₦airaland Forum

Empiree:
refute?. U think I have your time? . Are you any stranger to me?.


Quran being a Divine Revelation is the ABSOLUTE WORD of God to Prophet Muhammad(PBUH).

Onus is on you to prove otherwise with reference

For starters let's stick the portion of the quran being dealt with here. Quran 1: 1-7 does not contain ONLY the words of Allah. Neither does quran 6:104 and 27:91. It's clear there that it's a man or at best an angel talking.

So, if we are to believe that the Quran is entirely the word of Allah, Is Allah asking himself (Allah) to pray to Himself?
Who is worshipping who?
Who is asking for whose help?

Empiree:
PAIN

And I don't need to say much either bcus a lot has been said in different threads over the yrs.

Quran is the word of God relating past, present and future events to the messanger

You must agree that there is simply no way you can refute the presentation. That is if you will be as honest as this muktara- guy.

Empiree:
You again with ur nonsense

Anyways, enjoy 2 mins video

The issue at hand has been very well dealt with by shadeyinka that I don't even need to comment unless to add a thing or two.

That the quran contains both words of Allah and those of man and angels should be clear to any sensible person.

Waiting for mukhtara446 to untangle this knot and CLEARLY SHOW US how Al-Fathia is the words of Allah.

Habyz:
So are you saying Sahih Bukhari said Muhammed (SAW) was a paedophile I'm really interested in the fact that you said nothing of the sort from the very beginning, and Myriam Francois-Cerrah a Muslim apologist as you said questions the Hadith that has been a guiding block for billions of Muslim, I don't understand why you aren't giving me any proof of your claims, also it will be great if you could list some of the "modern muslim scholars" and also take the time to actually read the post on the link I sent to you.

1. By paedophile do you mean Sahih Bukhari's narrative of Mohamed's marriage to 6-year old Aisha?

2. Did you read the link you posted and didn't see the proof of Myriam Francois-Cerrah questioning the Hadith?

3. Didn't you also see statement on "modern muslim scholars"?

Habyz:
The truth about Muhammad and Aisha | Myriam François-Cerrah ...
https://www.theguardian.com › ... › Islam.. yea it sure is

Sahih Bukhari is regarded by a vast majority in Islam as the most authentic collection of Mohamed’s sayings and deeds.

If a portion of this same Hadith is now QUESTIONED by Moslem apologists like Myriam Francois-Cerrah then do such apologists have the right to accept other portions of the same book or even any other Hadith?

Did Bukhari, at the time he was writing, have any reason to DISCREDIT Mohamed?

If Moslems apologists do not want to rely on earliest Islamic sources then something must be wrong; don’t you think?

If it is now “some modern Muslim scholars (who) have more recently cast doubt on the veracity of the … hadith, used to assert Aisha’s young age” who would be considered MORE RELIABLE than earliest Islamic sources, then it should be clear that some people somewhere are trying to re-write history.

Deception is not new to Islam. So, when Moslem apologists want to defend their faith, lying and twisting of FACTS is alright by them as long as they think they are doing it in the name of their religion.

Soon, Islamic apologists will be telling us that Mohamed is still well and alive in Medina leading the Islamic world from there!

Habyz:
The book "Life if Muhammad that you talked about was written by who and also the facts was based on which historical writings, you didn't seem eager to mention them so I have to ask.

GOOGLE is your friend! !!!

lfleak:
Ok.. Let's get this straight...
If the op could make a reasonable video with HQ and still yet you still can't fathom the truth.. Then that is a great symptom of cognitive dissonance...

Therefore I won't waste my time to spoonfeed what you can find yourself to you...
Also, if you are not satisfied with the person of our lovely prophet, then you can easily get a 400 decibel source to get triggered..
Meanwhile, if you need more anti Islamic forums, books, websites, groups I have about 270 of them at my disposal... I hope they can help you linger your hate for Islam, prophet Muhammed(pbuh).

Aside that..you can get off my mention..

If you got off my mention I may not have responded to you.

I've responded to issues raised by the op in the video. If you didn't see it then I guess it's due to your condition - Cognitive Dissonance.

Islam stands or falls on what its books clearly say about it; not on what you apologists want the world to accept.

Your quran, hadith, tafsir, etc show us plainly what your religion stands for. It does not take what you label as anti-Islamic sources to tell us what Islam ACTUALLY stands for.

