₦airaland Forum

Empiree:
smh bro. Yes, you have linguistic comprehension problem

So in order words you are helping Allah to clear up the inconsistencies in the Quran. That's a nice job and Allah will be proud of you. You just decided to ignore the contradictions between the warsh and the Hafs Quran. Are you afraid of touching it? Or are you also confused like Allah?

I begged you to explained the hadith below;

Narrated Aisha: I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah's Apostle and I used to say, "Can a lady give herself (to a man)?" But when Allah revealed: "You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily).' (33.51) I said (to the Prophet),
"I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires."
(Sahih Bukhari 6:60:311).

You can chose between the first and second request: anyone convenient for you.

Asalama lekum!

Empiree:
YOu will forever argue this. MUCH or MANY is not our problem at all. Matter of fact they are valid. Ikhtilaf (singular) means "iyapa enu" in yoruba language. If you connect it in yoruba, it means you would have found therein orisirisi iyapa enu. The reason you can never understand is bcus you already made up your mind on a very simple issue. You chose to understand it differently to mean MUCH discrepancies suggest there are some discrepancies in it according to you. This is your understanding. In the ayah it actually used plural form, Ikhtilafan. "fan" is whats driving you crazy. The verse is clear but i dont understand what exactly is your problem?. I am not surprised by the way. It is evangelism thing.

The word 'MUCH CONTRADICTIONS' have become so complex that you have to start a linguistic class to make it clear to us. This is desperation at it peak. We have to enrol on a Yoruba language class to understand Arabic language translated into English by over 6 specialist in Arabic language. You are very confused.

As a matter of fact you have ignored the contradictions in Hafs and warsh Quran,, :maka why omo iyami'? I equally did a screenshot of these contradictions for you to do your independent verification but you pretended you never saw it, 'maka why nau'? I taught your 'gloooriozzzz' al-quran was sent down from heaven and personally handed over to rasool, and was also perfectly preserved, without ANY contradiction. This is what my Muslim friends told me when I was in secondary school and I believed you, at one point in your life, had also shared this falsehood.

'Abeg make una park well make I see road pass'. Thank God for Mr Bukhari and Mr Majjah for exposing guys.

sagenaija:
Our guy just used the headline of the article to create a wrong impression.
The very first sentence show that the writer was actually against the stand of the cardinal:
“Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, Washington’s retired “Cardinal” Theodore McCarrick opens his mouth at a press conference in Washington, D.C., and essentially endorses the Muslim religion.”

A following sentence makes things clearer:
“What can one say? The apostasy is full-blown at this point — the Modernists of the Vatican II Sect are no longer ashamed to openly praise the Islamic deity and use Muslim theological phrases in their public statements.”

Since Moslem apologists are quick to grab anything that seems to ‘support’ Islam they can hold on to anything even if it is a straw.

Like you pointed out, DEFLECTION and DISTRACTION are part of the rule of the 'game' for them.

Anything they can hold onto to distract a discussion is a fair game to Muslims. Even the article is against the so-called 'cardinal' yet my guy still make reference to it. I seriously don't understand how this guy think.

Empiree:
I know it is painful and frustrating for you to come up with this. It is too late to say muhammad is "fake prophet". It is old allegation. Get over that. Even your fellow CHRISTIAN leaders have dropped that myopic view long ago.

I believe your are a Catholic. If your religious leaders said prophet muhammad was a true prophet, who are you to argue otherwise?. Do you know better than him?.


And the Ayah you quoted, why did you place much emphasis on this translation when there are other translations that didn't use "much"?. In the Arabic lexicon if you translate the original Arabic word used in the Qur'an, ikhtilaf (اخْتِلَافًا) it gives you "discrimpancy", "different". There is nothing like added adjective in the prefix.


So if you copy paste part of the Ayah in translated lexicon it simply reads

"....they would surely have found in it discrepancies which means ZERO error.


Look at the last screenshot, I used the word ikhtilaf اخْتِلَافًا in another sentence. See what came up.

I have no time to entertain your deflection and distraction techniques this time around. We are not discussing a single misguided retired cardinal who shamelessly called Mohammed a prophet. The official stand of the Catholic church worldwide, as at today, is that Mohammed is a false prophet. I will rather stick to Catholic church's official statements and doctrines with respect to the person of Mohammed than an isolated 'cardinal' who probably didn't know whether an hadith existed. I won't respond to your Catholic cardinal propaganda again so that you don't drag me to another discussion. I am not a Catholic.

