Strange as it may sound, after every outpouring of prayer, Jesus Christ found his disciples lulled to sleep at their post. Again and again he bewailed:

"What could ye not watch with me for one hour?" — (HOLY BIBLE) Matthew 26:40.

"And again he (Jesus) went away, and prayed, and spoke the same words. And when he returned, he found them sleep again …" — (HOLY BIBLE) Mark 14:39-40.

Poor St. Mark bemoans that the disciples could give no excuse for their lassitude, their somnambulism. He records:

"neither knew they what to answer him", — (HOLY BIBLE) Mark 14:40

However, the most lucid, the most coherent and systematic of all Gospel writers, St. Luke, hazards a guess for this anomaly. He says:

"And when he (Jesus) rose from prayer, and was come to his disciples, he found them sleeping for SORROW."

(HOLY BIBLE) Luke 22:45


UNUSUAL REASONING

St. Luke, though he was never one of the elected Twelve disciples of Christ, holds numerous distinctions according to Christians. Among them, the "most historical", the beloved "physician", etc. As a Physician, his theory of men "SLEEPING FOR SORROW" is unique. Cries and waitings, sobs and sorrows were in abundance from Jerusalem to Gethsemane on the lips of Jesus (pbuh) which would shock and alert to wakefulness any un-ebriated1 person. Why were the "lullabies" of woe, lulling the disciples to slumber? Was their psychological make-up any different from that of twentieth century man? Professors of physiology opine that under shock, stress and fear the adrenal gland secretes a hormone into the bloodstream — nature's own injection — which chases away all sleep. Is it not possible that the disciples of Jesus had eaten too much and drunk too much: remembering that food and drink was all "on the house," 2, i.e. FREE!

CAUGHT NAPPING

The disciples were caught as the Englishman would say with their "pants down".1 Literally they were caught napping. The enemy trod over them roughshod. Only one of the soldiers of Christ had the presence of mind to ask:

". . . Master, shall we smite them with the sword?"

(HOLY BIBLE) Luke 22:49

But before Jesus could attempt a reply, the impetuous Peter struck out with his sword and cut off the right ear of one of the enemy. Jesus had not anticipated Roman soldiers. Realising that the tables were turned against his misconceived strategy, he advises his disciples:

". . . Put up again thy sword into its place; for all they that TAKE THE SWORD shall PERISH WITH THE SWORD."
(HOLY BIBLE) Matthew 26:52

1. "Pants down": a figure of speech, meaning caught in an unguarded moment; unawares.

CHANGE OF STRATEGY

Did Jesus not know the truth of this statement when he ordered his disciples to sell their garments and buy SWORDS? He surely did! Then why the contradiction now? . There is really no contradiction! The situation changes, so the strategy must also change. He had sense enough to realise that against trained and well-equipped Roman soldiers it would be suicidal for his sleepy warriors to offer even a pretence of resistance.


PRINCE OF PEACE

Why do not the Christian controversialists give their "Lord and Master" credit for this simple common-sense? Because they have been programmed for a period of two thousand years that Jesus, the "lamb", the "prince of peace", couldn't harm a fly. They overlook the other side of his nature which demanded blood and fire! They forget his instructions to his soldiers regarding those of his enemies who would not like him to rule over them, to bring them forth:

. . . and SLAY1 them before me."

(HOLY BIBLE) Luke 19:27

"Think NOT that I am come to send PEACE on earth; I. came NOT to send PEACE, but a SWORD."

(HOLY BIBLE) Matthew 10:34

"I am come to send FIRE on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?
Suppose ye that I am come to give PEACE on earth? I tell you, NAY; but rather DIVISION."

(HOLY BIBLE) Luke 12:49 & 51

brother vedaxcool, my Allah, for this above alone open another door of paradise for you to enter, so that you can choose by His Mercy any of the many doors, and close all the gates of hell away from you, never that you enter it. Amin.

Thank you nonpuqeater may ALLAH reward you abundantly for all your efforts in dispelling falsehood. AMIN

I laugh when pple hold guns and use it to shoot themselves with it.

Simple question is yet to be answered by someone claiming to dispel falsehood

toba:

BTW which book is confused?

And this

ttalks:

If the book that you are giving us evidence from is a confused book, that simply means the evidence you are giving us is also
confused.
Therefore, such evidence is unreliable and completely unacceptable. It is null and void! ! !

toba:

I laugh when pple hold guns and use it to shoot themselves with it.

Simple question is yet to be answered by someone claiming to dispel falsehood


And this

VERY GOOD YOU ACCEPT THAT YOUR BIBLE IS CONFUSING, HENCE IT WILL BE UNREASONABLE FOR YOU TO ACCEPT ANY CLAIMS IT CLAIMS

You must be smoking a cheap indian hemp, Where did i say anything about bible being a confusing book?

vedaxcool:

VERY GOOD YOU ACCEPT THAT YOUR BIBLE IS CONFUSING, HENCE IT WILL BE UNREASONABLE FOR YOU TO ACCEPT ANY CLAIMS IT CLAIMS

This is my post

toba:

BTW which book is confused?

u are yet to answer

Vadexcool, Nopuquiter, I must say, with displeasure that I'm impressed with your unrelenting efforts to always ridicule the Christian faith. Call it dialogue or whatever, my question; why are you people so obsessed with the futile effort to beat down Christianity with the reason of authenticating your faith? Do you think that your religion is an alternative to the Christian religion, in which case, if you are able to discredit Christianity by your wit, Christians would abandon Christianity and accept your religion? Do you think most Christians see it that way? Do you think that in order of authenticity, most Christians hold your religion second to theirs among numerous religions to choose from beside Christianity, just in case you are able to finally plant doubt in the minds of shallow rooted Christians destined to perish for lack of knowledge?
Do you value you religion? Will you be happy if its scorned like you do here? Do you think your religious feelings need to be respected by others? Will it make you happy if I bring things up always in your session to discredit your prophet? Will you not mind, considering its an intellectual forum and freedom of speech is necessary for utmost understanding?
Well, Personally speaking, I respect your religion, and to add, so much. I often tell myself "its not necessary afterall" anytime your arrogance here forces me to react in like manner, ie, going into your holy book to bring up embarrassing portions and that is why, most times I don't follow up your replies.
Now, Nopuquiter and Vadexcool, I put it to you guys that your religion has too much holes to leave the entire Christian population panting for breadth picking. If you doubt it, dare me to post those hole continuously in your section like you always come here to do. This is a challenge to you because this is something I would ordinarily not do. This is also an avenue to seek justification from whatever hullabaloo what I would be posting would definitely cause, meaning, let the wrath come upon your heads, that is, if your level of confidence in your assumed fool proof religion would allow you to believe whatever I have to post would even generate any wrath from either God or Man in the first place. I sincerely hope your confidence lets you accept this challenge, without which I would hold my peace and assume that you two are aware of the insufficiency of your religion to be called one, that is if, and only if.
I sincerely wait to hear a decisive answer from either one of you, take note, decisive is the word.

