tbaba1234: ^ When archeology supports the bible you accept it, but fail to recognize the many other times the bible fails in this regard. And there are many, for instance today archeologists claim that there were no wall in Jericho because cities were not built with walls in that age. The use of 'pharaoh' for the leader of egypt at the time of abraham and Joseph is wrong. I can go on and on.

So the bible contains some archeological facts, this is to be expected from any historical book... But it also contains some archeological fails, again expected from any work of man.So, archeology is not the science that will validate your book.

As regards using quotes from the bible, It depends on your audience and the place... If i am talking to a christian audience, i might want to use a book they revere. However, if i am talking to a atheist, i might use scholarly work. Some words of God still exist in the bible, it is just muddled up with the word of the prophet, the historian and God knows who else.

The Quran confirms what is true in your book.

My Oga, are you serious? Do you know that what archeological finds there are are based on progressive elaboration? By your wrapped logic no further archeological discoveries are to be made since all discoveries have been finished.

In every day archaeology many discoveries are made, theories confirmed or validated, new facts are uncovered, old theories disproved all based on the following;

(1) Tenacity of researchers in looking for evidence,

(2) Supporting technology eg carbon dating, CT scan, ground penetrating radar etc

(3) funds. These things don't come cheap.

(4) New supporting evidence from other archeological sites which makes clearer our understanding of life and times of characters AND events thus disproving or confirming earlier assertions by scientists.

Biblical accounts are being validated progressively that's what's keeping biblical archaeology active and vibrant discipline cos there is still so much to discover.

So don't go saying walls of jericho never existed etc. Maybe the technology to carry out that kind of research is not yet available.

You say archeological discoveries do not validated the bible, can you in all honesty say that archeological discoveries have validated 1/20th of your Quran as it has done to the Bible?

May I also ask, WHY MUST YOU QUOTE THE BIBLE TO VALIDATE YOUR ARGUMENT ON RELIGIOUS MATTERS AND HISTORY? even if you are talking to a Christian audience, its logical to USE THE QURAN to show its superior to the Bible! How can you prove that to me by quoting from the "corrupt" book to, for example, validate Muhammad's prophethood?!!!!!!!! Silly, I say!


How can the Quran confirm the Bible when YOU guys quote from it to try to VALIDATE YOUR religion? It can only mean that the BIble is needed to confirm the Quran. Unfortunately, it doesn't.

LEAVE THE "CORRUPT" BIBLE ALONE! (apologies to Frosbel)


with this said, let the thread continue.

^ I am not talking about archeological evidence that is yet to be found... I am talking about confirmed finds that prove the bible wrong on some counts... The leader of Egypt at the time of Abraham and Joseph was not called pharaoh... That is a fact..... Not a theory.... Pharaoh was only used in the new kingdom... We have more than enough details of ancient egypt to know that.

So no i am not talking theories, I am talking facts.... And the bible gets it wrong on more than one occasion.

My aim is not to put the bible down because i respect a book revered by so many people and I do not quote the bible for religious discussions unless i am speaking to a christian apologist. No one needs the bible to validate anything. Using it or not depends on the audience. If the discussion is on comparative religion, then it is expected.

The Quran is mind-blowing to say the least, and i am not talking about just the science of archeology... Just the language itself, the choice of words alone is mind blowing; It literally brings me to my knees. The English language does not capture the depth of it.

Read a hebrew bible (old testament) to understand what i am saying, some parts are beautiful, others are like a 3 year talking (with all due respect).... It can not all be from God. The beauty of the Quranic discourse is consistent all through the text.

Personally i do not use the bible passages much, because i think it is counterproductive to talk to christian by proving christianity wrong.. This makes them dig in, instead of opening up. I just use common sense and it works wonders. There are certain groups of christians it can be used for... It depends on your crowd.

tbaba1234: ^
So no i am not talking theories, I am talking facts.... And the bible gets it wrong on more than one occasion.

Then you guys should leave it alone. If it gets it wrong more than one occasion, why quote it to say Muhammed was the comforter, for example? Or the "nation" of islam is mentioned in it. How can you tell if that is even right? Hypocrisy of gargantuan proportions

My aim is not to put the bible down because i respect a book revered by so many people and I do not quote the bible for religious discussions unless i am speaking to a christian apologist. No one needs the bible to validate anything. Using it or not depends on the audience. If the discussion is on comparative religion, then it is expected.

Blatant Al-taquiyya of the highest order. You guys lie so easily. This is what you wrote:

Some words of God still exist in the bible, it is just muddled up with the word of the prophet, the historian and God knows who else

Is that for a book you "respect"? What about

some parts are beautiful, others are like a 3 year talking

How would you feel if one were to say that about the QUran. You lie!

search for threads on the comforter, nation of islam, haggar and ishmeal etc from your fellow al- taquiyyist to see how desperately they twist the Bible to try to justify the Prophet Mohammed and Islam. See how you guys were all worked up about the Turkey Gnostic "Bible" of Barnabas find; running temperature that the "Bible" will validate Muhammed's Prophethood! Not minding it gnostic. You guys instantly became Bible experts alleging clandestine moves to destroy it! Why the desperation? to prove what? Only uncertain products require to be validated! Never will Christians bat an eyelid on Islamic text and what it says on Christianity.

The Quran is mind-blowing to say the least, and i am not talking about just the science of archeology... Just the language itself, the choice of words alone is mind blowing; It literally brings me to my knees.

Give me a list of ten historical accounts (infact, just five) that is listed in the Quran that HAVE BEEN PROVED THROUGH ARCHAEOLOGY? Not plagiarised Bible accounts please. Original Quran accounts! The Quran says there were over 100,000 prophets sent to all people, Why are most prophets listed in the Quran Biblical prophets and figures? Why not Arabian Prophets? Since some may have been sent to the Arabs too. Serious questions that you guys should ask yourselves.

Another example: Doesnt incredulous stories about King Solomon (How a King with a thousand wives who at some point deviated from God is called a prophet beats me) listening to ants sound like Children's bed time stories?! ("the tortoise told the lion" sort of stories). the fact is that ants do not use sound but smell to communicate. Even if they did would he have heard? Of course, Muslim apologist will twist the words to fit a prevalent rational explanation. If in 10 years time science finds that ants do emit sound, the meaning of the words will be reworked to fit a plausible explanation!!!!!! You guys leave yourselves escape routes.

Just the language itself, the choice of words alone is mind blowing; It literally brings me to my knees.

Thats you. Many scholars and people do not agree with you. If it blows your socks off - enjoy! JUST LEAVE THE BIBLE OUT IT.

Let the Quran justify itself, by itself, for itself. If it contains holes that needs filling up with how, why and when? Too bad.



This argument is not the reason for this thread. You guys can continue searching for a "NAFDAC number" for your religion from the Bible - you will not get it. Christ has denied you in Mathews 7:15


ITS TIME THE THREAD RESUMES.

^Lol why are you embarrassing yourself like this?... You brought archeology and now you are not making any sense.. I am sorry if you are offended by my comments on the bible but that is not my aim.

I would take up your challenge on Archeology; Just about egypt, Id stop at five for now...

1. The Quran does not make the error of calling the leader at the time of Joseph pharaoh...

2. The Pharaoh in moses time claimed to be God, What does recent archeology tell us about that?

Has the story of Moses reached thee? Behold, thy Lord did call to him in the sacred valley of Tuwa, "Go thou to Pharaoh for he has indeed transgressed all bounds: And say to him, ‘Wouldst thou that thou shouldst be purified (from sin)? - And that I guide thee to thy Lord, so thou shouldst fear Him?'" Then did (Moses) show him the Great Sign. But (Pharaoh) rejected it and disobeyed (guidance); Further, he turned his back, striving hard (against God). Then he collected (his men) and made a proclamation, Saying, "I am your Lord, Most High". [Qur'an 79:15-24]

Pharaoh said: "O Chiefs! no god do I know for you but myself... [Qur'an 28:38]

By the early New Kingdom, deification of the living king had become an established practice, and[b] the living king could himself be worshipped and supplicated for aid as a god.[/b] [D. P. Silverman,"grinivinities And Deities In Ancient Egypt" in B. E. Shafer (Ed.) Religion In Ancient Egypt: Gods Myths, And Personal Practice, 1991, Routledge: London, p. 64.]

Stela no. 410 of Hildesheim Museum shows two people, one is standing wearing the double crown with the uraeus, a short skirt, a necklace and holds the so-called handkerchief or seal in one hand [Figure 5(a)]. He is called: "King of Upper and Lower Egypt, the Lord of the Two Lands ‘Ramesses-meryamun, the [b]God’"[/b].
{L. Habachi, Features Of The Deification Of Ramesses II, 1969, op. cit., p. 32}


3. From the Quran, It can be proved that Ramsses II was the pharaoh of the flood simply by examining the number of years of Moses leaving egypt (about 40 years) to going to midian (8-10 years) Only one pharaoh served that long.

Let's go to more astonishing stuff::

Or have they the dominion of the heavens and the earth and all between? If so, let them mount up with the ropes and means (to reach that end)! But there - will be put to flight even a host of confederates. Before them (were many who) rejected messengers,- the people of Noah, and ‘Ad, and Pharaoh, the Lord of Stakes, and Thamud, and the people of Lut, and the Companions of the Wood; - such were the Confederates. [Qur'an 38:10-13]

The intepretation of this is that Ramesses II had many buildings,

Ibn ʿAbbās (companion of the prophet) said: It means the lord of the secure building. Al-Ḍaḥḥāk said: He owned many buildings; buildings are called awtād. [/b]Also according to Ibn ʿAbbās as well as Qatādah and ʿAṭāʾ: He owned stakes and ropes and playgrounds where he was entertained.