I thought Muslims claim that Quran are the same, why are you complaining about the translation I am using? As a matter of fairness, I used the translation you provided on this thread with respect to Quran 4:82 so why are you now complaining about your own information? For the benefit of doubt, let's see how other translators render this same ayah:

Asad : Will they not, then, try to understand this Qur'an? Had it issued from any but God, they would surely have found in it MANY an inner contradiction!

Khattab : Do they not then reflect on the Quran? Had it been from anyone other than Allah, they would have certainly found in it MANY inconsistencies.

Malik : Why don't they research the Qur'an? Don't they realize that if it was from someone other than Allah, they would find MANY discrepancies in it.

Pickthall : Will they not then ponder on the Qur'an? If it had been from other than Allah they would have found therein MUCH incongruity.

Yusuf Ali : Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other than Allah they would surely have found therein MUCH discrepancy.

Sahih International (Saudi official quran)
Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an? If it had been from [any] other than Allah , they would have found within it MUCH contradiction.

I have given you 6 translations saying the same thing. The translators have scholarship in Arabic language, which I doubt you do, so their translations are credible and they collaborated each other. If you are not intellectually dishonest, you won't even bring this up as an issue. So according to your own Quran, there will be discrepancies, which I have shown you, but they won't be MUCH or MANY (Qur'an 4:82).

You completely ignored the discrepancies I screenshot between the Hafs and the warsh Quran. So before you quote any ayah for me, look at it critically so that I won't use it against you.

You equally ignore the hadith narration I provided with respect to Aisha's view on Mohammed's alleged revelation:

Narrated Aisha: I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah's Apostle and I used to say, "Can a lady give herself (to a man)?" But when Allah revealed: "You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily).' (33.51) I said (to the Prophet),
"I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires."
(Sahih Bukhari 6:60:311).

I need you to comment on Aisha's observation.

Asalama lekum!

We are just looking at two variations, hafs and warsh, out of 7 different 'readings' and have seen the contradictions in the the Arabic text. We have not even seen the manuscript yet, the manuscript dated from the time of Uthman ibn Affan, to do another comparison with what we have today but yet we are seeing obvious contradictions. The Quran made it clear that there will not be 'much contradictions' and yet we are seeing enough contradictions in different Arabic readings of the Quran.

If we can get hold of the Uthmanic manuscript, which I don't think ever existed or currently available, we will surely see the full disaster in the Quran.

Islam is a joke!

Let me stop here for now.

Some textual variations: warsh and hafs Quran.

Cheers01:
Empiree, how far?

It is very normal. Even Allah's messenger was a slave trader. What is the big deal?

sagenaija:
There is no Mohamed’s Koran manuscript today. There is no Abu Bakr’s Koran manuscript today. There is no Uthman’s Koran manuscript today.
All we have are Koran according to Hafs, Warsh, etc. These were written long after Mohamed.
You stated that the word in question can be “kill”, or “fight” or “fought” depending on how it is used. If Allah wanted the Koran to be CLEAR then he needs to make the meaning clear in order to avoid CONFUSION! Everyone reading the Arabic and translating to any other language must see that word as the same in the context in which it has been used. The word can ONLY mean one thing in the context of this verse.
Now to the point you missed:
I gave the versions of Q. 3:146 by Hafs and Warsh. One said “fought” and the other said “were killed”. These are two recognized Koran versions.
So, in this example, who is right – Hafs or Warsh?

The Quran never said there won't be ANY contradiction it said there won't be much (or many) contradiction but my 21st century Muslims will say 'there is no ANY single contradiction in the "glooorioouuuzzz" quran' while the Quran said the exact opposite:

Why do they not study the Quran carefully? If it had been from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it MUCH (not no contradiction at all) contradiction. [Sura 4:82]

This is how deep this brainwashing, mostly done at the mosque, had gone.

You made mention of Hafs, according to Islamic tradition Hafs, like Ibn Majjah and Imam Bukhari, also compiled an hadith which was rejected as completely false and fabricated by his fellow Muslims. If Muslims cannot trust hadith compilations by Hafs, why will they now trust his Qur'anic recitations which over 85% of Muslims use worldwide.