@Toba: It is the Bible that is confused. Otherwise, explain how the speaker and the own identified under this be God:

"And he cried out before he gave up the ghost; 'my God (Elio is the name he mentioned), my God (Again Eloi), why has, forsaken me"?

"And he answered them, "oh Israel, hear this, your Lord is my Lord, and He is One God".

"And he joined them by leading them in prayer to God in heavens" Halo be Thee name"

"And at the garden of Geshamane, he told his associates, followers to keep vigil, and he went deeper into the place, bowing, prostrating his face in prayers, many time throughout the night, praying to God Almighty, crying, weeping, begging, in supplication, not wanting to die".

There are many more. But then how is any of the above not a confusion when you say the speaker, and or the person being spoken about is God, son of God, but not just 100% servant of God? Could he be anything else other than servant? Can God also be servant of Himself?

nopuqeater:

@Toba: It is the Bible that is confused. Otherwise, explain how the speaker and the own identified under this be God:

But u claimed that mohammad was the holy spirit that jesus was referring to in the book of John the bible wasn't confusing then abi?

vedaxcool:

CAUGHT NAPPING

The disciples were caught as the Englishman would say with their "pants down".1 Literally they were caught napping. The enemy trod over them roughshod. Only one of the soldiers of Christ had the presence of mind to ask:

". . . Master, shall we smite them with the sword?"

(HOLY BIBLE) Luke 22:49

But before Jesus could attempt a reply, the impetuous Peter struck out with his sword and cut off the right ear of one of the enemy. Jesus had not anticipated Roman soldiers. Realising that the tables were turned against his misconceived strategy, he advises his disciples:

". . . Put up again thy sword into its place; for all they that TAKE THE SWORD shall PERISH WITH THE SWORD."
(HOLY BIBLE) Matthew 26:52

1. "Pants down": a figure of speech, meaning caught in an unguarded moment; unawares.

CHANGE OF STRATEGY

Did Jesus not know the truth of this statement when he ordered his disciples to sell their garments and buy SWORDS? He surely did! Then why the contradiction now? . There is really no contradiction! The situation changes, so the strategy must also change. He had sense enough to realise that against trained and well-equipped Roman soldiers it would be suicidal for his sleepy warriors to offer even a pretence of resistance.


PRINCE OF PEACE

Why do not the Christian controversialists give their "Lord and Master" credit for this simple common-sense? Because they have been programmed for a period of two thousand years that Jesus, the "lamb", the "prince of peace", couldn't harm a fly. They overlook the other side of his nature which demanded blood and fire! They forget his instructions to his soldiers regarding those of his enemies who would not like him to rule over them, to bring them forth:

. . . and SLAY1 them before me."

(HOLY BIBLE) Luke 19:27

"Think NOT that I am come to send PEACE on earth; I. came NOT to send PEACE, but a SWORD."

(HOLY BIBLE) Matthew 10:34

"I am come to send FIRE on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?
Suppose ye that I am come to give PEACE on earth? I tell you, NAY; but rather DIVISION."

(HOLY BIBLE) Luke 12:49 & 51

Now you speak in the voice of Ahmed Deedat and Zakir Naik. They've been proven wrong long ago so this useless answering you on that, plus, you wouldn't even understand. Still awaiting your reply to my earlier post though.

@The clown: « #72 on: Today at 05:39:48 PM »

Vadexcool, Nopuquiter, I must say, with displeasure that I'm impressed with your unrelenting efforts to always ridicule the Christian faith. Call it dialogue or whatever, my question;

Singular; question. Then he follows with tons of questions.

why are you people so obsessed with the futile effort to beat down Christianity with the reason of authenticating your faith?

No one is obsessed, and trying in futility, to beat down with or other wise to discredit Christainity in order to authnticate Islam. While Islam is already authenticated by its Oneness of your Creator, you have discredited Christianity by your multiple Gods, unles you authentica Hinduism, and others idolatry religions and ways, including the denial of existence of God groups; atheiszm, agnostics, too, then how do you personally authenticate Chritianity?

Do you think that your religion is an alternative to the Christian religion, in which case, if you are able to discredit Christianity by your wit, Christians would abandon Christianity and accept your religion?

Only if all of these are what you apply to Judaism in order to hold Christianity and its trinity above it, with your believe that even the bold "Moses" who spoke to Yahweh, Jehovah the One God Jesus son of Mary says he is a servant of and called Him Eloi, crying, weeping, begging, supplicating to Him, is going to be saved by Jesus, while that Eloi never mentioned that same thing you claimed for Jesus was never in the many many meeting. This is an evidence that you are not telling the truth, while Jesus promised an "another Comforter", who will speak with some voice level that people will hear what he says, correct people of their falsehood against God, Jesus and others, and lead people to complete and true belief, etc. Now how does a ghost speak that you heard him, or anyone hears him, what did he say and what language, and where is the record of anything he said, if you say it is Muhammad that Jesus son of Mary spoke about?

Do you think most Christians see it that way? Do you think that in order of authenticity, most Christians hold your religion second to theirs among numerous religions to choose from beside Christianity, just in case you are able to finally plant doubt in the minds of shallow rooted Christians destined to perish for lack of knowledge?

Is the bold not an indication that even then you discredit Islam and here you are grandstanding about your being not of a one who tries to win soul for "jesus"? Just like a true christian, your lies are very apparent to us who know that God is not a human and he is Unlike us.

Do you value you religion? Will you be happy if its scorned like you do here? Do you think your religious feelings need to be respected by others? Will it make you happy if I bring things up always in your session to discredit your prophet? Will you not mind, considering its an intellectual forum and freedom of speech is necessary for utmost understanding?

As to the bolded, many threads have been opened to discredit, Islam when it is clear that the individual who engaged in it has not done what he did on islamic laid out principles. Muhammad (AS) have been criticized for even marrying, even when no one of his wives (RA) complained, and no one has told any muslim when was the birth of Aisha (RA the one people used to try to tarnish him (AS)) relative to her father's becoming muslim. If Aisha was born before the entry of her household into Islam, she would at least be 13 years old by the time Migration from Makka; now, thats the way to argue, disproving the claims of her being 6 or even 9. Not that it matters.). Further, many have ridicled Islam by calling Allah a moon god, forgetting that he is also the God of all things. Do you feel me, man? so when you complain, look in the mirror, first, and then ask yourself, do i have the right to complain since i mount crusade against islam, even George Bush is still on the path of crusade?