Of all the Pharaohs, Ramesses II is the most renowned for his buildings::

[b]As a monument builder Ramesses II stands pre-eminent amongst the pharaohs of Egypt. Although Khufu had created the Great Pyramid, Ramesses' hand lay over the whole land. True, he thought nothing of adding his name to other kings' monuments and statues right back to the Middle Kingdom, so that nowadays the majority of cartouches seen on almost any monument proclaim his throne name - User-maat-re ('the justice of Re is strong').[P. A. Clayton, Chronicle Of The Pharaohs: The Reign-By-Reign Record Of The Rulers And Dynasties Of Ancient Egypt, 1994, Thames and Hudson Ltd.: London (UK), pp. 153-154. ]


4. Still unconvinced? There's more

And We made a people, considered weak (and of no account), inheritors of lands in both east and west, - lands whereon We sent down Our blessings. The fair promise of thy Lord was fulfilled for the Children of Israel , because they had patience and constancy, and[b] We levelled to the ground the great works and fine buildings which Pharaoh and his people erected (with such pride)[/b] [mā kāna yaṣnaʿu firʿawna wa qawhumū wa mā kānū yaʿrishūn]. [Qur'an 7:137]

What great works and building could the Quran be talking about?

Per Ramesses was probably the vastest and most costly royal residence ever erected by the hand of man. As can now be seen its known palace and official centre covered an area of at least four square miles, and its temples were in scale with this, a colossal assemblage forming perhaps the largest collection of chapels built in the pre-classical world by a single ruler at one time. [E. P. Uphill, The Temples Of Per Ramesses, 1984, Aris & Phillips, Warminster: England, p. 1.]


The once great Per Ramesses now lies in ruins, this is likely the destruction of the magnificent city talked about in the Quran::


5. There is still more!!

"But we can surely produce magic to match thine! So make a tryst between us and thee, which we shall not fail to keep - neither we nor thou - in a place where both shall have even chances." Moses said: "Your tryst is the Day of the Festival [yaum al-zīna], and let the people be assembled when the sun is well up." [Qur'an 20:58-59]

Could it be talking about the Heb-Sed (or simply Sed) festival? The festival celebrated 30 years after a new king then every three years after...

The Bible mentions none of these....... The Quran is accurate on all five counts....


As regards the Solomon and the ant, The Qur'an implied that Solomon (pbuh) understood and comprehended what the ant 'said'. Recently it has been discovered that ants DO communicate with sound.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/sitesearch.do?querystring=Hills+are+alive+with+the+sound+of+ants+%E2%80%94+talking+to+each+other&p=tto&pf=all&bl=on

The article says:

Hills are alive with the sound of ants — talking to each other
Lewis Smith, Environment Reporter
Published: 06 February 2009

Advances in audio technology have enabled scientists to discover that ants routinely talk to each other in their nests.

Most ants have a natural washboard and plectrum built into their abdomens that they can rub together to communicate using sound.

Using miniaturised microphones and speakers that can be inserted unobtrusively into nests, researchers established that the queens can issue instructions to their workers.

The astonished researchers, who managed to make the first recordings of queen ants “speaking”, also discovered that other insects can mimic the ants to make them slaves.

Rebel's large blue butterfly is one of about 10,000 creatures that have a parasitic relationship with ants and has now been found to have learnt to imitate the sounds as well as using chemical signals.

The butterfly's caterpillars are carried by ants into the nests where they beg for food and are fed by the workers. When a colony is disturbed the ants will rescue the caterpillars before their own broods.

Research several decades ago had shown that ants were able to make alarm calls using sounds, but only now has it been shown that their vocabulary may be much bigger and that they can “talk” to each other.

Professor Jeremy Thomas, of the University of Oxford, said improvements in technology had made the discoveries possible because it meant the ants could be recorded and subjected to playbacks without becoming alarmed.

By placing miniature speakers into the nest and playing back sounds made by a queen, the researchers were able to persuade ants to stand to attention.

“When we played the queen sounds they did 'en garde' behaviour. They would stand motionless with their antennae held out and their jaws apart for hours - the moment anyone goes near they will attack,” he said.

He described how the ants would press their antennae to the speaker just as they would seek to greet another ant in the nest.

Professor Thomas said it remained unclear how much the ants relied on sound for language but he suspected that further analysis would reveal a wider vocabulary than had been seen yet.

“The most important discovery is that within the ant colony different sounds can provoke different reactions,” he said. “I would be very surprised if we didn't get different types of sound.

“It's within the power of the ant to play different tunes by changing the rhythm with which they rub.”

He added that the detection of the role of sounds provided the “final piece of the jigsaw” to explain how Rebel's large blue caterpillars survive in ants' nests and should help to guide conservationists in trying to save the endangered European mountain species.

Francesca Barbero, of the University of Turin[size=12pt][/size], said: “Our new work shows that the role of sound in information exchange within ant colonies has been greatly underestimated.”

Karsten Schönrogge, of the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology in Oxfordshire, said the mimicry by the caterpillars was so convincing that the ants afforded them higher status than their own young. They will even slaughter their own young to feed the interlopers when food is scarce.

The findings were reported in the journal Science.

SO ANTS DO USE SOUNDS>>>

Another accurate description by the Quran::

Any one with a little knowledge of classical arabic would be blown away by the Quran.... You can never see a scholar of the Quran leave Islam.. The more people study Christianity , the less faith they have.. There is reason for it.. Dr. Jerald Dirks and Bart Ehrman are prominent examples.

I apologize for any offensive thing i might have said.

The use of bible for discussion is like any tool, It depends on your audience

double post

here is another proof of the Quran's compatibility with archaeology that was found recently after centuries.

[size=14pt]"Iram of the Pillars"[/size]

The Qur'an (1,400 years ago) mentions a certain city by the name of Iram (a city of pillars) [Qur'an: The Dawn 89:7], which was apparently not known in ancient history and non-existent as far as historians were concerned.The December 1978 edition of the National Geographic Magazine records that in 1973, the city of Ebla was excavated in Syria.One of the tablets discovered there mentioned the name Iram.[2]

The Qur'an mentions Iram alongside ʿĀd and Thamud:[3]

The Quran, chapter 89 (Al-Fajr), verse 6 to 14: “ 6: Have you not considered how your Lord dealt with 'Aad - 7: [With] Iram - that had lofty pillars, 8: The likes of whom had never been created in the lands 9: And [with] Thamud, who carved out the rocks in the valley? 10: And [with] Pharaoh, owner of the stakes? - 11: [All of] whom oppressed within the lands 12: And increased therein the corruption. 13: So your Lord poured upon them a scourge of punishment. 14: Indeed, your Lord is in observation.— translated by error”.

According to Islamic beliefs, King Shaddad defied the warnings of the prophet Hud and God smote the city, driving it into the sands, never to be seen again. The ruins of the city lie buried somewhere in the sands of the Rub' al-Khali. Iram became known to Western literature with the translation of The Book of One Thousand and One Nights.

Arabic tradition holds that the tribe of 'Ad were the great-grandchildren of Nuh or Noah. The Qur'an talks about 'Ad as “successors” after Noah's people (The Qur'an, chapter 7 (Al-A'raf), verse 69).

T. E. Lawrence showed some interest in Iram, and named it "The Atlantis of the Sands".

MORE ON IRAM:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iram_of_the_Pillars

tiarabubu:

Then you guys should leave it alone. If it gets it wrong more than one occasion, why quote it to say Muhammed was the comforter, for example? Or the "nation" of islam is mentioned in it. How can you tell if that is even right? Hypocrisy of gargantuan proportions




Blatant Al-taquiyya of the highest order. You guys lie so easily. This is what you wrote:

Some words of God still exist in the bible, it is just muddled up with the word of the prophet, the historian and God knows who else

Is that for a book you "respect"? What about

some parts are beautiful, others are like a 3 year talking

How would you feel if one were to say that about the QUran. You lie!

search for threads on the comforter, nation of islam, haggar and ishmeal etc from your fellow al- taquiyyist to see how desperately they twist the Bible to try to justify the Prophet Mohammed and Islam. See how you guys were all worked up about the Turkey Gnostic "Bible" of Barnabas find; running temperature that the "Bible" will validate Muhammed's Prophethood! Not minding it gnostic. You guys instantly became Bible experts alleging clandestine moves to destroy it! Why the desperation? to prove what? Only uncertain products require to be validated! Never will Christians bat an eyelid on Islamic text and what it says on Christianity.



Give me a list of ten historical accounts (infact, just five) that is listed in the Quran that HAVE BEEN PROVED THROUGH ARCHAEOLOGY? Not plagiarised Bible accounts please. Original Quran accounts! The Quran says there were over 100,000 prophets sent to all people, Why are most prophets listed in the Quran Biblical prophets and figures? Why not Arabian Prophets? Since some may have been sent to the Arabs too. Serious questions that you guys should ask yourselves.

