Why does Allah use the word "We" to refer to Himse

[Q_B|iz]

Q 1. We already know Allah our lord is One. As in Surah al-Ikhlas 112:1-4. But why does Allah the Lord use the word “We” to refer to Himself in many verse or ayat in the Qur’an? For example He says in Surah al-Anbiya’ 21:107 “And We did not send you (O Muhammad) except as a mercy to the world.” The word “we” is plural, more than one. Why does Allah use “we” instead of “I” to refer to Himself? (Izani Mahayudin bin Abd Aziz, Malaysia)

A 1. The Qur’an says very clearly that there is only One God, Allah. “There is no god but Allah” is the basic principle of Islam. There is no ambiguity about this fact in the Qur’an and there are hundreds of ayat or verses of the Qur’an that make this point very clear. Belief in more than one God is Shirk and it is a major sin according to the Qur’an.

Whenever in the Qur’an Allah is mentioned in the third person there are always singular pronouns used, such as He, him (Huwa or Hu). Whenever Allah is spoken to in the second person there are also singular pronouns, such as Thou, Thine and Thee (Anta, Ka). However only in the first person some times the pronouns I, My or Mine (Ana, Iyaya, ya) are used and sometimes We, Us and Our (Nahnu, Na) are used.

This is a style of speech. Sometime the speaker says I and sometime says we. We also use that in our conversations. In the Qur’an you will see that often the first person singular such I or My is used, when Allah speaks about His love, care and closeness and forgiveness for His servants. In a similar way the first person plural is often used when Allah speaks about His power, majesty, glory, great deeds or when He speaks about His anger and wrath for the sinners and criminals. (This is, of course, the general use. Sometime the reverse is also the case, depending on the context of the Surah.)

See for example the verses where the first person singular is used: “When My servants ask thee concerning Me, I am indeed close (to them): I listen to the prayer of every suppliant when he calleth on Me: let them also, with a will, listen to My call, and believe in Me: that they may walk in the right way.” (al-Baqarah 2:186) Or “Verily, I am Allah: there is no god but I: so serve thou Me (only), and establish regular prayer for celebrating My praise.” (Taha 20:14) or “But, without doubt, I am (also) He that forgives again and again, to those who repent, believe, and do right, who, in fine, are ready to receive true guidance.” (Taha 20:82) or see another example where both pronouns are used side by side, “Before them the People of Noah rejected (their Messenger): they rejected Our servant, and said, “Here is one possessed!” and he was driven out. Then he called on his Lord: “I am one overcome: do Thou then help (me)!” So We opened the gates of heaven, with water pouring forth. And We caused the earth to gush forth with springs. So the waters met (and rose) to the extent decreed. But We bore him on an (Ark) made of broad planks and caulked with palm-fibre: She floats under Our eyes (and care): a recompense to one who had been rejected (with scorn)! And We have left this as a Sign (for all time): then is there any that will receive admonition? But how (terrible) was My Penalty and My Warning? (al-Qamar 54:9-16)

See also some verses where the first person plural is used: “We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).” (al-Hijr 15:9) or “We created not the heavens, the earth, and all between them, but for just ends. And the Hour is surely coming” (al-Hijr 15:85) or “And among His Signs is this: thou seest the earth barren and desolate; but when We send down rain to it, it is stirred to life and yields increase. Truly, He Who gives life to the (dead) earth can surely give life to (men) who are dead. For He has power over all things.” (Fussilat 41:39). Or “Already has Our Word been passed before (this) to Our Servants sent (by Us). That they would certainly be assisted. And that Our forces, they surely must conquer. So turn thou away from them for a little while. And watch them (how they fare), and they soon shall see. Do they wish (indeed) to hurry on our Punishment? But when it descends into the open space before them, evil will be the morning for those who were warned (and heeded not) (al-Saffat 37:171-177). There are many other examples.

Christian writers in their desperate desire to prove their doctrine of Trinity have sometime interpreted some Biblical passages where first person plural is used to suggest that this means the “Divine Trinity”. For example in the Bible it is mentioned, “Then God said, “Let us make man in our image¦” (Genesis 1:26). Christian writers contend that this means that there is plurality in God (We seek Allah’s forgiveness for mentioning this blasphemy.) Sometime Christian missionaries also go to simple Muslims and try to confuse them by taking some verses from the Qur’an and tell them that the Qur’an also supports such doctrines. I tried to explain this point in some detail, because I have often heard this type of questions from some Christians.

Q2. I read your columns and I very much like them. But I have a problem of my own that always plagues me. So please help me. I have a serious depression resulting from worrying too much. I always worry about everything, from how people degrade and disrespect Islam, how they do not believe in God, and how the people are ignorant of it and make some stupid comments against our religion. It often makes me think why they say this and then makes me even more upset when they care not. I mean I am only 17 years old and this is my major problem unlike most teenagers. Can you please help me?

A2. Allah has blessed you with the concern for your religion and for your community. This concern is not a problem; it is a blessing. You should thank Allah that you have this concern. Instead of feeling depressed or angry, you should try to take this concern in a positive way. Pray regularly. Take good care of yourself. Try to be in the company of the Muslim youth who are serious minded and who are doing well at school and at home. Do not associate with those who are failures or those who always complain about others. I suggest that you also pray Tahajjud prayers. Get up about an hour before Fajr time. Take a full bath with the intention of purity. Put on clean clothes and pray four or eight rak’ah nafl prayer in a place where you are alone by yourself. Pray well. Make long Ruku’ and Sajdah and then make du’a. Ask Allah to teach you and to guide you.

You should also prepare yourself to correct the false information against Islam. You must pay attention to your studies, learn more and more about your religion and practice what you learn. Become a real soldier of Allah to guide Muslims and non-Muslims to the right path. Do not let this fire of faith die from your heart. Let it grow and let others also get the same concern that you have. May Allah bless you and keep you on the right path.

[Message]

Q 1. We already know Allah our lord is One. As in Surah al-Ikhlas 112:1-4. But why does Allah the Lord use the word “We” to refer to Himself in many verse or ayat in the Qur’an? For example He says in Surah al-Anbiya’ 21:107 “And We did not send you (O Muhammad) except as a mercy to the world.” The word “we” is plural, more than one. Why does Allah use “we” instead of “I” to refer to Himself? (Izani Mahayudin bin Abd Aziz, Malaysia)

A 1. The Qur’an says very clearly that there is only One God, Allah. “There is no god but Allah” is the basic principle of Islam. There is no ambiguity about this fact in the Qur’an and there are hundreds of ayat or verses of the Qur’an that make this point very clear. Belief in more than one God is Shirk and it is a major sin according to the Qur’an......

You don't get it do you? hmmm... you think three cannot be one? H20 can be liquid, solid and gas. at the right conditions they can exist as one. To be specific, at the triple point(a point where a substance is stable in three different states at the same time, given the right temperature and pressure) , H2O can be a liquid, a solid and a gas at the same time. I am not trying to say that God is like a substance or anything like that. But, What I am trying to get across is, it is posssible to be three and one at the same time. God is as one as He is three.
And, if thousands of verses in the quran says that God is one and not three, but one of them says it is three and not one, then ask for wisdom on why that is. Don't just pass the majority as the winner, as we only have one shot at death, got the wrong one, and you'll feel eternal pain in hell afterwards.
About, the style of saying "we" as "I", well, I don't have any idea how that is possible, unless that someone is referring to all his atoms in the body, which of course doesn't apply to God, as he is beyond science and the One who created atoms, not the other way round. Someone said that, at that time, it is common for people to refer "I" as "we". Well, firstly, God is there forever, no "time" constraint, and secondly, when is it that a person should refer "I" as "we"?

[Message]

this is a similar post with the one at Jesus was not the prophet moses prophesied...

[nisa]

i'm really not the professor here.. but i think we shouldn't expect God to conform to our way of describing our own human selves. He is not human. He is God, the mightiest divine force of the universe. So i think when He uses the word "we" it's really to show how mighty He is in the universe.

[Message]

i think we shouldn't expect God to conform to our way of describing our own human selves.

Well, I believe if God is trying to tell us "how many of Him" there really are/is, God will try to use simple human language to make us understand,
Or there will be a conflict in beliefs, not only among christians and muslims but also among people of similar faith. But, if the first leader of a certain religion is to teach something wrong in the beginning, then his followers are most likely to continue in his teaching. And this might last forever until someone realizes his mistake. Thus, trust not in thy leader if he teaches something that is not correct. Or not of the Holy book. Because the holy book is the best thing you can trust, as that is the word of God. Be it the quran in your case or the bible in my case. Beware of misleading leaders.

[Mogulxlnc]

People, ALLAH uses the word "WE" for himself because:

WE
S1, W1
/wi/ ; strong /wi:/ pronoun [used as the subject of a sentence]

1 I and one or more others: We were all amazed when we heard the news. | Shall we (=you and I) have a coffee, Ted? | Can we (=I and the others) go now, sir?

2 formal used by a king or queen in official language to mean I: We are not amused.

3 used by a writer or a speaker to mean you (the reader or listener) and them: We saw in the previous chapter how this situation had arisen.

4 used especially to children and people who are ill to mean you: And how are we feeling today, Mr. Robson?

5 formal people in general: Do we have the right to destroy the planet?
© Pearson Education Limited 2000

The Excerpt mentioned above is taken from Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English.
If you Christians want to believe that "WE" refers to "THE TRINITY", then I am sorry that is not the case. ALLAH uses the word "WE" because HE is THE CREATOR and has the RIGHT to use the word "WE" for HIMSELF. I mean if the wordly Kings can use it for themselves than why not ALLAH.
And for JESUS, ALLAH has the following to say:

[003:059] The similitude of Jesus before God is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: "Be". And he was.

[webmaster]

Why would Allah use the word WE when it is perfect for? To use WE means that Allah didn't write the Quran but somebody else did. If I wrote a serious book I will use
I said this,
I said that.
Not
WE said this
or
WE said that.

Example: "And God said","And God saw","And God made"!


Genesis 1

1. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
4. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
6. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
9. And God said, Let the waters under the Heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
10. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
11. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13. And the evening and the morning were the third day.
14. And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15. And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18. And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
20. And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
21. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
22. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
23. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
24. And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
26. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
29. And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
30. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
31. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

[Mogulxlnc]

Mr. Webmaster, somehow I think that you don't want to believe that there is one ALLAH. Specially you won't like to listen this from a MUSLIM. Therefore I suggest that you to find a CHRISTIAN Scholar whom you think is learned and able to understand your question and tell you that HIS MAJESTY can use the word "WE" for himself. Especially in Arabs the Chiefs and Kings and the Presidents usually use "WE" for themselves. It's quite natural over here in Islamic world.
If you really want to know that why ALLAH uses "WE" for Himself being SINGULAR, than find a man you believe and discuss the matter with. Please do keep us Posted!
One more thing, try to learn the English Language Structure, Because I think that the bestsellers have taken away a lot from you .

[webmaster]

"WE" The nominative case of the pronoun of the first person; the word with which a speaker or writer denotes himself. We is frequently used to express men in general, including the speaker. We is also often used by individuals, as authors, editors, etc., in speaking of themselves.

The We word you are using did not occur till after 1200a.d.by King John of England. Before that time, monarchs used the singular number in their edicts. So what you said was that the Quran was written after 1200a.d.!

[Mogulxlnc]

You poor soul!
That's what I can say for you. Remember, Quran is in ARABIC not in English. Naturally when you translate from one language to another you try to find equivalent words that can convey the message.

Arabic culture is far more richer than any other. Therefore you cannot compare English norms and decorems with ancient ARABIA. Norms prevailing in Ancient Arabia might have found their way in the western culture very late.
You are not even worth of a healthy debate. End of Discussion. Period.

Take a break, Have a KITKAT

[webmaster]

You poor soul!
That's what I can say for you. Remember, Quran is in ARABIC not in English. Naturally when you translate from one language to another you try to find equivalent words that can convey the message.

If your simple mind has not noticed we are speaking English here not Arabic, if the Quran was so perfect it could be translated because the words would be perfect. If it is composed of simple words and chants then it can't be translated and it is the product of simple minds writing simple things! Which is???

Arabic culture is far more richer than any other. Therefore you cannot compare English norms and decorems with ancient ARABIA. Norms prevailing in Ancient Arabia might have found their way in the western culture very late.

Norms and stories prevailing out of the Torah and Gospel's might have found their way in the Arabic cultures long before the Quran was ever written down. Which explains the twist on the original stories to suit the writers of the Quran and the power quest of the local tribes leaders!

BTW Chinese Culture is far richer then any Arabic Culture so quit worshipping a culture!

[H2O]

The We word you are using did not occur till after 1200a.d.by King John of England. Before that time, monarchs used the singular number in their edicts. So what you said was that the Quran was written after 1200a.d.!

Yes the English word "WE" was first used by King John of England when the English language was at it premature stage of development.

Remember you looked into an ENGLISH dictionary giving you the meaning and history of an English word which does not apply to ALL languages.

Also this topic was addressed with ample sources http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 1179#41179

[RomeSweetHome]

Mogulxlnc Wrote:

Mr. Webmaster, somehow I think that you don't want to believe that there is one ALLAH. Specially you won't like to listen this from a MUSLIM. Therefore I suggest that you to find a CHRISTIAN Scholar whom you think is learned and able to understand your question and tell you that HIS MAJESTY can use the word "WE" for himself. Especially in Arabs the Chiefs and Kings and the Presidents usually use "WE" for themselves. It's quite natural over here in Islamic world.
If you really want to know that why ALLAH uses "WE" for Himself being SINGULAR, than find a man you believe and discuss the matter with. Please do keep us Posted!
One more thing, try to learn the English Language Structure, Because I think that the bestsellers have taken away a lot from you

I am an arab and I often listen to al jazzera and other news networks etc.. I have never ever heard of a arabic king or president use the word "WE" instead of the word "I", thats complete nonsense, unless that person (president etc..) is revering to him AND his goverment.

Mogulxlnc Wrote:

You poor soul!
That's what I can say for you. Remember, Quran is in ARABIC not in English. Naturally when you translate from one language to another you try to find equivalent words that can convey the message.

Naturally yes! but this doesnt happen with Abdullah Yusuf Ali's translation of the Quran where he delibratly targets Christians.

For example there is no word for trinity in the arabic language, yet in Abdullah Yusuf Ali's translation he has translated "dont say three" into "dont say trinity", there is a difference.

Mogulxlnc Wrote:

Arabic culture is far more richer than any other. Therefore you cannot compare English norms and decorems with ancient ARABIA. Norms prevailing in Ancient Arabia might have found their way in the western culture very late.
You are not even worth of a healthy debate. End of Discussion. Period.

Arabic culture is far more richer than ANY OTHER? That is your sole opinion, that is not a fact.

Here we are interested in facts not opinions, unless stated that it is an opinion by you, Not when you present your opinion as a fact.

[H2O]

I am an arab and I often listen to al jazzera and other news networks etc.. I have never ever heard of a arabic king or president use the word "WE" instead of the word "I", thats complete nonsense, unless that person (president etc..) is revering to him AND his goverment.

You answered your own delimah. "..him AND his government.." which is his power and authority that he rules by. Same applical use as what the brother propounded upon.

When Alllaah uses "WE" to refer to him self instead of "I" it is impersonal referencing Himself AND His Majesty.

I would say you are way off from the roots of your own language which has been polluted by western ideology that has affect the term use of our language (Arabic). Due to western influences, the language (Modern Arabic) has shifted dramatically over the last six centures which has adopted the same ideological fashion as English.

Also, the Arabic language is far more richer than English and even older than Hebrew. When the brother was addressing Arabic vs English there is no opinion to this which is blunt fact.

Both of us speak Arabic and English. If you care to demonstrate how the Arabic language is not richer than English, in which the brother addressed, we would like to see your example of it not being so and we will present our example to back the brother's statement that you attacked.

[webmaster]

Also, the Arabic language is far more richer than English and even older than Hebrew. When the brother was addressing Arabic vs English there is no opinion to this which is blunt fact.

Is the Quran written in Aramaic or Arabic?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_language



Just for reference Greek alphabet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_alphabet

Aramaic alphabet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_alphabet

The first known text in the Aramaic alphabet is from the Dead Sea Scrolls

Hebrew alphabet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_alphabet

The first known text in the Hebrew alphabet is from the Dead Sea Scrolls

Arabic alphabet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_alphabet

The first known text in the Arabic alphabet is a late fourth-century inscription from Jabal Ramm
It has only been a literary language for 1500 years!

Varieties of Arabic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varieties_of_Arabic

Can you provide some documents in the style of the Quran Arabic Language before 100ad to support what the Quran actually means?

[H2O]

Also, the Arabic language is far more richer than English and even older than Hebrew. When the brother was addressing Arabic vs English there is no opinion to this which is blunt fact.

In the above quote that you responded to, were we speaking about the Arabic Language in general or the Quran ?

Lets try to get you back on the topic which you Christians have a bad habit going off wondering into.

Can you provide some documents in the style of the Quran Arabic Language before 100ad to support what the Quran actually means?

We wasnt speaking about Quran Arabic language or Arabic text to the quote you responded to. We were speaking about the Arabic Language in general. Did the Arabic language exist before 100ad ? Yes, your own book tells you that.

We were speaking about the spoken language and you come off some band wagon speaking about text ? How ridiculous.

So now you open up a whole new can of worms, I hope you like eating worms.

Southern Arabic

Semitic language of southern Arabia and the island of Socotra. South Arabic belongs to the Southern Peripheral group of Semitic languages, along with Ge'ez, Amharic, Tigré, Tigrinya, and the other Semitic languages of Ethiopia, Eritrea, and The Sudan. Modern dialects of the language include Mahri, Shahri (Ehkali), Harsusi, and Bathari on the Arabian shore of the Indian Ocean and Suqutri on Socotra. Harsusi has been influenced by Arabic to a greater extent than have the other dialects.

Minaean, Sabaean, Qatabanian, and Hadramawtian are the four known South Arabic dialects of ancient times. The earliest South Arabic inscriptions, dating from the 8th century BCE, are in the Minaean dialect. Sabaean is the dialect of the majority of South Arabic inscriptions; the latest inscriptions are from the 6th century CE. The type of Semitic alphabet in which the ancient inscriptions are written has 29 consonant signs but does not indicate vowels.

Encyclopedia Britannica 2004

Where is Makkah located ? In southern Arabia. What branch of the Arabic language did the Makkans speak ? Southern Arabic. What branch of the Arabic language was the Quran revealed in ? Southern Arabic. In what Arabic dialect was the Quran written in ? Quraish dialect the dialect of the tribe Muhammad came from.

[webmaster]

Also, the Arabic language is far more richer than English and even older than Hebrew. When the brother was addressing Arabic vs English there is no opinion to this which is blunt fact.

If "We" is used as a blunt fact by Muslims then it matters as to the actual language used!

In the above quote that you responded to, were we speaking about the Arabic Language in general or the Quran ?

For you to state what the "WE" means in the Arabic Language in general then you need proof of writings before the Quran was written to back it up!

Lets try to get you back on the topic which you Christians have a bad habit going off wondering into.

Changing the topic when the truth is shown is when muslims start the mumble jumbo!

Can you provide some documents in the style of the Quran Arabic Language before 100ad to support what the Quran actually means?

We wasnt speaking about Quran Arabic language or Arabic text to the quote you responded to. We were speaking about the Arabic Language in general. Did the Arabic language exist before 100ad ? Yes, your own book tells you that.

It tells me the Aramaic language existed before 100ad.
You are avoiding the orginal question!

We were speaking about the spoken language and you come off some band wagon speaking about text ? How ridiculous.

Topic is "Why does Allah use the word "We" to refer to Himself

[H2O]

Oops ! I didnt get the additional stuff in before you responded. Wanna try again ?

[H2O]

Now lets see Webby.

English and Spanish are written with the same alphabet system, are they the same langauge ?

Iranians, And Arabs use Arabic Alphabets, is it the same language ?

The Arabic language did not always use the alphabet system it uses now, or at the time when the Quran was revealed, it was adopted after a period of time even before the Quran was revealed which does not mean that the language was derived from that laugauge it adopted its alphabet system from.

Before the northern semetic alphabet was adopted, southern Arabic used a different alphabet system all together.

As it is remined the oldest Arabic script are found in the Minaean dialect which used an alphabet system not dependent on the northern semitic alphabet.

Development and diffusion of alphabets > The South Semitic alphabet

The South Semitic, or Sabaean, branch remained within the confines of the Arabian Peninsula for most of its history. It was in use at the beginning of the 1st millennium BC. The most that can be said about its origins is that it neither developed from nor directly depended upon the North Semitic alphabet. It may have been derived, ultimately, from the proto-Sinaitic script, with some influence from the North Semitic. Offshoots from the South Semitic branch include the Minaean, Himyaritic, Qatabanic, and Hadhramautic alphabets in southern Arabia, and Thamudene, Dedanite, and Safaitic alphabets in the northern part of the peninsula. Numerous inscriptions in these alphabets are the principal source for the study of those once-flourishing kingdoms, including Saba' (the biblical Sheba), relegated by the rise of Islam to the backwaters of history.

The Sabaean offshoot, a graceful and elegant script consisting of 29 letters, spread into Africa, where it became the progenitor of the Ethiopic alphabet; this in turn gave birth to the modern Amharic, Tigré, Tigrinya, and other alphabets of modern Ethiopia. These are the only South Semitic scripts still in use today.

Encyclopedia Britannica 2004

[webmaster]

Minaean, Sabaean, Qatabanian, and Hadramawtian are the four known South Arabic dialects of ancient times. The earliest South Arabic inscriptions, dating from the 8th century BCE, are in the Minaean dialect.

Then give us some transalations into another language before Muhammad! I have asked for sources and you reply "The Arabic language did not always use the alphabet system it uses now, or at the time when the Quran was revealed, it was adopted after a period of time even before the Quran was revealed"

Some Proof Please!

Example:
The Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek and Aramaic before Christ. After Christ the 2 sides (Jews and Christians) seperated into using 2 languages for the text. We also have numerous other non-biblical text in Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew and etc lang. writings to understand what was the orginal meaning of words and context to words.

The English doesn't dictate the Greek and the English doesn't dictate the Hebrew etc Aramaic etc. To understand a Hebrew or Greek word we have enough sources to triple check the meaning even if the majority doesn't want to hear the truth of what the actually word means.

Example: Abortion not sorcery equals Grk pharmakeia
http://www.electrosnap.com/abortion/for ... postID=621

That pharmakeia (pharmakon), as used by St. Paul in his letter to the Galatians and St. John in the book of Revelation, apparently refers to the practice of abortion has added support in extrabiblical literature, both pagan and Christian. Plutarch (A.D. 46 - 120), a pagan, uses pharmakeia to note that it was especially used for contraception and abortion purposes (Romulus 22 of his Parallel Lives).

Do you understand the proof needed for "We" yet?

[H2O]

Then give us some transalations into another language before Muhammad! I have asked for sources and you reply "The Arabic language did not always use the alphabet system it uses now, or at the time when the Quran was revealed, it was adopted after a period of time even before the Quran was revealed"

Some Proof Please!

You went on ranting to infer that Arabic didnt become a langauge until just after 100ce which a bunch of Looney Tunes. Then you start to base you proof based on the current Arabic alphabet being derived from the northern semitic alphabets.

This is what I negated to your allegations about the exitence of the Arabic language it self, not its alphabet system that you started taking a roller coaster ride about.

Do you understand the proof needed for "We" yet ?

Yes, and it is clear and simple.

And your God is One God: there is no god but He, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. 2:163

Say: He Allah is One 112:1

Allah stated over and over that he is ONE and ONLY ONE G-D. When he refers to him self as "WE" it is not refering to another G-D other than himself. "WE" is is refering to Allah and his Majesty.

If you want proof that this other character of language was used, it was alread post on another thread we had this show down in. http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 1179#41179

Now do you want proof before the Quran. Well lets see. Does G-D ever in the Bible refer to himself as "WE" "US" "OUR" ?

Plural Pronouns

What about plural pronouns? Does God ever speak in the first person plural by using such terms as "Us," "We," and "Our"? If the authors of the Bible were Unitarian in belief, then we would not expect to find God speaking in the plural. But if Trinitarianism is true, then that is exactly what we would expect to find in the Bible.

The evidence is clear that plural pronouns are used in reference to God in the following passages:

Then God said, "Let Us make man Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. (Gen. 1:26- 27)

First, the word "make" (...) in the phrase "Let us make man" is a [b]plural verb.[/b] The Hebrew grammar cannot be ignored. The main verb as well as the pronouns are all plural. This would indicate that God is the "Us" and "Our" who is speaking.

Second, that the plural pronouns refer to God and not to angels is clear from the singular nouns "image" and "likeness." Man is not created in the two images or two likenesses - God's and the angels. We are created in the image and likeness of God.

Third, this is also demonstrated by the repetition of the word "image" in verse 27. If the "image" in which man was created was reflective of angels as well as God, it would not have been rendered in the singular, but in the plural.

Fourth, some anti-Trinitarians have attempted to dismiss the passage as an example of the plural of majesty (pluralis majestaticus), much like Queen Victoria of England who is reported to have said, "We are not amused."

The only problem with this argument is that there was no plural of majesty in the Hebrew language during biblical times. Rabbi Tzvi Nassi, a lecturer in Hebrew at Oxford University, explains:

Every one who is acquainted with the rudiments of the Hebrew and Chaldee languages, must know that God, in the holy Writings, very often spoke of Himself in the plural. The passages are numerous, in which, instead of a grammatical agreement between the subject and predicate, we meet with a construction, which some modern grammarians, who possess more of the so-called philosophical than of the real knowledge of the Oriental languages, call a pluralis excellentiae. This helps them out of every apparent difficulty. Such a pluralis excellentiae was, however, a thing unknown to Moses and the prophets. Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, David, and all the other kings, throughout TeNaKh (the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa) speak in the singular, and not as modern kings in the plural. They do not say we, but I, command; as in Gen. xli. 41; Dan. iii. 29; Ezra i. 2, etc.[5]

http://answering-islam.org.uk/Trinity/morey7.html

Now why did I quote Robery Morey the biggest hater and critic of Islam ? Cause he made a valid point (I do read criticism about islam, I am not shy like some of you). He has shown that G-D referes to himself in the plural pronoun just like in the Quran using plural verbs with "WE" "US" "OUR" . Do you agree ? Does it mean G-D with other gods ? Or does it mean Just ONE GOD ?

The matter of discripancy is what does He mean by such plural usage. Some Christians call it the "Plural of Majesty" some call it a reference to the Trinity, and Muslims say it is G-D and His Majesty.

Point blank does G-D refer to himself in the Plural in the Quran and in the Bible ? Yes. What does he mean by such a thing is a matter of dispute about such usage even among Christians.

However, such dispute is among your selves with you own book. Our book uses the same character usage but makes it clear that Alllaah is One G-D whom is indivisible, and that the plural pronoun usage is trickly identified with Allah's Majesty and not another entity with him or a part of him.

As you would use your scripture to prove your trinity doctrine in support of the plural usage in reference to G-D as discribed in the Bible, then repect the same when we do the same with our book that you do not believe in all together.

Whatever is upon it (The Earth) will perish and the Continance of your Lord (O Muhammad) will abide possessing all Majesty and all Glory. Quran 55:26,27

When Alllaah speaks as "WE" it is refering to Himself and His Majesty.

[RomeSweetHome]

H2O Wrote:

You answered your own delimah. "..him AND his government.." which is his power and authority that he rules by. Same applical use as what the brother propounded upon.

When Alllaah uses "WE" to refer to him self instead of "I" it is impersonal referencing Himself AND His Majesty.

Are you serious? I have never heard this from a imam or any religious scholar, is this your own explanation?

H20 Wrote:

Also, the Arabic language is far more richer than English and even older than Hebrew. When the brother was addressing Arabic vs English there is no opinion to this which is blunt fact.

Older then Hebrew? what dialect of arabic are you talking about? the "brother" said culture so I replied concerning culture.

H20 Wrote:

Both of us speak Arabic and English. If you care to demonstrate how the Arabic language is not richer than English, in which the brother addressed, we would like to see your example of it not being so and we will present our example to back the brother's statement that you attacked.

I never said what language was richer or "better", Your "brother" said that his culture or the arabic culture was better then any other culture, I simply stated that was a opinion and not a fact. When he said ANY culture that doesnt just imply the English culture, it also implies the Chinese and every other culture on the face of this planet.

H20 Wrote:

Where is Makkah located ? In southern Arabia. What branch of the Arabic language did the Makkans speak ? Southern Arabic. What branch of the Arabic language was the Quran revealed in ? Southern Arabic. In what Arabic dialect was the Quran written in ? Quraish dialect the dialect of the tribe Muhammad came from.

Is that so? What about Uthman and the burning of the Qurans? I thought that he burned all the Qurans that where in a different dialect and kept the Quraish dialect? Also todays Quran contains casras, dummehs etc... all these didnt exsist in the original arabic language.

Muslims claim that not a dot has been added to the Quran or taken away! How mistaken are you? Its very much the opposite, thousands of dots have been added when originally no dots where present.

H20 Wrote:

English and Spanish are written with the same alphabet system, are they the same langauge?

Yeah you could say that, except the spainish have 3 extra letters.

Ch, Ll and Ñ.

Nothing you have said can honestly be used in support to why Allah in the Quran says "WE" instead of "I" when reffering to himself.

Could Allah be a truine God?

Peace

[(Omega)]

Nothing you have said can honestly be used in support to why Allah in the Quran says "WE" instead of "I" when reffering to himself.

Could Allah be a truine God?

The only thing thats consists of three when Allaah applies the word "we" is the Dragon, the Beast and the False Prophet!

And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty. Revelation 16:13,14

[H2O]

Are you serious? I have never heard this from a imam or any religious scholar, is this your own explanation?

You most be comatose. And you said you were an Arab ? Geesh, dont worry your not the first Christian Arab I have incountered. As a matter of fact I would rather deal with your kind than the Christian amarakiyyati wa aswadi .

It is a feature of literary style in Arabic that a person may refer to himself by the pronoun ‘nahnu’ (we) for respect or glorification. He may also use the word ‘ana’ (I), indicating one person, or the third person ‘huwa’ (he). All three styles are used in the Qur’an, where Allaah addresses the Arabs in their own tongue

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, 4/143

Allaah, may He be glorified and exalted, sometimes refers to Himself in the singular, by name or by use of a pronoun, and sometimes by use of the plural, as in the phrase (which translated means): ‘Verily, We have given you a manifest victory” [al-Fath 48:1], and other similar phrases. But Allaah never refers to Himself by use of the dual, because the plural refers to the respect that He deserves, and may refer to His names and attributes, whereas the dual refers to a specific number (and nothing else), and He is far above that.

These words, innaa ("Verily We") and nahnu ("We"), and other forms of the plural, may be used by one person speaking on behalf of a group, or they may be used by one person for purposes of respect or glorification, as is done by some monarchs when they issue statements or decrees in which they say " We have decided…" etc. [This is known in English as "The Royal We" – Translator]. In such cases, only one person is speaking but the plural is used for respect. The One Who is more deserving of respect than any other is Allaah, may He be glorified and exalted, so when He says in the Qur'an innaa ("Verily We") and nahnu ("We"), it is for respect and glorification, not to indicate plurality of numbers. If an aayah of this type is causing confusion, it is essential to refer to the clear, unambiguous aayaat for clarification, and if a Christian, for example, insists on taking ayaat such as

"Verily, We: it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e., the Qur'an)"


[al-Hijr 15:9 – interpretation of the meaning] as proof of divine plurality, we may refute this claim by quoting such clear and unambiguous aayaat as (interpretation of the meanings):

"And your god is One God, there is none who has the right to be worshipped but He, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful" [al-Baqarah 2:163]


and

"Say: He is Allaah, the One" [al-Ikhlaas 112:1]


and other aayaat which can only be interpreted in one way. Thus confusion will be dispelled for the one who is seeking the truth. Every time Allaah uses the plural to refer to Himself, it is based on the respect and honour that He deserves, and on the great number of His names and attributes, and on the great number of His troops and angels.

Al-'Aqeedah al-Tadmuriyyah by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, p. 75, 109.

In regards to the presence of the "us" and "our" in the Old Testament, this is actually a proof against Christian belief since they were never understood in the way Christians understand them until the time of ‘St’ Paul or later. In Semitic usage, it is customary for one in authority to speak of himself in the plural. For examples of this in the Bible, see 2 Samuel 16:20 and Ezra 4:16-19. Almighty God, in the Qur'an, uses the Arabic word for "We" when He makes some statements, but no one who knows the Arabic language ever understood it as an argument for indication of plurality. This is what we call the "Plural of Majesty", and it is mentioned in almost any book on Arabic grammar.

English has much the same thing. When a King or Queen issues a proclamation, they say "We, the King of England..." This is also done by monarchs in Arabic-speaking countries. Who are they talking to when they do this? Their intended audience of course, not themselves. The examples given above (i.e. 2 Samuel 16:20 and Ezra 4:16-19), also demonstrate this.

So it is suffice to say that plural forms, especially in Arabic and Hebrew and even English, don't necessarily imply plurality. The claim that "plurality of the Godhead" is implied in the language of the Old Testament (which is admittedly by the way imprecise) is just an invention by Christians in order to fill a previously determined theological need. The Greek translation of the Old Testament (known as the "Septuagint" translates "'Eloyhim" the plural form of God, as "ho Theos" (i.e. the God). This is a SINGULAR translation which was done at least two centuries prior to the coming of Jesus, peace be upon him, and shows that the implication of plurality in these words is a purely Christian invention. In spite of all this, if Christians still want to believe that the "Godhead", as they often refer to it as, is "plural", then that belief is to their own discredit.

It should also be mentioned that it's not just the incoherence of Christianity that leads one to these conclusions, because on top of all of this we have a new, CLEAR and unambiguous revelation - the Qur'an - that contradicts the Christian claims. Whether one agrees that the Qur'an is Almighty God's final revelation to mankind or not, the guidance in it is CLEAR. That the Qur'an's central message is the Unity of God is indisputable.

The message of the Bible isn't so clear. If God is merciful and really wants all men to be saved by believing in the Christian doctrines and beliefs, why didn't Jesus make the message clear? Why is most of the New Testament written by Paul, who still didn't make things clear?

Almighty God, as He describes Himself in the Qur'an, is Merciful and Compassionate towards His Creation, and one way which He manifests this is by making His revelations clear and comprehensible - even to the limited human mind.

Abu Iman 'Abd ar-Rahman Robert Squires

Maybe you need to do a refresh on our language, it seems you fell short. You are the first Nasaraa I have heard comment in negation on such a thing. But again even you Nasaraa are in dispute about the plural use.

Older then Hebrew? what dialect of arabic are you talking about? the "brother" said culture so I replied concerning culture.

What dialect do you think I am talking about and what difference does it make, isnt it all Arabic regardless of what dialect it is ?

Did you READ the quote above from britannica ? The OLDEST SCRIPT of the Arabic language dates back to 8BCE in the Southern Arabic dialect of
Minaean in which the alphabet system they used dates back to the begining of the first millinium BCE before they adopted the northern semitic alphabet system.

Not to mention southern Arabic has remained more stable than all the Semitic languages with less influence from other language cause of its isolation. In this same region is where our Nabi came from. Hebrew is NOT a stable semitic language. It is mixed with other semitic languages such as Egyptian, Arabic, Chaldea, Aramaic, and Cannan due to the enfluences the Iraelites incountered as they were subdued by various nations.

In what Arabic dialect was the Quran written in ? Quraish dialect the dialect of the tribe Muhammad came from.

Is that so? What about Uthman and the burning of the Qurans? I thought that he burned all the Qurans that where in a different dialect and kept the Quraish dialect?

Duh ! You basically said the same thing I said. What did I say ? I said the Quran was revealed in the dialect of the Quraish which was the dialect of Muhammad. When Uthman ordered the burning of the other copies of the Quran that differed in RECITAL ORDER by the people of Iraq and Sham. What did Uthman say to Zaid when he made additional copies in there correct order to send them out to the people of Iraq ? Lets refresh your comatose memory.

Volumn 006, Book 061, Hadith Number 510. (Al-Bukhari..and same reported by Muslim, Thirmidhi, Abu Dawud ahadeeth)
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Anas bin Malik : Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were Waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. Said bin Thabit added, "A Verse from Surat Ahzab was missed by me when we copied the Qur'an and I used to hear Allah's Apostle reciting it. So we searched for it and found it with Khuzaima bin Thabit Al-Ansari. (That Verse was): 'Among the Believers are men who have been true in their covenant with Allah.' (33.23)

Now what was this difference of Recital or Reading ?

Volumn 006, Book 061, Hadith Number 515. (Bukhari and same reported Muslim)
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Yusuf bin Mahk : While I was with 'Aisha, the mother of the Believers, a person from Iraq came and asked, "What type of shroud is the best?" 'Aisha said, "May Allah be merciful to you! What does it matter?" He said, "O mother of the Believers! Show me (the copy of) your Qur'an," She said, "Why?" He said, "In order to compile and arrange the Qur'an according to it, for people recite it with its Suras not in proper order." 'Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read first? (Be informed) that the first thing that was revealed thereof was a Sura from Al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire. When the people embraced Islam, the Verses regarding legal and illegal things were revealed. If the first thing to be revealed was: 'Do not drink alcoholic drinks.' people would have said, 'We will never leave alcoholic drinks,' and if there had been revealed, 'Do not commit illegal sexual intercourse, 'they would have said, 'We will never give up illegal sexual intercourse.' While I was a young girl of playing age, the following Verse was revealed in Mecca to Muhammad: 'Nay! But the Hour is their appointed time (for their full recompense), and the Hour will be more grievous and more bitter.' (54.46) Sura Al-Baqara (The Cow) and Surat An-Nisa (The Women) were revealed while I was with him." Then 'Aisha took out the copy of the Qur'an for the man and dictated to him the Verses of the Suras (in their proper order).

Also, the oral Quran always had preference over the written copy of the Quran. The diacrical marks were intruduced to assure the proper reading of the Quran by those whos mother tongue was not Arabic. Adding diacrital marks did and does not alter the Quran. Remember the Quran was NEVER in book form. The Quran was established orally and preserved orally. The need to write it down in book form was done to preserve its recital order in which many of the ahafeez had died in wars.

Yeah you could say that, except the spainish have 3 extra letters

You forgot to address the issue of Iranians and Lebanese etc that use the Arabic alphabet system but their language is not Arabic. The point I brought up is that Webby introduced such reasoning to infer the origin and era of the Arabic language cause of its Alphabet system adoption is strickly nonsense.

Could Allah be a truine God?

Why Triune ? The ideology is so stuck in your sculls that all you can think is "three" ? When you Nasaraa see plural you think "THREE" . That called mere programmed indoctrination.

For Christians who dont believe in the Quran you sure want to dictate the Aqeedah of the Quran like if you do. Wnat to show me where Allah infers himself to being TRI in the Quran ?

[H2O]

And your God is One God: there is no god but He, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. 2:163

Say: He Allah is One 112:1

For the sake of our English speaking spectators. Does "ONE" in 2:163 and 112:1 mean the same same ? No. In English yes, but in the original language of the Quran, No. How ?

In 2:163 which is repeated many times through out the Quran, perhaps hundreds of times, the Arabic word used for "ONE" is "waahid".

In 112:1 the Arabic word for "ONE" is "ahad" in which both arabic words are derived from the same root.

What is the significant difference between these two words? THe significance of waahid means 1 in number that also denotes the first and the begining ~ awwal.

The significance of Ahad means One that is indivisable and absolute in oneness.

Both verses discribe Allah's oneness which leave no room for ambiguity.

On the other hand, being that Christians may claim they worship ONE ~ waahid G-D that is a TRIUNE G-D as they believe they cannot claim their TRIUNE G-D ~ the man Jesus whom they worship ~ to be "Ahad" in which the word is unapplicable and contradictory to their monotheistic beliefs.

(Note: We are only addressing Trinitarian Christian, as all Christian no not believe in the Trinity.)

[RomeSweetHome]

H20 Wrote:

You most be comatose. And you said you were an Arab ? Geesh, dont worry your not the first Christian Arab I have incountered. As a matter of fact I would rather deal with your kind than the Christian amarakiyyati wa aswadi .

Comatose? I am fully awake my friend. Ummm Well I am Lebanese!

Christian amarakiyyati wa aswadi??? I have no clue what you are trying to say here.

H20 Wrote:

Maybe you need to do a refresh on our language, it seems you fell short. You are the first Nasaraa I have heard comment in negation on such a thing. But again even you Nasaraa are in dispute about the plural use.

Agreed.

H20 Wrote:

What dialect do you think I am talking about and what difference does it make, isnt it all Arabic regardless of what dialect it is ?

It is all arabic yes, but if you have different dialects often different words will come up too, or the same words that can mean different things. Want a example?

H20 Wrote:

Duh ! You basically said the same thing I said. What did I say ? I said the Quran was revealed in the dialect of the Quraish which was the dialect of Muhammad. When Uthman ordered the burning of the other copies of the Quran that differed in RECITAL ORDER by the people of Iraq and Sham. What did Uthman say to Zaid when he made additional copies in there correct order to send them out to the people of Iraq ? Lets refresh your comatose memory.

Oh my days! do I really have to go into depth with you about this?

The whole Quran was not completely compiled into a book until roughly 25 years after mohammeds death, although it did exsist, but rather on pieces of woods, papers, palm leaves, bones…etc.

There is even a Hadith that says a goat ate a piece of the Quran!! want the hadith?

What about the Copy of the Quran by Hafsa? Uthman returned Hafsa's copy of the Quran to her. Her copy however was later burned by Marwan b. Hakam (d.65/684). Why?

Burning of Hafsa's copy was the last chapter in covering up the addition of two false verses in sura 9 as later discovered.

What about the Tashkent Quran? I can't even be botherd to go into this in full to tell you the truth, been there done that.

Let me show you a few differences in the Qurans that we have.

The "original" Tashkent manuscript of the Quran of 20:3 is without nun but the modern version includes it






The Tashkent manuscript of the Quran in 36:20 is missing the Yaa and Nun which the modern version has. The Tashkent manuscript in 36:21 is missing a Meem which the modern version has.


The Tashkent manuscript in 20:108 is without seen which is in the modern version.






And many more examples that can make this post very long.

H20 Wrote:

Also, the oral Quran always had preference over the written copy of the Quran. The diacrical marks were intruduced to assure the proper reading of the Quran by those whos mother tongue was not Arabic. Adding diacrital marks did and does not alter the Quran. Remember the Quran was NEVER in book form. The Quran was established orally and preserved orally. The need to write it down in book form was done to preserve its recital order in which many of the ahafeez had died in wars.