Well, Personally speaking, I respect your religion, and to add, so much. I often tell myself "its not necessary afterall" anytime your arrogance here forces me to react in like manner, ie, going into your holy book to bring up embarrassing portions and that is why, most times I don't follow up your replies.
Now, Nopuquiter and Vadexcool, I put it to you guys that your religion has too much holes to leave the entire Christian population panting for breadth picking. If you doubt it, dare me to post those hole continuously in your section like you always come here to do. This is a challenge to you because this is something I would ordinarily not do.

While I throw my hat in the ring of your challenge, I advise that it be on this section so that even nonmuslims can read them. But we they be the truth like when Jesus said the name of God is Elio Who he jesus worshiped? And while we in Islam will say things that we will want you to defend by logical explanations, we will have the opportunity to alley your misgivings. Every verse of the Quran and every authentic hadith point to God being One, , and what are true Islam.

This is also an avenue to seek justification from whatever hullabaloo what I would be posting would definitely cause, meaning, let the wrath come upon your heads, that is, if your level of confidence in your assumed fool proof religion would allow you to believe whatever I have to post would even generate any wrath from either God or Man in the first place. I sincerely hope your confidence lets you accept this challenge, without which I would hold my peace and assume that you two are aware of the insufficiency of your religion to be called one, that is if, and only if.
I sincerely wait to hear a decisive answer from either one of you, take note, decisive is the word.

While Allah is Sufficient as my and all of believers Protector from all evils, and angers from Man and Genie, I ask Him to give all muslims and I who will respond wisdom to respond to you, in proper measure. If you find truth in our dialogue, Glory of it is all of Allah's.

This thread was opened for the purpose of ridicule. It has progressed to desperation, a rabid attempt to stand ground ( ) and to pass across the desired smattering of insult. In the rush to acheive purpose, OP has shown a marked lack of intelligence. I cannot but remember idiots anytime I read the stuff posted here in an attempt to seem applicable.

FYI, calling Christ names will not reduce Him a jot just as calling muhammad a prophet will not make him one - inside you, there is a nagging voice that sees the contradiction, the real truth and keeps trying to manifest. Kill it a million times, it will resurrect and again state truth. That is evidenced by the desperation, the anger, the tendency to violence and the desire for ignorance. It is fear that all your past years were a waste.

Well, OP dude, they were! What will you do about it - waste the ones up ahead as well?

« »


!

^^thats y Nigeria may never move forward.Nigerians are worse.Imagine its the islamic nuissance that look for trouble&yet cry foul. The xtians receives bashing from all sides(atheist,muslims,pagan deists etc) yet they live with it, unlike the muslims
ajoguegbe opened a thread on mohammad.firstly mukina2 moved it to islamic section&subsequently the thread was locked. This pathetic islamic pigs didnt see anything wrong with that.Here they are having free time to incite&look for trouble. May thunder strike them down.

^^Toba's paganizm raises its ugly head, talking about thunder (Ara; damn, toba, you are abosango?).

Why not Jesus instead of thunder?

Well Muslims can many things, but being PIGS is not one of them.


lol.

nopuqeater:

It is interesting to know that Abdullah bin Mas'ud who memorized the whole Quran was alive.

^Thank God, that this is a public forum, where Muslims who have hitherto been kept in the dark about the truth of their religion will have access to the truth for themselves. Do you think you are discussing with one of your people who has little knowledge about the origin of the qur'an or hadiths and can be lied to repeatedly?

Answer this questions:
#1. Why was bin Masud ordered to surrender the compilation of suras in his possession at the time of the compilation of the qur'an?
#2. Why was he beaten up when he refused to comply?

But of course, you will only come back here with insults rather than give straight answers to this two questions above.

@Aletheia; « #81 on: Today at 02:43:07 AM »

Quote from: nopuqeater on August 09, 2010, 09:18 PM
It is interesting to know that Abdullah bin Mas'ud who memorized the whole Quran was alive.
^Thank God, that this is a public forum, where Muslims who have hitherto been kept in the dark about the truth of their religion will have access to the truth for themselves. Do you think you are discussing with one of your people who has little knowledge about the origin of the qur'an or hadiths and can be lied to repeatedly?[/qute]am sure the scholar of islam. and when you found it unworthy, you moved to trinity.

Answer this questions:
#1. Why was bin Masud ordered to surrender the compilation of suras in his possession at the time of the compilation of the qur'an?

everyone, including Ali bin Abitalib [ra] was ordered to surrender the portions, or compilation that he/she had. everyone did voluntarily, and whosoever didnt had gone against the good of the community. reason for asking for the compilation from everyone, is to make sure that letter, word, sentence, phrase, chapter, section acts as the guaranty for one another being correct. The security of getting the correct Quran was not just by collecting a few compilations, but from the least to the most of compilations and recitations of each verse, chapters, by more than enough people, that accents and individual pronounciation were verified. I think you need to remember that, just like today, Quran was in use daily, in the lives of the Muslims, at least in the observations of daily salah.

When the Quran was being compiled under the Kalifah of Rasululah, Abu Bakr (RA), nothing else was entered into Quran, not commentaries (Tafsir) or Hadith. Maybe you should learn that from the Shi'a even as they differ from the larger Sunni, the Quran is still universally used by all.

#2. Why was he beaten up when he refused to comply?

Whatever the reason for beaten him, the normally meek Abu Bakr (RA) mounted an offensive against a group of muslims who refused to pay their Zakat. They claimed that Zakat was gone with the death of the Messenger (AS). Abu Bakr declared that they had became enemies who have declared War against Islam, and the proper response was to meet them in battlefield.

Many of them were killed, until the rest began to observe their duty to Allah under the Kalifah of Abu Bakr and the death of the Prophet (AS) is not a reason to stop paying Zakat. It would have also lead to people believing it is okay to say one is a muslim, but rejects any and all of the tenets of Islam. The killing of on the path of war apostates is more profound than beating up a man who refused to produce the Quran compilation that he has, of Quran, a devine document that the very "Zakat" is just a small but significant part. Are you beginning to see what that Quran for the community is very important, and a person who could easily add to the verification of its content refusing deserved by Allah whatever the community decide to give him/her.

But of course, you will only come back here with insults rather than give straight answers to this two questions above.

And just like you do not know the future, I have answered the questions and I have not insulted. You are, just like Jesus and all that are created, do not know the future.

@Aletheia: Your questions were very relevant, and need thorough answers.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Bakr - Cached - Similar From this piece, you will also find that Aisha (RA) was born before her father accepted Islam.

