₦airaland Forum

SIRTee15:
Exactly the argument. Standardised Quran is a collective compilation NOT the solo dictation Jibril gave to Muhammed.
If different sahabas were reciting different Qurans, it shows there was a divergence at the beginning which was later harmonised thru coercion and intimidation.

That Quran was preserved from Muhammed downwards is a fallacy.

No you oversimplify in some thought and wrongly conclude.

The Uthman codec used the dialect of Quraysh which is the dialect of prophet Muhammad pbuh.

Definitely one of the Ahruf in which the Quran was revealed and it could still accommodate various Qiraat.

What ʿUthmān Did:

- Standardize the written Qur’ān into one Uthmanic codex using the Quraysh dialect, the dialect of the Prophet pbuh

- Allow for multiple Qirāʾāt within that codex, as long as they didn’t contradict the rasm (the basic consonantal structure).

- Distribute official muṣḥafs to key regions and ordered the destruction of other divergent written copies to prevent confusion.

He did not:
- Eliminate the concept of Aḥruf altogether.
- Forbid or erase authentic Qirāʾāt that were taught by the Prophet pbuh and preserved through ijazah (certified transmission).
- Alter the content or theology of the Qur’ān.

What Happened to the Seven Aḥruf?
According to prominent scholars like Ibn al-Jazari, al-Suyuti, al-Qurtubi, and Ibn Taymiyyah:

After the Prophet’s passing, Umar and Uthman noticed that these Aḥruf were leading to disputes, especially as Islam spread to non-Arab communities.

ʿUthmān’s standardization aimed to preserve one Harf (Quraysh), which was deemed sufficient, while the Qirāʾāt continued to be preserved orally as part of that tradition.

The other Aḥruf weren’t removed by human action but were lifted by Allah’s will over time to prevent confusion.

TenQ:
So , go back to my posts you decided not to touch.

Only Muslims celebrate winning after they have been beaten blue-black like Gaza will celebrate winning whenever Israel just finished dealing with them.

Three pages of evidence against you!

Very weak and vain of you to bring in celebrate? What is there to celebrate?

Talmud is not scripture, but is essential for understanding and practicing the religion.

So the Jews are wrong to state tha?

All that a diligent student will innovate in Torah was already given to Moses at Sinai.”
— Talmud, Menachot 29b

“The words of the Scribes are more beloved than the words of the Torah.”
— Talmud, Sanhedrin 11:3

Oh you say you are Christian and claim you don't see any significance in the jews?

TenQ:
Honesttalk21 and CreativeOrbit

1. You just agreed with me that the Qur'an was collected and written down during the lifetime of your prophet.

I still ask the Question
Where is the Qur'an of Mohammed written on pieces of clothes?

2. You said:
The Qur’an we have today is complete not because it includes every word ever revealed, but because it includes everything Allah *willed* to remain. This view is upheld by both Sunni and Shi’a scholars,
BUT, the claim of modern Muslims is that, the Qur'an has been perfectly preserved word for word, letter for letter even up to the diacritical marks.

So, my question remains
Which of the over 32 Arabic Qur'an in existence is the EXACT copy of the Kalam Allah/ the Qur'an of Allah in paradise from which Jibril recited the Qur'an to Mohammed?

Please use any of your innovative devices to go record the recitation over 23 years of prophethood.

Go and study your claimed 32 Arabic Quran and regroup them for which are the same. There is a fundamental error in the claim.

You can't find out who Imam Al-Qarafi is without me? Seriously now

TenQ:
It is a pity for you.
Chain of Transmission of Qur'an!?
When I did not even extend beyond the differences between the Qur'an of Mohammed and that of Abubakar? I have not even gotten to the Qur'an of Uthman yet.





No wonder, the cowardly Admin deleted my response specifically to you on your self make-believe about honesttalk21.

Anyone who reads this chat from the beginning will see how weak your Islamic position is about the Qur'an!