The diacrical marks where inserted by whom exactly? and at what date? It has been proven that one diacrical mark can change the meaning of one arabic word into 11 meanings!

You say many of the ahafeez died in war? Very true.

"Many of the passages of the Qur'an that were sent down were known by those who died on the day of Yamama ... but they were not known by those who survived them, nor were they written down, nor had Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman (by that time) collected the Qur'an, nor were they found with even one (person) after them." (Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif, p. 23).

Missing passages from the Quran?

Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were Waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. Said bin Thabit added, "A Verse from Surat Ahzab was missed by me when we copied the Qur'an and I used to hear Allah's Apostle reciting it. So we searched for it and found it with Khuzaima bin Thabit Al-Ansari. (That Verse was): 'Among the Believers are men who have been true in their covenant with Allah.' (33.23)

Here we see how the problem of having different versions of the Qur'an was fixed. It was fixed by Uthman standardising one version of the Qur'an and ordering that all others be burnt. Thus even the "seven" variations that Muhammad allowed were removed.

Nobody around Muhammad's time considered the Quraishi Dialect to be any more eloquent and proper than anybody elses dialect. Notice that neither in the Hadiths or even the Quran do we see that the Quraish being extoled for their language.

H20 Wrote:

You forgot to address the issue of Iranians and Lebanese etc that use the Arabic alphabet system but their language is not Arabic. The point I brought up is that Webby introduced such reasoning to infer the origin and era of the Arabic language cause of its Alphabet system adoption is strickly nonsense.

So im not speaking arabic?

H20 Wrote:

For Christians who dont believe in the Quran you sure want to dictate the Aqeedah of the Quran like if you do. Wnat to show me where Allah infers himself to being TRI in the Quran ?

I guess we are trying to do as the Mulsims do with the Bible. Trying to prove Mohammed is in the Scriptures ect... Muslims go a little more further by trying to find Mohammed in the hindu scriptures too, it amazes me.

H20 Wrote:

(Note: We are only addressing Trinitarian Christian, as all Christian no not believe in the Trinity.)

"Christians" that dont believe in the Trinity are not Christians, they are a heretical cult.


Peace

[H2O]

Christian amarakiyyati wa aswadi??? I have no clue what you are trying to say here.

Your Lebanese, I didnt know. Sorry I dont speak Lebanese and of course you wouldnt understand in Fus'ha Arabiyyah.

It is all arabic yes, but if you have different dialects often different words will come up too, or the same words that can mean different things. Want a example?

Dont you think I know this ? Your lebanese. In your native language you have some Arabic words that you pronounce differently from the Arabic of the Hijazi to Yemen, but most of your language is different all together.

The whole Quran was not completely compiled into a book until roughly 25 years after mohammeds death, although it did exsist, but rather on pieces of woods, papers, palm leaves, bones…etc.

Are like ok ? Do you want us to talk in Arabic if you wish so you can understand better cause for some reason your not understand English very well. I said:

..Remember the Quran was NEVER in book form. The Quran was established orally and preserved orally. The need to write it down in book form was done to preserve its recital order in which many of the ahafeez had died in wars.

The authoritive source of the Quran was Orally transmitted. The text did not have authority over the oral transmision. The parts and pieces that were written that you mentioned were for people to learn and teach to memory.

There is even a Hadith that says a goat ate a piece of the Quran!! want the hadith?

The Quran was established orally and preserved orally

When Zaid first compiled the text into on complete book it was preferenced by the Oral Quran, which makes the written text a secondary source, not the primary source, that didnt have authority over the Oral Quran preserved by the ahafeez as it is today.

Even today, a hafeez corrects the written Quran in its tashkeel, or misspelled words.

What about the Tashkent Quran? I can't even be botherd to go into this in full to tell you the truth, been there done that.

I would love to entertain this.

Let me show you a few differences in the Qurans that we have.

Yea lets see your illusionary explanation.

The "original" Tashkent manuscript of the Quran of 20:3 is without nun but the modern version includes it...

...The Tashkent manuscript of the Quran in 36:20 is missing the Yaa and Nun which the modern version has. The Tashkent manuscript in 36:21 is missing a Meem which the modern version has.

The Tashkent copy have the letters laam meem = LM ~ lima the modern script has laam meem noon = LMN ~ liman"

There is no need for the "Noon" in script for an Arab cause it is NEVER PRONOUNCED ie SILENT or DROPPED, in Tajweed reading in either of the Tashkent or modern script.

The Arabic reads in both :

illaa tadh'kiratal-limayyakh'shaa

With or with out "yaa" , another silent consonant , in script it is pronounced the same as above.

The Tashkent copy did not textualize the silent consonants cause there was no need for it with the Arabicists.

Here is another example of the name Alllaah. It is spelled in arabic script as alif laam laam hah, but pronunced with alif maqsoorah that is never written.

The Tashkent manuscript in 20:108 is without seen which is in the modern version.

This is easy. That is a script error in the Tashkent text. Hve yu evr misselled a word but stil undrstod what wsa being red ? I do it all the time. But you understood what I said right ?

Wow ! I am sure when you have written in Arabic you missed out a letter in a word but it was still undertood what you meant which was not read the way you spelled it cause the reader understood what it was you were saying.

By the way, why didnt you tell us you were plagerizing you posted information off of an Islamic website ? http://www.submission.org/quran/protect.html

I would remind our spectators that this same website that this Lebanese Christain plagerized and twisted explains this difference and the proof of the preservation of the Quran. Our Lebanese Christian merely took things out of there perspective to use them to his manipulative advantage.

However as I have said before over and over to this lost bewildered Lebanese Christian, dont get me wrong I love Lebanese people I almost married one , the Quran was preseved Orally in its reading as the web site you plagerized from said:

Now that we have the Mathematical Miracle of the Quran, we know that the corrections made to the Uthmanic manuscript, that was corrected to the memorized Quran transmitted orally from one generation to the other was all planned by the Almighty who promised to preserve the Quran

In which we said before:

The Quran was established orally and preserved orally....The authoritive source of the Quran was Orally transmitted. The text did not have authority over the oral transmision

You Christian are merely trying to drag our scripture in the same catagory as you own.

So im not speaking arabic?

No. Its called Lebanese, you speak Lebanese. You may understand some Arabic as it may be affiliated with your native language. As a beduin will tell you Lebanese is not Arabic, your language is not of the Hijaz. Your grammar is different from Fus'ha Arabiyyah.

Just as with the plagerizing game you did, if you claim you understand Fus'ha Arabiyyah which is the standard Hijazi Arabiyyah I will take you to the test on the this forum. Try me I dare you !

"Christians" that dont believe in the Trinity are not Christians, they are a heretical cult.

That why your kind, the Trinitarians, persecuted those Christians that rejected such beliefs such as Arius who was Bishop of the Church of Alexander whos followers were also Antioch were executed if they did not accept the Trinitarian doctrine after 325 ac.

[RomeSweetHome]

H20 Wrote:

Your Lebanese, I didnt know. Sorry I dont speak Lebanese and of course you wouldnt understand in Fus'ha Arabiyyah.

You didn't know that I was Lebanese? Didn't the flag give it away just a bit? saying you dont speak Lebanese doesnt make sense, what you probably mean is that you dont speak arabic in the Lebanese dialect, oh and btw I do understand Arabic fus'ha.

H20 Wrote:

Dont you think I know this ? Your lebanese. In your native language you have some Arabic words that you pronounce differently from the Arabic of the Hijazi to Yemen, but most of your language is different all together.

Well actually no, it obviously sounds different due to the dialect but its not a different language like you are asserting.

H20 Wrote:

Are like ok ? Do you want us to talk in Arabic if you wish so you can understand better cause for some reason your not understand English very well. I said:

Are like ok? what do u mean by that? your not understand english very well? seems like you are the one having trouble with your english my friend.

H20 Wrote:

This is easy. That is a script error in the Tashkent text. Hve yu evr misselled a word but stil undrstod what wsa being red ? I do it all the time. But you understood what I said right ?

Wow ! I am sure when you have written in Arabic you missed out a letter in a word but it was still undertood what you meant which was not read the way you spelled it cause the reader understood what it was you were saying.

well thats because you are using the English alphabet. In arabic a single
"dot" can change the meaning of a word to roughly 11 meanings, that can therefore change the meaning of a entire sentence and so forth.

H20 Wrote:

By the way, why didnt you tell us you were plagerizing you posted information off of an Islamic website ? http://www.submission.org/quran/protect.html

I would remind our spectators that this same website that this Lebanese Christain plagerized and twisted explains this difference and the proof of the preservation of the Quran. Our Lebanese Christian merely took things out of there perspective to use them to his manipulative advantage.

I didn't tell you I was plagerizing because im not. I get my information and sources from the Internet, books and from the TV that is no secret.

The fact is I am in the process of making a massive article on Islam and I have taken a whole lot of stuff from the internet, books and things that are relevant on TV and Newpapers. I am dividing the article into chapters, one chapter is about the Quran etc... So I have included this information that I "plagerized" into the chapter. I have simple extracted it (from my saved file on Word) and posted it here as it is relevant to our discusstion.

thank you for posting the site it will be very useful to me, I may wish to refer to it in the future.

So in other words keep your pants on.

H20 Wrote:

No. Its called Lebanese, you speak Lebanese. You may understand some Arabic as it may be affiliated with your native language. As a beduin will tell you Lebanese is not Arabic, your language is not of the Hijaz. Your grammar is different from Fus'ha Arabiyyah.

Arabic is the official language in roughly 25 nations, over 260 million people speak Arabic, from Iraq to Morocco, Lebanon happens to be a part of that. Lebanese people speak Arabic with different dialects or accents. All children learn the official language in school which is the arabic fus'ha.

H20 Wrote:

Just as with the plagerizing game you did, if you claim you understand Fus'ha Arabiyyah which is the standard Hijazi Arabiyyah I will take you to the test on the this forum. Try me I dare you !

When you say fus'ha are we speaking about the same thing? The common arabic language that is spoken by all arab nations when they wish to communicate with each other? I personally understand Fus'ha but I do not speak it, it actually annoys me, I dont like the accent. I wasnt educated in Lebanon, I speak arabic but in the Lebanese dialect.

Go ahead Test me.

H20 Wrote:

That why your kind, the Trinitarians, persecuted those Christians that rejected such beliefs such as Arius who was Bishop of the Church of Alexander whos followers were also Antioch were executed if they did not accept the Trinitarian doctrine after 325 ac.

Although it is true that the doctrine of the Trinity was not officially formulated as a doctrine until the fourth century, this in no way detracts from the fact that the Church did hold to a Trinitarian pattern of belief prior to that time.

It was only in the fourth century when the Church was challenged by Arius of Alexandria who asserted that Christ was not God but rather a creation, that the debate around the Godhead really began. Prior to the challenge of Arius, the Church had never before had to contend with such a concentrated attack.

But the point is that the Church had to have already had a belief in the Deity of Christ before it could be attacked. Christ's Deity was always believed by the Church but was officially declared at the Council of Nicea in 325.

The same is true for the related doctrine of the Trinity. It was inevitable that the storm which surrounded the doctrine of the Deity of Christ would eventually lead to discussion about the Holy Spirit as well. Eventually, the Personhood, and Deity of the Holy Spirit was asserted at the Council of Constantinople in 381 in response to a number of Church leaders who disputed this. However, as with the Deity of Christ, there could not have been a dispute about the Deity of the Holy Spirit if there hadn't already been an existing belief which followed this pattern.

The doctrine of the Trinity is at the heart of Christianity.


Peace

[H2O]

You didn't know that I was Lebanese? Didn't the flag give it away just a bit?

Actually I saw the flag yes but what threw me for a spin is your name "RomeSweetHome" didnt think that a Lebanese Christian would like Rome especially what the Roman Church and the Crusaders did to them and the people of that region in the past.

So no I didnt take it seriously with a name like that. That would be like me running around here with the Palestinian flag with the name "Israelsweethome" or with the American flag with the name "Saudihomesweet" if you get what I mean.

Are like ok? what do u mean by that? your not understand english very well? seems like you are the one having trouble with your english my friend.

I missed out a word. Its kinda Hard to type and work at same time so please excuse my English. Are you like Ok ? That what I meant as I was jesting you.

well thats because you are using the English alphabet. In arabic a single
"dot" can change the meaning of a word to roughly 11 meanings, that can therefore change the meaning of a entire sentence and so forth.

I agree. But this is not the case with what you tried to assert. And if so which I have seen it happen before you can tell strait off the top what the word or letter is in context whereas before they never used dots or vowel signs in which they autmatically knew. Just like today when you go to Al-Jazira website there are no tashkeel but you know how to pronounce the words as you read along and what they mean. This same system was inserted into the Hebrew and Aramaic script as well to uniform its text for proper reading.

Again we have an Oral Quran and a written Quran. Never did the written Quran hold preference over the Oral Quran. It was and has always been the oral Quran that has proofed the written Quran in copying and printing errors and misspelled words or letters left out of the text and the correction of tashkeel if needed.

Your Job as a critic from this point is to find flaw in the Oral Quran in negation of it being not preserved, not running behind secondary sources that hold no authority over the primary.

Also whenever they publish Quran's the master print is proofed by Ahafeez.

I didn't tell you I was plagerizing because im not. I get my information and sources from the Internet, books and from the TV that is no secret.

If that is true why when you right click on the text images which are URL images and then properties they go back to that Islamic website ? Your readers are being mislead thinking these are your findings and your words which have merely been edited from their correct perspective.

Lets put it to the test for our prospectors. Right Click on the Quranic Image text then click on properties that Rome posted. The URL address goes right back to that islamic website where the URL was extracted from. You can only post URL Images on this forum website in which you have to be perfectly aware of, but Rome is acting like its his first time knowing about that website.

But the point is that the Church had to have already had a belief in the Deity of Christ before it could be attacked. Christ's Deity was always believed by the Church but was officially declared at the Council of Nicea in 325.

I agree to this. But also those who opposed the trinitarian doctrine also existed at the same time. People were divided about Jesus from since the time he walke on the Earth. You own book tells you that.

Arius nor his mentor were the founders of their doctrine it was something that pre-existed. The Church of Antioch had such a belief from since Christianity steppped foot on its door step.

The dispute was put to surface by Constintine to settle the debate in which he needed an empire with one doctrine to benefit his rule. The tables got turned on Arius, and many other Bishops and their follows. We are not talking about a little group of people but a whole nation including Bishops who opposed the trinitarian doctrine.

[Liberate]

Again we have an Oral Quran and a written Quran. Never did the written Quran hold preference over the Oral Quran. It was and has always been the oral Quran that has proofed the written Quran in copying and printing errors and misspelled words or letters left out of the text and the correction of tashkeel if needed.

Theres just one problem, tell us H2O how the koran was collated?
If Zaid or Uthman only required an oral transmission why didn't they just go to a hafeez or two and get them to recite while they write down why did they bother to collect the leaves, barks, animal skin "the quran was written upon"?


It looks like H2O has been continuing in his usual vein of making it up as he goes along, first he tells us he became a muslim because of the prediction of saudi oil in sura 9:28 when showed that said verse has nothing of the sort he abandons the thread and hopes nobody notices that the basis of his faith is hanging by a thread, when pointed out by fellow muslims his interpretations, personal explanations and ridicule of islamic hadiths fly in the face of respected islamic imams and scholars, coming from an individual without a qualification to his name to interpret islam for anybody other than his ego and desire to patronize on each and every post anybody he suspects doesn't know arabic he simply retreats for a while and pops up when he hopes things have quietened down...

Those meccan arabs must have some superb mental retention to memorise a 114 or was it 119 tome from end to end in a 23 span without having anything to read or write, when was the last time you memorised notes for the last 23 yrs without having so much as a piece of paper to jut things down in a 23 yr period???

bukhari 6 201 (Narrated Zaid bin Thabit Al-Ansari:... So I started locating [What does locate mean in relation to the context H2O?]the Qur'anic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who knew it by heart). I found with Khuzaima two verses of Surah at-Tauba which I had not found with anybody else...

Your comment at the beginning of this post has no basis in islam, let me get this straight we need an oral koran to proof text a written koran but we need a written koran to obtain an oral transmission? do you see our never ending loop?

Maybe you should make up your own religion, it is becoming ridiculous the levels you are prepared to go to deceive, do you think allah will let you in the 70 houris a room jannah for lying like this?


Or maybe this is a fabricated hadith??

But the point is that the Church had to have already had a belief in the Deity of Christ before it could be attacked. Christ's Deity was always believed by the Church but was officially declared at the Council of Nicea in 325.

I agree to this. But also those who opposed the trinitarian doctrine also existed at the same time.

Those who opposed the trinitarian doctrine subliminally somehow infers that they were closet muslims?

Let us be clear what Ariuis believed that led to the council of Nicae to clear what was already MAINSTREAM christianity.

1) Jesus was the Son of God

2) He died on the cross

3) He was not human

In the light of this please tell us how those 'unitarians' muslims like to shout about support the islamic cause? btw how is humble_guest these days? I remember he came up with the same argument about this phantom group of 'unitarians' who believed Jesus was just a prophet in the same vein as Mohammed and the trinitarians hunted them down and annhilated them totally until Mohammed came to resurrect the true doctrine, when pressed he refused to give us a name for this phantom group of 'unitarians' because if he had he wouldn't have had a leg to stand on. In case that is your argument the nestorians believed Jesus is the Father that was their heresy and is the heresy of unitarianism, nothing to do with the belief in one God as you would like your audience to think or maybe at this stage you will claim muslims understand unitarianism to be belief in one God and nothing more like you claimed when your allah/jibreel/Mohammed called Mary the mother of Jesus a literal "sister of Aaron" the brother of Moses.

The dispute was put to surface by Constintine to settle the debate in which he needed an empire with one doctrine to benefit his rule. The tables got turned on Arius, and many other Bishops and their follows. We are not talking about a little group of people but a whole nation including Bishops who opposed the trinitarian doctrine.

Do these bishops and whole 'nation' who opposed the trinitarian doctrine have a name? Would you care to tell us what name their doctrine was?

Would it happen to be called Nestorianism?

This is in essence what the heresy is:

When Jesus said "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me" according to the nestorians He was talking to Himself because He is the Father does this make sense?, I am well aware muslims still use this argument against the trinity.

[RomeSweetHome]

H20 Wrote:

Actually I saw the flag yes but what threw me for a spin is your name "RomeSweetHome" didnt think that a Lebanese Christian would like Rome especially what the Roman Church and the Crusaders did to them and the people of that region in the past.

So no I didnt take it seriously with a name like that. That would be like me running around here with the Palestinian flag with the name "Israelsweethome" or with the American flag with the name "Saudihomesweet" if you get what I mean.

If you knew anything about Lebanese people you would know that they spoke arabic in a different dialect, you would also know that the Christians in Lebanon are roughly all Maronite Catholic and that is why my name is ROMEsweethome as my spiritual leader (the pope) is in Rome.

Ignorance plays its part once again.

H20 Wrote:

If that is true why when you right click on the text images which are URL images and then properties they go back to that Islamic website ? Your readers are being mislead thinking these are your findings and your words which have merely been edited from their correct perspective.

Lets put it to the test for our prospectors. Right Click on the Quranic Image text then click on properties that Rome posted. The URL address goes right back to that islamic website where the URL was extracted from. You can only post URL Images on this forum website in which you have to be perfectly aware of, but Rome is acting like its his first time knowing about that website.

First of all I told you that I have been to that site, and I told you that I have copied and pasted relevant issues on that site onto my word and included it into a article that I am in the process of making.

What I didn't tell you because I thought it would just end there, is that it is saved like this in my word:





Image URL is: http://www.submission.org/images/t-20-3.gif

Thats what it looks like on my word.

I write the URL because in word you simply copy and paste a image you dont need a code to enter a image. I simple write down the URL in order to be able to post it into Forums like this one if needed, very simple try it.

You are trying to show people that I am a liar, but you are just ignorant and you are quick to jump to conclusions.


Very intresting post Liberate did H20 really say that he became a muslim because of the supposed prediction of Saudi oil in Sura 9:28? LOL I couldn't stop laughing.


Peace

[Liberate]

Very intresting post Liberate did H20 really say that he became a muslim because of the supposed prediction of Saudi oil in Sura 9:28? LOL I couldn't stop laughing.


Peace

Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 09:51 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:


...When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him. Deuteronomy 18:20-22



Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.

Quote:


O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise (9:2




Allah said to the muslim Arabs in the time of Muhammad that HE will soon enrich them. And it doesnt take a 12th grader to know the arabs were a poor nation at that time in which the Biazantine and Persian empires didnt dominate them. When did the Arab muslim of that region become RICH ? Who supplies the 1/3 of the world's oil and has the LARGEST oil reserves in the world. Is not Saudi Arabia one of the richest countries in the world that is now a GOLD MIND ?
...

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... abia#35578

He reiterates...

Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 12:31 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liberate wrote:
...(btw there are no prophecies in it and you know it, the byzantines and persians alledge prophecy was done over a bet ( haram in islam) and was out by several years, the conflict occurred and ended 613-14AD to 627AD-628AD, it exceeds the within 5-8yrs specified in your koran, at least you admit you came to islam with a lack of prophecies because there isn't any)..


Again how can you make statements about a book you have never read before ?

Quote:
O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque (In MAkkah). And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. 9:28


The Makkans today are the lagest suppliers of the world's oil muchless the whole of Arabia now. Also, Arabia which is today called Saudi Arabia is one of the worlds richest countries in the world.

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... abia#42126

[H2O]

Theres just one problem, tell us H2O how the koran was collated?
If Zaid or Uthman only required an oral transmission why didn't they just go to a hafeez or two and get them to recite while they write down why did they bother to collect the leaves, barks, animal skin "the quran was written upon"?

bukhari 6 201 (Narrated Zaid bin Thabit Al-Ansari:... So I started locating [What does locate mean in relation to the context H2O?]the Qur'anic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who knew it by heart). I found with Khuzaima two verses of Surah at-Tauba which I had not found with anybody else...

The answer was right up under your nose. As usual you have a bad habit of editing hadeeth in quote for your pathetic criticism. Doesnt look like Zaid was fully dependant upon the written material he also depended on ahafeez.

You chose one part of that hadeeth then wanted to apply reason to parts of its sentence but not apply it to the whole entire hadeeth. Lets look at the whole hadeeth.

‏حدثنا ‏ ‏موسى بن إسماعيل ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏إبراهيم بن سعد ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏ابن شهاب ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏عبيد بن السباق ‏ ‏أن ‏ ‏زيد بن ثابت ‏ ‏رضي الله عنه ‏ ‏قال ‏
‏أرسل إلي ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏مقتل ‏ ‏أهل ‏ ‏اليمامة ‏ ‏فإذا ‏ ‏عمر بن الخطاب ‏ ‏عنده قال ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏رضي الله عنه ‏ ‏إن ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏أتاني فقال إن القتل قد ‏ ‏استحر ‏ ‏يوم ‏ ‏اليمامة ‏ ‏بقراء القرآن وإني أخشى أن ‏ ‏يستحر ‏ ‏القتل بالقراء بالمواطن فيذهب كثير من القرآن وإني أرى أن تأمر بجمع القرآن قلت ‏ ‏لعمر ‏ ‏كيف تفعل شيئا لم يفعله رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏هذا والله خير فلم يزل ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏يراجعني حتى شرح الله صدري لذلك ورأيت في ذلك الذي رأى ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏زيد ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏إنك رجل شاب عاقل لا نتهمك وقد كنت تكتب الوحي لرسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏فتتبع القرآن فاجمعه فوالله لو كلفوني نقل جبل من الجبال ما كان أثقل علي مما أمرني به من جمع القرآن قلت كيف تفعلون شيئا لم يفعله رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال هو والله خير فلم يزل ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏يراجعني حتى شرح الله صدري للذي شرح له صدر ‏ ‏أبي بكر ‏ ‏وعمر ‏ ‏رضي الله عنهما ‏ ‏فتتبعت القرآن أجمعه من ‏ ‏العسب ‏ ‏واللخاف ‏ ‏وصدور الرجال حتى وجدت آخر سورة التوبة مع ‏ ‏أبي خزيمة الأنصاري ‏ ‏لم أجدها مع أحد غيره


http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 0&Rec=7435

Volumn 006, Book 061, Hadith Number 509.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Zaid bin Thabit : Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people! of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found 'Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), "Umar has come to me and said: "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur'an be collected." I said to 'Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" 'Umar said, "By Allah, that is a good project. "Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which 'Umar had realized." Then Abu Bakr said (to me). 'You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it in one book)." By Allah If they had ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an. Then I said to Abu Bakr, "How will you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" Abu Bakr replied, "By Allah, it is a good project." Abu Bakr kept on urging me to accept his idea until Allah opened my chest for what He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and 'Umar. So I started looking for the Qur'an and collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is:

'Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty... (till the end of Surat-Baraa' (At-Tauba) (9.128-129) Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur'an remained with Abu Bakr till he died, then with 'Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of 'Umar.

The rising death of the Qurraa'a of the Quran triggered the muslims to transcribe the Quran. It is obvious the Qurraa'a were more important than the written portions of the Quran that were with them and were of lease importance as to their preservation.

If the Quran that was written on materials was that important as you infered to be the primary dependant source then the deaths of the Qurraa'a would not have sparked an alarm to transcribe the Quran into a complete text as they already had the Quran in writing with them.

Zaid did collect the Quran from both written and Oral sources as the Hadeeth shows. The Quran orally had a greator authority and was more important over the written text as the hadeeth expresses.

What does locate mean in relation to the context H2O?

‏فتتبعت القرآن أجمعه > fatatabb3tu does not mean "So I started locating".

fatatabb3tu al-qur'aana ajma'uhu means "So I succeeded" or "and then I succeeded collecting the entire Quran".

Sorry, my source for accurate dependence is in Arabic not English. I have no dependence on english Islamic sources.

Zaid said he successfully collected the entire Quran. How did he know he collected the entire Quran if he was not Hafeez or not of the Qurraa'a ? He obviously new cause what he transcribed into a complete book had to have been comfirmed by the Qurraa'a ie ahafeez who knew the entire Quran.

It looks like H2O has been continuing in his usual vein of making it up as he goes along, first he tells us he became a muslim because of the prediction of saudi oil in sura 9:28 (1) when showed that said verse has nothing of the sort he abandons the thread and hopes nobody notices that the basis of his faith is hanging by a thread

(1) Nope. I said it was my final confirmation :

Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.

Why didnt you post this.

So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of اللّــه G-D that satisfies me ?

1) The logical consistancy of the Quran.

2) The rational and challenge it gives

3) The wisdom and reasoning it applies

4) Its natural aspects it delivers that conforms with nature it self

5) The obedience it asks toward اللّــه with reverence and love.

6) How to live in submission to اللّــه with balance in life

7) How to treat others as you would want to be treated by another

Its message is direct, blunt, and to the point

9) The belief in اللّــه oneness and the uniqueness of his divinity and the exalted manner of His sublime majesty

10) The belief in the prophets adn that اللّــه sent prophets to all nations of people

11) The belief in angels, scriptures, the life after death, hell, paradise, judgement day, and the resurrection.

This is how I came to believe the Quran was from Allah qualifying Muhammad as Prophet. Needless to say my belief in him as a Prophet was not sparked by the prophecies or Scientific indications of unseen realities through out the Quran. These things merely increased my belief but was not the cause or the root of it.

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 2112#42112

In which you jumped into the conversation with the following reply:

...(btw there are no prophecies in it and you know it, the byzantines and persians alledge prophecy was done over a bet ( haram in islam) and was out by several years, the conflict occurred and ended 613-14AD to 627AD-628AD, it exceeds the within 5-8yrs specified in your koran, at least you admit you came to islam with a lack of prophecies because there isn't any)..

Thereon after we went into the debate of what that verse is or is not. For me it is a prophecy that the Arab muslims of that region would be enriched. You argued about what ibn Katheer stated, in which I disagree with, about the booty they collected after the tribal war and your accusation of the Jizyah was what enriched then. Which I follwed up with :

Ah ! Liberate musbe didnt wake up yet, or he went off to work, or he is writting a novel rebuttle.

It was late last night and I wanted to finish the post but mey eye were caving in on me so I just didnt care and just hit send so I could go to bed .

I will finish up later on the reason why I do not accept Ibn Kathir's interpretation of that verse. And again Liberate scholars do not dictate Islam, they are merely men who are contributing with the best of their knowledge, which is their opinions. You obviously forgot the meaning of the word TAFSIR, it is a commentary of opinion of someones interpretation.

We do not consider them (Scholars) to be infalible in their knowledge, they are subject to error just like any other human being. We have a choice to agree or to disagree with a scholar as long as we have grounds to do so in which I will explain in my next post.

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 2316#42316

Date 09/29/2004

In which Liberate now today says:

first he tells us he became a muslim because of the prediction of saudi oil in sura 9:28 when showed that said verse has nothing of the sort he abandons the thread and hopes nobody notices that the basis of his faith is hanging by a thread

Let see how much of an exagerator you are.

Author Message
Topic: What qualifies Muhamad as a prophet ?
H2O

Replies: 66
Views: 1268
Forum: Muslim & Christian Discussion Forum Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 12:30 pm Subject: What qualifies Muhamad as a prophet ?
If i wish to learn more of Islam i would go to a muslim site... reading islamic info from a christian site... well what can i say... its stupid.

Yup exactly. Going to another person of a totally op ...
Topic: Jesus and the pagan myths
H2O

Replies: 42
Views: 386
Forum: Muslim & Christian Discussion Forum Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 02:17 am Subject: Jesus and the pagan myths
I have previously, challenged our Muslim brothers and sisters about the matter, and asked them to present some evidence for these claims.

So far nobody has taken up the challenge.

Geesh ! You ...
Topic: What qualifies Muhamad as a prophet ?
H2O

Replies: 66
Views: 1268
Forum: Muslim & Christian Discussion Forum Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 02:10 am Subject: What qualifies Muhamad as a prophet ?



( H2O leans against the forum wall, and shakes head with a gigling grin )

Would you like for us to translate that for you Liberate ? It is perfectly clear to us in the A ...
Topic: How do Muslims view the war in Iraq?
H2O

Replies: 56
Views: 952
Forum: Muslim & Christian Discussion Forum Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 01:24 am Subject: How do Muslims view the war in Iraq?
And ? What does that have to do with the topic of the forum ? Your a Christian not a Muslim.

If you want my personal vandata about Sadam then I can tell you as a Muslim. We need to put Saddam and ...
Topic: Trinity ~ God is One not 3!
H2O

Replies: 89
Views: 1040
Forum: Muslim & Christian Discussion Forum Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 02:22 pm Subject: Trinity ~ God is One not 3!
Christians believe there is one God, we don't believe there is three God's. And if you do not believe in the Trinity, you are not a Christian.

I respect this just to the same extent that we do not ...
Topic: Mahdi and Jesus will be back!!(when? no one knows!)
H2O

Replies: 31
Views: 299
Forum: Muslim & Christian Discussion Forum Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 03:04 am Subject: Mahdi and Jesus will be back!!(when? no one knows!)
wassalaam brother.

and the same words were used for nabi yahya yaa akhi. iqra' al-arabiyyah bil-Qur'aani qablihi .
Topic: Trinity ~ God is One not 3!
H2O

Replies: 89
Views: 1040
Forum: Muslim & Christian Discussion Forum Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 01:57 am Subject: Trinity ~ God is One not 3!
People can come up with so many examples to explain the Trinity, but its easier to just bend the knee and accept the Trinity for what it is and realize God's ways and thoughts are higher than ours (Is ...
Topic: Mahdi and Jesus will be back!!(when? no one knows!)
H2O

Replies: 31
Views: 299
Forum: Muslim & Christian Discussion Forum Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 01:38 am Subject: Mahdi and Jesus will be back!!(when? no one knows!)
assalaamu alaikum yazdimuslim

even though our beliefs may differ on this in regards to the Mahdi and the Messiah son of Maryam.

We do agree there will be a Mahdi to come, and actual human being. ...
Topic: Mahdi and Jesus will be back!!(when? no one knows!)
H2O

Replies: 31
Views: 299
Forum: Muslim & Christian Discussion Forum Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 01:16 am Subject: Mahdi and Jesus will be back!!(when? no one knows!)
Are you sure the jesus won't use a car bomb or something to do the job so that the "Dajal" will be melted like lead in fire?

And you might be sitting in the passenger seat Webby.
Topic: What qualifies Muhamad as a prophet ?
H2O

Replies: 66
Views: 1268
Forum: Muslim & Christian Discussion Forum Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 01:26 pm Subject: What qualifies Muhamad as a prophet ?
assalaamu alaikum alifaia

i do not know what your view is of bukhari and muslim etc ... for me.. they are not divine books... altho they are called sahih (true) it still is man made... it is writte ...
Topic: What qualifies Muhamad as a prophet ?
H2O

Replies: 66
Views: 1268
Forum: Muslim & Christian Discussion Forum Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 01:32 am Subject: What qualifies Muhamad as a prophet ?
I looked at the man in light of the koran,...

But you have never read the Quran thoroughly before .

All my sources are islamic jurispundence and scripture

Which you have not thoroughly read e ...
Topic: What qualifies Muhamad as a prophet ?
H2O

Replies: 66
Views: 1268
Forum: Muslim & Christian Discussion Forum Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 12:04 pm Subject: What qualifies Muhamad as a prophet ?
Ah ! Liberate musbe didnt wake up yet, or he went off to work, or he is writting a novel rebuttle.

It was late last night and I wanted to finish the post but mey eye were caving in on me so I just ...

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/search.ph ... &start=120

Well according to the forum post citistics I was right here, I did not abandon this forum as you claimed because of your wishfull thinking.

I didnt disappear from the forum as you alledged I went to other threads on this forum. I got cought up and merely forgot about this. So since you did bring me back to my unfinished work I will continue here.



The disagrement and its inconsistancy with the assertion of 9:28.

I have a right to agree or disagree with a scholar unless I can produce proof. This is an Islam rule.

Proof:

(1) Muslims did not become ghaniy from any Jizyah as alluded to cause at the time when 9:28 was revealed the Jews were already exiled from the land. So there was no Jizyah to collect. The Christians of Nasran and of the region were extinct. No Jizyah to collect from them also.

(2) The wars they fought and triumphed in with a minority fo pagan tribes after 9:28 was revealed only brought them temporary sustenance from the booty they collected that lasted them a short period of time which does not constitute as being "ghaniy" or to be rich, wealthy. Thus was no different form all the booty they collected before 9:28 was revealed in which their condition was still expressed as being poor.

(3) After the muslims conquered all of Arabia and after pursuing the Byzantine forces back from the Hijaz, they entered al-Quds in which documentation from christians who witness them as they entered in to Jerusalem say in ridicule:

Steven Runciman writes in his History of the Crusades: “… the Caliph Omar entered Jerusalem, riding upon a white camel. He was dressed in worn, filthy robes and the army that followed him was rough and unkempt; but its discipline was perfect. At his side was Patriarch Sophronius, as chief Magistrate of the surrendered city. Omar rode straight to the site of the …..
(Al Aqsa Mosque) whence his friend Mohammad (peace be upon him) had ascended into Heaven.

http://www.sevenverses.com/What%20is%20 ... uslims.htm

Does that sound like a rich and wealthy people to you that enterd Jerusalem ?Umar was the Khaleefah looking like that ? Doesnt sound like a rich ruler to me.

This event happened 7 years after the Prophet was taken from this world. The muslims still needy and not wealthy as discribed by the Christians.

The only time in history that the Arabs of that region became ghaniy was after oil was discovered in Saudi which made them one of the Richest nations in the world. The Arab muslims of Makkah before the dicovery of the oil lived ruling in poverty through out their wars with the Crusader, Mongols etc until oil struck that enriched them that fulfilled the promiss that was made to them by Allah in 9:28.

Image URL is: http://www.submission.org/images/t-20-3.gif

Thats what it looks like on my word.

So all that time, and as many times you have used it you didnt know what home site it was huh or had the curiousity to go back an research your finding ?

[RomeSweetHome]

H20 Wrote:

So all that time, and as many times you have used it you didnt know what home site it was huh or had the curiousity to go back an research your finding ?

I didnt need to go back to research my findings as I already took what I needed to take.

I simple finished that part of the article and moved on. Lets talk about something worth our time, shall we?

H20 Wrote:

So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of اللّــه G-D that satisfies me ?

1) The logical consistancy of the Quran.

2) The rational and challenge it gives

3) The wisdom and reasoning it applies

4) Its natural aspects it delivers that conforms with nature it self

5) The obedience it asks toward اللّــه with reverence and love.

6) How to live in submission to اللّــه with balance in life

7) How to treat others as you would want to be treated by another

Its message is direct, blunt, and to the point

9) The belief in اللّــه oneness and the uniqueness of his divinity and the exalted manner of His sublime majesty

10) The belief in the prophets adn that اللّــه sent prophets to all nations of people

11) The belief in angels, scriptures, the life after death, hell, paradise, judgement day, and the resurrection.

This is how I came to believe the Quran was from Allah qualifying Muhammad as Prophet. Needless to say my belief in him as a Prophet was not sparked by the prophecies or Scientific indications of unseen realities through out the Quran. These things merely increased my belief but was not the cause or the root of it.

Did Mohammed really fulfill the role of a prophet from God?

[Liberate]

Theres just one problem, tell us H2O how the koran was collated?
If Zaid or Uthman only required an oral transmission why didn't they just go to a hafeez or two and get them to recite while they write down why did they bother to collect the leaves, barks, animal skin "the quran was written upon"?

bukhari 6 201 (Narrated Zaid bin Thabit Al-Ansari:... So I started locating [What does locate mean in relation to the context H2O?]the Qur'anic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who knew it by heart). I found with Khuzaima two verses of Surah at-Tauba which I had not found with anybody else...

The answer was right up under your nose. As usual you have a bad habit of editing hadeeth in quote for your pathetic criticism. Doesnt look like Zaid was fully dependant upon the written material he also depended on ahafeez.

Do you see the bit I have highlighted in large bold font?

If these ahafeez had the koran from end to end, why would Zaid say he couldn't find those particular verses with anybody else but this one man?

Would you happen to tell us just how many of this phantom ahafeez existed pre and post the battle of Yamanah.

...collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is:

'Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty... (till the end of Surat-Baraa' (At-Tauba) (9.128-129) Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur'an remained with Abu Bakr till he died, then with 'Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of 'Umar.

The rising death of the Qurraa'a of the Quran triggered the muslims to transcribe the Quran. It is obvious the Qurraa'a were more important than the written portions of the Quran that were with them and were of lease importance as to their preservation.

How is it obvious giving your above highlighted source?

What does locate mean in relation to the context H2O?

‏فتتبعت القرآن أجمعه > fatatabb3tu does not mean "So I started locating".

fatatabb3tu al-qur'aana ajma'uhu means "So I succeeded" or "and then I succeeded collecting the entire Quran".

Sorry, my source for accurate dependence is in Arabic not English. I have no dependence on english Islamic sources.

I believe we have already been through this before if you are going to start reinterpreting your religion you need to show us your arabic scholar qualifications to entitle you to this again I ask you H2O where are your arabic scholar qualifications to dismiss what other scholars have to say?

Zaid said he successfully collected the entire Quran

What on earth do you think he was going to say, "sorry Uthmann/Abu Bakr I couldn't collect the entire koran allah has failed" alhamduillah?

. How did he know he collected the entire Quran if he was not Hafeez or not of the Qurraa'a ?

This is the type of logical fallacies you find yourself forced into; making an argument out of silence to deny what is blatantly obvious now Zaid is what he never said he was? I realise this was the argument of the Shia fellow before he left, I find it a little odd you are now quoting from shia websites and making shia arguments, has the h2O one man koranic re-interpreter translator, and hadith rejecter made himself another niche? after telling us you do not go to the masjids of the shias?

It looks like H2O has been continuing in his usual vein of making it up as he goes along, first he tells us he became a muslim because of the prediction of saudi oil in sura 9:28 (1) when showed that said verse has nothing of the sort he abandons the thread and hopes nobody notices that the basis of his faith is hanging by a thread

(1) Nope. I said it was my final confirmation :

Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.

and the above means what you became a haneef because of the prediction of saudi oil in sura 9:28? yes or no?

Why didnt you post this.

So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of اللّــه G-D that satisfies me ?

it's a little bit too late to wriggle out of the hole you have dug yourself in, the sura 9:28 prediction of saudi oil is the reason you gave to us as to why you became a muslim what you are quoting below is what you think qualifies Mohammed as a prophet and you also told us you would renounce islam if an emryologist showed you the 'detailed' "thing that is chewed, thing that clings" accurate description of foetal development is in error when it was shown to you to be nothing short of laughable a prediction of embryological development you abandoned the thread too.

1) The logical consistancy of the Quran.

You mean to you your religion to me mine and fight them who do not believe in islam even if they be the people of the book lie in wait for the pagans beleaguer them smite at their neck kill them until they pay the jizyah in willing submission...because it is now to me my religion to you mine too.

2) The rational and challenge it gives

The rationale of you are going to hell and have been made fuel for hell because... because allah is merciful? You mean make a sura like it, and the undeclared fatwa on anybody who dares to confront the challenge? or confronts islam for that matter or maybe it is the rationale of you H2O applauding the murder of Theo Van Gogh because he confronted your religion, if this is the rationale of the so called 'peaceful' muslims in the west I dread to think what the fundamentalist will do if they get power in Europe or America.

3) The wisdom and reasoning it applies

You mean don't raise your voice above that of the prophet and don't marry his wives after he dies because "such behaviour annoys the prophet and he is too shy to tell you but allah is not shy" to be repeated in masjids for all time because this is the final revelation for all mankind relevant to mankind for all eternity even though said Mohammed has been dead for 1400yrs.

4) Its natural aspects it delivers that conforms with nature it self

Ah yes the clouds coming "willingly or unwillingly"

5)The obedience it asks toward اللّــه with reverence and love.

You mean give 5% of booty (captured married women too) to the prophet because all the other prophets behaved like this and raped captured and married women and given the license to commit incest wether they be their adopted son's wives or not.

6) How to live in submission to اللّــه with balance in life

Washing your ankles and plucking your nasal hairs will get you into a wine and eternal fornication paradise with 70 'chained' women to a bed, I have to wonder in amazement that any rational individual is buying this stupidity.

7) How to treat others as you would want to be treated by another

If I invite you to a meal, don't talk to me eat and get out quickly? why did I invite you in the first place?
How would a woman feel reading that she is a tilth to be approached whenever and however the husband feels like it, and if she refuses to give her husband sex the angels will send her curses till the morning.

