₦airaland Forum

Empiree:
but when they explained to you, you said (unsatisfactorily) that they interpreted and reinterpreted quran. Now you taking about they quoted the verse again. What do you want?. You see now that your are dull?

To the puny brains of Moslem guys here, quoting back a quran passage amounts to an answer.

They will then run around claiming "refuted!" "Refuted! " "We have refuted you!"

Ask them where and how; they will say "Didn't you see it? If you didn't then it must be that you're dull. We wouldn't waste time repeating what has been CLEARLY stated"

What has been CLEARLY stated was actually the repeat of the passage.

Rashduct4luv
... ... ... ..
The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) issued instructions to execute every one of them who had grown pubic hair, and whoever had not grown pubic hair was left alone. Abu Dawood (4404) narrated with a saheeh isnaad from ‘Atiyyah al-Qurazi (may Allah be pleased with him) he said: I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah, and they examined (us). Those whose pubes had started to grow were executed and those whose pubes had not started to grow were not executed. I was among those whose pubes had not started to grow.

According to another report: They uncovered my private part and saw that my pubes had not yet started to grow, so they put me with the captive women and children.

See: al-Bidaayah wa’n-Nihaayah (6/34-94); Siyar A‘laam an-Nubala’ (1/470-480); Tareekh al-Islam (2/307-318); ar-Rawd al-Unuf (6/262-294)

Thus the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) put an end to the Jews of Banu Qurayzah who broke the treaty and formed an alliance with the mushrikeen to eradicate Islam and its people. So their plot backfired and they themselves were eradicated to the last man. Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds.

Now explain the two Bible verses i quoted telling why your gods permit such killings.

What you quoted here is just a repeat of all that I wrote earlier.

The only issue like I've pointed out over and over is your unwillingness to admit your prophet's shortcomings.

So, do you see that the prophet of Allah did not excel in kindness and mercy?

You left many of my questions unanswered. You have not explained anything but to JUST quote passages. And now you want us to explain Bible passages. If you're unable to explain yours then don't you think the Bible may be just too much for you to handle? If we have not sorted out the issues we have been on why do you now want to ADD new things? Is it to complicate matters, push away the matter on hand into the background or what?

So, from the passages you quoted, why do you think Mohamed excelled in kindness and mercy?

Rashduct4luv:
Alhamdulillah, i am still far above you. May Allah keep us Muslim far above Kufr and more in to Tawheed and sole reliance in Allah.

The summary of what happened is as follows:

When the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) migrated from Makkah to Madinah, there were three Jewish tribes in Madinah: Banu Qaynuqaa‘, Banu an-Nadeer and Banu Qurayzah. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) invited them to Islam, but most of them insisted on disbelieving. He drew up a covenant with them (i.e., a binding contract) then they waged war against him.

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

All three (Jewish tribes) waged war against him. He let off Banu Qaynuqaa‘, expelled Banu an-Nadeer, and killed Banu Qurazah and took their women and children captive. Soorat al-Hashr was revealed concerning Banu an-Nadeer, and Soorat al-Ahzaab was revealed concerning Banu Qurayzah.

You Moslems have a way of conveniently avoiding facts.

A way you do this is by having differing versions of Islamic history so that you can know which one to adopt under whichever group you find yourself.

If Mohamed said there is no compulsion in religion and he "INVITED" these Jewish tribes to Islam and they refused should "No compulsion in religion" not mean he should let them be?

Or was the "no compulsion in religion" a gimmick?

Now, was the "binding contract" decided by BOTH parties and agreed by both of them or was it really a set of rules ISSUED by Mohamed which the other party or parties are expected to FOLLOW whether they like it or not?

Earliest Islamic writers, WHO HAD NO REASON TO SAY ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY, actually gave detailed account of Islam's beginnings.

These were written long before the writer you're trying to use to JUSTIFY your postion.

These Jewish tribes NEVER waged war against Mohamed. Look at what I wrote earlier - Mohamed claimed that Gabriel asked him to go against them; not the other way round.