The deeper one digs into Islam, the more filth one uncovers.

Empiree:
smh... i have been watching him the very first day he announced his renunciation of islam. I have decided after watching many of his other videos that shaytan is playing prank inside his brain.



Do i need a story from you?. I watched everything and you are free to believe whatever you want. He even went to mosque to make fun inside house of God. Foolish him. Please, he is irrelevant to me at this point. I see no reason to talk about him.

Ohh, when he joined the ummah (the world's largest political party) the devil was not playing on his brain but now that he has uncovered the many fraud in Islam the devil is now playing on his brain. If tomorrow he revert back to Islam you guys will once again shout 'Allahu Akbar'! Can you see that you are a hypocrite?

For now he will surely be irrelevant because is not useful in the hands of Islamic propagandist but will once again become your poster boy and useful idiot once he tells your guys that I have 'reverted' back to Islam. 'Abeg park well make I see road'.

Empiree:
Fake man See as you are trying to copy my logical deduction?. In Ghanaian accent, it is not gonna werk



Irrefutable fact is that you have multiple contradicted Bibles And I have pointed out Luke 1:2 as a case study but you snubbed all the time. For record, Luke said;



"Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;"


Question: who are they?

who were the eyewitnesses?

Obviously these were unknown people and Luke confessed that he was not even actual witness of the events which shows that he was a mere historian. He had no certain knowledge about Jesus and who Jesus was. This is just one of the many discrepancies Quran talks about and you are still asking me to presented your original Bible after this clear evidence of distortion?





What is these jagbajagba all about?. Allah is the author of the Quran. Only Allah Can Author the Quran


"And it was not [possible] for this Qur'an to be produced by other than Allah, but [it is] a confirmation of what was before it and a detailed explanation of the [former] Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds." Sura 10:37



"Absolutely, we have revealed the reminder, and, absolutely, we will preserve it."[Q15:9]



Proof of Divine Authorship



Why do they not study the Quran carefully? If it had been from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction. [Sura 4:82]



All these proves, that Quran is from Allah. Everything in Quran is from Allah. The name of suras, the words of verses, the numbers assigned to the chapters and verses. Every single word is from Allah.

Sorry dear, I never knew you have a 'logical template' that is your exclusive reserve. At times you sound like a kid. You chosed to ignore the 'case study' I gave but rather engaged in an egoistic persuit. If you really have a good sense of logic, as you claimed, you will understand that it is someone that makes a claim that provides evidence. If a person accuse someone of murder, it is the person that makes the accusation that provides the evidence and not the other way round. If Mohammed accused the Torah and the injil of being distorted, a rational mind will expect Mohammed to provide the authentic one because it was perhaps in circulation at the time of Mohammed. Besides, since Allah (who always speak from both side of his mouth) said in the Quran that no one can change his words, the so-called previous revelations (Quran 6:115), why did he allow mortal men to change it? It is either Allah is lying or Muslims are confused.

You also raised the issue of eye witnesses when it comes to the account of the gospel according to Luke but you failed to mention any SINGLE eye witness to the so-called revelation in the Quran. Can you mention a single eye witness who can validate Mohammed's claim of receiving a 'revelation' from Allah through Jibril. The only slight witness to Mohammed's revelation fraud was by his child-bride, Aisha, who accused him of making 'revelation' up for his selfish desires. Read the hadith below:

Narrated Aisha: I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah's Apostle and I used to say, "Can a lady give herself (to a man)?" But when Allah revealed: "You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily).' (33.51) I said (to the Prophet),
"I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires."
(Sahih Bukhari 6:60:311).

According to Aisha (an eye witness and a wife to the false prophet), the Quran is nothing but the wishes and desires of Mohammed and not any Allah. This incident, where Aisha bursted the bubble of your fake prophet, is enough for me. Maybe you will, in a classical Islamic fashion and deflection, lie to me that 'it is a weak hadith' because you guys always have escape route like James Bond. I am sorry to say, James Bond might be a Muslim.