Its message is direct, blunt, and to the point

Yes it is so when it says fight the unbelievers even if they be the people of the book what do you say H2O? do you tell us this is being taken out of context in direct conflict with your al-azhar mentors? You know what you will be considered as if the 90%+ of muslims in the rest of the islamic world find out that this is what you preach?

9) The belief in اللّــه oneness and the uniqueness of his divinity and the exalted manner of His sublime majesty

And the point? the christians worship three gods? inclusive of Mary?

10) The belief in the prophets adn that اللّــه sent prophets to all nations of people

Where are the 120,000 prophets that have been sent throughout the world H2O? where is the record of them preaching the oneness of allah and coming with their revealed books? How can civilization lost 120,000 prophets preaching the same thing? when myths and tales of Noah and his flood can be found throughout civilisations the world over (From just 8 individuals) yet 120,000 people cannot be found except for a handful of plagiarised biblical prophets.

11) The belief in angels, scriptures, the life after death, hell, paradise, judgement day, and the resurrection.

Plagiarism is the highest compliment you should be thanking the zoroastrians too for their bridge and houris for your eternal flowing wine and hedonism.

Thereon after we went into the debate of what that verse is or is not. For me it is a prophecy that the Arab muslims of that region would be enriched

Then you still believe sura 9:28 is a prophecy of Saudi oil?

. You argued about what ibn Katheer stated,

I didn't argue about what he stated what he stated was mainstream islamic belief from the early scholars, he is a respected islamic scholar and you are?

We do not consider them (Scholars) to be infalible in their knowledge, they are subject to error just like any other human being.

Here we go again with that 'we' again, do you consider yourself plural in majesty?

So scholars are subject to error but somehow you are not?

The disagrement and its inconsistancy with the assertion of 9:28.

I have a right to agree or disagree with a scholar unless I can produce proof. This is an Islam rule

And where is this rule?
Are you a scholar?
Where are your arabic scholar qualifications?

Proof:

(1) Muslims did not become ghaniy from any Jizyah as alluded to cause at the time when 9:28 was revealed the Jews were already exiled from the land. So there was no Jizyah to collect. The Christians of Nasran and of the region were extinct. No Jizyah to collect from them also.

(2) The wars they fought and triumphed in with a minority fo pagan tribes after 9:28 was revealed only brought them temporary sustenance from the booty they collected that lasted them a short period of time which does not constitute as being "ghaniy" or to be rich, wealthy. Thus was no different form all the booty they collected before 9:28 was revealed in which their condition was still expressed as being poor.

(3) After the muslims conquered all of Arabia and after pursuing the Byzantine forces back from the Hijaz, they entered al-Quds in which documentation from christians who witness them as they entered in to Jerusalem say in ridicule:

Steven Runciman writes in his History of the Crusades: “… the Caliph Omar entered Jerusalem, riding upon a white camel. He was dressed in worn, filthy robes and the army that followed him was rough and unkempt; but its discipline was perfect. At his side was Patriarch Sophronius, as chief Magistrate of the surrendered city. Omar rode straight to the site of the …..
(Al Aqsa Mosque) whence his friend Mohammad (peace be upon him) had ascended into Heaven.

http://www.sevenverses.com/What%20is%20 ... uslims.htm

Does that sound like a rich and wealthy people to you that enterd Jerusalem ?Umar was the Khaleefah looking like that ? Doesnt sound like a rich ruler to me.

This event happened 7 years after the Prophet was taken from this world. The muslims still needy and not wealthy as discribed by the Christians.

The only time in history that the Arabs of that region became ghaniy was after oil was discovered in Saudi which made them one of the Richest nations in the world. The Arab muslims of Makkah before the dicovery of the oil lived ruling in poverty through out their wars with the Crusader, Mongols etc until oil struck that enriched them that fulfilled the promiss that was made to them by Allah in 9:28.

Looks like we are back to square one:

...(btw there are no prophecies in it and you know it, the byzantines and persians alledge prophecy was done over a bet ( haram in islam) and was out by several years, the conflict occurred and ended 613-14AD to 627AD-628AD, it exceeds the within 5-8yrs specified in your koran, at least you admit you came to islam with a lack of prophecies because there isn't any)..

Again how can you make statements about a book you have never read before ?

O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque (In MAkkah). And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. 9:28

The Makkans today are the lagest suppliers of the world's oil muchless the whole of Arabia now. Also, Arabia which is today called Saudi Arabia is one of the worlds richest countries in the world.

You are not fooling anyone but yourself.

HOW DO YOU DEFINE "SOON"?

Saudi arabia was created in 1932, after 1932 oil was discovered in the country, how do you define soon?, considering the bible already had that the descendants of Ishmael would be blessed seems allah is 1300 yrs too late. Do you not see the booty Mohammed was talking about was the captured women to be raped and the slavery to be had when he and his gang of cut throats besieged quraish businessmen

[H2O]

If these ahafeez had the koran from end to end, why would Zaid say he couldn't find those particular verses with anybody else but this one man?

But he found it. Thats all that mattered. And how did he know about these two verses if he could not find them with no one else ?

...collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is:

Was it written or Oral ? That last part does not indicate if he found it in text of memorization with Abi Khuzaima.

I believe we have already been through this before if you are going to start reinterpreting your religion you need to show us your arabic scholar qualifications to entitle you to this again I ask you H2O where are your arabic scholar qualifications to dismiss what other scholars have to say?

And I ask you Liberate where are your English scholar qualification to dismiss what other scholars have to say ?

What on earth do you think he was going to say, "sorry Uthmann/Abu Bakr I couldn't collect the entire koran allah has failed" alhamduillah?

Now your playing psychic again.

making an argument out of silence to deny what is blatantly obvious now Zaid is what he never said he was?

Just like how you made about the above huh ?

I realise this was the argument of the Shia fellow before he left, I find it a little odd you are now quoting from shia websites and making shia arguments, has the h2O one man koranic re-interpreter translator, and hadith rejecter made himself another niche? after telling us you do not go to the masjids of the shias?

He believes in the same book I believe in. We have the same Qiblah. WE both believe in Allah and Muhammad is his messenger. He is my brother, be he is a Shia, Sif, Salafi, Hanabi, Shafi'i, Malaki, Wahabbi etc (Except NOI) the are my brothers and sisters. Their differences is with Allah to answer on the day of Judgment.

and the above means what you became a haneef because of the prediction of saudi oil in sura 9:28? yes or no?

Nope. Just means it was a last confirmation.

how I came to believe the Quran was from Allah qualifying Muhammad as Prophet. Needless to say my belief in him as a Prophet was not sparked by the prophecies or Scientific indications of unseen realities through out the Quran. These things merely increased my belief but was not the cause or the root of it.

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 2112#42112

and the above means what you became a haneef because of the prediction of saudi oil in sura 9:28? yes or no?

Yes.

And where is this rule?
Are you a scholar?
Where are your arabic scholar qualifications?

Where is your Englsih scholar qualification ?

Looks like we are back to square one:

...(btw there are no prophecies in it and you know it, the byzantines and persians alledge prophecy was done over a bet ( haram in islam) and was out by several years, the conflict occurred and ended 613-14AD to 627AD-628AD, it exceeds the within 5-8yrs specified in your koran, at least you admit you came to islam with a lack of prophecies because there isn't any)..

Again how can you make statements about a book you have never read before ?

O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque (In MAkkah). And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. 9:28

The Makkans today are the lagest suppliers of the world's oil muchless the whole of Arabia now. Also, Arabia which is today called Saudi Arabia is one of the worlds richest countries in the world.

You are not fooling anyone but yourself.

HOW DO YOU DEFINE "SOON"?

Saudi arabia was created in 1932, after 1932 oil was discovered in the country, how do you define soon?, considering the bible already had that the descendants of Ishmael would be blessed seems allah is 1300 yrs too late. Do you not see the booty Mohammed was talking about was the captured women to be raped and the slavery to be had when he and his gang of cut throats besieged quraish businessmen

Looks like we are back to square two:

You (Liberate) made a comment as to the translation "SOON" which belongs together with "SOON WILL" it is from the Arabic "sawf" indicating the furture tense act to definitly occure. It was the matter of Abdullahs choice of words.

SHAKIR: O you who believe! the idolaters are nothing but unclean, so they shall not approach the Sacred Mosque after this year; and if you fear poverty then Allah will enrich you out of His grace if He please; surely Allah is Knowing Wise.

MAUDUDI: Believers! Those who associate others with Allah in His divinity are unclean. So, after the expiry of this year, let them not even go near the Sacred Mosque. And should you fear poverty, Allah will enrich you out of His bounty, if He wills. Surely Allah is All-Knowing, All-wise.

QARIBULLAH: Believers, the idolaters are unclean. Do not let them approach the
Sacred Mosque after this year. If you fear poverty, Allah, if He wills,
will enrich you through His bounty. He is Knowing, Wise.

None of these translators use "SOON" cause it is not the significance of "sawf" which expresses the future tense of a definite act to occure denoting no definite time.

Furthur Allah revelaed this from his knowledge:

Yet they(The Pagans) ask thee (Muhammad) to hasten on the Punishment! But Allah will not fail in His promise. Verily a Day in the sight of thy Lord is like a thousand years of your reckoning. 22:47

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 2178#42178

Note: Your source Ibn Kathir does not translate "SOON" cause again "SOON" is not the significance of "sawf". We provided more than enough sourced to establish grounds, unless you can come up with evidence to prove us wrong.

Do you know how to count ? does 9 come after 8 or 8 after 9 ? Geesh

Now after we have cleaned up your mess, we go back to the original theme. Surah 9:28 gives a prophecy that was fulfilled in the future.

I am dazzled over here trying to figure out how you could make such a mistake. Did you misread ? Or you just didnt understand what you were reading ? Or you were just following what the other monkey was doing and didnt bother to go back and READ and COMPREHEND the source for verification. Just imagine how much more of islam you have mistaken about due to comprehension failure.

Let me get this straight when it says "soon allah will enrich you", it really means allah will enrich your descendants 1300+yrs later because your descendants are the ones fighting the quraish, and collecting booty, did you also notice the conditional conjunctive clause "if he wills" Did you read the tafsir? Do you realise the efficient job you are doing ridiculing your own beliefs?

Well lets see, according to your source Ibn Kathir clearifies "if he wills" the translation.

[وَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ عَيْلَةً فَسَوْفَ يُغْنِيكُمُ اللَّهُ مِن فَضْلِهِ]


(and if you fear poverty, Allah will enrich you, out of His bounty), from other resources,


[إِن شَآءَ]


(if He wills), until,

http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=9&tid=20938

What does إِن شَآءَ = in shaa (if He wills) in the Arabic language signifiy ?

In Shaa Allah If God wills. (Used when talking about a future event)

http://www.muslims.4mg.com/word.html

Insha Allah for expressing a desire to do something

http://www.road-to-heaven.com/articles/sayings.htm

In sha' allah
Other Commonly Used Spellings: INSHA ALLAH,INSHAA ALLA, INSHA ALLA,IN SHA' ALLA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When a person wishes to plan for the future, when he promises, when he makes resolutions, and when he makes a pledge, he makes them with permission and the will of Allah. For this reason, a Muslim uses the Qur'anic instructions by saying "In Sha ' Allah." The meaning of this statement is: "If Allah wills." Muslims are to strive hard and to put their trusts with Allah. They leave the results in the hands of Allah.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/g ... INSHA.html

On the other hand when Allah uses it for himself the thing will come to pass only by his will.

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 2216#42216

And to add to this, not to long ago I went over this jargon usage with Loki.

"in shaa Allah" (If Allah wills) signifies the achievable that may or may not happen, which depends on the context it is being used in with other verb tense words in the Quran. If the Verb Tense in the statement of Quran it is being used in is absolute then it is clear that act will occure.

"law shaa Allah" (If Allah wills) signifies the achievable that will not happen.

When Allah says "In Shaa Allah" in the Quran refering to himself, in which Muhammad is the transmitter of Allah's message to mankind, where the statement is not absolute denotes that the author (Allah) does not wish to disclose his desire in permiting or not permiting a particular act to happen.

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 6683#46683

[RomeSweetHome]

H20 Wrote:

He believes in the same book I believe in. We have the same Qiblah. WE both believe in Allah and Muhammad is his messenger. He is my brother, be he is a Shia, Sif, Salafi, Hanabi, Shafi'i, Malaki, Wahabbi etc (Except NOI) the are my brothers and sisters. Their differences is with Allah to answer on the day of Judgment.

You say that a Shia "brother" of yours believes in the same book as you.

So do you agree with what the majority of the Shia believe regarding the Quran?

Do you agree that it has been tampered with?

Do you agree that statments regarding Ali have been removed?

If he is your "brother" in Islam, why is it that the majority of Sunni scholars regard the Shia as kufar (unbelievers) and vice versa?

Why is it that one must convert to the others denomination in order to get married?

Even today the conflict between the Shia and the Sunni Muslims still exists regarding the leadership after Muhammad and many other issues.

Above you have mentioned the similarities between you and your shia "brother", what about the differences?

Do you pray in the same way?

Do you say the call to prayer (ahdan) in the same way?

Do you break your fast in the same way?


Etc...

Peace

[Liberate]

If these ahafeez had the koran from end to end, why would Zaid say he couldn't find those particular verses with anybody else but this one man?

But he found it. Thats all that mattered. And how did he know about these two verses if he could not find them with no one else ?

Excuse me?
What exactly are you trying to say here?
Tell me you are not purposely being this ignorant?
Do you realise your hadith throws your whole argument that the ahafeez had the entire koran memorised from end to end in tatters?
The hadith indicates they only had it in bits
Read the hadith in it's proper context, it says we have lost those who memorised the koran (never does it state they had the entire koran from end to end memorised btw when are you going to tell us how many these qirra pre and post the battle of yamama were?), Zaid is told to collect the koran so that a bigger part will not be lost, notice it says "whereby a large part of the koran may be lost" the statement makes no logical sense unless it pertains to the koranic material that is being lost:

bukhari 6 201 (Narrated Zaid bin Thabit Al-Ansari: Abu Bakr sent for me after the casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra were killed). 'Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said: "Umar has come to me and said, the People have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle of) Yamama and I am afraid that there will be some casualties among the Qurra (those who know the Qur'an by heart) at other places, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost...[what do you think it means when it says a large part of the koran will be lost?]

...collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is:

Was it written or Oral ? That last part does not indicate if he found it in text of memorization with Abi Khuzaima.

How does this help you?
you mean orally he couldn't find anybody else with said verse?
or he couldn't find anybody's animal skin, bark, leaves with said verse?
This leaves a much bigger question what else could he have left out, your hadiths state several verses are missing.

I believe we have already been through this before if you are going to start reinterpreting your religion you need to show us your arabic scholar qualifications to entitle you to this again I ask you H2O where are your arabic scholar qualifications to dismiss what other scholars have to say?

And I ask you Liberate where are your English scholar qualification to dismiss what other scholars have to say ?

I am not the one dismissing venerated islamic scholars and historians as idiots who didn't know what they were talking about.

I am not the one retranslating the koran and claiming Yusuif Ali, Hilali and Khan, Pickthall, Sher Ali, Ibn Kathir were all in error and made terrible translations and only me with no arabic scholar qualification to my name is so arrogant to proclaim I have the monopoly on the truth and interpretation of islam your fellow muslims have confronted you over this ego you chose not to respond to them, you are what is referred to as driftwood all alone at sea the translator interpretator and
imam of your own doctrine, the beginning of a sect.

making an argument out of silence to deny what is blatantly obvious now Zaid is what he never said he was?

Just like how you made about the above huh ?

Sahih(authentic) bukhari 6 201 (Narrated Zaid bin Thabit Al-Ansari:...
, unless you collect it. And I am of the opinion that you should collect the Qur'9n.' Abu Bakr added, 'I said to 'Umar, "How can I do something which Allah's Apostle has not done?" 'Umar said (to me) "By Allah, it is (really) a good thing". So 'Umar kept on pressing trying to persuade me to accept his proposal, till Allah opened my bosom for it and I had the same opinion as 'Umar'. (Zaid bin Thabit added:) 'Umar was sitting with him (Abu Bakr) and was not speaking. Abu Bakr said (to me),'You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness); and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, [size=18Look for the Qur'an and collect it [/size](in one manuscript)' [Why would he be told to look for the koran if he already had it memorised??]. By Allah, if he (Abu Bakr) had ordered me to shift one of the mountains (from its place) it would not have been harder for me than what he had ordered me concerning the collection of the Qur'an. I said to both of them, 'How dare you do a thing which the Prophet (pbuh) has not done?' Abu Bakr said,...

I realise this was the argument of the Shia fellow before he left, I find it a little odd you are now quoting from shia websites and making shia arguments, has the h2O one man koranic re-interpreter translator, and hadith rejecter made himself another niche? after telling us you do not go to the masjids of the shias?

He believes in the same book I believe in. We have the same Qiblah. WE both believe in Allah and Muhammad is his messenger. He is my brother, be he is a Shia, Sif, Salafi, Hanabi, Shafi'i, Malaki, Wahabbi etc (Except NOI) the are my brothers and sisters. Their differences is with Allah to answer on the day of Judgment.

H2O I lost interest in taking you seriously long ago, compare what you said above with what you said earlier:

Imagine that ! Now I belong to a sect ? Ok what sect do I belong to that you are alleging ? That is so lame plus your talking non sense. Whats all that yapping going to do for you Liberate ? ANd by the way we dont belong to a sect The Quran Prohibits sectarianism.

I go to the same Masjids as te Sunnies and Salafies do with the exception of the Shia and the NOI.

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic.php?p=37969

As of july according to your post you weren't associated with the shia but now (November) you are best buddies, I have to wonder how you look yourself in the mirror and pretend to us you really are sure of what you believe in when it is obvious you are making it up as you go along.

and the above means what you became a haneef because of the prediction of saudi oil in sura 9:28? yes or no?

Nope. Just means it was a last confirmation.

Confirmation for what?

how I came to believe the Quran was from Allah qualifying Muhammad as Prophet. Needless to say my belief in him as a Prophet was not sparked by the prophecies or Scientific indications of unseen realities through out the Quran. These things merely increased my belief but was not the cause or the root of it.

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 2112#42112

and the above means what you became a haneef because of the prediction of saudi oil in sura 9:28? yes or no?

Yes.

Pls make up your mind just a few sentences above you said no now you say yes are you reading what you are typing? You are either desperate for a prophecy or seriously confused.

And where is this rule?
Are you a scholar?
Where are your arabic scholar qualifications?

Where is your Englsih scholar qualification ?

I am not the one contradicting the english language, by all means show us this rule let us see where you are basing your free lance take on islam from do you know what is stopping any arabic speaker from coming over to you and saying this is what the koran really says?

Looks like we are back to square one:

...(btw there are no prophecies in it and you know it, the byzantines and persians alledge prophecy was done over a bet ( haram in islam) and was out by several years, the conflict occurred and ended 613-14AD to 627AD-628AD, it exceeds the within 5-8yrs specified in your koran, at least you admit you came to islam with a lack of prophecies because there isn't any)..

Again how can you make statements about a book you have never read before ?

O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque (In MAkkah). And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. 9:28

The Makkans today are the lagest suppliers of the world's oil muchless the whole of Arabia now. Also, Arabia which is today called Saudi Arabia is one of the worlds richest countries in the world.

You are not fooling anyone but yourself.

HOW DO YOU DEFINE "SOON"?

Saudi arabia was created in 1932, after 1932 oil was discovered in the country, how do you define soon?, considering the bible already had that the descendants of Ishmael would be blessed seems allah is 1300 yrs too late. Do you not see the booty Mohammed was talking about was the captured women to be raped and the slavery to be had when he and his gang of cut throats besieged quraish businessmen

Looks like we are back to square two:

Which is in effect what you have been saying all along Ibn Kathir is in error and everybody else who disagrees with you which is ... basically everybody and every mainstream doctrine in islam? (do you have a set doctrine for your haneef muslim/s yet? or are there still plenty of things you have to fabricate yet?) BTW H2O you never answered when I asked why do you have a koran link in your signature when you have told us several times it is a terrible translation???

[H2O]

Do all Shia believe the same ? No.

Here is Audio if you want to learn.

http://www.askislam.com/Religions_and_B ... r_310.html

Other Links to Shia beliefs

http://www.masterliness.com/a/Shiite.htm

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Shia%20Imam

http://reference.allrefer.com/country-g ... ran70.html

Their Madzhab is just as vast as non Shia. Some of them do not hold to to the beliefs you posted above.

[H2O]

Do you realise your hadith throws your whole argument that the ahafeez had the entire koran memorised from end to end in tatters?

That doesnt mean Abi Khuzaima wasnt Hafeez whom Zaid could have also collected it from his memory rather than text. Its an up in the Air issue. He could of well been one of those Ahafeez who knew the entire Quran whom Zaid got the last verse of Taubah from. Also, this is what Zaid went out and collect. This doesnt mean he went to every single person through out Arabia whihc would have taken months to do but he went to those who were local and available.

The hadith indicates they only had it in bits
Read the hadith in it's proper context

Yup you and your illusionary reading.

whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost.

This indicates a larg portion of the Quran was memorized.

..So I started looking for the Qur'an and collecting it from (what was written on) [b]palmed stalks, thin white stones... [/b]

How did you determine how much of the Quran was written on those materials ? The Quran in Arabic in book size is less than a half inch in 8.5" X 11". The number of written materials is not mentioned.

and also from the men who knew it by heart,

How can you determine how many Qurraa'a men he went to and how much Quran they knew by heart ?

Hadeeth in context does not make mention that Zaid had it bits. there is no volume indication just you speculating conjecture of whishful thinking.

it says we have lost those who memorised the koran (never does it state they had the entire koran from end to end memorised),

Nope it doesnt say that. This is what it says.

Narated By Zaid bin Thabit : Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people! of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found 'Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), "Umar has come to me and said: "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, [b]and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost.

[/b]

The hadith indicates only some of the Qurraaa'a had died not all.

Zaid is told to collect the koran so that a bigger part will not be lost, notice it says "whereby a large part of the koran will be lost" the statement makes no logical sense unless it pertains to the koranic material that is being lost:

In which as I said before the majority of the Quran was memories by the Qurraa'a, and all of them did not die so to loose the majority of the Quran in which they feared that the next war would result in more casualties of the Qurraaa'a, so they had the Quran compiled just in case.

How does this help you?
you mean orally he couldn't find anybody else with said verse?

He collected it some how some way that is unidentified.

or he couldn't find anybody's animal skin, bark, leaves with said verse?

Does it say he collected it from him from written materials ?

This leaves a much bigger question what else could he have left out, your hadiths state several verses are missing.

Goes back to what I said. Someone must have confirmed he had the entire Quran for him to know he had collected all of it.

I am not the one dismissing venerated islamic scholars and historians as idiots who didn't know what they were talking about.

Show me where it says I have to be a graduate of an Islamic school to dismiss a scholars statements.

I am not the one retranslating the koran and claiming Yusuif Ali, Hilali and Khan, Pickthall, Sher Ali, Ibn Kathir were all in error and made terrible translations and only me with no arabic scholar qualification to my name is so arrogant to proclaim I have the monopoly on the truth and interpretation of islam your fellow muslims have confronted you over this ego you chose not to respond to them, you are what is referred to as driftwood all alone at sea the translator interpretator and
imam of your own doctrine, the beginning of a sect.

Read the begining of the Introduction to the translations. They said it over and over their translation is not the Quran and is subject to error. Non of them said their translation was the Authorized Version. I am not alone in this about rejecting translations of the Quran. We have no need of them. There are thousands of Arabic Speaking muslims hold the same view .

[Why would he be told to look for the koran if he already had it memorised??]

What, are you another comatos one ?

Zaid said he successfully collected the entire Quran. How did he know he collected the entire Quran if he was not Hafeez or not of the Qurraa'a ? He obviously new cause what he transcribed into a complete book had to have been comfirmed by the Qurraa'a ie ahafeez who knew the entire Quran

Does it look like I supported that Zaid knew the entire Quran ?

H2O I lost interest in taking you seriously long ago, compare what you said above with what you said earlier:

Then Hush and get loss, and let me and the Lebaneese continue. You want to turn this thread into a 12 page thread like we did the other one. I am up for it again if you like.

Rome, please excuse. It looks like Liberate and My self are going be at it for the next month on this thread. So as soon as he is finished then we can continue.

As of july according to your post you weren't associated with the shia but now (November) you are best buddies, I have to wonder how you look yourself in the mirror and pretend to us you really are sure of what you believe in when it is obvious you are making it up as you go along.

I am not associated. Correct. That doesnt mean we cant help each other. Just like the Sunnies and the Shia teamed up in Iraq. He has his madzhab and we have ours, but are to still repect each other.

Pls make up your mind just a few sentences above you said no now you say yes are you reading what you are typing? You are either desperate for a prophecy or seriously confused.

Read it again. Maybe you not seeing correctly.

I am not the one contradicting the english language, by all means show us this rule let us see where you are basing your free lance take on islam from do you know what is stopping any arabic speaker from coming over to you and saying this is what the koran really says?

Where is this Arabic speaker ? Rome you want to help your companion with some arabic lessons ? He needs some help.

If ROME and I were to debate like you were with me we wouldnt debate from a translation we would debate from the Quran or Hadeeth in Arabic were it is clear and understood. Not my fault you dont speak Arabic. Go take some lessons. I dont follow translations, so how can you argue with us in something we dont support ?

Which is in effect what you have been saying all along Ibn Kathir is in error and everybody else

You should read more of their work to see what they say on what they call their opinions that are subject to error.

basically everybody and every mainstream doctrine in islam?

BTW H2O you never answered when I asked why do you have a koran link in your signature when you have told us several times it is a terrible translation???

This is my Quran link, the Quran in Arabic. http://quran.muslim-web.com/

Thats my prime source.

Rome, we will get back to you in a few maybe days, maybe months as soon as Liberate is finishes.

[RomeSweetHome]

H20 Wrote:

Do all Shia believe the same ? No.

I did say the majority, not all.

Main stream denominations of Sunnis and Shias regard each other as Kufar (unbelievers0, I know, I have family on both sides.


H20 Wrote:

Rome, we will get back to you in a few maybe days, maybe months as soon as Liberate is finishes.

I am keeping my posts short and sweet, so that you have the time to respond equally.


Peace

[Liberate]

Do you realise your hadith throws your whole argument that the ahafeez had the entire koran memorised from end to end in tatters?

That doesnt mean Abi Khuzaima wasnt Hafeez whom Zaid could have also collected it from his memory rather than text. Its an up in the Air issue. He could of well been one of those Ahafeez who knew the entire Quran whom Zaid got the last verse of Taubah from. Also, this is what Zaid went out and collect. This doesnt mean he went to every single person through out Arabia whihc would have taken months to do but he went to those who were local and available.

As usual you are venturing into unknown territory, a logical fallacy of making an argument out of silence. since you say it would have taken months then you know how many of the quraa existed? would you care to tell us how many there were?

The hadith indicates they only had it in bits
Read the hadith in it's proper context

Yup you and your illusionary reading.

I suggest you read your hadiths further down the post that backs up my "illusionary reading"

whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost.

This indicates a larg portion of the Quran was memorized.

Let us imagine this scenario you receive a lecture in a class, a few days later a few of your colleagues die, the principal calls you and askes you to gather the parts of the lecture together so that the lecture is not entirely lost, to you the lecture was somehow memorised from end to end by the few students? Does it not occur to you that parts of the lecture has already BEEN LOST? and what you are doing is a salvage mission?

..So I started looking for the Qur'an and collecting it from (what was written on) [b]palmed stalks, thin white stones... [/b]

How did you determine how much of the Quran was written on those materials ? The Quran in Arabic in book size is less than a half inch in 8.5" X 11". The number of written materials is not mentioned.

and also from the men who knew it by heart,

How can you determine how many Qurraa'a men he went to and how much Quran they knew by heart ?

Pls tell us how many of this quraa existed pre and post the battle of yamama.

Hadeeth in context does not make mention that Zaid had it bits. there is no volume indication just you speculating conjecture of whishful thinking.

I suggest you read the hadiths a few posts down before you embarass yourself some more.

it says we have lost those who memorised the koran (never does it state they had the entire koran from end to end memorised),

Nope it doesnt say that. This is what it says.

Narated By Zaid bin Thabit : Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people! of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found 'Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), "Umar has come to me and said: "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, [b]and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost.

The hadith indicates only some of the Qurraaa'a had died not all.

Pls tell your audience how many of this quraa existed pre and post the battle of yamama?

How does this help you?
you mean orally he couldn't find anybody else with said verse?

He collected it some how some way that is unidentified.

or he couldn't find anybody's animal skin, bark, leaves with said verse?

Does it say he collected it from him from written materials ?

Do you realise how much of an emabrassment you are making of yourself and your religion H2O but knowing you I guess you will conveniently ignore this thread and focus on other topics:


Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 509:
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:

Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people! of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found 'Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), "Umar has come to me and said: "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur'an be collected." I said to 'Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" 'Umar said, "By Allah, that is a good project. "Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which 'Umar had realized." Then Abu Bakr said (to me). 'You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it in one book)." By Allah If they had ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an...

Bukhari Volume 9, Book 89, Number 301:
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:

Abu Bakr sent for me owing to the large number of casualties in the battle of Al-Yamama, while 'Umar was sitting with him. Abu Bakr said (to me), 'Umar has come to my and said, 'A great number of Qaris of the Holy Quran were killed on the day of the battle of Al-Yamama, and I am afraid that the casualties among the Qaris of the Quran may increase on other battle-fields whereby a large part of the Quran may be lost. Therefore I consider it advisable that you (Abu Bakr) should have the Qur'an collected.' I said, 'How dare I do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?' 'Umar said, By Allah, it is something beneficial.' 'Umar kept on pressing me for that till Allah opened my chest for that for which He had opened the chest of 'Umar and I had in that matter, the same opinion as 'Umar had." Abu Bakr then said to me (Zaid), "You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. So you should search for the fragmentary scripts of the Quran and collect it (in one Book)." Zaid further said: By Allah, if Abu Bakr had ordered me to shift a mountain among the mountains from one place to another it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an...

What do you think, he was looking for koran manuscripts or dictation from hafeez, btw I am sure your audience would like to know just how many of this ahafeez existed pre and post yamama?

This leaves a much bigger question what else could he have left out, your hadiths state several verses are missing.

Goes back to what I said. Someone must have confirmed he had the entire Quran for him to know he had collected all of it.

Read above

I am not the one dismissing venerated islamic scholars and historians as idiots who didn't know what they were talking about.

Show me where it says I have to be a graduate of an Islamic school to dismiss a scholars statements.

Tell me something anybody who comes against any of your interpretations what is the first thing you do?? you patronize them that they don't understand arabic, how do I know you are fit enough to dismiss the scholars that have interpreted the koran...where are your qualifications?

If you want to dismiss a scholar either you are the equal or greater especially in interpretations of a religious nature, you are not equal to any of the arabic scholars that have interpreted the koran, you would be made a laughing stock out of.

I am not the one retranslating the koran and claiming Yusuif Ali, Hilali and Khan, Pickthall, Sher Ali, Ibn Kathir were all in error and made terrible translations and only me with no arabic scholar qualification to my name is so arrogant to proclaim I have the monopoly on the truth and interpretation of islam your fellow muslims have confronted you over this ego you chose not to respond to them, you are what is referred to as driftwood all alone at sea the translator interpretator and
imam of your own doctrine, the beginning of a sect.

Read the begining of the Introduction to the translations. They said it over and over their translation is not the Quran and is subject to error. Non of them said their translation was the Authorized Version. I am not alone in this about rejecting translations of the Quran. We have no need of them. There are thousands of Arabic Speaking muslims hold the same view .

[Why would he be told to look for the koran if he already had it memorised??]

What, are you another comatos one ?

pls read the hadiths I have shown you relative to the "fragments"

Zaid said he successfully collected the entire Quran. How did he know he collected the entire Quran if he was not Hafeez or not of the Qurraa'a ? He obviously new cause what he transcribed into a complete book had to have been comfirmed by the Qurraa'a ie ahafeez who knew the entire Quran

Does it look like I supported that Zaid knew the entire Quran ?

What are you saying now?

This is what you said earlier in this thread:

Zaid said he successfully collected the entire Quran. How did he know he collected the entire Quran if he was not Hafeez or not of the Qurraa'a ? [Tell us H2O what does Hafeez mean?] He obviously new cause what he transcribed into a complete book had to have been comfirmed by the Qurraa'a ie ahafeez who knew the entire Quran.

You are now contradicting yourself over what you said about zaid being a hafeez I have to wonder if you have a short attention span or you and your wife are taking turns masquerading as your nick.

H2O I lost interest in taking you seriously long ago, compare what you said above with what you said earlier:

As of july according to your post you weren't associated with the shia but now (November) you are best buddies, I have to wonder how you look yourself in the mirror and pretend to us you really are sure of what you believe in when it is obvious you are making it up as you go along.

I am not associated. Correct. That doesnt mean we cant help each other. Just like the Sunnies and the Shia teamed up in Iraq. He has his madzhab and we have ours, but are to still repect each other.

I see maybe christians should rush over and receive help from mormons, or branch davidians, or jehovah witnesses or maybe churches of satan since they are called a church and believe in God? Is this behaviour universal in islam? The enemy of my enemy is my friend?

The sunnies and shia teamed up in Iraq?

Try not to be so revealing about your psyche we already know you support the killing of anybody who confronts your religion, now you are telling us you and your shia brothers are teaming up against the american infidels similar to what is happening in Iraq aren't you an american? If you hate your own country so much why don't you emigrate to the islamic paradise that is saudi arabia, where you can watch gays being beheaded with popcorn and refreshments, or have the religious police flog you for not bowing down to the ka'baa in time. I am beginning to understand why you are a muslim, I suspect it is the same reason why you came against your rabbis when you were a proselyte jew, and is the same reason why you have carved an antagonist niche within islam against the majority. it is the same reason why you are wanting the american government to come hard against muslim converts within america, seems you can't wait to get to jannah eh?. A psychiatrist would have a field day with your "them against me" attitude.

Pls make up your mind just a few sentences above you said no now you say yes are you reading what you are typing? You are either desperate for a prophecy or seriously confused.

Read it again. Maybe you not seeing correctly.

I find it incredulous you can be this patronising seeing you do not have a leg to stand on, this is your entire quote in response to mine your responses I have highlighted in red:

Quote:
and the above means what you became a haneef because of the prediction of saudi oil in sura 9:28? yes or no?


Nope. Just means it was a last confirmation.

Liberate wrote:
how I came to believe the Quran was from Allah qualifying Muhammad as Prophet. Needless to say my belief in him as a Prophet was not sparked by the prophecies or Scientific indications of unseen realities through out the Quran. These things merely increased my belief but was not the cause or the root of it.

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 2112#42112

Quote:
and the above means what you became a haneef because of the prediction of saudi oil in sura 9:28? yes or no?

Yes.

Do you see your contradictory responses in successive posts, when I asked you the very same question: "and the above means what you became a haneef because of the prediction of saudi oil in sura 9:28? yes or no"?

Do you see why I don't take you seriously seeing you can change your responses like this in mid flow?

I am not the one contradicting the english language, by all means show us this rule let us see where you are basing your free lance take on islam from do you know what is stopping any arabic speaker from coming over to you and saying this is what the koran really says?

Which is in effect what you have been saying all along Ibn Kathir is in error and everybody else

You should read more of their work to see what they say on what they call their opinions that are subject to error.

Listen to yourself, at least they are humble enough to declare their interpretations are subject to error and yours are not subject to error because?

basically everybody and every mainstream doctrine in islam?

would you care to tell us why Ibn Kathir is in error (and everybody else who disagrees with you) and you are incapable of error?

You don't even know your own ethnic language and are associating yourself with a language foreign to your greek heritage calling it "our language", I am sure your former mentors at al-azhar will be real impressed seeing a former proselyte jew megalomaniac with no arabic scholar qualifications dictating to them what their religion says. who are you to dictate to arabs and muslims what the koran says when you have no qualifications to say otherwise.

BTW H2O you never answered when I asked why do you have a koran link in your signature when you have told us several times it is a terrible translation???

This is my Quran link, the Quran in Arabic. http://quran.muslim-web.com/

Thats my prime source.

Surely you are aware that I am talking about your signature:

Download Quran and Hadeeth for Free here http://www.islamasoft.co.uk/downloads.html Learn about Islam from a Non dictatorial view

The koran used in that website is from Pickthall an english fellow using biblical language, you have told us several times that this is a terrible translation yet you reference it in your signature, are you this dishonest in wanting people to read something you regard as full of mistakes?

This brings me to what I told when you were first on this forum:

Liberate wrote:
It is impressive, and the height of arrogance that you are not a native arab speaker you are a learner of the language but everybody from Hilali and Khan, Sher Ali, Yusuf Ali, Marmaduke Pickthall were all completely inept at the interpretation of the koran according to you, but only you and your phantom make it up as you go along version, and your fringe islamic sect is supreme in it's interpretation of islam yet arabic is not your native language, you hardly speak your native language, and when you find it hard to express your views in english, everybody in this forum bar you has terrible reading comprehension


Quote:
All those translators were also no native arab speakers. And being a born arab speaker is irrelevant


Wait a minute for someone who arabic is not their mother tongue and who is not a recognised scholar of the language, and by all implications is nothing more than a student of the language, don't you find it a bit arrogant to imply that you are the greatest arabic speaker and interpreter this side of the atlantic?

Quote:
. Many people that are born Arabic Speakers do not understand Quranic Arabic. It is not the same as modern Arabic.


Ofcourse they don't understand it, but you do (Maybe you should take a step back and listen to yourself, is your ego this big? you have made serious blunders about teachings in islam in some of your posts, some you amended and some you did not, you are in no position to interpret the koran for the rest of the islamic world, I suspect they will make a laughing stock out of your translations), you are not a born arabic speaker but already you know it more than anybody else who has interpreted the koran, they were all lying and had terrible reading comprehension, every single one of them that is why there are contradictions. This is the muslim mentality, the jews and christian were all lying and corrupted their books, fellow muslims were all lying, incompetent and had terrible reading comprehension, if they are all lying and made terrible grave translational errors, shouldn't you be working night and day from day one producing a PROPER QURAN that is free of all this grave translational errors?

You told us you were translating the koran into english, did you forget or was that one of your abandoned projects while you decide which pizza slice of islam to adopt?

[H2O]

As usual you are venturing into unknown territory, a logical fallacy of making an argument out of silence. since you say it would have taken months then you know how many of the quraa existed? would you care to tell us how many there were?

No human being knows the exact amount. It was enough men to fight in a battle to be called a "Heavy Loss" and for those who were not killed to refer to them as "Heavy Loss" if they had died in the next battle in which their army consisted of thousands of mujaahideen.

..."Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields...

The number of men is expressed as a great number.

I suggest you read your hadiths further down the post that backs up my "illusionary reading"

In English or in Arabic ? We have the Arabic the original source lets see what you whipped up bellow.

Let us imagine this scenario you receive a lecture in a class, a few days later a few of your colleagues die, the principal calls you and askes you to gather the parts of the lecture together so that the lecture is not entirely lost, to you the lecture was somehow memorised from end to end by the few students? Does it not occur to you that parts of the lecture has already BEEN LOST? and what you are doing is a salvage mission?

Is the lecture recited no less than five times a day to memory ? That is a bad anology t compare with the preservation of the Quran which was, is recited dailey in dawn, noon, evening, sunset, night and more.

Pls tell us how many of this quraa existed pre and post the battle of yamama.

A great number to fight in wars to triumph over their enemies

I suggest you read the hadiths a few posts down before you embarass yourself some more.

In Englsih or Arabic ? Rome he might need your help on this, he cant see what we can see lets see if you will correct your brother in his error.

Pls tell your audience how many of this quraa existed pre and post the battle of yamama?

A great number to triumph over their enemies in war, and even those who didnt die were still of a great number to fight in other wars.

Do you realise how much of an emabrassment you are making of yourself and your religion H2O but knowing you I guess you will conveniently ignore this thread and focus on other topics:

Do you realize how pathetic your ambition is. And do you realize you are argueing with us with sources that are not valid with us in your criticism as a christian ? Thus will be shown below, and again I want to hear ROME get into to this but he is staying clear. He aided you on the begining but doesnt when it come to validity of translating the Arabic, I wonder why ?

Rome I put the Arabic hadeeth up for us, not for Liberate. We are ready to hear your input on this below on the accuracy of the translation of the hadeeth that Liberate is having a misleading field day with thinking that is what the hadeeth actually says.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 509:
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:

......So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it in one book)."....


Bukhari Volume 9, Book 89, Number 301:
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:

So you should search for the fragmentary scripts of the Quran and collect it (in one Book)."

The translation above is made by Dr. M. Muhsin Khan. As you noticed Vol. 6 Book 61, number 509 has " ( ) " which are the translators interpolated parenthasis and NOT from the Arabic nor does the Arabic say such a thing.

Vol.9 book 89 number 301 that parenthesis have been edited, taken out. I would like to know who took out the parenthesis ?

Volumn 006, Book 061, Hadith Number 509.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Zaid bin Thabit : Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people! of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found 'Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), "Umar has come to me and said: "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur'an be collected." I said to 'Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" 'Umar said, "By Allah, that is a good project. "Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which 'Umar had realized." Then Abu Bakr said (to me). 'You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it in one book)." By Allah If they had ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an. Then I said to Abu Bakr, "How will you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" Abu Bakr replied, "By Allah, it is a good project." Abu Bakr kept on urging me to accept his idea until Allah opened my chest for what He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and 'Umar. So I started looking for the Qur'an and collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is:

'Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty... (till the end of Surat-Baraa' (At-Tauba) (9.128-129) Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur'an remained with Abu Bakr till he died, then with 'Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of 'Umar.

the above is direct copy paste from Dr. M. Muhsin Khan translation which was erased in Liberates quote of the same translated Hadeeth.

Now below is the original source in Arabic. The red in Arabic is what the translation is suppose to reflect.

‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏موسى بن إسماعيل ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏إبراهيم بن سعد ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏ابن شهاب ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏عبيد بن السباق ‏ ‏أن ‏ ‏زيد بن ثابت ‏ ‏رضي الله عنه ‏ ‏قال ‏
‏أرسل إلي ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏مقتل ‏ ‏أهل ‏ ‏اليمامة ‏ ‏فإذا ‏ ‏عمر بن الخطاب ‏ ‏عنده قال ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏رضي الله عنه ‏ ‏إن ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏أتاني فقال إن القتل قد ‏ ‏استحر ‏ ‏يوم ‏ ‏اليمامة ‏ ‏بقراء القرآن وإني أخشى أن ‏ ‏يستحر ‏ ‏القتل بالقراء بالمواطن فيذهب كثير من القرآن وإني أرى أن تأمر بجمع القرآن قلت ‏ ‏لعمر ‏ ‏كيف تفعل شيئا لم يفعله رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏هذا والله خير فلم يزل ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏يراجعني حتى شرح الله صدري لذلك ورأيت في ذلك الذي رأى ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏زيد ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏إنك رجل شاب عاقل لا نتهمك وقد كنت تكتب الوحي لرسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏فتتبع القرآن فاجمعه فوالله لو كلفوني نقل جبل من الجبال ما كان أثقل علي مما أمرني به من جمع القرآن قلت كيف تفعلون شيئا لم يفعله رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال هو والله خير فلم يزل ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏يراجعني حتى شرح الله صدري للذي شرح له صدر ‏ ‏أبي بكر ‏ ‏وعمر ‏ ‏رضي الله عنهما ‏ ‏فتتبعت القرآن أجمعه من ‏ ‏العسب ‏ ‏واللخاف ‏ ‏وصدور الرجال حتى وجدت آخر سورة التوبة مع ‏ ‏أبي خزيمة الأنصاري ‏ ‏لم أجدها مع أحد غيره ‏

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 0&Rec=7435

‏فتتبع القرآن فاجمعه I would like to know where in that does it say fragments ? Liberate I was coming from what the hadeeth says in Arabic when I made my statement. We are coming from two different sources. I am coming and speaking from teh Arabic you are speaking from the interpolation of a translator that DOESNT EXIST IN THE ARABIC TEXT.

‏فتتبع القرآن فاجمعه Means "So collect the entire Quran" as it is being addressed to Zaid in the singular imperative.

Angain I would like someone to show me were in that Hadeeth in Arabic is "fragments" at ? ROME want to help your Christian brother. ?

What do you think, he was looking for koran manuscripts or dictation from hafeez, btw I am sure your audience would like to know just how many of this ahafeez existed pre and post yamama?

Show us were in the original where the mention of Fragments is ? I wasnt reading english when I commented. If ROME wont help you then go get Apple Pie whom you supported in his Arabic Tafsir of Surah 86. I didnt see you asking him for his Arabic qualification. And better yet he doesnt even speak Arabic nor understand didly of grammar but you still sided with him when he has no Arabic qualification. Let Apple Pie go get his handy Lexicons to help you in this.

Read above

No you go read above.

Tell me something anybody who comes against any of your interpretations what is the first thing you do?? you patronize them that they don't understand arabic, how do I know you are fit enough to dismiss the scholars that have interpreted the koran...where are your qualifications?

Go find someone who speaks Arabic. ROME says he speaks. Wouldnt he be the perfect canadate to debate in our own language ? SO ask him to confirm what I said.

If you want to dismiss a scholar either you are the equal or greater especially in interpretations of a religious nature, you are not equal to any of the arabic scholars that have interpreted the koran, you would be made a laughing stock out of.

Yea, so you wnat me to accept a scholar that say its of for sisters to not wear the Hijab like the Scholar in France did ? Pathetic. This is not Christianity . We are not Christians. I still want to know how those paranthesis got edit from Khan's translation to make it look like it was a translation of the Arabic ?

pls read the hadiths I have shown you relative to the "fragments"

I have below

‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏موسى بن إسماعيل ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏إبراهيم بن سعد ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏ابن شهاب ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏عبيد بن السباق ‏ ‏أن ‏ ‏زيد بن ثابت ‏ ‏رضي الله عنه ‏ ‏قال ‏
‏أرسل إلي ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏مقتل ‏ ‏أهل ‏ ‏اليمامة ‏ ‏فإذا ‏ ‏عمر بن الخطاب ‏ ‏عنده قال ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏رضي الله عنه ‏ ‏إن ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏أتاني فقال إن القتل قد ‏ ‏استحر ‏ ‏يوم ‏ ‏اليمامة ‏ ‏بقراء القرآن وإني أخشى أن ‏ ‏يستحر ‏ ‏القتل بالقراء بالمواطن فيذهب كثير من القرآن وإني أرى أن تأمر بجمع القرآن قلت ‏ ‏لعمر ‏ ‏كيف تفعل شيئا لم يفعله رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏هذا والله خير فلم يزل ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏يراجعني حتى شرح الله صدري لذلك ورأيت في ذلك الذي رأى ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏زيد ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏إنك رجل شاب عاقل لا نتهمك وقد كنت تكتب الوحي لرسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏فتتبع القرآن فاجمعه فوالله لو كلفوني نقل جبل من الجبال ما كان أثقل علي مما أمرني به من جمع القرآن قلت كيف تفعلون شيئا لم يفعله رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال هو والله خير فلم يزل ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏يراجعني حتى شرح الله صدري للذي شرح له صدر ‏ ‏أبي بكر ‏ ‏وعمر ‏ ‏رضي الله عنهما ‏ ‏فتتبعت القرآن أجمعه من ‏ ‏العسب ‏ ‏واللخاف ‏ ‏وصدور الرجال حتى وجدت آخر سورة التوبة مع ‏ ‏أبي خزيمة الأنصاري ‏ ‏لم أجدها مع أحد غيره ‏

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 0&Rec=7435

Doesnt say anthing about fragments.

What are you saying now?

This is what you said earlier in this thread:

Quote:
Zaid said he successfully collected the entire Quran. How did he know he collected the entire Quran if he was not Hafeez or not of the Qurraa'a ? [Tell us H2O what does Hafeez mean?] He obviously new cause what he transcribed into a complete book had to have been comfirmed by the Qurraa'a ie ahafeez who knew the entire Quran.


You are now contradicting yourself over what you said about zaid being a hafeez I have to wonder if you have a short attention span or you and your wife are taking turns masquerading as your nick.

You must be got bogged reading comprehension , yes read it all again.

Zaid said he successfully collected the entire Quran. How did he know he collected the entire Quran if he was not Hafeez or not of the Qurraa'a ? He obviously new cause what he transcribed into a complete book had to have been comfirmed by the Qurraa'a ie ahafeez who knew the entire Quran.

You understand yet ?

would you care to tell us why Ibn Kathir is in error (and everybody else who disagrees with you) and you are incapable of error?

Already did, go back and read.

Surely you are aware that I am talking about your signature:

Download Quran and Hadeeth for Free here http://www.islamasoft.co.uk/downloads.html Learn about Islam from a Non dictatorial view

Did you understand that blue. I dont think your included

The koran used in that website is from Pickthall an english fellow using biblical language, you have told us several times that this is a terrible translation yet you reference it in your signature, are you this dishonest in wanting people to read something you regard as full of mistakes?

If it is for your purpose of using them then of course not. Translations are not meant for criticism. They were meant to convey a basic message to peopel who wre sincerely seeking to learn and understand which is not your position.

You told us you were translating the koran into english, did you forget or was that one of your abandoned projects while you decide which pizza slice of islam to adopt?

As I said before. "Coming to a book store near you" that is backed by the University of of Azhar and the University of Medina. Just wait, you will see. then you will find out my Arabic qualification then.

[Liberate]

As usual you are venturing into unknown territory, a logical fallacy of making an argument out of silence. since you say it would have taken months then you know how many of the quraa existed? would you care to tell us how many there were?

No human being knows the exact amount.

Shows how much you know of your koranic history, Ibn Kathir says 450 died and they didn't know the koran from end to end only parts of it and when they died the parts died with them hence the urgent need to collate it before the koran was lost entirely, have you ever wondered why it doesn't say "a large part of the quraa may be lost" why does it say "a large part of the koran may be lost" in reference to the koranic material itself, it would make a lot more sense to suggest the quraa were the ones being lost if the koranic material was not affected, your scholars at understanding-islam even suggests the believers at yamama were recent converts to islam chances of them knowing vasts amounts of the koran were slim to none.

..."Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields...

The number of men is expressed as a great number.

I suggest you read your hadiths further down the post that backs up my "illusionary reading"

In English or in Arabic ? We have the Arabic the original source lets see what you whipped up bellow.

Let us imagine this scenario you receive a lecture in a class, a few days later a few of your colleagues die, the principal calls you and askes you to gather the parts of the lecture together so that the lecture is not entirely lost, to you the lecture was somehow memorised from end to end by the few students? Does it not occur to you that parts of the lecture has already BEEN LOST? and what you are doing is a salvage mission?

Is the lecture recited no less than five times a day to memory ? That is a bad anology t compare with the preservation of the Quran which was, is recited dailey in dawn, noon, evening, sunset, night and more.

Help me solve this conundrum how do you recite a text five times a day when your text has not been compiled yet?

Pls tell us how many of this quraa existed pre and post the battle of yamama.

A great number to fight in wars to triumph over their enemies

Triumph how? didn't they die?


Looks like allah couldn't protect them a pity seeing this were the guardians of the alledge heavenly text.

What do you think, he was looking for koran manuscripts or dictation from hafeez, btw I am sure your audience would like to know just how many of this ahafeez existed pre and post yamama?

Tell me something anybody who comes against any of your interpretations what is the first thing you do?? you patronize them that they don't understand arabic, how do I know you are fit enough to dismiss the scholars that have interpreted the koran...where are your qualifications?

Go find someone who speaks Arabic. ROME says he speaks. Wouldnt he be the perfect canadate to debate in our own language ? SO ask him to confirm what I said.

As usual you are trying to wriggle out of this discussion by patronising statements, you forget I don't need any help understanding arabic.

Your own language? Do you think you are arabic?

I think you should really see a psychiatrist it is a great shame when someone doesn't even know where they come from, were you ostracized from family functions? Is this why you are a muslim to get back at them?

If you want to dismiss a scholar either you are the equal or greater especially in interpretations of a religious nature, you are not equal to any of the arabic scholars that have interpreted the koran, you would be made a laughing stock out of.

Yea, so you wnat me to accept a scholar that say its of for sisters to not wear the Hijab like the Scholar in France did ? Pathetic [what is the meaning and relevance of this???]. This is not Christianity . We are not Christians. I still want to know how those paranthesis got edit from Khan's translation to make it look like it was a translation of the Arabic ?

I suggest you go and read them from the usc website same as me:

Volume 9, Book 89, Number 301:
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:

Abu Bakr sent for me owing to the large number of casualties in the battle of Al-Yamama, while 'Umar was sitting with him. Abu Bakr said (to me), 'Umar has come to my and said, 'A great number of Qaris of the Holy Quran were killed on the day of the battle of Al-Yamama, and I am afraid that the casualties among the Qaris of the Quran may increase on other battle-fields whereby a large part of the Quran may be lost. Therefore I consider it advisable that you (Abu Bakr) should have the Qur'an collected.' I said, 'How dare I do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?' 'Umar said, By Allah, it is something beneficial.' 'Umar kept on pressing me for that till Allah opened my chest for that for which He had opened the chest of 'Umar and I had in that matter, the same opinion as 'Umar had." Abu Bakr then said to me (Zaid), "You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. So you should search for the fragmentary scripts of the Quran and collect it (in one Book)." Zaid further said: By Allah, if Abu Bakr had ordered me to shift a mountain among the mountains from one place to another it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an. Then I said (to 'Umar and Abu Bakr), "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" Abu Bakr said, "By Allah, it is something beneficial." Zaid added: So he (Abu Bakr) kept on pressing me for that until Allah opened my chest for that for which He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and 'Umar, and I had in that matter, the same opinion as theirs.

So I started compiling the Quran by collecting it from the leafless stalks of the date-palm tree and from the pieces of leather and hides and from the stones, and from the chests of men (who had memorized the Quran). I found the last verses of Sirat-at-Tauba: ("Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves--' (9.128-129) ) from Khuzaima or Abi Khuzaima and I added to it the rest of the Sura. The manuscripts of the Quran remained with Abu Bakr till Allah took him unto Him. Then it remained with 'Umar till Allah took him unto Him, and then with Hafsa bint 'Umar.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamental ... 09.089.301

Show me where I edited the text?

Not only is your argument completely irrational, why do you think Zaid would be collecting leaves barks and animal skin IF HE WAS NOT COLLECTING FRAGMENTS?

pls read the hadiths I have shown you relative to the "fragments"

I have below

‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏موسى بن إسماعيل ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏إبراهيم بن سعد ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏ابن شهاب ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏عبيد بن السباق ‏ ‏أن ‏ ‏زيد بن ثابت ‏ ‏رضي الله عنه ‏ ‏قال ‏
‏أرسل إلي ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏مقتل ‏ ‏أهل ‏ ‏اليمامة ‏ ‏فإذا ‏ ‏عمر بن الخطاب ‏ ‏عنده قال ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏رضي الله عنه ‏ ‏إن ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏أتاني فقال إن القتل قد ‏ ‏استحر ‏ ‏يوم ‏ ‏اليمامة ‏ ‏بقراء القرآن وإني أخشى أن ‏ ‏يستحر ‏ ‏القتل بالقراء بالمواطن فيذهب كثير من القرآن وإني أرى أن تأمر بجمع القرآن قلت ‏ ‏لعمر ‏ ‏كيف تفعل شيئا لم يفعله رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏هذا والله خير فلم يزل ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏يراجعني حتى شرح الله صدري لذلك ورأيت في ذلك الذي رأى ‏ ‏عمر ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏زيد ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏إنك رجل شاب عاقل لا نتهمك وقد كنت تكتب الوحي لرسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏فتتبع القرآن فاجمعه فوالله لو كلفوني نقل جبل من الجبال ما كان أثقل علي مما أمرني به من جمع القرآن قلت كيف تفعلون شيئا لم يفعله رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال هو والله خير فلم يزل ‏ ‏أبو بكر ‏ ‏يراجعني حتى شرح الله صدري للذي شرح له صدر ‏ ‏أبي بكر ‏ ‏وعمر ‏ ‏رضي الله عنهما ‏ ‏فتتبعت القرآن أجمعه من ‏ ‏العسب ‏ ‏واللخاف ‏ ‏وصدور الرجال حتى وجدت آخر سورة التوبة مع ‏ ‏أبي خزيمة الأنصاري ‏ ‏لم أجدها مع أحد غيره ‏

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 0&Rec=7435

Doesnt say anthing about fragments.

Do you think I don't know you are quoting from a shia website?

Why don't you quote the same hadith from a sunni website, seeing the shias do not have the same respect for Bukhari ahadith as the sunnis do, either way you are in effect telling me Mushin Khan is in error yes?

That brings us back to our dilemma where are your qualifications to dismiss what he has to say?

What are you saying now?

This is what you said earlier in this thread:

Quote:
Zaid said he successfully collected the entire Quran. How did he know he collected the entire Quran if he was not Hafeez or not of the Qurraa'a ? [Tell us H2O what does Hafeez mean?] He obviously new cause what he transcribed into a complete book had to have been comfirmed by the Qurraa'a ie ahafeez who knew the entire Quran.


You are now contradicting yourself over what you said about zaid being a hafeez I have to wonder if you have a short attention span or you and your wife are taking turns masquerading as your nick.

You must be got bogged reading comprehension , yes read it all again.

Would you care to tell us what hafiz/hafeez means in english?

Zaid said he successfully collected the entire Quran. How did he know he collected the entire Quran if he was not Hafeez or not of the Qurraa'a ? He obviously new cause what he transcribed into a complete book had to have been comfirmed by the Qurraa'a ie ahafeez who knew the entire Quran.

You understand yet ?

would you care to tell us why Ibn Kathir is in error (and everybody else who disagrees with you) and you are incapable of error?

Already did, go back and read.

Why don't you answer the simple question?, Ibn Kathir is in error so is Yusuf Ali and Sher Ali, and Marmaduke Pickthall, and Hilali and Khan, and everybody else because I have not found any islamic sect that considers sura 9:28 to be a prophecy of saudi oil, except for you (it is to be expected since you are the imam of your own sect). H2O ARE YOU CAPABLE OF MAKING ERRORS, ARE YOUR TRANSLATIONS SUPERIOR TO ALL OF THE ABOVE?

Surely you are aware that I am talking about your signature:

Download Quran and Hadeeth for Free here http://www.islamasoft.co.uk/downloads.html Learn about Islam from a Non dictatorial view

Did you understand that blue. I dont think your included

The koran used in that website is from Pickthall an english fellow using biblical language, you have told us several times that this is a terrible translation yet you reference it in your signature, are you this dishonest in wanting people to read something you regard as full of mistakes?

If it is for your purpose of using them then of course not. Translations are not meant for criticism. They were meant to convey a basic message to peopel who wre sincerely seeking to learn and understand which is not your position.

Wait a minute you have no conscience telling people to read something you regard as a terrible translation just read it alhamduillah, it doesn't occur to you that the 80%+ of muslims that don't understand the arabic are using these 'terrible' translations, or maybe it is really ok to lie for allah, no matter what the lie is as long as you are lying for allah you might get a few more houris?

You told us you were translating the koran into english, did you forget or was that one of your abandoned projects while you decide which pizza slice of islam to adopt?

As I said before. "Coming to a book store near you" that is backed by the University of of Azhar and the University of Medina. Just wait, you will see. then you will find out my Arabic qualification then.

I seriously doubt you are involved at all in any of the stages, if it's going to be anything like what you have been spouting in this forum the fatwa will be arriving in florida faster than you know.

[H2O]

Shows how much you know of your koranic history

I didnt give a number cause there are contradicting views as to the EXACT number by scholars. So no, you are the one that doesnt know anything of Quranic history and the countless opinions of scholars on this issue:

When the above are added to the seventy Ansar who were killed in the battle of Yamama against Musaylima the Arch-Liar, and who were all memorizers of the Qur'an (qurra') [Bukhari and Muslim], the number of the Companions who had memorized the Qur'an rises to over a hundred. This number excludes the numerous Companions -- whether named or unnamed -- whose status of memorizers did not reach us through isnad, as well as the women of both the Muhajirin and the Ansar. All of this memorizing was mass-transmitted. The numbers of the next generations, of course, keep rising exponentially in identical fashion of transmission, and praise belongs to Allah

http://www.sunnah.org/history/memorizers.htm

And since you have equiped your self with sunni madzhab they say different backed by five other scholars. It looks like they didnt agree with Ibn Katheer as you stated he said. Your studies have only begun. And being that you dont have access to the Arabic makes it even worse for a critic.

..Ibn Kathir says 450 died and they didn't know the koran from end to end only parts of it and when they died the parts died with them hence the urgent need to collate it before the koran was lost entirely...

How did he know 450 died ? Where is his source coming from ? You have shown your incompetent reading comprehension tha for some reason give you Psychic illusionary understanding. So according to your source that you believe then if 450 died that was regarded by Uthman as a "Heavy Loss" then those who did not die of the Qurraa'a that was to aid in future wars must have been around the same number to be feared for a "HEAVY LOSS" also if that is the EXACT number.

...have you ever wondered why it doesn't say "a large part of the quraa may be lost" why does it say "a large part of the koran may be lost"...

Did you ever wonder why it only implies to the future which didnt happen yet and never happened again ?

...and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost....

Its doesnt say that the death of the Quraa'a at Yamama resulted in a great loss of the Quran. It merely stated for what MAY HAPPEN if they did not collect it as a book. It was a means of security which is all cases still did not happen again.

...in reference to the koranic material itself..

You have a good imagination I see.

...it would make a lot more sense to suggest the quraa were the ones being lost if the koranic material was not affected, your scholars at understanding-islam even suggests the believers at yamama were recent converts to islam chances of them knowing vasts amounts of the koran were slim to none.

Bring out your list of Scholars that says such a thing with there supported sources and we will bring out a list of scholars that says contrary. Lets see the list please. This how we muslims study other scholar sources. Scholars cannot come up and say something without some sort of backing.

Help me solve this conundrum how do you recite a text five times a day when your text has not been compiled yet?

Easy, its being even done today. They didnt need the Quranic text in a book form to memorize it completely. Remember the Quran was revealed in intervals of 23 years not all at once. Enough time to memory each verse and teach it to others before the next one was revealed.

Looks like allah couldn't protect them a pity seeing this were the guardians of the alledge heavenly text.

"Guardians" I am still trying to figure out where you got this from. Allah never said that muslims were the Guardians of the Quran. Do you mind showing us where Allah said muslims are Guardians of the Quran?

As usual you are trying to wriggle out of this discussion by patronising statements, you forget I don't need any help understanding arabic.

Your own language? Do you think you are arabic?

Technically I am Arab by language not by culture or nationality.

Just like some back in the days called Americans or Europeans "The English" meaning those who spoke English. The term Arab also meant those who spoke Arabic. There nationality was based on where they were from like Egyptians, Palestinians, Sysrians, Jordanians, Moroccan, Iraqis.

[what is the meaning and relevance of this???].

Couldnt you figure it out ?

I suggest you go and read them from the usc website same as me:

English ? You want me to go to an English website ? Why when I have access to non translated sources ?

Show me where I edited the text?

Where are the parenthesis in your Quote ?

Not only is your argument completely irrational, why do you think Zaid would be collecting leaves barks and animal skin IF HE WAS NOT COLLECTING FRAGMENTS?

How big were the leaves (Leafstalks), stones (Tablets), barks, and animal skin (Parchments). Fragments are small portions of material. the irrational is based on your reading comprehension of imagining an inference of size that isnt there.

Do you think I don't know you are quoting from a shia website?

So how would you know ?

Why don't you quote the same hadith from a sunni website, seeing the shias do not have the same respect for Bukhari ahadith as the sunnis do, either way you are in effect telling me Mushin Khan is in error yes?

Your funny what do you think www.al-islam.com is ? This is the English home page which and this is its Arabic home page http://www.al-islam.com/arb/ it not a Shia website. That is the website on it Arabic pages I made the quote from being that I cannot copy out of my own Sahih Al-Bukhari that is in all Arabic.

Would you like to see a Sunni translation of that of that hadeeth ?

Narrated Zaid bin Thabit al-Ansari, one of the scribes of the Revelation: Abu Bakr sent for me after the casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra (memorizers of the Quran, were killed). Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said: "Umar has come to me and said, the people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle) of Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be some casualties among the Qurra at other places, whereby a large part of the Quran may be lost, unless you collect it (in one manuscript, or book)...so Abu Bakr said to me (Zaid bin Thabit): You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness) and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur'an and collect it (in one manuscript)'...So I started locating the Quranic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who know it by heart)..." (24)

http://www.nellaieruvadi.com/islam/qurantext.asp

Here is another one:

Narrated Zaid bin Thabit al-Ansari, one of the scribes of the Revelation: Abu Bakr sent for me after the casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra (memorizers of the Quran, were killed). Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said: "Umar has come to me and said, the people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle) of Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be some casualties among the Qurra at other places, whereby a large part of the Quran may be lost, unless you collect it (in one manuscript, or book)…so Abu Bakr said to me (Zaid bin Thabit): You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness) and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur'an and collect it (in one manuscript)'…So I started locating the Quranic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who know it by heart)…"

http://salam.muslimsonline.com/~bicnews ... abeel3.htm

This one was cool.



I couldnt discribe it better.

That brings us back to our dilemma where are your qualifications to dismiss what he has to say?

I speak Arabic.

Would you care to tell us what hafiz/hafeez means in english?

You mind telling me how you got out of :

Zaid said he successfully collected the entire Quran. How did he know he collected the entire Quran if he was not Hafeez or not of the Qurraa'a ? He obviously new cause what he transcribed into a complete book had to have been comfirmed by the Qurraa'a ie ahafeez who knew the entire Quran.

..that I said Zaid memorized the whole Quran ? He had to know in some way that he had transcribed the entire Quran in which he was order to collect in which I expressed that in order for him to know, if he was not the Qurraa'a [does this sound like I am saying he was or he wasnt ?], it had to be confirmed by those who were of the Qurraa ie ahaveez.

And as for the word hafeez dont you know ?

Why don't you answer the simple question?,

I did go back and read. We are going to be going at this for another month on the same topic for another month. You should know this. Its going to be a revolving door of repeat after repeat.

Ibn Kathir is in error so is Yusuf Ali and Sher Ali, and Marmaduke Pickthall, and Hilali and Khan, and everybody else because I have not found any islamic sect that considers sura 9:28 to be a prophecy of saudi oil

Exactly, you havent found any thats the whole thing. Most of those scholars you mentioned about do not make any comment on 9:28 you mind posting their tafsir other than Ibn Katheer.

Which translator are you going to favor the one that uses SOON or the one that doesnt ?

except for you (it is to be expected since you are the imam of your own sect). H2O ARE YOU CAPABLE OF MAKING ERRORS, ARE YOUR TRANSLATIONS SUPERIOR TO ALL OF THE ABOVE?

First of all what sect do I belong to ? I dont belong to any sect. Now you call me an Imam. So that means, I would have to have Arabic Qualification to be one of these. How else would I teach my students whos families are Arabs and and stundent them selves are Arabs ? Lets see what you get out of this

Wait a minute you have no conscience telling people to read something you regard as a terrible translation

You mind posting for the people when I made that statement what was it I refering to, the whole translation work of the Quran or a particular translation of a verse ? Please post so our guest can see.

it doesn't occur to you that the 80%+ of muslims that don't understand the arabic are using these 'terrible' translations,

And they have been told in the introductories their translations may contain errors and that is not the Quran and for them to refer to the Arabic for confirmation of accuracy. Thats why we have schools in America and Europe for them to come to.

or maybe it is really ok to lie for allah, no matter what the lie is as long as you are lying for allah you might get a few more houris?

That sound like a christian thing to me.

I seriously doubt you are involved at all in any of the stages, if it's going to be anything like what you have been spouting in this forum the fatwa will be arriving in florida faster than you know

Want a copy of it and the reference commented on it by the Mu'alimoon of Al-azhar and Medina ? Just PM me where you would like me to send it to you. Dont worry I wont send you any viruses or try to hack your computer, not my style.

[RomeSweetHome]

H20 Wrote:

Go find someone who speaks Arabic. ROME says he speaks. Wouldnt he be the perfect canadate to debate in our own language ? SO ask him to confirm what I said.

I have tried to stay out of the "heavy" debating to allow you to respond quicker to Liberate, as you made the following comment in your previous post;

Rome, we will get back to you in a few maybe days, maybe months as soon as Liberate is finishes.

Anyhow it seems that you want me to be involved in this debate, so here I am.

H20 Wrote:

Is the lecture recited no less than five times a day to memory ? That is a bad anology t compare with the preservation of the Quran which was, is recited dailey in dawn, noon, evening, sunset, night and more.

Here you are trying to assert that the Quran was recited daily, not once but five times, how could one forget the scripture?

Well lets see what the hadith itself says about the memory of Mohammed himself.

Sahih al-Bukhari: book 61, volume 6

558. Narrated Aisha: Allah's Apostle heard a man reciting the Qur'an at night, and said, "May Allah bestow His Mercy on him, as he has reminded me of such-and-such Verses of such-and-such Suras, which I was caused to forget."

Didn't Mohammed pray five times daily? How was your prophet to forget some verses of the Quran?

559. Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet said, "Why does anyone of the people say, 'I have forgotten such-and-such Verses (of the Qur'an)?' He, in fact, is caused (by Allah) to forget."

Why would Allah want anyone to forget verses of the Quran?

Now lets see what the following hadith says about the companions memory.

Sahih Muslim: book 5, volume 2

(2286) Abu Harb b. Abu al-Aswad reported on the authority of his father that Abu Musa al-Ash'ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur'an and he said: You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bar'at. I have forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: "If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and [b]I have forgetten it, but remember (this much) out of it: [/b]"O people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise: (lxi 2.) and "that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13)

Above we see one of the Companions testifying the existence of part of a surah that is no longer in the Qur'an because it had been forgotten by him.

can you locate the above surah for me in the present day Quran?

H20 Wrote:

In Englsih or Arabic ? Rome he might need your help on this, he cant see what we can see lets see if you will correct your brother in his error.

Do you realize how pathetic your ambition is. And do you realize you are argueing with us with sources that are not valid with us in your criticism as a christian ? Thus will be shown below, and again I want to hear ROME get into to this but he is staying clear. He aided you on the begining but doesnt when it come to validity of translating the Arabic, I wonder why ?

I havent gone anywhere, I explained above my reasons for not getting to invloved in this debate.

H20 Wrote:

‏فتتبع القرآن فاجمعه I would like to know where in that does it say fragments ? Liberate I was coming from what the hadeeth says in Arabic when I made my statement. We are coming from two different sources. I am coming and speaking from teh Arabic you are speaking from the interpolation of a translator that DOESNT EXIST IN THE ARABIC TEXT.

‏فتتبع القرآن فاجمعه Means "So collect the entire Quran" as it is being addressed to Zaid in the singular imperative.

Angain I would like someone to show me were in that Hadeeth in Arabic is "fragments" at ? ROME want to help your Christian brother. ?

A simple reply would be that the word "fragments" is not included in the above hadith in the arabic text.

But neither does it exclude the notion that the Quran may have been collected by text, orally or even both.

What is the arabic word for fragments in the arabic Fusha that might have been used, if the word was actually present?

H20 Wrote:

Yea, so you wnat me to accept a scholar that say its of for sisters to not wear the Hijab like the Scholar in France did ? Pathetic. This is not Christianity . We are not Christians. I still want to know how those paranthesis got edit from Khan's translation to make it look like it was a translation of the Arabic ?

What was the reason the scholar made that judgment?

Could it have been to respect the laws of the country that you have been allowed to live in as equal people, with equal rights?

The Christians and Jews that live in your Islamic countrys are second class citizens and in some cases like Egypt have to pay a tax (jiza) for believing what they do.

You come to Christian countrys and are free to build mosques and be equal like everybody eles as long as you respect the law, and that you cannot do? You want to inforce your doctrine of Islamic belief above the laws of a non Islamic country! If you dont like the laws then you are free to go home.

In Egypt to this day Coptic Christians are not allowed to build Churches or even rebuild broken down churches, why?

H20 Wrote:

As I said before. "Coming to a book store near you" that is backed by the University of of Azhar and the University of Medina. Just wait, you will see. then you will find out my Arabic qualification then.

I will be waiting for this new interpretation of the Quran, by doing this do you admit that all todays interpretations are vastly incorrect?


H20 You are trying to impose that the Quran is perfect, that the surahs have been completely collected into the Quan, this is untrue. The fact is muslims cannot bring themselves to believe that the Quran has been tampered with, and parts of the Quran have been lost forever.

Abdullah ibn Umar, in the earliest days of Islam said:

It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: "Let none of you say 'I have acquired the whole of the Qur'an'. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Qur'an has disappeared? Rather let him say 'I have acquired what has survived.'" (as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.524).


A part of the Quran was eaten by a goat for crying out loud, I am trying to locate the hadith.

Peace

[Loki]

Some other hadith material wich refers to the quran's incompleteness.

1. It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: " Let none of you say 'I have acquired the whole of the Qur'an'. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Qur'an has disappeared? Rather let him say 'I have acquired what has survived.'" (as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.524).

2. We used to recite a Sura which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: "If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust" (Sahih Muslim, Vol. 2.p.501)

3. "God sent Muhammed and sent down the Scripture to him. Part of what he sent down was the passage on stoning, we read it, we were taught it, and we heeded it, The apostle stoned and we stoned them after him. I fear that in time to come men will say that they find no mention of stoning in God's book and thereby go astray in neglecting an ordinance which God has sent down. Verily stoning in the book of God is a penalty laid on married men and women who commit adultery. (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasulullah. p.684).

4. A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that it had been
revealed in the holy Quran that ten clear sucklings make the
marriages unlawful then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five
sucklings and Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) died and it
was before that time (found) in the holy Quran (and recited by the
Muslims). (Sahih Muslim, Vol. 2, p. 740).

5. In one of the six most authentic Hadith books by Ibne Maja we find a parable told by Hazrat AyshaR, in which she says:
"The aa'yaa on rape and nursing of babies were lying in book form, that was kept in the patio. When the Holy Messenger passed away, we became busy in his funeral. During this time, our domesticated pet goat ate the manuscript of these two aa'yaa. And so these aa'yaa were wasted."

6. There are seventeen thousand Ayah in real Quran. (Al Shafi, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 616)

Seems like RomeSweetRome used a couple of these allready, didn't see it, sorry if i'm repeating.

[Liberate]

Shows how much you know of your koranic history

I didnt give a number cause there are contradicting views as to the EXACT number by scholars. So no, you are the one that doesnt know anything of Quranic history and the countless opinions of scholars on this issue:

Are you a scholar of arabic and the koran H20? Why do you contradict koranic translations and tafsirs when you have no qualifications to do so?

When the above are added to the seventy Ansar who were killed in the battle of Yamama against Musaylima the Arch-Liar, and who were all memorizers of the Qur'an (qurra') [Bukhari and Muslim], the number of the Companions who had memorized the Qur'an rises to over a hundred. This number excludes the numerous Companions -- whether named or unnamed -- whose status of memorizers did not reach us through isnad, as well as the women of both the Muhajirin and the Ansar. All of this memorizing was mass-transmitted. The numbers of the next generations, of course, keep rising exponentially in identical fashion of transmission, and praise belongs to Allah

http://www.sunnah.org/history/memorizers.htm

How does this contradict the number of 450 by Ibn Kathir?

And since you have equiped your self with sunni madzhab they say different backed by five other scholars. It looks like they didnt agree with Ibn Katheer as you stated he said. Your studies have only begun. And being that you dont have access to the Arabic makes it even worse for a critic.

Would you care to show us the opinion of the five other scholars? Your opinion on the arabic translations to english is taken for what it is an opinion and fully entitled to it no matter how absurd it is yours and yours alone but since you proclaim it is incumbent on the majority and you have the onus on the truth and interpretation of islam, prove you are in a fit state to interpret the koran starting with your arabic scholar qualificaitons.

..Ibn Kathir says 450 died and they didn't know the koran from end to end only parts of it and when they died the parts died with them hence the urgent need to collate it before the koran was lost entirely...

How did he know 450 died ? Where is his source coming from ? ...

From those stories that gives foundation to your faith that you chose to reject, hadiths. Care to show us your sources that contradict the numbers let us see where their sources are coming from.

So according to your source that you believe then if 450 died that was regarded by Uthman as a "Heavy Loss" then those who did not die of the Qurraa'a that was to aid in future wars must have been around the same number to be feared for a "HEAVY LOSS" also if that is the EXACT number.

Run through that again, what are you trying to say here?

...have you ever wondered why it doesn't say "a large part of the quraa may be lost" why does it say "a large part of the koran may be lost"...

Did you ever wonder why it only implies to the future which didnt happen yet and never happened again ?

What are you talking about? Should we get into another debate about how your koran was collated and amended right up to the 10th century by the dajjal and his scribes (who helped allah by adding 1,000 characters to the koranic text), and how Puin shows the earliest koranic manuscripts to be revision upon revision.?

If someone memorised something and they die, and somebody else comes to salvage what they and other people memorised into a book why would they be saying let us compile it before a large part of the book may be lost (are the quraa the quran???) does it not occur to you that parts of the book have already been lost especially when there are hadiths from MUSLIMS that state this is the case??

...and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost....

Its doesnt say that the death of the Quraa'a at Yamama resulted in a great loss of the Quran. It merely stated for what MAY HAPPEN if they did not collect it as a book. It was a means of security which is all cases still did not happen again.

"we have suffered losses at yamamma and we may suffer loses at other places so I suggest you compile the quran from the leaves, barks and animal skin you have and the memory of those that remember parts of it in case we may lose the koran" to you somehow this does not refer to actual loss being incurred on the koranic text itself, especially when there are hadiths that state such and such a verse is missing, it is unbelievable the levels westernised muslims will go to justify and maintain the lie.

Tell us H2O when was the koran arranged in the order it is today, and what was the purpose of that arrangement?

...it would make a lot more sense to suggest the quraa were the ones being lost if the koranic material was not affected, your scholars at understanding-islam even suggests the believers at yamama were recent converts to islam chances of them knowing vasts amounts of the koran were slim to none.

Bring out your list of Scholars that says such a thing with there supported sources and we will bring out a list of scholars that says contrary. Lets see the list please. This how we muslims study other scholar sources. Scholars cannot come up and say something without some sort of backing.

Help me solve this conundrum how do you recite a text five times a day when your text has not been compiled yet?

Easy, its being even done today. They didnt need the Quranic text in a book form to memorize it completely. Remember the Quran was revealed in intervals of 23 years not all at once. Enough time to memory each verse and teach it to others before the next one was revealed.

When was the last time someone dictated something to you for 23 yrs and you memorised it end to end without writing anything down, this is just plain ridiculous didn't Mohammed have scribes that were writing down the abomination of a revelation?, are you going to deny this partiocular bit of your koranic history or maybe those hadiths were fabricated.

Looks like allah couldn't protect them a pity seeing this were the guardians of the alledge heavenly text.

"Guardians" I am still trying to figure out where you got this from. Allah never said that muslims were the Guardians of the Quran.

Tell us H2O what ahafeez means?

As usual you are trying to wriggle out of this discussion by patronising statements, you forget I don't need any help understanding arabic.

Your own language? Do you think you are arabic?

Technically I am Arab by language not by culture or nationality.

You are now going to start twisting applications of the english language like you do with arabic (strange thing is if koranic arabic is so clear a child can understand it why do you need an english thesaurus to find varying words that agree with what you want it to say and proclaim that all the other translations are in error and this is what the koran really says?) I am very sorry to disappoint you H2O I can understand the headache you are causing your mother, you are greek you can't change where you are from the first steps to curing the madness that has made you become a mujaheddin for islam is acceptance of who you are. Let me guess at one time too you were jewish by language too?

Do you recall a certain Johnny Walker of the taliban fame? Guess who he reminds me of?

I suggest you go and read them from the usc website same as me:

English ? You want me to go to an English website ? Why when I have access to non translated sources ?

The website also has access to the same non translated sources the difference between you and the translators are the translators are equipped to translate the arabic as they are scholars you on the other hand are not up to their level you are in no position to dictate to them what their religion says.

Show me where I edited the text?

Where are the parenthesis in your Quote ?

Go to the usc website link I gave, have a look at it and tell me where and what I edited.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamental ... 09.089.301

Volume 9, Book 89, Number 301:
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:
...So you should search for the fragmentary scripts of the Quran and collect it (in one Book)..."

The parentheses are displayed on the website as above surrounding in one book and not surrounding fragmentary scripts, since al-islam has an english version would you care to show us what it says for Bukhari volume 9 book 89 number 301?

Not only is your argument completely irrational, why do you think Zaid would be collecting leaves barks and animal skin IF HE WAS NOT COLLECTING FRAGMENTS?

How big were the leaves (Leafstalks), stones (Tablets), barks, and animal skin (Parchments). Fragments are small portions of material. the irrational is based on your reading comprehension of imagining an inference of size that isnt there

.

This is not worthy of a response...what are you trying to say here??
the size of the leafstalks stones, barks and animal skin??? relevance?

That brings us back to our dilemma where are your qualifications to dismiss what he has to say?

I speak Arabic.

Anybody can claim they speak arabic,you have been saying this from the beginning that every known translation and tafsir that does not agree with you is in error, what separates the wheat from the chaff? where are your qualifications to say anything related to islam? You speak arabic so does Osama so what?

Would you care to tell us what hafiz/hafeez means in english?

..that I said Zaid memorized the whole Quran ? He had to know in some way that he had transcribed the entire Quran in which he was order to collect in which I expressed that in order for him to know, if he was not the Qurraa'a [does this sound like I am saying he was or he wasnt ?], it had to be confirmed by those who were of the Qurraa ie ahaveez.

And as for the word hafeez dont you know ?

I was hoping you would tell your audience, you did say how did Zaid know he had the whole koran unless he was of the ahafeez did you not?

You then contradict yourself by claiming you didn't say he memorised the whole koran when ahafeez/hafiz means precisely that somebody who has committed the entire koran to memory, H2O for a muslim apologist you are an embarassment.

Why don't you answer the simple question?,

I did go back and read. We are going to be going at this for another month on the same topic for another month. You should know this. Its going to be a revolving door of repeat after repeat.

It seems you have picked up the habits of your foul mouthed shia brother.

Ibn Kathir is in error so is Yusuf Ali and Sher Ali, and Marmaduke Pickthall, and Hilali and Khan, and everybody else because I have not found any islamic sect that considers sura 9:28 to be a prophecy of saudi oil

Exactly, you havent found any thats the whole thing. Most of those scholars you mentioned about do not make any comment on 9:28 you mind posting their tafsir other than Ibn Katheer.

Uhm they do not mention any saudi oil prophecy because it does not exist, who agrees with you H2O regarding the saudi oil prophecy? where are their websites? you are so desperate to find anything to deem Mohammed prophethood you are clinging on straws making you a laughing stock, show us one tafsir anywhere that suggests sura 9:28 is a saudi oil prophecy, maybe that verse about the moon being split occured when Armstrong landed on the moon right?

Which translator are you going to favor the one that uses SOON or the one that doesnt ?

except for you (it is to be expected since you are the imam of your own sect). H2O ARE YOU CAPABLE OF MAKING ERRORS, ARE YOUR TRANSLATIONS SUPERIOR TO ALL OF THE ABOVE?

First of all what sect do I belong to ? I dont belong to any sect. Now you call me an Imam. So that means, I would have to have Arabic Qualification to be one of these. How else would I teach my students whos families are Arabs and and stundent them selves are Arabs ? Lets see what you get out of this

Yes ofcourse you don't belong in any sect and you don't believe in sects but you go only to the masjids of the sunnis as opposed to the shias, BUT YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN ANY SECTS. So you realise you need an arabic qualification to teach arabic and interpret the koran and islamic jurispundence pls tell us what your arabic scholar qualifications are I am sure everybody is dying to know.

Wait a minute you have no conscience telling people to read something you regard as a terrible translation

You mind posting for the people when I made that statement what was it I refering to, the whole translation work of the Quran or a particular translation of a verse ? Please post so our guest can see.

When? Good grief your posts are littered with ridicule and insults against anybody who has translated the koran into english, even respected scholars of islam, some of them Cambridge graduates yet hearing you it sounds like they didn't understand english, where are your qualifications to dismiss what these people have to say?

it doesn't occur to you that the 80%+ of muslims that don't understand the arabic are using these 'terrible' translations,

And they have been told in the introductories their translations may contain errors and that is not the Quran and for them to refer to the Arabic for confirmation of accuracy. Thats why we have schools in America and Europe for them to come to.

Wait a minute, would you care to answer a yes or no question:

Do you think your translation is error proof? yes or no?

or maybe it is really ok to lie for allah, no matter what the lie is as long as you are lying for allah you might get a few more houris?

That sound like a christian thing to me.

Excuse me?