Again, let's not lose sight of this: If your Allah is all merciful and your prophet is “the kindest of all men” and “mercy to the worlds” wouldn't more mercy be required of them than from others?

If you now come and want to argue that because Saul or anyone else killed people that that justifies your prophet's slaughter of thousands then where is the kindness and mercy? By your argument then, he is no different from any other killer in history. If he does not excel in kindness and mercy why should anyone follow him as an example?

Mohamed’s slaughtering of unarmed Jews:

When Allah’s Apostle returned on the day (of the battle) of Al-Khandaq (i.e. Trench), he put down his arms and took a bath. Then Gabriel, whose head was covered with dust, came to him saying, "You have put down your arms! By Allah, I have not put down my arms yet." Allah’s Apostle said, "Where (to go now)?" Gabriel said, "This way," pointing towards the tribe of Bani [tribe] Quraiza. So Allah’s Apostle went out towards them. (Bukhari)
This shows that Mohamed was NOT acting in self defense!

The Prophet said to Hassan, "Abuse them (with your poems), and Gabriel is with you (i.e. supports you)." (Through another group of sub-narrators) Al-Bara bin Azib said, "On the day of Quraiza’s (besiege), Allah's Apostle said to Hassan bin Thabit, ‘Abuse them (with your poems), and Gabriel is with you (i.e. supports you).’" (Bukhari)
This shows how poetry was used in the seventh-century Arabia. Beyond being used as a smear campaign, they appear to use it as an ‘invisible’ weapon of attack against enemies. Mohamed assassinated poets who mocked him. But now that he has the power, he gets to employ a satirical poet to do the same thing he assassinated others for.

When the tribe of . . . Quraiza was ready to accept Sad’s judgment, Allah’s Apostle sent for Sad who was near to him. Sad came, riding a donkey and when he came near, Allah’s Apostle said (to the Ansar) [or Helpers], "Stand up for your leader." Then Sad came and sat beside Allah’s Apostle who said to him. "These people are ready to accept your judgment." Sad said, "I give the judgment that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as prisoners." The Prophet then remarked, "O Sad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgment of the King Allah." (Bukhari)
The sentence: Death by decapitation for around 800-900 men and pubescent boys (according to Ibn Ishaq – Pg. 464), and enslavement for the women and children

Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi: I was among the captives of Banu [tribe] Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair. (Abu Dawud); also Ibn Ishaq, p. 466)

It is of note that:
1. It was Mohamed that was the aggressor. He was in fact relaxed and not expecting any attack when he claimed Gabriel asked him to go and fight.
2. There was a plea for mercy by the tribe of Qurazi, but Mohamed turned it down.
3. Mohamed ended up taking most the people’s wealth for himself leaving the rest for his warriors to share.

So, we see that Mohamed who is flaunted as “the kindest of all men” and “mercy to the worlds” was ANYTHING BUT MERCIFUL. He raided caravans stripping innocent people of their livelihood. He destroyed plantations of others denying them their means of sustenance. He killed several thousands in order to get their wealth and enrich himself.

And a right-minded person will dare claim that he is the “best man on earth”?

FACTS are being presented. FACTS that are kept away from MAJORITY of Moslems; who instead are presented with a whitewashed Mohamed, portrayed as one who he NEVER was.

And because of Islamic “CONDITIONING” Moslems are not even able to analyse the facts. They must see Mohamed as “best” of example even when the FACTS show otherwise. They NEVER address the ISSUES about him because of FEAR: They are afraid that if they do something bad may happen to them. Psychological fear and physical intimidation has been a strong weapon of Islam in continued subjugation of millions.

That is why we can see that NO Moslem on this thread has been able address the issues raised: they are afraid that if they face the FACTS as they are they may be faced with Allah's wrath, so it is better to keep silent even in the face of CLEAR evidence to the contrary. Allah may after all not be as merciful as it is claimed he is!

Rashduct4luv:
The way you abuse and degrade the best man on earth shows how ill-bred and uncouth you are. In driving home your point you chose the bias part. I think I will have to quote you book for you to see how biased and clueless you are. Wait for me a little.