The Qur'an — preservation
Main article: Origin and development of the Qur'an

According to Sunni Islam, Abu Bakr was instrumental in preserving the Qur'an in written form. [b]It is said that after the hard-won victory over Musaylimah in the Battle of Yamama fought in 632, Umar (the later Caliph Umar), saw that many of the Muslims who had memorized the Qur'an had died in battle. Fearing that the Qur'an may be lost or corrupted, Umar requested the Caliph Abu Bakr to authorize the compilation and preservation of the Book in written format. After initial hesitation, Abu Bakr made a committee headed by Zayd ibn Thabit which included the memorizers of the Qur'an and Umar and to collect all verses of the Book. After collecting all Qur'anic verses from texts in the possession of various sahaba, Zayd ibn Thabit and members of his committee verified the reading by comparing with those who had memorized the Qur'an. After they were satisfied that they had not missed out any verse or made any mistakes in reading or writing it down, the text was written down as one single manuscript and presented in a book form to the Caliph Abu Bakr. It is believed that this process happened within one year of the death of Muhammad when most of his sahaba (companions) were still alive.[/b]

, Later on, it became the basis of Uthman Ibn Affan's definitive text of the Qur'an which was published far and wide merely 18 years after the death of Muhammad. Later historians give Uthman Ibn Affan the principal credit for re-verification and publishing the Qur'an. Shi'as reject the idea that Abu Bakr or Umar were instrumental in the collection or preservation of the Qur'an.[35]

Nopuquiter,

You amuse me, so your first reaction to my post was my grammar? Well, thank God I don't need your approval for a degree in English language, I have none and don't need it. I'm happy though that you understood my questions despite the poor grammar, the purpose was achieved after all. 

You requested that I should post whatever I have against Islam here, in as much as I would want to, my answer to that request is no. You left your section to this place to meddle in whatever we discuss and even raise topics to insult and discredit our religion, I would do same in your section since I've gotten your permission. That though wouldn't prevent me from posting any other topic of interest about your religion in this section, thanks.

@Mr. The Clown: If you choose to benefit the Muslims with your gift of expose [french word]. fine.

But I thought it would serve the Christians better, if they could read your materials which you think should be able to keep the christians with "little" faith in the words of Jesus to the disciples, even stronger, running far away from Islam.

I was thinking the christians will not go to the muslim sections to read your posts. Hence your materials will serve no real purpose, even from the first thread. At least in the christian section, as you like to call it, it will at least survive a day or two, whereas in the muslim section it may not survive that much, since it your belief that the moderator[s] will lock it, them immediately as you open them.

just my own advice. But then satisfy yourself, but let me know on this thread when you open any, with its topic. I just wanna know to your piece and InshaAllah it will be a cake walk.

Once again Nonpuqeater has shown great determination and patience in dealing with falsehood.

having gone through all the post I come to see that my critics cry has become more of a plea to stop my expositions, but pls they should bear in mind that their cry's and insult tactics have failed to derail the course of this thread as yet again I will continue with more expositions,They have utterly failed to reply g=recent and past evidence in their context rather a whining boy has perpetually cried at intervals to stop asking question in cases where questions should be asked,  so pls there is no need to have heart breaks as I continue.

You requested that I should post whatever I have against Islam here, in as much as I would want to, my answer to that request is no. You left your section to this place to meddle in whatever we discuss and even raise topics to insult and discredit our religion, I would do same in your section since I've gotten your permission. That though wouldn't prevent me from posting any other topic of interest about your religion in this section, thanks.

Why boast and fail, quit all this baby tactics I have this I have that only to come and say  I do not have anything,  Nonpuqeater stay the truth is what he has aversion to.

^^thats y Nigeria may never move forward.Nigerians are worse.Imagine its the islamic nuissance that look for trouble&yet cry foul. The xtians receives bashing from all sides(atheist,muslims,pagan deists etc) yet they live with it, unlike the muslims
ajoguegbe opened a thread on mohammad.firstly mukina2 moved it to islamic section&subsequently the thread was locked. This pathetic islamic pigs didnt see anything wrong with that.Here they are having free time to incite&look for trouble. May thunder strike them down

Lol[b]! Wordsof the last crusader/inquisitor ---no papal power to kill----- in pains and fanatical rage he calls on thunder to redeem his faith, cry no more, please bro take am easy,it is just mere writing and the truth I have given you, I am feeling very sorry for you, I wonder whether you cried deeply aya take am easy pls do not cry.[/b]

Now let us examine the crucifixion,

"Pilate marvelled if he were already dead, and to him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead."

(HOLY BIBLE) Mark 15:44

Even Pilate was surprised he had died, because crucifixion is not designed to achieve someone;s death in short time (3 hours)


the Ressurection

Jesus is there! He is watching this woman. He knows who she is, and he knows why she is there. He approaches her from behind, and finds her crying. So he asks her:

"Woman, why wee pest thou? Whom seekest thou? —

(HOLY BIBLE) John 20:15

Before she replies, allow me to interject: "Why does he ask what appears to be silly questions? Doesn't he know the obvious reasons? Of course he does! Then why the silly questions?"

The answer is that in reality they are not silly questions, though they appear to be so. He knows that this woman is looking for him, and she is disappointed on not finding him; hence the weeping. But he also knows that because of his heavy disguise she would not be able to recognise him. So metaphorically speaking he is pulling her leg. In describing this incident John, referring to Mary Magdalene, says:

"She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him".

(Still John 20:15)


Now why should she suppose that he is a gardener? Do resurrected persons look like "gardeners"? Nol! Then why does she suppose him to be a gardener? Because he is disguised as a GARDENER! Why is he disguised as a gardener?

Because he is afraid of the Jews! Why is he afraid of the Jews?

Because they will definately "kill" him a second time, why should he be afraid to die? since the bible says it is ordained for all men to die once, meaning he did not ressurect neither did he die but GOD heard(accepted) his prayer and some how saved him, this only shows He was not willing and did not die for anybody's sins, pls do not decieve yourself and depend on him to clear your mess.

Another evidence against the purported crucifixion is that Jesus prophecised to the Jews on different occasions like as "-----Jonah was 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of the whale so shall the son of man(not God) be in the belly of the earth 3 days and 3 Nights----" but after making prophecies like this failed to come and prove to the Jews the prophetic claims WERE TRUE, that is If all the story of the crucifixion is true Jesus aught to have gone to the Jews and said to them that despite your plots I am still alive, despite all your injuries I am still alive, and also remember I said "I will go to the belly of the earth I like Jonah still come out alive " now I have fulfilled my prophecy no nothing like that in fact after the alleged crucifixion Jesus spent the remaining time avoiding the Jews and keeping a low profile, THE QUESTION BECOMES WHY? SIMPLE HE HAD NOT DIE AND KNOWS HE HAD TO AVOID THE JEWS IF NOT THEY WILL KILL HIM IF THEY HAD THE CHANCE IN FACT IF JESUS INDEED HAD RESURRECTED GOING TO STAND IN FRONT OF THE JEWS WILL MADE THEM ACCEPT HIS RELIGION WITH OUT DIFFICULTY BECAUSE BY HUMAN UNDERSTANDING WHEN ONE IS DEAD THERE IS NO COME BACK WHY WHY WHY DIDN'T HE SHOW HIMSELF TO THE JEWS AFTER HIS "RESURRECTION".

nopuqeater:

@Aletheia: Your questions were very relevant, and need thorough answers.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Bakr - Cached - Similar From this piece, you will also find that Aisha (RA) was born before her father accepted Islam.