You think the end game of christianity is to obtain houris (This is where the english whore is derived from how do you look yourself in the mirror with the full knowledge that you are doing all this to get whores) in a fornication wine frolick paradise called jannah? I am sorry but thats your religion, you have been very quiet around the aspects of paradise other than to laugh at it I am sure your fellow muslims will be real impressed that this self professed one man defender of the faith when pressed the best he can do is laugh at his own religion.

I seriously doubt you are involved at all in any of the stages, if it's going to be anything like what you have been spouting in this forum the fatwa will be arriving in florida faster than you know

Want a copy of it and the reference commented on it by the Mu'alimoon of Al-azhar and Medina ? Just PM me where you would like me to send it to you. Dont worry I wont send you any viruses or try to hack your computer, not my style.

Why don't you put it up on a website so it can be accesible to all if you believe you have the onus on the truth of islam don't you want everybody to have access to it? what are you scared of? I would rather ask your al-azhar mentors if they sanction your free lance translations of saudi oil prophecy in 9:28 and that the koran should be interpreted relative to the context when it says fight those that don't believe wether they be the people of the book or not, I am sure al-azhar would really like to know why a non scholar of the language in which arabic is not his native tongue is reinterpreting their religion for them, so for the 1400 yrs of islam only now in the 21st century is the truth coming out courtesy of a greek megalomaniac who thinks he is the greatest koran translator, reinterpreter and hadith rejecter this side of the atlantic?

[H2O]

Sahih al-Bukhari: book 61, volume 6

558. Narrated Aisha: Allah's Apostle heard a man reciting the Qur'an at night, and said, "May Allah bestow His Mercy on him, as he has reminded me of such-and-such Verses of such-and-such Suras, which I was caused to forget."

Didn't Mohammed pray five times daily? How was your prophet to forget some verses of the Quran?

And I am sure you know if anthing including that ahadeeth, even sahih, that contradicts the Quran, not to mention the majority of the ahadeeths, it is reject as false ahadeeth. Allah says:

Quran has authority over hadeeth. And the hadeeth you mention contradicts the majority of other ahdeeth that stated the Prophet recited the entire Quran every year during the month of Ramadhaan. You know this, but why favor a hadeeth that contradict even other hadeeths ?

And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgetten it, but remember (this much) out of it: "O people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise: (lxi 2.) and "that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13)

Above we see one of the Companions testifying the existence of part of a surah that is no longer in the Qur'an because it had been forgotten by him.

Who is WE and how many others is being spoken about other than Abu Musa al-Ash'ari ? He was a Yemenis and a leader of his tribe that went to another tribe(Basra) to hear them recite Quran. The contect does not denote "We" as refereing to all the companions of the Prophet. This is a matter of your interpretation.

can you locate the above surah for me in the present day Quran?

Yes sure.


http://quran.muslim-web.com/sura.htm?aya=061 this is Surah 62:2 refered to by Abu Musa al-Ash'ari


and the other is http://quran.muslim-web.com/sura.htm?aya=017 which Surah 17:13

Both Surah's are there.

But neither does it exclude the notion that the Quran may have been collected by text, orally or even both

It give the notion of both ie it was collected from from written text and what was memorize as show below.



As I go back to the beging, one confirmed the other in which the oral held preference to the correction of the text it seld, but of course it would take more than one hafeez to do this to confirm the accuracy of the text.

Could it have been to respect the laws of the country that you have been allowed to live in as equal people, with equal rights?

I cant be serious right ? No, we dont compromise our religion for the sake of a state.

The Christians and Jews that live in your Islamic countrys are second class citizens and in some cases like Egypt have to pay a tax (jiza) for believing what they do.

"Render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar" does this ring a bell ?

You come to Christian countrys and are free to build mosques

Come ? I didnt come any were I was always here. You are wrong ! I cant speak for Europe but I can for sure speak about here. Obviously you dont know the procedures one has to go through to build or establish a building structure.

1) Needs apoval from the city hall
2) City hall commitee members who are residence of that city that regulate what they can and cannot have.
3) The memebers are made of majority Christians and some Jews and Atheists.

This is our Masjed project http://www.icbr.org/ that we strugled for 4 years AGAINST Jews and Christian to build who denied us to build our Masjid which had to go to STATE SUPREME COURT. Now we have established the school in which we pray in until the actual musalah is built.

SO please save you balestic wichful thinking about we can build our masjid freely. We American Muslims spend more money in courts to get an approval through the law that is denied by so called Christians and Jews, than on our actual project that causes us to be delayed.

and be equal like everybody eles as long as you respect the law, and that you cannot do?

What, run around like an animal liek those on the Jerry Springer Show ? To be like the People on the COPS show ? To go to clubs drink, have sex, walk around half naked ? What does doing what I believe is right that does not harm other have anything to do with EQUAL . Rubbish. There is no EQUALITY in the West.

Blacks are still being discriminated against. Now Arabs and muslims are being discriminated against. Look how many muslims lost their Jobs or people refused to hire them after 9/11. Rich and poor are not equal, they do not treat you equal in ANY COUNTRY. That word is a Joke.

You want to inforce your doctrine of Islamic belief above the laws of a non Islamic country! If you dont like the laws then you are free to go home.

Ehm ! As long as the laws DO NOT compel us to do something against our beliefs we have no problem. Now to France banning Hijab, ther also banned Jewish and Christian symbols as well from public school. The problem we had is when a scholar who was respected came out in public and said its ok for our sister not to wear Hijab he was completely out of his darn mind.

So if your scholar told you its ok to have fornication cause everbody else does it do you think its right ?

In Egypt to this day Coptic Christians are not allowed to build Churches or even rebuild broken down churches, why?

Eh ! Before the 1st Amend. was created no mosque could be build publically in Christian America. The 1st Amend. is not even more than a century old yet.

I will be waiting for this new interpretation of the Quran, by doing this do you admit that all todays interpretations are vastly incorrect?

We will make sure I include this into the introduction. I like how you said NEW INTERPRETATION. In order to do this you would have to find the flaw in our translation. Dont worry we will keep you up to date. Just remember the name Dimitri in which I will retain my name in it.

H20 You are trying to impose that the Quran is perfect, that the surahs have been completely collected into the Quan, this is untrue.

No it is true.

The fact is muslims cannot bring themselves to believe that the Quran has been tampered with, and parts of the Quran have been lost forever.

You mean some muslims just like some chiristians right ? You answer to this is our answer about them also. Well, I guess thats their problem right ? Not ours.

Abdullah ibn Umar, in the earliest days of Islam said:

It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: "Let none of you say 'I have acquired the whole of the Qur'an'. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Qur'an has disappeared? Rather let him say 'I have acquired what has survived.'" (as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.524).

And we disagree with this, and will continue to. Before we go any further on this, is the Hadeeth Daif or Sahih. Also it contradicts other hadeeths. So why favor this over the others that said the opposite ?

A part of the Quran was eaten by a goat for crying out loud, I am trying to locate the hadith.

You make it sound like tha was the only copy or other didnt memorize it. Again we come back to this beuatiful word "


Said Zaid, the main Cheif scribe. All I have been seeing you CHristians to in criticism of Islam is choose hadeeth that you like which appeals to your advantage but disregard the other ahadeeth that contradict it. So how do you know which is right ?

What is the arabic word for fragments in the arabic Fusha that might have been used, if the word was actually present?

kisrah, tajzi'ah, or takseer. However kisrah would more fit the context per what Liberate was infering to in his criticism

------------------------------------------------NEXT LOKI----------------------------

Loki are you Irish ? Every time I see your name it makes me hungry cause I think of Lucky Charms.

Some other hadith material wich refers to the quran's incompleteness.

1. It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: " Let none of you say 'I have acquired the whole of the Qur'an'. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Qur'an has disappeared? Rather let him say 'I have acquired what has survived.'" (as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.524).

You remind me of a revolving door.

2. We used to recite a Sura which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: "If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust" (Sahih Muslim, Vol. 2.p.501)

I bet you didnt go back and read all the hadeeths about that.

Book 005, Hadith Number 2277.
------------------------------
Chapter : If there were two valleys (of gold for the son, of Adam, he would long for the third one.

Abu Huraira reported from the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) as having said this: The heart of an old person feels young for the love of two things: love for long life and wealth.


Book 005, Hadith Number 2278.
------------------------------
Chapter : If there were two valleys (of gold for the son, of Adam, he would long for the third one.

Abu Huraira reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had said this: The heart of an old person is young for two things: for long life and love for wealth.


Book 005, Hadith Number 2279.
------------------------------
Chapter : If there were two valleys (of gold for the son, of Adam, he would long for the third one.

Anas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The son of Adam grows old, but two (desires) in him remain young: desire for wealth and desire for life.


Book 005, Hadith Number 2280.
------------------------------
Chapter : If there were two valleys (of gold for the son, of Adam, he would long for the third one.

A hadith like this has been narrated by Anas through another chain of transmitters.


Book 005, Hadith Number 2281.
------------------------------
Chapter : If there were two valleys (of gold for the son, of Adam, he would long for the third one.

This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Anas through another chain of transmitters.


Book 005, Hadith Number 2282.
------------------------------
Chapter : one is not rich because of the abundance of goods.

Anas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If the son of Adam were to possess two valleys of riches, he would long for the third one. And the stomach of the son of Adam is not filled but with dust. And Allah returns to him who repents.


Book 005, Hadith Number 2283.
------------------------------
Chapter : one is not rich because of the abundance of goods.

Anas b. Malik reported: I heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) as saying this, but I do not know whether this thing was revealed to him or not, but he said to.


Book 005, Hadith Number 2284.
------------------------------
Chapter : one is not rich because of the abundance of goods.

Anas b. Malik reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If there were two valleys of gold for the son of Adam, he would long for another one and his mouth will not be filled but with dust, and Allah returns to him who repents.


Book 005, Hadith Number 2285.
------------------------------
Chapter : one is not rich because of the abundance of goods.

Ibn Abbas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If there were for the son of Adam a valley full of riches, he would long to possess another one like it, and Ibn Adam does not feel satiated but with dust. (14:13) And Allah returns to him who returns (to him). (14:14) Ibn Abbas said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur'an or not; and in the narration transmitted by Zuhair it was said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur'an, and he made no mention of Ibn Abbas.


Book 005, Hadith Number 2286.
------------------------------
Chapter : one is not rich because of the abundance of goods.

Abu Harb b. Abu al-Aswad reported on the authority of his father that Abu Musa al-Ash'ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur'an and he said: You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: "If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it: "Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise" (lxi 2.) and "that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13).

So who side did you take ? Abu Musa al-Ash'ari ? I would like to know how you christians keep picking and choosing hadeeths that are counteracted by others. Abu Musa al-Ash'ari had a faulty memory and confused one of the Prophets hadeeth with the Quran. Also in Arabic of the Hadeeth is different from the Quranic Arabic.

3. "God sent Muhammed and sent down the Scripture to him. Part of what he sent down was the passage on stoning, we read it, we were taught it, and we heeded it, The apostle stoned and we stoned them after him. I fear that in time to come men will say that they find no mention of stoning in God's book and thereby go astray in neglecting an ordinance which God has sent down. Verily stoning in the book of God is a penalty laid on married men and women who commit adultery. (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasulullah. p.684).

Maybe you misunderstood it. "GOD revealed or sent down to who ? What revelation of the RAjam are they talking about and its confirmation ?

Volumn 008, Book 082, Hadith Number 803.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Ash-Sha'bi : From 'Ali when the latter stoned a lady to death on a Friday. 'Ali said, "I have stoned her according to the tradition of Allah's Apostle."


Volumn 008, Book 082, Hadith Number 804.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Ash Shaibani : I asked 'Abdullah bin Abi Aufa, 'Did Allah's Apostle carry out the Rajam penalty (i.e. stoning to death)?' He said, "Yes." I said, "Before the revelation of Surat-ar-Nur or after it?" He replied, "I don't Know."

The stoning was not specifically mentioned in the Quran but instead the Quran confirmed the practice of rajam (stoning) as we continue to find out what was meant my what Allah Revealed or Sent down and what verses of the Quran confirmed the pratice of stoning.

Surah 3

[1] Alif Lam Mim.

[2] Allah! there is no god but He, the Living, the Self-Subsisting, Eternal.

[3] It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Musa) and the Gospel (of 'Isa).

[4] Before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the Criterion (of judgment between right and wrong). Then those who reject Faith in the Signs of Allah will suffer the severest penalty, and Allah is Exalted in Might, Lord of Retribution.

What other books did Allah send down other than the Quran in our teaching ? Lets finish up with hadeeth pertaining to the same subject you desired not to understand properly.

Volumn 008, Book 082, Hadith Number 809.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Ibn 'Umar : A Jew and a Jewess were brought to Allah's Apostle on a charge of committing an illegal sexual intercourse. The Prophet asked them. "What is the legal punishment (for this sin) in your Book (Torah)?" They replied, "Our priests have innovated the punishment of blackening the faces with charcoal and Tajbiya." 'Abdullah bin Salam said, "O Allah's Apostle, tell them to bring the Torah." The Torah was brought, and then one of the Jews put his hand over the Divine Verse of the Rajam (stoning to death) and started reading what preceded and what followed it. On that, Ibn Salam said to the Jew, "Lift up your hand." Behold! The Divine Verse of the Rajam was under his hand. So Allah's Apostle ordered that the two (sinners) be stoned to death, and so they were stoned. Ibn 'Umar added: So both of them were stoned at the Balat and I saw the Jew sheltering the Jewess.

And again where the specific verse of the Stoning came from that was inforced:

Book 017, Hadith Number 4214.
------------------------------
Chapter : Stoning to death of jews and other Dhimmis in case of adultery.

Al-Bara' b. 'Azib reported: There happened to pass by Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) a Jew blackened and lashed. Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) called them (the Jews) and said: Is this the punishment that you find in your Book (Torah) as a prescribed punishment for adultery? They said: Yes. He (the Holy Prophet) called one of the scholars amongst them and said: I ask you in the name of Allah Who sent down the Torah on Moses if that is the prescribed punishment for adultery that you find in your Book. He said: No. Had you not asked me in the name of Allah, I would not have given you this information. We find stoning to death (as punishment prescribed in the Torah). But this (crime) became quite common amongst our aristocratic class. So when we caught hold of any rich person (indulging in this offence) we spared him, but when we caught hold of a helpless person we imposed the prescribed punishment upon him. We then said: Let us agree (on a punishment) which we can inflict both upon the rich and the poor. So We decided to blacken the face with coal and flog as a substitute punishment for stoning. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: O Allah, I am the first to revive Thy command when they had made it dead. He then commanded and he (the offender) was stoned to death. Allah, the Majestic and Glorious, sent down (this verse): "O Messenger, (the behaviour of) those who vie with one another in denying the truth should not grieve you..." up to "is vouchsafed unto you, accept it" (v. 41)2176 It was said (by the Jews): Go to Muhammad; it he commands you to blacken the face and award flogging (as punishment for adultery), then accept it, but it he gives verdict for stoning, then avoid it. It was (then) that Allah, the Majestic and Great, sent down (these verses): "And they who do not judge in accordance with what Allah has revealed are, indeed, deniers of the truth" (v. 44); "And they who do not judge in accordance with what Allah has revealed-they, they indeed are the wrongdoers" (v. 45); "And they who do not judge in accordance with what God has revealed-they are the iniquitous (v. 47). (All these verses) were revealed in connection with the non-believers.

The Prophet gave the order according to the Torah for the Adulter (Jew) and Adulteress(Jewess) to be stoned in which the Quranic verses 5:41-47 of the Quran had confirmed the stoning as the hadith mentions:

Surah 5

[41] O Prophet! let not those grieve thee, who race each other into Unbelief: (whether it be) among those who say "We believe" with their lips but whose hearts have no faith; or it be among the Jews, - men who will listen to any lie, - will listen even to others who have never so much as come to thee. They change the words from their (right) times and places: they say, "If ye are given this, take it, but if not, beware! "If anyone's trial is intended by Allah, thou hast no authority in the least for him against Allah. For such, it is not Allah's will to purify their hearts. For them there is disgrace in this world, and in the Hereafter a heavy punishment.

[42] (They are fond of) listening to falsehood, of devouring anything forbidden. If they do come to thee, either judge between them, or decline to interfere. If thou decline, they cannot hurt thee in the least. If thou judge, judge in equity between them. For Allah loveth those who judge in equity.

[43] But why do they come to thee for decision, when they have (their own) Law before them? Therein is the (plain) command of Allah; yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) People of Faith.

[44] It was We who revealed the Law (to Musa): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the Prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah's Will, by the Rabbis and the Doctors of Law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's Book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear Me, and sell not My Signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers.

[45] We ordained therein for them: "Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal." But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it is an act of atonement for himself. And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) wrong-doers.

[46] And in their footsteps We sent 'Isa the son of Maryam, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.

[47] Let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.

So there goes your verses that was revealed confirming the pratice of Rajam. An thus is why it was continued. In order to understand the history of the verses of the Quran must understand the Quran historically.

4. A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that it had been
revealed in the holy Quran that ten clear sucklings make the
marriages unlawful then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five
sucklings and Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) died and it
was before that time (found) in the holy Quran (and recited by the
Muslims). (Sahih Muslim, Vol. 2, p. 740).

Which is refering to Surah 4:23 that mentions all together a man and a woman of the same suckle cannot marry all together regardless of of how many time they suckled. The hadeeth does not stand to that Quran that does mention the prohibitation of sucklings.

Prohibited to you (for marriage) are: your mothers, daughters, sisters, father's sisters, mother's sisters, brother's daughters, sister's daughters, foster-mothers who gave you suck, foster sisters (daughters of women who suckled you), your wives' mothers, your step-daughters under your guardianship born to your wives to whom you have gone in ( consum-mated marriage), no prohibition if you have not gone in, (those who have been) wives of your sons proceeding from your loins (natural sons), and two sisters in wedlock at one and the same time except for what is past, for God is Oft-forgiving." (4:23)

Quran is clean cut on this issue. No verse was left out and no verse mentioned anything about the number amount of times of the suckle to make a Nikah harram. The hadeeth, in the light of Quran, is distorted. Again Hadeeth doesn not supersede Quran, nor is Hadeeth the Word of Allah.

5. In one of the six most authentic Hadith books by Ibne Maja we find a parable told by Hazrat AyshaR, in which she says:
"The aa'yaa on rape and nursing of babies were lying in book form, that was kept in the patio. When the Holy Messenger passed away, we became busy in his funeral. During this time, our domesticated pet goat ate the manuscript of these two aa'yaa. And so these aa'yaa were wasted."

There were more than one copy of the Quranic text. Your above is remotely irrelevant due to the fact countless ahadeeth attest to multiple copies and Memorizers of the Quran not to mention this was before the battle of Yamama when there were countless memorizors and even after.

6. There are seventeen thousand Ayah in real Quran. (Al Shafi, Vol. No. 2, Page No. 616)

Verses sepration were not introduced until later on when the tashkeel was introduced. The Quran when written was written with no ayah division. Being that that is not a hadeeth you quoted but from Imami Shafi comments that were more than likely taken out of context.

Both you and ROME did nothing but copy and paste from Christian websites and didnt have the ardacity to confirm the information. But thanks for letting our spectators know your post are mere copy cat and that your supposed finding are not your own.

Seems like RomeSweetRome used a couple of these allready, didn't see it, sorry if i'm repeating.

Yup thats what you did. But its ok I am use to the carbage that needs to be swept out.

Let me go on to liberate now lets see what he got to say. Wow, I am taking on all three of you know. I can imagine what the response will be.

--------------------------------------------NEXT LIBERATE-----------------------

Are you a scholar of arabic and the koran H20? Why do you contradict koranic translations and tafsirs when you have no qualifications to do so?

Cause they are wrong that why. Show me where it says I have to be a scholar other than an Arabic speaker with eveidence to refute another scholars claim ? Remember this isnt Christianity which seems you have been using this lame excuse that I have to be a scholar to have authority to dismiss another scholars statment. This is what they do in Christianity not Islam.

How does this contradict the number of 450 by Ibn Kathir?

Whats the difference between 104 and 450 ?

Would you care to show us the opinion of the five other scholars?

Sure:

1. al-Nawawi, al-Tibyan fi Adab Hamala al-Qur'an (p. 31);

2. al-Dhahabi, Tabaqat al-Qurra' (1:24-50)

3. al-Suyuti, al-Itqan fi `Ulum al-Qur'an (1:70-72);

4. al-Zarkashi, al-Burhan fi `Ulum al-Qur'an (1:241-243);

5. Nur al-Din `Itr, `Ulum al-Qur'an al-Karim (p. 164-166).

Look them up your self. Get off you Online Christian Critic school and go to a real library.

Your opinion on the arabic translations to english is taken for what it is an opinion and fully entitled to it no matter how absurd it is yours and yours alone but since you proclaim it is incumbent on the majority and you have the onus on the truth and interpretation of islam, prove you are in a fit state to interpret the koran starting with your arabic scholar qualificaitons.

How owuld you know? Are you an Arabic Scholar ? I would like for you to show me where it say I have Arabic scholar Qualifications to speak on the Quranic Arabic. Who made this rule ? A Christian ?

From those stories that gives foundation to your faith that you chose to reject, hadiths. Care to show us your sources that contradict the numbers let us see where their sources are coming from.

How many time are we going to tell you this. If the hadeeth conflicts with the Quran it is rejected, if the hadeeth coinsided with the Quran it is accepted.

Run through that again, what are you trying to say here ?

Think About it

What are you talking about?

Read it again maybe it will become a little bit more clearer.

hould we get into another debate about how your koran was collated and amended right up to the 10th century by the dajjal and his scribes (who helped allah by adding 1,000 characters to the koranic text), and how Puin shows the earliest koranic manuscripts to be revision upon revision.?

Sure lets go for it. And make sure to show us the difference of arabic words with tashkeel and with out. What is the different.

If someone memorised something and they die, and somebody else comes to salvage what they and other people memorised into a book why would they be saying let us compile it before a large part of the book may be lost (are the quraa the quran???) does it not occur to you that parts of the book have already been lost especially when there are hadiths from MUSLIMS that state this is the case??

Nope. just says the it maybe loss not a prior loss occured.

"we have suffered losses at yamamma and we may suffer loses at other places so I suggest you compile the quran from the leaves, barks and animal skin you have and the memory of those that remember parts of it in case we may lose the koran" to you somehow this does not refer to actual loss being incurred on the koranic text itself, especially when there are hadiths that state such and such a verse is missing, it is unbelievable the levels westernised muslims will go to justify and maintain the lie.

"Parts" can you show us where in that hadeeth it say the memorizors only knew parts ? Seems to me you have started your Christian interpolated illusionary understanding has stired up again.

Tell us H2O when was the koran arranged in the order it is today, and what was the purpose of that arrangement?

Click to back page and read back to here and you will have the answer.

When was the last time someone dictated something to you for 23 yrs and you memorised it end to end without writing anything down, this is just plain ridiculous didn't Mohammed have scribes that were writing down the abomination of a revelation?, are you going to deny this partiocular bit of your koranic history or maybe those hadiths were fabricated.

Yes he did have scribes that wrote it down, but didnt they also hear it from the prophet being repeated in their congregational prayers ? They did this every day. It was heard, then written, then heard again over and over and taught to others. The Majority of the first generation of muslims could not read and write had to learn the quran orally.

It is He Who has sent amongst the Unlettered a Messenger from among themselves, to rehearse to them His Signs, to sanctify them, and to instruct them in Scripture and Wisdom, - although they had been, before, in manifest error; -
62:2

the Unlettered < al-ummiyyin Pl. those who cannot read or write.

Looks like allah couldn't protect them a pity seeing this were the guardians of the alledge heavenly text

Who said who was going to guard the Quran ? Did the Qurraa'a die in the next war after Yamama ?

Tell us H2O what ahafeez means?

It means protectors or preservers.

Now, I am going to ask you who said who was going to protect or guard the Quran ?

You are now going to start twisting applications of the english language like you do with arabic (strange thing is if koranic arabic is so clear a child can understand it why do you need an english thesaurus to find varying words that agree with what you want it to say and proclaim that all the other translations are in error and this is what the koran really says?)

No it plain and simple. You are an English man that doesnt understand Arabic culture and Jargon.

I am very sorry to disappoint you H2O I can understand the headache you are causing your mother, you are greek you can't change where you are from the first steps to curing the madness that has made you become a mujaheddin for islam is acceptance of who you are. Let me guess at one time too you were jewish by language too?

You really think so huh ? Ther you go again wiht you wishful thinking.

Do you recall a certain Johnny Walker of the taliban fame? Guess who he reminds me of?

Awe, isnt that soo nice. YOu ever heard of Hamza Yusuf and other like him from the west that are reverts to the religion and can speak the language better than National Arabs themselves. They are regarded as Arabc not by nationality but by the language.

The website also has access to the same non translated sources the difference between you and the translators are the translators are equipped to translate the arabic as they are scholars you on the other hand are not up to their level you are in no position to dictate to them what their religion says.

According to who ?

Go to the usc website link I gave, have a look at it and tell me where and what I edited.

You ever heard of guilty cause of association ? You believed it, and followed it, so burn with it.

This is not worthy of a response...what are you trying to say here??
the size of the leafstalks stones, barks and animal skin??? relevance?

It has much relevance. Size determines the amount of space you will have to write something on. All those materials collected are in the plural. Size is considerable for the amount of information that could be contained in them.

Anybody can claim they speak arabic,you have been saying this from the beginning that every known translation and tafsir that does not agree with you is in error, what separates the wheat from the chaff? where are your qualifications to say anything related to islam? You speak arabic so does Osama so what?

Its my opinion in which I disagree based on sources. And again according to who do I need of such thing to prove a scholar wrong ?

I was hoping you would tell your audience, you did say how did Zaid know he had the whole koran unless he was of the ahafeez did you not?

If you didnt get it the first time go back and read again maybe it will dawn on you.

You then contradict yourself by claiming you didn't say he memorised the whole koran when ahafeez/hafiz means precisely that somebody who has committed the entire koran to memory, H2O for a muslim apologist you are an embarassment.

You must have gotten bad grades in English when you were a kid in grade school.

It seems you have picked up the habits of your foul mouthed shia brother.

You your man worhsipping pathetic wishful thinking moronic casper inspired bat brains have made the same bad mouth disrespectful comments to us and our prophet every time you post something about islam. Not once could you carry on a convo with any muslims without making slashing remarks. That why I answer you the way I do now cause I have absolutel NO repect for you. Others on here, except for few, have entertained debating in proper tone without trying to offend anyone.

Uhm they do not mention any saudi oil prophecy because it does not exist, who agrees with you H2O regarding the saudi oil prophecy? where are their websites? you are so desperate to find anything to deem Mohammed prophethood you are clinging on straws making you a laughing stock, show us one tafsir anywhere that suggests sura 9:28 is a saudi oil prophecy, maybe that verse about the moon being split occured when Armstrong landed on the moon right?

Your right 9:28 doesnt mention any about oil. It mention a prophecy of the Arabs of the Region becoming rich, in which after the establishment of, they became rich, without it they would probably be just like afghanistan.

Yes ofcourse you don't belong in any sect and you don't believe in sects but you go only to the masjids of the sunnis as opposed to the shias, BUT YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN ANY SECTS. So you realise you need an arabic qualification to teach arabic and interpret the koran and islamic jurispundence pls tell us what you arabic scholar qualifications are I am sure everybody is dying to know.

No Shia Mosques around here. This is Boca on one mosque is here in this town. The Shia come to the masjid to. I prayed next to one on friday. Nope I am not a sect. I am a muslim a haneed muslim and that is what I am commanded all to be.

When? Good grief your posts are literred with ridicule and insults against anybody who has translated the koran into english, even respected scholars of islam, some of them cambridge graduates yet hearing you it sounds like they didn't understand english, where are your qualifications to dismiss what these people have to say?

According to who ? What rule says that. Remember this is not Christianity your rules as to the matter of religous interpretation doesnt apply to us.

Wait a minute, would you care to answer a yes or no question:

yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes choose which one like you do with our hadeeths

Do you think your translation is error proof? yes or no?

So far what we have presented as our own can you find error ? It still falls short in distance of being the Quran or like it but we got it as close as we could to the original.

When we are finisehd we will let you all know.

Excuse me?

You think the end game of christianity is to obtain houris (This is where the english whore is derived from how do you look yourself in the mirror with the full knowledge that you are doing all this to get whores) in a fornication wine frolick paradise called jannah? I am sorry but thats your religion, you have been very quiet around the aspects of paradise other than to laugh at it I am sure your fellow muslims will be real impressed that this self professed one man defender of the faith when pressed the best he can do is laugh at his own religion.

You will find out soon. It a promiss.

Why don't you put it up on a website so it can be accesible to all if you believe you have the onus on the truth of islam don't you want everybody to have access to it?

Well before we do that we first have to learn how pathetic you are in you thinking , how you hit, dodge, run, attack, back flip, cart wheels, summer saults etc in your debates.
You are our labratory rats, we get result after experementing before procceeding with the goal.

I would rather ask your al-azhar mentors if they sanction your free lance translations of saudi oil prophecy in 9:28 and that the koran should be interpreted relative to the context when it says fight those that don't believe wether they be the people of the book or not, I am sure al-azhar would really like to know why a non scholar of the language in which arabic is not his native tongue is reinterpreting their religion for them, so for the 1400 yrs of islam only now in the 21st century is the truth coming out courtesy of a greek megalomaniac who thinks he is the greatest koran translator, reinterpreter and hadith rejecter this side of the atlantic?

You want some oil ? Ok we will make sure we send you couple quarts for your olds mobile.


Woosh, finally finshed. Well I might as well prepare my self for when all of you respond. I would like to carry on our short debate with ROME again. It might be a while as I said. Liberate got bored and jumped in and he is going to continue like a revolving door. Lokie you want to join him to. Come on guys , make up your own stuff stop copy and pasting.

Remember we are on the defensive here you are the offensive. We will stop when your ready to stop. I would like to see this top out to over 100 pages. Lets see if we can do it guys. Oh by the way while you all are occupied with me in this room you might have some company in others.

[H2O]

Eh I am not going back to correct that stuff. For some reason this forum starts acting up whenever I try posting Arabic script.

[Liberate]

And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgetten it, but remember (this much) out of it: "O people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise: (lxi 2.) and "that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13)

Above we see one of the Companions testifying the existence of part of a surah that is no longer in the Qur'an because it had been forgotten by him.

Who is WE and how many others is being spoken about other than Abu Musa al-Ash'ari ?

At least the translators of that hadith recognise the proper usage of 'we' in relation to the context other than the capricious we us our you keep on spouting, do you think you are plural in majesty too?

Let me go on to liberate now lets see what he got to say. Wow, I am taking on all three of you know. I can imagine what the response will be.

Isn't this what you want? That secretly allah will allow you into paradise as you are fighting the kuffor on his behalf on their turf (surely this is major good works) as you are not sure if your good works will gain you entry into the houris paradise, why won't you discuss paradise H2O? Don't you believe you will get 70 x 70 chained houris per room serving you wine for all eternity? do you realise it is the carnal thoughts of a carnal mind and you cannot accept it? are you worried your fellow muslims will realise you really are all at sea all by yourself in your views?


--------------------------------------------NEXT LIBERATE-------------------------------------

Are you a scholar of arabic and the koran H20? Why do you contradict koranic translations and tafsirs when you have no qualifications to do so?

Cause they are wrong that why.

No comment

How does this contradict the number of 450 by Ibn Kathir?

Whats the difference between 104 and 450 ?

Is that what your source says:

When the above are added to the seventy Ansar who were killed in the battle of Yamama against Musaylima the Arch-Liar, and who were all memorizers of the Qur'an (qurra') [Bukhari and Muslim], the number of the Companions who had memorized the Qur'an rises to over a hundred. This number excludes the numerous Companions -- whether named or unnamed -- whose status of memorizers did not reach us through isnad, as well as the women of both the Muhajirin and the Ansar. All of this memorizing was mass-transmitted. The numbers of the next generations, of course, keep rising exponentially in identical fashion of transmission, and praise belongs to Allah

http://www.sunnah.org/history/memorizers.htm

Pls tell us how the phrases in bold contradict the number of 450?

Would you care to show us the opinion of the five other scholars?

Sure:

1. al-Nawawi, al-Tibyan fi Adab Hamala al-Qur'an (p. 31);

2. al-Dhahabi, Tabaqat al-Qurra' (1:24-50)

3. al-Suyuti, al-Itqan fi `Ulum al-Qur'an (1:70-72);

4. al-Zarkashi, al-Burhan fi `Ulum al-Qur'an (1:241-243);

5. Nur al-Din `Itr, `Ulum al-Qur'an al-Karim (p. 164-166).

Look them up your self. Get off you Online Christian Critic school and go to a real library.

Why don't you paste their views for all to read why dodge the issue?

Your opinion on the arabic translations to english is taken for what it is an opinion and fully entitled to it no matter how absurd it is yours and yours alone but since you proclaim it is incumbent on the majority and you have the onus on the truth and interpretation of islam, prove you are in a fit state to interpret the koran starting with your arabic scholar qualificaitons.

How owuld you know? Are you an Arabic Scholar ? I would like for you to show me where it say I have Arabic scholar Qualifications to speak on the Quranic Arabic. Who made this rule ? A Christian ?

What is stopping anybody whatsoever telling you this is what the koran really says and you accepting what they say?... where are your qualifications?

From those stories that gives foundation to your faith that you chose to reject, hadiths. Care to show us your sources that contradict the numbers let us see where their sources are coming from.

How many time are we going to tell you this. If the hadeeth conflicts with the Quran it is rejected, if the hadeeth coinsided with the Quran it is accepted.

I have asked you several times where the hadiths I have shown you contradict the koran the only contradiction is in your own conscience of what you think it ought to say.

hould we get into another debate about how your koran was collated and amended right up to the 10th century by the dajjal and his scribes (who helped allah by adding 1,000 characters to the koranic text), and how Puin shows the earliest koranic manuscripts to be revision upon revision.?

Sure lets go for it. And make sure to show us the difference of arabic words with tashkeel and with out. What is the different.

Completely irrelevant have you forgotten this ayat:

Nay! This is a Glorious Qur’an, (Inscribed) in the Al-Luah Al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)! (Qur’an 85:21-22)

It says there is a copy of the koran in heaven, is allah keeping up with the 1,000+ characters added by the dajjal and his scribes or maybe the above is a terrible translation and your translation somehow omits the obvious as you have done all along.

If someone memorised something and they die, and somebody else comes to salvage what they and other people memorised into a book why would they be saying let us compile it before a large part of the book may be lost (are the quraa the quran???) does it not occur to you that parts of the book have already been lost especially when there are hadiths from MUSLIMS that state this is the case??

Nope. just says the it maybe loss not a prior loss occured.

The hadith only makes sense if parts of the book have already been lost and you need to collate it to stop other parts being lost. This is the only rationale I can see within that hadith it makes no sense compiling the koran if there were quraa left right and centre that knew the entire book.

"we have suffered losses at yamamma and we may suffer loses at other places so I suggest you compile the quran from the leaves, barks and animal skin you have and the memory of those that remember parts of it in case we may lose the koran" to you somehow this does not refer to actual loss being incurred on the koranic text itself, especially when there are hadiths that state such and such a verse is missing, it is unbelievable the levels westernised muslims will go to justify and maintain the lie.

"Parts" can you show us where in that hadeeth it say the memorizors only knew parts ? Seems to me you have started your Christian interpolated illusionary understanding has stired up again.

Tell us H2O when was the koran arranged in the order it is today, and what was the purpose of that arrangement?

Click to back page and read back to here and you will have the answer.

It was arranged in other to be easily memorised, was this the way Mohammed arranged it? Why did it have to be arranged in a different chronology to that alledgedly done by Mohammed?

Tell us H2O what ahafeez means?

It means protectors or preservers.

Protectors and preservers of what? (There is a point to this, I would like us to come to an agreement for once)

Now, I am going to ask you who said who was going to protect or guard the Quran ?

If you mean:

Verily, We, it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur’an) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption). (Qur’an 15:9)

allah didn't do a good job seeing you even admit there have been additions to it and there are numerous sahih hadiths that there are omissions from it. (BTW since Mohammed said the koran was revealed in 7 readings who gave uthman the authority to burn the other copies including those 7 readings against what allah's prophet had said?)

You are now going to start twisting applications of the english language like you do with arabic (strange thing is if koranic arabic is so clear a child can understand it why do you need an english thesaurus to find varying words that agree with what you want it to say and proclaim that all the other translations are in error and this is what the koran really says?)

No it plain and simple. You are an English man that doesnt understand Arabic culture and Jargon.

I am very sorry to disappoint you H2O I can understand the headache you are causing your mother, you are greek you can't change where you are from the first steps to curing the madness that has made you become a mujaheddin for islam is acceptance of who you are. Let me guess at one time too you were jewish by language too?

You really think so huh ? Ther you go again wiht you wishful thinking.

All the above were what you said yourself, either you have a short attention span or other people are using your nick to not remember things that you said yourself.

Do you recall a certain Johnny Walker of the taliban fame? Guess who he reminds me of?

Awe, isnt that soo nice. YOu ever heard of Hamza Yusuf and other like him from the west that are reverts to the religion and can speak the language better than National Arabs themselves. They are regarded as Arabc not by nationality but by the language.

I guess my point was lost on you.

You still think you are an arab?

How many times have you set foot on arabian soil?

Hamza Yusuf was a revert so at one time he was a muslim then he changed then he came back to islam? and now wants democracy to absorb islam (an oxymoron) . Just as you are evolving from christianity to judaism to islam and now to a haneef muslim who is going it alone as the imam of his own masjid and infallalible translation, I see Hamza Yusuf has teaching licenses where are yours H2O?, we both know when push comes to shove he is not up to your level right?

Go to the usc website link I gave, have a look at it and tell me where and what I edited.

You ever heard of guilty cause of association ? You believed it, and followed it, so burn with it.

Why don't you quote for us the Bukhari hadith as it is present in english at al-islam.com? Is this your entire argument it is translated wrong because because... I say so?

This is not worthy of a response...what are you trying to say here??
the size of the leafstalks stones, barks and animal skin??? relevance?

It has much relevance. Size determines the amount of space you will have to write something on. All those materials collected are in the plural. Size is considerable for the amount of information that could be contained in them.

Where on earth are you going with this?

Need I remind you that when Mohammed had one of his 'fits' it would occur at inopportune times his scribes would rush over to write the revelation with whatever they had to hand, are you trying to make an argument that the leafs, animals skin, barks e.t.c were insignificant? your religion disagrees with you, your hadiths disagrees with you (not even closely contradicted in the koran)

Anybody can claim they speak arabic,you have been saying this from the beginning that every known translation and tafsir that does not agree with you is in error, what separates the wheat from the chaff? where are your qualifications to say anything related to islam? You speak arabic so does Osama so what?

Its my opinion in which I disagree based on sources. And again according to who do I need of such thing to prove a scholar wrong ?

In that case will you agree with Apple Pie on his exegesis? we can both agree he came with sources? Do you agree with what he said because he came with sources?

Why should anything you say supercede a recognised imam or arabic scholar?

I was hoping you would tell your audience, you did say how did Zaid know he had the whole koran unless he was of the ahafeez did you not?

If you didnt get it the first time go back and read again maybe it will dawn on you.

You then contradict yourself by claiming you didn't say he memorised the whole koran when ahafeez/hafiz means precisely that somebody who has committed the entire koran to memory, H2O for a muslim apologist you are an embarassment.

You must have gotten bad grades in English when you were a kid in grade school.

You say ahafeez means a guardian?

Guardian of what?

It seems you have picked up the habits of your foul mouthed shia brother.

You your man worhsipping pathetic wishful thinking moronic casper inspired bat brains have made the same bad mouth disrespectful comments to us and our prophet every time you post something about islam.

Where did this come from? Your shia brother was foul mouthed and banned from the forum for being just that (Do you want to join him?). I don't recall ever having to stoop to insults to get my point across:

Let me give you something you can relate to:

Let us imagine for a second you are a sikh, you wear a turban you believe in the unity of god, you abhor pagan practices, and you believe in doing good works and giving to charity, you treat your holy book like it is literally holy with kisses and a sacred spot in your home sometimes a whole room just for it.


Your religion is dated over 1000 yrs after islam, but yet you claim this is the one true religon and the gurus came to resurrect the true religion.

You then claim that islam has corrupted it's holy book and the true religion lies in the works of Guru nanak and Guru Gobin Singh, and this was the one true religion laid down by God any other variant of this religion is because the variants have some aspects of the true religion which they bastardised, muslims are not supposed to cut their hair to a certain length but to let it grow, not letting it grow is haram and will mean eternal hell.


Or maybe you are a Bahai, you abhor pagan practices, and believe in the unity of God, and believe in private prayer.
Your religion is founded over 1200 yrs after islam, yet you claim this is the one true religion and your founder came to resurrect the one true religion.

All the other religions have corrupted the message of the one true religion ressurected by Mirza Ali Mohammed, Mirza Husayn Ali, and Abdul Baha, all persecuted and killed therefore proof of their prophethood!!!

What is islam supposed to make of such a claim?

Will you respect the views of Mirza Ali Guru Goin Sigh et al relative to the fundamentals of your faith?


Do you see then what christianity makes of Islam? especially when it makes claims that allah is the original name of God, arabic is the language of heaven, and the four sacred months not to fight in is the perfect religion from the beginning of mankind.

You expect christians to respect a pirate, murderer, incestual individual, rapist and an individual that would be locked up in the majority of MUSLIM countries for pedofilia but yet is the best example for all mankind whose actions transcends time? You expect me to respect the views of this fraud of a prophet?

Before you make the same accusation with judaism over christianity bear in mind the jewish problem with christianity is one of interpretation, never corruption.

Where is the proof that God (that does not change) sent revelations as poetry for the prophets as 'inspiration' in judaism or christianity, which prophet in the whole of christianity or judaism contemplated suicide after having an encounter with God or an angel of God?. What makes you think this is not the work of satan.?

If on other other hand you take any criticism of Mohammed as a personal criticism against you (which lets face it is the islamic mentality) God help us live in peace with freedom of speech. The moment you applauded the murder of Theo Van Gogh you lost a lot of crediblity on this forum, you showed the islamic spirit for what it really was lie that islam is peaceful and you are all about getting along with your fellow man until you get the upper hand then show them what really controls you.

Uhm they do not mention any saudi oil prophecy because it does not exist, who agrees with you H2O regarding the saudi oil prophecy? where are their websites? you are so desperate to find anything to deem Mohammed prophethood you are clinging on straws making you a laughing stock, show us one tafsir anywhere that suggests sura 9:28 is a saudi oil prophecy, maybe that verse about the moon being split occured when Armstrong landed on the moon right?

Your right 9:28 doesnt mention any about oil.