Please tell me; what is "abuse and degrade" in what i have written.
Keep deceiving yourself.
Let me go on to my second issue.
Watch out for it!

Rashduct4luv:
As for the marriage in no 1, it is prevalent and common in their time". There is no marriage age for a lady. And none of his enemies called him a paedophile except the ignoramuses of today.

As for the no 2, Prisoners of war are slaves and it is permitted to sleep with them. They have rights to fair treatment unlike the wars this days where the prisoners of war are starved, raped and killed.

You can bring the evidences for the others!

In no.1, a simple question for you: How come Mohamed NEVER married out any of his daughters at 6 or 9 years of age even though, like you said, "it is prevalent and common in their time"?

On no.2, I don't want to believe you're serious. Why are there 'war crimes' today? Have you never heard of people being tried for war atrocities?

Look at your response again. It does not make sense.

So, Mohamed, a 'PROPHET' of Allah can be as debased as any other human being. No morality is expected of him. No integrity is required of him. Yet he is the "best" of examples to be followed? Come on guy, how are you thinking?

UmarIbnShittu:
y waste my time explaining anything to you when I can just twist and retwist context to suit me BTW I learnt that(smear tactic) from you
u r still a lyon

one bottle of zamzam for u Lyon cheers!!!

I know that this is what you enjoy - throwing banters, anything else but face the real issue. It's actually a psychological thing. In the face of what you see about Islam's defects you're still hoping that it is not all these shortcomings.

You said I lied. I challenged you prove it and instead you want to get drunk. You've been unable to prove me wrong.

If you choose to follow a lie that is your cup of tea. But we have offered you the unblemished, sinless Saviour - Jesus Christ. He guarantees eternity with God. He is the ONLY way to God. Leave UNCERTAINTY for CERTAINTY.

UmarIbnShittu:
didn't u said unarmed jews from the hadith u posted u just shot urself in the leg

the lady u said he raped didn't even sleep in his room
"laughing "or perhaps he raped her using Wi-Fi "
so FYI u r a lyon

I have numbered my previous points to help you comprehend things better.

This last post of mine was on ONE of the listed items not on all.

It was not even about unarmed Jews; that is yet to come. So, where "didn't u said unarmed jews from the hadith u posted u just shot urself in the leg" came from i don't get.

Mohamed murdered a man and forcibly slept with his wife, and to you that is not gross?

I know you guys: You want to EVADE the issues. You will not address the thing i posted but instead will resort to smear tactic. Those who are reading us will see through your tricks.

ADDRESS the issue if you can without resorting to your ridiculous tactics. Stick to what i have presented.

UmarIbnShittu:
u this lyon when will stop this ur habit of lying

Ok where are ur reference

Take one of the things i pointed out:

Mohamed murdering a man in Khaybar and forcibly having sex with his wife that same day is not gross!

Sahih al-Bukhari 371— When Allah's Messenger invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there (early in the morning) when it was still dark. Allah's Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode, too, and I was riding behind Abu Talha. Allah's Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of Allah's Prophet. Then his thigh was uncovered by the shift of his Izar (waist-sheet), and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of Allah's Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, "Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned." He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, "Muhammad (has come) along with his army." We conquered Khaibar, (took the captives), and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, "O Allah's Prophet! Give me a slave-girl from the captives." The Prophet said, "Go and take any slave-girl." He took Safiyya bint Huyai.

Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, 511— We came to Khaybar by night, and the apostle passed the night there; and when morning came he did not hear the call to prayer, so he rode and we rode with him, and I rode behind Abu Talha with my foot touching the apostle's foot. We met the workers of Khaybar coming out in the morning with their spades and baskets. When they saw the apostle and the army they cried, "Muhammad with his force," and turned tail and fled. The apostle said, "Allah akbar! Khaybar is destroyed. When we arrive in a people's square it is a bad morning for those who have been warned." . . . The apostle seized the property piece by piece and conquered the forts one by one as he came to them. . . . The women of Khaybar were distributed among the Muslims.

