Why the need to show you As-Samari from the Torah?
Did you check the root words of
السامرى and سمير separately on your AI assistant? Or it cannot handle arabic?

TenQ:

So, which one of these says As-Samari is the same as Samir

As-Samari mean : the Samaritan or a citizen of Samaria

Can you show us from the Torah that the As-Samari mislead the children of Israel?



Note that:
Samir and As-Samari mean different things.

Explore2xmore:
What do you understand from the reading?
Nothing?

مُسۡتَكۡبِرِينَ بِهِۦ سَٰمِرًا تَهۡجُرُونَ

You don't even answer my own questions but you expect me to answer yours!?

Okay:
Quran 38:2
"[They are] arrogant toward it [with] evil arrogance, [and] disdainfully."



Will you now translate my own questions!?

a. Translate: محمد هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!
b. Translate : "الله هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!"

There is just One word difference between the two statements!

Explore2xmore:
Why the need to show you As-Samari from the Torah?
Did you check the root words of
السامرى and سمير separately on your AI assistant? Or it cannot handle arabic?

I have shown you root words of some English words : does it make sense to you?

Let me give you three sets of words that share the same root and thus meaning exactly the same.

1. Principal vs. Principle
You can see that both share the same root Princip
By Islamic reasoning, both Principal and Principle mean exactly the same thing.

2. Capital vs. Capitol
You can see that both share the same root Capit
By Islamic reasoning, both Capital and Capitol mean exactly the same thing.

3. Desert vs. Dessert
You can see that both share the same root sert
By Islamic reasoning, both Desert and Dessert mean exactly the same thing.



Can you see how stupid your logic sounds!?

Explore2xmore:
Myopic reasoning

@RoyalDiadems
@advocatejare
@JudgeWilson
@MightySparrow
@SIRTee15

Anything to absolve the false prophet from his blunders.
What do Arabs call Samaritans? What's the Arabic name for samaritans.

As-Samiri is not limited to one meaning.
The likely falsification of your belief is what you should be wary of.


Deviations from the pure doctrines of Jesus and all prophets before him started with Paul, who never met Jesus. Paul was the first to claim the Godhead and divine sonship of Jesus, as well as his resurrection. Yet, the disciples and the early Christian generations were unitarians. They resisted the efforts of Paul and his followers to change both the faith and law of Moses and Jesus, and, later, many of them were tortured and killed for holding to their faith.

Trinity was imposed for the first time, as an official creed of the Roman Empire, by Emperor Theodosius in the year 381 AC. The motive was mainly political, to save the Roman Empire by putting an end to the split between the Unitarian Christians and the Trinitarians, a split that persisted even after the Council of Nicea in 325 AC adopted the Pauline doctrines deifying Jesus as son of God.

Trinity, subsequently endorsed by the Council of Constantinople in 381 AC, attracted those who found in it a compromise between their original pagan beliefs and Christianity. Trinity was an invention of Athnasius of Alexandria in the 4th century after Jesus departure.

SIRTee15:


Anything to absolve the false prophet from his blunders.
What do Arabs call Samaritans? What's the Arabic name for samaritans.

With all my regular answers!
بَلِ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ فِي عِزَّةٍ وَشِقَاقٍ
"But those who disbelieve are in pride and dissension."
(Q 38: Verse 2)

This is not what I asked you to translate.

مُسۡتَكۡبِرِينَ بِهِۦ سَٰمِرًا تَهۡجُرُونَ

TenQ:

You don't even answer my own questions but you expect me to answer yours!?

Okay:
Quran 38:2
"[They are] arrogant toward it [with] evil arrogance, [and] disdainfully."



Will you now translate my own questions!?

a. Translate: محمد هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!
b. Translate : "الله هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!"

There is just One word difference between the two statements!

Explore2xmore:
As-Samiri is not limited to one meaning.

This is the problem with Islam. Ask one question regarding blunders in the Koran and u get 20 different answers. No consensus. Every muslim trying to force the truth into the Koran thereby creating more confusion
We had this argument with LegalWolf sometime ago re Al samiri. He actually said Al samiri is a samaritan but argued the name has no link to Samaria.
Now u here claiming Al samiri is the name of an Egyptian and not a samaritan.
Is like different koranic schools teach from different material. Ok have u checked the tafsir on origin of Al samiri? What does it say?

[quote author=Explore2xmore post=125674520]

The likely falsification of your belief is what you should be wary of.