Another example: Doesnt incredulous stories about King Solomon (How a King with a thousand wives who at some point deviated from God is called a prophet beats me) listening to ants sound like Children's bed time stories?! ("the tortoise told the lion" sort of stories). the fact is that ants do not use sound but smell to communicate. Even if they did would he have heard? Of course, Muslim apologist will twist the words to fit a prevalent rational explanation. If in 10 years time science finds that ants do emit sound, the meaning of the words will be reworked to fit a plausible explanation!!!!!! You guys leave yourselves escape routes.




Thats you. Many scholars and people do not agree with you. If it blows your socks off - enjoy! JUST LEAVE THE BIBLE OUT IT.

Let the Quran justify itself, by itself, for itself. If it contains holes that needs filling up with how, why and when? Too bad.



This argument is not the reason for this thread. You guys can continue searching for a "NAFDAC number" for your religion from the Bible - you will not get it. Christ has denied you in Mathews 7:15


ITS TIME THE THREAD RESUMES.

my advice to you is to stop crying because you cannot fight God.it is not our fault or plan for Islam to exist.we can only see and accept the truth.

Before I start, please have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artifacts_significant_to_the_Bible which is an imcomplete list by the way.

tbaba1234: ^Lol why are you embarrassing yourself like this?... You brought archeology and now you are not making any sense..

Am I? Who is embarrassing himself more? You guys trying to force Islam into the Bible, or me, showing how ridiculous that is?

I am sorry if you are offended by my comments on the bible but that is not my aim.

Its Ok. I have heard worse.

1. The Quran does not make the error of calling the leader at the time of Joseph pharaoh...

Here is Encyclopedia Britanicca to give an insight why the translations of the Bible use Pharaoh as King of Eygpt.

pharaoh, (from Egyptian per ʿaa, “great house”), originally, the royal palace in ancient Egypt; the word came to be used as a synonym for the Egyptian king under the New Kingdom (starting in the 18th dynasty, 1539–1292 bce), and by the 22nd dynasty (c. 945–c. 730 bce) it had been adopted as an epithet of respect. The term has since evolved into a generic name for all ancient Egyptian kings, although it was never formally the king’s title.

The Bible translation uses Pharaoh to refer to the King of Egypt. Translation wise, the Oba of Lagos or King of Lagos refers to the same person. In fact, the Bible uses both "Pharaoh" and "Melek" (the Hebrew term for King) in the story of Joseph (See Genesis 39:20 , 40:1, 40:5, 41:6). It is also interesting to note that the Bible uses both Pharaoh and Melek to refer to the King of Egypt in the account of Moses and the Exodus (see Exodus 6:11 and 13).

2. The Pharaoh in moses time claimed to be God, What does recent archeology tell us about that?

Has the story of Moses reached thee? Behold, thy Lord did call to him in the sacred valley of Tuwa, "Go thou to Pharaoh for he has indeed transgressed all bounds: And say to him, ‘Wouldst thou that thou shouldst be purified (from sin)? - And that I guide thee to thy Lord, so thou shouldst fear Him?'" Then did (Moses) show him the Great Sign. But (Pharaoh) rejected it and disobeyed (guidance); Further, he turned his back, striving hard (against God). Then he collected (his men) and made a proclamation, Saying, "I am your Lord, Most High". [Qur'an 79:15-24]

Pharaoh said: "O Chiefs! no god do I know for you but myself... [Qur'an 28:38]

Unfortunately, this information (about the dietification of Pharaohs) was know in Pre-islamic Arabia. Even Pharaohs as late in the day as Cleopatra were deitified. Its doesnt take much to know that Arabs in Pre-islamic Arabia knew about Egypt, its pyramids and splendour, its culture and nuances. Also, these practices influenced kingdoms near and far e.g. the Kingdoms of Nubia, Kush, and the Aksum (The Christians who sheltered Muhammed in the early days of Islam) in their culture eg mumification, elaborate burial and religious customs. The King/God concept was known in the middle east so its nothing spectacular.

With all these influence around arabia, to know that Eygptians considered their Kings as Gods (till about 30 BCE) in pre-Islamic Arabia, seriously, is not a serious archaeological expose! This what a scholar had to say on this


[i] A long held view among historians that pre-Islamic Arabia was wholly isolated from the wider Near East has given way in recent decades to a more subtle and useful descriptions. The peninsular, both in geographic and cultural terms, were a considerable distance from more cosmopolitan societies of Egypt, Syria and Iran. But the religious, commercial and cultural influences emanating from these regions into Arabia were clear. . . . These mutual influences were inevitable results of centuries of cultural and commercial exchanges between the Arabs, including inhabitants of Arabian peninsula and their non Arab neighbours. The Rise of Islam, Mathew Gordon.


This is just one of the many scholars who have examined the influences of neighbouring states and culture in pre-Islamic Arabia. There are more scholars who have found this to be so.

3. From the Quran, It can be proved that Ramsses II was the pharaoh of the flood simply by examining the number of years of Moses leaving egypt (about 40 years) to going to midian (8-10 years) Only one pharaoh served that long.

Let me quote a scholarly work on this:

The name Ramses should not restrict the oppression of the Jews to the 19th dynasty because this name is not unique to the 19th dynasty. Ramses, which means “son of Ra—the sun god,” was a name commonly used to honor pharaohs. For instance, Ahmose, the founder of the 18th dynasty, was also called Ramses, as was a later 18th dynasty king, Amenhotep III. F.N. Jones, Chronology of the Old Testament.

Why is this important? You were not specific in the number of years Moses left Egypt and went to midian (giving approximate years), so how did you arrive at the exact total years and tie that to the passages? The Quran didnt say when Ramses came to the throne. Also, did the Quran give the number of years before Moses left Egypt? Or went to Midian? Where did that info come from? Not the Bible again I hope!

Let's go to more astonishing stuff::

Or have they the dominion of the heavens and the earth and all between? If so, let them mount up with the ropes and means (to reach that end)! But there - will be put to flight even a host of confederates. Before them (were many who) rejected messengers,- the people of Noah, and ‘Ad, and Pharaoh, the Lord of Stakes, and Thamud, and the people of Lut, and the Companions of the Wood; - such were the Confederates. [Qur'an 38:10-13]

The intepretation of this is that Ramesses II had many buildings,

Ibn ʿAbbās (companion of the prophet) said: [b]It means the lord of the secure building. Al-Ḍaḥḥāk said: He owned many buildings; buildings are called awtād. [/b]Also according to Ibn ʿAbbās as well as Qatādah and ʿAṭāʾ: He owned stakes and ropes and playgrounds where he was entertained.

Of all the Pharaohs, Ramesses II is the most renowned for his buildings::

You guys are interesting!!!

The term "Lord of the stakes" is open to interpretations! What does that mean? we shall see;

One group of Muslim apologist, in response to critism that Pharaoh threatened his Magicians with crucifixion (despite this practice was not being practised at the time) quote this verse and section (Lord of the Stakes) to show that Pharoah practised THAT! - http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/crucify.html

For you, it means that the Pharaoh was a builder! Does that description fit "Lord of the Stakes"? Stakes means - A strong wooden or metal post with a point at one end so it can be driven into the ground, Instrument of execution consisting of a vertical post that a victim is tied to for burning, A strong wooden or metal post with a point at one end so it can be driven into the ground, - Wordweb dictionary.

You see the inconsistency?

But assuming you are right,which is a big assumption, stories about Egypt were available in pre-islamic Arabia (as shown above)to show the splendour of temples in Egypt, so it was nothing new and the passage not concise.

This is what the various Muslim commentators on the Quran says about the verse you claim shows Pharaoh to be a master builder:

Abdullah Yusuf Ali
'Pharaoh, the Lord of Stakes'

Marmaduke Pickhtall
'Pharaoh firmly planted'

M.H. Shakir
'Firon, t[b]he lord of spikes[/b]'

George Sale
'Pharaoh the contriver of stakes'

Arthur John Arberry
'Pharaoh, he of the tent-pegs'

Zaheen Fatima Baig
'Fir'aun, owner of the stakes'


Dude, In the light of the above, I ask which builder was Pharaoh?!

4. Still unconvinced? There's more

And We made a people, considered weak (and of no account), inheritors of lands in both east and west, - lands whereon We sent down Our blessings. The fair promise of thy Lord was fulfilled for the Children of Israel , because they had patience and constancy, and[b] We levelled to the ground the great works and fine buildings which Pharaoh and his people erected (with such pride)[/b] [mā kāna yaṣnaʿu firʿawna wa qawhumū wa mā kānū yaʿrishūn]. [Qur'an 7:137]

What great works and building could the Quran be talking about?

Per Ramesses was probably the vastest and most costly royal residence ever erected by the hand of man. As can now be seen its known palace and official centre covered an area of at least four square miles, and its temples were in scale with this, a colossal assemblage forming perhaps the largest collection of chapels built in the pre-classical world by a single ruler at one time. [E. P. Uphill, The Temples Of Per Ramesses, 1984, Aris & Phillips, Warminster: England, p. 1.]


The once great Per Ramesses now lies in ruins, this is likely the destruction of the magnificent city talked about in the Quran::

I am still unconvinced! in the above Quran verse, WHICH PHARAOH was the Quran referred to? Having proved that the experienced the cultural influences of Eqypt were felt in pre-Islamic Arabia, they would have heard about the pyramids. Was the Quran telling us information not available at the time? NO. Moreso, the generalisation rendered the verse impotent within the context of your point. To underscore the generalisation of that verse you yourself say "this is LIKELY the destruction of the magnificent city. . . ."