Here we go again, didn't you mention in several posts that you became a muslim because of this alledge prophecy of saudi oil you now try and wriggle out of what you said by trying to argue in terms of semantics when the end result puts you straight back in the logical fallacy you have built for yourself...

It mention a prophecy of the Arabs of the Region becoming rich, in which after the establishment of, they became rich,

So now it is still a prophecy of Saudi oil? but above it wasn't a prophecy of saudi oil?, I have to wonder if you really do have a short attention span, and this is the fellow that proclaims his translation of the koran is superior to every known english translation.

without it they would probably be just like afghanistan.

Interesting that there is no country under the banner of islam that can be considered as successful apart from fossil fuels which they didn't work for.

Yes ofcourse you don't belong in any sect and you don't believe in sects but you go only to the masjids of the sunnis as opposed to the shias, BUT YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN ANY SECTS. So you realise you need an arabic qualification to teach arabic and interpret the koran and islamic jurispundence pls tell us what you arabic scholar qualifications are I am sure everybody is dying to know.

No Shia Mosques around here. This is Boca on one mosque is here in this town. The Shia come to the masjid to. I prayed next to one on friday. Nope I am not a sect. I am a muslim a haneed muslim and that is what I am commanded all to be.

Is your imam a sunni by any chance, how would he feel knowing that there is someone in his masjid who is re-interpreting the koran for himself dismissing hadiths and tafsirs from respected scholars without a qualification to his name?

When? Good grief your posts are literred with ridicule and insults against anybody who has translated the koran into english, even respected scholars of islam, some of them cambridge graduates yet hearing you it sounds like they didn't understand english, where are your qualifications to dismiss what these people have to say?

According to who ? What rule says that. Remember this is not Christianity your rules as to the matter of religous interpretation doesnt apply to us.

Then in that case Apple Pie is 100% spot on in his exegesis that the koran proclaims that Jesus is God, do you agree with his exegesis because he came with solid proof from Lane's and Omar's lexicon which you couldn't refute except embarass yourself.

Going by your argument Osama is right to wage his jihad against America the beheadings of innocents in Iraq is justified, palestinian sucide bombers are justified they can all find koranic ayats to justify their actions, is this really your stand point? because Osama can find a sura to justify killing you as one of those whose speech does not leave his throat.

The rules are universal no average joe without a qualification to his name to interpret and teach arabic and islam to others will be taken seriously, where again are your qualifications to justify you re-interpreting and re-translating anything about islam to muslims?
Are you this arrogant to proclaim all the scholars are in error (even your al-azhar tutor??? because Al-azhar does not subscribe to the notion of the koran being interpreted relative to the context as you say it does)

Wait a minute, would you care to answer a yes or no question:

yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes choose which one like you do with our hadeeths

This is becoming childish, it seems you picked this up alot from your foul mouthed shia brother.

Do you think your translation is error proof? yes or no?

So far what we have presented as our own can you find error ? It still falls short in distance of being the Quran or like it but we got it as close as we could to the original.

In order words you interpretations are without error. I think you should take a honest look at yourself H2O, who do you think is going to take you seriously with an attitude like this?

When we are finisehd we will let you all know.

You are not finished? Didn't you say you wanted my email address so you could email it to me, and all this while you hadn't even finished it yet, let me guess you are making amendments to the saudi oil prophecy in sura 9:28 that would otherwise make you a laughing stock.

Excuse me?

You think the end game of christianity is to obtain houris (This is where the english whore is derived from how do you look yourself in the mirror with the full knowledge that you are doing all this to get whores) in a fornication wine frolick paradise called jannah? I am sorry but thats your religion, you have been very quiet around the aspects of paradise other than to laugh at it I am sure your fellow muslims will be real impressed that this self professed one man defender of the faith when pressed the best he can do is laugh at his own religion.

You will find out soon. It a promiss.

Considering the manner in which you applauded the murder of Theo Van Gogh I don't know what you to make of the above

Why don't you put it up on a website so it can be accesible to all if you believe you have the onus on the truth of islam don't you want everybody to have access to it?

Well before we do that we first have to learn how pathetic you are in you thinking , how you hit, dodge, run, attack, back flip, cart wheels, summer saults etc in your debates.
You are our labratory rats, we get result after experementing before procceeding with the goal.

I see so this is your purpose for your posts about the translations of the koran? If you expect us to iron out the bugs in your translation for you that tells me you are not entirely honest even with yourself, if you were truly honest with yourself you would translate it with the true root words (as you believe it) end to end and then let it be open to scrutiny rather than have christians help you proof text it, that tells me you are deluding yourself that you are honest to the arabic.

I would rather ask your al-azhar mentors if they sanction your free lance translations of saudi oil prophecy in 9:28 and that the koran should be interpreted relative to the context when it says fight those that don't believe wether they be the people of the book or not, I am sure al-azhar would really like to know why a non scholar of the language in which arabic is not his native tongue is reinterpreting their religion for them, so for the 1400 yrs of islam only now in the 21st century is the truth coming out courtesy of a greek megalomaniac who thinks he is the greatest koran translator, reinterpreter and hadith rejecter this side of the atlantic?

You want some oil ? Ok we will make sure we send you couple quarts for your olds mobile.

You are not making much sense H2O or are you trying to divert attention from your embarassing interpretations of saudi oil prophecy in sura 9:28?

Woosh, finally finshed. Well I might as well prepare my self for when all of you respond. I would like to carry on our short debate with ROME again.

Is this a subliminal plea?

Remember we are on the defensive here you are the offensive. We will stop when your ready to stop. I would like to see this top out to over 100 pages. Lets see if we can do it guys...

That reminds me of humle_guest that was his purpose for his a must read topic, it seems you and him have the same motive for coming on christian forums to see that your threads are the longest and must read, I have to wonder if you are this much of an attention seeker.

[Loki]

H20

1. you don't have the authority to reject the early islam fathers who compiled the hadiths
2. the hadiths are allready sorted out truth from error at the very beginning
3. I have hadiths in wich Muhammed commands the punishment of stoning... so it doesn't concern the torah but the quran as Muhammed points out when he commands it. If you want i'll post them for you.
4. If the hadith needs to confirm the quran, then there is no needs for hadiths, it's all in the quran allready.
5. Why does 90% of the sharia laws consist of hadith material? when there is no need for external scripture.
6. Why do you base holy laws on laws that should be rejected because the lack of confirmation in the quran? For example, what if you had to pray 10 times instead of 5 in order for Allah to hear you? can the quran confirm this? no, the hadith is the only material for this, and it's a untrustworthy book as you pointed out. Your way of reasoning crumbles if you look into it.

And i've come across sites from muslims who literally hate muslims that disregard bukhari and muslim material as utterly false or weak because it doesn't apply to 21th century western standards.
1. While most of these people that reject them, never probably read the hadiths fully and probably aren't even scholars on the subject
2. Muhammed was not a role model for the 21th century or any time for that matter... even without the hadith the quran could confirm this. You can flip flop all you want, but the truth remains the same.

and i don't mind sounding like a revolving door, i'm giving facts and points... arguments work like nails, if you hit them a couple of times they'll run trough to you. When you don't you only stumble over them pick yourself up and continue as if nothing happend.

[RomeSweetHome]

H20 Wrote:

And I am sure you know if anthing including that ahadeeth, even sahih, that contradicts the Quran, not to mention the majority of the ahadeeths, it is reject as false ahadeeth. Allah says:

Quran has authority over hadeeth. And the hadeeth you mention contradicts the majority of other ahdeeth that stated the Prophet recited the entire Quran every year during the month of Ramadhaan. You know this, but why favor a hadeeth that contradict even other hadeeths ?

A false hadith? It has been included as one of the most authentic, what you on about? The hadiths were already arranged, some where rejected some were accepted, the hadith I happened to Quote was accepted as authentic.

al-Bukhari is regarded as the second holiest book in Sunni Islam and you reject it?

Have you just noticed the contradictions in your hadiths? Man you got to wake up, You say I am the camatose?

H20 Wrote:

Who is WE and how many others is being spoken about other than Abu Musa al-Ash'ari ? He was a Yemenis and a leader of his tribe that went to another tribe(Basra) to hear them recite Quran. The contect does not denote "We" as refereing to all the companions of the Prophet. This is a matter of your interpretation.

When I said WE, I ment me and the fellow spectators.

H20 Wrote:

I cant be serious right ? No, we dont compromise our religion for the sake of a state.

You cant be serious? or do you mean me? yes I am serious!

That fact is that state that you speak of is a secular state, respect it and its laws if you wish to live in it.

H20 Wrote:

"Render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar" does this ring a bell ?

Then you admit Islam can be compared to the brutal pagan Romans?

H20 Wrote:

Come ? I didnt come any were I was always here. You are wrong ! I cant speak for Europe but I can for sure speak about here. Obviously you dont know the procedures one has to go through to build or establish a building structure.

When I said come, I was speaking in general. I do know there are procedures, at least you have the ability to build one even though it takes you time.

Most Islamic countrys like Egypt there is no hope in even trying to ask the goverment to allow you to build a new church.

H20 Wrote:

SO please save you balestic wichful thinking about we can build our masjid freely. We American Muslims spend more money in courts to get an approval through the law that is denied by so called Christians and Jews, than on our actual project that causes us to be delayed.

Here in the UK its much more easier to build mosques and even in the whole of Europe. You might get delayed but at the end of the day you still have that chance, the Christians in Egypt have no such thing.

H20 Wrote:

What, run around like an animal liek those on the Jerry Springer Show ? To be like the People on the COPS show ? To go to clubs drink, have sex, walk around half naked ? What does doing what I believe is right that does not harm other have anything to do with EQUAL . Rubbish. There is no EQUALITY in the West.

those people on the Jerry Springer show are FREE to act in anyway they desire, at the end of the day God is going to judge them. What good is it to FORCE people to be what they are not? and do what they do not want to do?

For example in Iran women must cover there heads, what is the point of them doing this if its not from the heart? By the way this law also applies to all non muslims! What happened in Afghanistan after they were freed?
Most of the women removed the "body bags" they where FORCED to wear.

H20 Wrote:

Blacks are still being discriminated against. Now Arabs and muslims are being discriminated against. Look how many muslims lost their Jobs or people refused to hire them after 9/11. Rich and poor are not equal, they do not treat you equal in ANY COUNTRY. That word is a Joke.

Forgive me for not shedding a tear for you muslims. Instead I will shed a tear for those Sudanese Christians that are getting butchered and those Christians in Indonesia and throughout the world.

Being persecuted for what? and by whom? Persecuted by the muslims for being Christians.

Who is blowing up Churches in Iraq today?

On the other hand I can understand why people dislike you and your muslim brothers, you have bought another level of terror into this world and hate. If 9/11 wasnt enough to make people hate you then I dont know what would be.

H20 Wrote:

Ehm ! As long as the laws DO NOT compel us to do something against our beliefs we have no problem. Now to France banning Hijab, ther also banned Jewish and Christian symbols as well from public school. The problem we had is when a scholar who was respected came out in public and said its ok for our sister not to wear Hijab he was completely out of his darn mind.

Yeah you said it. France asked Jews to remove there religious symbols, Christians the same and asked Muslim women to remove the hijab.

Now why is it that France recived Terror threats? and by whom and why?

It recived terror threats by muslims saying they would attack France if it carried out such a law on the hijab. I dont see Jews or Christians acting in the same way.

Have those muslims forgotten France's policy regarding Iraq?

What about Theo van Gogh who was stabbed and shot by a muslim?

Just becuase of a film that spoke against Islam regarding the treatment of women.

These muslims are more animalish then those immoral people on Jerry Springer, dont you think?

H20 Wrote:

Eh ! Before the 1st Amend. was created no mosque could be build publically in Christian America. The 1st Amend. is not even more than a century old yet.

Can you build mosques now? YES! can you build chruches in Egypt or even fix them? NO! there isn't even one church in Saudi arabia to this day, not one. Christians worshipping at home in saudi Arabia are arressted if caught.

H20 Wrote:

No it is true.

You have failed to prove that the Quran is complete.

H20 Wrote:

You mean some muslims just like some chiristians right ? You answer to this is our answer about them also. Well, I guess thats their problem right ? Not ours.

No, I actually mean 99% of muslims, not some.

Christians can look back to the dead sea scrolls etc...

Muslims can? oh I forgot they rememberd the Quran by heart. I hope they didnt have a memory like Mohammed who forgot parts of surahs.

H20 Wrote:

And we disagree with this, and will continue to. Before we go any further on this, is the Hadeeth Daif or Sahih. Also it contradicts other hadeeths. So why favor this over the others that said the opposite ?

I am not the one that assembled the hadiths into a book, so do not ask me why I picked this certain hadith, ask whoever put it in the book in the first place. I can get you random contradictions and things that are out of this world from the hadiths.

Let me ask you the same question;

Why have you favoured the ones that are opposite? Because without the Quran your deen (religion) is nothing, and you know this.
Obviously you shall disagree, even though its from your books, not ours.

H20 Wrote:

You make it sound like tha was the only copy or other didnt memorize it. Again we come back to this beuatiful word "

In one of the six most authentic Hadith books by Ibne Maja we find a parable told by Hazrat AyshaR, in which she says:

"The aa'yaa on rape and nursing of babies were lying in book form, that was kept in the patio. When the Holy Messenger passed away, we became busy in his funeral. During this time, our domesticated pet goat ate the manuscript of these two aa'yaa. And so these aa'yaa were wasted."

It seems the part the goat ate from the Quran was the only "copy".

H20 Wrote:

Said Zaid, the main Cheif scribe. All I have been seeing you CHristians to in criticism of Islam is choose hadeeth that you like which appeals to your advantage but disregard the other ahadeeth that contradict it. So how do you know which is right ?

Do you actually read what you type? you are admitting that your hadiths are useless, a bunch of contradictions. I am using hadiths to support my view that the Quran is incomplete and you are choosing to ignore these hadiths and reject them simply because you cannot accept that your Quran is not all present.

Good question! How do YOU know which is right? YOU are the muslim not me, ethier way it has no affect on me, as peservation does not necessarily imply truth.

Peace

[H2O]

Quote:
How does this contradict the number of 450 by Ibn Kathir?


Quote:
Whats the difference between 104 and 450 ?


Is that what your source says:

This is what it says:

The men and women Companions known as the memorizers of Qur'an (al-qurra') were:

1-4. The Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs. However, Abu Bakr and `Umar died before memorizing it completely, while `Uthman and `Ali were among those who gathered (jama`a) the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him. `Uthman was one of those who used to recite the entire Qur'an in one day and night.

5. `Abd Allah ibn Mas`ud -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

6. Salim, Mawla Abi Hudhayfa -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

7. Mu`adh ibn Jabal -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

8. Ubay ibn Ka`b -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him. He would recite it all in eight days.

9. Zayd ibn Thabit -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

10. Abu Zayd -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

11. Abu al-Darda' -- Allah be well-pleased with him-- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him. His class in the mosque of Damascus counted 1,600 students, each ten with one monitor. If a student made a mistake the monitor corrected him, and if the monitor made a mistake Abu al-Darda' corrected him.

12. Abu Musa al-Ash`ari -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

13. `Abd Allah ibn `Amr ibn al-`As -- Allah be well-pleased with him. He was ordered by the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- to recite it in no less than seven days.

14. Talha ibn `Ubayd Allah -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

15. Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

16. Hudhayfa ibn al-Yaman -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

17. Abu Hurayra -- Allah be well-pleased with him. He was examined by Ubay.

18. `Abd Allah ibn al-Sa'ib -- Allah be well-pleased with him. He was examined by Ubay.

19. `Abd Allah ibn `Umar -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

20. `Abd Allah ibn `Abbas -- Allah be well-pleased with him. He was examined by Ubay.

21. `Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

22. `A'isha bint Abi Bakr -- Allah be well-pleased with her.

23. Hafsa bint `Umar -- Allah be well-pleased with her.

24. Umm Salama -- Allah be well-pleased with her.

25. `Ubada ibn al-Samit -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

26. Mu`adh Abu Halima -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

27. Mujammi` ibn Jariya -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

28. Fadala ibn `Ubayd -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

29. Maslama ibn Mukhallad -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

30. Anas ibn Malik -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

31. Umm Waraqa bint `Abd Allah ibn al-Harith -- Allah be well-pleased with her.

32. Abu Umama al-Bahili -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

33. `Utba ibn `Amir -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

34. Tamim al-Dari -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- and who used to recite the entire Qur'an in one day and night.

When the above are added to the seventy [34+70= 104]Ansar who were killed in the battle of Yamama against Musaylima the Arch-Liar, and who were all memorizers of the Qur'an (qurra') [Bukhari and Muslim], the number of the Companions who had memorized the Qur'an rises to over a hundred [104]. This number excludes the numerous Companions -- whether named or unnamed -- whose status of memorizers did not reach us through isnad, as well as the women of both the Muhajirin and the Ansar. All of this memorizing was mass-transmitted. The numbers of the next generations, of course, keep rising exponentially in identical fashion of transmission, and praise belongs to Allah.

Sources:

1. al-Nawawi, al-Tibyan fi Adab Hamala al-Qur'an (p. 31);

2. al-Dhahabi, Tabaqat al-Qurra' (1:24-50)

3. al-Suyuti, al-Itqan fi `Ulum al-Qur'an (1:70-72);

4. al-Zarkashi, al-Burhan fi `Ulum al-Qur'an (1:241-243);

5. Nur al-Din `Itr, `Ulum al-Qur'an al-Karim (p. 164-166).

http://www.sunnah.org/history/memorizers.htm

They say 70 were killed in the war of Yamama in which total of known memorizers were 104. There reference were by the following scholars.

Pls tell us how the phrases in bold contradict the number of 450?

We all know you were a terrible at math.

Completely irrelevant have you forgotten this ayat:

Nay! This is a Glorious Qur’an, (Inscribed) in the Al-Luah Al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)! (Qur’an 85:21-22)

It says there is a copy of the koran in heaven, is allah keeping up with the 1,000+ characters added by the dajjal and his scribes or maybe the above is a terrible translation and your translation somehow omits the obvious as you have done all along.

And there are different views on the interpretation of that verse. Some believe The tablets mentioned are refering the actual tablets the Quran was written on, and others believe it is that tablets which are in heaven.

I agree with the earlier cause Allah menitons the Quran was also written on pages.

Surah 80

[11] By no means (should it be so)! For it is indeed a Message of instruction:

[12] Therefore let whose will, keep it in remembrance.

[13] (It is) in suhuf held (greatly) in honour,

[14] Exalted (in dignity), kept pure and holy

[15] (Written) by the hands of scribes,

[16] Honourable and Pious and Just.

" Suhuf " ~ pages

These verses are not totally agreed on also as some who regard the tablets are in heaven rather than the tablets on which the Quran was actually written on believe the scribes here are refereng to angels. This we disagree with being that the verse as it is in connection with the various materials the Quran was recorded on such as Tablets and Pages (Parchments etc) as mentioned in the Quran are two different materials mentioned in plurality that cannot be allocated to Ummul-Kitab which is one heavenly book.

Liberate, you keep introducing one particular madzhab beliefs in Islam which does not constitued the Islamic world views. If you want to study the various madzhab you can go to the link I provided below.

The hadith only makes sense if parts of the book have already been lost and you need to collate it to stop other parts being lost. This is the only rationale I can see within that hadith it makes no sense compiling the koran if there were quraa left right and centre that knew the entire book.

It is biased rational conjecture on your behalf with the incomplete sources you obtained which are only from one perspective view. You sources are merely copy and paste from other Chritian websites which are not your own labored efforts in searching through all the hadeeths available in english nor the Quran which you have never completely read to establish criticism.

It was arranged in other to be easily memorised, was this the way Mohammed arranged it? Why did it have to be arranged in a different chronology to that alledgedly done by Mohammed?

It was arranged in its order the way the Prophet recited it.

allah didn't do a good job seeing you even admit there have been additions to it and there are numerous sahih hadiths that there are omissions from it. (BTW since Mohammed said the koran was revealed in 7 readings who gave uthman the authority to burn the other copies including those 7 readings against what allah's prophet had said?)

‏قال قال رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏بني الإسلام على خمس شهادة أن لا إله إلا الله وأن ‏ ‏محمدا ‏ ‏رسول الله وإقام الصلاة وإيتاء الزكاة والحج وصوم رمضان ‏

‏قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏بُنِيَ الْإِسْلَامُ عَلَى خَمْسٍ شَهَادَةِ أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ ‏ ‏مُحَمَّدًا ‏ ‏رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَإِقَامِ الصَّلَاةِ وَإِيتَاءِ الزَّكَاةِ وَالْحَجِّ وَصَوْمِ رَمَضَانَ ‏

You mind explaining what we added and what did it change. With or without tashkeel it still says the same thing has the same meaning.

How many times have you set foot on arabian soil?

Guess

Why don't you quote for us the Bukhari hadith as it is present in english at al-islam.com?

They dont have Bukhari it available in English, only in Arabic. I posted it in English translated by Dr Muhsin Khan which can be downloaded from the link I supplied below.

Didnt you read what you Lebenese Christian brother said:

A simple reply would be that the word "fragments" is not included in the above hadith in the arabic text.

But neither does it exclude the notion that the Quran may have been collected by text, orally or even both.

In which I said:

It gives the notion of both ie it was collected from written text and what was memorize as show below.

Or is it he also need Arabic Scholar Qualification in order to understand ahadeeth also is why you are over looking his confirmation ?

Need I remind you that when Mohammed had one of his 'fits' it would occur at inopportune times his scribes would rush over to write the revelation with whatever they had to hand, are you trying to make an argument that the leafs, animals skin, barks e.t.c were insignificant? your religion disagrees with you, your hadiths disagrees with you (not even closely contradicted in the koran)

And copies were made and distributed through out the community for those who can read to learn and teach those who could not.

In that case will you agree with Apple Pie on his exegesis? we can both agree he came with sources? Do you agree with what he said because he came with sources?

Why should anything you say supercede a recognised imam or arabic scholar?

There is a big difference between our selves and Apple Pie. He free lances his translations using other translations as guides then he goes back makes changes to what he believes is the meaning, whom doesnt speak Arabic a wit, doesnt know how to translate grammar, and doesnt know Arabic parts of speach if it was to slap him. He has to go back to find out what each and every word means, he cannot look at a word and know what it means unless which he has already made himself aquinted with, neither knows what particle and participle words are. We challenged him to translate a verse without knowing what ayah or surah it is. He remained mute. He takes up all other challenges but wont take that up. We still have the challenge open.

Here we go again, didn't you mention in several posts that you became a muslim because of this alledge prophecy of saudi oil you now try and wriggle out of what you said by trying to argue in terms of semantics when the end result puts you straight back in the logical fallacy you have built for yourself...

Since you like to edit with your wishful thinking let our audience decide:

Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.

So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of اللّــه G-D that satisfies me ?

1) The logical consistancy of the Quran.

2) The rational and challenge it gives

3) The wisdom and reasoning it applies

4) Its natural aspects it delivers that conforms with nature it self

5) The obedience it asks toward اللّــه with reverence and love.

6) How to live in submission to اللّــه with balance in life

7) How to treat others as you would want to be treated by another

Its message is direct, blunt, and to the point

9) The belief in اللّــه oneness and the uniqueness of his divinity and the exalted manner of His sublime majesty

10) The belief in the prophets adn that اللّــه sent prophets to all nations of people

11) The belief in angels, scriptures, the life after death, hell, paradise, judgement day, and the resurrection.

This is how I came to believe the Quran was from Allah qualifying Muhammad as Prophet. Needless to say my belief in him as a Prophet was not sparked by the prophecies or Scientific indications of unseen realities through out the Quran. These things merely increased my belief but was not the cause or the root of it.

What do you all the audience think ?

You are not making much sense H2O or are you trying to divert attention from your embarassing interpretations of saudi oil prophecy in sura 9:28?

And you going to get the same answer over and over.

Allah said to the muslim Arabs in the time of Muhammad that HE will soon enrich them. And it doesnt take a 12th grader to know the arabs were a poor nation at that time in which the Biazantine and Persian empires didnt dominate them. When did the Arab muslim of that region become RICH ? Who supplies the 1/3 of the world's oil and has the LARGEST oil reserves in the world. Is not Saudi Arabia one of the richest countries in the world that is now a GOLD MIND ?

Your right( Liberate) 9:28 doesnt mention any about oil. It mention a prophecy of the Arabs of the Region becoming rich, in which after the establishment of, they became rich, without it they would probably be just like afghanistan.

Why you are so persistant on this issue is amazing. What are you afraid of ? You are not going to change my mind and you know this, so what is it, our audience ? I think that is what it is cause you wont get off this subject. You have already stated your criticism and repeated you self over five times on the topic in the offense and I have already stated my grounds. But this isnt enough for you though you keep going and going and going like an energizer bunny wabbit.

1. you don't have the authority to reject the early islam fathers who compiled the hadiths

according to who ?

2. the hadiths are allready sorted out truth from error at the very beginning

False. Ahadeeth were authenticated by unbroken chain of transmission to the best of the scholars abilities. The hadeeths were never tested by Quran. Also, many hadeeth contradict each other.

3. I have hadiths in wich Muhammed commands the punishment of stoning... so it doesn't concern the torah but the quran as Muhammed points out when he commands it. If you want i'll post them for you.

And when did this particular event happen, before or after the issue of the Jewish man and woman who were stone by the rajam found in the Torah ? If it was before then you would have a point, and would consider for investigation of the hadeeth with others. But if it was after, then we are still in the same boat as to why those verses were revealed comfirming the practice of Rajm that was continued. You would have to produce proof that was before the verses of the Quran that confirm the practice of rajam. All you can do in this matter is conjecture cause you are not aquinted with the science of hadith and how to date them.

4. If the hadith needs to confirm the quran, then there is no needs for hadiths, it's all in the quran allready

Who ever said hadeeth confirming Quran. It is the Quran that confirms that authenticity of the ahadeeth. Ahadeeth are commentary that give us the reason of why such and such verses were revealed helps us to understand the historical meaning of the Quran, in which there is a general meaning that is standard and clear for us.

5. Why does 90% of the sharia laws consist of hadith material? when there is no need for external scripture.

Have you ever studied Shariah law ? I dont think you ever did to mention such a ridiculous comment. Have you ever heard of Fiqhus-sunnah ? It is the major schools of thought "madzhab" that use both Quran and sunnah to establish shariah law ? Also have you ever read Sahih al-Bukhari and Mulims collections ? Each topic or chapter for hadeeths is aided by a Quranic verse that established the standard of the law in which we adopt which is practiced according to the sunnah of our Prophet that is recorded in hadeeth.

This is the Link for Fiqhus-sunnah http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... c&start=40

6. Why do you base holy laws on laws that should be rejected because the lack of confirmation in the quran? For example, what if you had to pray 10 times instead of 5 in order for Allah to hear you? can the quran confirm this? no, the hadith is the only material for this, and it's a untrustworthy book as you pointed out. Your way of reasoning crumbles if you look into it.

Wrong. The five daily prayers are mentioned in the Quran. The link we provided about on Fiqhus-sunnah provided proof. And you have it all backwards. What should be rejected is hadeeth, not Quran, that show lack of comfirmation by other hadeeths.

And i've come across sites from muslims who literally hate muslims that disregard bukhari and muslim material as utterly false or weak because it doesn't apply to 21th century western standards.

Thats good to hear they hate them, cause they are doing the right thing. They are sticking to the Quran as the primary source.

1. While most of these people that reject them, never probably read the hadiths fully and probably aren't even scholars on the subject

I dont think so. Primary goal of a Muslim is to read Quran and ahadeeth available. I find it not likely that they havent read Bukhari and Muslim. I have and they have a right as a muslims to disagree or to accept a hadeeth on good grounds. Hadeeths are not divine nore the word of Allah.

2. Muhammed was not a role model for the 21th century or any time for that matter... even without the hadith the quran could confirm this. You can flip flop all you want, but the truth remains the same.

Is Jesus you role model ? Is he the role model for a Jew ? So of course our Prophet wouldnt be a role model to you. Please dont speak for us in which you are in a bad habit of dictating other peoples religion. you have our beliefs are you have yours.

false hadith? It has been included as one of the most authentic, what you on about? The hadiths were already arranged, some where rejected some were accepted, the hadith I happened to Quote was accepted as authentic.

al-Bukhari is regarded as the second holiest book in Sunni Islam and you reject it?

Have you just noticed the contradictions in your hadiths? Man you got to wake up, You say I am the camatose?

Rome, you are soo late. Want to go to the first thread I started on months ago in which I have stated numerous time that hadeeths contradict each other muchless the Quran ?

Anyhow. Hope fully Webby got the forum fixed. The hadith contradict this verse of the Quran.

By degrees shall We teach thee to declare (the Message), so thou shalt not forget, 87:6

This is what I meant. Sorry last time I tried to post the Quran itself this forum googled it.

Ahdeeth collection of Bukhari and Muslims were not tested by the Quran. They are conditioned as sahih based on the unbroken chain of the transmission that they could find to the best of their abilities.

That fact is that state that you speak of is a secular state, respect it and its laws if you wish to live in it

Do you respect the law of gay people can get married ? And the law of abortion ? You couldnt possible agree with it right ? How could you respect something that Allah is displeased with ? Now, I may not respect it as to my disagreement with it. Pleanty of non Muslim American who dont respect ie disagree or degrade such laws. But what do we do ? We just continue with our lives shunning such people who practice hidious things. So please dont tell us to respect law that Allahhimself does not respect.

Does Allah respect gay marriage, abortion, stip clubs, porno, fornicationor adultry ?

Then you admit Islam can be compared to the brutal pagan Romans?

No. When last did you read the Torah ? Non Jews living in a Jewish land also had to pay taxes to such state.

Now what happen to what you said "That fact is that state that you speak of is a secular state, respect it and its laws if you wish to live in it" The same goes for Christians wanting to live in a muslims country.

But dont get me wrong now, America has a right if it wanted us out then we should leave. I would have no problem in doing that.

When I said come, I was speaking in general. I do know there are procedures, at least you have the ability to build one even though it takes you time.

If there we no laws and the Christian voice was the law we would have no masaajid in the US nore in the UK. It is the Atheist laws that protect us bidznillah from Christian ambition. Let me remind you before the 1st amendment NO mosque could be built on Chritian ground.

those people on the Jerry Springer show are FREE to act in anyway they desire, at the end of the day God is going to judge them. What good is it to FORCE people to be what they are not? and do what they do not want to do?

Sowhat was the purpose of the Torah in which Allah had moses inforce onto the people ?

For example in Iran women must cover there heads, what is the point of them doing this if its not from the heart? By the way this law also applies to all non muslims! What happened in Afghanistan after they were freed?
Most of the women removed the "body bags" they where FORCED to wear.

If she lives in that country she should adhear to public law or leave. Again, we get into another issue of why women should dress properly and cover their beauty. Christianity in the past in these countries inforced such a thing of morals , ethics, respect. Being that Christians fell away from what was suppose to be inforced to secure the godlines of a country it fell right into that hand of the Atheist that took all of that away. Now look at America and the UK. They are acting just like those past nation that Allah distroyed. Look how these countries EXPLOIT women now. Look at the family house hold now. Look how rude children are now. Look how women dress now.

Forgive me for not shedding a tear for you muslims. Instead I will shed a tear for those Sudanese Christians that are getting butchered and those Christians in Indonesia and throughout the world

.

Dont, we wont for you. It is in your nature as a Christian to yearn for your brothers and sister whom Unjustice is being done to. The same for my self, I yearn when I hear the State of the Palestinians or any of my brothers and sisters that are being oppressed

Who is blowing up Churches in Iraq today?

If there were not secular and Christianity ruled what do you think they would do to our masaajid ?

What about Theo van Gogh who was stabbed and shot by a muslim?

Just becuase of a film that spoke against Islam regarding the treatment of women.

These muslims are more animalish then those immoral people on Jerry Springer, dont you think?

I would agree to the unjust way some our women are being treated in the east. They are deprived of islam law ans are rules by cultural, nationalistic, and tribalistic customs that against Quran and Sunnah.

I was not ticked off about that. as a matter of fact that Arab felt he insulted his people. The same a black person would do if a film maker made a film that degraded black women. A black American would be moved to want to kill such a person.

I dont think it was a matter of religion persay that was his motive of killing him. I think it was much more personal that insulted his people.

Now, other than that, I screamed when I heard what he did with the Quran that had me burning up to th point I thought he had deserved every spark he got. Again what does the Quran say about such a thing:

When thou seest men engaged in vain discourse about Our Signs, turn away from them unless they turn to a different theme. If Satan ever makes thee forget, then after recollection, sit not thou in the company of those who do wrong. 6:68

I have my self countless times violated this ayah based on forgetfulness and allowing emotions and feelings to take control.

You have failed to prove that the Quran is complete

.

Now we have not. You presented source that we counteracted. I think we should leave our audience to think for them selves as to this rahter than have you and I claiming we did this or that.

No, I actually mean 99% of muslims, not some.

Your percentage is a way off also.

Muslims can? oh I forgot they rememberd the Quran by heart. I hope they didnt have a memory like Mohammed who forgot parts of surahs.

Ehm !

By degrees shall We teach thee to declare (the Message), so thou shalt not forget, 87:6

Thats what the Quran says making the hadeeth statement FALSE.

I am not the one that assembled the hadiths into a book, so do not ask me why I picked this certain hadith, ask whoever put it in the book in the first place. I can get you random contradictions and things that are out of this world from the hadiths.

You picked them from a website you read. It was based on your findings but the findings of another.

Why have you favoured the ones that are opposite? Because without the Quran your deen (religion) is nothing, and you know this.

If a hadeeth reports something that does not conflict with Quran but another hadeeth. We have to weigh the evidence based on the majority of reports from different people. If hadeeth A contradicts hadeeth B and C, E, F, G ahadeeth back confirms B then A is rejected.

IF any of the Hadeeth contradict Quran they are automatically rejected.

This is how we are to decide what hadeeth are good and what are not. YOU ALL HAVE NO SYSTEM TO CHOOSE we do, in which you are free to choose what you like to support your criticism.

In one of the six most authentic Hadith books by Ibne Maja we find a parable told by Hazrat AyshaR, in which she says:

"The aa'yaa on rape and nursing of babies were lying in book form, that was kept in the patio. When the Holy Messenger passed away, we became busy in his funeral. During this time, our domesticated pet goat ate the manuscript of these two aa'yaa. And so these aa'yaa were wasted."

It seems the part the goat ate from the Quran was the only "copy".

And again where are other ahadeeth mentioned that confirm this hadeeth from different people that such a verse was eaten up.

Do you actually read what you type? you are admitting that your hadiths are useless, a bunch of contradictions. I am using hadiths to support my view that the Quran is incomplete and you are choosing to ignore these hadiths and reject them simply because you cannot accept that your Quran is not all present.

I am cautious of hadeeth, I dont trust them until they have cleard examination of the Quran and verified with other hadeeths. I wasnt admitting that they are useless. They are usless if they cannot be confirmed by Quran or other hadeeths. If they contradict the Quran they are automatically reject being they are Sahih or not. Again, ahadeeth is not the divine word of Allah on the Quran is. Some muslims follow this path some muslim do not thinking the Imam's were error free.

[Liberate]

Quote:
How does this contradict the number of 450 by Ibn Kathir?


Quote:
Whats the difference between 104 and 450 ?


Is that what your source says:

This is what it says:

The men and women Companions known as the memorizers of Qur'an (al-qurra') were:

1-4. The Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs. However, Abu Bakr and `Umar died before memorizing it completely, while `Uthman and `Ali were among those who gathered (jama`a) the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him. `Uthman was one of those who used to recite the entire Qur'an in one day and night.

5. `Abd Allah ibn Mas`ud -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

6. Salim, Mawla Abi Hudhayfa -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

7. Mu`adh ibn Jabal -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

8. Ubay ibn Ka`b -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him. He would recite it all in eight days.

9. Zayd ibn Thabit -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

10. Abu Zayd -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

11. Abu al-Darda' -- Allah be well-pleased with him-- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him. His class in the mosque of Damascus counted 1,600 students, each ten with one monitor. If a student made a mistake the monitor corrected him, and if the monitor made a mistake Abu al-Darda' corrected him.

12. Abu Musa al-Ash`ari -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

13. `Abd Allah ibn `Amr ibn al-`As -- Allah be well-pleased with him. He was ordered by the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- to recite it in no less than seven days.

14. Talha ibn `Ubayd Allah -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

15. Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

16. Hudhayfa ibn al-Yaman -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

17. Abu Hurayra -- Allah be well-pleased with him. He was examined by Ubay.

18. `Abd Allah ibn al-Sa'ib -- Allah be well-pleased with him. He was examined by Ubay.

19. `Abd Allah ibn `Umar -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

20. `Abd Allah ibn `Abbas -- Allah be well-pleased with him. He was examined by Ubay.

21. `Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

22. `A'isha bint Abi Bakr -- Allah be well-pleased with her.

23. Hafsa bint `Umar -- Allah be well-pleased with her.

24. Umm Salama -- Allah be well-pleased with her.

25. `Ubada ibn al-Samit -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

26. Mu`adh Abu Halima -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

27. Mujammi` ibn Jariya -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

28. Fadala ibn `Ubayd -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

29. Maslama ibn Mukhallad -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

30. Anas ibn Malik -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

31. Umm Waraqa bint `Abd Allah ibn al-Harith -- Allah be well-pleased with her.

32. Abu Umama al-Bahili -- Allah be well-pleased with him.

33. `Utba ibn `Amir -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him.

34. Tamim al-Dari -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- one of those who gathered the Qur'an in the time of the Prophet -- Allah bless and greet him -- and who used to recite the entire Qur'an in one day and night.

When the above are added to the seventy [34+70= 104]Ansar who were killed in the battle of Yamama against Musaylima the Arch-Liar, and who were all memorizers of the Qur'an (qurra') [Bukhari and Muslim], the number of the Companions who had memorized the Qur'an rises to over a hundred [104]. This number excludes the numerous Companions -- whether named or unnamed -- whose status of memorizers did not reach us through isnad, as well as the women of both the Muhajirin and the Ansar. All of this memorizing was mass-transmitted. The numbers of the next generations, of course, keep rising exponentially in identical fashion of transmission, and praise belongs to Allah.

Sources:

1. al-Nawawi, al-Tibyan fi Adab Hamala al-Qur'an (p. 31);

2. al-Dhahabi, Tabaqat al-Qurra' (1:24-50)

3. al-Suyuti, al-Itqan fi `Ulum al-Qur'an (1:70-72);

4. al-Zarkashi, al-Burhan fi `Ulum al-Qur'an (1:241-243);

5. Nur al-Din `Itr, `Ulum al-Qur'an al-Karim (p. 164-166).

http://www.sunnah.org/history/memorizers.htm

They say 70 were killed in the war of Yamama in which total of known memorizers were 104. There reference were by the following scholars.

See the bit I highlighted in bold with large font, would you like to tell us what the phrase "this number EXCLUDES" means

Pls tell us how the phrases in bold contradict the number of 450?

We all know you were a terrible at math.

I find it surprising how you can be so patronizing when it is you that is embarassing yourself and oblivious to the meaning of 'exclude' relative to the context, this is a pattern through all your posts H2O and this is the same trick you try to play with the arabic claiming since arabic is a "living language" you can utilise an english thesaurus to find meanings that don't contradict what was shown to you to be a blatant contradiction, btw H2O this is what Yusuf Ali says in his preface:

...In choosing an English word for an Arabic word a translator necessarily exercises his own judgement and may unconsciously be expressing a point of view, but that is inevitable

which is precisely what you do being deceitful with the ambiguity of an english thesaurus, yet claim you are without error.

Completely irrelevant have you forgotten this ayat:

Nay! This is a Glorious Qur’an, (Inscribed) in the Al-Luah Al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)! (Qur’an 85:21-22)

It says there is a copy of the koran in heaven, is allah keeping up with the 1,000+ characters added by the dajjal and his scribes or maybe the above is a terrible translation and your translation somehow omits the obvious as you have done all along.

And there are different views on the interpretation of that verse...

And your view is correct?

Give us a break!!!

Some believe The tablets mentioned are refering the actual tablets the Quran was written on, and others believe it is that tablets which are in heaven.

I agree with the earlier cause Allah menitons the Quran was also written on pages.

What tablets?

according to you glorious tablets = pages? glorious pages that some ended up in the belly of a goat?

You mean the leaves barks animal skin, and memories of men were tablets?

If the koran existed as tablets why didn't Zaid simply just mention I went and collected the tablets of the koran from whoever had it; which brings us to another question who had these tablets H2O? Aisha and her goat?

Tell us H2O how do you reconcile what you have said above with what you said on how the koran was collated?

Liberate, you keep introducing one particular madzhab beliefs in Islam which does not constitued the Islamic world views. If you want to study the various madzhab you can go to the link I provided below.

The download the quran for yourself link which you tell us is a terrible translation? Where are your madzhabs H2O?, I have been asking you this for months, it seems you are picking beliefs from the sunnis and the shias and making a pizza out of it then telling us you are without error, show us one site that summarizies your beliefs.

The hadith only makes sense if parts of the book have already been lost and you need to collate it to stop other parts being lost. This is the only rationale I can see within that hadith it makes no sense compiling the koran if there were quraa left right and centre that knew the entire book.

It is biased rational conjecture on your behalf with the incomplete sources you obtained which are only from one perspective view. You sources are merely copy and paste from other Chritian websites which are not your own labored efforts in searching through all the hadeeths available in english nor the Quran which you have never completely read to establish criticism.

Most of my hadiths are obtained from muslims sources, I go straight to the the usc website, if you have anything we have not covered relating to the hadiths care to show them to us.

It was arranged in other to be easily memorised, was this the way Mohammed arranged it? Why did it have to be arranged in a different chronology to that alledgedly done by Mohammed?

It was arranged in its order the way the Prophet recited it.

Where are islamic sources to say this?

This is what your esteemed scholars say with hadiths to back up what they say:

(Jalal al Din `Abdul Rahman b. abi Bakr al Suyuti, "al Itqan fi `ulum al Qur'an", Halabi, Cairo, 1935/1354, pt 1, p. 60) : ibn `Abbas asked `Uthman what possessed him to place surat al Anfal, one of the mathani, with Bara'a, one of the mi'in, join them with no bismillah between them and place them among the seven lengthy suras. `Uthman replied that often the Prophet received quite long revelations. He would call for one of the scribes and say, 'Put these verses in the sura in which so-and-so occurs.' Anfal was among the first of the Medina revelations and Bara'a among the last. Since its contents resembled those of Anfal, `Uthman took it to belong with it, for the Prophet had died without explaining that it was part of it. (Jalal al Din `Abdul Rahman b. abi Bakr al Suyuti, "al Itqan fi `ulum al Qur'an", Halabi, Cairo, 1935/1354, pt 1, p. 65) Malik had a shorter explanation for the absence of this bismillah. The beginning of Bara'a fell out and its bismillah fell out with it.