Deviations from the pure doctrines of Jesus and all prophets before him started with Paul, who never met Jesus. Paul was the first to claim the Godhead and divine sonship of Jesus, as well as his resurrection. Yet, the disciples and the early Christian generations were unitarians. They resisted the efforts of Paul and his followers to change both the faith and law of Moses and Jesus, and, later, many of them were tortured and killed for holding to their faith.

Trinity was imposed for the first time, as an official creed of the Roman Empire, by Emperor Theodosius in the year 381 AC. The motive was mainly political, to save the Roman Empire by putting an end to the split between the Unitarian Christians and the Trinitarians, a split that persisted even after the Council of Nicea in 325 AC adopted the Pauline doctrines deifying Jesus as son of God.

Trinity, subsequently endorsed by the Council of Constantinople in 381 AC, attracted those who found in it a compromise between their original pagan beliefs and Christianity. Trinity was an invention of Athnasius of Alexandria in the 4th century after Jesus departure.

You obviously don't know what u talking about. U just regurgitating a clear dawah script.
I'm happy to enlighten u if u willing to learn. I will take u back to the 1st century AD where it all began.
But first learn about the apostolic fathers and make sure u read the book of acts thoroughly.

Finally I leave u with this from Peter, the disciple of our Lord about Paul.

2 Peter 3.15-16

15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 Paul writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

It's safe to say Muslims are amongst the ignorant and unstable that distort Paul's word according to Peter.

Explore2xmore:
With all my regular answers!
بَلِ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ فِي عِزَّةٍ وَشِقَاقٍ
"But those who disbelieve are in pride and dissension."
(Q 38: Verse 2)

This is not what I asked you to translate.

مُسۡتَكۡبِرِينَ بِهِۦ سَٰمِرًا تَهۡجُرُونَ

Is the above the translation of
a. Translate: محمد هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!
b. Translate : "الله هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!"

The Truth is never afraid of scrutiny.

God can never be supported with LIES and DECEIT!

As-Samiri is not limited to one meaning.
The likely falsification of your belief is what you should be wary of.
Deviations from the pure doctrines of Jesus and all prophets before him started with Paul, who never met Jesus. Paul was the first to claim the Godhead and divine sonship of Jesus, as well as his resurrection. Yet, the disciples and the early Christian generations were unitarians. They resisted the efforts of Paul and his followers to change both the faith and law of Moses and Jesus, and, later, many of them were tortured and killed for holding to their faith.

Trinity was imposed for the first time, as an official creed of the Roman Empire, by Emperor Theodosius in the year 381 AC. The motive was mainly political, to save the Roman Empire by putting an end to the split between the Unitarian Christians and the Trinitarians, a split that persisted even after the Council of Nicea in 325 AC adopted the Pauline doctrines deifying Jesus as son of God.

Trinity, subsequently endorsed by the Council of Constantinople in 381 AC, attracted those who found in it a compromise between their original pagan beliefs and Christianity. Trinity was an invention of Athnasius of Alexandria in the 4th century after Jesus departure.

Explore2xmore:
As-Samiri is not limited to one meaning.
The likely falsification of your belief is what you should be wary of.


Deviations from the pure doctrines of Jesus and all prophets before him started with Paul, who never met Jesus. Paul was the first to claim the Godhead and divine sonship of Jesus, as well as his resurrection. Yet, the disciples and the early Christian generations were unitarians. They resisted the efforts of Paul and his followers to change both the faith and law of Moses and Jesus, and, later, many of them were tortured and killed for holding to their faith.

Trinity was imposed for the first time, as an official creed of the Roman Empire, by Emperor Theodosius in the year 381 AC. The motive was mainly political, to save the Roman Empire by putting an end to the split between the Unitarian Christians and the Trinitarians, a split that persisted even after the Council of Nicea in 325 AC adopted the Pauline doctrines deifying Jesus as son of God.

Trinity, subsequently endorsed by the Council of Constantinople in 381 AC, attracted those who found in it a compromise between their original pagan beliefs and Christianity. Trinity was an invention of Athnasius of Alexandria in the 4th century after Jesus departure.

More likely you.
Can you present a copy of this write up of 2 Peter 3.15-16 before Paul's association with the apostles?

[quote author=SIRTee15 post=125674963][/quote]

Sorry Christians: Our Bible Contains Fake Letters From Paul (And Peter)


BOTTOM LINE: Your Bible is chock-full of pseudepigrapha.