Even the medieval Arabs accused Mohammed of being being a fraudulent man hiding behind Allah hence another convenient revelation which you quoted above:

"And it was not [possible] for this Qur'an to be produced by other than Allah, but [it is] a confirmation of what was before it and a detailed explanation of the [former] Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds." Sura 10:37

If the illiterate Arabs and one his many wives, who saw him, knew and knew his antics, could be sceptical about his so-called revelations, how about you an educated , exposed and modern man? Bros, you 'fall my hands ooo'. Honestly you really disappointed me if you can't see and reason for yourself. If you still don't understand that the Quran is all about 'circumstantial revelations' to suit a particular time, place and issue, then you need to put in your thinking cap. You also quoted the ayah below;

Why do they not study the Quran carefully? If it had been from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction. [Sura 4:82]

The ayah you quoted said 'they would have found within it MUCH contradiction'. The ayah didn't say they won't find ANY contradiction but that they won't find MUCH. Do you want us to start listing the contradictions and errors in the Quran?

Asalama lekum!

Empiree:
onus is not on us but you since your bible or gospel already have these obvious distortions which confirms Quran position. I have out up a challenge up there for your buddy. See if you can help him. Seems he cant help himself. We are absolutely under no obligation to provide original injil. We have enough evidence to prove your distortions.



You dont have it. You dont need to be apologetic about it. It is too late for you to concoct fake names in 2019. Your 4 chronological Gospels are fraud. We muslims only picked whatever is in harmony with islamic teachings from it. We use Quran as a standard criteria to judge the Bible.



"Blessed is He who sent down the Criterion i:e Quran, upon His Servant that he may be to the worlds a warner" - Surah Furqan ayah 1



I simply did not notice. And, pint of correction.I know that you knew but you followed your dire. Quran was not names by Muhammad(saw) but His Creator. So these names of Animals you mentioned goes to show you that Qur'an covers all aspect of life including ant for that matter. It mentioned cow in reference to Jews who worshipped golden calf or questioned their prophet about sacrificial cow they were ordered for.

Mr. "educated and intelligent" one, since you (people of the Book) are so damn educated, how come you teach pupils in schools that 1+1+1=3 but when it comes to simple religious issue, 1+1+1=1 and then you told us that we can not understand unless and until we have "holy spirit"?. How's that "education" working for you?

You are not a good student of law and logic. If I present you a fake 1 dollar bill and you, as a banker, identified the money as a fake, you need to present me an original bill to show me that the money I wanted to deposit is fake. If I present a forged check, for payment in a bank, the bank, upon identifying the check as fake, will arrest me for forgery. If I try to claim innocence, the bank will not present me a book to tell me that the check is fake. They will present me a similar check for us to compare with the fake on my hand. That's how an organized setup works. The bank will not ask me to present an original check again, knowing fully well that i want to defraud them. They will show me an original check to confirm that what I presented is forged.

The onus is on who makes a claim is to present an evidence. The Muslims make a claim that the current Bible is distorted, although you will agree with the verses that does not contradict your Quran, so it is Muslims that need to provide the REAL bible that was not distorted. This is just commonsense.

You said Allah named the Quran by himself, including the surah (such as ant, table, donkey, camel, etc). In order words Allah inspired Uthman ibn Affan, the owner of the current Quran, to name each ayah after an ant, a table, a donkey, a cow, etc. And, you thinking you are dealing with kids, claimed that the 'surah cow: was in reference to the golden calf, kindly provide a proof. Pls provide a prove for his your sensational and smart claim.

As a typical deflector you are, you can't box me back into the issue of the Trinity because even your prophet did not understand it. Go back and read your Quran and come back and tell us how Mohammed understood it.

Empiree:
You know a man is confused after knowing what tawhid or Oneness of God is and then foolishly renounced islam over trivial issue. You noticed that he never argued on essence of islam, that's major tenet which God is One. Rather he was busy over silly things. Thats definition of confusion. He could preach for 40yr. Who cares if he renounce islam after that?. So since he is still alive, he still has hope. He may tomorrow changes faith to Judaism to Hinduism to Buddhism to Taoism to Shintoism to Atheism to Scientologist back to Islam. You just cant tell at this moment.

Maybe you deliberately choose not to watch the video so that it will not weaken your faith as advised by Mohammed. If you take time to watch many of his videos, which I have done, maybe your opinion will shift. However, because of your arrogance, you may not like to watch it so that you will not have any reason to doubt your false prophet Mohammed; you may chose to remain in your fantasy world created by Mohammed and polished by Imam Bukhari.

