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

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

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

i will try to explain to you and inshaAllah you will understand.i see your sincerity otherwise i would have simply laughed at your supposition that we are told to follow the Quran alone.

the contentious part of the verse is:

"wa iza zakarta rabbaka *fil Qur'ani wah'dahu* walaw alaa adbaarihim nufura"

now ask yourself this:why was this verse revealed and why did the people described therein used to turn away in aversion?

first,let me translate that part of the verse in the way i believe is correct and in the way you mistranslated it.

my way :
*And when you mention your lord, in the Quran, alone*, they run away in aversion.

the above is the word for word translation verbatim i have given on my own.

your way:
*And when you preach your lord,using the Quran alone*, they run away in aversion.


let me now clarify the points:

1.) there is no where in the verse that indicates that the people turned their face because it was the Quran alone that was "used".

2.) a literal translation of the verse shows that it is when Allah in the Quran is mentioned alone that they show opposition.

3.) this is a clear case of tense and context.you can either say THE ALONE part refers to "Allah only" or "the Quran only".

i asked a question:to who was this verse addressed? this verse was addressed to the polytheists who had many gods and not to a muslim or any muslim or sahaba who believes in only One God (Allah).the polytheists turned away because Allah in the Quran is mentioned alone.therefore it is not because Allah was only mentioned in the Quran but Allah alone is mentioned in the Quran unlike their belief in many gods.so this is the context of the verse.if we go to hadith we also see places where Allah is mentioned alone and in fact i can say no one else besides Allah.are we to reject that because Allah must only be mentioned in the Quran alone/only? i dont think so.

tbaba1234:

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

Some bible scholars say the bible was corrupted, some say it is not. . .Some koranic scholars say the koran was preserved some say it is not. . .many koranic scholars do NOT agree with the islamic claim of authorship, just as many biblical scholars do not agree on the biblical claim of authorship. . .We have had this discussion before. . .

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

Why is it that is it ONLY those whose stories were talked about in details in the bible were also talked about in details in the koran?. . .

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

It is "said," it is "believed". . .What am I to do with all these mere speculations?. . .Ad is said to be the fourth in the generation of Noah and this can be corroborated by which source external source?. . .

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

So we know these places existed.

You don't know if any of these places exist, you ONLY believe they do and there is a very big difference between the two. . .

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

Personally, I dodn't even take this claims seriously. . .It is just a claim, nothing different from say Moses wrote the Pentateuch. . .Or the disciples of Jesus wrote the gospels. . .They are just claims. . .Mohammed received all his revelations in Mecca is nothing but a muslim claim. . .

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

I know of muslim scholars like Ahamed Deedat that claim the bible is written in 3rd person narrative so its false. . .The same applies to the koran and if we are to go by such claim then the koran is also false. . .

mazaje:

I know of muslim scholars like Ahamed Deedat that claim the bible is written in 3rd person narrative so its false. . .The same applies to the koran and if we are to go by such claim then the koran is also false. . .

i also know of him mentioning that.i think i have explained the difference between the 3rd person narrative in the Quran and the bible.the 3rd person narrative in the Quran is done with the foreknowledge of Allah and by His will,command and permission.while in the bible,the third person narratives occur without the knowldge of the author the particular bible book is attributed to.the 3rd party narrative is even established to be the words of the author.and in some cases it is stated after the demise of the author (i cited Moses' obituary).

mazaje:

Some bible scholars say the bible was corrupted, some say it is not. . .Some koranic scholars say the koran was preserved some say it is not. . .many koranic scholars do NOT agree with the islamic claim of authorship, just as many biblical scholars do not agree on the biblical claim of authorship. . .We have had this discussion before. . .

Why is it that is it ONLY those whose stories were talked about in details in the bible were also talked about in details in the koran?. . .

It is "said," it is "believed". . .What am I to do with all these mere speculations?. . .Ad is said to be the fourth in the generation of Noah and this can be corroborated by which source external source?. . .

You don't know if any of these places exist, you ONLY believe they do and there is a very big difference between the two. . .

Personally, I dodn't even take this claims seriously. . .It is just a claim, nothing different from say Moses wrote the Pentateuch. . .Or the disciples of Jesus wrote the gospels. . .They are just claims. . .Mohammed received all his revelations in Mecca is nothing but a muslim claim. . .

I know of muslim scholars like Ahamed Deedat that claim the bible is written in 3rd person narrative so its false. . .The same applies to the koran and if we are to go by such claim then the koran is also false. . .

