₦airaland Forum

@olabowale,

Please desist from all the silly excuses and face up to the issues in the thread. If that's a hard thing to understand or remember, here it is again:

The thread is about the translations and versions of both the Qur'an and the Bible.

Since Muslims have been hanging their tattered exculpations on the hinges of a mindless argument on "translations", we would rather you either have something genuine and honest to present; or failing to do so, simply save us all the comical displays of your theatrical rehearsals at saying absolutely nothing.

Count down:

. . . . 4 Days to winners being declared.

Enjoy!

Ifestoja:
Hi Pilgrim, its amazing the way you despise catholics, what actually have they done to you. I think you should concentrate on your salvation and leave judgement of which church is doing the right thing to God. I've seen all your efforts and strenght trying to prove your points on how catholics are not christians and on what the Pope said about Mary and also on how they worship Mary. Can you please channel these efforts towads preaching against fonication, abortion, corruption and other ills facing our society today and leave catholics alone. I just want to tell you that if you hate something or someone so much, you are attatched to that person with an emotional feelings that is as strong as iron, whereas, that person taking control over your happiness. Please argue more on more life changing issues and not church

Thank you, Ifestoja. I would rather not argue anything here with you - the godly advice of my friends is sufficient for me at this time.

God bless you plenty.

@Ganjaseed,

Ganjaseed:
You misunderstood pilgrim.1 She is very neutral this time, She has not attack anybody yet. Red very well Mrs Pope.

Thank you for that frank comment. I was going to respond to Ifestoja, but my friends (who were with me at the time) prevailed upon me to chill, and let someone else observe what you have just posted! They (my friends) quoted this verse to me:

Proverbs 27:2
Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth;
a stranger, and not thine own lips.

Now, I believe even more that the Bible is full of life - it is LIVING! Just as they said, someone else will sooner post an observation - and you did!

God bless you.

@mdsocks,

Good morning. How body? Thanks for your rejoinder, and here's what I'd like you to carefully observe:

mdsocks:
But you forget that ,

Evil and Evils are the same. This example is just a difference of singular and plural and not "outright distortion".

I am sorry to let bring this to your attention: evil and evils are the same as far as the nature of thing thing is concerned - they are both EVIL. But as far as tenses are concerned, they are worlds apart.

In the example I offered, there is a difference between "whisperer" (singular) and "whisperers" (plural). Often times, Muslims have tried to magnify their attacks on the Bible between different numbers of subjects - but it is amazing that when the same issues are pointed out in the Qur'an, Muslims have nothing to tender in defence.

So far, I have not seen a real debate on this issue of "versions" and "translations" either of the Bible or the Qur'an. The examples I have offered so far are simply to demonstrate that it is highly disingenuous for Muslims to try and attack the Bible based merely on translations, which is to say that they should apply the same rules to the translations and versions of the Qur'an.

Remember I asked you a pointed question: Is it fair, in your estimation, to attack any book based merely on translations?

If you assume that the case of singular and/or plural subjects is not such a big deal in the Qur'an, should it be such a big deal in the Bible translations as well? WHY do Muslims deliberately try to find fault in the translations of the Bible, whereas they are too scared to apply the same rule to their own Qur'an?!?

mdsocks:
We could have two whisperers or just one. Its a futuristic thing and nt a past event.

I haven't even come to the grammatical bloopers in the Qur'an as yet. . . and the difference between two "whisperer[b]s[/b]" and just one "whisperer" is so huge as to confuse the simple minded reader of such translations as to what and who exactly Muslims in that verse are seeking refuge from!

mdsocks:
You can compare that to.

Is the comparison now on the tenses of past, present or future? There is a difference between singular and plural narratives from Muslim translators who give difference accounts, you know.

mdsocks:
E.g, King james version 20 people died in a car crash.

Another version, 4000 people died in a car crash.

You can spot the difference.

I acknowledge that difference - again based merely on TRANSLATIONS. I'm sure you're not going to hold water when we come to the same idea in the Qur'an where we can find the difference between 1,000 and 50,000 (a difference of 49,000). You get where I'm going - yes?

mdsocks:
I could have one whisperer while others have two or more whisperers,it dosen't change anything.

It does change the whole thing, my dear. If I wasn't a Muslim and had no clue, then I would have nothing to present. But the reverse is the case - that verse does not assume that a Muslim can have one or two whisperer(s) - for every Muslim acknowledge that the verse in context was referring to SATAN himself!! How many SATAN (as different from demons) does Islam preach?

mdsocks:
So,it dosen't call for any broadcast that its another version.

So also, the Muslim broadcast that the Bible is another version is a waste of time and internet resources.

Cheers.

[quote author=+osisi link=topic=103281.msg1882047#msg1882047 date=1201138472]She has served you the said platter in several threads,you no chop am?

. . .

oya begin explain am before the others show up[/quote][quote author=D__D link=topic=103281.msg1882096#msg1882096 date=1201142715]Serve me this serve me that . . . oya babs do you need me to serve you fork and knife to digest the above?[/quote]@+osisi and D__D,

It's quite a shame that people like babs787 are so callous when it comes to simple issues. My query earlier to samsonola which he quoted as having "caught [his] my attebntio" was this:

[quote author=pilgrim.1 link=topic=103281.msg1879611#msg1879611 date=1201095364]@samsonola,

<<snip>>

Please which TRANSLATION of the Qur'an do YOU recommend?[/quote]WHICH TRANSLATION does samsonola recommend - QED. It was a simple query to have elicited a simple answers as to whether he would recommend either of the following from among hundreds:

[list]Abdullah Yusuf Ali

Maulana Muhammad Ali

Maulawi Sher Ali

Arthur John Arberry

Muhammad Asad

Maulana Abdul Majid Daryabadi

Rashad Kalifa

Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Khan (1926 -)

Muhammad Marmaduke William Pickthall

Hassan Qaribullah and Sheik Ahmad Darwish

George Sale[/list]

There are several more. . . but my query was:
[quote author=pilgrim.1 link=topic=103281.msg1879611#msg1879611 date=1201095364]@samsonola,

Please which TRANSLATION of the Qur'an do YOU recommend?[/quote]We should just take it that, because people like babs787 are struggling to understand simple English (or otherwise being seriously callous), it is no surprise that he was diverting attention to something entirely outside my question to samsonola.