The Qur'an — preservation
Main article: Origin and development of the Qur'an

According to Sunni Islam, Abu Bakr was instrumental in preserving the Qur'an in written form. [b]It is said that after the hard-won victory over Musaylimah in the Battle of Yamama fought in 632, Umar (the later Caliph Umar), saw that many of the Muslims who had memorized the Qur'an had died in battle. Fearing that the Qur'an may be lost or corrupted, Umar requested the Caliph Abu Bakr to authorize the compilation and preservation of the Book in written format. After initial hesitation, Abu Bakr made a committee headed by Zayd ibn Thabit which included the memorizers of the Qur'an and Umar and to collect all verses of the Book. After collecting all Qur'anic verses from texts in the possession of various sahaba, Zayd ibn Thabit and members of his committee verified the reading by comparing with those who had memorized the Qur'an. After they were satisfied that they had not missed out any verse or made any mistakes in reading or writing it down, the text was written down as one single manuscript and presented in a book form to the Caliph Abu Bakr. It is believed that this process happened within one year of the death of Muhammad when most of his sahaba (companions) were still alive.[/b]

, Later on, it became the basis of Uthman Ibn Affan's definitive text of the Qur'an which was published far and wide merely 18 years after the death of Muhammad. Later historians give Uthman Ibn Affan the principal credit for re-verification and publishing the Qur'an. Shi'as reject the idea that Abu Bakr or Umar were instrumental in the collection or preservation of the Qur'an.[35]

^^^Surprise, surprise, quoting from wikipedia article which presents the politically correct story, rather than the qur'an or hadiths. Isn't it because an examination of them will reveal the reason to be this: Masud (who came to Islam long before Thabit and memorized and recited 70 suras flawlessly) did not accept Thabit's quran as authentic?
How did your two previous posts answer my questions:

aletheia:

Answer this questions:
#1. Why was bin Masud ordered to surrender the compilation of suras in his possession at the time of the compilation of the qur'an?
#2. Why was he beaten up when he refused to comply?

[b]Another evidence against the purported crucifixion is that Jesus prophecised to the Jews on different occasions like as "-----Jonah was 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of the whale so shall the son of man(not God) be in the belly of the earth 3 days and 3 Nights----" but after making prophecies like this failed to come and prove to the Jews the prophetic claims WERE TRUE, that is If all the story of the crucifixion is true Jesus aught to have gone to the Jews and said to them that despite your plots I am still alive, despite all your injuries I am still alive, and also remember I said "I will go to the belly of the earth I like Jonah still come out alive " now I have fulfilled my prophecy no nothing like that in fact after the alleged crucifixion Jesus spent the remaining time avoiding the Jews and keeping a low profile, THE QUESTION BECOMES WHY? SIMPLE HE HAD NOT DIE AND KNOWS HE HAD TO AVOID THE JEWS IF NOT THEY WILL KILL HIM IF THEY HAD THE CHANCE IN FACT IF JESUS INDEED HAD RESURRECTED GOING TO STAND IN FRONT OF THE JEWS WILL MADE THEM ACCEPT HIS RELIGION WITH OUT DIFFICULTY BECAUSE BY HUMAN UNDERSTANDING WHEN ONE IS DEAD THERE IS NO COME BACK WHY WHY WHY DIDN'T HE SHOW HIMSELF TO THE JEWS AFTER HIS "RESURRECTION".[/b]

I taught muslims are supposed to shelve their sword during the month of Ramadan. Not surprising though since Mohammad fought the battle of badr in the unholy holy month

@Aletheia: @Aletheia: « #89 on: Today at 04:31:07 PM »

Quote from: nopuqeater on Today at 05:03:41 AM
@Aletheia: Your questions were very relevant, and need thorough answers.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Bakr - Cached - Similar From this piece, you will also find that Aisha (RA) was born before her father accepted Islam.

The Qur'an — preservation
Main article: Origin and development of the Qur'an

According to Sunni Islam, Abu Bakr was instrumental in preserving the Qur'an in written form. It is said that after the hard-won victory over Musaylimah in the Battle of Yamama fought in 632, Umar (the later Caliph Umar), saw that many of the Muslims who had memorized the Qur'an had died in battle. Fearing that the Qur'an may be lost or corrupted, Umar requested the Caliph Abu Bakr to authorize the compilation and preservation of the Book in written format. After initial hesitation, Abu Bakr made a committee headed by Zayd ibn Thabit which included the memorizers of the Qur'an and Umar and to collect all verses of the Book. After collecting all Qur'anic verses from texts in the possession of various sahaba, Zayd ibn Thabit and members of his committee verified the reading by comparing with those who had memorized the Qur'an. After they were satisfied that they had not missed out any verse or made any mistakes in reading or writing it down, the text was written down as one single manuscript and presented in a book form to the Caliph Abu Bakr. It is believed that this process happened within one year of the death of Muhammad when most of his sahaba (companions) were still alive.

, Later on, it became the basis of Uthman Ibn Affan's definitive text of the Qur'an which was published far and wide merely 18 years after the death of Muhammad. Later historians give Uthman Ibn Affan the principal credit for re-verification and publishing the Qur'an. Shi'as reject the idea that Abu Bakr or Umar were instrumental in the collection or preservation of the Qur'an.[35]
^^^Surprise, surprise, quoting from wikipedia article which presents the politically correct story, rather than the qur'an or hadiths. Isn't it because an examination of them will reveal the reason to be this: Masud (who came to Islam long before Thabit and memorized and recited 70 suras flawlessly) did not accept Thabit's quran as authentic?

Many books have been written about the process of the compilation of the Quran. One of them in English, which I have read was a translation by Jammal Zarabozzo, out of Colorado, titled "The Introduction to the science of Quran." While the first people to accept Islam were from the household of Muhammad (AS), these people included ALi bin AbiTalib, just as soon Khadijah (RA), accepted Islam, and Zayd who could have been described as Bin Muhammad, until adoption was abrogated by the verse in Surah Ahzab. The first family that accepted the religion that just came to Makka was Abu Bakr after this, consisting of Abu Bakr, 2 daughters (Aisha and Asma'a, Abdullah, and a wife, while AbdulRahman, and another wife rejected Islam. The above proved that Mas'ud (RA) was not the only one, but one among 100s of HAfith of Quran. It also proves that Aisha (ra) was born long before her father became Muslim, even so as it is within the first year. Ali must just as been good in Quranic memorization as much as Mas'ud, while Ali was a door of the fountain of knowledge, Muhammad was that knowledge, and Mas'ud was not from the house of Muhammad.

