maybe 2 very fat threads as your markers? How about how black and how white the threads, and other variables since you want to ignore the hadith, a thing that indicated how Muhammad [as] the one who Allah revealed His Book to didn't use threads, but something entirely different [some say the top of the mountain while other say its heavenward]?

why swear by all that can be seen and what can not be seen when Allah says do not swear but by Him Alone if you must? Let us guide our fingers and our selves. May Allah overlook all our faults. Amin.

@mkmyers

That u running from thread to thread on the same issue is enough reason to ignore you

mazaje:

That is a very biased assumption. . .How can muslims claim that the bible is corrupt when muslims fail to provide the original version. . .That is a very silly claim

Lol! Erudition man, so a document cannot be labeled corrupt without d original document provided? I wonder if usisky can label such an individual, then what else is left to say? Let's ask mazaje how do christians print their modern where do they get the ORIGINAL copy to print their today's' copy.

mazaje:

It is VERY true, what do you know about Hud? Which country or region was he sent to and is there any clear and established source out side the koran that corroborates the koranic story about the existence of any Hud? What are the names of his parents, was he married or not? if he was married how many wives did he have? What personal detail can you give about him from the koran compared to say Moses or Abraham?. . .Same goes for Salih

Hud and Salih were sent to the arabia penisular, Hud was belived to have been sent to a city known as Aad in the Qur'an but refered to by bendiouns Ubar, in todays Oman . . . Any muslims worth his salt will tell you the Qur'an is a book of signs where Allah reveals tale of ancient civilizations to teach the ummah about his signs and wonders. . .

mazaje:

That is the claim of the muslims, there is no evidence for that claim. . .It is ONLY reported. . .We also have reports of a christians that said Mohammed knows nothing and he told Mohammed everything he knows about the koran and even wrote it for him. . .What does that tell you?. . . .

mazaje:

The bible is not the word of god because it contains 3rd person narrative but when the 3rd person narrative is shown in the koran, muslims try to dribble their way through. . .In the same koran you find allah swearing in his name. . .There is nothing divine in the koran, it reads like any other human construct and writing. . .There is NOTHING inside it that could not be written by humans who lived at that time. . .There is nothing like allah addressing humans in 1st, 2nd or 3rd persons. . There are just the writers of the koran writing their own stories and claiming divine authorship over what is clearly a human writing. . .

Just answer the question on where the christians get their original bible to print the mordern one . . .

@mkmyers

That u running from threrad to thread on the same issue is enough reason to ignore you

mazaje:

That is a very biased assumption. . .How can muslims claim that the bible is corrupt when muslims fail to provide the original version. . .That is a very silly claim

It is VERY true, what do you know about Hud? Which country or region was he sent to and is there any clear and established source out side the koran that corroborates the koranic story about the existence of any Hud? What are the names of his parents, was he married or not? if he was married how many wives did he have? What personal detail can you give about him from the koran compared to say Moses or Abraham?. . .Same goes for Salih

That is the claim of the muslims, there is no evidence for that claim. . .It is ONLY reported. . .We also have reports of a christians that said Mohammed knows nothing and he told Mohammed everything he knows about the koran and even wrote it for him. . .What does that tell you?. . . .

The bible is not the word of god because it contains 3rd person narrative but when the 3rd person narrative is shown in the koran, muslims try to dribble their way through. . .In the same koran you find allah swearing in his name. . .There is nothing divine in the koran, it reads like any other human construct and writing. . .There is NOTHING inside it that could not be written by humans who lived at that time. . .There is nothing like allah addressing humans in 1st, 2nd or 3rd persons. . There are just the writers of the koran writing their own stories and claiming divine authorship over what is clearly a human writing. . .

The bible scholars confirm this claim ::: I do not have to produce an original copy when the history shows many incidents of human corruption of the text. Do a little independent reading from a neutral site or from scholarly christian or Jewish records..... Muslim scholars have their differences but we are all unanimous on the preservation of the Quran. Personally i don't care about the Bible.

The cities of AD and Thamud were well known to the Arabs: Those were the the cities of HUD and Salih::: It was in Arabia... The Quran talks about stories that its audience relate to. The family of HUD , Salih, Jonah, Job and a host of others were not discussed because they added nothing new to the story. The Quran is straight to the point. But we know about them from muslim sources:

Ad was located around eastern yemen/western oman: In the 1980s there was the discovery of what is thought to be Ubar, mentioned in the Qur'an as Iram, which is believed to have been the capital of ʿĀd. The town's ancestor, ʿĀd, is said to have been fourth in generation from Noah, his father being Uz, who was the son of Aram, who was the son of Shem, who was the son of Noah. ( Abdullah Yusuf Ali,The Holy Qur'an: Text, Translation and Commentary,)

Thamud was well known to the Arabs. The oldest known reference to Thamud is a 715 BC inscription of the Assyrian king Sargon II which mentions them as being among the people of eastern and central Arabia subjugated by the Assyrians. (M. Th. Houtsma et al., eds., E.J. Brill's first encyclopaedia of Islam, 1913-1936).