Sahih Muslim 3328— Anas reported: I was sitting behind Abu Talha on the Day of Khaibar and my feet touched the foot of Allah's Messenger, and we came (to the people of Khaibar) when the sun had risen and they had driven out their cattle, and had themselves come out with their axes, large baskets and hatchets, and they said: (Here come) Muhammad and the army. Allah's Messenger said: Khaibar is ruined. Verily when we get down in the valley of a people, evil is the morning of the warned ones (al-Qur'an, xxxvii. 177). Allah, the Majestic and the Glorious, defeated them (the inhabitants of Khaibar), and there fell to the lot of Dihya a beautiful girl, and Allah's Messenger got her in exchange of seven heads, and then entrusted her to Umm Sulaim so that she might embellish her and prepare her (for marriage) with him.

Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, 515— Kinana b. al-Rabi, who had the custody of the treasure of B. al-Nadir, was brought to the apostle who asked him about it. A Jew came to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, "Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?" he said Yes. The apostle gave orders that the ruin was to be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr bin al-Awwam, "Torture him until you extract what he has, so he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad bin Maslama and he struck off his head, in revenge for his brother Mahmud.

The History of al-Tabari, Volume 39, 185— While the Prophet was lying with Safiyyah, Abu Ayyub stayed the night at his door. When he saw the Prophet in the morning, he said, “Allahu Akbar.” He had a sword with him; he said to the Prophet, “O Messenger of Allah, this young woman had just been married, and you killed her father, her brother, and her husband, so I did not trust her (not to harm) you.”

Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, Volume II, 252— The Apostle of Allah sent for Zaynab Bint al-Harith [that’s the woman who poisoned him] and said to her: What induced you to do what you have done? She replied: You have done to my people what you have done. You have killed my father, my uncle, and my husband, so I said to myself: If you are a prophet, the foreleg will inform you; and others have said: If you are a king, we will get rid of you.

These are all Islamic sites but I'm waiting for you to DENY them as is common with you guys.

UmarIbnShittu:
u this lyon when will stop this ur habit of lying

Ok where are ur reference

Are you a Moslem and you don't know these things?

If I show you any of these things I stated will you retract your comment and apologize?

Empiree:
^^^^

Just show us what you ever agreed with Muslims on nl?. None. Why do you think we will waste our time knowing too well you ain't here to reason?

Have told you to read 3 to 4 preceeding verses. That clears the air.

You guys speak from both sides of the mouth.

You lack honesty. Maybe you're following the path of "the best of deceivers".

This is what you said sometime back:

“I was going to post the ayah more appropriately in a very clear term bcus you denied explanation posted by the brother yesterday. Just wait for me in few hours from now to do that. Maybe you will get thte picture.It doesn't change the context or meaning of the verse, rather it gives clear view of what the verse is talking about”

Now instead of making us ‘get the picture’ and giving us ‘clear view of what the verse is talking about’ you are asking us to read 3 to 4 preceding verses. The 3 to 4 preceding verses have NOTHING to do with the verse in question. Don’t try to confuse matters. No air has been cleared.

Tell us; are you able to answer the question or not?

Rashduct4luv:
I am sick of Bible stories and lies! How can God in the Bible save Lot and his daughters only for them to sleep with him and have babies.
This is gross!

1. But Mohamed marrying a six year old and consummating the marriage with her at nine (9) is not gross!

2. Mohamed murdering a man in Khaybar and forcibly having sex with his wife that same day is not gross!

3. Mohamed's slaughtering of 900 unarmed Jews in one day is not gross!

4. Mohamed sleeping with a dead woman is not gross!

If these are not gross then your head must be composed of alien matter.

The questions we've asked are so simple. Yet it appears our Moslem guys need some basic English Language and Compression training.

All I read them say is:
"I rather use my time to train my dog than waste it on explaining things to a fool"
"last I check it u dat can't comprehend a simple self explanatory verse."
"is clear just like that."
"What he and the other guy explained to you is "extended tafsir" i:e explanation."
"Take it or leave it."

The issue is simple. One verse of the quran. Sura 3:81.

Who are the Prophets who are to help Mohamed when he comes?