Well, I guess +osisi is right afterall; because if we can't get a good translation of the Qur'an to understand Islam, and Muslims are too queer among themselves to recommend any translation, the Qur'an is not worth anybody's time. In another thread, olabowale is of the opinion that any translation of the Qur'an is NOT the Qur'an. Good deal I dumped it.

olabowale:
@Flakes: Muhammad condoned rape, you said? Am going to assume that your ibn Ishaq was not a Muslim.

No Muslim that I know of has ever denounced ibn Ishaq as a non-Muslim.

You must be a very queer Muslim ducker who tries to offer all sorts of cover up to sculpt out your own type of Islam. If you find the SAHIH Hadiths of Bukhari in clear print demonstrating the real Muhammad, you swerve frantically to the personal opinion that your Bukhari is different from the one every Muslim reads. If someone quotes ibn Ishaq, you have headaches so quickly as to assume he is no longer a Muslim. Well done - these are the kinds of things that weaken your arguments even among Muslim readers.

@olabowale

olabowale:
You Africans, whose mother tongue is not English are using translated Qur'an as the Qur'an of Islam.

Keep crying. As a Yoruba man, what connection do you have with the Quraish?

olabowale:
I have news for you, Christians; Qur'an is purely in Arabic.

Which one of the "Arabic" among the several?

olabowale:
So that you understandnyour follies, pick your tribal language in Nigeria. Lets pick Igbo for illustration. If few Igbo writers were to write what it means, of the verses of Qur'an, in Igbo language, you will have so many slightly varied words. For example the writer from Abia state will write slightly a different Qur'an than a person in Enugu. But neither is a true Qur'an.

In other words, all the verses you and your Muslim brethren have been quoting from the Qur'an are not the Qur'an afterall - since they are not arabic scripts you have been quoting? Islam is more confused that we had imagined!

olabowale:
A true Qur'an must be in pure Arabic, when you hear the sound, since it is an oral revelation.

Which confirms that there was never any "book" that Gabriel or anybody gave to Muhammad. The Qur'an is purely the dictations of Muhammad's thoughts - no wonder it took him 15 days to duck and hide from the simple questions that the Jewish rabbis offered him.

olabowale:
You see where I am going with this.

Yes we do - you going straight to more confusion than when you first began, and no one's following you there.

olabowale:
So your hammering on the English language 'Qur'an,' is a baseless and lack of real argument against Islam.

Go preach that to babs787 and his bandwagon who have been hammering on the English TRANSLATIONS of the Bible. As far as this thread is about the Muslim misgivings about "TRANSLATIONS", we shall hold on to that and present the same warped "translations" of the Qur'an till your eyes pop out for all your protests.

olabowale:
A Yoruba man who speaks only Yoruba, is not required to read English Qur'an.

Nope - but he is required to first learn "Arabic" (or is it "Quraish" before he can shout to 'Allah', not so? We have asked that question several times and no Muslim offered any answers - probably because you all realize the silliness of your reasoning.

olabowale:
However every Muslim is encouraged to learn how to recite, read Qur'an in Arabic.

God does not require you to subject yourself to Arabic before you can talk to Him in prayer and praise.

olabowale:
Hadith is graded based on its sound narrations and other factors. However, when you read hadith, you can see whether it fits the quality of Muhammad (as), or not.

Your Muslim scholars did not wait for your to dictate this line before they acclaimed that Bukhari and Muslim ahadiths are SAHIH. As long as they hold those ahadiths as "authentic", we are quite well to go there and read all the so-called qualities of Muhammad for ourselves, thank you.

olabowale:
He will not curse a soul unless the soul does truly deserve it.

His curses followed him to his grave - where they truly belong.

For the umpteenth time:

STICK TO THE ISSUES IN THE THREAD and SAVE ALL THE DEFLECTIVE TRICKS!!!

@olabowale,

olabowale:
@away4real You did not see my several entries of the Qur'an which speak about covenant of Allah with His slave Prophet Ibrahiim.

They were not entries - they were rather excuses tirelessly presented to scuttle round the one question that davidylan offered you!

olabowale:
It shows that you are a disingenuous person.

It rather shows that he is an astute observer. If you had imagined that your excuses would wash with the question, it only comes back to demonstrate how dishonest you truly are.

olabowale:
No wonder you will see that the Keferis understand Islam more than Muslims!

They (so-called keferis) have demonstrate time and again that you guys have no grasp of your own religion before turning outward to smuggle Muhammad into other people's holy books!

olabowale:
First a knowledge that is not beneficiary is not a knowledge at all.

Is that why you have been slaving all this while to demonstrate that yours was so unbeneficial - which explains yet again the reason why you so love to derail topics of threads with your endless nothingness?

The message has been repeated several times already - specifically for YOU:

                                     STICK TO THE ISSUE HERE!!!

olabowale:
A disbeliever acquiring knowledge of belief is what we call a Mutamushriik, or orientalist. Copying and pasting are not indications of lack of good grasp of Islamic religion. Islam has a firm and laid down process. For example we do not go against Muhammad (as) in any matter of religion.