To change the subject, you ran away from specific hadiths 1-5 to argue with SIRTeee15 to argue about CONSENSUS of Islamic scholars who came 300 to 600 years after Mohammed!

Go back to the origin of Islam and check what your earliest scholars say.

Don't react in this way. I only pointed out a clear flaw in the position your friend Sirtee15 put you in.

The chain of transmission provides a trace back to the origin from the prophet Muhammad pbuh which you choose to overlook or are unable to study.

The variants you force about are divine. What is there to run from? Keeping the discussion centred on the Quran's preservation!

SIRTeee15:
Really, I thought Quran transmission and preservation is word for word.
The consensus on Sanaa manuscripts amongst scholars is not anonymous.

While Gabriel Said Reynolds offers thoughtful academic insights, his use of speculative phrases like "one might imagine…" doesn’t equate to a firm assertion about a lost or hidden Qur’an.

The Ṣanʿāʾ palimpsest doesn’t undermine the Qur’an’s integrity. Instead, it:

Affirms a rich history of oral and written transmission

Shows early flexibility in expression—something you'd expect in a vibrant oral culture

Confirms that the final standardized Qur’an is the result of a careful, collective effort, rather than a solo rewrite.

SIRTeee15:
After Uthman had him beaten and got his ribs broken? That sounds like intimidation and oppression- what gangsters will do to have their way.

The absence of robust primary evidence supporting claims of violence against ibn Mas'ud undermines the assertion's credibility.

SIRTeee15:
The Prophet Muhammad said: “The Koran was revealed in seven dialects, all of them are right and perfect.” When Uthman banned whichever he banned from the Koran, and burned whichever he burned, he banned passages Allah has revealed and burned parts of the Koran which were given to the Muslims by the Messenger of Allah. He appointed a small group of Sahaba (close friends of Muhammad) to rewrite the Koran and left out those who heard the Prophet and memorized what he said. When Ibn Massoud objected to the burning of the other codices of the Koran, Uthman had him taken out of the mosque with violence, and struck him to the ground, and broke one of his ribs. (Hussein, A-Fitnato Al-Kobra [The Great Sedition], pp. 160-161, 181-182)

These are your own Islamic sources providing historic evidence that there was serious disagreement amongst the Sahaba about what should constitute the Quran, they couldn't even agree.

The idea that preservation of the Qur'an can be traced to Muhammed is a lie. It's a claim not supported by your own Islamic narratives and sources.

TenQ is already justice with the textual variance of different Quranic manuscripts.

SIRTeee15:
After Uthman had him beaten and got his ribs broken? That sounds like intimidation and oppression- what gangsters will do to have their way.

The authenticity of the Qur'an has sparked quite a bit of scholarly discussion, especially when it comes to the actions of Caliph Uthmān ibn Affān and his interactions with key figures like Ibn Mas‘ūd. One claim suggests that Ibn Mas‘ūd was against the burning of personal mushafs and that Uthmān even assaulted him, leading to broken ribs. However, historical evidence largely contradicts this narrative. Reliable sources, such as Sahih Bukhārī and Sahih Muslim, don’t back up these reports of violence, indicating that the stories about Uthmān's aggression likely come from weak or fabricated hadiths often found in Shia literature or Orientalist writings.

Another claim suggests that Surah al-Ahzab originally had 200 verses, referencing narrations from Aisha (RA) and Ubayy ibn Ka‘b. While these accounts appear in Musnad Ahmad, they face scrutiny due to their weaker chains of transmission. Most scholars interpret these references to additional verses as relating to abrogated content rather than a genuine reduction in length by Uthmān. Historical theology recognizes the principle of naskh (abrogation), where certain verses revealed during the Prophet’s lifetime were removed by divine will, a concept that classical scholars accept.

