₦airaland Forum

honesttalk21:
Notice what just happened here. You started off by accusing Aisha of destroying evidence out of fear. But when that argument fell apart under scrutiny, you suddenly shifted your stance, claiming that wasn’t your point after all. That change is significant. When one argument crumbles, it seems you just switch to another. That’s not presenting evidence; it’s dodging the issue.

I didn't report that the tame sheep ate your Qur'an. I quoted Aisha. If you have a problem, bring her to Nairaland.

I told you that my objective was to show you that verse exist that were DELETED from your Qur'an .
You asked for other SIMILAR narrative (thinking Aisha's own was the only one and I provided them).
Did you forget so soon?

honesttalk21:
Now, let’s get to the main claim: that the ten and five adult sucklings were supposedly verses from the Quran that were removed because they were deemed shameful.

If that were really the case, where’s the Mushaf?

Show me a single canonical Mushaf that contains those verses.
Show me one non-canonical companion codex that includes them.
Show me an early manuscript that preserves them.
Show me a regional textual family that references them.
Show me a qiraah that transmits them as part of the Quran.

There’s nothing.

Not in Ibn Masud’s codex.
Not in Ubayy’s codex.
Not in any reported Mushaf from companions.
Not in any Sana manuscript.
Not in any manuscript from any region or century.

There’s a complete lack of textual evidence.

That single fact alone discredits the corruption claim.

I accept your challenge BUT on one condition
Bring me a copy of either
the Qur'an of Mohammed
the Quran of Abubakar
the Ibn Masud’s codex.
the Ubayy’s codex.
I promise to locate the missing verses from there.

Do you accept my challenge? Dont tell me that you cant even find a single copy of a full Quran before the Topkapi Manuscript which is also incomplete.

honesttalk21:
You’re trying to use one solitary hadith report to overshadow a body of scripture that’s been widely transmitted. The Quran is established through tawatur which means it’s been recited widely, memorized across regions, kept stable in manuscripts, and passed down unanimously within the community. A single narration from Ibn Majah simply can't measure up to that standard.

Are you blind? Solitary hadith report!?
Are you this dazed from me flogging out the lies i. the standard islamic narrative!?

I used two full pages to give you evidences from your hadiths
1. Breastfeeding adults
2. Stoning

I even quoted another verse you Muslims deleted from the Qur'an

You forgot that you skipped it totally?
SMH!

Go back there and read the several hadiths quoted by me.

honesttalk21:
Authenticating a hadith and transmitting the Quran aren't the same thing. Mixing them up is a serious methodological mistake. The Quran requires mass transmission. That report doesn’t meet that criterion, which means it was never part of the canonical Quran.

You argue that Muslims removed it because it was shameful.

But that same tradition has preserved the narration in hadith collections. A community trying to cover up an embarrassment wouldn’t keep a record of it in its most respected texts. Transparency counters your conspiracy theory.

You claim there’s an abundance of evidence. So, let’s see it. Not just words, not emotional appeals. Show us the manuscript. Show us the rival canon. Show us any protests from companions. Show us any regional variations.

You can’t, because none of that exists.

Boohoo!
A thief/419 went to a bank to fraudulently claim some money. He snatched the check and swallowed it. They showed him the CCTV with the testimony of the Cashier.

He 419 says: Show me the check!

Give us the complete copy of the Qur'an from Mohammad, Abubakar, Ibn Mas'ud or Uthman, then we shall find what you want for you!
SMH!

honesttalk21:
The compilation of texts after the Prophet’s death wasn’t about replacing anything. Revelation during his lifetime was recorded and memorized in various forms. After he passed away, those materials were compiled into a single codex. Collecting isn’t the same as disappearing. Standardization doesn’t equate to corruption.

Claims about abrogation during revelation shouldn’t be confused with deletion after the canon has been established. Those are different historical claims needing different types of proof. You’ve only illustrated narrations dealing with legal changes during the period of revelation. You haven’t shown any alterations made after the canon was set.

If corruption had really taken place, we’d have some traces. Manuscripts would show variations if texts were changed. Competing traditions would persist if there were efforts to suppress them. That’s what we find with other scriptures; it’s not what we see with the Quran.

The challenge is clear and straightforward:

Show me a Mushaf that includes these so-called missing verses as part of the Quran.

Until you can do that, the claim of non-preservation isn’t established. It’s simply an assertion.

Abrogation reports are preserved. Manuscript consistency is maintained. The 114 surah canon is intact.

The burden of proof remains unmet.

Please explain
1. Were abrogated verses part of the Qur'an dictated by Jibril to Mohammed ? YES or NO!
2. Were these abrogated verses part of the original Qur'an and mother of the book in paradise? YES or NO!
3. Were some of the abrogated verses ALSO deleted from the book of Allah in paradise? YES or NO!
4. Explain why abrogated verses still exist in written form in your Extant Qur'an?

nairalanda1:
In other words, you won't believe me if i told you that 'The Sun orbits the Galactic Center at a distance of 24,000 to 28,000 light-years'.

Good morning.

Oh, and the 68% of metered customers are part of the overall 40% that do not pay. But since you don't want to accept facts that don't suit you, you chose to misrepresent the statistics.(Note that most people aren't metered yet.)

So, 28% of those who bypass the meter still go on to pay for a non-existent reading?

Ohyoudidnt:
Please focus and stop jumbling matters. With or without Ajaokuta Nigeria needs power. Siemens is a relatively recent inclusion for Ajaokuta who are already multi tens of billions in Power debt. You want to Nigerianise Siemens and kill it in debt?

Think! Other steel plants in Nigeria that employed German, Japanese, or Austrian contractors had successfully begun operations without Siemens at a time ,whereas Ajaokuta, the Soviet project, has been unsuccessful for 45 years. So without the importance you place on Siemens we can have power.

Can we not talk without war of words?
Is is not islamic debates with emotions also involved

nairalanda1:
68% bypassing meters sauce

40% not paying sauce

Band A Users form only 20% of total users.

What you have shown is two statements just like yours. Who did the study and why are the culprits not being brought to book?

68% bypass + 40% not paying already exceed 100% of the available power.

If this data is correct, tell me why the electricity distribution companies are operating?