Good that someone rightly observes that your last line was idolatry - go figure.

olabowale:
Unlike you who go over the head of Jesus in the matter of your beliefs in God, worship of God, etc. For example Mark 12 verse 29, Jesus was reported to have said that God is One Lord. That God is the Lord of Jesus, as well.

Jesus also said that He is the Son of God (John 10:36) - would you be willing to quote that one also? Your selective quoting of the Bible does not help the smuggling of Muhammad's denials into the revelations and prophecies of the biblical prophets, you know.

olabowale:
But then you guys then developed a three in One godship. You have this fishy smell in your living room, you still have the gut to tell me I do not understand my religion?

We have more guts to tell you that your religion is hogwash. Until you grow up and start reasoning like an adult and face the issues of threads without your frantic drama, you will only give us more guts to tell you what you truly need to hear and read.

olabowale:
First, Islam deals with heart accepting and the tongue truly believing in One God. So a person who is worshipping a multiple head deity, is not fit to talk about any understanding of Islamic beliefs.

Which again demonstrates that Muslims are dubious. Thank God I left Islam with its deliberate lies. This issue about "multiple heads" has been made clear to you and a challenge offered you to please quote where in the Bible you read any verse speaking about "3 godheads" (plural). Until you become a cursing machine, we have not found you quote that verse. Why then will people not have the guts to tell you to your face that Islam produces dunces?

If you are honest enough, be willing to acknowledge that your premises are unfair, untrue, incoherent, inconsiderate, and untenable. If you truly have any substance to your misgivings, quote the verses directly and discuss them - this is what others have been doing. If you can't endure that, please continue to give the public the guts to tell you what you can't endure to read.

@away4real,

away4real:
@ olabowale is this debate on the trinity?? ,

It is now obvious that when Muslims are presented with the straight and simple truth they really do not want to read, then they deliberately try to deflect a topic.

OLABOWALE & co, your efforts to derail the topic of this thread are not working!

Hi @away4real,

away4real:
@ olabowale, a lot of us are following this thread unbiased, its unnecessary for you to bring in Mr. Nwando.

Can you just imagine the silliness of it?

away4real:
Please can you and babs stick to the issues raised,

Abeg advise them as much as you can - because this is the very thing that so many people have cautioned these gentlemen endlessly on the Forum: STICK to the issues raised - which they NEVER do!!!

away4real:
i for one thought the Koran was 1 (no versions) and the hadiths i never understood but here osisi and pilgrim have totally torn u guys apart, you guys seem to have nothing to say.

Infact, this is no contest at all - and if anything, it simply demonstrates that Muslims have nothing tangible to present in their vexations.

away4real:
Again i call please stick to the issues raised if there is one version of the Koran prove it, and also the issue of the convenant raised on the other thread you also have not answered David asked what is the convenant and you said nothing i for one wanted to see if there was any similarity

I thought I was the only one who noticed that.

away4real:
You guys don't show a good grasp of your religion, always copy and pasting discuss

That's all we saw until the bubble went burst for them!

away4real:
in your own languages it will help in understanding for us the less fanatical about superioroty of religions. Pilgrim 1 seems to know more than you guys and shes a christain.

Well, I never claim any superiority for myself. But one thing I detest in Muslim hypocrisy is to pretend a scholarship that simply do NOT possess just so they could endlessly seek to deride Christianity!

away4real:
Please stick to the discussion at hand. I beg of u address issues, I really am interested in this debate.

I hope they would comply. . . if they care to.

Cheers.

@olabowale,

olabowale:
@+Osisi: +Osisi, you are becoming nastier by the pounds! Mr. Nwando needs to take charge. Qur'an is not a revelation that is in the hands of few elites. Unlike your 'Good News,' the Qur'an is always in the community of Muslims. First, the greatest authority of Qur'an among men, was Muhammad (as), who Qur'an was revealed upon. His wife, Aisha (ra), one of the mothers of the believers, called Muhammad 'the walking Qur'an.' So that you know that every ayah of Qur'an was accounted for, Jibril and Muhammad (as Jami'a) used to recite it, all of what was Qur'an, once to each other, in the month of Ramadan.

Muhammad was not the walking Qur'an - be that as it may. He clearly forgot parts of the Qur'an, and how then could such a flattering title be his?

olabowale:
(I need to educate you here because if I know you and your group well, you will run with my statement, but twisting to justify your own falsehood,

Muslims have always tried to twist words to arrive at completely different inferences to buttress their fallacies.

olabowale:
The first year of revelation, the Qur'an had fewer verses than what we call the Qur'an the  second year, and the second year has fewer verses that the Qur'an of the third year. Yet each year whatever verses that that Qur'an had, was full Qur'an for that year until more revelations were revealed to make it fuller. A verse, when recited is Qur'an. Even a word in it when recited, it means Qur'an is recited. You get the idea now? In the 23rd year, you had the fullest Qur'an in the month of ramadan than any of the previous Ramadans) But this 23 rd year of Ramadan recitation, between Jibril and Muhammad (as) was different. They recited it to each other twice, breaking away from their usual one time recitation to each other!

And the point is. . .?

olabowale:
Muhammad died before the next Ramadan. Now, Umar was not among the group of people who committed a great amount of Qur'an. Abdal bin Mas'ud (Moshoodi, for you Nigeria people), is a great reciter and committed the whole Qur'an into memory. If there is a verse of the Qur'an that talks about stoning, it would not have been removed from the Qur'an and Umar would not have been the only person to know it. What we see here is that you have fell back into relapse, you go back to your usual bad sites, again.

WHY then did Muhammad practice the same injunction of stoning people?

olabowale:
However, Allah tells us in the Qur'an to take what Muhammad gives and stay far away from what he forbids.