His first video talked about why he left Islam. Another of his video talked about Mohammed and zainab (the wife of his adopted son, zaid). You will also a video he made on hafs, warsh and durin (I don't think I get the spelling) Quran. He also made video on how Muslims have been attacking him online after he left Islam, some threatening to kill him as recommended by Mohammed. This is the same people that were shouting 'Allahu Akbar' when he joined the fold of the ummah. That's Islam anyway.

Rashduct4luv:
What of its several harmful effect! Music corrupts the soul. It is used to impart ideologies to a negligent mind. Drug abuse, homosexuality, indecent dressing, fornication, etc has been promoted by Music.

The contribution of Music is negligible to us Muslims. It remains Haram and Useless.

One of them spotted.

sagenaija:
To expose your lies!

Only a man who is sick in the head will tell us, in the face of glaring evidence in Islamic books, that the Koran was compiled into a book during the lifetime of Mohamed.

I know you believe so many odd things but to lie against your own prophet ought to be haram even to you! Haba!

The most popular present day Koran was only agreed in Egypt in as recent as 1924. Yes or No?

He is very ignorant of the fact that Muslim academics, in Alzar University, Cairo Egypt, in 1924, had to come together to agree on a uniform Quran and further works on Islamic source documents and related manuscripts was stopped. If the Quran was uniform, prior 1924, why will they set up a committee to harmonise the existing Quran? This guys are either liars or are just lazy to do research of their religion. While the Bible of 1800 to 2019 can still be found at homes and libraries, where are the Quran of 1900 to 1923? Destroyed? Let's wait for an answer from the genius himself (empire).

Empiree:
Bro, stop doing yourself disservice. Pls post screenshots of your research. I have watched this confused guy before. If you want to use his evidence at least post screenshots for the world to see. I am not the only one reading. I have watched this video before but go ahead and post screenshots. Not everyone is fortunate enough to watch it. Post screenshots if you are indeed truthful.

When the guy 'reverted' to Islam you guys were jumping up and down shouting 'Allahu Akbar' but now that his eyes are wide open he has become a confused man. Islam hypocrisy!

How will you call a man who spent over 7years preaching and defending Islam, even on YouTube, a confused man? How can you call a man who spent over 5 years learning to write and speak Arabic, to better his 'deen', a confused man? You are the confused man here because you can't match his commitment to Islam when he was still ignorant of the false and deceptive religion (Islam)..

sagenaija:
Who (Really) Wrote The Koran?
Did you see the bolded?
Why is it easy for you Moslems to lie even in the face of FACTS?
Maybe its because like i said Islam speaks from both sides of the mouth
so, you can pick and choose as it will support your argument.
Was the Koran not originally supposed to be RECITATIONS?
And was there no concern YEARS AFTER MOHAMED DIED about those
who memorized it having died and how it may lead to loss of portions of the Koran?
It is well known when the Koran was first compiled into a book yet you are telling us
blatant lie; just to win an argument?
And here you are telling us that it was written down "in the lifetime" of Mohamed.
Whao! This lie alone is enough to make anyone reading us see you for who you are.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqDQcvV4VSA?list=PLqx2MGQd88gq2vNsRhu-tfYB1GZ99WfMK

Another issue is that there is no any SINGLE surviving manuscript of the Quran that can be dated from the time of Uthman ibn Affan, the man whole officially endorsed the current Quran Muslims have now. He also failed to tell us why Allah allowed a goat to eat part of the Quran (sunnah jbn majjah 1944) such that the ayah had to be omitted from the Quran. Oh, Ibn majjah is a Jew (Muslims' scape goats).

I still don't get it when a religion that is built on rumours, gossips and hearsay (hadith) which are used to interpret (and make meanings) the Quran will claim moral right to condemned a religion that fake God, Allah, even identified with. What a shame!

Empiree:
I know you are in serious pain because, obviously, you can't defend those contradictions I cited earlier. You simply made no reference to them. Anyways, they are still up there should you have time to figure it out. For now, I know it hurts that you can't really fix problems with your Bible or Gospels or whatever you which to call it. You and your partner should try to figure out why you have Gospels according to Mathew Mark Luke and John instead of Jesus himself.

I am so pained right now that I am on 'drip' at the hospital (hiss). You guys are always smarter than Allah and his messenger. I asked you to provide the 'original Torah and the injil' which you claimed your prophet had before he died. It is very ridiculous that your prophet, who can't read or right (according to Muslims) will tell literate people (people of the book) that their text is wrong. Like an illiterate man correcting a Wole Soyinka on his literary works. This argument can only be sustained and supported by the magical logic of Muslims.