Ohyoudidnt:
There exactly is where you have concern. I show that there has been such agreement in the past so move your desktop literary study using the FOI and relevant elements of investigation to inquire about what is going on rather than demanding a solution that is already in place. That is more honourable.

I do not deny that there was a negotiation with Siemens, I only don't know what was signed with them and the level it is.

The solution is only in place AFTER execution of the plans. Can tou say that about Ajaokuta Steel that has guzzled up hundreds of billions in USD with nothing to show for it?

nairalanda1:
Erm....UK pays 0.401 USD per unit for residental
USA Pays..0.184 USD

Nigeria pays: 0.036 USD. Also Nigeria: 68% of metered customers bypass their meters and overall 40% don't even pay for the power they use. Not seen in the UK and USA at all.

SAUCE

Our Band A with 20 Hours per day of electricity is $0.13–0.14

Where also did you get the information that 68% of metered customers bypass their meters ?

I dont know where you gor your data.

honesttalk21:
I had stated before

Abrogation should not be confused with corruption; rather, it represents a progressive revelation over the 23 years of the Quran's descent, as indicated in Quran 2:106. The Preserved Tablet holds all divine knowledge, while the earthly Quran consists solely of what Allah chose to maintain for recitation. Divine omniscience does not equate to the finalized revealed text, similar to how John 21:25 acknowledges that not everything was recorded. Reports about abrogated recitations found in hadith literature demonstrate transparency rather than a loss of text, as these accounts were preserved openly instead of being hidden. Additionally, the refinement of legislation does not imply shame or afterthought; development within revelation serves an educational purpose, much like how Christians accept the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant. The Quranic verse on breastfeeding pertains specifically to infant nursing, whereas contested adult suckling reports were never included in the canonical Quran.

The report you mention from Sunan Ibn Majah (no. 1944) does not support claims of Quranic corruption. According to Islamic criteria, it is considered weak (daif) and solitary (ahad), and it is not found in a similar form in Sahih al-Bukhari or Sahih Muslim. This report simply states that a sheep consumed a sheet kept under Aishah's pillow during the upheaval following the Prophet's death. Even if we accept this account at face value, it pertains to a private written document and not to the Quran itself, which has been preserved through mass memorization, communal recitation, and widespread transmission. If a single sheet could jeopardize revelation, then the entire preservation system would have collapsed; its continued existence illustrates that such material was never part of the finalized text that has been widely transmitted.

More importantly, accusations of corruption do not meet the burden of proof. To substantiate claims of textual alteration, one would need manuscript evidence showing supposed missing verses, documented objections from Companions regarding their removal, alternative codex traditions preserving different versions, or regional textual variations after canonization—none of which exist. Instead, we find reports discussing abrogation that have been openly preserved within Islamic scholarship. Reports concerning rajam illustrate both recitation and legal practice without implying canonical inclusion; during Abu Bakr's compilation and Uthman's standardization processes, verses that had already been abrogated in recitation were excluded while preserved verses like 2:233 and 4:23-33 remained intact. This shows a controlled preservation process rather than loss.

Abrogation refines revelation; corruption alters scripture. The former takes place during revelation and is documented transparently. In contrast, corruption would necessitate disruption of texts after canonization for which no evidence has been provided.

You are still repeating your preferred lies.
If you are speaking the truth, please explain
1. Were abrogated verses part of the Qur'an dictated by Jibril to Mohammed ? YES or NO!
2. Were these abrogated verses part of the original Qur'an and mother of the book in paradise? YES or NO!
3. Were some of the abrogated verses ALSO deleted from the book of Allah in paradise? YES or NO!
4. Explain why abrogated verses still exist in written form in your Extant Qur'an?

The standard Islamic narrative is not adding up sir no matter how many times you repeat it to yourself simply because it is a fabrication!


Above all,
Explain why the almighty Allah allowed even as small as a 1 time SUCKLING of adult men in his eternal Qur'an?

I don't understand!
Why was the verse of adult SUCKLING even abrogated from the Qur'an?

honesttalk21:
The claim that Aisha tore a page out of fear of being stoned is fundamentally flawed and contradicts the very report it references.

It is your opinion and you have a right to explain exactly why Aisha made the statement that a sheep ate only the said sheet AND how she knew what was written on the sheet.

honesttalk21:
To begin with, the narration from Ibn Majah does not indicate any secrecy, destruction, or concealment on Aisha's part. It merely states that a written sheet was found under her pillow and that a domestic animal consumed it while the household was preoccupied with the Prophet’s death. This behavior does not suggest someone hiding evidence; rather, it describes a personal note in a home where revelation had been documented in various ways.

No problem!
My argument wasn't about thr sheep, nor Aisha BUT of the report that verses were missing from the Qur'an. And several other hadiths agreeed with me.

honesttalk21:
Moreover, and perhaps more importantly, Aisha herself publicly transmitted the report. If she were trying to conceal something that could incriminate her, she would not have shared it openly with her students or allowed it to be included in major hadith collections circulated throughout the Muslim world. The presence of this report in the tradition indicates transparency rather than fear.

This case if Aisha us inconsequential to me here as My interest was the missing verses in the Qur'an.

honesttalk21:
Additionally, the legal framework renders this accusation nonsensical. In Islamic law, rajm requires strict evidentiary standards: either four reliable eyewitnesses to the act or multiple voluntary confessions. There are no historical records indicating any accusations against Aisha met this requirement. In fact, during the false accusation incident (al-ifk), divine revelation vindicated her in Qur’an 24:11–20. This episode illustrates not vulnerability but formal exoneration enshrined in the Qur'an itself. The notion that she secretly feared execution is at odds with both legal and historical records.

My emphasis was the 10 tines SUCKLING of adult men which according to multiple hadiths was abrogated to 5. The Muslims have removed both the 10 and 5 because it is shameful. Otherwise, explain why the almighty Allah will temporarily reveal such verse in the eternal Qur'an

honesttalk21:
Finally, even if one were to speculate about a motive, it would still be irrelevant to the matter at hand. The Qur'an was not preserved on a single personal sheet; it was memorized by many companions and transcribed into multiple copies. If a verse was part of the finalized Qur'an recited by many, its preservation would not depend on one sheet from a single household. Destroying a private document could not erase a text transmitted through tawātur.