So, who actually is the commander - Allah or Muhammad?

olabowale:
In another verse, The Almighty says that Muhammad never talks out of his own desire.

Muhammad actually talked out of his desire.

olabowale:
In another we are commanded to Obey Allah and obey the Messenger. Yet in another Allah says that when Allah and His Messenger have made a decision on any matter, it does not befit a true believer to have any other view point, opinion or idea, etc on that matter! I can give you many verses pertaining to Muhammad as it concerns what he does.

Shirk! Joining Muhammad as partner with 'Allah' in all the instances you have mentioned is pure shirk - regardless what you argue here. This is the same thing that Muslims have always sought to attack in Christianity, but when it comes to Muhammad and 'Allah', it is alright for shirk to be celebrated.

olabowale:
Further, since all prophets can with the same message and guidance from the same source, God Almighty, it will not be impossible that the law of punishment of adultery would be the same.

If all prophets came with the same message (as surely the Biblical prophets did), where did Muhammad ever acknowledge God as FATHER? Muhammad's denial of God being FATHER is clearly not the same message as the biblical prophets affirmed.

olabowale:
Afterall, Jesus (as), did not abrogate/cancel that Mosaic law.

Thank you very much - could you kindly preach that to babs787 who has been trying to force his idea of abrogation into the Bible where it does not exist?

olabowale:
Or did he, +Osisi?

He did not - and I've asked that you guys go and find out the meaning of "FULFILL" in the verse where Jesus affirmed that was what He came to do. If I asked you about the "abrogated verses" of the Qur'an, you will offer excuses like babs787 did. If i am wrong, please list out all the abrogated verses of the Qur'an and enlighten us, thank you.

olabowale:
In the Qur'an we see the commandments for five salah, but the rakah of each was not indicated in the Qur'an.

Good one. Since you have always argued that all the prophets came with the same message, where did Moses, Abraham and David ever perform those five salah or rakah - rakah which you cannot find in the Qur'an according to you?

olabowale:
It was from the mouth of Muhammad, in his hadith that we know that Salatul Subh is 2 rakah, Magrib is 3 rakah, and 4 rakah each for Zuhr, Asr and Isha. Muhammad was the one who gives the pronouncements of which rakah is silent and which is in loud voice.

Where did the Biblical prophets perform the rakah?

olabowale:
Whatever Muhammad (as) legislated, it was Allah who commanded him to do so.

Another fabu. Muhammad claimed that he has given more commandment than Allah gave in his Qur'an - did you forget that? Before any Muslim flies off the handle on this one, I simple ask you to deny it first and shame yourselves for how empty you are of your own religion before looking outward to attack others.

olabowale:
What would you have done if the adultery was so close to home, espectially when its too close for comfort?

What adultery - the non-existent one that Muhammad re-engineered about Jesus speaking in the cradle. . . or the one you have not been able to show for your claims?

olabowale:
It is then the true personality comes streaming out, demanding for more that the 'pound of flesh, but include in it the blood, bones and cartilage, etc! Please go sedon!

Pack yourself one corner. Inspite of all your long theories you are still fighting to unknot your shoelace on your misgivings.

@babs787,

When I requested for a simple outline of all the abrogated verses in the Qur'an, this was your answer:

babs787:
Quran 2v106: Whatever a verse (revelation) do we abrogate or cause to be forgotten. We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allah is able to do all things.


Qur'an 16 vs 101
"When We substitute one revelation for another,- and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages),- they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not.

It simply demonstrates that you actually do not know which verses in the Qur'an are abrogated but have been following the wayo apologetics of Muslim scholars who are as confused as to which Quranic verses are actually abrogated.

Meanwhile, in addition of the fact that God never caused any one of His prophets to either FORGET or SUBSTITUTE any verse for another in the Bible, it further goes to demonstrate that the whole Muslim idea of trying to force that idea into the Bible proves the fallacy of Muhammad's claims to be a prophet among the ranks of the Biblical prophets. Directly against your idea of "forgetting" and "substituting" verses for abrogations, Jesus stated clearly that "Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35).

As you try to sort out the dilemma of your "forgotten" and "substituted" verses in the Qur'an, could you be so kind as well to help clarify why this particular verse was cancelled from the Qur'an? Here - the references are referring to the same event:

[list]
(1) FASTING

Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 3, Book 31, Num. 170:
Narrated Nafi: Ibn 'Umar recited the verse: "They had a choice
either to fast or to feed a poor person for every day, and said
that the order of this Verse was cancelled.[/list]

[list]

(2) MARTYRS

Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Book 52, Num. 57:
Narrated Anas: The Prophet sent seventy men from the tribe of
Bani Salim to the tribe of Bani Amir. When they reached there,
my maternal uncle said to them, "I will go ahead of you, and if
they allow me to convey the message of Allah's Apostle (it will be
all right); otherwise you will remain close to me."

So he went ahead of them and the pagans granted him security.
But while he was reporting the message of the Prophet ,
they beckoned to one of their men who stabbed him to death.
My maternal uncle said, "Allah is Greater! By the Lord of the Kaba,
I am successful." After that they attached the rest of the party
and killed them all except a lame man who went up to the top of
the mountain. (Hammam, a sub-narrator said, "I think another man
was saved along with him)."

Gabriel informed the Prophet that they (i.e the martyrs) met their Lord,
and He was pleased with them and made them pleased. We used to recite,
"Inform our people that we have met our Lord, He is pleased with us and
He has made us pleased" Later on this Quranic Verse was cancelled.