If you accept Mohamed who:
1. Killed captives taken in battle who surrendered – Ibn Ishaq 451
2. Encouraged his men to rape enslaved women – Abu Dawood 2150, Quran 4:24
3. Demanded captured slaves and a fifth of all other loot taken in war – Quran 8:41
4. Was NEVER tortured, but tortured others – Muslim 4131, Ibn Ishaq 436, 595, 734, 764
5. “And fight them until there is no more persecution and religion is only for Allah” – Quran 8:39
6. Blessed the brutal murder of a half-blind man – al-Tabari 1440
as a "lovely prophet" then it must be that your medical condition may be more than Cognitive Dissonance.

lfleak:
still a symptom of cognitive dissonance..

Since you've been diagnosed with Cognitive Dissonance we can look for medical help for you.

Some people actually believe Mohamed himself suffered from psychological disorder. You can find and read:

Unmasking Muhammad; The Malignant Narcissist and His Grand Delusion Allah
By: Sijit Das

There's no copyright issues so you can spread it to others.

lfleak:
go do a mental test and upload the result here before I consider you serious.. For now.. Rim off my mention

When a man cannot face a superior argument and he's not humble enough to admit it he resorts to haphazard use of words!!

lfleak:
Cognitive dissonance.. I will never waste my time trying to educate you.. Good luck with your delusion.

"cognitive dissonance
nounPSYCHOLOGY
the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioural decisions and attitude change."

Islam & the Quran:
1. A religion of peace ......... Strive hard against unbelievers & do not be friends of Jews and Christians and pagans

2. We worship only one god ...... We believe in both Allah and Mohamed

3. Allah is the way to Paradise ....... You must believe both Allah and Mohamed to enter Paradise

4. You must not associate anything with Allah ....... We must pray also to Mohamed everyday, kiss a black stone in Mecca, run between two hills and go around Kabba

5. We give you instructions ........ We abrogate the instructions


“Those who can make you believe
absurdities can make you commit atrocities”. - Voltaire

iamgenius:
@ plainbibletruth, you still quote the same old lies. Show us d arabic versions of the books, your lies are not even perfect. Christians lies are exposed already; mistranslation of the original arabic text.

LoL!
Why don't you present the position you claim or consider the correct one. Simply saying something is a lie doesn't cut it if you can't provide convincing evidence.

If I quote the quran, the Hadith or Sura and you're so lazy to check them out yourself don't expect me to spoonfeed you. Prove me wrong by showing everyone what the "correct" position is. It shouldn't be that difficult should it?

FACTS remain FACTS irrespective of the illusion a person may want to create for himself and believe in. A human being who believes he's SUPERMAN and decides to jump from a 20-story building and land on a bare concrete can do so only to see that reality of the human body and the comical Superman are two entirely different things.

Mohamed:
1. Killed captives taken in battle who surrendered – Ibn Ishaq 451
2. Encouraged his men to rape enslaved women – Abu Dawood 2150, Quran 4:24
3. Demanded captured slaves and a fifth of all other loot taken in war – Quran 8:41
4. Was NEVER tortured, but tortured others – Muslim 4131, Ibn Ishaq 436, 595, 734, 764
5. “And fight them until there is no more persecution and religion is only for Allah” – Quran 8:39
6. Blessed the brutal murder of a half-blind man – al-Tabari 1440

“Those who can make you believe
absurdities can make you commit atrocities”. - Voltaire

Abdulgaffar22

You conveniently forgot these:

John 8:12
When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

John 3:17
“For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”

Mat 28:18-20
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Luke 24:46-47
And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

1 John 2:2
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Habyz:
Yes I'm a proud Muslim and the prophet never had sex with a six year old nor did he raid any caravan, if he did I have a feeling that you would have pointed it out instead of asking if I was a Muslim or not.

Choose FACTS not FEELINGS.
Don’t just go by your feelings, see the Islamic facts:
On Mohamed’s Marriage to a 6-year Old
SAHIH AL-BUKHARI
Narrated Aisha:
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234)
Narrated Hisham's father:
Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236)

IBN HISHAM
He married ‘A’isha in Mecca when she was a child of seven and lived with her in Medina when she was nine or ten. She was the only virgin that he married. Her father, Abu Bakr, married her to him and the apostle gave her four hundred dirhams. (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasulullah (The Life of Muhammad), translated by Alfred Guillaume [Oxford University Press, Karachi, Thirteenth Impression 1998], p. 792)

Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abu Dawud, Al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir and so many other early Islamic writers also confirm this same FACT of Mohamed’s (who was in his fifties) marriage to a six-year old Aisha.