[quote author=SIRTee15 post=125674963][/quote]
The Pseudepigrapha presents challenges to the genuity of the New Testament by raising doubts about the authenticity and authorship of the biblical texts. Their existence showcases the practice of attributing writings to well-known biblical figures to enhance credibility, challenges the notion of a unified and consistent New Testament canon, and highlights the limitations of relying solely on the Bible as a historical document.

P.S I don't have Dawah scripts.

Explore2xmore:
More likely you.
Can you present a copy of this write up of 2 Peter 3.15-16 before Paul's association with the apostles?

2nd Peter was written very late into Peter's life, the letter was more like a farewell message.

I think it is right to refresh your memory as long as I live in the tent of this body, 14 because I know that I will soon put it aside, as our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me.
2 Peter 1.13-14

Peter already knew Paul at the time he wrote it. U can't unknown what's already known. U simply desperately clutching at straws.

As usual, u changing goal post again- typical of apologetic Muslims.
U came her and argued the disciples disagreed with Paul, I showed u evidence they agreed with him. Now u asking for letters disciples wrote b4 they met Paul.

Ok here is Peter said about Jesus b4 he met Paul. Do u agree with him.

15 “But what about you?” Jesus asked. “Who do you say I am?”
16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, [b]the Son of the living God.”
[/b] Matthew 16.15-16

God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of it. 33 Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. 34 For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said,

“‘The Lord said to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand
35 until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet.”’[f]

36 “Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified both Lord and Messiah.”

Acts 2.32-36

Now do u believe the those words of Peter, the disciple of our LORD; or it's Paul he hasn't met that poured those sayings this unto his head via futuristic Bluetooth.

Explore2xmore:

The Pseudepigrapha presents challenges to the genuity of the New Testament by raising doubts about the authenticity and authorship of the biblical texts. Their existence showcases the practice of attributing writings to well-known biblical figures to enhance credibility, challenges the notion of a unified and consistent New Testament canon, and highlights the limitations of relying solely on the Bible as a historical document.

P.S I don't have Dawah scripts.

Ok no problem, we leave biblical texts out as primary evidence.
Have u read about apostolic fathers,
also read Didache and the ode of Solomon.
I'm ready to cure u of your ignorance by educating u on 1st century Christianity where it all began.
What did they believe, did they know about trinity. Did they believe Jesus is God.

I already did this with an atheist and a so called Jew on this forum. I would have referred u to my posts on the topic but it won't really benefit u since u are a Muslim.
They argued from the angle of Jesus never existed.

Your own angle is Paul was a fraud. I already debunked it outrightly but willing to do more.

Explore2xmore:
More likely you.
Can you present a copy of this write up of 2 Peter 3.15-16 before Paul's association with the apostles?

Have u checked what your tafsirs say about Al samiri?
Or u already given up on the glaring blunder.

Explore2xmore:
Sorry Christians: Our Bible Contains Fake Letters From Paul (And Peter)


BOTTOM LINE: Your Bible is chock-full of pseudepigrapha.

U have to provide evidence of Pseudepigrapha otherwise u making junk claims.
Your atheist methodological approach of bible criticism will only expose the Koran and sink it.

because we all know the Koran u have today is not the one recited by Muhammed or his companions.

https://readingacts.com/2018/03/18/2-peter-and-pseudepigraphy-2/

As J. N. D. Kelly said in 1969, “scarcely anyone nowadays doubts that 2 Peter is pseudonymous

Perharps you can bring the Quran of old for critical comparison with what is available perharps you can show substantial difference if at all in the meaning of the message.
Keep repeating the missionary apologetics that know not what they say.

SIRTee15:


U have to provide evidence of Pseudepigrapha otherwise u making junk claims.
Your atheist methodological approach of bible criticism will only expose the Koran and sink it.

because we all know the Koran u have today is not the one recited by Muhammed or his companions.

You translated your writing already

TenQ:

Whats so difficult in this again!
I've translated the sentences for you


a. Translate: محمد هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!
Answer: Muhammad is the arrogant judge of his people!"





b. Translate : "الله هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!"
Answer: Allah is the arrogant judge of his people!"



Are these translations correct?

TenQ:




[quote author=TenQ post=125677011]
Is the above the translation of
a. Translate: محمد هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!
b. Translate : "الله هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!"

The Truth is never afraid of scrutiny.

God can never be supported with LIES and DECEIT!

You did not translate this
مُسۡتَكۡبِرِينَ بِهِۦ سَٰمِرًا تَهۡجُرُونَ

Explore2xmore:
You translated your writing already

I translated it check!

You are the one who has been consistent in mot answering my questions!