The Prophet invoked Allah for forty days to curse the murderers from
the tribe of Ral, Dhakwan, Bani Lihyan and Bam Usaiya who disobeyed
Allah and his Apostle.[/list]

[list]

(3) MARTYRS

Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Book 52, Num. 69:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: For thirty days Allah's Apostle invoked Allah
to curse those who had killed the companions of Bir-Mauna; he invoked
evil upon the tribes of Ral, Dhakwan, and Usaiya who disobeyed Allah
and His Apostle. There was revealled about those who were killed at
Bir-Mauna a Quranic Verse we used to recite, but it was cancelled
later on. The Verse was:

"Inform our people that we have met our Lord. He is pleased with us
and He has made us pleased"[/list]

[list]
(4)  MARTYRS

Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 5, Book 59, Num. 421:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet invoked evil upon those (people)
who killed his companions at Bir Mauna for 30 days (in the morning prayer).
He invoked evil upon (tribes of) Ril, Lihyan and Usaiya who disobeyed
Allah and His Apostle.

Allah revealed a Quranic Verse to His Prophet regarding those who had
been killed, i.e. the Muslims killed at Bir Ma'una, and we recited the Verse
till later it was cancelled. (The Verse was 'Inform our people that we
have met our Lord, and He is pleased with us, and we are pleased with Him."[/list]

Please don't fly off the handle or try your hat-trick of evading the simple question. Here again:

[quote author=pilgrim.1 link=topic=107465.msg1881612#msg1881612 date=1201124882]could you be so kind as well to help clarify why this particular verse was cancelled from the Qur'an?[/quote]Cheers.

@babs787,

babs787:
@pilgrim.1

I did not lose any face and if you care to know I change my signature as often as I like but try to show that you were trained.

Everytime you lose face you and olabowale resort to this childish rant of being "trained". There's nothing wrong with changing one's signature - but the message was well received before it was changed: "Die EXCEPT As A Muslim" - and that was the only sane thing you have said on Nairaland.

babs787:
Unfortunately, you will be ignored by that same Jesus because he was not sent to you.

Lol. . . I know in my heart that He has called me His own! If Jesus sent to only the Jews (as Muslims have claimed), why all the Muslim pretences that still turn out to be that Muslims MUST believe in Him as well? Was he sent to the Quraish and the Yorubas? Better hurry up and truly believe in Him instead of trying to consign Him only to the Jews.

babs787:
How many questions have you been able to answer on christianity?

As many questions that Muslims have offered without the Muslim hypocrisy. Go figure - I still have pleasant discussions with gentlemen like mdsocks even when we do not agree; others are there and we have exchanged views amicably even when they disagree with me. But when we ask you to follow in their manner and invite a genuine discussion, you have always pretended a scholarship you clearly do not possess - nevermind even the fact that you offer endless excuses to buy time!

babs787:
@luvus

You may go there to read the unexpected.

What is the "unexpected"?

babs787:
Why not sit for a debate rather than jumping from thread to thread. You can go there and have a look please

The same way that you and your Muslim brethren jump from thread to thread.

@babs787,

babs787:
@pilgrim.1

Dont try to be evasive, you saw my question quite right and here it goes:

Can you read? Here again:

[quote author=pilgrim.1 link=topic=103281.msg1879611#msg1879611 date=1201095364]Please which TRANSLATION of the Qur'an do YOU recommend?

Besides, who is the "muslim scholars" that are willing to share the truth with humility and not try to mislead the enquirer?

I am only simply asking you about these issues in the hope that we can better understand you and not mistake your own version of apologetics for what it already is.[/quote]What is so difficult in those lines that you are tirelessly sweating to unknot yourself?

babs787:
The above really caught my attebntio hence my quoting it. Please in all honesty, can you give me the verses in full from the translators going against each and some missing verses just like I have doing with your bible?

Both in translations "going against each" as well as "missing verses" of the Qur'an have been provided in the relevant thread.

@babs787,

babs787:
Kindly supply me verses missing in some translations but present in others and verses going against each other in the translations

If you don't mind dropping your hideous hypocrisy, please kindly let us know if these translations of the Qur'an are saying EXACTLY the same things:

babs787:
Sura 2 v 138 ~ Which is it:

~ a "religion"
~ a "system"
~ a "baptism"
~ a "dye", or:
~ a "colour"?

[list]
Pickthall
(We take our) colour from Allah, and who is better than Allah
at colouring. We are His worshippers.

Yusuf Ali
(Our religion is) the Baptism of God: And who can baptize better
than God? And it is He Whom we worship.

Hilali-Khan
[Our Sibghah (religion) is] the Sibghah (Religion) of Allah (Islam)
and which Sibghah (religion) can be better than Allah's? And we
are His worshippers. [Tafsir Ibn Kathir.]
 
Shakir
(Receive) the baptism of Allah, and who is better than Allah in baptising?
and Him do we serve.

Sher Ali
Say, `We have adopted the religion of ALLAH; and who is better than ALLAH
in teaching religion, and him alone do we worship.'

Rashad Khalifa
Such is GOD's system, and whose system is better than GOD's?
"Him alone we worship." 

Arberry
the baptism of God; and who is there that baptizes fairer than God?
Him we are serving.

Palmer
The dye of God! and who is better than God at dyeing? and we are
worshippers of Him.

Rodwell
Islam is the Baptism of God, and who is better to baptise than God?
And Him do we serve.

Sale
The baptism of God [have we received], and who it better than God to
baptize? Him do we worship.[/list]

May I remind you, sir, that there is a world of DIFFERENCE between all these words:

[list] ~ a "religion"

~ a "system"

~ a "baptism"

~ a "dye",

~ a "colour"?!?[/list]

There are numerous such examples - but the point is simply this: which "translation" of the Qur'an is claimed to be free from error - even by Muslim scholars themselves? Your argument has always been based on "translations and versions" - and the simple query here has been to apply the same rule to the Qur'an for the fact that all the various translations are saying different things altogether!

babs787:
Now why was his ministry limited to Jew during his time, telling his disciples not to go to the land of the gentiles and had to tell them later to go to all nations.