On Raiding of Caravans
Islamic sources CLEARLY show that it was Mohamed who first attacked and antagonized the Meccans.
In “The Life of Muhammad” referred to above, written by A. Guillaume, a translation of Ibn Ishaq’s history of Mohamed, Ibn Ishaq records that Mohamed, after settling down in Medina, either led or sent his followers out on raids with the purpose of enriching both himself and his followers from the loot that they gained from these expeditions.
“When the Quraysh saw that the apostle had a party and companions not of their tribe and outside their territory, and that his companions had migrated to join them, and knew that they had settled in a new home and had gained protectors, they feared that the apostle might join them, SINCE THEY KNEW THAT HE HAD DECIDED TO FIGHT THEM. So they assembled in their council chamber, the house of Qusayy b. Kilab where all their important business was conducted, to take counsel what they should do in regard to the apostle, FOR THEY WERE NOW IN FEAR OF HIM. (Guillaume, p. 221; bolded and capital emphasised)
Then the apostle prepared for war in pursuance of God’s command to fight his enemies and to fight those polytheists who were near at hand whom God commanded him to fight. This was thirteen years after his call. (Ibid., p. 280)
“Their Muslim brethren reproached them for what they had done, and the Quraysh said, ‘Muhammad and his companions have violated the sacred month, shed blood therein, taken booty, and captured men… but God turned this against them, not for them, and when there was much talk about it, God sent down to his apostle: ‘They will ask you about the sacred month, and war in it. Say, war therein is a serious matter, but keeping people from the way of God and disbelieving in Him and in the sacred mosque and driving out His people there from is more serious with God.’ i.e. If you have killed in the sacred month, they have kept you back from the way of God with their unbelief in Him, and from the sacred mosque, and have driven you from it when you were its people. This is a more serious matter with God than the killing of them whom you have slain. ‘And seduction is worse than killing.’ i.e. They used to seduce the Muslim in his religion until they made him return to unbelief after believing, and that is worse with God than killing. ‘And if they will not cease to fight you until they turn you back from your religion if they can.’ i.e. They are doing more heinous acts than that contumaciously. (Guillaume, pp. 287-288)

The same book records numerous RAIDS which Mohamed and his followers engaged in – Pages 360 to 677 – including that on Khaybar that eventually led to his being poisoned by a Jewish lady and his eventual death from the poison.
So we see Mohamed Ordering raids during one of the sacred pilgrimage months, when, according to established custom, hostilities were to be suspended. A situation that was so disturbing to many, including the pagans who continued to respect existing traditions. Suddenly, and CONVENIENTLY, a divine revelation came, approving warfare against unbelievers and stating that all Moslems who spread Islam through force of arms are deserving of special merit.

Conclusion
Mohamed’s moral life leaves much to be desired as can be seen from his life history. The issue with 6-year old Aisha is only a tip of the iceberg regarding Mohamed’s sexual lifestyle.

Any claim that Mohamed did not initiate raids is a blatant lie and a wicked distortion of the truth. Mohamed used these raids to enrich himself, increase his control over his followers and expand his quest for first, the domination of Arabia and thereafter as far as he could go.

Anyone who desires the truth MUST be willing to have an open mind to look at FACTS objectively. I ask you to do so with the facts presented on this matter rather than quickly push aside all that have been presented.

If you honestly search for the TRUTH you will find HIM because he himself said "I am the way, and the TRUTH, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me" John 14: 6

iamgenius:
Bro, ............
........ The Christians also did the same with Prophet Muhammad(peace be upon him) whom Jesus told them about his coming as the last messenger and Prophet of Allah.

Jesus NEVER told Christians that Mohamed was going to come after him as a last messenger or prophet. Never!

Moslems only say this, and erroneously so,to boost the image and credibility of Mohamed.

Habyz:
Who is this six year old he "married" or had sex with. And where is it written in any historical record.
When did he raid any caravan and what proof do you have.