This will be my last reply:

99% of muslim scholars are unanimous on the authorship of the Quran:: Biblical scholars do not know the authors of many books in the bible... Secular Scholars might attribute the Quran to Muhammad(SAW)not God.

Sounding like a broken record now, the stories of Hud and salih and luqman or the youth in the cave are detailed in the Quran as much biblical stories of Jonah or Job or solomon or lot much more than John in the Quran: straight to the point.

Only Abraham, Noah, Moses, Jesus and Joseph are detailed::: Again it is the audience: Apart from Joseph, which Allah calls the most beautiful story. Abraham, Noah, Moses and Jesus are Messengers (not just prophets) : They came with a law for their people. That is one of the reasons they are more detailed accounts of them.

I never said the Quran was only revealed in Mecca: Most of the stories were revealed in Mecca; The laws were established in medina when muslims had a state.

@Lagoshia
ok then. Am glad you did not laugh at all. Otherwise, we will have to open a new thread just for that.lol
i will also give u a reply, sensing your honesty.
1)you have chosen to confound the clear message in verse 17:46 with grotesque misrepresentation of it. This is just one verse we discussing, i have hundreds- but this one verse sends out a clear message: that God is to be advocated in the "quran alone".
2)Since u have chosen to apply the so called "asbab nuzl"(reason for revelation), i will

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

Please is Ali's translation different from Pickhtall?

@Logoshia
sorry for dat. Am using my phn. Typed a lengthy text and it simply disappeared. Will complete God willing

usisky: @Lagoshia
ok then. Am glad you did not laugh at all. Otherwise, we will have to open a new thread just for that.lol
i will also give u a reply, sensing your honesty.
1)you have chosen to confound the clear message in verse 17:46 with grotesque misrepresentation of it. This is just one verse we discussing, i have hundreds- but this one verse sends out a clear message: that God is to be advocated in the "quran alone".
2)Since u have chosen to apply the so called "asbab nuzl"(reason for revelation), i will

even if i'm to take the verse in isolation and only use it to interprete itself and alongside other verses in the Quran,we see that the aversion of the ones mentioned to the Quran and their reason to turn away is because Allah alone is mentioned.it is common sense.

otherwise,if you tell me those people turned away because it is only the Quran that is used,you should tell us what other book they were advocating for to be used.the hadiths was not written until years after the Prophet's (sa) death because of abu bakr's prohibition.

the verse clearly is refering to people that existed.it is not talking in the abstract or about people in future.

usisky: @Logoshia
sorry for dat. Am using my phn. Typed a lengthy text and it simply disappeared. Will complete God willing

no problem.take your time!

mkmyers45: Please is Ali's translation different from Pickhtall?

Peace bro. in some instances,yes. Compare 39:45 of Ali's and pickhtall's. That verse is one of the greates quranic criterion for strict monotheism/true belief in God. Even though both are not entirely correct, pickhtall carries d day for that one.

mazaje:

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

Erudition indeed simple question I asked mazaje is do you need an original document to prove a currupted text? And I also asked How do Christians print their copies is it from the ORIGINAL bible or what? Pls answer this simple questions rather than deliberately straying away from the questions, or is this your own level of "erudition" lol!

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

All the above have bee n address, we do not need to know what food a prophet consumed or what colour of shoes he wore! We only need to understand the message Allah reveals by telling us the story of HUD therein lies the signs, you cowardly D; ran away from the low life thread you started to discredit Islam and now u seek to start the flie issue, something that was thoroughly dealt with? I see u are actining ur usual irrational incoherent self! Keep it up!! Another reason we are better off serving Allah . . .

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

SO?

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

Simple questions are already proving to erudite for mr. Erudition, only people of usisky caliber can consider you erudite! Lol D;, leaving the simple question where do christians get their original bible to print the mordern one unanswered and please do let usisky down a fourth time in a roll! D;

"verily those who disbelief in Allah and His messenger, and they seek to differentiate between Allah and His Messenge[/b]r, and they say[b] 'we believe in some parts but reject some parts' and they seek to hold a path there in between. [b]Indeed these are true disbelievers, a[/b]nd we have reserved for the unbelievers a humiliating punishment" Quran-(5:149-150)

@usisky if u r really a submitter then u should well grounded in 'sarf', 'nahw' and 'balagha' as these are crucial to understanding the Quran. Thus I will assume the above verse is self explanatory to YOU.