So we know these places existed.

The christian in Medina who used a time machine to teach him all he knew in mecca before migrating. The same reference you use for that hadith tells you that half of the rabbis in medina became muslim.

The 3rd person argument is a very weak one, I already illustrated how each is used depending on the audience.

Does the Quran Require Christians to engage in Redaction Criticism?
https://www.nairaland.com/908665/what-does-quran-say-itself#10542961

James finds it incredible that the Quran would tell Christians to judge by the Gospel if indeed the Gospel is corrupted. The verse he refers to is as follows in the Yusuf Ali translation:

Let the people of the Gospel Judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed they are (no better than) those who rebel. (Quran 5:47)

From this verse James argues as follows:
1. This verse approves of the Gospels as they are;
2. Muhammad who authored the Quran did not know the contents of the Gospels to realize that his own teachings contradict the Gospels; and
3. Muslims now seeing the contradiction between the Quran and the Gospels defend their faith by inventing the doctrine of biblical corruption.

In the first place, however, this verse does not approve of the Gospels as they are. It calls on Christians to judge not ‘by the Gospels’ but ‘by what God has revealed in the Gospel’. There is a difference between Gospel and Gospels. One is singular; the other plural. God taught the Gospel to Jesus, and we may presume that this is the Gospel that Jesus preached. Now in the Bible there are four Gospels which contradict each other on essential points. Obviously God did not reveal such contradictory statements in the Gospels.

Second, it is no secret now, nor was it a secret in the time of the Prophet, that the Gospels teach that Jesus is the Son of God. Yet the Quran says that this is an invented claim matching that of those who disbelieved of old:

The Jews call Uzair a son of Allah and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouths; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the truth! (Quran 9:30)

Hence it is incorrect to say that Muhammad did not realize that the Quran contradicts the Gospels on this point.

Third, Muslims did not need to invent a doctrine of biblical corruption, because the errors in the Bible were already plain for everyone to see. Some early Church Fathers did acknowledge that the Bible contained errors. But later, the doctrine of the infallibility of the Bible became generally accepted after the Quranic revelation was already established. Therefore at the time of the Quranic revelation it was not necessary to go to great lengths to debunk the doctrine. The Quran mostly took a passive stance of merely correcting the narratives that are known from the Bible. On occasion, however, the Quran does make statements about the invention of scripture such as in the verse already cited, and in 2:79:
Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say: "This is from Allah" to traffic with it for a miserable price! Woe to them for what their hands do write and for the gain they make thereby. (Quran 2:79)

Redaction criticism is of course a highly developed aspect of modern Biblical studies. It would seem ridiculous to assert that the Quran was asking Christians in the seventh century to engage in an activity which will not become known until the twentieth century. But this does not mean that people at the time were naïve. Even at the time people could differentiate between what God revealed in the Scripture and what people invented without sanction from God.

At the time people could see that what Jesus preached was in many respects different from the later claims made about him. It was already obvious that the Gospel of John presented a highly developed Christology, for example, that could not be credited to the historical Jesus. People at the time could ask themselves, even if they did not do so before: Is not everything in the Scripture inspired by God? Why would anyone say, “Judge by what God has revealed therein”?

We should recall that at the time the Canon of the Eastern Syriac Christians was still being worked out. For a long time they had accepted only twenty-two of the now twenty-seven books that now make up the New Testament. Hence it would still be fresh in the minds of Christians that the inspiration of Bible is not self-evident, and needs some human judgment to accept or reject certain books.

At the time the Quran did charge believers with the responsibility of verifying news that came to them. Based on this principle Muslims soon developed elaborate measures to sift conflicting claims about what our prophet said, and did. This was their version of Redaction Criticism, even though they did not use this term. There is no reason to suppose that Christians were not capable of doing something similar which would eventually develop into full-blown redaction criticism.

But the fact that the Quran did not require seventh-century Christians to engage in Redaction Criticism with all its modern apparatuses does not mean that the Quran would excuse present-day folks from exercising their mental faculties. The Quran requires us to use our faculty of reason, and God will hold us responsible for that which we are capable. If the tools and thinking were not developed at the time people would not be responsible for applying it, but now that they are available we would be held responsible if we reject their use.

James’ Mention of Bart Ehrman

It is already evident to me from the Biola debate that mention of Bart Ehrman will not help to advance my point with James. In the Seattle Debate, therefore, I did not appeal to Bart Ehrman, proving my case instead either by (a) presenting the actual proof that leads to my conclusions, by ( citing scholars other than Bart Ehrman, or by doing both (a) and ( .