Are you a Moslem and you do not know these things?

parisbookaddict:
you have said a lot of ignorant and sickening things since we started chatting years ago but this is perhaps one of your worst. so you are happy innocent people (including kids)are getting murdered in finand by muslims because some brits, Spaniards, french, germans and dutch colonized parts of africa 100 years ago and did terrible things.

i wonder what your feelings are about the arabs that raped and pillaged africa and till this day have african slaves who are treated like sub humans and have no rights in most of the arab world.

you are a disgusting person.

I suspect that as long as it is in the name of Islam he will be blinded to the evil.

aminusanti:
You are not making any sense I swear, you are only going back n forth and at the same time confusing yourself...if you re having difficulty to comprehend then why not ask someone to help you out ?? I have nothing more to add on this addressed issue..

Your reaction is understandable.

So you've now turned to swearing. Are you swearing in the name of Allah or Mohamed?

You seem to have forgotten or lost comprehension of even your previous posts that you are now claiming to be confused and having difficulty understanding this simple fact.

I know that Islam makes it difficult for some clear logical thinking. In most cases, if not in all, Islam only calls for you to accept what has been stated in the quran without question. You therefore find it had to accept the truth even when it is starring you in the face.

Aminusanti, Visitor700, Talkislam

You may not have had an option going into Islam but you do not have to continue in the irrationality of blind defence of the quran or Islam.
The quran says it is CLEAR, that it explains itself, and that is a book for which there is no doubt.
Therefore when we look at the passage in Q. 18 we should expect it to be nothing less than the quran claims. If it is UNCLEAR, does not explain itself and leaves room for doubt then the quran leaves itself open for query.

One thing I’ve seen you guys do is to say the phrase “he found it setting” does not really mean he found it setting in a pool of muddy water. What it means is that “it appears to him” or it’s “as if it were setting in the ocean”. Notice that the word used for the body of water referred to is for a small body of water – pool or spring; it is not river, or sea or ocean.
In a clear instance where the quran claims something was not what it seems, it did not say something otherwise. In the case of JESUS’ CRUCIFICTION the quran (4: 157) did not say they FOUND Jesus crucified on the cross but used the phrase “but so it was made to appear to them”
If this idea was also meant of the Dhu’l Quanain’s experience why were these same words not used? Why did the quran not simply say it only appeared to him that the sun set in a pool of muddy water?
The word “FOUND” or “to find” is used in other places in the quran. Where these words were found, did they have the same idea of “it only appears”? The answer is NO!
Why then do you guys want us to believe the unbelievable?
In Q. 18 First, Mohamed was asked a question about Dhu’l Quanain.
Dhu’l Quanain takes a trip. He went on a road trip.
If the purpose of the narrative was for him to just “SEE” the sunset why would he need to take a trip? Couldn’t he have just waited for the sunset and then described it?
Then, he physically REACHED A PLACE.
If the record of the setting sun is not literal then the record of his travel and reaching a place and meeting a people there shouldn’t be taken as literal, should they? If so what then do they represent?

The Muddy Spring
Like I said earlier a spring is not ocean, sea or even a LAKE. Now, is there a spring or pool of water ANYWHERE in the world that is so wide and stretches to the horizon such that when the sun sets it would appear to set into it? The answer again is NO!
I have seen Moslem apologists use the picture of a sea side or ocean to explain this portion of the quran when the quran itself CLEARLY said spring or pool; showing the ridiculous extent they are ready to go to make their ‘explanations’ agree with their preconceived notion.

Hadith Authentication
The hadith I quoted from is considered top classification. In it Mohamed says the sun “sets in a spring of warm water”. Discrediting it in order to justify your position is dishonesty. The earliest Islamic scholars did not think that way. Perhaps the 21st century Moslem understand the quran better that the early scholars.

How the early Islamic Scholars interpreted this quran
How did Tabari interpret this portion of the quran? In the HISTORY of Tabari, in quoting Abdula Ibn Abbas he said THE SUN LITERALY SETS IN A POOL OF MUDDY SPRING.

Altafsir.com
This site has the Tafsirs.
From:
1. Tafsir Mujahid (104H) the ealiest
Up to the 10th Tafsir (303H)
Up to the 18th Tafsir (427H)
All of them saw that narrative as being literal.
A story written 700 years before Mohamed actually had this “sun setting in a muddy pool” story.
It was not until the 21st Tafsir by Al- Tusi (460H) 1067AD that the claim that it may not have been as the quran stated it began to come up. But others such as Ibn Al-Akhshad held on to the actual quranic statement.