The kindness of Islam is what prompted whoever beat Mas'ud to beat him so that he can return to his senses for the greater good of the community, just like the war waged against those who refused to pay their Zakat, otherwise people like you may be claiming that it is not necessary to pay zakat. And as to Mas'ud, Muhammad (AS) said in a hadith; you support your brother against oppression, twice; The first, when he is being oppressed by his oppressor. The second when he is the oppressor, you fight him against his action, first pointing it out to him so that he leaves the act of oppression, then you may have to fight him against that evil that he is involved in to correct him. Mas'ud (ra), i guess was corrected.

How did your two previous posts answer my questions:
Quote from: aletheia on Today at 02:43:07 AM
Answer this questions:
#1. Why was bin Masud ordered to surrender the compilation of suras in his possession at the time of the compilation of the qur'an?
#2. Why was he beaten up when he refused to comply?

Alhamdulillah, he was not the only one with some portion of the Quran. Ali bin AbiTalib, and many others have just what we can consider 100% of Quran. Everyone in Madina had some portion of Quran. Everyone. So i dont know your gripe. Quran was binded because 100s of Memorizers were being killed and the community leaders felt that it will be of a greater good to the community if it was put into a singular Book for a reference later, withing the 2 and 1/2 years of the death of the propet (AS). Abu Bakr and Umar his successor made that decision in the company of other companions. No one objected, including the LION among them in the personality of Ali.

Your argument is very weak because everything else points against it. Read whatever source you want, you will be able to know that with or without Mas'ud, Quran was complete. Tell me what Surah or ayah that Mas'ud would have added or would have blotted? Mas'ud led prayers many many years after the Quran was compiled, did he recite any thing ther than what is in the Quran that we have today, considering that the chain of recitation has never been broken, from Allah Who revealed it, to Jibril (except the 4 last verse of Baqarah), to Muhammad (AS) to the Sahabah, men and women (RA), the the tabihin (rA), to the tabitabihin (ra), to every generation even to this day. Tell me where there is a break and what Mas'ud said he wanted to add or substarct. Speak up.

^^ No study of the early transmission of the Qur'an would be complete without an analysis of the contribution of Abdullah ibn Mas'ud, one of the most prominent of Muhammad's companions.

#1. He was one of his earliest disciples and we are told that he was "the first man to speak the Qur'an loudly in Mecca after the apostle" (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasulullah, p.141).
#2. There is much evidence to show that he was regarded by Muhammad himself as one of the foremost authorities on the Qur'an, if not the foremost, as appears from the following hadith:

Narrated Masruq: Abdullah bin Mas'ud was mentioned before Abdullah bin Amr who said, "That is a man I still love, as I heard the Prophet (saw) saying, 'Learn the recitation of the Qur'an from four: from Abdullah bin Mas'ud - he started with him - Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa, Mu'adh bin Jabal and Ubai bin Ka'b". (Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 5, p.96)

The same tradition in the other great work of hadith also specifically mentions that Muhammad "started from him" (Sahih Muslim, Vol. 4, p.1312), showing that he was deliberately mentioned first, indicating that Muhammad regarded him as the foremost authority on the Qur'an. Among others mentioned is Ubayy ibn Ka'b who also compiled a separate codex of the Qur'an before it was destroyed by Uthman.

#3. It is significant to find no mention of Zaid ibn Thabit in this list which shows quite conclusively that Muhammad regarded Ibn Mas'ud and Ubayy ibn Ka'b as far better read in the Qur'an than him.

#4. In another hadith we find further evidence of Ibn Mas'ud's prominence in respect of his knowledge of the Qur'an:

Narrated Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) (ra): By Allah other than Whom none has the right to be worshipped! There is no Sura revealed in Allah's Book but I know at what place it was revealed; and there is no verse revealed in Allah's Book but I know about whom it was revealed. And if I know that there is somebody who knows Allah's Book better than I, and he is at a place that camels can reach, I would go to him. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 6, p.488).

#5. In a similar tradition we read that he added to this that he had recited more than seventy surahs of the Qur'an in Muhammad's presence, alleging that all Muhammad's companions were aware that no one knew the Qur'an better than he did, to which Shaqiq, sitting by, added "I sat in the company of the Companions of Muhammad (may peace be upon him) but I did not hear anyone having rejected that (that is, his recitation) or finding fault with it" (Sahih Muslim, Vol. 4, p.1312).

#6. There are solid evidences to show why Abdullah ibn Mas'ud at first refused to hand over his codex for destruction. It was precisely because the companion of Muhammad considered his own text to be superior to and more authentic than Zaid's that he was angered at Uthman's decree.

#7. In a source we find that, when Uthman's order came for the destruction of the other codices and the uniform reading of the Qur'an according to Zaid's codex alone, Ibn Mas'ud gave a khutba (sermon) in Kufa and declared:

"The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Qur'an. I like it better to read according to the recitation of him (Prophet) whom I love more than that of Zayd Ibn Thabit. By Him besides Whom there is no god! I learnt more than seventy surahs from the lips of the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him, while Zayd Ibn Thabit was a youth, having two locks and playing with the youth". (Ibn Sa'd, Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, Vol. 2, p.444).

Abdullah ibn Mas'ud clearly resisted Uthman's order, not because of sentiment but clearly because he sincerely believed that his text of the Qur'an, gained firsthand from Muhammad himself, was more authentic than the text of Zaid.

Far from the Qur'an being universally accepted in a standard form there were, on the contrary, vast differences in the texts distributed in the various provinces. Uthman's action brought about the standardisation of a single text for the whole Muslim world - it was not a perpetuation of an already existing unity - and Zaid's copy had no greater claim to authenticity than Ibn Mas'ud's. It was simply arbitrarily chosen as the standard text because it was close at hand in Medina despite evidence that it was missing several suras and shortened others.