Our Moslem guys have been unable answer this and other simple questions. Why? They just cannot bring themselves to see any fault in the quran. So, no matter what is pointed out, their "CONDITIONING" tells them to reject every objection. They lose objectivity. Even when they see a fault they have to convince themselves that it is not a fault and that there must be a way out.

That is why they would rather quote the passage over and over again instead of simply telling us the answer to our questions.

Empiree
Do you interpret this or not? Malachi 2:3
"Because of you I will rebuke your descendants; I will smart on your faces the dung of your festival sacrifices, and you will be carried off with it".

Sweet dung :

So God actually tossed sh!t at people or you need to INTERPRET it or not? .

Very smart of you!

Get well soon buddy

You're acting true to type!

once again, get well soon buddy

Only you can be this "ingenious"!

someone already explained to you in p0. I can even help you more to replace the "prophets" with YOU i:e JEWS AND CHRISTIANS. And it will mean the same thing still. How about that?

This is exactly what we're agreeing on!
You have the ability to change a word like 'Light' to 'Darkness' and in your very own words "... it will mean the same thing still"

Is that not what it's all about?

Empiree:
so whats the point of explaining if you have no intention of conceding?. You arent new here. I know you too well.

Anyway....

reinterpretation and interpretation, which one do you do or both?

We make things clear.

It's you Moslems who always come up with “ingenious” reinterpretation to “clarify” what Allah REALLY means.

Things are never as they seem with you guys. If the quran talks in the present tense you can always come up with your ingenious reinterpretation to "show" that the quran REALLY meant past tense.

If the quran and the Hadith day that the sun sets in a pool of muddy water you come up and say that what the quran "really" meant was that "it appears as if" it sets in a pool of muddy water. Every other thing surrounding the naration is thrown overboard. That's "smart" reinterpretation!

Here we have a passage about those who are to "help" Mohamed but you guys come up with your "reinterpretation" that the "helpers" did not have to be living at the same time as Mohamed.

Very convenient!

UmarIbnShittu:
u knw the topics am refering to

Anyhow, this thread is about which version of the quran is original.

A few Islamic claims about the quran:

1. Mohamed perfectly memorized the quran.
2. He dictated the quran to his followers who memorised it and wrote it down exactly as it was told them.
3. Mohamed regularly examined and ratified what was written.
4. There has only ever been one version of the quran.
5. All qurans are identical with no variants.
6. The quran is perfectly preserved. Because of this it is superior to other scriptures.
7. These claims can be proven.

But are these claims true?

Let's look at the true position:
1. Mohamed did not a perfect memory.
From the quran:
"We will make you recite, [O Muhammad], and you will not forget, EXCEPT what Allah should will. Indeed, He knows what is declared and what is hidden." Q 87:6-7

So Allah can will him to forget.
Some Moslem apologists will argue that what Allah will let Mohamed forget are those portions he (Allah) abrogated; but nothing in this verse or any other verse says so.
Btw, if the quran is a book that has been perfectly preserved in heaven why didn't Allah just give a single rendition instead of stating something and then rescinding it?
From the Hadith:
Narrated Aisha: The Prophet heard a man reciting the Qur'an in the mosque and said, "May Allah bestow His Mercy on him, as he has reminded me of such-and-such verses of such a Surah." (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 556; also Sahih Muslim: bk. 4, no. 1720)

Narrated Abdullah ibn Mas'ud: ... (Muhammad said) I am only a human being and I forget just as you do; so when I forget, remind me ... (Sunan Abu Dawud: bk. 3, no. 1015; also Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 1, bk. 8, no. 394)

2. Not so. There is evidence to the effect that a follower of Mohamed once suggested his own phrasing of a recitation Mohamed made and had it written the way he proposed.

3. No. Apart from Mohamed other men taught the quran. There is no evidence that Mohamed sought to ensure that there was a regular coming together to compare notes.

4. Different companions of Mohamed had their differing renditions of the Quran.

5. That the Caliph Uthman destroyed several differing versions of the quran clearly confirms that the quran has never had only one version.

6. No. Uthman's quran did not include the vowel markings or the dots used to distinguish between certain letters. As a result words can be formed or read in different ways even though Moslem apologists will argue that they are dialectical renderings.