But in case they are not I add:

"indeed there is for you in the messenger of Allah exemplary behaviours...." Quran- ahzaab. I ask u where can you find these exemplary characters of the prophet

"...and what ever the messenger brings for you then hold on to it and whatever he forbids you then stay away from it...." quran- mumtahanah

"...and obey Allah and obey his messenger and those with authority amongst you, and if you differ amongst yourself concerning anything then refer it to Allah and his Messenger" quran- nisa'i I know we can refer cases to Allah by referring to the Quran, but I ask you how do we refer to the messenger MUHAMMAD PEACE BE UPON HIM?

vedaxcool:

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

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

Hmmm...Lagoshia and usisky think otherwise.

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

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

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

I think your views of the qu'ran are exceptional. So Lagoshia mistranslates? Hmmm

LagosShia:

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

mkmyers45: Hmmm...Lagoshia and usisky think otherwise.

stop putting words into my mouth.how do i disagree?

mkmyers45: Hmmm...Lagoshia and usisky think otherwise.

Please can outline their "thoughts" cause I am beginning to have serious reservations over ur credibility and honesty! And also so u do not assume things about people that may be false

LagosShia:

stop putting words into my mouth.how do i disagree?

What does it mean to you to Standardize the Qu'ran?

vedaxcool:

Please can outline their "thoughts" cause I am beginning to have serious reservations over ur credibility and honesty! And also so u do not assume things about people that may be false

Lagoshia's translation for usisky was not found in usisky's Ali and Pickhall versions/translation of the qu'ran.

@ Biger boy- peace

please note: i am not here to promote myself or garnish my Ego. God sees my heart, i do wat i do for the concern i have for my fellow men folk. I do belive we all here out of good intentions; i hope.
I also believe u are striving to make it to God's kingdom as much as i am. Do u really want to support the prophet muhammad? If so, then follow the words that u are certain(100%) came out of his mouth-Quran. And not the satanic innovations called hadith & sunnah. U people realize that the hadith is largely the reason the immage islam is destroyed. because of the hadiths, the prophet is seen as a tyrant, perverted womanizer,murdrer, rapist ,paedophile etc etc. Yet u ppl cannot comprehend. I bet non of u have truly read the hadiths- pls do. Dnt just pick wat appears to b gud teachings, while disregarding others. The "Yujur veda" have beautiful teachings. The "zend avesta" has gud teachings. "Rig veda" too. The gospel selF. U Don read the psalms?. What truly constitutes true revelation from? Contrast the hadith with quran, maybe u will become seer. If u dnt get me. Pls initiate a thread, Clearly stating wat u wish verify. My fingers dey hurt. Pleasure. Sallam

mkmyers45: Lagoshia's translation for usisky was not found in usisky's Ali and Pickhall versions/translation of the qu'ran.

How does this address any of what I wrote?

mkmyers45: Lagoshia's translation for usisky was not found in usisky's Ali and Pickhall versions/translation of the qu'ran.

The first translation was from "sahih international".then in my next post on the verse in contention i presented word for word translation by myself.

and how is all that relevant?

mkmyers45: What does it mean to you to Standardize the Qu'ran?

in the case of the Quran in usthman's day,was to present copies from the original and by the scribes who memorise the Quran to prevent people either distorting verses or their recitation as was observed in some places and reported to the 3rd sunni caliph.

@Logoshia

apologies. Gotta go. Got some coding work to do. Sai gobe. My finger hurt. Will end our little discourse tomrw. God willing

What I whsh to verify @ usisky is :

With all due respect are you a Muslim? My question arises from your choice of terminology when u type, they r a bit strange to the Islamic 'register'

I quoted for you the Quran (not the Hadith) to prove to u that the prophets lifestyle known only through authetic Hadith is also a source of authority in Islam

Passionate appeal void of backing of the Quran ( which I assumed you should be well versed in since it is ur only authority) is meaningless to me.

If you are not well grounded in that which you profess, then why should the seeing follow the blind?

"and We revealed to you (O Muhammad) AL-KITAAB and AL-HIKMAT and we taught you that which you knew not..." Quran -nisa

I suppose you can elucidate the meaning of the two bolded to us, O you person of the Quran.

usisky: @Logoshia

apologies. Gotta go. Got some coding work to do. Sai gobe. My finger hurt. Will end our little discourse tomrw. God willing

Fi Amanillah!

vedaxcool:

How does this address any of what I wrote?

Two people translating a verse differently? Hmmmn "'O, People of the Book! Ye have no
ground to stand upon unless ye
stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord.' It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy ... those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (Scriptures), and the Sabaeans and the Christians - any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, - on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." (Sura 5:71-72). (My emphasis).