By the way, even BEFORE the time of the Prophet in 600BCE, much of Egyptian great palaces lay in ruins thanks to the infighting/inconsistent state/religious policies between Pharaohs before 30 BCE and relentless invasion by foreign armies after that. No surprises that the destruction was reported AFTER it happened!

To make this a serious archealogical matter, we need a location (thebes, Memphis, Karnak, Kawa, Jebel Barkal etc) something distinct that could be proved by archealogical digs. Such generalisations makes your point weak. Sorry!

5. There is still more!!

"But we can surely produce magic to match thine! So make a tryst between us and thee, which we shall not fail to keep - neither we nor thou - in a place where both shall have even chances." Moses said: "Your tryst is the Day of the Festival [yaum al-zīna], and let the people be assembled when the sun is well up." [Qur'an 20:58-59]

Could it be talking about the Heb-Sed (or simply Sed) festival? The festival celebrated 30 years after a new king then every three years after...

Again, the generalisations in the verse helps us not! Even you are not so sure, you wrote, "[b]Could it be talking about the Heb-Sed. . . ". The Quran should have given us more to work with. There are so many festivals the Eygtians celebrate. They were elaborate and religious in nature. They were carried out till Islam came into the kingdom. Remember the influence of Egyptian culture in pre-islamic Arabia? Connect the dots. For some of these festivals see http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/festival.htm

These generalisations are what makes many doubt. To be seen to be accurate or archaeologically relevant, we need names, times (juxtaposed with reigns of kings, for example, or events), events that can be related to - referenced - not generalisations that even you can say for sure what it is! An example, the Bible will says ". . . in the 3rd year of the Reign of King ABC the LORD said to Prophet XYZ go the brook at HYA. . . " This specificity makes it a worthy source material.

The Bible mentions none of these....... The Quran is accurate on all five counts....

And you are making "could, maybe, likely" statements! Are you for real! Accuracy and precision go hand in hand with details.

As regards the Solomon and the ant, The Qur'an implied that Solomon (pbuh) understood and comprehended what the ant 'said'. Recently it has been discovered that ants DO communicate with sound. SO ANTS DO USE SOUNDS>>>[/b]

I did acknowledge that science may find that ants use sound and sure it will be just as said! Good for King Solomon and his super sharp ears! I will leave it at that as we will be delving into another matter. (May I add that according to the Bible King Solomon was no prophet but a king of Israel, a builder who married plenty women despite warnings. They led him astray and got him punished by God).

Any one with a little knowledge of classical arabic would be blown away by the Quran.... You can never see a scholar of the Quran leave Islam.. The more people study Christianity , the less faith they have.. There is reason for it.. Dr. Jerald Dirks and Bart Ehrman are prominent examples.

I see. Such a generalized statement again, such a cheap shot. If true, most theologians, preachers, pastors will ditch the faith. Since it hasnt happened, its a poor attempt to score a point.

Well since you gave two persons you say left Christianity, let me give you three Islamic Scholars that have left Islam - prominent ones so you dont think I made up their names : Dr. Mustapha Mark Gabriel (Former Professor of Islamic Studies at Al-Azhar University) Mollazade Mehmed Ali (Renowned Orientalist); Alexander Kasimovich Kazembek Famous Orientalist; of course there are others - scholars, imams, terrorists etc.

But converts mean nothing. On the last day it'll be you, your creator and the moment of truth.

I apologize for any offensive thing i might have said.

Apologies accepted. And I say the same to you. No hard feelings.

The use of bible for discussion is like any tool, It depends on your audience

A tool is important; without it serious real work can't be done - good or bad. Its essential and powerful, useful and can save lives. Its use can make a difference between bad and good work. A tool used wrongly can injure and kill. The "tool" you have in your hands is very powerful. It just might save your life.

For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. Hebrews 4:12


For Christians, the Quran serves no purpose whatsoever - no matter the audience.





Can the thread resume now?

tiarabubu, you have done a very good job of destroying tbaba123's argument. . .He keeps repeating the myth that the ancient arabs living during the time of Mohammed knew nothing about the ancient Jews, Christians or Egyptians even when all evidence points other wise. . .Even the koran acknowledges that fact. . .The people at that time even by the koran's admission states that the people accused Mohammed of retelling old tales they were already familiar with. . .Yet tbaba123 for reasons best known to him keeps denying that fact. . .He keep saying things like there were NO christians or Jews in Mecca. . . . . .Its very easy to take stories you already know about and later claim divine revelations in Mecca, no?. .

We have heard this (before): if we wished, we could say (words) like these: t[b]hese are nothing but tales of the ancients[/b]" (8:31).

They have heard the stories before and accused Mohammed of repeating old tales of the ancients they were already familiar with . . .Since the Koran as we know it today is not the work of one person then there is nothing special when old tales appear in it. . .

tiarabubu: Before I start, please have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artifacts_significant_to_the_Bible which is an imcomplete list by the way.

Again, I have no problem with archeological facts in the bible or any book? I would be shocked if it didn't... That doesn't prove divinity... I am more concerned with the wrong things, the contradictions, the myths and all.... That can not come from a word of God.... I have hundreds of false things...

Things like a global flood,
Vegetation appeared before the sun (Gen. 1:11–12), (P.s: the whole creation story),
Abraham came from Ur of the Chaldees (Gen. 11:31)(Ur of the Chaldees did not exist until about the eighth century B.C.,about one thousand years after the time of Abraham.)
Jacob and Esau fought in the womb.(Gen. 25:21–28) (took hold of his heel at delivery??, really )
Joshua and the walls of Jericho (Archeological facts invalidate the story) (At the time of Joshua, Jericho had neither walls nor residents. The city had been vacated centuries earlier.)

There are hundreds and hundreds of these kinds of things... So I am not going to go into validating anything because i have no problems with it... I have problems with so much false information in what is deemed word of God.

Here is Encyclopedia Britanicca to give an insight why the translations of the Bible use Pharaoh as King of Eygpt.

pharaoh, (from Egyptian per ʿaa, “great house”), originally, the royal palace in ancient Egypt; the word came to be used as a synonym for the Egyptian king under the New Kingdom (starting in the 18th dynasty, 1539–1292 bce), and by the 22nd dynasty (c. 945–c. 730 bce) it had been adopted as an epithet of respect. The term has since evolved into a generic name for all ancient Egyptian kings, although it was never formally the king’s title.

The Bible translation uses Pharaoh to refer to the King of Egypt. Translation wise, the Oba of Lagos or King of Lagos refers to the same person. In fact, the Bible uses both "Pharaoh" and "Melek" (the Hebrew term for King) in the story of Joseph (See Genesis 39:20 , 40:1, 40:5, 41:6). It is also interesting to note that the Bible uses both Pharaoh and Melek to refer to the King of Egypt in the account of Moses and the Exodus (see Exodus 6:11 and 13).

Your quote indicts you:: Let us look at it shall we?

pharaoh, (from Egyptian per ʿaa, “great house”),
originally, the royal palace in ancient Egypt; the word came to be used as a synonym for the Egyptian king under the New Kingdom (starting in the 18th dynasty, 1539–1292 bce), and by the 22nd dynasty (c. 945–c. 730 bce) it had been adopted as an epithet of respect. The term has since evolved into a generic name for all ancient Egyptian kings, although it was never formally the king’s title.

So like your quote says... It became a synonym for egyptian king in THE NEW KINGDOM.... meaning in the old kingdom it was not used as a synonym for king....

Since after the new kingdom, meaning it was after the new kingdom people adopted it for all kings... Historically, the old kingdom NEVER used pharaoh.... so much for archeological accuracy

Joseph existed in the Old Kingdom, in the old kingdom the King was NEVER REFERRED TO AS PHARAOH... It is an historical fallacy to even try to justify it..... The king at the time of Joseph and Abraham were NOT called pharaoh in their life times.

Interestingly, The Interpreter's Dictionary Of The Bible understood some of the discrepancies in the Egyptology data concerning the Story of Joseph(P) and states that:

The frank attitude toward the stories about Egypt in Genesis and Exodus is that folk memory had retained the essentials of great Hebrew experience but had later clothed that memory with some details imperfectly recollected and some circumstantial details borrowed from later times and conditions. (George Arthur Buttrick (Ed.), The Interpreter's Dictionary Of The Bible, Volume 3, 1962 (1996 Print), Abingdon Press, Nashville, pp. 774 (Under Pharaoh).)

This can not be the word of God, Are the errors and imperfections the word of God too?...

Please don't try and defend this obvious mistakes from the writers of the bible.

Unfortunately, this information (about the dietification of Pharaohs) was know in Pre-islamic Arabia. Even Pharaohs as late in the day as Cleopatra were deitified. Its doesnt take much to know that Arabs in Pre-islamic Arabia knew about Egypt, its pyramids and splendour, its culture and nuances. Also, these practices influenced kingdoms near and far e.g. the Kingdoms of Nubia, Kush, and the Aksum (The Christians who sheltered Muhammed in the early days of Islam) in their culture eg mumification, elaborate burial and religious customs. The King/God concept was known in the middle east so its nothing spectacular.