Please what do you understand by 'all nations' and note that we have 'all the nations' in some versions. So what do you understand by that phrase?

This question has been answered several times - and by introducing them here again, you are not so smart as to try and deflect the topic.

babs787:
Quran 2v106: Whatever a verse (revelation) do we abrogate or cause to be forgotten. We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allah is able to do all things.


Qur'an 16 vs 101
"When We substitute one revelation for another,- and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages),- they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not.

Now what do you understand by 'abrogation' with regards to the biblical verses presentd?

Neither ideas of abrogation is in the Bible - for God never caused any of His prophets to "FORGET" any verse; nor did He cause them to "SUBSTITUTE" one verse for another. Since this is what Muslims are claiming for the Qur'an, it is no wonder it is self-attested as a "forgery" - because you will not find your definition of "abrogation" in any verse of the Bible.

@babs787,

babs787:
@Pilgrim.1

I taught you would talk on the abrogation from the bible but it seemed you lost there.

No, there was nothing to talk about any abrogation from the Bible when there were no such abrogations. The Muslim idea of abrogations is a pitiful doctrine as insidious as ever - and that is why Muslims have remained confused themselves while trying to force that idea into the Bible. They can keep their abrogated and abrogating Qur'an till all the verses are abrogated in it - but the message of the Bible has remained ever the same, thank you.

babs787:
Now I read your hypocrisy here. I opened a threrad sometime and asked you qiestions but you ran claiming that it was ferreted from website

no one has accused me about any hypocrisy - and the fact you keep repeating the same sad remarks only demonstrates your second nature. Your misgivings only derived from the fact that you were always plagiarizing materials from websites until I directly challenged you to desist from the straight-faced habit while lying to the public that they were your own replies!!

babs787:
and I even gave you biblical verses to start but you still avoided my questions but you are jubilating over what you ran away from in another thread.

I have never run away from any thread - the same as you always duck simple questions offered you with the same excuses as we read about Muhammad. My simple answer to you was that you only dropped your hypocrisy - then we can discuss. Did you ever comply?

babs787:
Lest I forget, you posted some missing verses from Khalifa's Quran, please why have you not been quoting from the same book all these while and it is very glaring that it was a deliberate omission

Excuse me, WHY have you been using the same dishonest arguement of translation to attack the Bible and now complaining about my referring to Khalifa? Have Muslims not hypocritically been quoting Dr. Rashad Khalifa on the "miracle of 19 in the Qur'an" to prove their hypocristic apologetics?

If you are seeking a geuine discussion, my premise was simple: apply the same rule to your own Qur'an and drop your callous trade.

babs787:
and can you please serve me other translators having the verses missing but present in others?

And what have you said about the simple question of "translations" of the Qur'an? Have you not been basing your argument on "translations" of the Bible in various versions?

babs787:
I am asking you again, if the punishment is still being carried out, on what basis would it have been removed?

How can you be answering a simple question by pretending to "ask again"? Do you have an honest answer or you are following Muhammad's footsteps of never answering questions but trying to buy time for 15 days?

@+osisi,

Thank you for reminding me about this:

[quote author=+osisi link=topic=107465.msg1881203#msg1881203 date=1201117923]pilgrim please don't let the slaves of allah derail this thread.
That is always their tactics when they are caught up in their lies.[/quote]Infact, I'm almost on my way out for an appointment - and a friend here just quipped about that same thing as she screamed: "don't let them derail the thread. . . that guy_{meaning babs787} is craftily deflecting the issue of translations of the qur'an!!"

Nne, make I go - I'll visit again to see what's been going on.

Shalom and many blessings o jare!

@+osisi,

[quote author=+osisi link=topic=107465.msg1881142#msg1881142 date=1201116959]babs,you miss the point or you're trying to be evasive.[/quote]It's going to be hard for a Muslim to stop being evasive. We know how Muhammad ducked simple questions from the Jews until after 15 days after he declared his answers would come in the morning.

[quote author=+osisi link=topic=107465.msg1881142#msg1881142 date=1201116959]You are angry at the wrong person,I did not pen the hadiths.[/quote]Nothing new. Tell a Muslim to take a look at what their scholars are propagating - when he sees the stark truth, he gets upset at the wrong person.

[quote author=+osisi link=topic=107465.msg1881142#msg1881142 date=1201116959]See the commentary above.
The hadith is an authentic one and here we clearly see 2 individuals fighting over which verse was abrogated or allowed.[/quote]In Islam, Muslims are fond of choosing which of the authentic hadiths to deny - so nothing new there.

[quote author=+osisi link=topic=107465.msg1881142#msg1881142 date=1201116959]The issue is not about abrogation ,(we already know allah hurried to please his prophet when he was in a bind )but about which ones were abrogated.[/quote]Long and short, there was no "book" - the Qur'an was merely Muhammad's dictations.

[quote author=+osisi link=topic=107465.msg1881142#msg1881142 date=1201116959]so stay on course here.[/quote]Hard luck if he does.

@babs787,

babs787:
Even though because of his mercy Jesus healed the sick daughter, he made it clear that his mission was to the Jews, not to the Gentiles.

He made it clear that His ministry of salvation was to the entire world - both Jews and Gentiles:

Matthew 24:14
And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world
for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

babs787:
Later on this was abrogated and Jesus commanded his disciples to reach out to all peoples.

Lol. . . there are no "abrogated verses" in the Bible as 'Allah' has abrogated so many verses in his Qur'an to such an extent that Muslims are not sure among themselves which are still standing.