[b]
"Narrated Zaid bin Thabit; Abu Bakr as-Saddiq sent for me when the people of Yamama had been killed, (I went to him) and found `Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me); "Umar has come to me and said; "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra of the Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Qur'an by heart) , and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur'an be collected." I said to `Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?", "Umar kept urging me until Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realise the good idea which `Umar had realised.", "then Abu Bakr said (to me).', So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it (in one book).", So I started looking for the Qur'an and collecting it, Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur'an remained with Abu Bakr till he died, then with `Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of `Umar."]].
[/b]

So to simply dismiss you futile point, Usman(Ra) didn't compile the Qur'an, it was Abubakar, that is there was an original copy, immediately after the death of the Holy Prophet S.A.W, hence Usman (Ra) merely standardized the Qur'an., due to the fact that people were reciting ( reading) it differently on other parts of the Islamic Empire due to what? due to the fact that the initial copies of the Qur'an did not have those floating symbols that were known to be vowels which indicate whether it is an a, e or u etc sound, but the meccan, medina etc knew where the apporiate marks are to be placed due to the fact that the qur'an was revealed in their own dialect, to cut a long story short the Standardization of the Qur'an only added those marks that were misssing and hence made the pronunciation of the meccans to become the standard recitation because Arabic has I think 12 dialect. Now as for your claim that because Ibn Musaud was clearly the only expert and know all in matters involving the Qur'an only goes to show how Ignorant you are of the situation( I know you are quoting verbatim from Answering- Islam and as I have noticed with d author-- a strange desire to make claims that are not conversant with Islamic reasoning, and like you master shammon, always allow you clouded judgment of the history of Christianity to confuse you when trying to understand Islam), there were many individuals that had knew the Qur'an by Heart, unlike the New testament were you notice gross incompetence on some of Jesus disciples --they forsoke him and fled, the prophet companions were very competent and were involved in the process of both the initial compilation and then the standardization of the Qur'an, even during the revelation of the Qur'an the Prophet dictated it to scribes to write it them down, so during the complattion of the Qur'an the HIs companion merely gathered all the writings into one book.

one reason I bothered to answer you is simply because as I have Noticed your lack of credible response to my essay on the crucifixion and your perpetual struggle to change the subject matter----this brings to mind who authored the bible. More explosive essay in just a moment.

Here are some Historical evidence that show the Qur'an had been consistent over a long period of time closely to the Prophet's time
2. List Of Dated Qur’anic Texts From 1-100 AH / 622-719 CE

An Arabic Inscription From Cyprus, 29 AH / 650 CE.

Qul hū Allāhu ahad Allāhu al-ṣamad lam yalid wa-lam yulad wa-lam yakun lahu kufūwan aḥad [Complete Qur’an 112]

Translation: Say: God the one, God the eternal, He did not beget and was not begotten. And there is none like unto Him.

The Arabic Islamic Inscriptions On The Dome Of The Rock In Jerusalem, 72 AH / 692 CE.

Inscriptions In The Inner Octagonal Arcade

Lahu al-mulku wa lahu al-ḥamdu yuhyī wa yumītu wa huwa ‘ala kulli shayin qadīr [a conflation of Qur’an 64:1 and 57:2], inna allāha wa malā'ikatahu yusallūna ‘ala al-nabīyi yā ayyuhā al-ladhīna āmanū sallū ‘alayhi wa sallimū taslīmā [Complete Qur’an 33:56], yā ahla al-kitābi lā taghlū fī dīnikum wa lā taqūlū ‘ala allāhi illā al-ḥaqqa innamā al-masīhu ‘Īsa abnu maryama rasūlu allāhi wa kalimatuhu alqāhā ila Maryama wa rūhun minhu fa'āminū billāhi wa rusulihi wa lā taqūlū thalāthatun antahū khayrāan lakum innamā allāhu ilahun wāḥidun subhānahu an yakūna lahu waladun lahu mā fī al-samāwāti wa mā fī al-ardi wa kafa billāhi wakīlā. lan yastankifa al-masīhu an yakūna ‘abdāan lillāhi wa lā al-malā'ikatu al-muqarrabūna wa man yastankif ‘an ‘ibādatihi wa yastakbir fasayaḥshuruhum ilayhi jamī‘ā [Complete Qur’an 4:171-72], wa al-salāmu ‘alayhi yawma wulidu wa yawma yamūtu wa yawma yub‘athu hayyā [Complete Qur’an 19:33, with change from first to third person], dhālika ‘Īsa abnu maryama qawla al-haqqi al-ladhī fīhi yamtarūn. mā kāna lillāhi an yattakhidha min waladin subhānahu idhā qada amrāan fa'innamā yaqūlu lahu kun fayakūn [Complete Qur’an 19:34-35], inna allāha rabbī wa rabbukum fā‘budūhu hādhā sirātun mustaqīm [Complete Qur’an 19:36, except for initial "wa"], shahida allāhu annahu lā ilāha illā huwa wa al-malā'ikatu wa ūlū al-‘ilmi qā'imāan bil-qisti lā ilāha illā huwa al-‘azīzu al-ḥakīm. inna al-dīna ‘inda allāhi al-islāmu wa mā akhtalafa al-ladhīna ūtū al-kitāba illā min ba‘di mā jā'ahumu al-‘ilmu baghyāan baynahum wa man yakfur bi'āyāti allāhi fa'inna allāha sarī‘u al-hisāb [Complete Qur’an 13:18-19].

Translation: Unto Him belongeth sovereignity and unto Him belongeth praise. He quickeneth and He giveth death; and He is Able to do all things, Verily God and His Angels bless the Prophet; O you who believe, bless him and salute him with a salutation!, O, People of the Book! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning God save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of God, and His Word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in God and His messengers, and say not 'Three' - Cease! (it is) better for you! - God is only One God. Far be it removed from His transcendent majesty that He should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And God is sufficient as Defender. The Messiah will never scorn to be a servant unto God, nor will the favoured angels. Whoso scorneth His service and is proud, all such will He assemble unto Him", Peace be on him the day he was born, and the day he dies, and the day he shall be raised alive!, Such was Jesus, son of Mary, (this is) a statement of the truth concerning which they doubt. It befitteth not (the Majesty of) God that He should take unto Himself a son. Glory be to Him! When He decreeth a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! and it is", Lo! God is my Lord and your Lord. So serve Him. That is the right path", "God (Himself) is witness that there is no God save Him. And the angels and the men of learning (too are witness). Maintaining His creation in justice, there is no God save Him, the Almighty, the Wise. Lo! religion with God (is) Islam. Those who (formerly) received the Book differed only after knowledge came unto them, through transgression among themselves. Whoso disbelieveth the revelations of God (will find that) lo! God is swift at reckoning".

Inscriptions In The Outer Octagonal Arcade

Qul hū Allāhu ahad Allāhu al-ṣamad lam yalid wa-lam yulad wa-lam yakun lahu kufūwan aḥad [Complete Qur’an 112], inna allāha wa malā'ikatahu yusallūna ‘ala al-nabīyi yā ayyuhā al-ladhīna āmanū sallū ‘alayhi wa sallimū taslīmā [Complete Qur’an 33:56], al-ḥamdu lillāhi al-ladhī lam yattakhidh waladāan wa lam yakun lahu sharīkun fī al-mulki wa lam yakun lahu wa līyun mina al-dhulli wa kabbirhu takbīrā [Complete Qur’an 17:111 complete except for the initial wa quli, i.e., "and say"], lahu al-mulku wa lahu al-hamdu yuhyī wa yumītu wa huwa ‘ala kulli shayin qadīr [a conflation of Qur’an 64:1 and 57:2],

Translation: Say: God the one, God the eternal, He did not beget and was not begotten. And there is none like unto Him, Verily God and His Angels bless the Prophet; O you who believe, bless him and salute him with a salutation!, Praise be to God, Who hath not taken unto Himself a son, and Who hath no partner in the Sovereignty, nor hath He any protecting friend through dependence. And magnify Him with all magnificence", Unto Him belongeth sovereignity and unto Him belongeth praise. He quickeneth and He giveth death; and He is Able to do all things.