With all these influence around arabia, to know that Eygptians considered their Kings as Gods (till about 30 BCE) in pre-Islamic Arabia, seriously, is not a serious archaeological expose! This what a scholar had to say on this


[i] A long held view among historians that pre-Islamic Arabia was wholly isolated from the wider Near East has given way in recent decades to a more subtle and useful descriptions. The peninsular, both in geographic and cultural terms, were a considerable distance from more cosmopolitan societies of Egypt, Syria and Iran. But the religious, commercial and cultural influences emanating from these regions into Arabia were clear. . . . These mutual influences were inevitable results of centuries of cultural and commercial exchanges between the Arabs, including inhabitants of Arabian peninsula and their non Arab neighbours. The Rise of Islam, Mathew Gordon.


This is just one of the many scholars who have examined the influences of neighbouring states and culture in pre-Islamic Arabia. There are more scholars who have found this to be so.

This show a unique ignorance of history; The knowledge of Hieroglyphics had been lost for centuries before Islam; ... the bible came from the same region and was earlier than Islam so the information in it should be more accurate if anything. Infact, the old testament was translated to greek when the jews lived under the Ptolemaic Dynasty (rulers of egypt till 30BC). Why does the bible still make this unforgivable mistake time and time again?... It would have been easy to correct the historical blunders if the knowledge existed at the time.

When it comes to the study of history; you can not build on conjecture... Things like maybe the pre-islamic arabs knew this is untenable... what of the ancient Jews and the Jews who translated the old testament to greek,they should have known more if the knowledge was available?

It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that culture itself must have had its influences... The extent of any influence is what is important... It is improbable and almost impossible for all of these details of ancient egypt in the Quran could have come a time when most of the information was not even available in Egypt itself (the bible didn't benefit from it).... Impossible... Maybe the ancient egyptians came from the future to inform the arabs....

Unless you can build a case showing that such detailed history existed in Mecca at the time of the prophet... you are just building straw-men...

Let me quote a scholarly work on this:

The name Ramses should not restrict the oppression of the Jews to the 19th dynasty because this name is not unique to the 19th dynasty. Ramses, which means “son of Ra—the sun god,” was a name commonly used to honor pharaohs. For instance, Ahmose, the founder of the 18th dynasty, was also called Ramses, as was a later 18th dynasty king, Amenhotep III. F.N. Jones, Chronology of the Old Testament.

Why is this important? You were not specific in the number of years Moses left Egypt and went to midian (giving approximate years), so how did you arrive at the exact total years and tie that to the passages? The Quran didnt say when Ramses came to the throne. Also, did the Quran give the number of years before Moses left Egypt? Or went to Midian? Where did that info come from? Not the Bible again I hope!

Your quote is meaningless...

The Quran gives the ages when Moses left egypt (40 years from the classical arabic understanding of "A man at full strength" and when he lived in Midian (8-10) plus the other years in Egypt. We know only one pharaoh in the old kingdom served that long...

Everything is from the Quran... By using the following information

1.The number of years that Pharaoh reigned before Moses was born;
2. The age of Moses when he left for Midian;
3. The number of years he stayed in Midian; and
4. The length of Moses second sojourn in Egypt after returning from Midian.

When he reached full age [balagha ashuddah], and was firmly established (in life) [istawā], We bestowed on him wisdom and knowledge: for thus do We reward those who do good. [Qur'an 28:14]

He was already pharaoh before Musa(AS) was born:

balagha ashuddah wa istawā is translated by most of the scholars as 40 years-

Tafsīr al-Ṭabarī,
Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī,
Tafsīr al-Jalalyn, (http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=28&tAyahNo=14&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2)
Al-Kashshāf of al-Zamakhsharī, etc.
Ibn Abbas ( http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=28&tAyahNo=14&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2)

Just a few, He spent another 8-10 in Midian

......He said: "I intend to wed one of these my daughters to thee, on condition that thou serve me for eight years; but if thou complete ten years, it will be (grace) from thee. But I intend not to place thee under a difficulty: thou wilt find me, indeed, if Allah wills, one of the righteous." He said: "Be that (the agreement) between me and thee: whichever of the two terms I fulfill, let there be no ill-will to me. Be Allah a witness to what we say." Now when Moses had fulfilled the term, and was travelling with his family, he perceived a fire in the direction of Mount Tur. He said to his family: "Tarry ye; I perceive a fire; I hope to bring you from there some information, or a burning firebrand, that ye may warm yourselves." [Qur'an 28:26-29]

That is already 50 years; plus the number of years before Musa was born and the Quran of years of famine and plague, then a period of good time, then period of another plague... then another period of good time...

Only one Pharaoh served up to 60 years; That is Ramsess II... He served for 66 years.. No other pharaoh fits the bill...

You guys are interesting!!! grin shocked shocked shocked

The term "Lord of the stakes" is open to interpretations! What does that mean? we shall see;

One group of Muslim apologist, in response to critism that Pharaoh threatened his Magicians with crucifixion (despite this practice was not being practised at the time) quote this verse and section (Lord of the Stakes) to show that Pharoah practised THAT! - http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/crucify.html

For you, it means that the Pharaoh was a builder! Does that description fit "Lord of the Stakes"? Stakes means - A strong wooden or metal post with a point at one end so it can be driven into the ground, Instrument of execution consisting of a vertical post that a victim is tied to for burning, A strong wooden or metal post with a point at one end so it can be driven into the ground, - Wordweb dictionary.

You see the inconsistency?

But assuming you are right,which is a big assumption, stories about Egypt were available in pre-islamic Arabia (as shown above)to show the splendour of temples in Egypt, so it was nothing new and the passage not concise.

This is what the various Muslim commentators on the Quran says about the verse you claim shows Pharaoh to be a master builder:

Abdullah Yusuf Ali
'Pharaoh, the Lord of Stakes'

Marmaduke Pickhtall
'Pharaoh firmly planted'

M.H. Shakir
'Firon, the lord of spikes'

George Sale
'Pharaoh the contriver of stakes'

Arthur John Arberry
'Pharaoh, he of the tent-pegs'

Zaheen Fatima Baig
'Fir'aun, owner of the stakes'


Dude, In the light of the above, I ask which builder was Pharaoh?!

3. (palm on face)Your comment here shows ignorance of the nuances of classical Arabic; Awtad or stakes was used as housing in classical arabic... The arabs called the tents where they lived awtad... because that was the strongest part of the building. So It was a figure of speech common in classical Arabic. Stop displaying Ignorance abeg

Ibn Abbas was a companion of the prophet, he translated as lord of the secure building, Al-Ḍaḥḥāk said: He owned many buildings; buildings are called awtād.

There is also an interpretation as crucifixion... But it depends on who interprets it.... But the owner of many building is an interpretation as old as Islam itself


4. Pr-Ramesses was the most elegant of Ramssess II buildings, Pr- Ramessess is the only city built fully by the Ramssess

The Quran specically talks about his great works of this one Pharaoh ....

We levelled to the ground the great works and fine buildings which Pharaoh and his people erected (with such pride) [mā kāna yaṣnaʿu firʿawna wa qawhumū wa mā kānū yaʿrishūn]. [Qur'an 7:137]

The unique feature about Per Ramesses is that it is the only city of imperial size in the ancient near east, rivalling Heliopolis, Memphis and Thebes in splendour, known to have been entirely planned, built and fully completed under one King. (E. P. Uphill, The Temples Of Per Ramesses, 1984, op. cit., p. 228)

The Quran talk only about what was built by this one pharaoh and per ramssess fit the bill perfectly.


5. The Quran gives reference to a festival, your bible doesn't... The fact that egypt had festivals shows that the Quran was right.

Since this one might be ambiguous, I give you one more:

We took the Children of Israel across the sea: Pharaoh and his hosts followed them in insolence and spite. At length, when overwhelmed with the flood, he said: "I believe that there is no god except Him Whom the Children of Israel believe in: I am of those who submit (to Allah in Islam)." (It was said to him): "Ah now!- But a little while before, wast thou in rebellion!- and thou didst mischief (and violence)! "This day shall We save thee in the body, that thou mayest be a sign to those who come after thee! but verily, many among mankind are heedless of Our Signs!" [Qur'an 10:90-92]

We know Ramssess II body is in the Egyptian Museum today..... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KV7 ... Another information your bible fails to mention...



I specifically said a scholar of the Quran...Dr. Mark Gabriel is a phony anyway ... Al Ahzar denied him, He was never a professor there...He is yet to provide proof that he went to the prestigious school.... Where are his credentials? How come no one knows him from al ahzar. These guys deceive you guys and sell books.... Yusuf Estes asked about him in azhar and he was told that the guy was never a professor there: When i find the video, i will post it.

I am not a scholar but i can point to many of his false statements about Islam. A scholar should at least be correct about the basics...The only person claiming to be from al ahzar is him (all the references to this are from him).. There are no records of Him anywhere... Where are his publications as a professor at al azhar?

They keep getting exposed as frauds... Unfortunately you guys are willing to anyone that talks bad about Islam, so they make money... One of the fastest way to make money in the west is to claim to be an ex muslim and write a book against Islam.

most of these ex-muslim videos put up by christians are totally fake. Any Muslim who has basic knowledge can spot this...

Again i reiterate, You will not find a 'verified' scholar of the Quran leave Islam (except the fake guys ofcourse)... It is just not possible..

Islam is truth, It is the only faith, where one can be 100% percent certain of, the evidence is overwhelming, and it is consistent..