Translate
a. Translate: محمد هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!
b. Translate : "الله هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!"

The Truth is never afraid of scrutiny.

Explore2xmore:
You translated your writing already

You do the translation as I want to learn from you
Translate
a. Translate: محمد هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!
b. Translate : "الله هو القاضي المتكبر لشعبه!"

Explore2xmore:
https://readingacts.com/2018/03/18/2-peter-and-pseudepigraphy-2/

As J. N. D. Kelly said in 1969, “scarcely anyone nowadays doubts that 2 Peter is pseudonymous

See the evidence produced by the article u presented for Pseudepigrapha.
Mainly Conjecture, assumptions, opinion. So much for scholastic work.

Anyway I equally highlighted evidence of the authenticity of peter's authorship in the same article.
Not sure if a rebuttal is needed.

Explore2xmore:
https://readingacts.com/2018/03/18/2-peter-and-pseudepigraphy-2/

As J. N. D. Kelly said in 1969, “scarcely anyone nowadays doubts that 2 Peter is pseudonymous

Further evidence Peter agreed with Paul's teaching can be found in Acts 15 at the council of Jerusalem.


Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”

6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

12 The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them.

The writing style and vocabulary of 2 Peter are vastly different from that of Peter's acknowledged letters. The Greek used in this epistle is more polished and sophisticated, suggesting a later date and a different author. Additionally, the content of 2 Peter reflects a more developed Christian theology, which is unlikely to have been present in Peter's lifetime.

Another piece of evidence indicating that 2 Peter is not authored by Peter is the letter's reliance on earlier New Testament texts. The author of 2 Peter seems to be familiar with the letters of Paul, specifically referencing them as "Scripture" alongside the Old Testament. This suggests that the letter was written after Paul's works had already been compiled and recognized as authoritative. As Peter is not known to have had such knowledge or regard for Paul's writings during his lifetime, it strongly suggests a later date for the letter's composition.

Furthermore, the historical context in which 2 Peter was written supports the idea that it is pseudepigraphal. The letter reflects concerns about false teachers and internal disputes within the early Christian community, which were more prominent in the second century AD. The mention of Paul's letters as Scripture and the perceived need to remind the readers of Jesus' promise of his second coming also point to a later time period when the apostles were passing away, and the Christian faith was developing. These factors, along with the absence of any reference to Paul's death or the events leading up to it, suggest that 2 Peter was likely written well after Peter's death.

SIRTee15:


See the evidence produced by the article u presented for Pseudepigrapha.
Mainly Conjecture, assumptions, opinion. So much for scholastic work.

Anyway I equally highlighted evidence of the authenticity of peter's authorship in the same article.
Not sure if a rebuttal is needed.

Explore2xmore:


Perharps you can bring the Quran of old for critical comparison with what is available perharps you can show substantial difference if at all in the meaning of the message.
Keep repeating the missionary apologetics that know not what they say.

There is, in fact, a virtually unanimous opinion among the early historians that the Qur'an, as it stands, is incomplete.

Abdullah ibn Umar, in the earliest days of Islam, was quite emphatic about this:

It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: "Let none of you say 'I have acquired the whole of the Qur'an'. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Qur'an has disappeared? Rather let him say 'I have acquired what has survived.'" (as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.524).

FYI, Abdullah bin Umar was a companion of your prophet Muhammad and a son of the second Caliph Umar.

Another one....

This is from Abu Musa al-Ash'ari, one of the early authorities on the Qur'an text and a companion of Muhammad....

We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Sura) Bara’at (sura 9). I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: “If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust” ... (Sahih Muslim: bk. 5, no. 2286)

This is from a sahih hadith.

Now show me this missing verse from the modern day Koran since u say the text u have today is the same recited by Muhammed.

It is a fact that the compilation of the Mushaf was not left to one person but a committee therefore whatever a member may have forgotten will have been remembered by another.

Zaid ibn Thabit, a trusted companion of Prophet Muhammad, played a pivotal role in the compilation of the Quran. His meticulous memory and vast knowledge of Quranic verses were crucial in preserving the sacred text.
His commitment to authenticity was paramount, as any alteration would compromise the Quran's integrity. His association with Prophet Muhammad further solidified the belief that the compiled version was an accurate representation of the original revelation.

SIRTee15:


There is, in fact, a virtually unanimous opinion among the early historians that the Qur'an, as it stands, is incomplete.

Abdullah ibn Umar, in the earliest days of Islam, was quite emphatic about this:

It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: "Let none of you say 'I have acquired the whole of the Qur'an'. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Qur'an has disappeared? Rather let him say 'I have acquired what has survived.'" (as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.524).