The Copper Plaque Inscriptions At The Dome Of The Rock In Jerusalem, 72 AH / 692 CE.

lam yalid wa-lam yulad wa-lam yakun lahu kufūwan aḥad [Part of Qur’an 112:3-4], allāhumma mālika al-mulki tu'utī al-mulka man tashā'u wa tanzi‘u al-mulka mimman tashā'u [Part of Qur’an 3:26], kataba ‘ala nafsihi al-raḥmata [Part of Qur’an 6:12], wasi‘at raḥmatuhu kulla shayin [Part of Qur’an 7:156, with shift from first to third person]

Translation: He begotteth not nor was begotten and there is none comparable unto Him, Owner of Sovereignty! Thou givest sovereignty unto whom Thou wilt, and Thou withdrawest sovereignty from whom Thou wilt, He hath prescribed for Himself mercy,

Northern Inscription

lam yalid wa-lam yulad wa-lam yakun lahu kufūwan aḥad [Part of Qur’an 112:3-4], [Muḥammad rasūl Allāh] arsalahu bi-l-huda wa dīn al-ḥaqq liyudhhiru ‘ala al-dini kullahi wa-law karih-al-mushrikūn [Almost complete Qur’an 61:9 with an adjustment at the beginning to introduce Muhammad], Āmannā billāhi wa mā unzila ila Muḥammad wa mā ūtiya al-nabīyūna min rabbihim lā nufarriqu bayna aḥadin minhum wa naḥnu lahu muslimūn [Part of Qur’an 2:136 or 3:84, with change of person and omission of the central section, where Ibrahim, Isma‘il, Ishaq, Ya‘qub, the "tribes", Musa, and ‘Isa are mentioned individually].

Translation: He begotteth not nor was begotten and there is none comparable unto Him, Muhammad is the messenger of God whom He sent with guidance and the religion of truth that He might make it prevail over all religions even if the associators are averse, We believe in God and that which was revealed unto Muhammad and that which the Prophets received from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered.

Aniconic Silver Coins ("Reformed Coinage", Minted By The Umayyad Caliph ‘Abd al-Malik, From 77 AH / 696 CE.

Reverse field: Allāhu aḥad Allāhu al-ṣamad lam yalid wa-lam yulad wa-lam yakun lahu kufūwan aḥad

God the one, God the eternal, He did not beget and was not begotten. And there is none like unto Him [Complete Qur’an 114 except for the initial qul hu. However, the "reformed" dīnār also omits the verse wa-lam yakun lahu kufūwan aḥad ("And there is none like unto Him" ].

Reverse margin: [Muḥammad rasūl Allāh] arsalahu bi-l-huda wa dīn al-ḥaqq liyudhhiru ‘ala al-dini kullahi wa-law karih-al-mushrikūn [Almost complete Qur’an 61:9 with an adjustment at the beginning to introduce Muhammad]

Muḥammad is the messenger of God whom He sent with guidance and the religion of truth that He might make it prevail over all religions even if the associators are averse.

A Rock Inscription From Makkah Containing Qur’an 38:26, 80 AH / 699-700 CE.

yā Dāwūdu innā ja‘alnāka khalīfatan fī al-ardi faḥkum bayna an-nāsi bil-ḥaqqi wa lā tattabi‘i al-hawa fayudillaka ‘an sabīli allāhi inna al-ladhīna yadillūna ‘an sabīlillāhi lahum ‘adhābun shadīdun bimā nasū yawma al-ḥisāb [Complete Qur’an 38:26].

Translation: O David, we have indeed made you a vicegerent on earth. So judge between men in justice, and do not follow your desires which will mislead you from the path of God. Verily, for those who stray from the path of God is severe chastisement, for those who have forgotten the Day of Reckoning.

A Rock Inscription From Makkah Dated 84 AH / 703-704 CE.

yā ayyuhā al-nāsu attaqū rabbakumu al-ladhī khalaqakum [Part of Qur’an 4:1], wa al-ladhīna min qablikum la‘allakum tuflihūn [Part of Qur’an 2:21 and 2:189].

Translation: Oh mankind, fear your Lord who created you, and those who came before you if you wish to be successful.

A Rock Inscription From Makkah Containing Qur’an 20:130, 84 AH / 703-704 CE.

wa sabbiḥ biḥamdi rabbika qabla tulū‘i al-shamsi wa qabla ghurūbihā wa min ānā'i al-layli fasabbiḥ wa atrāfa al-nahāri la‘allaka tarda [Almost complete Qur’an 20:130].

Translation: So laud the praises of your Lord before the rising of the sun and before its setting, and during a portion of the night, and at the thresholds of the day, so that you may be pleased [with God's subsequent reward].

Inscription In A Mosque In Damascus, Built By Caliph Walīd, 86-87 AH / 705-706 CE.

Lā ikrāha fī al-dīni qad tabayyana al-rushdu mina al-ghayyi faman yakfur bit-tāghūti wa yu'umin billāhi faqadi astamsaka bil-‘urwati al-wuthqa lā anfisāma lahā wa allāhu samī‘un ‘alīm [Complete Qur’an 2:256].

Translation: There is no compulsion in religion, the right way has become distinguished from error, and he who rejects false deities and believes in God has grasped a firm handhold that will never break, God is all-hearing and all-knowing.

Jabal Usays (Syria) Inscription Containing First Line Of The Throne Verse (Qur’an 2:255), 93 AH / 711 CE.

Allāhu lā ilāha illā huwa al-ḥayyu al-qayyūmu [Part of Qur’an 2:255, the Throne Verse (Ayat al-Kursi)].

Translation: God! None has the right to be worshipped but He, the Ever Living, the One who sustains and protects all that exists.

A Rock Inscription From Makkah Dated 98 AH / 716-717 CE.

wa man yatawakkal ‘ala allāhi fa-allāhu [huwa] hasbuhu wa-[inna] allāha bālighu amrihi wa [ ] qad ja‘ala allāhu likulli shay'in qadrāan [Almost complete Qur’an 65:3].

Translation: Whomsoever places their trust in God, He will suffice them. Verily, God will fulfill His purpose. Indeed, He has set everything in measure.

It quotes part of 65:3 as it is and the rest of the verse is slightly modified without changing the meaning. The words in square brackets indicate the actual word in the Qur’an in place of the word preceding it.