I sincerely hope that you can one day just study the translations of the Quran without bias, and ask questions as you go; Our prejudices blind our conclusions. For me, i read the bible and many other books during my period (late teens) of actively searching for truth, i would like to believe that my conclusions were not based on any pre conceived biases... at least that was the plan.

There are no words to express what the Quran as a book is... The more you know, the more you are in awe of what an amazing book, this Quran is.... I am not even talking about science; Just the language itself is stunning and overwhelming.

All the proof for truth exist in the Quran, and it is consistently beautiful... There are gems everywhere in the book.

The delusion that the bible is needed for anything is only a christian delusion...

mazaje: tiarabubu, you have done a very good job of destroying tbaba123's argument. . .He keeps repeating the myth that the ancient arabs living during the time of Mohammed knew nothing about the ancient Jews, Christians or Egyptians even when all evidence points other wise. . .Even the koran acknowledges that fact. . .The people at that time even by the koran's admission states that the people accused Mohammed of retelling old tales they were already familiar with. . .Yet tbaba123 for reasons best known to him keeps deny that fact. . .He keep saying things like there were NO christians or Jews in Mecca. . . . . .Its very easy to take stories you already know about and later claim divine revelations in Mecca, no?. .

We have heard this (before): if we wished, we could say (words) like these: t[b]hese are nothing but tales of the ancients[/b]" (8:31).

They have heard the stories before and accused Mohammed of repeating old tales of the ancients they were already familiar with . . .Since the Koran as we know it today is not the work of one person then there is nothing special when old takes appear in it. . .

Honestly, if I had thought of this verse earlier, I wouldn't have written down this long post. That verse sums it up.

mazaje: tiarabubu, you have done a very good job of destroying tbaba123's argument. . .He keeps repeating the myth that the ancient arabs living during the time of Mohammed knew nothing about the ancient Jews, Christians or Egyptians even when all evidence points other wise. . .Even the koran acknowledges that fact. . .The people at that time even by the koran's admission states that the people accused Mohammed of retelling old tales they were already familiar with. . .Yet tbaba123 for reasons best known to him keeps deny that fact. . .He keep saying things like there were NO christians or Jews in Mecca. . . . . .Its very easy to take stories you already know about and later claim divine revelations in Mecca, no?. .

We have heard this (before): if we wished, we could say (words) like these: t[b]hese are nothing but tales of the ancients[/b]" (8:31).

They have heard the stories before and accused Mohammed of repeating old tales of the ancients they were already familiar with . . .Since the Koran as we know it today is not the work of one person then there is nothing special when old takes appear in it. . .

na bad belle dey worry you to the extent that you dont care about making sense anymore so far as you are attacking tbaba.

the verse you mentioned about "tales of the ancient" does not actually refer to what is found in the Quran in entirety but an accusation of the pagans on particular beliefs which Islam holds.this is just one among the many accusations they levelled to discredit the source of the Quran as reported in the Quran on the reaction of the pagans in accordance to their disbelief.they even accused the Prophet (sa) of being liar,mad and under magical influence.also,when they describe something as "tales of the ancient",they do not necessarily have had to come across them or known them before.but even if they knew them,they in particular referred to the promise of after-life as "tale of the ancient":

Holy Quran 27:66-68
"Rather, their knowledge is arrested concerning the Hereafter. Rather, they are in doubt about it. Rather, they are, concerning it, blind.And those who disbelieve say, "When we have become dust as well as our forefathers, will we indeed be brought out [of the graves]?We have been promised this, we and our forefathers, before. This is not but tales of the ancient."

also,what is shared beliefs between the abrahamic faiths is recognizable in the Quran and what was knowledge unknown to the arabians like the references tbaba has given and i also gave (and many more knowledge stated in the Quran unknown to the people before) are distinct features of the Quran.obviously,when ignorant pagans do not know something,it sounds in their ears as fabrication.if they had known them,they say it is "ancient tales".both accusations and more are made.if they had known those tales,they would pointed out that they have heard it before and it is "ancient tale".but non like that happened on the Quranic narrations that brought new revelations and not already existing beliefs like resurrection-their accusation on those is "fabrication".accusing the Quran of being "made-up" or "fabrication" when it comes to things they have not heard or they directly do not agree with,is another accusation they made.

the jews had lived in arabia.but can you tell us for what purpose they migrated to arabia? do you know that the arabians never knew hebrew? there was no arabic bible? the arabians were pagan idol-worshippers and very backward and unlearned people? the way you are exaggerating the point of jews being in arabia,one would expect all of the arabians or a majority of them to have being jewish.but that wasn't the case.among the arabians you have a tiny minority known as the hanif who were monotheist and claimed to adhere to the path of their forefather Abraham (as) and shunning idol-worship.

it is also obvious from the Quran that there were many things the arabians or those in arabia never have heard of and they admitted to that.i would not go deep to bring out more revelations from the Quran to that effect.i'd bring out the verses to make my point:

Holy Quran 69:44-47
And if he had invented false sayings concerning Us,We assuredly had taken him by the right hand.And then severed his life-artery,And not one of you could have held Us off from him.

The Holy Quran 38:7
"We never heard (the like) of this among the people of these latter days: this is nothing but a made-up tale!"

tiarabubu:

Honestly, if I had thought of this verse earlier, I wouldn't have written down this long post. That verse sums it up.

thank God i already replied before you posted the above.

resurrection mainly is referred to by the pagans of arabia as an "ancient tale".is Jesus's (as) resurrection also an "ancient tale" according to you?their accusation does not spare what christians too believe in.

tiarabubu:

Honestly, if I had thought of this verse earlier, I wouldn't have written down this long post. That verse sums it up.

This means nothing, what does it prove? What tales were they talking of, exactly? We have tales like the companions of the elephants and Ad & thamud which the Arabs knew something about... And we also have tales which the Quran testifies that the prophet himself did not know.... Example: The story of moses & pharaoh;;; The story of mary, His detractors could easily have claimed that the Quran was lying and discredited him with that information... The same Quran refutes your claims:

And you, [O Muhammad], were not on the western side [of the mount] when We revealed to Moses the command, and you were not among the witnesses [to that]. (Surah 28:44)

That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you, [O Muhammad]. And you were not with them when they cast their pens105 as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed. (Surak 3:44) (Story of mary)

That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal, [O Muhammad], to you. And you were not with them when they put together their plan while they
conspired. (Surah Yusuf :102)

Time and time again the Quran tells the prophet he is unaware of these stories, If these were common stories; these would have been easy ammunition for his distractors.

Show me the historical evidence of where this information came from:: You keep living in your delusion....

Debunked again...

tbaba1234:

Again, I have no problem with archeological facts in the bible or any book? I would be shocked if it didn't... That doesn't prove divinity... I am more concerned with the wrong things, the contradictions, the myths and all.... That can not come from a word of God.... I have hundreds of false things...

Thanks for your confession. the bible does record Archaeological facts. Which is likely devine? A book of facts or a book that is vague, open to interpretations?

Things like a global flood,
Vegetation appeared before the sun (Gen. 1:11–12), (P.s: the whole creation story),
Abraham came from Ur of the Chaldees (Gen. 11:31)(Ur of the Chaldees did not exist until about the eighth century B.C.,about one thousand years after the time of Abraham.)
Jacob and Esau fought in the womb.(Gen. 25:21–28) (took hold of his heel at delivery??, really )
Joshua and the walls of Jericho (Archeological facts invalidate the story) (At the time of Joshua, Jericho had neither walls nor residents. The city had been vacated centuries earlier.)

Interestingly, I did mention progressive elaboration of archeaology - they are bound to disagree until the puzzle fits together. There are interesting debates between Bryant Wood and Kathleen Kenyon's position on Jericho, for example. As expeditions and new dating methods come, more evidence will come to light. Afterall it was such advances that made Kathleen Kenyon propose her theory in the 1990's on Jericho not inhabited at the time of Joshua. We can never have all the facts in a day, so relax, as they come in.

On the Jacob/Esau issue, honestly, what is so unbelievable about twins rumbling in the womb and their birth with one clutching the other. Which is more plausible between that and Solomon listening to ants? Not only the sensitivity needed to hear the sound, other issues crop up! Don't go there.

Your quote indicts you:: Let us look at it shall we?

pharaoh, (from Egyptian per ʿaa, “great house”),
originally, the royal palace in ancient Egypt; the word came to be used as a synonym for the Egyptian king under the New Kingdom (starting in the 18th dynasty, 1539–1292 bce), and by the 22nd dynasty (c. 945–c. 730 bce) it had been adopted as an epithet of respect. The term has since evolved into a generic name for all ancient Egyptian kings, although it was never formally the king’s title.

So like your quote says... It became a synonym for egyptian king in THE NEW KINGDOM.... meaning in the old kingdom it was not used as a synonym for king....

Since after the new kingdom, meaning it was after the new kingdom people adopted it for all kings... Historically, the old kingdom NEVER used pharaoh.... so much for archeological accuracy

Joseph existed in the Old Kingdom, in the old kingdom the King was NEVER REFERRED TO AS PHARAOH... It is an historical fallacy to even try to justify it..... The king at the time of Joseph and Abraham were NOT called pharaoh in their life times.