For a start, could you enuciate for us ALL the abrogated verses of the Qur'an against all those that are not abrogated?

babs787:
It is clear that the concept of abrogation: the nullifying of an older commandment or practice in favour of a newer law, is nothing new and it has been practiced by God for reasons known to him.

Again here: Jesus never claimed to come and "nullify" any verse of the Bible. His word was not about "nullifying" anything, but about[b] FULFILLING[/b] them. This is why I asked olabowale to go and find out what the term means.

babs787:
What we know is that the laws governing the mankind (i.e., Shariah) changes according to the needs of the society.

In order words, laws of 'Allah' are also changing - according to your inference here?

babs787:
But the concept of monotheism (i.e., Tawheed) remains the same.

Inspite of all your excuses, please where at all did Muhammad refer to God as FATHER in just the same way as the Biblical prophets declared of God?

babs787:
The Creator knows very well that his creation, the humans, need time and discipline to grow and mature, He reveals commandments and practices that help them develop both as individuals and as members of society.

Has His revelation of His being the FATHER ever changed, babs787?

@babs787,

babs787:
@babyosis


This is my last for your last post too and the next will be for Pilgrim.1

Be sure you don't bring up any illiterate post when trying to dscuss with me. You know how I rubbish the Muslim games you have been playing - I've done so in different threads - and this won't be any different. If you are seeking a genuine discussion, then drop your hypocrisy.

babs787:
Do you and Pilgrim/1 have any Quranic translations having Bismillah in that same verse and please since you are that ignorant to quote without having a re-think of what you are posting, we have more than one verse not having Bismillah and Allah made provision for same in some verses.

With due respect, I have not regarded you with such uncouth language - and if you don't mind, drop your vexations and behave.

We know how the Bismillah verses did not survive those chapter headings - they were humanly deliberated and not as assumed by Muslims that they were so given by 'Allah'.

babs787:
Now Babyosis and Pilgrim.1, what happened to other verse that is not having Bismillah in the beginning as well?

Muslims should tell us - did they not claim that "everything" in the Qur'an came straight from 'Allah'? How come Muhammad was claiming the Qura'n as a "book" when there was no text and he was dictating to his companions? Do Muslims understand what a "book" is at all?

@pahtahkee,

pahtahkee:
@ Pilgrim.1,

Lol. . . . . . . . . Oh now I get it. The Professor of deceit on the religious forum babs, actually got this trait for Muhammad. Fifteen days, yet he can not answer simple questions.

It is precisely because Muhammad failed to prove himself a prophet even to the Jews, that was why his hatred followed him to his grave. Even with so much cursing on his lips against Christians and Jews, none of such curses has ever taken effect.

pahtahkee:
Jesus was a man filled with the wisdom of God. Even when Pharisees came with difficult and guile questions, He was bestowed with wisdom to know what to say!

Yep, and that is why the Muslim mindset is to seek to castigate the same Jesus whom they say they believe in. Classic hypocrisy unmatched!

@babs787,

babs787:
You do not really know what you are missing for not being a muslim.

Even your signature said "Die EXCEPT As A Muslim" - so what is anyone missing when you so advise them? Finally, you had to lose face and change it now to: "To ignore the facts does not change the facts"! Well done - to ignore the facts we have been sharing all along actually does not change them.

At least, I know the many things I'm glad to leave behind in Islam when the love of Christ touched me - and I'm eternally grateful.

@pahtahkee,

pahtahkee:
Thanks oh my sister. I have actually suffered in silence watching and reading this Babs of a person punishing simple common sense. Thinking to himself he sounds intelligent.

Lol. . . what "intelligence"? Ducking questions and offering excuses are not to be mistaken for "intelligence". But Muslims today are only copying the example of Muhammad who kept ducking simple questions. Sample another one of Muhammad's ducking:


[list]The Quraysh sent two men to the Jewish Rabbis of Medina, reasoning that the Rabbis had superior knowledge of the scriptures and about the prophets of God. The two Quraysh men described their tribesman, Muhammad, to the Rabbis. The Rabbis told the men to ask Muhammad three questions:


[list]"They (the rabbis) said, `Ask him about three things which we will tell you to ask, and if he answers them then he is a Prophet who has been sent (by Allah); if he does not, then he is saying things that are not true, in which case how you will deal with him will be up to you. Ask him about some young men in ancient times, what was their story? For theirs is a strange and wondrous tale. Ask him about a man who travelled a great deal and reached the east and the west of the earth. What was his story? And ask him about the Ruh (soul or spirit) -- what is it? If he tells you about these things, then he is a Prophet, so follow him, but if he does not tell you, then he is a man who is making things up, so deal with him as you see fit.'"[/list]

The famous story, in the Sira, goes that when Muhammad was informed of the three questions from the Rabbis, he declared that he would have the answers in the morning. However, Muhammad did not give the answer in the morning. For fifteen days, Muhammad did not answer the question. Doubt in Muhammad began to grow amongst the people of Mecca. Then, after fifteen days, Muhammad received the revelation that is Surah Al-Kahf ("the Cave", the eighteenth chapter of the Qur'an. Surah Al-Kahf mentions the "People of the Cave," a strange story about some young men in ancient times who slept in a cave for many years. . . . >> [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_in_the_Qur'an#Dhul-Qarnayn_in_early_Islamic_literature]see it here[/url][/list]

So, when you see Muslims ducking simple questions and scooting off to buy time in a roundabout manner, they lifted that practice straight from Muhammad.

pahtahkee:
. . .

[list][li]an elocutionary delivery of a piece of poetry or prose, without the text, before an audience.[/li][/list]

So babs, given the definition of recitation above, what exactly is your point?

