The 5 versions of the Arabic Koran

@Pilgrim.1


I  taught you would talk on the abrogation from the bible but it seemed you lost there.

Now I read your hypocrisy here. I opened a threrad sometime and asked you qiestions but you ran claiming that it was ferreted from website and I even gave you biblical verses to start but you still avoided my questions but you are jubilating over what you ran away from in another thread.

Lest I forget, you posted some missing verses from Khalifa's Quran, please why have you not been quoting from the same book all these while and it is very glaring that it was a deliberate omission and can you please serve me other translators having the verses missing but  present in others?






Calm down se o ti gbo. You aint see nothing yet and don't run when I give you questions under the pretext of being lifted from website?

Kindly supply me verses missing in some translations but present in others and verses going against each other in the translations




Can you still supply me verses going against each other in the Quran and some missing in some, present in others just I like I did with your bible?


Do you care for a thread on this:



 


Now why was his ministry limited to Jew during his time, telling his disciples not to go to the land of the gentiles and had to tell them later to go to all nations.

Please what do you understand by 'all nations' and note that we have 'all the nations' in some versions. So what do you understand by that phrase?




Quran 2v106: Whatever a verse (revelation) do we abrogate or cause to be forgotten. We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allah is able to do all things.


Qur'an 16 vs 101
"When We substitute one revelation for another,- and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages),- they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not.

Now what do you understand by 'abrogation' with regards to the biblical verses presentd?




Very good, now let us read the bible for clarification:


Jesus said:

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17-19)


The above meant that he didnt come to cancel any law but to fulfil it.

Lets see if really the above statement is true



1.
Abrogation Of Divorce

In the Old Testament we find the following law concerning divorce:

If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, (Deutronomy 24:1-2)

Now without going into the minute of this particular law of divorce, one thing becomes immediately clear. Not only is divorce permitted by God, it is legal for her to remarry.


However in the time of Jesus, the rules of divorce seem to have taken a You-turn.

"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.' But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery. (Matthew 5:31-32)


Here Jesus abrogated the former permission to divorce according to the husband's displeasure and strictly allowed it under one condition - adultery. He even went so far as to legislate that divorcees were not permitted to remarry, clearly abrogating the former permission. But what is the reason given for this abrogation? Had God changed His mind? Is this evidence of God not being omniscient? Or more importantly, is this evidence that in fact God was never the author of these laws?

Let us read further:

Well Jesus himself explains:

"Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?" Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." (Matthew 19:7-9)


2.
Law Of Absolute Justice

In the book of Deteronomy:

Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. (Deutronomy 19:21)

Now God Jesus first commanded them to take life for life etd but had it changed/abrogated/canceled:

"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. (Matthew 5:38-42)


3.
Law Of Oaths

We read:

If you make a vow to the LORD your God, do not be slow to pay it, for the LORD your God will certainly demand it of you and you will be guilty of sin. But if you refrain from making a vow, you will not be guilty. Whatever your lips utter you must be sure to do, because you made your vow freely to the LORD your God with your own mouth. (Deutronomy 23:21-23)


That is, it is permissible to make an oath for various reasons, however, the swearer must fulfil the oath he makes. In Jesus' time it became necessary for him to abrogate this permission so that the swearing of oaths became forbidden. In Matthew it is recorded:


"Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, `Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.' But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God's throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. Simply let your `Yes' be `Yes,' and your `No,' `No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one. (Matthew 5:33-37)


Let me stop there in order to attend to your other write up.





Read the biblical verses I served you up.

Quran 2v106: Whatever a verse (revelation) do we abrogate or cause to be forgotten. We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allah is able to do all things.


Qur'an 16 vs 101
"When We substitute one revelation for another,- and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages),- they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not.






You should learn how to talk those old to be your father first and if you would be civil a little, babs will have a debate with you and not with your lack of moral that you have been displaying all these while.



Sorry for that and please do you have any explanation to another chapter not having Bismillah in the beginning and some chapters having more than one Bismillah?




So do you have any proof for your above allegation and if they were deliberately removed, why are they in other chapters and what is the purpose of their omission?

Thanks




You saw my question and here it is again:

babs for the last time,please don't change the subject.
The authentic hadith I quoted said stoning was revealed,allah's prophet practiced it and his followers after him did.
My question
            Kindly show us that revelation in todays Koran about stoning adultresses.

@babyosis





I am asking you again, if the punishment is still being carried out, on what basis would it have been removed?