Those wonderful memories that stored the Qur'an perfectly akso stored the Hadiths, thus, you have no excuses.

Also, the EVIDENCES are stacked against you from your own sources. I am sure no never expected me to bring out several Sahih hadiths that prove that the Qur'an with you now is different from the Qur'an of Allah

honesttalk21:
Thus, the accusation against Aisha is not only dishonorable but also fundamentally illogical. It fabricates motives without evidence, overlooks her public narration, disregards legal standards for rajm, and misinterprets how the Qur'an was transmitted. Even if such a sheet existed as described, it would not and could not serve as proof of post-canon deletion.

The historical question remains unchanged where is the manuscript tradition, rival codex, or mass recitation chain that demonstrates removal from the canon? None exists. Attacking Aisha's character does nothing to address this evidentiary gap.

Should you choose to continue this discussion do well to have the supposedly changed manuscript or rival cannon.

Being Obstinate about what you repeat to yourself from the standard islamic narrative is inconsequential. The important thing is that EVIDENCES abound in Islamic sources that your extant Qur'an is what survived after generations of doctoring by Islamic scholars.

When lies are too much, the liar forgets his previously told lies. Muslims forget that they also had told us that their Qur'an was initially collected in the lifetime of Mohammed. Somehow, Mohammed's Qur'an as usual DISAPPEARED and was replaced by that of Abubakar.

Sorry!

Ohyoudidnt:
But Siemens have been here since 2006 and probably before.
There's a project worth €161.33 million since December 2024 too.

I don't know the FG terms of agreement with Siemens and no one is showing any update of work accomplished.

Lets cross our hands and watch.

Have a good night rest

honesttalk21:
Abrogation is not the same as corruption. The reports concerning rajm and the suckling narrations illustrate abrogation that occurred during the period of revelation, a concept well-established in Islamic scholarship. They do not indicate that verses were inserted into a completed Quran and later removed.

To establish corruption, evidence of an existing canon that was subsequently altered would be necessary. This would require manuscripts containing the supposed deleted verses, documented objections from Companions regarding their removal, competing regional codices, or alternative textual traditions. None of this evidence exists.

Abrogation is corruption especially in Islam for these reasons
1. Were the abrogated verses in the Qur'an of Allah in heaven or not: if they are there, then we expect that the abrogated verses will be retained in the Qur'an.
2. Evidence of your so-called abrogated verses exist. This is why we could point to them in your hadiths. The evidences abound sir.
3. Some of your Abrogation are evidences of an afterthought based on shame as example: Why will Allah order Muslim men to do Suckling?

honesttalk21:
Classical scholars interpreted the narrations in Sahih Muslim about reducing ten sucklings to five as abrogation of recitation prior to canonization. No manuscript, whether early or late, includes these verses as part of the compiled Quran. They are missing from every known codex tradition across all regions. This universal absence is historically significant.

Unfortunately, your trusted sahih hadiths are EVIDENCES to how the Qur'an of Allah had been tampered with.

honesttalk21:
The report in Sunan Ibn Majah about a sheet being eaten is considered weak by numerous hadith scholars and has a solitary transmission. Similar narration don't have key words mentioned the same. More importantly, the Quran was preserved through extensive memorization by the Companions. Its preservation did not rely on a single written page tucked under a pillow. If those verses had been part of the canonical Quran, many would have memorized them, they would have been included in Abu Bakr's compilation, and multiple Companions would have defended their inclusion. There are no records of such inclusion or protest.

Aisha was afraid of being stoned to death for adultery, so she tore off the sheet that could implicate her. But this wasn't my argument

My argument was to show you DELETED verses from the Qur'an of Allah
1. the verse of stoning
2. the verse of Suckling
3. verses like "`Do not forsake your real father (and attribute yourself to someone else), for this is an act of kufr,"

Your hadiths are good evidences that exposed these inherent problems in your Qur'an

honesttalk21:
If those verses had remained part of the Quran after the Prophet’s death and were later removed, we should expect to find manuscript traces, recorded disputes, sectarian preservation efforts, or regional variations. None exist. Early manuscripts from various regions consistently preserve the same 114 surahs: no preserved rajm verse, no preserved suckling verse, and no alternative Quranic canon.

The main confusion lies between abrogation during revelation and deletion after canonization. The former is integral to Islamic doctrine; the latter would require textual evidence that simply does not exist.

What the historical record reveals is progressive revelation with some rulings abrogated prior to final compilation and a universal acceptance of the canonical text. This aligns with Islamic theology regarding canon formation rather than suggesting textual corruption.

You have shown evidence for abrogation reports but have not established any post-canon alterations. The burden of proof for corruption remains unfulfilled.

I very well highlighted it to show you that these so-called abrogated verses were RECITED after the death of your prophet.

Several hadiths shown that Rajam was RECITED well after your prophet's death
Several hadiths shown that Suckling was RECITED well after your prophet's death

RhemaJet7:
Some years back, I overheard someone, saying, Daddy G.O. said the person that will take over from him, is currently an unbeliever, drinking beer from one beer parlour to another.
Same way God revealed to him partially the person that will take over from him, same way God told me who will take over from me too, He just mentioned the State he or she will come from.

So, I think it is the job of God to replace him, when the time comes, God will ingeniously work it out

Whoever the person is need time to enter into the shoes of Baba.
It is wisdom.
Baba did not want infighting amongst his Pastors, hence his statement

RhemaJet7:
Ever since I had the dream, I have made it an habit to be praying and interceding for Daddy G.O.

Yesterday, in response to my prayers about him, I got a divine message about him, in dream, I heard, "PEACE FOR DADDY G.O."

Obviously,.Daddy G.O. has a lot of enemies even within RCCG, even among Senior Pastors in RCCG.

The attacks increase ever since some RCCG pastors told Daddy G.O. to resign, and Daddy G.O. said "no", God has not told him to resign

These are the reasons why Daddy G.O. does not trust anybody again even in the church RCCG.

In a bid to avoid being poisoned, he stopped receiving food from people except his wife.

He equally made his son Pastor Leke Adeboye his Personal Assistant, he doesn't trust anybody again even in the church.

Same reason he changed his place of residence, relocated to an estate you will hardly identify the particular house he resides, security is beaffed up.