(Burhan al Din al Baji, "Jawab", MS Dar al Kutub, Taimur "majami`", no. 207, f. 14) `Ali reported that the stoning verse had been revealed but those who bore it together with other verses in their memories perished in the Yemama.

The following clearly shows Uthman was placing suras where he thought they ought to be, not Mohammed, when did Uthman seek his 'prophetic' advise when he did these things? Or are they above fabricated hadiths?

allah didn't do a good job seeing you even admit there have been additions to it and there are numerous sahih hadiths that there are omissions from it. (BTW since Mohammed said the koran was revealed in 7 readings who gave uthman the authority to burn the other copies including those 7 readings against what allah's prophet had said?)

‏قال قال رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏بني الإسلام على خمس شهادة أن لا إله إلا الله وأن ‏ ‏محمدا ‏ ‏رسول الله وإقام الصلاة وإيتاء الزكاة والحج وصوم رمضان ‏

Neutral literal translation: ‎he said Prophet said ‎ ‎God bless him and grant him salvation ‎ ‎ the Islam was based on the one fifth of a testimony that there is no god but Allah and that ‎ ‎Mohammad ‎ ‎Prophet is like وإقام the prayer and the giving of the charity and the pilgrimage and the fasting of a ramadan ‎

‏قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏بُنِيَ الْإِسْلَامُ عَلَى خَمْسٍ شَهَادَةِ أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ ‏ ‏مُحَمَّدًا ‏ ‏رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَإِقَامِ الصَّلَاةِ وَإِيتَاءِ الزَّكَاةِ وَالْحَجِّ وَصَوْمِ رَمَضَانَ ‏

Neutral literal translation: ‎he said a prophet said for ‎ ‎he prayed to on him and he granted salvation ‎ ‎coffees the Islam on five testimony that there is not god except to that ‎ ‎Mohammad ‎ ‎prophet for وَإِقَامِ prayer and the giving of charity and pilgrimage and fasting ramadan ‎

We can extract the five times a day prayer from the translation, it is still stating that allah prays for Mohammed and grants him peace/and or salvation!!! again you are dismissing the main point of my question who gave Uthmann permission to burn the other 7 dialects the prophet said the koran was revealed in?

Why don't you quote for us the Bukhari hadith as it is present in english at al-islam.com?

They dont have Bukhari it available in English, only in Arabic. I posted it in English translated by Dr Muhsin Khan which can be downloaded from the link I supplied below.

Didnt you read what you Lebenese Christian brother said:

A simple reply would be that the word "fragments" is not included in the above hadith in the arabic text.

But neither does it exclude the notion that the Quran may have been collected by text, orally or even both.

In which I said:

It gives the notion of both ie it was collected from written text and what was memorize as show below.

Or is it he also need Arabic Scholar Qualification in order to understand ahadeeth also is why you are over looking his confirmation ?

The usc website of Dr Mushin Khan's translation clearly has no parenthesis around fragmentary scripts for Bukhari vol 9 book 89 number 301, you pasted an english translation for Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 509 and refused to paste a similar english translation for Bukhari vol 9 book 89 number 309 from any site, let us see who is being devious here unless ofcourse you are attacking Mushin Khan for not understanding arabic? which would not be surprise seeing it is what you have been doing from day one.

In that case will you agree with Apple Pie on his exegesis? we can both agree he came with sources? Do you agree with what he said because he came with sources?

Why should anything you say supercede a recognised imam or arabic scholar?

There is a big difference between our selves and Apple Pie. He free lances his translations using other translations as guides then he goes back makes changes to what he believes is the meaning

This is like the pot calling the kettle black, anybody who has a read any of your translation posts will see you were shown a contradiction you run over to an english thesaurus and find varying forms of the contradicted word that was shown to you using an ENGLISH thesauarus ignoring the context of the arabic and making a mockery of it you then claim your translation is superior and whoever translated it beforehand into english didn't know what they were talking about, why should I believe you? Because you came with sources? Apple Pie came with sources too, adequate sources, it was an embarassment of a discussion, you had to quit the thread when you were shown for not knowing the diference between exegesis and translate, and this is the fellow who thinks his english translations are superior to anybody who has ever translated the koran.

Here we go again, didn't you mention in several posts that you became a muslim because of this alledge prophecy of saudi oil you now try and wriggle out of what you said by trying to argue in terms of semantics when the end result puts you straight back in the logical fallacy you have built for yourself...

Since you like to edit with your wishful thinking let our audience decide:

Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.

So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of اللّــه G-D that satisfies me ?

1) The logical consistancy of the Quran.

2) The rational and challenge it gives

3) The wisdom and reasoning it applies

4) Its natural aspects it delivers that conforms with nature it self

5) The obedience it asks toward اللّــه with reverence and love.

6) How to live in submission to اللّــه with balance in life

7) How to treat others as you would want to be treated by another

Its message is direct, blunt, and to the point

9) The belief in اللّــه oneness and the uniqueness of his divinity and the exalted manner of His sublime majesty

10) The belief in the prophets adn that اللّــه sent prophets to all nations of people

11) The belief in angels, scriptures, the life after death, hell, paradise, judgement day, and the resurrection.

This is how I came to believe the Quran was from Allah qualifying Muhammad as Prophet. Needless to say my belief in him as a Prophet was not sparked by the prophecies or Scientific indications of unseen realities through out the Quran. These things merely increased my belief but was not the cause or the root of it.

What do you all the audience think ?

Who are you trying to fool H2O?

The first quote as to the reason you became a haneef muslim was posted Jul 08 :

Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 09:51 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:


...When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him. Deuteronomy 18:20-22




Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.

Quote:


O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise (9:2




Allah said to the muslim Arabs in the time of Muhammad that HE will soon enrich them. And it doesnt take a 12th grader to know the arabs were a poor nation at that time in which the Biazantine and Persian empires didnt dominate them. When did the Arab muslim of that region become RICH ? Who supplies the 1/3 of the world's oil and has the LARGEST oil reserves in the world. Is not Saudi Arabia one of the richest countries in the world that is now a GOLD MIND ? Hmm let see some fact here .

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic.php?p=35578

You then try an amalgamate a post you later made on a completely separate topic, separate subject and totally different forum for that matter made over two months later:

Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 05:05 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What qualifies Muhamad as a prophet ?

This is a critical question as on the bases of:

1) What are the qualifications of a Prophet ?

2) By whom are these qualification deemed ?

3) What is a Prophet in semetic terms ?

Number "1" is based on number "2" which can be deemd by ones own opinion, or religious indoctrination.

When we are seeking for truth we set criteriors for our selves to determine what a thing is or is not by merits.

What is a Prophet or in the semitic term "Nabi" should be defined.
A "Nabi" is one who does not speak his own words but the words G-D commanded him to say by divine revelation.

This is the strict meaning of the word. Who is qualified as a "Nabi ~ Prophet" is merited by one's self and the rules he/she adopts as their criterior to determine who is a true Prophet of G-D or not.

So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of اللّــه G-D that satisfies me ?

1) The logical consistancy of the Quran.

2) The rational and challenge it gives

3) The wisdom and reasoning it applies...

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic.php?p=42112

You are not making much sense H2O or are you trying to divert attention from your embarassing interpretations of saudi oil prophecy in sura 9:28?

And you going to get the same answer over and over.

Allah said to the muslim Arabs in the time of Muhammad that HE will soon enrich them. And it doesnt take a 12th grader to know the arabs were a poor nation at that time in which the Biazantine and Persian empires didnt dominate them. When did the Arab muslim of that region become RICH ? Who supplies the 1/3 of the world's oil and has the LARGEST oil reserves in the world. Is not Saudi Arabia one of the richest countries in the world that is now a GOLD MIND ?

Your right( Liberate) 9:28 doesnt mention any about oil. It mention a prophecy of the Arabs of the Region becoming rich, in which after the establishment of, they became rich, without it they would probably be just like afghanistan.

Why you are so persistant on this issue is amazing. What are you afraid of ? You are not going to change my mind and you know this, so what is it, our audience ? I think that is what it is cause you wont get off this subject. You have already stated your criticism and repeated you self over five times on the topic in the offense and I have already stated my grounds. But this isnt enough for you though you keep going and going and going like an energizer bunny wabbit.

I am hoping to show you just how rational you are making yourself look. You have said it is a saudi oil prophecy and in the next breath say it is not a saudi oil prophecy but somehow it still is a saudi oil prophecy! (which one should we believe? It seems you have not made up your own mind, and this is the fellow that believes his interpretation of the koran supercedes everybody else's?) says the arabs would get rich...and the saudi oil is how they got rich, how is it not then a saudi oil prophecy? will you make up your mind?

[Loki]

1. you don't have the authority to reject the early islam fathers who compiled the hadiths

according to who ?

according to a 1200 year timespan between you and the writer who at the time sought out wich was truth and wich wasn't.

Do you think i have the authority to reject statements of Clementine of Alexandria just because 'i think' he is lying? without the proof or arguments for it?

You don't read biographies and pick out what you like just because you don't like the author.

2. the hadiths are allready sorted out truth from error at the very beginning

False. Ahadeeth were authenticated by unbroken chain of transmission to the best of the scholars abilities. The hadeeths were never tested by Quran. Also, many hadeeth contradict each other.

Bukhari alone trew hundreds of hadith verses away because he said that they were not authenthic and that the ones he compiled were authentic. Bukhari had certain rules to proof a authentic verse from a false one, and threw hundres aways because they failed the test. And the hadiths were never tested with the Quran because back then that rule didn't excist for a Quran to be equal with the hadith. The hadith was equal with the quran back then, everything in the hadith was cultural practise derived from the quran and Muhammed's following.

3. I have hadiths in wich Muhammed commands the punishment of stoning... so it doesn't concern the torah but the quran as Muhammed points out when he commands it. If you want i'll post them for you.

And when did this particular event happen, before or after the issue of the Jewish man and woman who were stone by the rajam found in the Torah ? If it was before then you would have a point, and would consider for investigation of the hadeeth with others. But if it was after, then we are still in the same boat as to why those verses were revealed comfirming the practice of Rajm that was continued. You would have to produce proof that was before the verses of the Quran that confirm the practice of rajam. All you can do in this matter is conjecture cause you are not aquinted with the science of hadith and how to date them.

Read it and conclude for yourself.

Ibin Shihab reported that a man in the time of the Apostle of Allah
(may peace be upon him) acknowledged having committed adultery and
confessed it four times. The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon
him) then ordered and he was stoned. (Muwatta Iman Malik, p. 350).

`An unmarried man committed adultery with a wife of another man' -
they said. `I can take decision for both of you, according to the
book of Allah' - Muhammed answered (Muwatta Imam Malik.p.351).

The young bachelor was exiled for one year after scourging him
hundred times and the woman was stoned too. Tradition makes it very
clear that this punishment was executed according to the book of
Allah.

The scourging is from the Quran, shows that it is revealed within his revelation period, and the stoning should of been too since he putteth it into practise at the same in and wich Uthman complained that it was missing from the book.

4. If the hadith needs to confirm the quran, then there is no needs for hadiths, it's all in the quran allready

Who ever said hadeeth confirming Quran. It is the Quran that confirms that authenticity of the ahadeeth. Ahadeeth are commentary that give us the reason of why such and such verses were revealed helps us to understand the historical meaning of the Quran, in which there is a general meaning that is standard and clear for us.

so practiclly more then 90% of the hadiths are useless, like the book of nursing and all that wich that cannot be compared to quranic verses is useless since you can't confirm all that stuff. Then you shouldn't believe a word of it. I've seen verses in wich Muhammed says that you loose two to one qirat's a day for owning a dog... that probably means that this isn't true since the quran can't confirm this.

5. Why does 90% of the sharia laws consist of hadith material? when there is no need for external scripture.

Have you ever studied Shariah law ? I dont think you ever did to mention such a ridiculous comment. Have you ever heard of Fiqhus-sunnah ? It is the major schools of thought "madzhab" that use both Quran and sunnah to establish shariah law ? Also have you ever read Sahih al-Bukhari and Mulims collections ? Each topic or chapter for hadeeths is aided by a Quranic verse that established the standard of the law in which we adopt which is practiced according to the sunnah of our Prophet that is recorded in hadeeth.

The Sunni's use hadiths only on a lesser level then Shia's. Yet are Shia's not muslims then? Then why do you count these when you make statistics of how many muslims their are in the world... when Shia's are not? it would only make the gap of christian versus muslim population only bigger in favor of christianity.

6. Why do you base holy laws on laws that should be rejected because the lack of confirmation in the quran? For example, what if you had to pray 10 times instead of 5 in order for Allah to hear you? can the quran confirm this? no, the hadith is the only material for this, and it's a untrustworthy book as you pointed out. Your way of reasoning crumbles if you look into it.

Wrong. The five daily prayers are mentioned in the Quran. The link we provided about on Fiqhus-sunnah provided proof. And you have it all backwards. What should be rejected is hadeeth, not Quran, that show lack of comfirmation by other hadeeths.

five times prayer is explained in detail in the hadiths, while it isn't in the quran. yet their are tons of stuff in hadiths wich are uncomparable to any quranic verse... yet tons of these hadiths are accepted because it applies to the 'times'. When Arabia was still a country of camel herders, race horse jockeys and bedouien merchants they related to whole other hadith verses then muslims extremists or 21th century sufi's of today for example. With or without quranic support merely to adapt it to their cultural or philosophical state of that period of time. The hadiths are pick what you like books. If they see something they like a muslim will make sure to try and proof it with a quranic verse even too the point of perversion.

And i've come across sites from muslims who literally hate muslims that disregard bukhari and muslim material as utterly false or weak because it doesn't apply to 21th century western standards.

Thats good to hear they hate them, cause they are doing the right thing. They are sticking to the Quran as the primary source.

glad you agree

1. While most of these people that reject them, never probably read the hadiths fully and probably aren't even scholars on the subject

I dont think so. Primary goal of a Muslim is to read Quran and ahadeeth available. I find it not likely that they havent read Bukhari and Muslim. I have and they have a right as a muslims to disagree or to accept a hadeeth on good grounds. Hadeeths are not divine nore the word of Allah.

to read a ahadeeth is a primary goal as well? i thought the quran was a complete book? i mean can or could Islam excist with only a quran? if their were no hadiths in excistence? why do you threat hadith material as semi-holy anyway. Christians don't even do that with their apocrypha, it's either false, untrusthworthy or unrevealing and rejected on those grounds. Neither is anyone obliged to read them.

2. Muhammed was not a role model for the 21th century or any time for that matter... even without the hadith the quran could confirm this. You can flip flop all you want, but the truth remains the same.

Is Jesus you role model ? Is he the role model for a Jew ? So of course our Prophet wouldnt be a role model to you. Please dont speak for us in which you are in a bad habit of dictating other peoples religion. you have our beliefs are you have yours.

acctually Jesus is the one we live in, he is our role model in spirit and in person. Their are jews who believe in christ, yet if you mean judaism i don't know why they should, they don't share the same faith in this.

Neither am i prejuiced in judging Muhammed, i can go into debating Muhammed's 'goodness' with my arguments. yet i think if you think that 'rigtheousness' is subjective to someone's opinion. Then we have different meanings of rigtheousness.

[H2O]

See the bit I highlighted in bold with large font, would you like to tell us what the phrase "this number EXCLUDES" means

"This number (104) EXCLUDES "whether named or unnamed -- whose status of memorizers did not reach us through isnad, as well as the women of both the Muhajirin and the Ansar. All of this memorizing was mass-transmitted."

Sources say 70 were killed in the Battle of Yamama not 450.

What tablets?

according to you glorious tablets = pages? glorious pages that some ended up in the belly of a goat?

Tablets are made of stones Pages are made of parchments. To different materials as we stated before. I did not say that the Tablets are pages.

If the koran existed as tablets why didn't Zaid simply just mention I went and collected the tablets of the koran from whoever had it

What were tablets made of back then ?

which is precisely what you do being deceitful with the ambiguity of an english thesaurus, yet claim you are without error.

Nope.

If the koran existed as tablets why didn't Zaid simply just mention I went and collected the tablets of the koran from whoever had it; which brings us to another question who had these tablets H2O? Aisha and her goat?

Tell us H2O how do you reconcile what you have said above with what you said on how the koran was collated?

We go by what the Quran says first. Quran mentions the material it was recorded on were Tablets and Pages.

What the hadeeth mentions are additional materials they wrote on. Hadeeth is not superior Quran in authenticity or report.

Most of my hadiths are obtained from muslims sources, I go straight to the the usc website, if you have anything we have not covered relating to the hadiths care to show them to us.

Already posted the translated ahadeeth from their origin.

The following clearly shows Uthman was placing suras where he thought they ought to be, not Mohammed, when did Uthman seek his 'prophetic' advise when he did these things? Or are they above fabricated hadiths?

Where are other ahadeeth to confirm this of different reports ?

‏قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏بُنِيَ الْإِسْلَامُ عَلَى خَمْسٍ شَهَادَةِ أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ ‏ ‏مُحَمَّدًا ‏ ‏رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَإِقَامِ الصَّلَاةِ وَإِيتَاءِ الزَّكَاةِ وَالْحَجِّ وَصَوْمِ رَمَضَانَ

Neutral literal translation: ‎he said a prophet said for ‎ ‎he prayed to on him and he granted salvation ‎ ‎coffees the Islam on five testimony that there is not god except to that ‎ ‎Mohammad ‎ ‎prophet for وَإِقَامِ prayer and the giving of charity and pilgrimage and fasting ramadan ‎

We can extract the five times a day prayer from the translation, it is still stating that allah prays for Mohammed and grants him peace/and or salvation!!! again you are dismissing the main point of my question who gave Uthmann permission to burn the other 7 dialects the prophet said the koran was revealed in?

Here is the catch 22 to that. We wrote the first one with no tashkeel and then added tashkeel to the other as we re-typed it of how it is pronounced.

Then you you went to http://www.cimos.com/index.asp?src=try to see what the difference was. Your bot translation didnt render "Allah" ~ GOD also the term "Sallallahu alaihi wassalaam" does not mean ‎"he prayed to on him and he granted salvation ". It mean" may Allah's benediction be upon him". And where did it come up with "Coffee" from ?

The usc website of Dr Mushin Khan's translation clearly has no parenthesis around fragmentary scripts for Bukhari vol 9 book 89 number 301, you pasted an english translation for Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 509 and refused to paste a similar english translation for Bukhari vol 9 book 89 number 309 from any site, let us see who is being devious here unless ofcourse you are attacking Mushin Khan for not understanding arabic? which would not be surprise seeing it is what you have been doing from day one.

Its just plain and simple adn confirmed by another Arabic Speaking Christian. It does not exist in the Rabic text. In the Original sources for Muhsin Khan's translation there are in parenthesis denoting the translators interpolation.

Who are you trying to fool H2O?

The first quote as to the reason you became a haneef muslim was posted Jul 08 : ..........................

You then try an amalgamate a post you later made on a completely separate topic, separate subject and totally different forum for that matter made over two months later:

This is what I said before you made your fancy editing

[quote=H2O"]Since you[Liberate] like to edit with your wishful thinking let our audience decide:

Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.

So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of اللّــه G-D that satisfies me ?

1) The logical consistancy of the Quran.

2) The rational and challenge it gives

3) The wisdom and reasoning it applies

4) Its natural aspects it delivers that conforms with nature it self

5) The obedience it asks toward اللّــه with reverence and love.

6) How to live in submission to اللّــه with balance in life

7) How to treat others as you would want to be treated by another

Its message is direct, blunt, and to the point

9) The belief in اللّــه oneness and the uniqueness of his divinity and the exalted manner of His sublime majesty

10) The belief in the prophets adn that اللّــه sent prophets to all nations of people

11) The belief in angels, scriptures, the life after death, hell, paradise, judgement day, and the resurrection.

This is how I came to believe the Quran was from Allah qualifying Muhammad as Prophet. Needless to say my belief in him as a Prophet was not sparked by the prophecies or Scientific indications of unseen realities through out the Quran. These things merely increased my belief but was not the cause or the root of it.

[/quote]


You do know what later means right ? Again what does our audience think

You just cant let our audience think for themselves huh ? Lets see what you going to come back with on this issue that you dont want to stop ranting about.

I am hoping to show you just how rational you are making yourself look. You have said it is a saudi oil prophecy and in the next breath say it is not a saudi oil prophecy but somehow it still is a saudi oil prophecy! (which one should we believe? It seems you have not made up your own mind, and this is the fellow that believes his interpretation of the koran supercedes everybody else's?) says the arabs would get rich...and the saudi oil is how they got rich, how is it not then a saudi oil prophecy? will you make up your mind?

And I again I respond for the numerous time:

And you going to get the same answer over and over.

H2O addressing OMEGA wrote:
Allah said to the muslim Arabs in the time of Muhammad that HE will soon enrich them. And it doesnt take a 12th grader to know the arabs were a poor nation at that time in which the Biazantine and Persian empires didnt dominate them. When did the Arab muslim of that region become RICH ? Who supplies the 1/3 of the world's oil and has the LARGEST oil reserves in the world. Is not Saudi Arabia one of the richest countries in the world that is now a GOLD MIND ?



H2O wrote:
Your right( Liberate) 9:28 doesnt mention any about oil. It mention a prophecy of the Arabs of the Region becoming rich, in which after the establishment of, they became rich, without it they would probably be just like afghanistan.

according to a 1200 year timespan between you and the writer who at the time sought out wich was truth and wich wasn't.

Do you think i have the authority to reject statements of Clementine of Alexandria just because 'i think' he is lying? without the proof or arguments for it?

Sure why not. If you find enough evidence then yes you can.

You don't read biographies and pick out what you like just because you don't like the author.

You can only do such thing based on hoq much knowledge you have.

Bukhari alone trew hundreds of hadith verses away because he said that they were not authenthic and that the ones he compiled were authentic. Bukhari had certain rules to proof a authentic verse from a false one, and threw hundres aways because they failed the test. And the hadiths were never tested with the Quran because back then that rule didn't excist for a Quran to be equal with the hadith. The hadith was equal with the quran back then, everything in the hadith was cultural practise derived from the quran and Muhammed's following.

In which his student Muslim went back over his work and did not accept some ahadeeth he accepted. Sahih came out wiht lesser ahadeeth than Bukhari, obvioucly the student found flaw and rejected ahadeeth that Bukhari accepted as isnad.

The Term Saheeh is applied to the isnad of the ahadeeth. These collection were never verified with Quran.

One Scholar however in his book Riyadhussalaheen by Imam Nawawi confirmed the Sahih collection with the Quran and with other Sahih ahadeeth in which a great portion of ahadeeth were rejected that were claimed to be Sahih.

He managed to collect a concise collection that does not contradict Quran and that confirm each other of multiple reports. He does not inlcude a hadeeth that only has one report that is not backed by others.

So there is more out there than you can fathom.

The young bachelor was exiled for one year after scourging him
hundred times and the woman was stoned too. Tradition makes it very
clear that this punishment was executed according to the book of
Allah.

And I asked when did this happen, before or after the verses was revealed confirming the Stoning in Torah in the event mentioned in the hadeeth with the Jewish man and wowan which you didnt answer nor established anything.

so practiclly more then 90% of the hadiths are useless, like the book of nursing and all that wich that cannot be compared to quranic verses is useless since you can't confirm all that stuff. Then you shouldn't believe a word of it. I've seen verses in wich Muhammed says that you loose two to one qirat's a day for owning a dog... that probably means that this isn't true since the quran can't confirm this.

Would you like me to repeat my self again ? If the hadeeth contradicts quran it is rejected, and if the hadeeth contradicts other hadeeths that confirm each other it is rejected. If the hadeeth is reported by only one person and not confirmed by another it is rejected.

five times prayer is explained in detail in the hadiths, while it isn't in the quran. yet their are tons of stuff in hadiths wich are uncomparable to any quranic verse... yet tons of these hadiths are accepted because it applies to the 'times'.

The Quran mentions how many salawaat to be made by the time periods mentioned in the Quran. Fajr, Zhuhr, Asr, Maghrib and 'Ishaa'a

to read a ahadeeth is a primary goal as well? i thought the quran was a complete book? i mean can or could Islam excist with only a quran? if their were no hadiths in excistence? why do you threat hadith material as semi-holy anyway. Christians don't even do that with their apocrypha, it's either false, untrusthworthy or unrevealing and rejected on those grounds. Neither is anyone obliged to read them.

Hadeeth are not divine nor semi holy. They are mere insight commentary to the Quran and tell us the Sunnah of Prophets with the Quran.

[Liberate]

See the bit I highlighted in bold with large font, would you like to tell us what the phrase "this number EXCLUDES" means

"This number (104) EXCLUDES "whether named or unnamed -- whose status of memorizers did not reach us through isnad, as well as the women of both the Muhajirin and the Ansar. All of this memorizing was mass-transmitted."

Sources say 70 were killed in the Battle of Yamama not 450.

Wait a minute didn't you try and make an argument for the last umpteen posts that 104 were killed instead of 450 now you give a number that 70 were killed (didn't you try and make an argument that 104 were killed at the battle of yamama!!! it seems getting you to make up your mind is like getting blood from a stone), pls tell us H2O what is the topic of the source url you gave us what does it mean when it says companions of the prophet as it's title H2O?, what relevance does this have to do with the initial thread of how many memorisers existed pre and post the battle of Yamama, pls tell us H2O what the terms ansar, hafiz/ahafeez and quraa mean?

What is the difference between an ansar and a hafiz H2O?

From the dicitonary of islam:

Ansar - means 'Helpers'. Muslims of Madinah who helped the Prophet (saw) and the Makkan Muslims when they immigrated to Madinah...

Hafiz - A person who has memorised and can recite the whole Qur'an by heart. Means 'Protector' or 'Preserver'...

Qari - once who recited the Qur'an constantly and correctly.

http://www.irca.org.au/dictionary/

So when your source says 70 ansar were killed what do you think it is restricted to especially with it's title being companions of the prophet.?

What tablets?

according to you glorious tablets = pages? glorious pages that some ended up in the belly of a goat?

Tablets are made of stones Pages are made of parchments. To different materials as we stated before. I did not say that the Tablets are pages.

You didn't? This is what you said in response to my post:

Liberate wrote:
Completely irrelevant have you forgotten this ayat:

Nay! This is a Glorious Qur’an, (Inscribed) in the Al-Luah Al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)! (Qur’an 85:21-22)

It says there is a copy of the koran in heaven, is allah keeping up with the 1,000+ characters added by the dajjal and his scribes or maybe the above is a terrible translation and your translation somehow omits the obvious as you have done all along.

And there are different views on the interpretation of that verse. Some believe The tablets mentioned are refering the actual tablets the Quran was written on, and others believe it is that tablets which are in heaven.

I agree with the earlier cause Allah menitons the Quran was also written on pages.

Help us out here, what do you mean when you say you agree with the earlier interpretation that the tablets mentioned are referring to the actual tablets the koran was written upon, and you agree with it because allah mentions the quran was also written on pages?

Tell us what you mean by the above H2O in reference to tablets??

It loooks like you are either seriously confused or just an out and out liar.

which is precisely what you do being deceitful with the ambiguity of an english thesaurus, yet claim you are without error.

Nope.

when H2O have you admitted that you might even REMOTELY be in error in any of your translations?

Most of my hadiths are obtained from muslims sources, I go straight to the the usc website, if you have anything we have not covered relating to the hadiths care to show them to us.

Already posted the translated ahadeeth from their origin.

You should have realised by now I don't take any of your translated ayats seriously there are merely your opinion backed up with the theatre of your mind, no relevance whatsoever to do with islam, your line of thought is backed up by nobody in the islamic world except you and you alone, merely your opinion not incumbent on anybody, you are not a scholar of arabic you are a sorry excuse for a muslim apologetic. Unable to express yourself (or even lie properly) in english yet claim your english translations are superior and eithout error.

The following clearly shows Uthman was placing suras where he thought they ought to be, not Mohammed, when did Uthman seek his 'prophetic' advise when he did these things? Or are they above fabricated hadiths?

Where are other ahadeeth to confirm this of different reports ?

Oh I see it's rejected because you can't find any other hadiths to back them? (Have you looked for it (I seriously doubt it)? or the hadith rejecter part of you wants to surface)

This is absolutely ridiculous, is it rejected because there are hadiths that contradict them? If so where are they?

Are you rejecting it because it contradicts the koran? If so where does it contradict the koran?

Or are you rejecting it (without evidence) because you want to reject it or else your religion and standpoint come crashing like a dominoes deck...

‏قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏بُنِيَ الْإِسْلَامُ عَلَى خَمْسٍ شَهَادَةِ أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ ‏ ‏مُحَمَّدًا ‏ ‏رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَإِقَامِ الصَّلَاةِ وَإِيتَاءِ الزَّكَاةِ وَالْحَجِّ وَصَوْمِ رَمَضَانَ

Neutral literal translation: ‎he said a prophet said for ‎ ‎he prayed to on him and he granted salvation ‎ ‎coffees the Islam on five testimony that there is not god except to that ‎ ‎Mohammad ‎ ‎prophet for وَإِقَامِ prayer and the giving of charity and pilgrimage and fasting ramadan ‎

We can extract the five times a day prayer from the translation, it is still stating that allah prays for Mohammed and grants him peace/and or salvation!!! again you are dismissing the main point of my question who gave Uthmann permission to burn the other 7 dialects the prophet said the koran was revealed in?

Here is the catch 22 to that. We wrote the first one with no tashkeel and then added tashkeel to the other as we re-typed it of how it is pronounced.

Then you you went to http://www.cimos.com/index.asp?src=try to see what the difference was. Your bot translation didnt render "Allah" ~ GOD also the term

"Sallallahu alaihi wassalaam" does not mean ‎"he prayed to on him and he granted salvation ". It mean" may Allah's benediction be upon him".

The debate has already been discussed and brought to surface by many a natural arabic speaker, a neutral translator shows it for what it is, why does "peace be upon him" have different arabic characters yet somehow mean the same for Mohammed and all other koranic prophets?? It is balatantly obvious your translation and many translations have tampered with the fact in order to hide that allah is praying for his prophet!! Yet you are brainwashed from youth that your "pure" arabic "understood by a child" doesn't really mean what it means.

And where did it come up with "Coffee" from ?

The translation is a literal translation of the word regardless of wether it is a name or not.

The usc website of Dr Mushin Khan's translation clearly has no parenthesis around fragmentary scripts for Bukhari vol 9 book 89 number 301, you pasted an english translation for Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 509 and refused to paste a similar english translation for Bukhari vol 9 book 89 number 309 from any site, let us see who is being devious here unless ofcourse you are attacking Mushin Khan for not understanding arabic? which would not be surprise seeing it is what you have been doing from day one.

Its just plain and simple adn confirmed by another Arabic Speaking Christian. It does not exist in the Rabic text. In the Original sources for Muhsin Khan's translation there are in parenthesis denoting the translators interpolation.

what do you mean here? Do you mean Mushin Khan's original translation has no parentheses?

In that case would you care to show us what it says for Dr Mushin Khan's translation of Bukhari vol 9 Book 89 number 309 from any website, not Volume 6 Book 51 number 509

Who are you trying to fool H2O?

The first quote as to the reason you became a haneef muslim was posted Jul 08 : ..........................

You then try an amalgamate a post you later made on a completely separate topic, separate subject and totally different forum for that matter made over two months later:

This is what I said before you made your fancy editing

What editing did I make H2O? you are trying to join two threads from different forums with a gap of over 2 months to make it look like there were continuous, anybody who sees the date the subject the topic and the forum will realise what you said as to why you became a muslim in the frist place (saudi oil prophecy) has no relevance to the other post two months later which you try as make as one regardless of wether you put "later" they will simply see you for someone who is dishonest and trying to wriggle out of his embarassing posts.

[quote=H2O"]Since you[Liberate] like to edit with your wishful thinking let our audience decide:

Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.

So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of اللّــه G-D that satisfies me ?

1) The logical consistancy of the Quran.

2) The rational and challenge it gives

3) The wisdom and reasoning it applies ...

In other words you became a haneef muslim and then 2 months later you found out reasons for you becoming a haneef muslim!!! that involved re-interpreting what a divine book was and how to define what a prophet meant so you can move the goal posts for Mohammed to qualify, at least the audience knows the mind set of the individual they are dealing with, ready to lie and deviate attention from the irrationality of his stance.

H2O why did you conveniently delete the thread I asked you as to who gave Uthman the authority to burn the 7 readings the 'prophet' of allah stated the koran was revealed in?

Why have you side stepped discussing the delights of paradise H2O?

What are you afraid of?

[H2O]

So when your source says 70 ansar were killed what do you think it is restricted to especially with it's title being companions of the prophet.?

A Hafeez is a Qari or Qurraa'a(pl.)

The Ansar is an attributive name given to those who helped fight in the wars and aided the the Prophet. The fact of the matter they do not say 450 died in the battle Yamama as you stated Ibn Katheer said.

Help us out here, what do you mean when you say you agree with the earlier interpretation that the tablets mentioned are referring to the actual tablets the koran was written upon, and you agree with it because allah mentions the quran was also written on pages?

Obviously you dont take the time to read and understand my post correctly.

Completely irrelevant have you forgotten this ayat:

Nay! This is a Glorious Qur’an, (Inscribed) in the Al-Luah Al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)! (Qur’an 85:21-22)

It says there is a copy of the koran in heaven, is allah keeping up with the 1,000+ characters added by the dajjal and his scribes or maybe the above is a terrible translation and your translation somehow omits the obvious as you have done all along.

And there are different views on the interpretation of that verse. Some believe The tablets mentioned are refering the actual tablets the Quran was written on, and others believe it is that tablets which are in heaven.

I agree with the earlier [the actual tablets the Quran was written on] cause Allah menitons the Quran was also written on pages.

Surah 80

[11] By no means (should it be so)! For it is indeed a Message of instruction:

[12] Therefore let whose will, keep it in remembrance.

[13] (It is) in suhuf held (greatly) in honour,

[14] Exalted (in dignity), kept pure and holy

[15] (Written) by the hands of scribes,

[16] Honourable and Pious and Just.

" Suhuf " ~ pages

These verses are not totally agreed on also as some who regard the tablets are in heaven rather than the tablets on which the Quran was actually written on believe the scribes here are refereng to angels. This we disagree with being that the verse as it is in connection with the various materials the Quran was recorded on such as Tablets and Pages (Parchments etc) as mentioned in the Quran are two different materials mentioned in plurality that cannot be allocated to Ummul-Kitab which is one heavenly book.

The Quran mentions more than on particular material it was recorded on which does not conform to the idea of a heavenly book (Singular) as mentioned called Ummul-Kitaab which in indeed the heavenly.

Tell us what you mean by the above H2O in reference to tablets??

It loooks like you are either seriously confused or just an out and out liar.

Seems you want to be Psychic again. Why didnt you just stick to "you didnt understand and for me to confirm what I meant" rather than jumping to conclusions ? Why ask a question then answer it your self with negative notion ?

when H2O have you admitted that you might even REMOTELY be in error in any of your translations?

When you learn to speak Arabic then we can discuss this matter. As of now you blind of the Language. We have constantly submitted some of our translations to those who disagree with translations all together for proof. We are taking a step at a time. It took us 4 months just to translate Surah Al-Baqarah. Then made some corrections as it was proofed by Scholars.

Have we made mistakes ? Yes we have. Better suggestions have given help to us. Unlike the rest of the other translators they never put there translation out for criticism by other scholars. We have. After every Juz of the Quran is translate it is submitted to various ulimah for feed back.

Also, you have went over board about my criticism of other scholars translations. I never said their whole translation work is in error. You are exagerating. WE merely disagreed with some horrible translated parts of the Quran that we have had debates about.

You should have realised by now I don't take any of your translated ayats seriously there are merely your opinion backed up with the theatre of your mind

Then dont continue to debate with me. Our source is directly from the fountian, the Quran its self. Dont worry, we also included in our preface, that we are subject to error also, and that Quran in Arabic conveys more than it does in English and the Englsih does not substitute the Quran in Arabic etc.

...no relevance whatsoever to do with islam, your line of thought is backed up by nobody in the islamic world except you and you alone, merely your opinion not incumbent on anybody, you are not a scholar of arabic you are a sorry excuse for a muslim apologetic. Unable to express yourself (or even lie properly) in english yet claim your english translations are superior and eithout error.

You have studied Islam based on a Sunni perspective, not a Salafi etc. There are various schools of thought called Madzhabs that you have nto ventured into yet. Why ? Cause you studied are dictated from Christian websites who propound the majority of time on Sunni views.

Oh I see it's rejected because you can't find any other hadiths to back them? (Have you looked for it (I seriously doubt it)? or the hadith rejecter part of you wants to surface)

It is rejected cause it has no support.

This is absolutely ridiculous, is it rejected because there are hadiths that contradict them? If so where are they?

Well then you might as well say court of law testamonies are ridiculous then. Its the saem proceedure as what they do in Law. If one person's testimony conflicts with another, and the other is supported by other testimony to the same thing then whos testimony is not backed by another is regarded as not credible. Its called weighing eveidence. And being that Hadeeth are not divine nor the word of Allah they will fall under such catagory.

Or are you rejecting it (without evidence) because you want to reject it or else your religion and standpoint come crashing like a dominoes deck...

Actually no. I reject it cause it is not supported. You will not find that hadeeth in Imam Nawawi in his book "Riyadhussalaheen" which is a compilation of hadeeth by Bukhari and Mulim that only conform with Quran and with each other. There was one point in my life when I didnt accept hadeeth all together when I first embraced Islam. But I was consulted by some of my teachers after some years to reconsider they used the Quran to show me how to know if a hadeeth is bad or not and how to know if a hadeeth is credible or not.

The debate has already been discussed and brought to surface by many a natural arabic speaker, a neutral translator shows it for what it is, why does "peace be upon him" have different arabic characters yet somehow mean the same for Mohammed and all other koranic prophets?? It is balatantly obvious your translation and many translations have tampered with the fact in order to hide that allah is praying for his prophet!! Yet you are brainwashed from youth that your "pure" arabic "understood by a child" doesn't really mean what it means.

So in our prayes we also say "Allahumma sallee alaa Muhammdiw-wa alaa 'aaali Muhammad kamaa salayta alaa Ibraheema wa alaa 'aali Ibraheem..." In which to Abraha the same thing is said. The word does not mean for Allah to pray for them. It means to bestow benediction on them.

The translation is a literal translation of the word regardless of wether it is a name or not

I still woudl like to know what word it says "Coffee" it is so literal. We wrote that sentence from the top of our heads adn we did not say anything about "Coffee"

what do you mean here? Do you mean Mushin Khan's original translation has no parentheses?

Down load the hadeeth software your self. His original/the original source of the translation has parenthesis. And again it not in the Arabic.

In that case would you care to show us what it says for Dr Mushin Khan's translation of Bukhari vol 9 Book 89 number 309 from any website, not Volume 6 Book 51 number 509

Yea sure you can download the hadeeth software from the link I provided below. Also, I showed in prior post on this thread that other translators did not render such a parenthesized phrase. But I see that you like Muhsin Khan's translation cause it appeals to your criticism.

What editing did I make H2O?

You excluded when quoting me "H2O later wrote" which indicated a post that was done later conforming wiht the date you listed.

you are trying to join two threads from different forums with a gap of over 2 months to make it look like there were continuous

And that was the reason why I added into the quote "later".

anybody who sees the date the subject the topic and the forum will realise what you said as to why you became a muslim in the frist place (saudi oil prophecy) has no relevance to the other post two months later which you try as make as one regardless of wether you put "later" they will simply see you for someone who is dishonest and trying to wriggle out of his embarassing posts.

We will post what I said again:

H2O wrote:
Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.


H2O later wrote:
So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of اللّــه G-D that satisfies me ?

1) The logical consistancy of the Quran.

2) The rational and challenge it gives

3) The wisdom and reasoning it applies

4) Its natural aspects it delivers that conforms with nature it self

5) The obedience it asks toward اللّــه with reverence and love.

6) How to live in submission to اللّــه with balance in life

7) How to treat others as you would want to be treated by another

Its message is direct, blunt, and to the point

9) The belief in اللّــه oneness and the uniqueness of his divinity and the exalted manner of His sublime majesty

10) The belief in the prophets adn that اللّــه sent prophets to all nations of people

11) The belief in angels, scriptures, the life after death, hell, paradise, judgement day, and the resurrection.

This is how I came to believe the Quran was from Allah qualifying Muhammad as Prophet. Needless to say my belief in him as a Prophet was not sparked by the prophecies or Scientific indications of unseen realities through out the Quran. These things merely increased my belief but was not the cause or the root of it.

H2O addressing OMEGA wrote:
Allah said to the muslim Arabs in the time of Muhammad that HE will soon enrich them. And it doesnt take a 12th grader to know the arabs were a poor nation at that time in which the Biazantine and Persian empires didnt dominate them. When did the Arab muslim of that region become RICH ? Who supplies the 1/3 of the world's oil and has the LARGEST oil reserves in the world. Is not Saudi Arabia one of the richest countries in the world that is now a GOLD MIND ?



H2O wrote:
Your right( Liberate) 9:28 doesnt mention any about oil. It mention a prophecy of the Arabs of the Region becoming rich, in which after the establishment of, they became rich, without it they would probably be just like afghanistan.

Now rather than dictate to our audience let them decide for them selves if your accusaion is true or false. I made my point and woudl just leave it as is, but you dont want to leave. Everytime you bring this up I will keep repeating.

In other words you became a haneef muslim and then 2 months later you found out reasons for you becoming a haneef muslim!!!

Let our audience to decide.

that involved re-interpreting what a divine book was and how to define what a prophet meant so you can move the goal posts for Mohammed to qualify, at least the audience knows the mind set of the individual they are dealing with, ready to lie and deviate attention from the irrationality of his stance.

Thats you personal opinion. And yes atleast the audience knows what type of mind set mentality they are dealing with also.

[quote=Liberate"]H2O why did you conveniently delete the thread I asked you as to who gave Uthman the authority to burn the 7 readings the 'prophet' of allah stated the koran was revealed in?[/quote]

I have no idea what you are talking about. I havent deleted anything.

Why have you side stepped discussing the delights of paradise H2O?

What is the topic of this forum ? Why cant you ever stick to the topic of a forum ? You never fail in doing it. You have soo much animosity it clouds you focus and comprehension.

I came here to this thread to clearify the misconceptions of Islam. Not in the offense to preach or teach our deen.