Interestingly, The Interpreter's Dictionary Of The Bible understood some of the discrepancies in the Egyptology data concerning the Story of Joseph(P) and states that:

The frank attitude toward the stories about Egypt in Genesis and Exodus is that folk memory had retained the essentials of great Hebrew experience but had later clothed that memory with some details imperfectly recollected and some circumstantial details borrowed from later times and conditions. (George Arthur Buttrick (Ed.), The Interpreter's Dictionary Of The Bible, Volume 3, 1962 (1996 Print), Abingdon Press, Nashville, pp. 774 (Under Pharaoh).)

This can not be the word of God, Are the errors and imperfections the word of God too?...

Please don't try and defend this obvious mistakes from the writers of the bible.





This show a unique ignorance of history; The knowledge of Hieroglyphics had been lost for centuries before Islam; ... the bible came from the same region and was earlier than Islam so the information in it should be more accurate if anything. Infact, the old testament was translated to greek when the jews lived under the Ptolemaic Dynasty (rulers of egypt till 30BC). Why does the bible still make this unforgivable mistake time and time again?... It would have been easy to correct the historical blunders if the knowledge existed at the time.

When it comes to the study of history; you can not build on conjecture... Things like maybe the pre-islamic arabs knew this is untenable... what of the ancient Jews and the Jews who translated the old testament to greek,they should have known more if the knowledge was available?

It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that culture itself must have had its influences... The extent of any influence is what is important... It is improbable and almost impossible for all of these details of ancient egypt in the Quran could have come a time when most of the information was not even available in Egypt itself (the bible didn't benefit from it).... Impossible... Maybe the ancient egyptians came from the future to inform the arabs....

Unless you can build a case showing that such detailed history existed in Mecca at the time of the prophet... you are just building straw-men...

Unfortunately as always you build conjectures and present them as facts. They aren't worthy of replying to, honestly.

which details in the Quran? What was the name of the Pharoah whose body was preserved (Remember Ramses was applied to several Kings). What was the exact age of Moses when he left for Midian? What were the names of the cities the Jews built in Eygpt? These questions are just FROM YOUR WRITE UP? Where are the details there? Please!

If the stories were detailed, we could argue that such details couldn't have travelled that distance to Arabia. BUT the vagueness is consistent with stories passed along trade routes (eg Ah did you hear of the story of Pharaoh Ramses of Egypt? He built palaces of gold and pyramids. One he vexed the god Amun who totally destroyed his magnificent cities!). Now tell me you can't weave a vague story around that. BUT if I gave dates, associated historical events, names, back story, location and proper narrative wouldnt that be harder to fault? Abegi.

Your quote is meaningless...

The Quran gives the ages when Moses left egypt (40 years from the classical arabic understanding of "A man at full strength") and when he lived in Midian (8-10) plus the other years in Egypt. We know only one pharaoh in the old kingdom served that long...

Everything is from the Quran... By using the following information

1.The number of years that Pharaoh reigned before Moses was born;
2. The age of Moses when he left for Midian;
3. The number of years he stayed in Midian; and
4. The length of Moses second sojourn in Egypt after returning from Midian.

When he reached full age [balagha ashuddah], and was firmly established (in life) [istawā], We bestowed on him wisdom and knowledge: for thus do We reward those who do good. [Qur'an 28:14]

He was already pharaoh before Musa(AS) was born:

balagha ashuddah wa istawā is translated by most of the scholars as 40 years-

Tafsīr al-Ṭabarī,
Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī,
Tafsīr al-Jalalyn, (http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=28&tAyahNo=14&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2)
Al-Kashshāf of al-Zamakhsharī, etc.
Ibn Abbas ( http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=28&tAyahNo=14&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2)

Just a few, He spent another 8-10 in Midian

......He said: "I intend to wed one of these my daughters to thee, on condition that thou serve me for eight years; but if thou complete ten years, it will be (grace) from thee. But I intend not to place thee under a difficulty: thou wilt find me, indeed, if Allah wills, one of the righteous." He said: "Be that (the agreement) between me and thee: whichever of the two terms I fulfill, let there be no ill-will to me. Be Allah a witness to what we say." Now when Moses had fulfilled the term, and was travelling with his family, he perceived a fire in the direction of Mount Tur. He said to his family: "Tarry ye; I perceive a fire; I hope to bring you from there some information, or a burning firebrand, that ye may warm yourselves." [Qur'an 28:26-29]

That is already 50 years; plus the number of years before Musa was born and the Quran of years of famine and plague, then a period of good time, then period of another plague... then another period of good time...

Only one Pharaoh served up to 60 years; That is Ramsess II... He served for 66 years.. No other pharaoh fits the bill...

You see what I mean by the vague verses of the Quran? "A man at full strength" is 40? Why not 60 given that ancient men were more robust and fit than our coca cola/fried chips generation; or why not 20 since ancient men mature early and life expectancy is low due to disease and conflict?

So in future when Ramses II is adjuded 30, of course the open statment "A man at full strength" will still fit the bill? puhlease!

". . .balagha ashuddah wa istawā is translated by most of the scholars as 40 years . . ." See what I mean? the passage is open to interpretation giving you room to manoeuvre. Why not 20 0r 30, or 50, or 60. So to understand the years we need a several tasfirs and scholars (who dont even totally agree) We need concise dates, please

3. (palm on face)Your comment here shows ignorance of the nuances of classical Arabic; Awtad or stakes was used as housing in classical arabic... The arabs called the tents where they lived awtad... because that was the strongest part of the building. So It was a figure of speech common in classical Arabic. Stop displaying Ignorance abeg

Ibn Abbas was a companion of the prophet, he translated as lord of the secure building, Al-Ḍaḥḥāk said: He owned many buildings; buildings are called awtād.

There is also an interpretation as crucifixion... But it depends on who interprets it.... But the owner of many building is an interpretation as old as Islam itself

". . .But it depends on who interprets it . . ."

Uncle! we are not kids here!

the contradiction among your kind is clear. Better scholars than you say that verse is crucifixtion, you say its buildings, various translations say different things. PUHLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

4. Pr-Ramesses was the most elegant of Ramssess II buildings, Pr- Ramessess is the only city built fully by the Ramssess

The Quran specically talks about his great works of this one Pharaoh ....

We levelled to the ground the great works and fine buildings which Pharaoh and his people erected (with such pride) [mā kāna yaṣnaʿu firʿawna wa qawhumū wa mā kānū yaʿrishūn]. [Qur'an 7:137]

The unique feature about Per Ramesses is that it is the only city of imperial size in the ancient near east, rivalling Heliopolis, Memphis and Thebes in splendour, known to have been entirely planned, built and fully completed under one King. (E. P. Uphill, The Temples Of Per Ramesses, 1984, op. cit., p. 228)

The Quran talk only about what was built by this one pharaoh and per ramssess fit the bill perfectly.

Several Scholars have shown that this information about Eqypt was known in pre Islamic Arabia. Nothing spectacular about this description.

Is the description of distant lands and cultures from what they heard and saw by ancients explorers like Vasco Degama, Marcopolo, or Ibn Khaldun divine?

5. The Quran gives reference to a festival, your bible doesn't... The fact that egypt had festivals shows that the Quran was right.

Since this one might be ambiguous, I give you one more:

We took the Children of Israel across the sea: Pharaoh and his hosts followed them in insolence and spite. At length, when overwhelmed with the flood, he said: "I believe that there is no god except Him Whom the Children of Israel believe in: I am of those who submit (to Allah in Islam)." (It was said to him): "Ah now!- But a little while before, wast thou in rebellion!- and thou didst mischief (and violence)! "This day shall We save thee in the body, that thou mayest be a sign to those who come after thee! but verily, many among mankind are heedless of Our Signs!" [Qur'an 10:90-92]

We know Ramssess II body is in the Egyptian Museum today..... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KV7 ... Another information your bible fails to mention...

points to ponder

(i) Scholars have shown that the name Ramses was a name for several Pharaohs (as I have shown in my earlier posts). Which one was the Quran referring to and which one is in the museum. We need a NAME so we can match it with the Ramssess in the Museum and then we can nod in agreement with you.

(ii) as I have shown in my earlier post, knowledge of the preservation of kings (King/god deitification)is known in pre-Islamic Arabia. Unless the Quran gives us a name and we match that with the Ramses in the museum, you are drifting, yet again, into the realm of conjecture!

(iii) Since the Quran didn't give us a name aside "Ramses", was the drown Pharaoh's body lost or preserved? One can argue that it was recovered. Afterall drowned people's bodies get washed up on beaches right? Ok, lets examine scholars' position on this:

In the 13th dynasty, during the reign of Neferhotep I, the Semitic slaves [some scholars believe these slaves to be jews] suddenly departed from Tel ed-Daba and Kahun.
Completion of the king’s pyramid was not the reason why Kahun’s inhabitants eventually deserted [Kahun], abandoning their tools and other possessions in the shops and houses. . . . The quantity, range, and type of articles of everyday use which were left behind suggest that the departure was sudden and unpremeditated.
Furthermore, Neferhotep I’s mummy has never been found, and his son Wahneferhotep did not ever reign, Neferhotep being succeeded by his brother Sobkhotpe IV. Ashton and Down, Unwrapping the Pharaohs, p. 100, quoting Dr. Rosalie David’s The Pyramid Builders of Ancient Egypt

The sudden departure of the Semitic slave population fits the biblical account of the Hebrew slaves’ sudden exodus from Egypt after the tenth plague. The pharaoh’s mummy is missing because he died in the Red Sea with his army when he pursued the slaves, and his son never ruled because he died in the tenth plague. His successor was his brother, Sobekhotep IV

I specifically said a scholar of the Quran...Dr. Mark Gabriel is a phony anyway ... Al Ahzar denied him, He was never a professor there...He is yet to provide proof that he went to the prestigious school.... Where are his credentials? How come no one knows him from al ahzar. These guys deceive you guys and sell books.... Yusuf Estes asked about him in azhar and he was told that the guy was never a professor there: When i find the video, i will post it.