Then, regarding, transportation, sometimes, he uses helicopter as against vehicle.

As the enemies try him spiritually, they are also trying him physically.

May God continue to protect him and his family and protect his followers, and admirers too

Pray that Baba will announce the name of the person who will take over from him soon. If he doesn't do that before God calls him, RCCG will implode

honesttalk21:
Glad you are saying this. Look through our chats and see if this evidence you put with great accomplishment hasn't been already addressed then tell me if any evidence has been enough for you.

You asked for corroborating EVIDENCE apart from Sunan Ibn Majah 1944 showing that the extant Qur'an is DIFFERENT from the Qur'an of Allah.

So, I showed you EVIDENCES from your religious books about
1. Removal of the Verse of Stoning from the Qur'an
2. Removal of the Verse of Breastfeeding from the Qur'an
3. I even showed you a previously RECITED verse that you Muslims have removed from the Qur'an



If you had responded to these before, why ask for proofs that has overwhelmed you?


The problem of Islam is that it was founded entirely on the foundation of FALSEHOOD. Thus, it is too easy to burst your claims!



The TRUTH always set a person FREE when it is Adopted Jesus Love's You!

RhemaJet7:
I want someone to help me interpret this powerful dream about Daddy G.O.

Today, Wed., February 11, 2026, around 5 am, I had a dream about Daddy G.O..

I was in a place like Redemption Camp, I saw Daddy G.O. entering a building, went upstairs, I took interest to interact with him as I waited for him to come down, when he came down, I greeted him, we exchange hand shake, I wanted to use the opportunity to ask him to pray for me, but I suddenly developed another thought that I can ask him, can I pray for you sir?
We are in a living room with about 8 people men and women, Daddy G..O wanted to go to his personal room and rest, I was chosen to lead him to his room, suddenly, he wanted to collapse as he complained about back pain, I held him as I knelt down, he was resting on my hand, then, people there gave me a cup of water, they asked me to give him water, I gave him the water, and I said, this is not an ordinary pain, it is a witchcraft attack, and I prayed for Daddy G.O. saying "you shall not die but live", then, I summon the courage, I challenged the witch responsible for the attack to show up, I commanded everybody in the room to go out and leave the three of us alone, as I prepared to confront the attacker. Then, I woke up.

This is the third time I'm dreaming about Daddy G.O.

In all those dreams, we always interacted with each other.
In real life, we have never interacted with each other. Daddy G.O. doesn't know me.

I have also dreamt about Mummy G.O. once, and Pastor Leke Adeboye once.

I worship in RCCG, I was once a Worker in my previous RCCG Parish, but now just a Member at my current RCCG Parish.

I am a Prophet, I have my own ministry named New Nation Gospel Ministries International

Olaide Mudasiru

. Please take some time to intercede for Pastor Adeboye. As you pray, you will know exactly what to pray for about him.

Even Moses sometimes need a Joshua or an Aaron.

Shalom

Lukuluku69:
If it is the Will of Allah to turn me into a Blue Bird in His Jannah, so be it and since you have referenced a Green Bird, may His Will be done!

I am all for it.

Any other thing?

When there are too many spoken lies, the liar forgets his previous lies.

You seem not to realise that if it is true that you will become birds in paradise, then all the hoolabalu stories of what happens to a Muslim in his grave is a Funny Joke?



You forget that even Islamic prophets are in their Graves doing Salat!

SMH!

Come to Jesus, The truth will set you FREE

TenQ:
Your are very correct for both Muslim children who died amd martyrs

Here is another hadith

The Martyr

Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1641
Narrated Ka'b bin Malik:
From his father that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "The souls of the martyrs are in green birds, suspended from the fruit of Paradise, or the trees of Paradise."
[Abu 'Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan Sahih.


The Muslim Babies

Sahih Muslim 2662 b
'A'isha, the mother of the believers, reported that a child died and I said:
There is happiness for this child who is a bird from amongst the birds of Paradise. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said: Don't you know that Allah created the Paradise and He created the Hell and He created the dwellers for this (Paradise) and the denizens for this (Hell)?


Other Muslims

Sunan Ibn Majah 4271
It was narrated from ‘Abdur-Rahman bin Ka’b Al-Ansari that his father used to narrate that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
“The believer’s soul is a bird that eats from the trees of Paradise, until it will be returned to his body on the Day when he is resurrected.”

https://sunnah.com/urn/505720
Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that Abd ar-Rahman ibn Kab ibn Malik al-Ansari told him that his father, Kab ibn Malik, used to relate that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "The ruh of the mumin is a bird that sits in the trees of the Garden until Allah returns it to his body on the day He raises him ."


Mishkat al-Masabih 1632
He quoted his father to the effect that he used to tell that God’s messenger said, “The spirit of a believer is only a bird which feeds on (Here the Arabic is ta'luqu fi. Mirqat quotes Suyuti who explains it as in the translation above. The verb can have either the sense of being attached to something or of eating) the trees of paradise till God restores him to his body on the day He resurrects it.”

Lets see how Muslims will twist the plain Hadith!



Why LIES are so many, the LIARS forget that they have spoken other contradictory lies.

honesttalk21:
You reference Ibn Majah 1944 to argue for Qur’anic corruption, but if this demonstrates anything, it's that they do not meet the Qur’anic verification standards such as mass transmission, memorization, liturgical use, revelation context, surah placement, and community acceptance. They fail on all counts. According to Islamic criteria, their absence aligns perfectly with theological predictions, which means your argument about “lost verses” collapses on itself.

No amount of EVIDENCE is sufficient for a Muslim!

The dog destined to be lost does not listen to the hunters whistle

EVIDENCE THAT THE VERSES LIKE SUCKLING WAS REVEALED BUT DISAPPEARED FROM THE WRITTEN QUR'AN

Muslims pride themselves that the ORIGINAL Qur'an was meant to be RECITED and not written

honesttalk21:
Ok. What other similar reports exist? How does it stand compared to how other verses of the Quran are transmitted and recorded? What was the situation of its revelation?

honesttalk21:
Are there hadith of similar wording or context graded Sahih? There indeed is the point outside these 2 narrators are there chains without them?

honesttalk21:
We will come to that. What replications or similar narrations of Sunan Ibn Majah 1944: Book 9, Hadith 100 exist?

honesttalk21:
I'm not here to repeat what lacks valuable evidence. If you can't offer something substantial to discuss, then there's no reason for us to engage. Please return when you're better informed. Thank you.