In addition , the idea that Ubayy ibn Ka‘b had a different mushaf with extra surahs doesn’t imply wrongdoing on Uthmān’s part; these differences reflect early teaching methods rather than any corruption of the text. Overall, the narrative that seeks to undermine Uthmān’s role in the Qur'anic compilation lacks solid evidence and overlooks the agreement among the Sahabah, including Ali ibn Abi Talib, who backed Uthmān's efforts to standardize the text. Therefore, what might seem like inconsistencies or omissions are better understood through the lenses of abrogation, dialect standardization, and the preservation of oral tradition.


You will do better in scrutinizing the authenticity of the claims that Ibn Masud was beaten up to forcefully accept the standardised Quran.

Did Tenq show how the core meaning of the verses were lost? Did he prove any wrong or faults in the transmission chain? No!

Or is it how honesttalk21 dismantled his reliance on a pronounciation of words in one verse that is easily explained by dialectic difference you refer to?

SIRTeee15:
One of the greatest reciters approved by Muhammed himself, Ibn Masud called the Quranic script compiled by Uthman a corrupt work and rightly rejected it.

When ibn Masud protested the burning of his own Quran he personally compiled, he was beaten, his ribs broken and thrown out of the mosque on the order of Uthman

Abdullah Ibn Masud said, “I recited from the Messenger of Allah (saw) seventy surahs which I had perfected before Zaid Ibn Thabit had embraced Islam.” (The Codices of Ibn Mas'ud and Ubayy Ibn Ka'b, – Ibn Abi Dawud’s Kitab al-Masahif, p. 17)

“I acquired directly from the Messenger of Allah (saw) seventy surahs when Zaid was still a childish youth - must I now forsake what I acquired directly from the Messenger of Allah?” ( Ibid., p. 15)

When Uthman's agents came to Kufa to burn all the variants, Abd Allah Ibn Masud hid his copy of Quran from them and told his followers to do the same. He justified his own version of the recitation by reminding people:

"I recited before Allah's Messenger more than seventy suras of the Qur'an. His Companions know that I have a better understanding of Allah's Book than they do; and if I were to know that someone had a better understanding than I have, I would have gone to him." It was said that nobody could find fault with Abd Allah's version
(Sahih Muslim, Book 031, Number 6022)

Let’s closely look at the situation with Ibn Mas‘ūd, who initially had some objections that are often misunderstood.

His Main Concerns were that he felt left out of the conversation, especially given his status as a senior reciter.

He believed that his own personal mushaf, which he had written under the guidance of the Prophet, deserved a place in the final compilation.

He had some disagreements regarding a few surahs most notably, he didn’t include Surah al-Falaq and an-Nās.

Importantly, there’s no authentic hadith or historical record that states Ibn Mas‘ūd labeled the Uthmanic Mushaf as "corrupt" in terms of alteration or fabrication. That term tends to pop up in more contentious or revisionist discussions, rather than in the works of mainstream Islamic historians.

In the end, Ibn Mas‘ūd did come to accept the Uthmanic mushaf.

He ceased his objections once the Ummah came together around it.

You rather base your stance on the hadith regarding 70 surahs and label the remaining 44 as false? Please identity these surahs for better scrutiny.

There’s no evidence to suggest he promoted an alternative Qur'an.

Imam al-Nawawī noted:

“The correct view is that he (Ibn Mas‘ūd) withdrew his opposition and aligned with the consensus.”

SIRTee15:
I don't believe the Quran is perfectly preserved right from the mouth of Muhammed. There was serious distortion and manipulation with the Quran development during the caliphate of Uthman.

He complied the Quran of his own wish and desire and burned the ones he didn't like.

The Sana manuscript is clear evidence of the discrepancy in Quranic compilation and tradition is early islamic era.

The Sanʿa manuscript is an essential piece for grasping how the early Qurʾān was transcribed and preserved. Its palimpsest nature shows a practical solution to the limited availability of parchment, rather than any theological disagreements. This common practice of erasing and rewriting over older texts doesn’t suggest that there were different versions of the scriptures; it simply highlights the logistical hurdles that early scribes faced.