Even if the surnames of the gospel writers are provided you will still ask for their botanical names because that's what Islam is built on, apologetics and not convictions. I asked you why Mohammed named some surah after animals such as ant, cow, camel, etc and you ignored it but now asking me to provide the full names of the gospel writers. You are very funny and childish bro. And do you really think an illiterate Arabs cave man (Mohammed) have the intellectual capacity to meaningfully, on an academic or theological level, engage the people of the book (educated people). Do you know one of the reasons Mohammed (and the Arabs) call the Jews and the Christians 'the people of the book'?

Go figure!

Empiree:
I have exposed you guys

You are always 'exposing' with daft argument. Why hailing yourself while you have proved nothing?

Empiree:
you stuck. You are now at a crossroad

You seem to have become more angry and radical these days. What happened? Did you visit Pakistan lately? We are talking about Muslims crying of Islamophobia and oppression but are (Muslims) the worst oppressors worldwide. In any Muslim community where Muslims are majority, the tendency of the minority to be oppressed is over 95%. Take a look at Pakistan and India. Muslims are thriving, growing, many movies, occupying government positions in India but Hindus in Pakistan are almost wiped out and their is a government sanctioned policy to oppress non-muslims and the Ahmadiyyas. In Pakistan. accusing someone of blasphemy (especially non-muslims) is the easiest way of settling scores. The victim is already guilty until proven Innocent (Like Aisha Bibi and thousands of unknown ones).

Your blind defense of evil is legendary, all in the name of protecting Islam. Please change your thinking.

Empiree:
please don't be offended by this statement.

I don't know whether you are zombie sometimes or not. Even with this verse you quoted, it is still telling you to hold fast to your book. The book referring to in this Ayah is still injil of Jesus and Torah of Moses in their authentic forms. You can twist all you want. After all, even today's Bible you don't follow it's laws. Jews also don't follow their laws. Only Muslims try as much as possible to follow Quranic laws. How can you not see that this Bible you have today is blatantly in gross error, first by claiming Jesus is God. This alone is a red flag. I also gave you examples from Jewish book of double standards but you guys snubbed. I showed you from Jewish book where they consider gentiles (non-jews) less than humans. That Jews may charge gentiles interest but they can not charge fellow Jews interest. And you are telling me this is a book from God?. In the same book they said Moses wrote Torah but at the same time Moses is talking about how he buried himself. Yet you still considered this perfect book of God?. So these are pointing to what Qur'an says in the last sura I quoted you.

Do me a big favor, how about you do some research before you reply?. Because your replies reveals to me that you don't think critically or did some academic research before you reply. That's just sad. Don't just reply because your want to win argument.

I also showed you like three times already conflicting accounts in the Bible. I showed you how Luke claimed to gather his Gospel from eyewitnesses which means he wrote his Gospel from informations he gathered from different people which also confirms what Qur'an says about distortions in your book. How could you still consider this book from God when the author himself confessed his writings were collected from people?. Be sensible man. It will be pointless to keep giving you references from Quran if you can not put on your thinking cap.

Few weeks ago I showed you conflicting crucifixion accounts. Yet you turned the other side. If you continue like this I see no reason to go further. Why is it difficult for you to accept the fact that Torah and Gospel you have today are not the same books revealed to their respective prophets?.

Abeg, think please.

It is very magical that Muslims will claim that the Bible had been corrupted but do not have a single copy of the incorruptible one. Where is the 'authentic' Torah and the injil that Zakir Naik, and millions of his fellow clowns, have been talking about? They don't have it because they have to manufacture lies to discredit the Bible. It is even worrisome for a religion like Islam, whose founder was tutored by a gnostic Christian, waraqa ibn naufal, to challenge the Bible? It is even more worrisome that it was even this same Christian that told him that he is a prophet, not even Allah or jibril. Islam is a pack of comedy!

And you are switching from 'the Torah and the injilhas been distorted' to 'the Jews and the Christians do not follow the law in their book', what a confused set of people! It is very ironic that Muslims, whose holy book (Quran) cannot stand alone without manufactured stories (hadith, seerah, altabari) to support it will accuse the Bible of being distorted. The same manufactured stories that has been classified as strong, weak and fabricated and are still being used to making a meaning of every ayah of the Quran. You are the one to open your brain and know that you have been scammed big time by the Arabian conmen, together with their Persian collaborators (the Turkish, the Iranians and the Uzbeks).