LagosShia:

Holy Quran 5:71
And they thought there would be no [resulting] punishment, so they became blind and deaf. Then Allah turned to them in forgiveness; then [again] many of them became blind and deaf. And Allah is Seeing of what they do.

Please quote us you Sura 5:71

usisky: @ Biger boy- peace

please note: i am not here to promote myself or garnish my Ego. God sees my heart, i do wat i do for the concern i have for my fellow men folk. I do belive we all here out of good intentions; i hope.
I also believe u are striving to make it to God's kingdom as much as i am. Do u really want to support the prophet muhammad? If so, then follow the words that u are certain(100%) came out of his mouth-Quran. And not the satanic innovations called hadith & sunnah. U people realize that the hadith is largely the reason the immage islam is destroyed. because of the hadiths, the prophet is seen as a tyrant, perverted womanizer,murdrer, rapist ,paedophile etc etc. Yet u ppl cannot comprehend. I bet non of u have truly read the hadiths- pls do. Dnt just pick wat appears to b gud teachings, while disregarding others. The "Yujur veda" have beautiful teachings. The "zend avesta" has gud teachings. "Rig veda" too. The gospel selF. U Don read the psalms?. What truly constitutes true revelation from? Contrast the hadith with quran, maybe u will become seer. If u dnt get me. Pls initiate a thread, Clearly stating wat u wish verify. My fingers dey hurt. Pleasure. Sallam

Allah foretold this in the Quran. In sura Ali Imran: " ...and assuredly you shall hear from those who were given the books before you (Jews and christians) and from pegans many derogatory words..."
So it's nothing new, they called the prophet many names during his time on earth, so why expect less from the disbelievers now. But with patience, fear of Allah and constant clarification, LA YADURRUNA KAIDUHUM SHAI' A.

mkmyers45: Two people translating a verse differently? Hmmmn "'O, People of the Book! Ye have no
ground to stand upon unless ye
stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord.' It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy ... those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (Scriptures), and the Sabaeans and the Christians - any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, - on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." (Sura 5:71-72). (My emphasis). Please quote us you Sura 5:71

Holy Quran 5:71-72
And they thought there would be no [resulting] punishment, so they became blind and deaf. Then Allah turned to them in forgiveness; then [again] many of them became blind and deaf. And Allah is Seeing of what they do.They have certainly disbelieved who say, " Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers.

Holy Quran 5:68
Say, "O People of the Scripture, you are [standing] on nothing until you uphold [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord." And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. So do not grieve over the disbelieving people.

I am zulu

i have a 7 year old betrothed. when do you think it is right to consume her as to please allah the most knowing?

vedaxcool:

Erudition indeed simple question I asked mazaje is do you need an original document to prove a currupted text? And I also asked How do Christians print their copies is it from the ORIGINAL bible or what? Pls answer this simple questions rather than deliberately straying away from the questions, or is this your own level of "erudition" lol!

Yes, you need an original document to show a corrupted one. . .Christians print from the copies of the once they claim to be the original one just like muslims print from the copies of the ones they also claim to be the original one. . .Again where is allah's original bible so that we can compare it with the one muslims claim is corrupt and differentiate from the two. . Was it eaten by camels under aisha's bed?. . .

All the above have bee n address, we do not need to know what food a prophet consumed or what colour of shoes he wore! We only need to understand the message Allah reveals by telling us the story of HUD therein lies the signs, you cowardly D; ran away from the low life thread you started to discredit Islam and now u seek to start the flie issue, something that was thoroughly dealt with? I see u are actining ur usual irrational incoherent self! Keep it up!! Another reason we are better off serving Allah . . .

Very interesting that it is only stories that are written in details in the binle that happen to be also written in details in the koran. . .Allah reveals or Mohammed and his cronies plagiarized?. . .Keep on deluding yourself with the mythological writings and superstitions of ancient arabs. . .So you are better off as muslims, eh? Sure how else will the delusion make sense to you, if you don't delude yourself into thinking that accepting aged long mythologies and superstition makes you better. . .I laugh i arabic. . .

SO?

Means mohammed got his stories from a christian. . .

Simple questions are already proving to erudite for mr. Erudition, only people of usisky caliber can consider you erudite! Lol D;, leaving the simple question where do christians get their original bible to print the mordern one unanswered and please do let usisky down a fourth time in a roll! D;

According to christians they got the copy they have today from the copies of the original, just as muslsims claim to get their copies of the koran from the original. . .