Additionally, the differences observed in this manuscript, like variations in spelling, shouldn’t be confused with actual textual differences. Changes in spelling, word order, or missing diacritical marks were quite normal and didn’t change the meaning of the recitation. The later standardization through iʿjām and tashkil represents a move towards clarity, but it doesn’t mean there was any initial inconsistency in the message.

It’s also crucial to remember that the integrity of the Qurʾan has always been rooted in oral tradition. The dedicated memorization efforts by the sahabah and the Prophet Muhammad’s pbuh interactions with Jibrīl during Ramadan reinforce this oral tradition as fundamental.

Finally, even respected scholars like Michael Cook and Francois Deroche point out that while early manuscripts shed light on the preservation process, they don’t undermine the established consistency of the ʿUthmānic Qurʾān. Therefore, the Ṣanaa manuscript enriches our understanding rather than challenging core beliefs

SIRTee15:
I don't believe the Quran is perfectly preserved right from the mouth of Muhammed. There was serious disruption and manipulation with the Quran development during the caliphate of Uthman.

He complied the Quran of his own wish and desire and burned the ones he didn't like.

The Sana manuscript is clear evidence of the discrepancy in Quranic compilation and tradition is early islamic era.

It will be most valuable and sincere if you can clearly state what constitute the serious disruption and manipulation with the Quran under the caliphate of Uthman.

A blanket statement without substance is of no value.

TenQ:
1. Because he knows the answer Mohammed did not yet know.
2. The set of questions never existed either I. Judaism or Christianity. Only in Islam did we see the question being asked and the answer given.

Again, my TWO Questions:
1. So, is Abdullah bin Salam a prophet of Allah or Mohammed?
It seems every prophet before Mohammed knew the answer except Mohammed until Jibril told him!
2. How come Mohammed was a prophet but he didn't know the answer till Abdullah bin Salam asked him?

That bin Salam understood the hypocritical behaviour of his people?

You also are far from aware that in
Talmud – Niddah 31a (Babylonian Talmud):
If the woman emits seed first, she will give birth to a male. If the man emits seed first, she will give birth to a female.

This version inverts the genders compared to the hadith.

But it still links order of climax/ejaculation to child’s sex.

It’s unfortunate that there seems to be a misunderstanding regarding the preservation of the Qur’an. Allow me to clarify the matter:

1. Preservation Does Not Mean Every Revelation Was Included

The presence of abrogation or references to lifted verses does not compromise the perfection of the Quran’s preservation. Rather, it affirms that the Qur’an was preserved exactly as Allah intended through divine selection of what should remain recited and recorded, and what was to be lifted. The Prophet pbuh personally oversaw this process, instructing where each verse belonged.

It’s important to distinguish between different forms of revelation:

Qur’an (recited revelation )– Recited as scripture.
Hadith Qudsi – Sacred but not part of the Qur’an.
Abrogated Verses – Once revealed, then lifted.

The Prophet pbuh received many revelations, but not all were meant for permanent inclusion in the Qur’an. As Imām al-Qarāfī noted in al-Furūq, preservation was never about including every revealed word, but preserving what Allah intended to endure.

2. Abrogation Was Part of the Revelation Process. As Allah says:
We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth one better than it or similar to it.
(Surah al-Baqarah 2:106)

When companions like Zayd ibn Thābit or Aʾishah mention certain verses that were once recited, they are not implying anything was lost rather, they’re affirming that some verses were revealed and then divinely lifted.

3. The Prophet pbuh personally supervised the Compilation as he

* Called scribes to write specific verses,
* Arranged them in precise order,
* Instructed that certain revelations not be recorded as Qur’an due to abrogation.

Thus, what remained in the Qur’an was only what the Prophet pbuh affirmed and this is the essence of true preservation.

Furthermore, the compilation of the Qur’an under Caliph Uthman was done with the full consensus of the companions. None of them, including those who narrated abrogated or lifted verses, ever claimed the Qur’an was incomplete. Even scholars from the Ahl al-Bayt affirmed its authenticity.