 



Read below for clarification:

It is also very strange that ‘Umar remains the only Companion to talk about the stoning verse in a vast majority of books. This fact strongly suggests that for quite sometime the stoning verse and ‘Umar were uniquely tied to each other. Indeed, in one of the traditions it is assumed that ‘Umar was the only one who knew about the stoning verse:


[It is reported by] Ibn Abi Shaybah, concerning al-masahif, from al-Layth bin Sa‘d who said: The first to collect the Qur`an was Abu Bakr and Zayd bin Thabit wrote it. And people came to Zayd bin Thabit (with the portions of the Qur`an) but Zayd did not write anything (in the Qur`an) except with the testimony of two reliable witnesses. The last part of Surah Bara`ah was not found except with Khuzaymah bin Thabit. He said, “Write it, for the Messenger of God had declared the testimony of Khuzaymah equivalent to that of two men.” So he wrote it. And ‘Umar came with the verse of stoning but Zayd would not write it because ‘Umar was alone (in his testimony) (Al-Suyuti as quoted in ‘Awn al-Ma‘bud 3130)


According to this story, in the time of Abu Bakr when the Qur`an was reportedly collected no one knew about the stoning verse or no one remembered it except ‘Umar. This story is absent from all of the nine collections of Hadith covered in the Hadith Encyclopedia and does not even have complete isnad.


Examination of the asanid of ‘Umar’s hadith suggests the approximate time when the hadith was fabricated: As noted above the asanid show that the hadith can be take back with some probability only to the time of ‘Ubayd Allah and Ibn al-Musayyab. Now both of these Successors died in or after 93 and those who transmitted from them -- al-Zuhri, Yahya bin Sa‘id etc -- died in or after 124. ‘Ubayd Allah and Ibn al-Musayyab therefore could not have transmitted the hadith to the third-generation narrators too much earlier than 75. If we allow a couple of decades for the hadith to gain wide enough circulation for ‘Ubayd Allah and Ibn al-Musayyab to start quoting it, then we can date it somewhere between 50-80.


Examination of the contents of the narrations of ‘Umar’s hadith leads to a very significant result which may be stated at that outset: not all narrations of ‘Umar’s hadith talk about a missing Qur`anic verse about stoning. In fact, narrations that do not refer to such a verse have much more varied asanid than those that refer to it. This result is significant because it strongly suggests that ‘Umar’s hadith originally did not talk about the stoning verse.

Are you okay now?

Thanks

I'll return later @ babs,just make sure you're wearing diapers,you may need it

@babs787,


No, there was nothing to talk about any abrogation from the Bible when there were no such abrogations. The Muslim idea of abrogations is a pitiful doctrine as insidious as ever - and that is why Muslims have remained confused themselves while trying to force that idea into the Bible. They can keep their abrogated and abrogating Qur'an till all the verses are abrogated in it - but the message of the Bible has remained ever the same, thank you.


no one has accused me about any hypocrisy - and the fact you keep repeating the same sad remarks only demonstrates your second nature. Your misgivings only derived from the fact that you were always plagiarizing materials from websites until I directly challenged you to desist from the straight-faced habit while lying to the public that they were your own replies!!


I have never run away from any thread - the same as you always duck simple questions offered you with the same excuses as we read about Muhammad. My simple answer to you was that you only dropped your hypocrisy - then we can discuss. Did you ever comply?


Excuse me, WHY have you been using the same dishonest arguement of translation to attack the Bible and now complaining about my referring to Khalifa? Have Muslims not hypocritically been quoting Dr. Rashad Khalifa on the "miracle of 19 in the Qur'an" to prove their hypocristic apologetics?

If you are seeking a geuine discussion, my premise was simple: apply the same rule to your own Qur'an and drop your callous trade.


And what have you said about the simple question of "translations" of the Qur'an? Have you not been basing your argument on "translations" of the Bible in various versions?

@babs787,

When I requested for a simple outline of all the abrogated verses in the Qur'an, this was your answer:


It simply demonstrates that you actually do not know which verses in the Qur'an are abrogated but have been following the wayo apologetics of Muslim scholars who are as confused as to which Quranic verses are actually abrogated.

Meanwhile, in addition of the fact that God never caused any one of His prophets to either FORGET or SUBSTITUTE any verse for another in the Bible, it further goes to demonstrate that the whole Muslim idea of trying to force that idea into the Bible proves the fallacy of Muhammad's claims to be a prophet among the ranks of the Biblical prophets. Directly against your idea of "forgetting" and "substituting" verses for abrogations, Jesus stated clearly that "Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35).

As you try to sort out the dilemma of your "forgotten" and "substituted" verses in the Qur'an, could you be so kind as well to help clarify why this particular verse was cancelled from the Qur'an? Here - the references are referring to the same event:







Please don't fly off the handle or try your hat-trick of evading the simple question. Here again:


Cheers.