But the fact of Bart Ehrman’s importance in modern discourse on the Bible is also evident from the fact that James himself cannot seem to avoid mentioning him.

Aside from the recognition that this scholar must receive, however, James’ mention of him creates the very distraction I wished to avoid. If I had cited him James would have attacked him. I did not mention him and James is still attacking him while attempting to refute me. Why?

James needs to deal with the scholars whom I did cite in specific reference to Redaction Criticism, such as Scott McKnight, James Dunn, and Raymond Brown. But it seems that he is unable to attack these scholars, and he picks on Ehrman instead. Even if we do not like the man, is it fair to keep criticizing him like this? Moreover, even if this scholar is the worst devil around, how does James’ attack on him disprove my points which I supported with reference to McKnight, Dunn, and Brown whom James evidently does not dare attack in a similar fashion?

James’ Understanding of Redaction Criticism
James expresses the view that Bart Ehrman starts with the assumption that the synoptic Gospels are giving different views of Jesus. He asks why it should be necessary to assume that, whereas a more reasonable hypothesis would be that the various writers were addressing different audiences.

I am sorry to say that this manner of putting the matter does not demonstrate adequate knowledge of Redaction Criticism. The ‘assumption’ that the Gospels give different views of Jesus is not an assumption with which scholars such as Ehrman, McKnight and Dunn begin. Rather, it is the conclusion that comes from a careful examination of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Of course this is now an inherited conclusion from previous generations of scholars who, having conducted such investigations found this conclusion unavoidable.

But even if one starts with the assumption that the writers were addressing different readers, a fair mind will be compelled, on examining the evidence, to conclude, all over again, that Matthew and Luke in using Mark have each in their own way modified the information about Jesus to make him conform to the writer’s own view of Jesus. In our debates I have shown clear evidence of an author modifying the facts of the story about Jesus, such as in the story of Jairus’ daughter. In this particular case James admitted that Matthew has telescoped the story; and I as I have pointed out, this gave Matthew the license to take what one man said and put in into the mouth of another man at a different point in the story.

http://shabirally.co, ne_of_oct23.php

mkmyers45: So before usthman they was no complete copy? how then was there an AVQ?

Haba! Whatever you worship should teach you to be honest, like explained to you in another thread the following:

There really isn't such thing as an AVQ, Uthman r.a did not compile the Qur'an as such but actually standardized the texts of the Qur'an. A copy of the Qur'an existed long b4 the reign of Uthman r.a started. Why did he standardize the text of Qur'an? Well during his reign reports came to him that people in certain parts of the Islamic empire had been reciting the Qur'an differently, hence this was due mainly to the differences in the dialect of the arabs hence this difference led to different recitation, hence Uthman r.a started the process of standardization of the Holy book, this mere involved the addition of vowels symbols to the Qur'an, by vowels I refer to those floating symbols you see when reading the Qur'an, facts are that there was already an Original COPY of the Qur'an and there were numerous individuals that already have memorized the Qur'an. The addition of those vowels can be seen like this imagine u were to read this ' I lk lk a flffy pllw' there could be numerous interpretation of the above but persons well versed in english will interpret it as follows, I look like a fluffy Pillow. Hence the addition of those symbols made clear what those verses mean to a non quraysh reciter of the Qur'an, as the Qur'an was in actual fact revealed in the quraysh dialect. Hence Uthman did not make any AVQ he merely standardize the holy book of Allah, the greatest of revelation; the Qur'an. Hope this clarifies you confusion.

@.....
ok. I swear by God. Are u happy now?

[size=14pt]do we muslims say that the "original bible" was corrupted and do we believe in an "original bible"?[/size]

that is a false assumption christians ask when muslims say that the bible is corrupted or to be more precise "corrupt".

the bible itself is a book.and the book referred to as "bible" is not mentioned once in the Quran.we muslims do not believe in anything called bible.the bible was compiled and is a book of books.we muslims believe in the tawrat (torah) given to Moses (as) and Injil (gospel) given to Jesus.we do not believe all these messages are in one book or must be in one book ( "bible" ) as the "inspired word of God",as the christians believe both the messages of Jesus and Moses (as) and other prophets are found in one book.the bible was compiled by fallible men (the early church fathers).they decided (even through voting) which book to add and which book not to add.the messages of Jesus and Moses (as) and the prophets generally that is found in the bible were transmitted through those around them.the messages were either written by those around the prophets or transmitted orally to others who wrote.