I also told you that your most reliable hadith was written by Imam Bukhari, an Uzbek man, about 230/years after the death of Mohammed. Is Mohammed aware of the hadith? Did Allah also inspire and approve the hadith? Did Imam Bukahri meet Mohammed or any of the sahabas alive? How many hadith did Bukhari collect that were later filtered and 'downsized' to about 7200 collected narration? And this is same book (filled with rumours and gossips) that you use to explain the thousands of confusing ayah in the Quran. Bros abeg put on your thinking cap if you don't have any yet. Islam is a pack of lies and some stories lifted from existing religions (Judaism, Christianity, Zoroastrianism and Sabianism).

Look at the flaws in your religious text that are very glaring before accusing others. Very ironic and surprising!

eduora:
i didn't catch up your sentences very well

In what sense?

usermane:
Then it should've been Theism V Atheism.

Anyway, I ask because I know no debate on Islam and Atheism or Christianity is complete without invoking the "scientific miracles"

I usually don't like getting involved in atheists-Muslim or atheist-christian debate but as soon as I see 'scientific miracles' I chuckled. I hope it won't get to that ridiculous level. I am on the standby 'watching' you guy's debate. Tintknz, Empire and AlBaqir you guys are trying.

sagenaija:
Empiree, please answer this:
You quoted the above. But the Koran also says:
Yusuf Ali (Quran 5:68) : Say: "O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord." It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. But sorrow thou not over (these) people without Faith.

So, which one is true?

Again, did Mohamed ever say that the Jewish and Christian Holy Books have been corrupted?

NOTE: "Distort in their usage" and "forgot" do not mean the same as 'distorted'.

I don't know who is more confused? Mohammed, Allah or ordinary Muslims and it seems the communication between Allah and Mohammed is not always clear.

As you rightly pointed out, there is a difference between 'distorting the words', which in modern-day context could mean 'twisting the word'. We might read the same book but have a different view of the passage, and one might even forget some of what he read, and this is the issue Mohammed had with the Jews and the Christians. However in the verses that followed, he still asked the Jews and the Christians to stand firm of the 'Torah and the Injil'.

Muslims will however chose any ayah of the Quran that suits them and pretend as if no other ayah nullify it. This is a serious Islamic dilemma, chose whatever favours you in the hadith, Quran and the seerah. This is intellectual dishonesty on the part of Muslims and their scholars which exposes the falsehood and inconsistencies in Islam.

Empiree:
I'm not really interested in your atotonu. The only thing I'm responding to is this.

Told you and true2god that Islam technically doesn't recognize what you called Bible or go Gospel. These terms were made by men and women by men. They wrote stories about Jesus. That's what chronological Gospels mean. They are Gospels according Mathew Mark Luke and John. Not Gospel according to Jesus.

So this alone dismissed your claim that Quran recognizes your Bible. This is nonsense. Now here is a verse of Qur'an which points to distortions, changes, discrepancies in your Bible or Gospels or whatever your want to call it.



Sura Maida ayah 13


So for their breaking of the covenant We cursed them and made their hearts hard. They distort words from their [proper] usages and have forgotten a portion of that of which they were reminded. And you will still observe deceit among them, except a few of them. But pardon them and overlook [their misdeeds]. Indeed, Allah loves the doers of good.




Maida 14


And from those who say, "We are Christians" We took their covenant; but they forgot a portion of that of which they were reminded. So We caused among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. And Allah is going to inform them about what they used to do.



Verse 13 clearly says Jews distorted thier Book. Verse 14 clearly says christians have distorted thier Book.

What about the Torah which were named after events (Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, Numbers), Persons (Joshua) and Archiving (Chronicles)? Are they also fake? Was Allah unaware of the naming of each book for sake of clarity? How about the Quran that some surah are named after camel, cow, ant, Mary, etc. It is very ridiculous when Muslims have problems in the naming of the books in the Bible while the surah is named after animals (camel, cow, ant, etc). Who did the naming? Allah, Mohammed or the Caliph? Please stop making fun of yourself.