Imam al-Baqir: No one can claim he possesses more of the Qur’an than what is in the muṣḥaf.

Imām Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq: The Qur’an is one, revealed by One, and confirmed by the Prophet.

The Qur’an we have today is complete not because it includes every word ever revealed, but because it includes everything Allah *willed* to remain. This view is upheld by both Sunni and Shi’a scholars, including Tusi, Tabrisi, al-Suyuti, and Fakhr al-Din al-Razi.

It's sad you are unable to comprehend and accept that:

1. The presence of abrogation and reports of lifted verses does not mean the Qur'an wasn't perfectly preserved. It affirms that the preservation was carried out exactly as Allah intended i.e with divine selection of what should remain recited and recorded, and what should not. The Prophet pbuh himself instructed what verses should go where.

Preservation ≠ (doesn't equal) Inclusion of Every Revelation

Revelation comes in many forms:

Qur’an (mutluww)

Hadith Qudsi

Abrogated verses (once recited, then lifted)

The Prophet pbuh received much revelation, but not all of it was meant for eternal recitation.
Imām al-Qarāfī, al-Furūq

2. 2. Abrogation Was a Part of the Revelation Process
“We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth one better than it or similar to it.”
(Surah al-Baqarah 2:106)

So when Zayd ibn Thābit or Aʾishah mention missing verses, they are not saying “we lost it,” but rather:
“It was once revealed, then Allah lifted it.”

3. 3. The Prophet pbuh personally Supervised What Went into the Qur’an.
He would:
Call scribes to write specific verses,
Arrange them in specific order,
Tell companions not to write or recite some things as Qur’an (because they had been abrogated).

This means that only what the Prophet pbuh confirmed as Qur'an remains. That is preservation.


The mushaf of ʿUthman was compiled with consensus of the Companions.

No companion said: This Qur’an is incomplete.

Even those who reported lifted verses (like Zayd and Abu Musa) were among those who affirmed the authenticity of the final mushaf.

Also;
The suspicion raised about the integrity of the codex of the Qur’an was dropped.”
– Study Quran commentary on Shiʿi exegesis

Imām al-Bāqir: No one can claim he has with him more of the Qur’an than what is in the muṣḥaf.

Imām Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq: The Qur'an is one, revealed by One, and confirmed by the Prophet

The Qur’an today is complete, not because every revealed word remains, but because:

Everything Allah willed to remain has remained.

The Ahl al-Bayt and Ṣaḥābah never doubted the preserved core.

Scholars from both Sunni and Shi’a traditions Ṭūsī, Ṭabrisī, al-Suyūṭī, Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī affirm the integrity of the Qur’ān’s preservation.

TenQ:
TWO Questions:
1. So, is Abdullah bin Salam a prophet of Allah or Mohammed?

It seems every prophet before Mohammed knew the answer except Mohammed until Jibril told him!
2. How come Mohammed was a prophet but he didn't know the answer till Abdullah bin Salam asked him?

Why would you think question 1.

2. Please enlighten me about other prophets being asked this question and their answers

honesttalk21:
Why bother with this guy. I have addressed his incorrect perception and misconceptions of evidence for. The Quran is well preserved as it was initially transmitted.

He is trying to water down the reality of his error

Yes I agree with you.

You clearly showed him that

1. Jam‘ al-Qur’an refers to both the memorization and the written compilation of the Quran.

2. The Prophet pbuh had scribes who recorded verses during his lifetime.

3. Abū Bakr’s team followed strict guidelines, requiring written proof and two witnesses for verification.

4. ʿUthmān focused on standardizing the dialect, not altering the content.

5. The Qur’an has been preserved through widespread memorization and manuscripts, with no changes to its doctrine.

6. There are no lost surahs, no additions, and no editing councils involved.


No other scripture boasts this level of preservation. Let’s be real about the evidence.