I am not a scholar but i can point to many of his false statements about Islam. A scholar should at least be correct about the basics...The only person claiming to be from al ahzar is him (all the references to this are from him).. There are no records of Him anywhere... Where are his publications as a professor at al azhar?

They keep getting exposed as frauds... Unfortunately you guys are willing to anyone that talks bad about Islam, so they make money... One of the fastest way to make money in the west is to claim to be an ex muslim and write a book against Islam.

most of these ex-muslim videos put up by christians are totally fake. Any Muslim who has basic knowledge can spot this...

Again i reiterate, You will not find a 'verified' scholar of the Quran leave Islam (except the fake guys ofcourse)... It is just not possible..

Islam is truth, It is the only faith, where one can be 100% percent certain of, the evidence is overwhelming, and it is consistent..

For your information Professor Mark Gabriel's conversion was a huge embarassment to Al Azhar university. Did you honestly think they will keep his record there with glee? Ol boy be realistic. His degrees were withdrawn and he was derecorgnised. Of course any enquiry about him in Al Ahzar will come to naught. BUT HAS AL AHZAR ITSELF DENIED HIM?

Since his time in Al-Ahzer, his views on religion has been controversial so his take on Islam will not be main stream. Of course, for the likes of you scholars are those who share your view

Again i reiterate, You will not find a 'verified' scholar of the Quran leave Islam (except the fake guys ofcourse)... It is just not possible..

verified by who? YOU? of course those that leave Islam are fake guys!
What you are doing is called living in denial!

I sincerely hope that you can one day just study the translations of the Quran without bias, and ask questions as you go; Our prejudices blind our conclusions. For me, i read the bible and many other books during my period (late teens) of actively searching for truth, i would like to believe that my conclusions were not based on any pre conceived biases... at least that was the plan.

There are no words to express what the Quran as a book is... The more you know, the more you are in awe of what an amazing book, this Quran is.... I am not even talking about science; Just the language itself is stunning and overwhelming.

All the proof for truth exist in the Quran, and it is consistently beautiful... There are gems everywhere in the book.

Again, its you. What the Quran does to you, is to you. You may find it beautiful beyond description, some wouldn't. That's life man. Dr Mark Gabriel searched for the truth too and came up with a different answer from yours. Its a path we all must choose and we should be respected for it. That doesn't make him fake cos if he is, YOU ARE TOO!

Even atheists have a right to question, to disbelieve if they choose. Its their life. Their intensity of disbelief may be stronger than the strength of your belief. That doesn't make them fake. They are humans and allowed to make a choice.

The delusion that the bible is needed for anything is only a christian delusion...

And who has been quoting the Bible right, left and center?

From Prophet Muhammed as the comforter and mentioned by name in John 14:16,
Arabia in the Bible Deuteronomy 33:2
The nation of Islam in Isaiah 21:7
The rise of Islam Genesis 12:1-3
etc etc

see interesting sites that try to forge Islam from the Bible
http://www.answering-christianity.com/open_challenge.htm
http://www.answering-christianity.com/prediction.htm
http://bibleperversion.com/ and thousands more


It looks like its more of a Muslim delusion to try to force Islam into the BIBLE. Give ONE instance where Quran is used to JUSTIFY Christianity? Just one!

You are CONFUSED.

LET THE THREAD RESUME PLEASE!

tbaba1234:

This means nothing, what does it prove? What tales were they talking of, exactly? We have tales like the companions of the elephants and Ad & thamud which the Arabs knew something about... And we also have tales which the Quran testifies that the prophet himself did not know.... Example: The story of moses & pharaoh;;; The story of mary, His detractors could easily have claimed that the Quran was lying and discredited him with that information... The same Quran refutes your claims:

And you, [O Muhammad], were not on the western side [of the mount] when We revealed to Moses the command, and you were not among the witnesses [to that]. (Surah 28:44)

That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you, [O Muhammad]. And you were not with them when they cast their pens105 as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed. (Surak 3:44) (Story of mary)

That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal, [O Muhammad], to you. And you were not with them when they put together their plan while they
conspired. (Surah Yusuf :102)

Time and time again the Quran tells the prophet he is unaware of these stories, If these were common stories; these would have been easy ammunition for his distractors.

Show me the historical evidence of where this information came from:: You keep living in your delusion....

Debunked again...

You can't use the Quran to justify the Quran. What are you expecting the Quran to record? Yes Prophet Muhammed's detractors are RIGHT?

Are you OK?




You are not intellectually sound as you seem.

LET THE THREAD CONTINUE, PLEASE

@tiarabubu

The Koran did not mention any Ramesses. . .It only mention the king as pharoah, the king remains nameless in the koran, something very typical of hear say stories. . The people that wrote the story in the koran were just retelling ancient stories. . .All the details were missing. . .No name of the king, no name of the city which the people built nothing just conjectures and nothing more, remember they were retelling stories that happened thosands of years earlier. . .

tbaba1234:

This means nothing, what does it prove? What tales were they talking of, exactly? We have tales like the companions of the elephants and Ad & thamud which the Arabs knew something about... And we also have tales which the Quran testifies that the prophet himself did not know.... Example: The story of moses & pharaoh;;; The story of mary, His detractors could easily have claimed that the Quran was lying and discredited him with that information... The same Quran refutes your claims:And you, [O Muhammad], were not on the western side [of the mount] when We revealed to Moses the command, and you were not among the witnesses [to that]. (Surah 28:44)

That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you, [O Muhammad]. And you were not with them [/b]when they cast their pens105 as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed. (Surak 3:44) (Story of mary)

[b]That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal, [O Muhammad], to you. And you were not with them when they put together their plan while they
conspired. (Surah Yusuf :102)

Pls don't be dishonest. . .The passage only says the prophet was not a witness to the events, it never said he did not know about the events. . .The only problem with the muslims was that we have nothing from the the pre-islamic arabs about themselves except the very one sided stories of them from the mouth of the muslims. . .Very little is known about them from their own sources, everything we know about their religion and their interactions with the Muslims we know from the mouths of the muslims with their bias and agenda. . .No body is to take the stories of the muslims written about the pre islamic pagans seriously. . .Even schorlas disagree with the muslims stories about the pagans. . .From wikipedia it says

There is very little material on which to base a description of pre-Islamic religion, particularly in Mecca and the Hejaz. The Qur'an and the hadith, or recorded oral traditions, give some hints as to this religion. Islamic commentators have elaborated these hints into an account that, while coherent, is doubted by academics in part or in whole.

The bottom is is very clear. . .The people knew about the stories Mohammed was retelling, and stated that he was only retelling stories of the ancients stories which they themselves were already familair with. . .

Time and time again the Quran tells the prophet he is unaware of these stories, If these were common stories; these would have been easy ammunition for his distractors.

False, it says he was not a WITNESS(you were not with them). . . It doesn't say you never knew about the stories so try another one. . .

Show me the historical evidence of where this information came from:: You keep living in your delusion....

Debunked again...

Those that put the Koran together were familair with the stories. . .The story as narrated in the Koran is completely deviod of any details and typical of stories you hear from not so clear sources. No name of the king, no name of his adies or any member of his house hold, no name of city even though the cities had names you are only left with ridiculous conjectures like "he could have been part of the case" . . .Josephus and Pliny for example wrote about the way the ancient egyptians preserved the bodies of their kings some 700 years before Mohammed was born, so how is that new knowledge from the unseen?

Am enjoying this fact based exchange by both sides. But let me make a suggestion to the tiarabubu and tbaba team. How about you base the arguments on factual proving of disproving of points made.

FOR EXAMPLE TBABA POINTED TO

. Vegetation appeared before the sun (Gen. 1:11–12), (P.s: the whole creation story),
Abraham came from Ur of the Chaldees (Gen. 11:31)(Ur of the Chaldees did not exist until about the eighth century B.C.,about one thousand years after the time of Abraham.)

The tiabubu team can provide evidence that tha above is fact and tbaba is wrong (and not arguments like the Muslims also believe similar things )

this is a message to the moderator (Maclatunji) who is banning Shia members (including my senior brother "LagosShia") on the forum in a bid to silence them.you should know firstly that this forum isn't your father's property.even the owner appreciates the fact that the forum is a public forum.

you are abusing your mandate and portraying yourself as insane.May Allah (swt) hold you accountable for your tyranny online.you should know that we are many and if we wish,we can gather up to 100 members in this forum to make sure nothing but Islam as the Shia follow it in its pure form (not sunnism/wahhabism) prevails.

be mindful of Allah tabaraka.if you refuse to act responsibly,we'd make sure you get fed-up in moderating this forum.we'd turn it into a mess.your planned assault at a specific group of people is disgraceful.

i hope Seun sees this or if things do not change i'd make sure the nonsense prevailing here gets to his knowledge.i wonder what type of moderator take sides.