Islam is never a standard to validate Christianity while the opposite it true because your Allah asked you to 'consult the people of the book'. Allah never asked the people of the book to get guidance from the Muslims. Muslims seem to always try to correct Allah's mistakes.

And see desperation, you have to do a google search for the word 'distortions' to key it into your obviously biased argument. The surah Maida, ridiculously meaning ' table', is devoted to Jewish and Christian hatred (quran 5:51) and was written in Medina. How can I take the opinion of Mohammed serious, in surah Maida, as the surah was written when there was a serious hostility between the Muslims and the 'people of the book' in Medina? How can you expect an enemy to give a fair assessment of you? This is just commonsense. In one place Mohammed asked Muslims to consult the people of the book for guidance (in Mecca when he needed their support) and in another place he accused them of distorting the meanings (not the letters) when he no longer needed their support and was now very powerful (in Medina).

And on the same surah, Allah asked the Jews and the Christians to stand on the Torah and the Injil:

Yusuf Ali (Quran 5:68) : Say: "O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord." It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. But sorrow thou not over (these) people without Faith.

Allah, in the same surah, asked the Jews and the Christians to stand on the Torah and the Injil, is that not confusion?

See below for further reading of your claim in your last paragraph:

https://veritasdomain./2012/07/23/are-there-verses-in-the-quran-that-shows-the-bibles-corruption-part-3-surah-513/

Asalama lekum!

Empiree:
Let me save myself precious time from copying this. Here is reference that counters your post on Abdallah Ibn Sa`d Ibn Abi Sarh.

And so? Was it written by 'the Jews and the Christians' (your usual punching bag) or Muslim scholars and historians?

Empiree:
show us evidence that injil given to Jesus was documented by him?. His injil was distorted after him. It is very important that we know details of Bible writers who claim to know Jesus. How come they had contradicted messages if truly they had the same injil given to Jesus?

There is no any Injil given to Jesus, that's Islamic fallacy. The first 4 books of the new testaments, which Muslims call 'the Injil' is a documented record of the time and life of Jesus Christ as written by eye witnesses. In this modern era, it can be called a biography of the life and time of Jesus Christ: his virgin birth, his adulthood ministry, his death and resurrection. And the Injil is clear enough, except Muslims who will be searching for issues in the Bible to attack Christianity, a practice which Mohammed started.

Muslims made a claim that Allah gave Mohammed the Quran but information from various hadith claimed otherwise. Mohammed never wrote the Quran and he never audited the contents (because he can't even read) to verify if what he dictated, to his secretaries, were correctly written down. That's why I gave an example of out of the secretaries, Abdullah ibn saad ibn abi sarh, who was manipulating the writings of the Quran to suit his own rhythm while Mohammed concurred. I gave you references, from Islamic sources, which you called 'fake news'.

You are very well aware that Mohammed didn't ask his sahabas to compile the Quran as a book; it was a government project conceived by Omar ibn kathab after learning that most reciters of the Quran had died in the battle of yamama and to avoid further loss of the information in the Quran, the idea of making it as a single document was conceived.

In summary, after the Quran was finally compiled by Uthman ibn Affan, he ordered the burning of other manuscripts that he doesn't agree with. Some other pieces of the Quran were burnt by Uthman and cannot be found in the present-day Quran. I don't even want to bring up the issue of some part of the Quran that was eaten by a he-goat (sunnah ibn majjah 1944). So if your Quran is so much bastardized and you have to fall back to the hadith (written over 230 years after the death of Mohammed by an Uzbekistani man) to clear things up the inconsistencies in the Quran, it is very unfortunate that hypocrite Muslims will accuse the Judeo-christian scriptures of 'distortions'.

Asalama lekum!

BabyApple:
My brother i don explain to you... Not a must for you to believe.. You are free to take ogun as your god no one fight you ontop am.. Since na the ogun create you...

You are mixing things up. My question to you is: who spoke in surah al-fathiha? Allah, jibril or Mohammed?

BabyApple:
He is a Muslim because he worship God the same way the prophets that came before him worshipped One God. He never worship Trinity God and he also believe in all the Prophets that came before him , He fast for God too, He believe in Angel and He also believe in the last day. That what makes him a Muslim. He didn't come with any religion of his own.

Go and relax; you have a limited understanding of your religion. Who spoke in surah al-fathiha? Is it Allah, Mohammed or Jibril?