TenQ:
We can come back to this later.

So, Tell me sir,
What is wrong IN this hadith about Mohammed's answer and can this hadith show that Mohammed was speaking the truth about Jibril or not?

I don't see anything wrong with the hadith.

The truth was spoken about Jibril

TenQ:
According to him and the hadith, `Abdullah bin Salam accepted Islam.

Has it come to your view that `Abdullah bin Salam could be the greatest liar amongst to Jews?
I believe you've heard of deep cover spies before!
LOL!

He said: ask them about me before they know about my conversion to Islam!

Even though, this is not the issue at stake, Can you please answer this YES or NO question
When`Abdullah bin Salam became a Muslim, did he cease being a Jew?


Then we can go back to the hadith

So, Tell me sir,
What is wrong IN this hadith about Mohammed's answer and can this hadith show that Mohammed was speaking the truth about Jibril or not?

The statement about Jews that they are a people of falsehood, is more about a specific situation than a blanket statement about all Jews in Islam.
In Islamic teachings, there’s a deeper understanding that recognizes the diversity among Jewish communities. Some individuals who betrayed the trust during the time of the Prophet Muhammad in Medina were rightly criticized for their actions, while others were acknowledged for their honesty and integrity

TenQ:
Hello my friend.
It's a long time.

You are wondering that what is the trick in the hadith I just posted!? `Abdullah bin Salam gave the trick question not me!

My claim with the hadith is that there is no Jibril anywhere and every claim about Jibril is certainly fraudulent!

Very well and not unexpected from you.

Whoever is an enemy to Allah, His angels, His messengers, and Jibrīl and Mīkāl, then verily, Allah is an enemy to the disbelievers."
Surah al-Baqarah 2:98


You know Abdullah bin Salam accepted Islam

TenQ:
This is what I am stating!

It is amazing that as a Muslim, you did NOT see the problem with the hadith. The question was a trick question that both Mohammed and your Islamic scholars and then you have fallen for

Long time troublesome Tenq.

What is the trick?

TenQ:
I always show you proofs from your Islamic literatures.

Denying the truth is your nature: it's not a surprise!
Burying your head in the sand doesn't change then truth!

Explore2xmore:
Audacity of a liar TENQ to talk about truth.

Do you deny your lies that hadith contradict each other or is it one another?
Once caught you shifted to hadith contradicting the Quran even despite your ability inability to understand either the hadith or Quran.

No more time for clowns like you

Your proof of misplaced, misconstrued interpretation an understanding.

TenQ:
If you have a question, open a thread and I promise to join you.

Truth with Knowledge is the only weapon against Islam

Audacity of a liar TENQ to talk about truth.

Do you deny your lies that hadith contradict each other or is it one another?
Once caught you shifted to hadith contradicting the Quran even despite your ability to understand either the hadith or Quran.

No more time for clowns like you

TenQ:
Stop crying!

Consoling yourself or this is some sort of psychological psychiatric compensation?

Matthew 19:24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

Mark 10:25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God

Luke 18:25 Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

Please explain if the Camel actually goes through the eye of a needle.

Will you understand a metaphorical statement like I will rather take out my 2 kidneys than drink poisoned wine?

[quote author=TenQ post=133849616][/quote]The clown has lost control again.

TenQ:
Since you have nothing else to say by the gross conflict of directions between Allah and your prophet, you can call it a day.

You remind me of Hamas, after beating them blue-black, they will come out shouting that they won the fight!
SMH!

The final kick of the dying donkey?

A LOW DOWN DIRTY SHAME.

You say the hadiths of different scholars contradict then I ask you to show this.

You then rephrase and contradict yourself that the Quran and hadiths contradict each other without understanding what the hadith means.

Just as the proud peacock you cannot ask for the explanation as you rather stick to your faulty prejudice of Islamophobia that suits your condescending self.

Read Matthew 19:24, Mark 10:25) and Luke 18:25 and probably you can get a hint.