Sahih Muslim 1452 b
'Amra reported that she heard 'A'isha (Allah he pleased with her) discussing fosterage which (makes marriage) unlawful; and she ('A'isha) said:
There was revealed in the Holy Qur'an ten clear sucklings, and then five clear (sucklings).

Why do you think your God gave verses on sucking in the HOLY Qur'an?


https://sunnah.com/malik/30/18
الرضاع30 Suckling
Yahya related to me from Malik from Abdullah ibn Abi Bakr ibn Hazm from Amra bint Abd ar-Rahman that A'isha, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Amongst what was sent down of the Qur'an was 'ten known sucklings make haram' - then it was abrogated by 'five known sucklings'. When the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, died, it was what is now recited of the Qur'an."
Yahya said that Malik said, "One does not act on this."

Is it true that the verse of suckling adult men was recited in the Qur'an after the death of Mohammed?

So, who abrogated it by deleting it from the Qur'an?
Was it found too shameful?


https://sunnah.com/malik/30/1
الرضاع30 Suckling
Yahya related to me from Malik from Abdullah ibn Abi Bakr from Amra bint Abd ar-Rahman that A'isha, umm al-muminin informed her that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was with her and she heard the voice of a man asking permission to enter the room of Hafsa. A'isha said that she had said, "Messenger of Allah! There is a man asking permission to enter your house!" The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "I think it is so-and-so" (referring to a paternal uncle of Hafsa by suckling). A'isha said, "Messenger of Allah! If so-and-so were alive (referring to her paternal uncle by suckling) could he enter where I am?" The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Yes. Suckling makes haram as birth makes haram."

Did your prophet practiced Suckling?


Sahih Muslim 1452 a
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with, her) reported that it had been revealed in the Holy Qur'an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings and Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) died and it was before that time (found) in the Holy Qur'an (and recited by the Muslims).

Unfortunately, Muslims will not open their eyes to the truth. Do you not think that Just One Suckle of an Adult man is sick by itself not to speak of 10 or 5?

Sunan Ibn Majah 1944
It was narrated that 'Aishah said:
“The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.”

Aisha explained in detail what happened to her own copy of the Qur'an




Question:
Why do you think Allah REVEALED the command of sucking in his beautiful book?

EVIDENCE THAT THE VERSES LIKE RAJAM WAS REVEALED BUT DISAPPEARED FROM THE WRITTEN QUR'AN

Muslims pride themselves that the ORIGINAL Qur'an was meant to be RECITED and not written

honesttalk21:
Ok. What other similar reports exist? How does it stand compared to how other verses of the Quran are transmitted and recorded? What was the situation of its revelation?

honesttalk21:
Are there hadith of similar wording or context graded Sahih? There indeed is the point outside these 2 narrators are there chains without them?

honesttalk21:
We will come to that. What replications or similar narrations of Sunan Ibn Majah 1944: Book 9, Hadith 100 exist?

honesttalk21:
I'm not here to repeat what lacks valuable evidence. If you can't offer something substantial to discuss, then there's no reason for us to engage. Please return when you're better informed. Thank you.

Sunan Ibn Majah 1944
It was narrated that 'Aishah said:
“The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed1 , and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.”

“The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed

https://sunnah.com/bulugh/10/5
لحدود10 Hudud
'Umar bin al-Khattab (RAA) narrated that he addressed the people and said, 'Verily Allah has sent Muhammad with the Truth and sent down the Book to him, and the verse of stoning was included in what Allah sent down. We recited, memorized and comprehended it. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) accordingly (to what was in the verse) stoned to death (whoever committed adultery while being married), and we stoned after his death. But I am afraid that after a long time passes, someone may say, 'We do not find the Verses of stoning in Allah's Book , and thus they may go astray by abandoning an obligation that Allah has sent down. Verily, stoning is an obligation in the Book of Allah to be inflicted on married men and women who commit adultery, when their crime is proven, evident by pregnancy, or through the confession (of the adulterer).' Agreed upon.


The verse of stoning was revealed and included in the Qur'an but somehow disappeared



Musnad Ahmad 276
It was narrated that Ibn `Abbas said:
`Umar said: Allah, may He be exalted, sent Muhammad (ﷺ) and sent down the Book to him. Among that which was revealed to him was the verse of stoning. We recited it and understood it. But I fear that with the passage of time, some people will say: We do not find the verse of stoning in the Book of Allah, and as a result an obligation that Allah revealed will be forsaken. Stoning is the due punishment in the Book of Allah for those who commit zina, both men and women, if they have been married and if proof is established, or there is a pregnancy or a confession


In agreement with Aisha, the verse of stoning was revealed, recited but somehow deleted from the Qur'an of Uthman



Musnad Ahmad 1210
It was narrated that ‘Amir said:
Shurahah became pregnant and her husband was absent. Her former master took her to ‘Ali, and ‘Ali (رضي الله عنه) said to her: Perhaps your husband came to you or perhaps someone forced you against your will? She said: No. And she admitted zina. So `Ali (رضي الله عنه) flogged her on Thursday and I was present, and he stoned her on Friday and I was present. He ordered that a hole be dug for her up to her navel, then he said: Stoning is the way of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). The verse of stoning was revealed but those who used to read it and other verses of the Qur`an died in al-Yamamah.

Evidence that the verses were not perfectly memorized as revealed verses died out with the Muslims who died at the battle of al-Yamamah.

A big prophetic failure on the part of Allah who promised to protect the Qur'an.

Quran 75:16-19
"Move not your tongue concerning it to make haste therewith. Indeed, upon Us is its collection and its recitation. So when We have recited it, then follow its recitation. Then indeed, upon Us is its clarification."

Evidence that Allah failed to collect the Qur'an



Sunan Abi Dawud 4418
‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abbas said:
‘Umar b. al-Khattab gave an address saying: Allah sent Muhammad (ﷺ) with truth and sent down the Books of him, and the verse of stoning was included in what He sent down to him. We read it and memorized it. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had people stoned to death and we have done it also since his death. I am afraid the people might say with the passage of time: We do not find the verse of stoning in the Books of Allah, and thus they stray by abandoning a duty which Allah had received. Stoning is a duty laid down (by Allah) for married men and women who commit fornication when proof is established, or if there is pregnancy, or a confession. I swear by Allah, had it not been so that the people might say: ‘Umar made an addition to Allah’s Book, I would have written it (there).