Conclusion
The evidence regarding what EXACTLY the quran says is simply undeniable.
Not all of the quran is perfectly CLEAR and ERROR FREE as you have been made to believe.

Well done! You've done a good job here.

Because today's Christian no longer THINKS he swallows any thing that is offered to him hook line and sinker.

Many who are quick to preach 'Christian liberty' are the same who put many under the yoke of slavery.

The FACT that no New Testament epistle commands tithing ought ordinarily to speak volume to the Christian. But it would appear that when LEGALISM drives a group of people, reason is thrown to the wind.

I pray that many who read this writeup will do so with an unbiased mind and so profit from it.

aminusanti:
My friend .......

*Vegetation was created on the third day and sun on the fourth:

According to the book of Genesis, Chapter 1 Verses 11 to 13, vegetation was created on the third day along with seed bearing grasses, plants and trees, and sun was created on the fourth day (verses 14-19). How is it scientifically possible for vegetation to have appeared on earth without the presence of the sun?

*SUN and the MOON both emit light?

According to the Bible, both the sun and the moon emit their own light. Genesis Chapter 1 verse 16 says “And God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night.” Today, science tells us that the moon does not have its own light. This confirms the Qur’anic concept that the light of the moon is a reflected light. To say that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) 1400 years ago corrected these scientific errors in the bible and then copied the “corrected passages” onto the Qur’an is to state the impossible.

Instead of addressing the issues he brought up you engage in DEFLECTION by shifting focus to other things.
That should say something about you.

It is a WELL KNOWN FACT that hundreds of years before Mohamed SCIENTISTS and PHILOSOPHERS knew the so-called science of the quran. When you modern Islamic apologists want to make the world THINK that these things were SUDDENLY revealed only in the quran you make a fool of yourselves and your unsuspecting listeners and readers.

Aristotle lived hundreds of years before Mohamed.
Did he discover anything about the earth or the universe?
Your answer to that question should show how sincere you are in knowing the TRUTH.

Visitor700:
And what does the commentary say about quran 18:86?

Before you go off on a tangent let's get things in perspective: It is the recording in the Bible (not commentary ) that clearly stated that Apostle John was having a spiritual experience.
In the case of sura 18 narrative NOTHING in the quran stated that it was a vision or dream or the kind.

So, the two are not at par. They are not the same. Apostle John's case is talking about a non-physical experience while
Dhul-Qarnayn's experience was a physical, natural one.

In explaining them therefore, it will be wrong to assume that they are one and the same kind of experience.

Like I will show later, NONE of the earliest Islamic source thought it should NOT be seen as a purely natural experience.

It's more of you contemporary Moslems, who know the reality, but wanting to justify the quran as error-free, seek "smart-interpretation" to try to wriggle out of quranic quagmire.

Remember again that THE QURAN says it is CLEAR and EXPLAINS ITSELF. Therefore if multiple COMMENTARIES are required to explain simple passages and statements in the quran then that CLAIM is itself an indictment against the quran: We can then say it is not as clear as it says it is.

Visitor700:
Why?

Because that narrative clearly states that the Apostle John was having a spiritual experience.

Visitor700:
You didn't answer my question. Is it valid to interpret (Revelation 12:1) literally?

No, it is not.

aminusanti:
For a critic like you, u will always see it as unclear simply bcus your cooked up stories cant fit in. Quran is as clear as day. Exact thing was highlighted to u from ur scriptures but you simply rejected the fact

pls stop all this ur blind argument jst try n educate yourself on why some hadith re considered weak or rejected first

/b] again help yourself first and things will start making sense to you

your proofs pls or just give us a single commentary on it by any mufassir.


Double standard


U can mock around now but a day will come when it will make a perfect sense to you

irrelevant

You r yet to provide a single error from the Holy Quran as you claim but if you cant I will proceed to put forward the ones from the bible so, we can see if it's truly from God. Would u do us a favor to explain them pls?

[b]I feel sympathy for you.
If you choose to ACCEPT a thing because you were told it is the truth without really checking it out and becoming convinced that it is actually the truth then no one can help it that you have brainwashed YOURSELF through Islamic propaganda.