7. Moslem apologists are NEVER able to CLEARLY prove any of these claims. Any purported claim to that effect is false and a pursuit in futility.

Empiree:
do u believe in that verse of Qur'an?

How can one believe something one has doubt about?

What is the whole purpose of all these discussions?

You have to clear the doubts first. But you're making a poor job at that so far.

UmarIbnShittu:
no
It just my personality i don't lock aggression in my hearth I vent it out
once get provoked. I flip the humanity switch just like "Damon"

Whao!

Jesus Christ promised peace. Instead of getting agitated violently by flipping the humanity switch he can give you the stability to remain calm in any storm.

Empiree:
why do christians interpret the bible as well?

"Reinterpretation" and interpreting are not the same thing.

UmarIbnShittu:
he has answered it
But op am not sure passed through anything called a school

I have noticed something about you:why do you keep bringing up topic that has been adressed?

Which TOPIC that has been addressed do I keep bringing up?

UmarIbnShittu:
... .....till I get provoked then I get agressive

Is there a "spirit" in Islam that has a tendency toward aggression and other hostile and violent behaviours?

Just thinking out loud!

Not really asking for a reply.

Islam wants to ATTRACT everyone, so it claims that every well known person from Adam to Jesus, particularly those having to do with Judaism and Christianity, was a Moslem.

Yet Islam refuses to accept the books recording the lives of these people because it wants to stick to its own version of the history of these people to make it conform to its worldview.

Particularly it wants all to accept that Mohamed was the "best" of the Prophets even when Islamic history itself shows otherwise. Mohamed CONTRAVENED everything the other Moslems are to do. For example, he had more wives and sex slaves than Allah allowed any Moslem: Yet no Moslem can pattern his life after this even though many Moslems will argue that they are to pattern their lives after his. They end up creating a larger-than-life picture of what Mohamed was for Moslems to follow.

Islam therefore resort to "reinterpretation" of what ordinarily should be simple to understand or interpret. And all this is to make people "see" what they want them to see and not the reality.

iamgenius:
Do you have to waste your time with these people? They chose not to say anything about my explanation of the verse. They are only twisting the verse to suit the errors they claim. They'll keep pushing you...

Your "explanation" was full of discordant tones.

1. Allah states that He took a pledge from every Prophet .... that when Allah gives them the Book and the Hikmah ... ... then a Messenger came afterwards, they would believe in and support him.

The quran records no such prophets living at the time of Mohamed. The pledge is therefore irrelevant. If Allah knew they would not be living during the time of Mohamed why exact a pledge from them?

2. Allah took the pledge from the Prophets that they would believe in each other.
Then the Prophets are to take pledges from their nations.

Where in the world did you see all these in the verse under review!!!?

3. Your last paragraph is so convoluted that it will take a thread on its own.

NOTHING in the verse we are looking at is talking about the things you brought up in the last paragraph.

So you have not really addressed the issues; and you want us to clap for you?

UmarIbnShittu:
they've helped "past tense" you might need to review the verse again
And not only the whole of d 24 prophets B4 him
Wall'Allahu a'alam
tym for salat
BRB

Here we go again!

Let me put here part of the version YOU quoted:
"... and then there comes to you a Messenger fulfilling that which is with you, you shall surely believe in him and have to help him ..."

Please, where is "past tense" here?

Allah is telling these prophets that a Messenger will come to them and that they are to "believe" him and "help" him.

They couldn't have believed in him and helped him in the "past", could they?

UmarIbnShittu:
Ismaeel(AS)-Ishmeal was originated from Saudi arabia
Lûth(AS)-Lot was originated from Iraq
Sir

Were these the Prophets Allah spoke to who are "to help" the messenger who is to come - Mohamed?

iamgenius:
Did I abuse you? No, I didn't. I'm just trying to teach you what you don't know.

The seven readings mean SEVEN DIALECTS.
Arabic language has SEVEN DIALECTS, The Quran was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad(peace be upon him) in those seven dialects. If anybody recites using any if the dialects, they are still saying the same thing.