Umar too was bewildered about how the verse of stoning disappeared grom the Qur'an and the perfect Muslim power of perfect recitation failed all of them.

Umar is still scratching his head on the disappearance of the verse



Mishkat al-Masabih 3557
‘Umar said:
God sent Muhammad with the truth and sent down the Book to him, and the verse of stoning was included in what God most high sent down. God's Messenger had people stoned to death and we have done it also since his death. Stoning is a duty laid down in God’s Book for married men and women who commit fornication when proof is established, or if there is pregnancy, or a confession.


The verse of stoning was definitely in the book of Allah and it is a DUTY but either Abubakar or Uthman deleted it. Meaning that the extant Qur'an is an abridged version.
SMH!


Sahih Muslim 1691 a
'Abdullah b. 'Abbas reported that 'Umar b. Khattab sat on the pulpit of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and said:
Verily Allah sent Muhammad (ﷺ) with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession.

So, the book of Allah contains Rajam but the book of Muslims do not BUT Muslims think that the Qur'an is perfectly preserved!?



Musnad Ahmad 331
It was narrated from ‘Umar that he said:
Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, sent Muhammad (ﷺ) with the truth, and He sent down with him the Book. One of the things that were revealed to him was the verse of stoning. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) stoned [adulterers] and we stoned [them] after him. Then he said: We used to recite , `Do not forsake your real father (and attribute yourself to someone else), for this is an act of kufr, if you do that, or it is an act of kufr to forsake your real father (and attribute yourself to someone else).` And the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: `Do not praise me as the son of Maryam was praised; rather I am a slave, so say: His slave and His Messenger.` Perhaps Ma`mar said: `As the Christians praised the son of Maryam.”


Other verses that somehow disappeared from the perfect memory of Muslims is

`Do not forsake your real father (and attribute yourself to someone else), for this is an act of kufr...,



Too bad that on LIES this Religion is Built with people like you doing everything to defend the indefensible




Question:
1. Do you agree that verses revealed and RECITED after the death of Mohammed like the Rajam got Expunged from the Qur'an?
2. Are you aware that argument of abrogation fails woefully here as ONLY Mohammed could abrogate a verse. If any verse was recited after Mohammed, such verse could not be said to be abrogated.

honesttalk21:
I'm not here to repeat what lacks valuable evidence. If you can't offer something substantial to discuss, then there's no reason for us to engage. Please return when you're better informed. Thank you.

Sorry!
I have given you at least ONE EVIDENCE from your own authentic religious source and it is you who desire ANOTHER kind of evidence without presenting yours.

So, you are permitted to run off if you need another RECEIPT other than that presented to you. How many RECEIPTS is required to prove any transactions? Is it Three?

honesttalk21:
We will come to that. What replications or similar narrations of Sunan Ibn Majah 1944: Book 9, Hadith 100 exist?

You think I care about how many hadiths coping themselves?

How many people could enter Aisha's room to see that a tame sheep ate the Qur'an?

Sorry, its a lame excuse!

honesttalk21:
I an listening/reading to/from you and asked of other reports like it remember a related discussion?

You dont want me to trust the mother of Muslims!?

Aisha's testimony is enough for me. I once heard a Muslim scholar once said that Allah set up the little Aisha for Mohammed to marry her for her sharp memory?

Is it untrue that Aisha's exceptional memory made her the foremost narrator of Hadith, earning her the title "Mother of the Believers" for preserving Sunnah.

honesttalk21:
Ok. What other similar reports exist? How does it stand compared to how other verses of the Quran are transmitted and recorded? What was the situation of its revelation?

Is it a Maudu hadith?

But you don't like it anyways!


Why do you think Allah revealed the verse of breastfeeding adults ten times?

honesttalk21:
👂 ✍️

Sunan Ibn Majah 1944: Book 9, Hadith 100
It was narrated that 'Aishah said:
“The Verse of stoning and of
breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and
ate it.”


The verses were part of your Qur'an till your prophet died. Was Aisha keeping the abrogated verses?

letskeeptalking:
I guess my real question is: knowing what you know now, would you make the same choice again?

I’m currently on the verge of divorce after 15 years of marriage and three kids.. Even though this is my decision, I feel like I have no real choice. My husband (if I can even call him that) says he doesn’t want to lose his family, but he does absolutely nothing to show it.

A lot has happened over the years, and it’s reached a point where I genuinely believe there is no future for us as a couple.

So I feel like I have two options: divorce him and move forward as a single mother… or stay, knowing I could never love him again.

I worry about my kids and how growing up with parents in a loveless marriage might shape their future relationships and choices. But then I also wonder, would they be better off growing up with a single mother?

I’m not concerned about stigma or even about finding another partner someday. Honestly, the way I feel right now, I’m ready to remain celibate for life.

If you’ve gone through this, can you please share your experience?
Do you regret your choice?
Looking back, would you make the same decision again?

Why don't you try to fix your marriage?

The outside always looks greener but it is not true!

It is easier fixing a marriage than fixing he consequences of divorce on your children.

Love is not a feeling, love is a CHOICE!

I hope you are not already entertaining another man, trust me it wouldn't work. No responsible man will date a married woman!

If you need help, call me please!

honesttalk21:
The claim you make presupposes its own conclusion: that multiple distinct versions of the Qur'an existed and that Uthman chose a flawed one while destroying superior alternatives. There is no historical evidence supporting the idea of competing Qur'anic canons acting as rival scriptures. While early variations in recitation are recognized, there are no indications of competing theological texts.

So,
1. Where is the verse of Rajam in your Qur'an
2. Where is the verse of breastfeeding adult men in your Qur'an

why, the verses existed till Mohammed died!

honesttalk21:
The seven aḥruf were not separate books; they represented permissible modes within a single revelation and losing these modes does not equate to losing content. Your question shows misinterpretation and understanding the nature of the seven aḥruf. No classical authority has outlined Seven distinct books,
Seven unique sets of surahs, Seven theologically separate revelations.