Again to summarize on this issue:
"he FOUND it setting in a miry spring, or spring of dark mud" cannot be interpreted other than that HE FOUND THE SUN SETTING IN A ......

It cannot be interpreted in any other way like you want to make yourself see.

Mohamed interpreted it the same way: He said: It sets in a spring of warm water.


BUT because you know that it shows an error in the quran you reject even Mohamed's interpretation. How unfortunate.

Visitor700:
The only person who is wrong here is you.

Ibn kathir's commentary on the said verse PROVED that the verse is not to be taken LITERALLY.

It is not my interpretation. It was taken from ibn kathir's commentary. One of the most highly regarded quran commentaries worldwide.

Your undue resentment against islam is preventing you from accepting the fact so lets turn the table around. Should we also interpret this bible verse literally?

"And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars."
(Revelation

The Bible passage you quoted doesn't work in your favour.
The Bible is clear where it should be taken literally or figuratively.
Not so the quran.

Now, that passage in the quran is CLEARLY about the narration of a real person's experience. Yes or No?
And we are not told he SAW a vision. Nor was he dreaming. If the "CLEAR" quran needs extra rigmarole to make it clear then it's not quite what it says about itself; don't you think?

aminusanti:
you are quoting a rejected hadith my friend
The narration is anomalous (shaadh) and defective (mu’allal). if you are interested in knowing how & why it was rejected i can break it down to you here in details..
Read here to know the methodologies they used in authenticationg Hadiths
http://www.iiit.org/uploads/4/9/9/6/49960591/books-in-brief_authentication_of_hadith.pdf


The narration along with the chain of narrators goes as;


>>(Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 3991)<<
Yazid bin Harun- Sufyan bin Husain- Al-Hakam bin ‘Utaybah- Ibrahim (b. Yazid al-Taymi)- Yazid al-Taymi- Abu Dharr said: I was sitting behind the Apostle of Allah who was riding a donkey while the sun was setting. He asked: Do you know where this sets? I replied: Allah and his Apostle know best. He said: It sets in a spring of warm water.

Above is the Hadith you quoted and below is the authenticated version of it

>>(Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 54, Hadith 421)<<
The Prophet asked me at sunset, "Do you know where the sun goes (at the time of sunset)?" I replied, "Allah and His Messenger know better." He said, "It goes (i.e. travels) till it prostrates Itself underneath the Throne and takes the permission to rise again, and it is permitted and then (a time will come when) it will be about to prostrate itself but its prostration will not be accepted, and it will ask permission to go on its course but it will not be permitted, but it will be ordered to return whence it has come and so it will rise in the west. And that is the interpretation of the Statement of Allah: "And the sun is quickly proceeding towards its destination. That is the designing of the All-Mighty, the All-Knowing. "

The significant difference is of the words “it sets in a spring of warm/murky water.”

Apparently, the words from Qur’an 18:86 were confused and appended to the hadith that had no link to the ayah whatsoever. The narrator failed to understand the real significance of the verse and the hadith and for apparent semblance he confused the two

The verse from the Holy Qur’an i.e. surah 18 ayah 86 is simply about how the sunset appeared to Zulqarnain and even the classical Muslim scholars understood it like that. The detailed explanation of it is in my prev post.

Read here what the Quran says :


Quran
"And it is He who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all [heavenly bodies] in an orbit are swimming".

"Quran 21:33
It is He Who created the Night and the Day and the sun and the moon: all (the celestial bodies) swim along each in its rounded course."



Now even if you stick to this rejected hadith that doesnt prove anything cus as i mentioned early, it is a kind ancient practice which i will be proving to you from your scriptures. see the pic below

*my question for you there is : why is it you have problem with the "the sun set" in the Quran but you dont see the one in your bible as anything??

Does the sun set on them or what? pls stop confusing yourself

For a book that is said to be CLEAR, when it takes a lot of rigmarole to arrive at the meaning of words, phases and sentences or even passages then it's either the book is not as clear as it says it is or set itself up to be interpreted incorrectly from the beginning.

What do you think?

Secondly, how come even though muslims would tell the world they believe the hadith, they have been unable to agree on which ones to collectively use and so make it easy for any muslim apologist to refuse to accept reference to any of them used?