therefore,we can easily see that the bible itself as a book is a corruption of the messages of the prophets since the book was not compiled through divine order or by the prophets themselves.however,since upon examination we see that the bible does contain verses in the various books that are agreeable to muslims and the Quran,we are left to say that the bible does contain divine revelation.for instance,we can find in the bible traces of the injil and tawrat,but the bible itself as a whole is neither tawrat nor injil.or to narrow it down,the old testament contains tawrat but is not "the tawrat";and the new testament contains injil but is not "the injil".the bible as a book is not a revelation but it contains revelations.the books that are written may contain the messages of the prophets and what was transmitted and could also contain falsehood,additions or subtractions (lost messages not recorded) through the hands of fallible men.therefore,i say that the bible itself can be seen as a corruption of the prophetic messages.

to conclude,it is fallcy when a christian asks the muslim to provide him with a so called "original bible".there is no such thing because the bible itself is not believed by muslims to be a revealed or divine book as a whole or having a divine origin.it should be examined bits and pieces for the muslim to know what to accept in the light of the holy Quran and Islam and what not to accept.therefore there is nothing as "original bible".there is "original torah" and that was the message given to Moses (as).upon examining the bible's old testament,the books referred to as torah can be seen to be contradictory and having errors and therefore we can conclude that upon transmission,the message of the torah was corrupted.

also,if we say the bible was corrupted (not only corrupt as in respect to the divine revelations of the prophets),we can also see that even upon what examining was compiled/accepted as "the bible",tampering has occurred.examining the different versions of the bible we see evidence of interpolations and clear tampering as the versions differ from themselves and constantly undergo editing and re-editing.the bible therefore contains the word of God,the word of prophets,the word of scribes and religious authorities and the word of the historian and it is not farfetched if more types are identified.therefore this mixture compiled into one book (of books which themselves are not authentic) makes the bible a corrupt cocktail of messages.

vedaxcool:

Lol! Erudition man, so a document cannot be labeled corrupt without d original document provided? I wonder if usisky can label such an individual, then what else is left to say? Let's ask mazaje how do christians print their modern where do they get the ORIGINAL copy to print their today's' copy.

Muslims claim the bible is corrupted but still use the corrupt bible to validate the koran. . .Where exactly are the corrupted parts in the bible? Where is allah's original version so that we can know the corrupt versions are?. . . .Was it also eaten by a goat under aisha's bed?. . .

Hud and Salih were sent to the arabia penisular, Hud was belived to have been sent to a city known as Aad in the Qur'an but refered to by bendiouns Ubar, in todays Oman . . . Any muslims worth his salt will tell you the Qur'an is a book of signs where Allah reveals tale of ancient civilizations to teach the ummah about his signs and wonders. . .

The FACT still remains, the ONLY prophets that were discussed in details in the koran are the ones found in the bible, was Hud married or not? Who is his father? What about his mother? What are their names?. . .How many kids did he have?. . .Hud was "believed" to be sent to a city known as Aad. . .What exatcly are allah's signs and wonders . . .Mohammed saying that a fly carries diseases in one wing and cure on the other wing?

According to a hadith that muslims consider to be a correct tradition, a christians said Mohammed did not know anything and he wrote the koran for him. . .He was his source of stories. . .

Just answer the question on where the christians get their original bible to print the mordern one . . .

They never claimed that the original ones were corrupted, you are the ones making the claim. . did allah also leave the original bible under aisha's bed to be eaten by a goat? or was it eaten by a camel?. . .

double post. . .

@lagoshia
this is my translation:
[17:46]we place shields around their minds, to prevent them from understanding it, and deafness in their ears. *And when you preach your lord,using the Quran alone*, they run away in aversion.

this is the arabic transliteration of the asterisk part: "wa iza zakarta rabbaka *fil Qur'ani wah'dahu* walaw alaa adbaarihim nufura"

now observe the new asterik i have put in the transliteration. Can u see the difference In translation.
Without even explaining, u should be able to observe the glaring disparity with mine and yours. Who is correct? Thank God for the arabic text. The various tranlators of the quran deliberately distorted several verses of the quran, by false rendition in translation. They had spotted the imminent contradiction between the current islamic practices/belief and what the quran advocates, hence the need for mistranslation. Please mr lagoshia, tell me, in your own words what the asteriked text imply. Be sincere. GOD teaches that:
[56:79] None can grasp it EXEPT THE SINCERE.

@mazaje and Mkmyers

Your questions have been answered; It seems there is a will to argue; when you are losing the argument you result to silly tactics like misquoting people in the case of mkmyers and saying derogatory thing about God as in Mazaje's last post.

You do not have to believe in God to show some respect for what people rever::

This thread is for those who want to know: We can have a discussion on topics outside this medium:


@usisky

you can create a new thread for any discussion: Like i said, this thread is for those who want to know: