₦airaland Forum

yusuf01:
This will be my last post as regards this
But are you talking about someone he met when he was less than 10 years, the meeting which didn't last a day? He was able to cram 114 chapters in a meeting that didn't last a day? He was able to predict the future (surat Rum) just by this meeting with the so-called jew? And to make you argument a whole lot interesting, this meeting happened before he was 10,  Like Allah said in one of His verses, nothing will make you guys believe, you will continue to ask questions, you will continue to wander, still looking for excuses. Reason; Allah guides whom he wills, and for those that are misled, will be wandering until death comes. Just like the jews refused Jesus, the christians refused Mohammed.
The Qu'ran was compiled during the caliphate of Uthman Bin Affan (the 3rd Calliph), a result of what you have pointed out; 1, there were beginning to have new versions, due to the change in tongues and meanings. Just like an Ibadan guy will speak a different yoruba compared to a lagosian, different meanings were being given to it. And 2, just like you said, the sahabas who memorised the full Qur'anic texts were being murdered. The same arguments were presented to Uthman, and was advised to compile the full texts in a book so as to be a reference. Then, the copy present in Umm Samamah (one of the wives of the prophet) was the one used for compilation - the full meanings and tongue preserved. The other versions burnt and the compiled one distributed around, the same one we have today. Have you asked yourself; why is it that when you check 90 percent of the arabic Qur'an, on each page you find the same word, the same letter, throughout for the complete 114 chapters? Reason; to preserve the meanings, so that we won't have adulterated versions. BTW, the other 10 percent are different just for compression; to reduce them to pocket sized versions. Do you think when Allah was joking when He said He was the one that will protect the Qur'an? These are the methods of preservation, the same way we recite the Qur'an anytime we pray so that we continue to memorise it, someone can't recite Sura Fatiha another way, nobody will pray under such person. These are preservation methods. The Qur'an is the last revelation, and Allah has made it a duty upon Himself to protect it, it's not written by the companions - the way the Bible was written by companions, the Pauls, the Banabas, , NO. The Qur'an was revealed during the life of the last prophet, and revelations stopped after he died!

The mistake that early Christians made was to not have committee create a single,  consistent version of the events of life of Jesus,  and a big part of that was due to the fact that they didn't have strong rulers who could force the issue in the early days.   Early Islam had the benefit of unified leadership and a determination to develop a single book out of several versions (7 I believe).   Speaking as someone who is convinced that all religion is man-made and that there is no such thing as a prophet,  sons of god, or holy books,      I wouldn't say the Qur'an is entirely consistent,  but it is more consistent than the Bible because of the way it was assembled.  But as anyone knows,  consistency does not mean correct.

In my humble opinion religion should be one sentence:  do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself.

I have been in Dakar since 2007  and I do not believe there will be a civil war or Ivory Coast situation.   Senegal is not divided along ethnic lines,  nor does the military want to rule.  

Plus the people here usually get tired after a few hours of protesting and go home to eat and sleep.  In any case there will be a runoff election in late March between Wade and Sall.

Obasanjo has not aged well.

tiarabubu:
@lagoshia
just as with the course of writing the Hadith where great effort went into shifting through accounts of the faithful, many felt the "need" or zealousness to formulate additional religious text to fit their thinking on how the gospel should be. It was critical that the religious text were preserved as they truly are and early Church fathers guarded against that. Paul warned of it several times in his letters to fledgling churches of his days.

as for those talking about the bible being put together,  for the sake of understanding even the Koran went through some collation under the caliphs, some parts were lost as a result of men who memorized them dying in battles and there are several versions with differences in the middle east. some processes were initiated to try to get the Koran as original as possible. Whether they succeeded is a debate for another day.

Christians know who was to come after Christ. Apart from the xteristic of the comforter as listed by Jesus himself, the lifestyle,  personality, message, style and actions of both are poles apart and its implausible that Jesus meant that Prophet Muhammad was the comforter.

Some Muslims have used the root letters and sounds in the Christian texts common to that of Muhammad's name to justify him being mentioned even though the meaning are completely different (for want of time I will not go to details now). Not one is convincing. It will be something similar they will look out for.

Then of course the conspiracy theories of Christians wanting to do this and that to aid the propagation of their religion. Its a worn out path for apologists that one will not dignify with a response.

and finally, why the desperation to validate prophet Muhammad through Christian texts? The obsession is beyond me, honestly. He needs no mention in Christian text for his message to shine through. I don't see this obsession from other religions.

Lets see what this Gospel of Barnabas has to offer even though we know from Paul's writing  the strong relationship between himself and Barnabas; both men have not contradicted themselves.

Funny I was just about to write something similar to you.   In any case I fully agree.    People read into things whatever they want to believe.  Just because there is a word in Hebrew that sounds like ONE of Mohammad's names (Achmed) does not mean that he is mentioned in the Torah.  For that matter,  my given name is also mentioned in the Torah.  Hardly a prediction of me.

I am neither Muslim or Christian--more like a freethinker--and what would be most interesting to me would be to see an examination of the book and the text  by scientists and historians.  I am sure it will turn out to be dated much later than they claim as have all previous copies of St. Barnabas;   not sure if the Turks would allow this,  however.

In my opinion all religions are man-made.  Hell and Satan are figurative terms used to describe our own struggles,  rather than a real place and a real being.

Hypocrisy is also quoting religion to condemn one sexual sin (homosexuality), while ignoring other sexual sins (adultery and prostitution). As far as I am concerned, those using religion as a justification to make homosexuality illegal, while NEVER EVER suggesting criminalizing adultery, are just as big a hypocrite as those who favor homosexuality while not permitting bigamy.

And yes, I also wouldn't mind seeing polygamy made legal in western countries, but fairness would require that women be allowed more than one husband in addition to the usual one man with multiple wives.