How the joke Tenq the clown contradicts himself

TenQ:
I am just showing you that Islam is a chronic collections of contradictions.


How does one need explanations from scholars for things that are clearly presented by other scholars?

Are people like Bukhari and Muslim not scholars?

And Quickly went to:

TenQ:
The contradiction is between the Qur'an and the Hadiths.

[/quote]In the first place is the Quran a recitation composed by scholars or the hadith?

Furthermore he doesn't understand the hadith by scholars but quickly says they contradict the Quran.

Simply too slow on the uptake

TenQ:
I am just educating you from the Bible on the meaning of kunfayakun because you seem not to know that it is creation by the power of command ALONE!


Allah claimed he created Adam from the mud with his two hand!
How can Allah also claim that he created Adam by his command?

I actually doubt you know the meaning of contradiction.

It is an irreconcilable contradiction if you don't know.

Of course you must express your prejudice and bias.

Do extremely well to explain to yourself why the Bible which is not one revelation to one person should be the benchmark for the Quran revealed to one person?

Why Kun fa yakun in Arabic has no basis with the compilation of books you call the Bible rewritten and collated in different languages? Don't leave out the review of the group in deciding which is and which isn't Canon and should not be Included.

TenQ:
Why do you enjoy convincing yourself of untruths?

It is either Allah created Adam with his hands or he spoke Adam into existence. QED!!

Let me give you an example:

Gen 1:1-3:
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light."

Let there be Light and there was Light!

There was not additional thing God did on the Light that he spoke into existence.

Or

Gen 1:11-12:
"And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good."

There was no additional thing God did on bringing out vegetations.



But Mohammed the copycat, he mixed everything up because of lack of knowledge and understanding.

Too bad!

God created many different things.

Did he create them all alike?

Does light have a spirit like mankind?

Will the account of light, water and all other created things be like man's?

Do these things have freewill like mankind?

TenQ:
I am just showing you that Islam is a chronic collections of contradictions.


How does one need explanations from scholars for things that are clearly presented by other scholars?

Are people like Bukhari and Muslim not scholars?

Perhaps you should first show the contradiction in the Hadiths you shared

TenQ:
Apart from
Riyad as-Salihin 432
Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: Messenger of Allah said, "On the Day of Resurrection, Allah will deliver to every Muslim, a Jew or a Christian and say: 'This is your ransom from Hell-fire."'

Your prophet also said it in Bukhari
Sahih Muslim 2767 b
Abu Burda reported on the authority of his father that Allah's Apostle said:
No Muslim would die but Allah would admit in his stead a Jew or a Christian in Hell-Fire. 'Umar b. Abd al-'Aziz took an oath: By One besides Whom there is no god but He, thrice that his father had narrated that to him from Allah's Messenger

Is imam Muslim also a liar?

Here is another one

Riyad as-Salihin 432
Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari (May Allah be pleased with him) reported:
Messenger of Allah said, "On the Day of Resurrection, Allah will deliver to every Muslim, a Jew or a Christian and say: 'This is your ransom from Hell-fire."'
Another narration is: Messenger of Allah said, "There would come people amongst the Muslims on the Day of Resurrection with sins as heavy as a mountain, and Allah would forgive them".



If indeed Quran 6:164 is correct and everyone will pay for their sin, coupled with the hadith Riyad as-Salihin 432,
Can you tell me why Muslims (who did not repent before their death) with sins as great as mountains would NOT bear the consequences of their sins?

I am waiting!

I didn't ask you to go collate similar narrations but get understanding of what the narration states. If you need assistance let this be explained to you by those who understand.

Do you have problems comprehending that or you just cannot comprehend?

TenQ:
All this verse has shown is that there is a BIG contradiction in the Qur'an.
It is either Allah created Adam with a command or Allah created Adam with some Actions.

Again
Is it false that Allah created Adam with mud?
Is it false that Allah created Adam with his hands?
Is it false that Allah breathe his spirit into Adam?