When the quran is quoted muslim apologists run to the hadith. When the hadith is quoted they put up disclaimers. If this is not deception and confusion I wonder what it is.

The hadith I quoted is well accepted by Moslems. If you're now rejecting it that goes a long way to show how deceptive you guys can be.

Now, you bring in the Bible passage to shift focus away from what we are talking about. That's another tactics of yours - DEFLECTION.

This is the difference: The quran says "he FOUND THE SUN SETTING"; Not "he SAW the sun setting". If "saw" were used your attempt at reinterpretation will hold water. But that was not the word used. And so your explanations run into murky waters.


Even the Sahir Bukhari you quoted does not help matters. what is "It goes (i.e. travels) till it prostrates Itself underneath the Throne and takes the permission to rise again"?
Where does the fixed Sun travel to?
Under which throne does it prostrate?
The sun PROSTRATE? How?
Which permission to rise from where?

If you don't see that these are all 7th century Arabian understanding of what Mohamed thought was happening and not what a "book that existed in heaven" could have stayed then maybe you still living in the 7th century.

If you choose to stick to ANCIENT reasoning fine but please don't think everyone else can be as easily fooled as you've done to yourself.

If the quran that is said to be CLEAR need reference to "ancient practice" , chains of narrators, and understanding of classical Muslim scholars then it SIMPLY IS NOT AS CLEAR AS IT SAYS IT IS.

If that is so then something is wrong with the quran; don't you think?

aminusanti:
it's really hard debating with you people honestly, you use verses of the Qur'an out of context, and seemingly, without knowledge as to the background to which they were revealed and those verses are either literal or allegorical in meaning.

the surah 18 describes a certain traveler (Dhul Qarnain) who came to eventually see the sun setting in a muddy spring but that's only describing it from the point of view of the onlooker, it is not saying that in fact the sun sets in the muddy spring only that from his vantage point it appeared to him such.. in a simplified way: ALLAH (SWT) is describing what appeared to the traveler (Dhul Qarnain). Example if i say to you how is New York ? you can only tell me your own view on how you see NY but not exactly how it is. and again thats the culture of people back then (common practice)

" And they ask you about Dhuk -Qarnain. Say: "I shall recite to you something of his story. Verily, We established him in the earth, and we gave him the means of everything. So he followed a way. Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of black muddy water. And he found near it a people. We (Allah) said (by inspiration): "O Dhul-Qarnain! Either you punish them, or treat them with kindness."
Holy Qur'an (18:83-86)

You have CAREFULLY chosen to disregard other issues I raised.
You have not touched on Mohamed's own explanation in the Sunan Abu Dawud 3991. Do you agree with Mohamed's explanation or not?

Visitor700:
There's no error here. You took the verse out of context. Below is an extract from ibn kathir's commentary of (Quran 18:86)

"(he found it setting in a spring of Hami'ah) meaning, he saw the sun as if it were setting in the ocean. This is something which everyone who goes to the coast can see: it looks as if the sun is setting into the sea but in fact it never leaves its path in which it is fixed. Hami'ah is, according to one of the two views, derived from the word Hama'ah, which means mud."

It's either you're right and your prophet Mohamed is WRONG or you are wrong and your prophet is right.
Either way, you show the quran to have error.

Let’s see where and how:
By turning to hadith.
In Sunan Abu Dawud 3991 we find this:
Abu Dhar said: I was sitting behind the Apostle of Allah who was riding a donkey while the sun was setting. He asked: Do you know where this sets? I replied: Allah and his Apostle know best. He said: It sets in a spring of warm water.

We can immediately see then that there is absolutely no room for the kind of reinterpretation of what the quran said.
So the PERFECTLY CLEAR quran tells us that the sun sets in a pool of water.

In a bid to defend your religion you may end up insulting your prophet and Allah if you claim to speak more clearly than your god and a better interpreter than your prophet.

For a book that is said to be CLEAR, when it takes a lot of rigmarole to arrive at the meaning of words, phases and sentences or even passages then it's either the book is not as clear as it says it is or set itself up to be interpreted incorrectly from the beginning.

What do you think?

Now again to the passage in question:
"he FOUND it setting in a miry spring, or spring of dark mud" cannot be interpreted other than that HE FOUND THE SUN SETTING IN A ...... It did not say "he SAW AN IMAGE of the sun. It says he FOUND THE SUN.