The aḥruf refer to permissible modes of recitation within a given revelation. Losing modes does not equate to losing content. If there were six complete Qur’ans, where are their manuscripts? Where are their lists of surahs? Where are their theological distinctions? Where are the communities that support them? They simply do not exist.

The narrations about stoning and breastfeeding are openly preserved in ḥadīth literature and addressed through the doctrine of abrogation; rejecting this theology does not prove textual collapse. The report about the sheep consuming it is weak, and even if accepted, Qur'anic preservation was widespread through mass memorization alongside written fragments not reliant on a single document.

The fact that the verse of stoning and breastfeeding were in the Qur'an till the death of Mohammed is Open for all to see.

Who removed it?

honesttalk21:
No Uthmanic original survives, but neither do any originals from other ancient scriptures. What we have are early manuscripts that show a common consonantal framework across different regions, without alternate surahs, missing chapters, or rival doctrinal Qur'ans. Standardization happened early, gained rapid acceptance, and left no competing textual families behind. That is the historical record. Whether one sees it as divine preservation or political consolidation is a matter of theological interpretation rather than a verifiable historical conclusion.

Read my lips as I didn't ask you for the copy of the Qur'an of Uthman. What I asked for was copies of copies!

Please provide one if it exist!

honesttalk21:
If Uthman froze errors, provide the rival Qur'an with or without errors he supposedly erased. If six ahruf were lost, pinpoint the missing revelation not just lost pronunciations. If standardization equals corruption, then no ancient scripture exists under your criteria.

All you needed to do was to tell me the isnad of chains of writing the Qur'an
From Mohammed, to Abubakar, to Uthman, to.....

And I've asked tou a thousand times.

Is the Qur'an of Abubakar identical to the Qur'an of Uthman?

FxMasterz:
Thank you for shedding more lights on this.

I am waiting for Antichristian's version, and the versions of our many Muslim friends on Nairaland.

Honesttalk21 Antichristian AbulAbbas JimRohn may tell us that the Arabic of the word BIRD actually mean Not Bird

Yorubastardz:
My aunt who was barren adopted a boy in 2002

Fast forward to 2025 last June.
This boy turned my aunt life upside down

He Insults her like mad. Disrespect her in front of visitors. Scold at her

This got me thinking if Adoption is worth it
Because the boy clearly don't feel connection

And during some of their outburst
He will curse her and her family.. Omo

After seeing this same pattern in 3 families
I have concluded ADOPTION IS A NO NO!!!!

So, sorry please.

The boy may have a mental problem inherited from the biological parent.
Sometimes , the problem is a spiritual inheritance that is following the boy.

Some people are lucky with adoption especially if the background of the baby is sound.

Not withstanding , the first point of call is to rule out Schizophrenia at the hospital. The situation may still be salvageable

FxMasterz:
Muslims will Become Green Birds in Paradise.

Antichristian, is the Hadith really true? Do you believe you'll become a green bird in paradise? Do you really want to become a green bird? Will the true God really turn you in a bird? What is His purpose for turning you into a green bird really? Please TenQ, can you help shed more lights into this?


The Hadith is Sahih.

Sahih Muslim 1887:

It has been narrated on the authority of Masruq Who said: We asked 'Abdullah about the Qur'anic verse: "Think not of those who are slain in Allah's way as dead. Nay, they are alive, finding their sustenance in the presence of their Lord.." (iii. 169).

He said: We asked the meaning of the verse (from the Holy Prophet) who said:

The souls, of the martyrs live in the bodies of green birds who have their nests in chandeliers hung from the throne of the Almighty. They eat the fruits of Paradise from wherever they like and then nestle in these chandeliers.

Once their Lord cast a glance at them and said: Do ye want anything? They said: What more shall we desire? We eat the fruit of Paradise from wherever we like. Their Lord asked them the same question thrice. When they saw that they will continue to be asked and not left (without answering the question). they said: O Lord, we wish that Thou mayest return our souls to our bodies so that we may be slain in Thy way once again. When He (Allah) saw that they had no need, they were left (to their joy in heaven).


A Message for all Muslims. Please think deeply about you becoming a bird in paradise, and consider if truly, this Islam you so much believe in is the truth of God Almighty.

I will appreciate your response to my questions. They're not just for those people I mentioned alone.

Thank you, and may God lead us all into the Way, the Truth and the Life. May your eyes be opened.

Your are very correct for both Muslim children who died amd martyrs

Here is another hadith

The Martyr

Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1641
Narrated Ka'b bin Malik:
From his father that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "The souls of the martyrs are in green birds, suspended from the fruit of Paradise, or the trees of Paradise."
[Abu 'Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan Sahih.


The Muslim Babies

Sahih Muslim 2662 b
'A'isha, the mother of the believers, reported that a child died and I said:
There is happiness for this child who is a bird from amongst the birds of Paradise. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said: Don't you know that Allah created the Paradise and He created the Hell and He created the dwellers for this (Paradise) and the denizens for this (Hell)?


Other Muslims

Sunan Ibn Majah 4271
It was narrated from ‘Abdur-Rahman bin Ka’b Al-Ansari that his father used to narrate that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
“The believer’s soul is a bird that eats from the trees of Paradise, until it will be returned to his body on the Day when he is resurrected.”

https://sunnah.com/urn/505720
Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that Abd ar-Rahman ibn Kab ibn Malik al-Ansari told him that his father, Kab ibn Malik, used to relate that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "The ruh of the mumin is a bird that sits in the trees of the Garden until Allah returns it to his body on the day He raises him ."


Mishkat al-Masabih 1632
He quoted his father to the effect that he used to tell that God’s messenger said, “The spirit of a believer is only a bird which feeds on (Here the Arabic is ta'luqu fi. Mirqat quotes Suyuti who explains it as in the translation above. The verb can have either the sense of being attached to something or of eating) the trees of paradise till God restores him to his body on the day He resurrects it.”

Lets see how Muslims will twist the plain Hadith!