FYI, Abdullah bin Umar was a companion of your prophet Muhammad and a son of the second Caliph Umar.

Another one....

This is from Abu Musa al-Ash'ari, one of the early authorities on the Qur'an text and a companion of Muhammad....

We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Sura) Bara’at (sura 9). I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: “If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust” ... (Sahih Muslim: bk. 5, no. 2286)

This is from a sahih hadith.

Now show me this missing verse from the modern day Koran since u say the text u have today is the same recited by Muhammed.

Explore2xmore:
The writing style and vocabulary of 2 Peter are vastly different from that of Peter's acknowledged letters. The Greek used in this epistle is more polished and sophisticated, suggesting a later date and a different author. Additionally, the content of 2 Peter reflects a more developed Christian theology, which is unlikely to have been present in Peter's lifetime.

Ok let's destroy each one after the other. No real evidence, just opinion and conjecture up and down.

It's actually 1st Peter that's more polished, cultured writing with good Greek vocabulary. 2nd Peter is quite crude, repetitive and rough.
U just need to read both to know which could have been literally written by a rugged fisherman.

The answer to the difference in textual variance is in 1 Peter 5.12

[b]With the help of Silas, whom I regard as a faithful brother, I have written to you briefly, encouraging you and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Stand fast in it.[/b]

Peter wrote 1 Peter with the help of a secretary- reason why it's polished and well cultured, but most likely wrote 2 peter himself in a hurry.
Some of Paul's letters were also written by his secretary. The gospel of Mark was peter's account of the gospel written down by John Mark.

It is interesting you even refer to As-Suyuti. How many centuries after Muhammad pbuh did he come into being? Do you say there were no documented Quran before this?

What did other members of those who copiled the Quran say?
It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar

Who reports in a chain from 4 persons?
If I tell you I heard from D that C says that B says A said something how will you perceive the accuracy of what is said?

Al-Ash'ari, known for his expertise in Quranic recitation, scrutinized each verse, ensuring its conformity to the original revelation received by the Prophet Muhammad. His meticulous efforts not only eliminated any discrepancies but also enhanced the authenticity of the Quran.

SIRTee15:


There is, in fact, a virtually unanimous opinion among the early historians that the Qur'an, as it stands, is incomplete.

Abdullah ibn Umar, in the earliest days of Islam, was quite emphatic about this:

It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: "Let none of you say 'I have acquired the whole of the Qur'an'. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Qur'an has disappeared? Rather let him say 'I have acquired what has survived.'" (as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.524).

FYI, Abdullah bin Umar was a companion of your prophet Muhammad and a son of the second Caliph Umar.

Another one....

This is from Abu Musa al-Ash'ari, one of the early authorities on the Qur'an text and a companion of Muhammad....

We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Sura) Bara’at (sura 9). I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: “If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust” ... (Sahih Muslim: bk. 5, no. 2286)

This is from a sahih hadith.

Now show me this missing verse from the modern day Koran since u say the text u have today is the same recited by Muhammed.

Is Silas not the rich man that introduced Paul to the Peter and James? Was he an apostle during the lifetime of Jesus?

SIRTee15:


Ok let's destroy each one after the other. No real evidence, just opinion and conjecture up and down.

It's actually 1st Peter that's more polished, cultured writing with good Greek vocabulary. 2nd Peter is quite crude, repetitive and rough.
U just need to read both to know which could have been literally written by a rugged fisherman.

The answer to the difference in textual variance is in 1 Peter 5.12

[b]With the help of Silas, whom I regard as a faithful brother, I have written to you briefly, encouraging you and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Stand fast in it.[/b]

Peter wrote 1 Peter with the help of a secretary- reason why it's polished and well cultured, but most likely wrote 2 peter himself in a hurry.
Some of Paul's letters were also written by his secretary. The gospel of Mark was peter's account of the gospel written down by John Mark.

Explore2xmore:
It is a fact that the compilation of the Mushaf was not left to one person but a committee therefore whatever a member may have forgotten will have been remembered by another.

Zaid ibn Thabit, a trusted companion of Prophet Muhammad, played a pivotal role in the compilation of the Quran. His meticulous memory and vast knowledge of Quranic verses were crucial in preserving the sacred text.
His commitment to authenticity was paramount, as any alteration would compromise the Quran's integrity. His association with Prophet Muhammad further solidified the belief that the compiled version was an accurate representation of the original revelation.