@ olabowale, a lot of us are following this thread unbiased, its unnecessary for you to bring in Mr. Nwando.

Please can you and babs stick to the issues raised, i for one thought the Koran was 1 (no versions) and the hadiths i never understood but here osisi and pilgrim have totally torn u guys apart, you guys seem to have nothing to say.

Again i call please stick to the issues raised if there is one version of the Koran prove it, and also the issue of the convenant raised on the other thread you also have not answered David asked what is the convenant and you said nothing i for one wanted to see if there was any similarity

You guys don't show a good grasp of your religion, always copy and pasting discuss in your own languages it will help in understanding for us the less fanatical about superioroty of religions. Pilgrim 1 seems to know more than you guys and shes a christain.

Please stick to the discussion at hand. I beg of u address issues, I really am interested in this debate.

Hi @away4real,


Can you just imagine the silliness of it?


Abeg advise them as much as you can - because this is the very thing that so many people have cautioned these gentlemen endlessly on the Forum: STICK to the issues raised - which they NEVER do!!!



Infact, this is no contest at all - and if anything, it simply demonstrates that Muslims have nothing tangible to present in their vexations.


I thought I was the only one who noticed that.


That's all we saw until the bubble went burst for them!


Well, I never claim any superiority for myself. But one thing I detest in Muslim hypocrisy is to pretend a scholarship that simply do NOT possess just so they could endlessly seek to deride Christianity!


I hope they would comply. . . if they care to.

Cheers.

A goat may have eaten some of the "revelations"

 a slave girl, Barirah, testified (al-Tabari, p.1523), “The only fault I ever found in ‘Ā’ishah is that, when I was kneading my dough and ordered her to watch it, she fell asleep over it, and the pet sheep (or a goat) came and ate it.”

Na by Hazrat Ā’ishah that ayat-e-Rajm and ayat Raza’at were revealed, they were written on something. I kept them under the cart, meanwhile the holy prophet died and we became busy and one GOAT came and ATE those ayyat” (Ibn-e-Maja).   

 

 This is further confirmed Bukhari. Volume 8, Book 82, Number 824:

 Na Ash-Shaibani:  I asked 'Abdullah bin Abi 'Aufa about the Rajam (stoning somebody to death for committing illegal sexual ). He replied, "The Prophet carried out the penalty of Rajam," I asked, "Was that before or after the revelation of Surat-an-Nur?" He replied, "I do not know."

This is even more pathetic.

A mere man standardised the Koran and had all other copies burnt (save the ones lost in memory and those the goat  aka ewure already digested)

 Different Eternal Uncorrupted Koran(s!!!) have been Burned by the Righteous Third Caliph Uthman

   Bukhari: vol. 6, hadith 510, pp. 478-479; book 61 Na Anas bin Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were Waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) , " So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. , "

http://www.sakshitimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=134&Itemid=42

@ olabowale is this debate on the trinity??    , its ok for u to be confused or attempt to ridicule the trinity, but please the debate is on the Koran. Islam this Christainity that, jumpup here shout there, just stick to the debate.

Now back to the issue from what u state the versions are just translations in other languages. I doubt that based on the evidence from osisi.

Enjoy anyway i no get power 4 this una talk, i leave that to osisi and pilgrim and they seem to be doing a good job.

I will watch from the sound lines. Again stick to the debate and stop blowing cold fire, hmm can a fire be cold , well olabowale's fire is cole,  take a chill pill no be fight, make everybody take am easy, tolerance is what i preach, but this nairaland na wah i wonder where people get all d info.

Anyway Jesus is Lord to me and theres no controversy for me oh.

@away4real,


It is now obvious that when Muslims are presented with the straight and simple truth they really do not want to read, then they deliberately try to deflect a topic.

OLABOWALE & co, your efforts to derail the topic of this thread are not working!

@olabowale,


They were not entries - they were rather excuses tirelessly presented to scuttle round the one question that davidylan offered you!


It rather shows that he is an astute observer. If you had imagined that your excuses would wash with the question, it only comes back to demonstrate how dishonest you truly are.


They (so-called keferis) have demonstrate time and again that you guys have no grasp of your own religion before turning outward to smuggle Muhammad into other people's holy books!


Is that why you have been slaving all this while to demonstrate that yours was so unbeneficial - which explains yet again the reason why you so love to derail topics of threads with your endless nothingness?

The message has been repeated several times already - specifically for YOU:

                                      STICK TO THE ISSUE HERE!!!