He has no point. The point really is that the Muslim claim that 'Allah' sent down any book to Muhammad is a fraud. There was no such "book" - it was all a recitation that Muhammad dictated as he went along.

@ismailys,

ismailys:
@pilgrim
i have read the article on wikipedia , and i think you should wait till they publish their
findings instead of predetermining their conclusion.

Excuse me, dear ismailys. . . the investigators themselves HAVE published some of their findings - otherwise they would not have stated that "In it are textual variations from the standard Quran that is presently read throughout the world".

I have only waited to see what Muslim apologists have had to say on the research works of people like Gerd R Puin. It is a notorious idea being circulated in the Muslim world that Puin has not made any publications. One of the Muslims who emailed me and ranted so much about this received this simple reply from me:

    Please go and read:

Die dunklen Anfange. Neue Forschungen zur Entstehung und fruhen
Geschichte des Islam
("The dark beginnings: new research on the origin and early history of Islam,"
Hans Schiller Verlag, 2005)

   That is one of Gerd R Puin published works on this issue. When you are done,
   come back and let's talk.

That was 3 months ago. I sent him several reminders forthnightly - I never heard from him.

Do you care to go read the same thing as well? Then come back and let's talk.

ismailys:
if at the end of the day lets say there is a slight variation from the conventional quran( in your dreams) im sure u will be jumping up and down in excitement .

I'm not that gullible to fulfill your dreams. It is because Muslims are fond of never actually researching, that is why they can celebrate their illiterate rants. My one concern here was to apply the same worries of "translations and versions" to the Qur'an that Muslims have used to attack the Bible.

ismailys:
anyway till then,

Please go and read:

Die dunklen Anfange. Neue Forschungen zur Entstehung und fruhen
Geschichte des Islam
("The dark beginnings: new research on the origin and early history of Islam,"
Hans Schiller Verlag, 2005)

It is also available in English - then we shall read from you. What you are looking for is there.

Cheers.

@babs787,

Please save the pretences. The issues I referred to are the TRANSLATIONS - and where you require examples, we have offered to discuss them in several threads. The issue is simple:

    Are there translations of the Qur'an?

   Why do Muslims disingenuously try to attack the Bible based merely on translations?

   Inspite of all the translations available (Qur'an and Bible), has the message of the
   Bible changed about God being known as FATHER?


The basic premise is all about "translations" - that is why I asked the referer which of the translations of the Qur'an he would like to recommend.

pahtahkee:
Pilgrim.1 and +osisi, you have practically finished the whole topic!


God Bless you both.

God bless you many times over o jare.

@olabowale,

olabowale:
And by the way, in Nigeria, alone, there are now Qur'an translations, into the many of the national languages. Let just take ten as the number of the languages, presently. Yet when any of the people from any of the local languages is going to recite the Qur'an, say an Igbo man, example Alhaji Isa Okeke, of Enugu, he does not recite it in Igbo, but in PURE ARABIC!

I'm sorry for you. The Bible has been translated into over 2,000 (two thousand) languages:

[list] The United Bible Societies is currently involved
with close to 600 translation projects covering
nearly 500 languages.

. . . .

Over five centuries ago, Johann Gutenberg issued
the first book printed from moveable type – a beautifully
executed folio-size Latin Bible. Since that time,
complete books of the Bible have been produced by
various agencies, and there are now over 2,370 languages
in which at least one book of the Bible has been published.

. . . .

At the start of the nineteenth century, Scriptures were
available in just 68 languages. Today, Scriptures are available
in no less than 2,403 languages, with the complete Bible having
been translated into at least 426 languages, and the New
Testament into some 1,115. In addition, parts of the Bible
(Portions) have been made available in a further 862 languages.

. . . . >> read more.[/list]


Wycliffe Bible Translators Forms Vision 2025

Although translation work among Wycliffe Bible Translators
has been progressing faster than ever (more than 2,200 languages
have at least some of the Bible in their language), at least three
thousand languages still need the good news translated into
their heart language.

Members of thirty-two minority language groups worldwide received
God’s word in their own heart languages for the first time in 2006
thanks to a long-standing partnership between Bible League and
Wycliffe Bible Translators.

. . . >> read more.

There are several more.

Meanwhile, these people do not have to first learn Hebrew, Aramaic, Quraish, Kufi, or Greek before they can understand the Love of God in Jesus Christ for them.

olabowale:
(By the way the name belongs to a real person, in exactly where I mentioned, in Igbo land).

That does not add credence to your arguments.

olabowale:
Can you christians in good conscience compare this incidental scenerio, above about this Muslim Ibo man, to any Ibo Christian who will use Igbo language Bible/Injiil for his sunday or whenever worship?

Yep - we have done that comparison before. Did Muhammad not refer to David as the BEST WORSHIPPER, with the BEST PRAYER and the BEST FASTING? And for all of that, David did not one day speak Quraish, Kufi or Arabic. Go figure, dear bros.

olabowale:
So the translations that you are talking about of Qur'an simply serves as understanding tool, to the persons who reads it in his/her local language, be it English of America, Canada or British, or any othe languages, including my beloved YORUBA! Aji se bi YORUBA lanri, YORUBA on ji se bi eni kon!

We hear - it has now become a "tool". That is after your brethren have shamelessly and cowardly used the translations for their weak arguments and you can no longer effectively embrace the "translations" of the Qur'an. Well done.

olabowale:
But I am a MUSLIM first, before I am a YORUBA.

Wayo. You were born a Yoruba first before you came to embrace Islam.

olabowale:
My Soul submits to Allah, before any getting together of my folks! That is the absolute truth. And I take it to the bank, all day long.

When you go to the bank, scratch your head again about the translations of the Qur'an.

Cheers.