This done talk finish now.
Mr Man, go and pull out that verse I quote from your modern day koran. The verse about son and adam and seven Valleys. If it's not there, what happend to it.
The early companions recited it so where don't u guys recite it anymore.

See the polishing he did for Zaid thabit. U claim his vast memory of the Koran is exemplary but had to travel the end of the earth to find the only person who knew the last verse of Surah at-Tauba

So I started looking for the Qur'an and collected it from (what was written on) palm-leaf stalks, thin white stones, and also from men who knew it by heart, till I found the last verse of Surat at-Tauba (repentance) with Abi Khuzaima al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol.6, p.478)

So where then is the authenticity of that verse, where is the chain of narration of that verse if only one person knew it when the Koran was compiled?

Raheeqilmaktoom:


No one who knows a thing about Islam will honor the guy with response.

I engaged him once, he ran away and locked down the thread. I doubt if the guy looks at the crap he copies and paste with 2 eyes.

Just engage him away from the topic and he will vanish.

Mr liar!

Who is the one who has vanished from this topic?

I have challenged you with respect to your lies, you've not been able to prove it till now. How you think you can use lies to defend Allah is puzzling to me

Again:

Raheeqilmaktoom:


No one who knows a thing about Islam will honor the guy with response.

I engaged him once, he ran away and locked down the thread. I doubt if the guy looks at the crap he copies and paste with 2 eyes.

Just engage him away from the topic and he will vanish.

I challenge you to your face you shameless liar
1. Show me the link of the thread where you engaged me AND I ran away!
2. Show me the link of the thread where I locked down my thread (because of you)
3. Show me the website or places where you think I do copy-paste my threads on Nairaland..


You are a Shameless liar if you can't prove your claims above!



Now, I ask you too
1. Look at the verse below and tell me that my translation was wrong

Qur'an 46:31
يَٰقَوْمَنَآ أَجِيبُوا۟ دَاعِىَ ٱللَّهِ وَءَامِنُوا۟ بِهِۦ يَغْفِرْ لَكُم مِّن ذُنُوبِكُمْ وَيُجِرْكُم مِّنْ عَذَابٍ أَلِيمٍ

Qur'an 46:31
O our people! respond to Allah's Messenger and believe in Him. He will forgive you your sins and guard you from a painful doom.

2. If you think my translation is wrong, please translate the Arabic sentence below as correctly as you can

Bible 46:31
"يَا قَوْمَنَا، أَجِيبُوا بُولَ وَءَامِنُوا بِهِۦ ۖ يَغْفِرْ لَكُم مِّن ذُنُوبِكُمْ وَيُجِرْكُم مِّنْ عَذَابٍ أَلِيمٍ"

Let's see who will run away!

Cc: gaskiyamagana

SIRTee15:


This done talk finish now.
Mr Man, go and pull out that verse I quote from your modern day koran. The verse about son and adam and seven Valleys. If it's not there, what happend to it.
The early companions recited it so where don't u guys recite it anymore.

See the polishing he did for Zaid thabit. U claim his vast memory of the Koran is exemplary but had to travel the end of the earth to find the only person who knew the last verse of Surah at-Tauba

So I started looking for the Qur'an and collected it from (what was written on) palm-leaf stalks, thin white stones, and also from men who knew it by heart, till I found the last verse of Surat at-Tauba (repentance) with Abi Khuzaima al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol.6, p.478)

So where then is the authenticity of that verse, where is the chain of narration of that verse if only one person knew it when the Koran was compiled?

You present hearsay about some verses which doesn't amount to proof.

Zaid bin Thabbit did not forget those verses of At-Tauba but needed someone to testify that he had previously written this in front of Prophet Muhammad pbuh.

Explore2xmore:
It is a fact that the compilation of the Mushaf was not left to one person but a committee therefore whatever a member may have forgotten will have been remembered by another.

Zaid ibn Thabit, a trusted companion of Prophet Muhammad, played a pivotal role in the compilation of the Quran. His meticulous memory and vast knowledge of Quranic verses were crucial in preserving the sacred text.
His commitment to authenticity was paramount, as any alteration would compromise the Quran's integrity. His association with Prophet Muhammad further solidified the belief that the compiled version was an accurate representation of the original revelation.

Of course, deny it once your own book becomes evidence against u. Question it's authenticity or the chain of narration.
Asking me what year the book was written...
Why don't u tell me what year sahih Muslim and sahih Al Bukhari were written.
How many centuries (not even yrs) after the death of Muhammad were they compiled.