To help you understand this, we have many dialects for every kanguages: If a Yoruba man from Ibadan or Oyo wants to say YAM in his language he will say "ISU". If a Yoruba man from Ekiti or Ijebu (I don't remember which of the two) wants to say YAM in the same Yoruba language, he will say "USU". They are both referring to YAM.
YOU GOT IT?

Why are you answering your own question instead of addressing the OP's questions?

Are you trying to DEFLECT the issues?
If not, why don't you go back, take a careful look at the questions and answer if you can.

It's clear that majority of Moslems have been CONDITIONED to only accept what they are told about the quran, The hadith and Islam.

Point them to a clear INCONSISTENCY or ERROR in the quran (the quran which btw Mohamed never wrote but recited to others who eventually compiled the recitations into a book several years after his death) and they will refuse to see it because that would go against their CONDITIONING. Going ahead to accept weaknesses in Islam would mean confronting the TRUTH; something many of them are unwilling or afraid to face.

That is why NOT ONE OF THEM has been able to answer the questions asked on just a single simple portion of the quran. They just can't face the truth!

Jesus Christ said:
"I am the way, and the TRUTH, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me" John 14: 6

iamgenius:
Because you are too dull to understand the verse. And you can't read the Quran without taking your hatred for Islam along.

Why you guys think that pointing out the TRUTH about the quran translates to hate is something that only a "genius" brain can understand.

Maybe we should call on "nitwit" brains to help us out or better still let's look for "i-am-not-a-genius" to make things clearer for you guys.

UmarIbnShittu:
oh why oh OYO

Let me open your eyes!

According to that verse you quoted, the Prophets Allah spoke to are "to help" the messenger that is to come. If Mohamed is the messenger to come, who are these prophets who were to "help" or support him? For them to be able to "help" him wouldn't they be living at the same time as he lived?
Is there any evidence of this in the CLEAR and EXPLANATORY quran?

iamgenius:
Allah states that He took a pledge from every Prophet whom He sent from Adam until `Isa, that when Allah gives them the Book and the Hikmah, thus acquiring whatever high grades they deserve, then a Messenger came afterwards, they would believe in and support him. Even though Allah has given the Prophets the knowledge and the prophethood, this fact should not make them refrain from following and supporting the Prophet who comes after them. This is why Allah, the Most High, Most Honored, said:

(And (remember) when Allah took the covenant of the Prophets, saying: "Take whatever I gave you from the Book and Hikmah.'') meaning, if I give you the Book and the Hikmah,

"and afterwards there will come to you a Messenger confirming what is with you; you must, then, believe in him and help him.'' Allah said, "Do you agree (to it) and will you take up Isri'')

I say: Allah never sent a Prophet but after taking his pledge that if Muhammad were sent in his lifetime, he would believe in and support him.'' Allah commanded each Prophet to take a pledge from his nation that if Muhammad were sent in their time, they would believe in and support him.

Allah took the pledge from the Prophets that they would believe in each other.

Therefore, Muhammad is the Final Prophet until the Day of Resurrection. He is the greatest Imam, who if he existed in any time period, deserves to be obeyed, rather than all other Prophets. This is why Muhammad led the Prophets in prayer during the night of Isra' when they gathered in Bayt Al-Maqdis (Jerusalem). He is the intercessor on the Day of Gathering, when the Lord comes to judge between His servants.

Why does it take all these rigmarole to explain a single verse.
Didn't quran claim to be clear and explanatory?

UmarIbnShittu:
good luck on your life quest of finding errors u might want broadcast the news on ait

Even in the face of facts there are those of you Moslems who will still choose to hold on to the contrary.

A lie repeated well enough becomes accepted as true. The power of repetition has been used to fool Moslems and even non-Moslems into accepting claims that are non-existent in the Quran.

The Moslem has been made to repeat some things for so long that it has virtually become impossible for him to imagine the error of such statements or even think through such statements to see errors. That's EXACTLY what you're doing right now!

How come instead of responding to SPECIFIC ISSUES you're tying up yourself in knots?