Why LIES are so many, the LIARS forget that they have spoken other contradictory lies.

honesttalk21:
When discussing the preservation of the Qur'an's text, the focus often shifts from the existence of early variations, which are well-documented, to how these variations are understood. During Caliph ʿUthman ibn ʿAffan's rule, around 650-653 CE, a standardized version of the Qur'an was created and distributed to major centers within the expanding Muslim world. Reports suggest that ʿUthman ordered the destruction of alternative texts, leading to a consistent Qur'anic text across regions. Controlled recitational differences were maintained through the canonical qira'at.

Uthman making your Quran consistent was mere Freezing the errors and adopting a unified text for everyone.
To prove this I asked
1. Where is the verse of Rajam in your Qur'an
2. Where is the verse of breastfeeding adult men in your Qur'an

So, all Uthman did was to adopt ONE out of several multiple Qur'an being recited.

honesttalk21:
A frequent topic of interest is the seven ahruf mentioned in early Islamic sources. Only one form, based on the Quraysh dialect, became the standard written text. The other six ahruf did not continue as separate written forms. Some view this as suppression, while others believe the standardized text was versatile enough to accommodate various recitational styles. Scholars debate the nature of the seven ahruf, with some considering them dialectal differences and others seeing them as linguistic classifications. Importantly, no separate Qur'anic canons arose from these variations.

So, who are those reciting the other six Ahruf of the Qur'an?

But you have other problems if you use the argument of suppression of the other Ahruf of the Qur'an
Was Mohammed wrong by asking Allah to give him other Ahruf of the Qur'an?
If Mohammed was wrong, how come Allah didn't seem to know better to correct Mohammed that multiple Ahruf will cause corruption of the Qur'an?

honesttalk21:
The lack of diverse textual families is noteworthy. In other religious traditions, multiple scriptural versions often leave behind evidence such as regional manuscripts or alternative canons. However, the Qur'an does not show such competing versions. Although ʿUthman ordered the destruction of non-standard texts, the complete disappearance of six independent traditions without any surviving evidence is rare. Early manuscripts display a shared consonantal structure.

If the other 6 Ahruf of the Qur'an are nonexistent, it is a proof that 6/7 parts of the Qur'an is lost.

Your problem is worse because there exist NO TRACE of the Standardized and Written Uthmanic Qur'an anywhere. This was why Muslims had to use the RECITATION according to Hafs (not even his Quran).

honesttalk21:
The codex of ʿAbd Allah ibn Masʿud is frequently cited as evidence of early textual diversity. He maintained a personal codex and initially resisted relinquishing it. Some reports describe differences in surah order and missing short surahs. However, early companion codices were more like personal notes than formal copies, often featuring annotations, variant readings, and personal arrangements. No distinct Ibn Masʿud manuscript tradition with a unique structure emerged. His readings were absorbed into the broader tradition, and no rival canon developed from his work. The evidence points to localized variations rather than entirely separate texts.

Stories of verses once recited but absent from the current Qur'an, such as the stoning verse, also spark debate. These accounts appear in major hadith collections and are explained in Islamic theology by the doctrine of abrogation, which allows for the withdrawal of certain revelations. Critics might view this as a retrospective explanation, but the early Muslim community did not try to include these reports in the standardized text, indicating an agreed boundary for the Qur'anic corpus.

The doctrine of abrogation holds no water for disappearance of verses. Why?

Are every verse in the Qur'an extant or some have been abrogated?

Does the verse of Rajam and breastfeeding adults in the Qur'an of Allah in paradise or not? If not, explain why Jibril recited what he did not receive from Allah to Mohammed?

Finally on this,
The verse of Rajam was in the Qur'an till Mohammed died. So, who removed it

Sunan Ibn Majah 1944: Book 9, Hadith 100
It was narrated that 'Aishah said:
“The Verse of stoning and of
breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and
ate it.”

As of Mohammed's death, the Rajam was part of the Qur'an. Who removed it?

honesttalk21:
Accounts of the Prophet being reminded of verses underscore the human aspect of oral transmission, highlighting distributed memorization and communal correction. The system relied on collective recitation, not just individual memory. The inclusion of such reports in authoritative collections suggests transparency. Oral cultures often preserve complex material accurately, and in the Qur'an's case, oral transmission complemented early written records.

If Mohammed can forget the Qur'an

honesttalk21:
The early Arabic script, which initially lacked vowel marks and diacritical dots, is significant. These were added later to formalize existing recitational traditions, not to create new texts. Early manuscripts show a consistent consonantal text across regions, with only minor differences. Compared to other ancient scriptures with multiple manuscript families and unstable canons, the Qur'an achieved early consolidation.

Interpretations often hinge on initial assumptions. Viewing the Qur'an as an ancient text reflects early canon formation. From the Qur'an's claim of divine protection, historical processes can be seen as fulfilling this promise. Human efforts in compiling, standardizing, memorizing, and reciting do not contradict preservation; they may be its means.

Historically, there were early variations; ʿUthman standardized the text soon after the Prophet's death, removed alternative materials, allowed controlled recitational diversity, and the text achieved widespread consistency early on. Whether this reflects political consolidation or the successful preservation of a recognized text is open to interpretation. The absence of competing canons, early standardization, integration of companion readings, manuscript consistency, and open discussions of early variations support the idea that the Qur'an was effectively preserved in its canonical form. From an Islamic viewpoint, these historical processes represent the means through which divine preservation was realized.

Falsehoods in islam are easily revealed with simple questions

1. Was the Qur'an of Uthman identical to the Qur'an of Abubakar?
2. Muslims seem to forget that the Quran was collected an written in the lifetime of Mohammed.

Muslim scholars edited and re-edited the Qur'an and then backtracked it to the time of Mohammad with their own fabricated Isnad. The lack of paper trails is an evidence that they intentionally removed whatever earlier Quran from History.

WriterrNg:

---

I also heard that he eats Putin's shit as breakfast.

What kind of mole sells the best weapons to the enemies of his handlers??

Coming from you, I can only say "it must be the truth" depending on what you call shit.

I am sure you did not know that President Donald Trump canceled the sale of long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine.

I am sure you don't know that Patriots Interceptor Missiles are undersupplied with excuses based on limited US stockpile.

I am sure you don't know that after the initial 40 ATACMS missiles given to Ukraine, not one has been given to them by USA.

If you will talk about HIMARS, you should kuku shamelessly talk about Rifles and uniforms and vests


So, What are the so-called BEST WEAPONS you seem to be afraid of?
SMH!