Look at the entire portion: "Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of dark mud, and he found near it a people"

Your argument may have appeared to be believable except for the fact that you forgot to add the concluding portion to your argument.
Note what the last portion says " ..........and he found near it a people" He found a people where?
Note that it started with: " Until, when he reached the setting of the sun......" He REACHED where?
Now, how do you reconcile this with the rest of your explanation?

You'll see then that your "explanations" do not hold water just as the pool of mukky water cannot in any wise be said to hold the sun or be the place where the sun sets.

It is a CLEAR FACT that the sun does not set in a pool of water.
Can a book – the quran – which says this and by so doing clearly propagating error be trusted?
If by reinterpretation you end up in blasphemy of your prophet and god can you be assured of Paradise or end up in hell for blasphemy?

Way Out!
Follow the only unique and supernatural One – Jesus Christ who said:
“I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (Jn. 14:6).
“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:3)
“He who believes in the Son (as Saviour) has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him” (Jn. 3:36).

Salvation is ENTIRELY God's work.
Man adds NOTHING to it.
Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that NOT OF YOURSELVES, it is the GIFT of God."
Titus 3:5 "He saved us, not on the basis of DEEDS which we have done in righteousness, but according to HIS MERCY"

Man was still in sin when God provided salvation.
Romans 5:8 "While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us"

The only thing man DOES to be saved is a NON-MERITORIOUS expression of faith.
Ephesians 2:9 "not as a result of works, so that no one may boast"
Acts 16:31 "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved"
JOHN 1:12, JOHN 3:16

Since God DOES NOT require man's righteousness BEFORE he saves him, he (God) requires no righteousness of man to keep him IN CHRIST; God's righteousness is what keeps the man saved because salvation is ENTIRELY God's work.
1 Corinthians 1:30 "But by HIS DOING you are in Christ Jesus. ..."

Therefore it is God's GRACE that guarantees the believer 's eternal security.

aminusanti:
Christianity n hypocrisy......lol

i have given ... ...

* You have ... .....

* You doubt the Quran revelation b believing it was reveled by satan/ demon to a Mad Man yet you couldnt point out a single error or contradiction in it..

I've presented a proof of ERROR in the quran to which no Moslem has been able to fault.
Here it is again:
A case in point:
Sura 18:83-86 claims the sun sets in a spring or pool of muddy water.
The sun DOES NOT set in a pool of muddy water.
That is an ERROR in the quran.

TalkIslam:
Both questions are interrelated and will be answered together.

When the Muslims fled persecution from Makkah to Madinah, they made treaties with the Banu qaynuqa, Banu Nadir, and other tribes. It was stipulated that they would not help any enemy against the Muslims.

To recap, in previous years, the Banu Qaynuqa were expelled due to waging war against the Muslims and giving the Quraysh military supplies.

The Banu Nadir on the other hand, gave over information to the Quraysh on the weak spots of the Muslims, at the battle of Uhud. So as to give the Quraysh advantage over the Muslims. And they further, also tried assassinating the Prophet (p). With these treacheries committed by them, the Prophet (p) expelled them.

With them getting expelled, some among Banu Qaynuqa and many of the Banu Nadir’s leaders settled in Khaybar. Having the enmity and hatred towards the Muslims, they hatched up plots, and incited other tribes in Arabia to attack the Muslims. Let me just highlight few instances before, where they attacked and killed Muslims, while they were in Khaybar:

1. The people of Khaybar were also involved in the Battle of Trench, when the Muslims were attacked in Madinah with ten thousand troops, again here they sided and waged war against the Muslims.

2. They made the Banu Qurayzah break their pact, and made them side with enemies in attacking the Muslims.

3. Al-Yusayr Ibn Rizam, one of their leaders gathered Banu Ghatafan to attack the Muslims.

We see from the above, that these people were not a peaceful lot. Instead of moving to Khaybar for peace, and get on with life, they used Khaybar as a military headquarters to attack and kill Muslims.

When the Jews of Khaybar hired soldiers from banu Ghatafan to attack Madinah, this was the last straw, and as result a decision was made by Prophet Muhammed pbuh to engage the enemy on their land, and put a stop to their attacks once and for all.

Can you quote your sources?
What you wrote up there appear to be COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from what I've read on the Khaybar matter.