If these are false, then we can agree that Allah created Adam by a command of "BE" and Adam was!

Wonderful! The jester is in circus again giving some boring clown show.

It's a shame you do not realize that there are no contradictions but complimentary.

All your questions are answered in clear statements in the Quran however the limit of your human thinking cannot fathom how they go together.

You are limited within the limits of your thinking or your jest in condescending bias deprives you of seeing different.

The creation of Adam from clay, along with the divine command "Be" (Kun), illustrates the harmonious balance in Allah's creative process. Adam's formation showcases Allah's wisdom in shaping humanity, underlining the material side of existence. The command "Kun" represents Allah's ultimate authority, enabling creation to occur instantly and without limitations. This duality emphasizes Allah's omnipotence and sovereignty, shedding light on the intricate relationship between wisdom and power in the act of creation.

TenQ:
I stated with evidence from the Bible that Jesus would be our RANSOM from the fire of Hell all I wanted to know is WHY it makes sense for Christians and Jews to be your own ransom from the fire. Does it make sense to you?
Why is it that Christians and Jews will be your own ransom as Muslims from hellfire?

Christians agree that everyone is liable to his sins, but the problem is that it's consequence is impossible for anyone to bear. This is why the repentant person gets from God the Father the One who can carry the justice of God on our behalf as our RANSOM from the fire (for according to God, a sinner must be punished)

If your claim is that you are solely liable for your conduct, why did your prophet say:
Riyad as-Salihin 432
Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: Messenger of Allah said, "On the Day of Resurrection, Allah will deliver to every Muslim, a Jew or a Christian and say: 'This is your ransom from Hell-fire."'

Why would Christians and Jews pay for the judgment of Fire on the Muslims?

You will note that as a Christian, we don't have any problems in EXPLAINING how or why we believe the Scriptures. But not so with you Muslims. Because Islam is a randomly copied religion devoid of reasons for most of your copied actions.

Are you certain you are not a terrorist?

This your ransom position and a lot of what we hear/see going around. Can a ransom be given to one who has it all?

Study Riyadh saliheen very well and if you don't understand better ask.


......No one will reap except what they sow. No soul burdened with sin will bear the burden of another. Then to your Lord is your return, and He will inform you of your differences.
Quran 6:164

TenQ:
Exactly the same way interpreted that Jesus is NOT the Messiah. And they interpreted that Jesus was not born of a virgin. And they interpreted that Jesus was a sorcerer. Do you agree with them on these?

Reconcile with them as they are the people from which your Jesus is from. I sense a Pharisees and Sadducees like difference in your opinion. What I feel is irrelevant as it is you and them to resolve.

TenQ:
I m NOT a Muslim as the question is strictly for you Muslims.

TenQ:
All I ask is WHY?
Why according to Islam is Jesus the ONLY one who has not died and is with Allah according to your prophet?

You now remember you are not a Muslim but in your delusions you know more about the Quran and Islam than Muslims?

You say only Jesus but cannot account for every single person that lives in your street talk less of the world and specifically all that have existed through thd many millennia to know who else is with Allah despite haven not died. You now have full documentation of all humanity since the inception of mankind?

Where did you get your statement about only Jesus from?

TenQ:
Doesn't your prophet agree that every son of Adam is a sinner?
Mishkat al-Masabih 2341
Anas reported God’s messenger as saying, "All the sons of Adam are sinners, but the best of sinners are those who are given to repentance."


Do you disagree that Isaac (Abraham's Son) is a son or descendant of Adam?

Another assignment for you. What is the validity in terms of authenticity of what you reproduced despite proudly sharing you are ignorant to provide reference as you are not muslim?

If all descendants of Adam are sinners please what are the sins of Abraham's son in relation to your faulty belief in human blood sacrifice for redemption or reconciliation with God?

You see how deeply pagan your belief is?

From sacrifice you change to test? Please I know you clown a lot but these turn around contradictory jokes make no sense.