If you want to start another thread to talk about our beliefs in paradise then do it.

You have already drawn us to a different subject and interupted the discussion with us and Rome. You cant help it cause its in your nature to bash, rather than to understand humbly.

You should ask your self what are you affraid of ? Dont hope for nothing for me cause it will be in vain and you know this. So the only people you should be trying to convince is our audience, not me, cause I am surely not trying to convince you.

[RomeSweetHome]

H20 Wrote:

Rome, you are soo late. Want to go to the first thread I started on months ago in which I have stated numerous time that hadeeths contradict each other muchless the Quran ?

You admit that the hadiths contradict each other, and that some contradict the Quran. So basically hadiths are not reliable. I know you are going to say they are only reliable once compared to the teachings of the Quran, but what if the Quran is absent on something the hadith speaks about?

For example, what about Dogs in the home and pictures etc... the Quran to my knowledge doesnt specify anything about this, but the hadiths do.

Will you then automatically accept the hadith?

And why is it Bukhari is considered the second holiest book in Sunni Islam if it contains hadiths that contradict each other?

H20 Wrote:

Do you respect the law of gay people can get married ? And the law of abortion ? You couldnt possible agree with it right ? How could you respect something that Allah is displeased with ? Now, I may not respect it as to my disagreement with it. Pleanty of non Muslim American who dont respect ie disagree or degrade such laws. But what do we do ? We just continue with our lives shunning such people who practice hidious things. So please dont tell us to respect law that Allahhimself does not respect.

I respect all laws even though some are morally against my beliefs.

I do not agree with certain laws, that is correct. But I do not go around using violence to promote my views, I would use the legal system to challenge these laws.

First of all not all muslims "shun" the laws, havent you heard of the riots here in Manchester? and other areas. Havent you heard of Abu Hamza here in London? obviously not.

Instead of trying to fight france's decision legally, some muslims have threatened France with acts of terror, and the majority of the muslim community in France support those that made that threat.

H20 Wrote:

Does Allah respect gay marriage, abortion, stip clubs, porno, fornicationor adultry ?

You are not getting my point. I am simple saying that forcing people to be something they are not is worthless if its not from the heart.

I presume all the above disgust God.

Forcing women to be faithful to their husbands and vice versa, is worthless if its not from the heart.

There are underground Strip clubs etc.. in many Mulsim countrys, not just the west.

H20 Wrote:

No. When last did you read the Torah ? Non Jews living in a Jewish land also had to pay taxes to such state.

I know this, thats why I campared Islam to the pagan Romans. The Romans taxed the Jews as Rome was a Pagan "secular" state. Islam is doing what Rome did. Is it ok for Islam to tax the Jews and Christians because Rome did? is that what you are saying?

H20 Wrote:

Now what happen to what you said "That fact is that state that you speak of is a secular state, respect it and its laws if you wish to live in it" The same goes for Christians wanting to live in a muslims country.

That is my point, the Christians are fighting the tax system in those muslims countrys legally, have you heard of any violence comming from Christians trying to change the law and have equal rights?

Muslims on the other hand more then often choose violence to settle things.

H20 Wrote:

But dont get me wrong now, America has a right if it wanted us out then we should leave. I would have no problem in doing that.

Are you not American? You might not have a problem but believe me your brothers in Islam would, and things would get very ugly.

H20 Wrote:

If there we no laws and the Christian voice was the law we would have no masaajid in the US nore in the UK. It is the Atheist laws that protect us bidznillah from Christian ambition. Let me remind you before the 1st amendment NO mosque could be built on Chritian ground.

There is a Mosque in the Vatican City, so the above is not true.
The Vatican is run by Christians not athiests I presume.

On the other hand, Not a single Church exsists in Saudi Arabia and If a Christian is caught having prayer meetings in his home he would be arrested. If a Christian wishes to bring his bible into Saudi Arabia with him he would not be allowed to enter unless he left the bible behind. I mean honestly this is extreme.

H20 Wrote:

Sowhat was the purpose of the Torah in which Allah had moses inforce onto the people ?

The Torah is a revelation of the character of God as well as an insight of what is to come. The Torah is God's instruction on how those who place their trust in Him are to live.

Deuteronomy 30:11-14 -- "For this commandment which I command you today is not too mysterious for you, nor is it far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who will ascend into heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?' Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, 'Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it.' But the word is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it."

God Himself makes it clear -- He told His people that the Law was not too hard for them to follow.

Inforce?

H20 Wrote:

If she lives in that country she should adhear to public law or leave. Again, we get into another issue of why women should dress properly and cover their beauty. Christianity in the past in these countries inforced such a thing of morals , ethics, respect. Being that Christians fell away from what was suppose to be inforced to secure the godlines of a country it fell right into that hand of the Atheist that took all of that away. Now look at America and the UK. They are acting just like those past nation that Allah distroyed. Look how these countries EXPLOIT women now. Look at the family house hold now. Look how rude children are now. Look how women dress now.

Then the above should also apply to the situation in France.

H20 Wrote:

Dont, we wont for you. It is in your nature as a Christian to yearn for your brothers and sister whom Unjustice is being done to. The same for my self, I yearn when I hear the State of the Palestinians or any of my brothers and sisters that are being oppressed

I feel for the palestinains too, I am against the present state of Israel.

But the palestinians are not angles, they were the cause of the war in Lebanon and in Jordan.

Ye have heard this is hath been said,
Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate
thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love
your enemies, bless them that curse you,
do good to them that hate you, and pray
for them which despitefully use you, and
persecute you; that ye may be children of
your father which is in heaven.
Matthew 5:43-35.

Tears should be flowing for everyone regardless of religion.

H20 Wrote:

If there were not secular and Christianity ruled what do you think they would do to our masaajid ?

I am sure you are aware of the war that accured between Turkey and Greece, on the Island of Cyprus. The Turks had a side and the Greeks another. I went to the Greek side on vacation and I saw several Mosques intact from the war and none where destroyed. On the Turkish side hardly any churches remanied.

H20 Wrote:

I would agree to the unjust way some our women are being treated in the east. They are deprived of islam law ans are rules by cultural, nationalistic, and tribalistic customs that against Quran and Sunnah.

I was not ticked off about that. as a matter of fact that Arab felt he insulted his people. The same a black person would do if a film maker made a film that degraded black women. A black American would be moved to want to kill such a person.

I dont think it was a matter of religion persay that was his motive of killing him. I think it was much more personal that insulted his people.

Wanting to kill someone and actually doing it are two different things.

I wouldn't think a practicing black Christian would kill someone over any issue, specailly racial.

H20 Wrote:

Now, other than that, I screamed when I heard what he did with the Quran that had me burning up to th point I thought he had deserved every spark he got. Again what does the Quran say about such a thing:

What did he say? how many things have muslims said about the bible? I dont see them getting shot and stabbed.

A few months ago my aunts husband (a Sunni muslim) came into my room and saw a bible on my table next to my bed, he started telling me that it was a bunch of crap and that its not worth the paper its written on. He said that its better used as fire wood and that I should throw it into the bin.

I was hurt but I never thought of killing him.

H20 Wrote:

Now we have not. You presented source that we counteracted. I think we should leave our audience to think for them selves as to this rahter than have you and I claiming we did this or that.

I personally am not impressed with your defence regarding the Qurans integrity.

H20 Wrote:

You picked them from a website you read. It was based on your findings but the findings of another.

I didnt pick them from a website, I got those hadiths from a MUSLIM book. And there are many, many more.

H20 Wrote:

And again where are other ahadeeth mentioned that confirm this hadeeth from different people that such a verse was eaten up.

I have located a hadith that says a goat ate part of a surah that was lost (wasted), do you reject this hadith? and if you do, on what grounds?

Peace

[Liberate]

So when your source says 70 ansar were killed what do you think it is restricted to especially with it's title being companions of the prophet.?

A Hafeez is a Qari or Qurraa'a(pl.)

The Ansar is an attributive name given to those who helped fight in the wars and aided the the Prophet. The fact of the matter they do not say 450 died in the battle Yamama as you stated Ibn Katheer said.

Let us refresh what this discussion is about:
I showed you a Bukhari hadith that states Zaid collected the koran from leaves barks, animal skin and the memory of men who knew it (qira/quraa).

I showed you hadiths that state that parts of the koran were lost from the memorisers when they died, Ibn Kathir states that 450 of these memorisers died at the battle of Yamama a significant number, I state to you that parts of the koran were being lost hence the need to collate it before huge parts were lost.

You go into an irrelevant argument showing me a website url that says 70 of the ansar died at the battle of yamama it doesn't occur to you that the ansar and the memorisers at yamama were completely different people, not all ansar were qira, you even proved this with your definition of who the ansar were I was trying to show you that the companions of 70 ansar does not contradict the number of 450 MEMORISERS (not all were ansar some of those ansar accoridng to some sources were jews) according to Ibn Kathir.

I ask you again H2O if the qiraa were so numerous why did Zaid need to collect leaves and barks and animal skin on which the parts of the koran was written on to collate it, why didn't he just go to a few qiraa to have them recite what they knew, the logical answer according to the sources H2O is parts were lost, parts were missing the majority of memorisers were dead it was a salvage job, you are being spoon fed lies about this superior mental ability of the arabs who transmitted perfect copies en mass from an illiterate people.

Help us out here, what do you mean when you say you agree with the earlier interpretation that the tablets mentioned are referring to the actual tablets the koran was written upon, and you agree with it because allah mentions the quran was also written on pages?

Obviously you dont take the time to read and understand my post correctly.

Completely irrelevant have you forgotten this ayat:

Nay! This is a Glorious Qur’an, (Inscribed) in the Al-Luah Al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)! (Qur’an 85:21-22)

It says there is a copy of the koran in heaven, is allah keeping up with the 1,000+ characters added by the dajjal and his scribes or maybe the above is a terrible translation and your translation somehow omits the obvious as you have done all along.

And there are different views on the interpretation of that verse. Some believe The tablets mentioned are refering the actual tablets the Quran was written on, and others believe it is that tablets which are in heaven.

I agree with the earlier [the actual tablets the Quran was written on] cause Allah menitons the Quran was also written on pages.

Surah 80

[11] By no means (should it be so)! For it is indeed a Message of instruction:

[12] Therefore let whose will, keep it in remembrance.

[13] (It is) in suhuf held (greatly) in honour,

[14] Exalted (in dignity), kept pure and holy

[15] (Written) by the hands of scribes,

[16] Honourable and Pious and Just.

" Suhuf " ~ pages

These verses are not totally agreed on also as some who regard the tablets are in heaven rather than the tablets on which the Quran was actually written on believe the scribes here are refereng to angels. This we disagree with being that the verse as it is in connection with the various materials the Quran was recorded on such as Tablets and Pages (Parchments etc) as mentioned in the Quran are two different materials mentioned in plurality that cannot be allocated to Ummul-Kitab which is one heavenly book.

The Quran mentions more than on particular material it was recorded on which does not conform to the idea of a heavenly book (Singular) as mentioned called Ummul-Kitaab which in indeed the heavenly.

Where are you going with this attempt?

The quran mentions it was more than one particular material, which does not correspond to a heavenly book?

Let us recall what this discussion is about:

You H2O state that you do not believe there is a koran in heaven

You H2O state that the verse Nay! This is a Glorious Qur’an, (Inscribed) in the Al-Luah Al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)! (Qur’an 85:21-22) does not refer to a heavenly book but to pages the koran was written on

Which brings us straight back to our dilemma where are these pages?

Why didn't Zaid use them during his collation of the koran

The verse says the pages are preserved, preserved where H2O?

Do you see the fallacy of having said koranic ayat when the koran hasn't been compiled yet? or do you accept that when it mentions the koran it is only talking of a partial koran?

Tell us what you mean by the above H2O in reference to tablets??

It loooks like you are either seriously confused or just an out and out liar.

Seems you want to be Psychic again. Why didnt you just stick to "you didnt understand and for me to confirm what I meant" rather than jumping to conclusions ? Why ask a question then answer it your self with negative notion ?

when H2O have you admitted that you might even REMOTELY be in error in any of your translations?

When you learn to speak Arabic then we can discuss this matter.

This is basically what you say to everybody, this about sums up your whole patronizing attitude, the person who thought you arabic is probably frothing at the mouth when he finds out how you reinterpret the religion.

As of now you blind of the Language. We have constantly submitted some of our translations to those who disagree with translations all together for proof. We are taking a step at a time. It took us 4 months just to translate Surah Al-Baqarah. Then made some corrections as it was proofed by Scholars.

Have we made mistakes ? Yes we have. Better suggestions have given help to us. Unlike the rest of the other translators they never put there translation out for criticism by other scholars. We have. After every Juz of the Quran is translate it is submitted to various ulimah for feed back.

Which ulimah?

I would really like to know who is allowing your free lance translation and which sect they represent, because if they are from al-azhar are they also aware of the mockery you make of the koran in relation to it's contextual history?

Also, you have went over board about my criticism of other scholars translations. I never said their whole translation work is in error. You are exagerating. WE merely disagreed with some horrible translated parts of the Quran that we have had debates about.

Some parts H2O?

Which parts did you agree with?

Fundamental parts like Jesus coming back you reject and reinterpret claiming Jesus suddenly died and was taken to some heavenly realm already dead (with no reason other than your own personal conjecture that no one can find the grave of Mary so Jesus must be buried somewhere near Mary) H2O your views on mainstream islam is alien to 95% of islam, and yet you act like are without error, even when your fellow muslims have confronted you over your very strange views.

You should have realised by now I don't take any of your translated ayats seriously there are merely your opinion backed up with the theatre of your mind

Then dont continue to debate with me. Our source is directly from the fountian, the Quran its self.

Which you retranslate, reinterpret and claim you are correct regardless of what the 95% of islam says.

Dont worry, we also included in our preface, that we are subject to error also, and that Quran in Arabic conveys more than it does in English and the Englsih does not substitute the Quran in Arabic etc.

Wait a minute what exactly can you convey in arabic that you are unable to convey in english? Does allah only tolerate arabic?

...no relevance whatsoever to do with islam, your line of thought is backed up by nobody in the islamic world except you and you alone, merely your opinion not incumbent on anybody, you are not a scholar of arabic you are a sorry excuse for a muslim apologetic. Unable to express yourself (or even lie properly) in english yet claim your english translations are superior and eithout error.

You have studied Islam based on a Sunni perspective, not a Salafi etc. There are various schools of thought called Madzhabs that you have nto ventured into yet. Why ? Cause you studied are dictated from Christian websites who propound the majority of time on Sunni views.

How many times have I asked you which islamic school of thought you are getting your views from?

How many times have you replied?

Where are your madzhabs H2O? we would like to know where you are getting this hybrid singular interpretation from, do you recall the numerous times I asked you to show me where you obtained the tafsir of samiy al mujalid? to this day you never showed anyone of us where you got that tafsir from, is this the attitude of someone who believes he has the onus on truth?

Oh I see it's rejected because you can't find any other hadiths to back them? (Have you looked for it (I seriously doubt it)? or the hadith rejecter part of you wants to surface)

It is rejected cause it has no support.

How do you define if it has no support? if the koran doesn't mention it it is rejected just as you reject that Mohammed had sexual intercourse with an 8 yr old girl because the koran said marry al-nissa which you automatically take to mean young women therefore Mohammed couldn't have done it with an 8 yr old girl!! (disregarding the law of abrogation which somehow doesn't apply to you because?? your madhzab says so? which you have been unwilling to show us it's beliefs and which no one knows what it will cough up when faced with yet another immoral issue) with an attitude like that how can you possibly find fault with any immoral law or action of alledge prophet with a fill in the gaps the way you want it mentality.

This is absolutely ridiculous, is it rejected because there are hadiths that contradict them? If so where are they?

Well then you might as well say court of law testamonies are ridiculous then. Its the saem proceedure as what they do in Law. If one person's testimony conflicts with another, and the other is supported by other testimony to the same thing then whos testimony is not backed by another is regarded as not credible. Its called weighing eveidence. And being that Hadeeth are not divine nor the word of Allah they will fall under such catagory.

This is not what you are doing you are contradicting esteemed scholars and imams, and re translating the koran according to what you want it to say contrary to what those who were closer to Mohammed believed.

Or are you rejecting it (without evidence) because you want to reject it or else your religion and standpoint come crashing like a dominoes deck...

Actually no. I reject it cause it is not supported

Not supported how?

Did you search for it?

Did your pre conceived notion already disregard it before comparison?

. You will not find that hadeeth in Imam Nawawi in his book "Riyadhussalaheen" which is a compilation of hadeeth by Bukhari and Mulim that only conform with Quran and with each other. There was one point in my life when I didnt accept hadeeth all together when I first embraced Islam.

If you cannot follow the edicts of a religion other than reinterpret it to your own liking, maybe the religion is not for you.

But I was consulted by some of my teachers after some years to reconsider they used the Quran to show me how to know if a hadeeth is bad or not and how to know if a hadeeth is credible or not.

Wow is all I have to say you mean you subjected yourself to authority???anyone reading your posts would get the feeling you regard yourself as the greatest koranic translator, reinterpreter and hadith rejecter this side of the atlantic even if Mohammed himself was to come to you and say this is what said verse means you are more likely to tell him to shut up that he doesn't understand arabic.

The debate has already been discussed and brought to surface by many a natural arabic speaker, a neutral translator shows it for what it is, why does "peace be upon him" have different arabic characters yet somehow mean the same for Mohammed and all other koranic prophets?? It is balatantly obvious your translation and many translations have tampered with the fact in order to hide that allah is praying for his prophet!! Yet you are brainwashed from youth that your "pure" arabic "understood by a child" doesn't really mean what it means.

So in our prayes we also say "Allahumma sallee alaa Muhammdiw-wa alaa 'aaali Muhammad kamaa salayta alaa Ibraheema wa alaa 'aali Ibraheem..." In which to Abraha the same thing is said. The word does not mean for Allah to pray for them. It means to bestow benediction on them.

Tell us H2O what is the arabic for Mohammed's pbuh and the arabic for all the other prophets' pbuh?

The translation is a literal translation of the word regardless of wether it is a name or not

I still woudl like to know what word it says "Coffee" it is so literal. We wrote that sentence from the top of our heads adn we did not say anything about "Coffee"

Since you wrote it from the top of your head (could it be possible that you made an error H2O? are you this conceited?). The neutral translator saw al qAhwatu in what you typed if you think you are not the one who might have made a mistake against a bot when you are the one who said you wrote it off the top of your head, then someone needs a lesson in humility, I find it hard to believe you will subject your koranic translations to any scholar with an attitude like this.

In that case would you care to show us what it says for Dr Mushin Khan's translation of Bukhari vol 9 Book 89 number 309 from any website, not Volume 6 Book 51 number 509

Yea sure you can download the hadeeth software from the link I provided below

In other words you have no proof and are unwilling to provide any proof that Mushin Khan's translation of Bukhari vol 9 book 89 number 309 included parentheses.

.

Also, I showed in prior post on this thread that other translators did not render such a parenthesized phrase

You showed a translation for Bukhari 6 book 51 Number 509, not for volume 9 Book 89 number 309

What editing did I make H2O?

You excluded when quoting me "H2O later wrote" which indicated a post that was done later conforming wiht the date you listed.

you are trying to join two threads from different forums with a gap of over 2 months to make it look like there were continuous

And that was the reason why I added into the quote "later".

anybody who sees the date the subject the topic and the forum will realise what you said as to why you became a muslim in the frist place (saudi oil prophecy) has no relevance to the other post two months later which you try as make as one regardless of wether you put "later" they will simply see you for someone who is dishonest and trying to wriggle out of his embarassing posts.

We will post what I said again:

H2O wrote:
Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.


H2O later wrote 2 months later in a separate forum with a separate subject and a separate topic:
So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of اللّــه G-D that satisfies me ?

1) The logical consistancy of the Quran.

2) The rational and challenge it gives

3) The wisdom and reasoning it applies

...

Without the clarification in bold above H2O you are trying to pass off both threads as relating to the same discussion when you told us in July you became a haneef because of the prophecy of Saudi oil in the koran, and over two months later you then decide to find circular reasons as to why Mohammed is a prophet...in other words Mohammed is a prophet because the koran which he did not write didn't see a word of and is recorded in several muslim traditions as having undergone several amendments from what Mohammed alledgedly said says he is a prophet without a prophecy of alledge prophet...

H2O addressing OMEGA wrote:
Allah said to the muslim Arabs in the time of Muhammad that HE will soon enrich them. And it doesnt take a 12th grader to know the arabs were a poor nation at that time in which the Biazantine and Persian empires didnt dominate them. When did the Arab muslim of that region become RICH ? Who supplies the 1/3 of the world's oil and has the LARGEST oil reserves in the world. Is not Saudi Arabia one of the richest countries in the world that is now a GOLD MIND ?



H2O wrote:
Your right( Liberate) 9:28 doesnt mention any about oil. It mention a prophecy of the Arabs of the Region becoming rich, in which after the establishment of[of what H2O? oil? then is it not a prophecy of saudi oil? listen to yourself], they became rich, without it they would probably be just like afghanistan.

Now rather than dictate to our audience let them decide for them selves if your accusaion is true or false. I made my point and woudl just leave it as is, but you dont want to leave. Everytime you bring this up I will keep repeating.

In other words you became a haneef muslim and then 2 months later you found out reasons for you becoming a haneef muslim!!!

Let our audience to decide.

that involved re-interpreting what a divine book was and how to define what a prophet meant so you can move the goal posts for Mohammed to qualify, at least the audience knows the mind set of the individual they are dealing with, ready to lie and deviate attention from the irrationality of his stance.

Thats you personal opinion. And yes atleast the audience knows what type of mind set mentality they are dealing with also.

H2O why did you conveniently delete the thread I asked you as to who gave Uthman the authority to burn the 7 readings the 'prophet' of allah stated the koran was revealed in?

I have no idea what you are talking about. I havent deleted anything.

Have a look at this thread have a look at the number of times I have asked you who gave Uthman the authority to burn the 7 readings and how many times you have side stepped the issue (even in this response)

Why have you side stepped discussing the delights of paradise H2O?

What is the topic of this forum ? Why cant you ever stick to the topic of a forum ? You never fail in doing it. You have soo much animosity it clouds you focus and comprehension.

I came here to this thread to clearify the misconceptions of Islam. Not in the offense to preach or teach our deen.

If you want to start another thread to talk about our beliefs in paradise then do it.

How many times have you said this so as to avoid the questions being asked of you?

You have already drawn us to a different subject and interupted the discussion with us and Rome

This is not the first time you have brought this excuse so as not to respond to a question?

. You cant help it cause its in your nature to bash, rather than to understand humbly.

Look who is talking about humility!!

Good grief H2O when have you responded to ANYBODY without patronising them before you respond to the main issue? I have not seen a thread that you have not stooped to patronising wether it be their knowledge of arabic, hebrew aramaic greek..., when you say understand humbly don't you mean just accept it? regardless of how irrational how immoral how antiquated, how silly?

You should ask your self what are you affraid of ? Dont hope for nothing for me cause it will be in vain and you know this

All I want you to do is apply rationality to your scriptures it does not stand up to the cold light of reason given the evidence in the koran and the context of those ayats in the ahadith.

So the only people you should be trying to convince is our audience, not me, cause I am surely not trying to convince you.

Have you really done justice to your view point as to why you are a muslim the whole time you have been on this forum? As I stated earlier all I want you to do is apply rationality to your scriptures as I told you a few months ago anybody can put on a good debate it really doesn't mean anything you only judge a reliigon on it's scriptures and with your God given logic, for all we know your coming on to a christian forum and debating them is your false sense of security to justify what you believe in, just as you are indirectly asking us to clear the bugs in your koranic translations you may feel if you can hold up a debate with a christian/christians on their own turf you can justify belief in your religion it is very revealing how you shy away from criticism against christinaity, the few threads where you touched on attacking christianity you had to quit when it was shown to you how irrational your stance was, like your thread about christianity incorporating the pagan myth of a virgin birth, when it was shown to you that the koran has this same alledged myth you decided to do what you do best and abandon the thread, it seems it is beginning to occur to you that any noose around christianity means a millstone for islam, or are you unwilling to confront christianity because maybe the questions you are afraid to ask when explained to you will leave you with no excuse? As the saying goes ignorance is bliss, like many of the muslims here who have left when they have been unable to defend the koran on many an issue, if you want to defend your faith and at the same time criticize us for not seeing the koran through your very tinted glasses you are not doing yourself any favors but making yourself look very dishonest indeed.

[H2O]

You admit that the hadiths contradict each other, and that some contradict the Quran. So basically hadiths are not reliable. I know you are going to say they are only reliable once compared to the teachings of the Quran, but what if the Quran is absent on something the hadith speaks about?

Yes hadeeths are reliable if they pass the litmus test including those that are Sahih as they were never tested in such a manner by the Quraan or supportive witness reports or to be sought conflicts with each other, rather they were selected based on Isnad only.

If a hadeeth mentions something that is not indictated on the subject manner of the Quran, the weight of evidence from multiple witness ie reports on the subject matter holds weight to be reliable since the insad has already been verified. If it is a report only by one person which is not supported by others to back it up then it is not reliable.

For example, what about Dogs in the home and pictures etc... the Quran to my knowledge doesnt specify anything about this, but the hadiths do.

Will you then automatically accept the hadith?

According to the Quran we are allowed to have dogs for economical reasons for hunting, guarding etc and not just for a pet. Numerous ahadeeth coincide with this.

Not have a dog in your house nor pictures has much merit.

1) Your house is your Mosque, Church, Temple etc where one prays, that should be kept clean, and free from any type of animated or life like images.

2) Dogs can disturb us when praying, as they can see thing we cannot see, such as Angels and Jinns.

We can only speak on this based on experience rather than trying to explain such a hadeeth which does not explain the reason why Angels dont come into houses where there is a dog or pictures ie animated life like pictures.

At my former office we had a guard dog. When ever I went into a room to go pray the dog would break his neck trying to get into the same room I was in and barking up a storm at the door. After I was finished the Dog would stop and go away minding his own business. The dog would be sleeping and would be awaken everytime when I go to make salah in an isolated room when making salah silently.

I have a Christian friend who has a dog in his house with pictures in the living room and kitchen. When I go to the guest room that has no images to make salah the dog does not bother me. Then one time his wife decorate the guest room with Christmas images in which I went out side to make salah. All of a sudden the dog, which could not see me, was ranting around in the house wanting get out side and was barking towards my direction. After making salah the dog stopped.

These are my personal experiences. Dogs can see things we cannot. Ever seen a dog barking into mid air or at a wall or chasing somthing you couldnt even see and thought the dog was going crazy ? These are Jinns playing with your pet and having a field day with him.

The hadeeth is backed by Quran on the issue of the dog only as a helper etc but not to have just for a pet. As to the Angels not coming into a house with animated life like Images can only be understood by a muslims whom has experienced the phenomina as your place of worship should be pure and clean of imagery as the Angels come down, as we believe, to join the worhsiper in Salah.

And why is it Bukhari is considered the second holiest book in Sunni Islam if it contains hadiths that contradict each other?

The mistake that some muslims make is they dont read what Bukhari said himself about his collection. There are many muslims and scholars who are cautious of ahadeeth and know there is a possiblity of a Sahih being bad.

http://www.mostmerciful.com/bukhari--mu ... adeeth.htm

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/bukhari.html

I personally am not impressed with your defence regarding the Qurans integrity.

Well thats why you are a Christian and I am muslim. The statement can be said in reverse "I personally am not impressed with Christian defence regarding the Bible's integrity." Which is why I am not a Christian, Jew etc .

I didnt pick them from a website, I got those hadiths from a MUSLIM book. And there are many, many more.

There are many books written by muslims that doesnt mean some of them are right or wrong. Its take diligent study and labored tasks to root out what is reality. I doubt a Christian will have such ability in doing this with another religion without being influenced by prejudice of his/her own beliefs. Such a task are for those who are seeking to understand and looking for truth, not someone bound to their faith.

I have located a hadith that says a goat ate part of a surah that was lost (wasted), do you reject this hadith? and if you do, on what grounds?

Which is reported by one person. Also we do not believe such a thing was lost as the only copy makes it silly to believe being the Quran was in such demand and stringent effort to be learnt and memorized.

Questions start flying on that hadeeths credability. How did they get such material ? Those are not the scribes who reported that. The scribes were the one that wrote down the Quran and distrubuted copies to the community for people to learn, teach, and memorized. The Quran was the main literal source for the Ummiyyin people to learn how to read and write in the time of muhammad.

So being such a narrator of hadeeth was not a scribe of the prophet how did they end up with the only copy as alleged to was supposed to be eaten by a goat ?

Criticism on that hadeeth can come at many angles to discredit it with numerous hadeeths in support to give it the LITMUS TEST which it cannot pass.

Let us refresh what this discussion is about:
I showed you a Bukhari hadith that states Zaid collected the koran from leaves barks, animal skin and the memory of men who knew it (qira/quraa).

Sure lets refresh, lets see how well you can refresh your delima memory.

I ask you again H2O if the qiraa were so numerous why did Zaid need to collect leaves and barks and animal skin on which the parts of the koran was written on to collate it, why didn't he just go to a few qiraa to have them recite what they knew,

Sounds like you cant make up your mind. He did collect it from memorizers. How much he collected is unknown, he himself knew a great portion of the Quran, but yet still gathered written materials. From this it sounds like he was confirming the written and oral sources with each other.

Ibn Kathir states that 450 of these memorisers died at the battle of Yamama a significant number

You have done such a great job before posting references up. Why cant you do it with Ibn Katheer on this issue and how Ibn Katheer came up with 450 when the hadeeths are saying 70. But before we ellaborate on this you said something else that we would like to hit with one stone.

You go into an irrelevant argument showing me a website url that says 70 of the ansar died at the battle of yamama it doesn't occur to you that the ansar and the memorisers at yamama were completely different people,

Absolutely not. The Qurraa who were killed in the battle of Yamama were the Ansar. There is NO hadeeth that reported 450, and we would like to see where Ibn Katheers source for 450 when the hadeeths narrate contrary.

Sahih Al-Bukhari

Volumn 005, Book 059, Hadith Number 405.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Qatada : We do not know of any tribe amongst the 'Arab tribes who lost more martyrs than Al-Ansar, and they will have superiority on the Day of Resurrection. Anas bin Malik told us that seventy from the Ansar were martyred on the day of Uhud, and seventy on the day (of the battle of) Bir Ma'una, and seventy on the day of Al-Yamama. Anas added, "The battle of Bir Ma'una took place during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle and the battle of Al-Yamama, during the caliphate of Abu Bakr, and it was the day when Musailamah Al-Kadhdhab was killed."

Volumn 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 299.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Anas : The people of the tribes of Ril, Dhakwan, 'Usiya and Bani Lihyan came to the Prophet and claimed that they had embraced Islam, and they requested him to support them with some men to fight their own people. The Prophet supported them with seventy men from the Ansar whom we used to call Al-Qurra' who (out of piety) used to cut wood during the day and pray all the night. So, those people took the (seventy) men till they reached a place called Bi'r-Ma'ana where they betrayed and martyred them. So, the Prophet invoked evil on the tribe of Ril, Dhakwan and Bani Lihyan for one month in the prayer.

not all ansar were qira, you even proved this with your definition of who the ansar were I was trying to show you that the companions of 70 ansar does not contradict the number of 450 MEMORISERS (not all were ansar some of those ansar accoridng to some sources were jews) according to Ibn Kathir.

And again,post for us Ibn Katheer and his reference of 450 Died. The Qurra that died were but Ansar.

[quote=Liberate"]the logical answer according to the sources H2O is parts were lost, parts were missing the majority of memorisers were dead it was a salvage job, you are being spoon fed lies about this superior mental ability of the arabs who transmitted perfect copies en mass from an illiterate people.[/quote]

A logical answer according to your bias and prejudice wantoness. There are plenty of people today that know entire Quran by heart. My Shiekh is a Hafeezh,and I have heard him recite Quran from a to z. So expressing that such a thing is impossible to be done is just one of your disbeliefs.

You showed hadeeth that have no support from another much less contradicted by others that have support.

You H2O state that you do not believe there is a koran in heaven

No wrong. This is what I said :

The Quran mentions more than on particular material it was recorded on which does not conform to the idea of a heavenly book (Singular) as mentioned called Ummul-Kitaab which in indeed the heavenly

The Quran, The Torah, Zuboor, and Injeel etc all came from Ummul-Kitaab in islamic beliefs. The material the Quran mentions were the actual materials the Quran was written on in the time of our Prophet(s.a.w.) which has nothing to do with a heavenly book which is not physical.

You H2O state that the verse Nay! This is a Glorious Qur’an, (Inscribed) in the Al-Luah Al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)! (Qur’an 85:21-22) does not refer to a heavenly book but to pages the koran was written on

Wrong I made no mention of such a thing: Lets recap your memory:

..This we disagree with being that the verse as it is in connection with the various materials the Quran was recorded on such as Tablets and Pages (Parchments etc) as mentioned in the Quran are two different materials mentioned in plurality that cannot be allocated to Ummul-Kitab which is one heavenly book.

Where did you get out of our statement that Tablet is refering to pages ?

Which brings us straight back to our dilemma where are these pages?

"Pages" can be refering to parchments the Quran was written on or any soft material for writting that was used.

"Tablet" In Arabic is "Lauh" can be either, board, plate, sheet, slab, or slate of hard materials used for writting to record ie "Mahfoozh"

Why didn't Zaid use them during his collation of the koran

Lets see what the hadeeth says again.

Narrated Zaid bin Thabit al-Ansari, one of the scribes of the Revelation: Abu Bakr sent for me after the casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra (memorizers of the Quran, were killed). Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said: "Umar has come to me and said, the people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle) of Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be some casualties among the Qurra at other places, whereby a large part of the Quran may be lost, unless you collect it (in one manuscript, or book)…so Abu Bakr said to me (Zaid bin Thabit): You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness) and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur'an and collect it (in one manuscript)'…So I started locating the Quranic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who know it by heart)…"

What were writting pages made of back then ?

Do you see the fallacy of having said koranic ayat when the koran hasn't been compiled yet? or do you accept that when it mentions the koran it is only talking of a partial koran?

The Quran was written within 23 years. As each revelation was revealed it was order by the prophet to his scribes to write it down. Selective material were being used such as tablets and pages ie boards, stones, parchments and palmleaves in which copies were distributed out into the muslim community to be learnt, taught, and memorized before the other revelation was revealed.

What are pages ? a Page or pages do not give the notion of a book. I think you need to refresh on your English.

PRONUNCIATION: AUDIO: pj KEY
NOUN: 1. a. A leaf or one side of a leaf, as of a book, letter, newspaper, or manuscript: tore a page from the book. b. The writing or printing on one side of a leaf. c. The type set for printing one side of a leaf.
2. A noteworthy or memorable event: a new page in history.
3. Computer Science A quantity of memory storage equal to between 512 and 4,096 bytes.
4. Computer Science A webpage.
5. pages A source or record of knowledge: in the pages of science.
VERB: Inflected forms: paged, pag·ing, pag·es

Did you get it yet ?

Some parts H2O?

Which parts did you agree with?

Those which we addressed on this forum.

Fundamental parts like Jesus coming back you reject and reinterpret claiming Jesus suddenly died and was taken to some heavenly realm already dead (with no reason other than your own personal conjecture that no one can find the grave of Mary so Jesus must be buried somewhere near Mary) H2O your views on mainstream islam is alien to 95% of islam, and yet you act like are without error, even when your fellow muslims have confronted you over your very strange views.

Your percentage is a grave exageration. And the return of Jesus is NOT a fundamental belief in islam. Do you mind showing us where in the Quran it clearly states Jesus will return ? And do you mind posting up teh people that you claim confronted me whom from what I remember agree that the return of Jesus is symbolical not literal. Go ahead make you move and post the muslims you claim said such a thing. Again you exagerating.

Which you retranslate, reinterpret and claim you are correct regardless of what the 95% of islam says.

Do you have any idea what a retranslation is ? How could we do a restranslation if out dependant source is not a translation ? In that case all translation are restanslated.

Wait a minute what exactly can you convey in arabic that you are unable to convey in english? Does allah only tolerate arabic?

You cannot translate from one language into another word for word. You loose meaning as each language has its own unique character in expressive meaning.

I asked you to show me where you obtained the tafsir of samiy al mujalid? to this day you never showed anyone of us where you got that tafsir from, is this the attitude of someone who believes he has the onus on truth?

And it is obviously from those long over exausted threads you did get it.

How do you define if it has no support?

You are the critic not me. So tell us how you difine something that has not support and is contradicted by other hadeeth ?

if the koran doesn't mention it it is rejected just as you reject that Mohammed had sexual intercourse with an 8 yr old girl because the koran said marry al-nissa which you automatically take to mean young women therefore Mohammed couldn't have done it with an 8 yr old girl!! (disregarding the law of abrogation which somehow doesn't apply to you because??

It was rejected because the majority of sources contradict such a hadeeth of her being that age.

your madhzab says so?

No, mathamtics says so In which on the other thread we had this debate on we posted the links for you but it seems that wasnt enough.

which you have been unwilling to show us it's beliefs and which no one knows what it will cough up when faced with yet another immoral issue) with an attitude like that how can you possibly find fault with any immoral law or action of alledge prophet with a fill in the gaps the way you want it mentality.

It was something practice by people in general even in the USA. You are simply being cultural biased. Even if it was true I still would have no probelm with it cause it was something practice among all nations of people and religions.

This is not what you are doing you are contradicting esteemed scholars and imams, and re translating the koran according to what you want it to say contrary to what those who were closer to Mohammed believed

You make it sound like you read ALL scholars work. Most of Scholar work is in Arabic in which the minority are in englsih. So how could you make a statement when you your self are not a scholars to have read the scholars works ? We have more access to what scholars say adn you do not. You sources are limited to waht is available online ours are not.

Not supported how?

Did you search for it?

Did your pre conceived notion already disregard it before comparison?

We have Sahih Al-Bukhari 9 volume set and Sahih Muslim , MishkatulMasabih, and RiyadhusSalaheen in their Arabic that make no mention of cuh a thing by another reporter.

Imam Nawawi does not include hadeeth that have no collaborative support by other hadeeth which was disregarded by him.

If you cannot follow the edicts of a religion other than reinterpret it to your own liking, maybe the religion is not for you.

The Edicts of our religion does not teach us to follow things blindly by accepting them without question if it is not understood. The religion is all for me, do you have another considered religion ? Please dont make me laugh, I would rather be shot than to believe in what you believe in.

would really like to know who is allowing your free lance translation and which sect they represent

Do you know what a free lance translation is ? I dont think you do. Your just using words that have no relevance to the alleged. Sound to me your copying what I said about Apple Pie whom has no comparison to us in his attempted translations.

Wow is all I have to say you mean you subjected yourself to authority???anyone reading your posts would get the feeling you regard yourself as the greatest koranic translator, reinterpreter and hadith rejecter this side of the atlantic even if Mohammed himself was to come to you and say this is what said verse means you are more likely to tell him to shut up that he doesn't understand arabic.

WE have done that which other translators have not done. Put their works up for criticism and test by other scholars and to work with others rather than independantly to get back a contructive imput on the project.

And I am only a hadeeth rejecter when a hadeeth does not pass the Litmus Test ir confirmation from Quran and other isnad ahadeeth.

A hadeeth Rejecter such as the Rahsad Khalifah possie do not believe in Hadeeth period and all together. How does this apply to us ?

Since you wrote it from the top of your head (could it be possible that you made an error H2O? are you this conceited?). The neutral translator saw al qAhwatu in what you typed if you think you are not the one who might have made a mistake against a bot when you are the one who said you wrote it off the top of your head, then someone needs a lesson in humility, I find it hard to believe you will subject your koranic translations to any scholar with an attitude like this.

No we did not make a mistake. Your bot transltor must be really stupid and must be seeing things.

‏قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏بُنِيَ الْإِسْلَامُ عَلَى خَمْسٍ شَهَادَةِ أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ ‏ ‏مُحَمَّدًا ‏ ‏رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَإِقَامِ الصَّلَاةِ وَإِيتَاءِ الزَّكَاةِ وَالْحَجِّ وَصَوْمِ رَمَضَانَ ‏

Do you mind telling us where you see al qAhwatu, to be mentioned. Get some help you going to need it. We did not mention al qahwat = coffee in our statement.

In other words you have no proof and are unwilling to provide any proof that Mushin Khan's translation of Bukhari vol 9 book 89 number 309 included parentheses.

Already provided the proof from teh Arabic which was confirmed by a Arabic speaking Christian and confirmed by other translators.

te]Without the clarification in bold above H2O you are trying to pass off both threads as relating to the same discussion when you told us in July you became a haneef because of the prophecy of Saudi oil in the koran, and over two months later you then decide to find circular reasons as to why Mohammed is a prophet...in other words Mohammed is a prophet because the koran which he did not write didn't see a word of and is recorded in several muslim traditions as having undergone several amendments from what Mohammed alledgedly said says he is a prophet without a prophecy of alledge prophet...

Again I said :

Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.

So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of اللّــه G-D that satisfies me ?

1) The logical consistancy of the Quran.

2) The rational and challenge it gives

3) The wisdom and reasoning it applies

4) Its natural aspects it delivers that conforms with nature it self

5) The obedience it asks toward اللّــه with reverence and love.

6) How to live in submission to اللّــه with balance in life

7) How to treat others as you would want to be treated by another

Its message is direct, blunt, and to the point

9) The belief in اللّــه oneness and the uniqueness of his divinity and the exalted manner of His sublime majesty

10) The belief in the prophets adn that اللّــه sent prophets to all nations of people

11) The belief in angels, scriptures, the life after death, hell, paradise, judgement day, and the resurrection.

This is how I came to believe the Quran was from Allah qualifying Muhammad as Prophet. Needless to say my belief in him as a Prophet was not sparked by the prophecies or Scientific indications of unseen realities through out the Quran. These things merely increased my belief but was not the cause or the root of it.

Allah said to the muslim Arabs in the time of Muhammad that HE will soon enrich them. And it doesnt take a 12th grader to know the arabs were a poor nation at that time in which the Biazantine and Persian empires didnt dominate them. When did the Arab muslim of that region become RICH ? Who supplies the 1/3 of the world's oil and has the LARGEST oil reserves in the world. Is not Saudi Arabia one of the richest countries in the world that is now a GOLD MIND ?

Your right( Liberate) 9:28 doesnt mention any about oil. It mention a prophecy of the Arabs of the Region becoming rich, in which after the establishment of, they became rich, without it they would probably be just like afghanistan.

And again and again. You just dont have enough confidence in your self to have to keep on repeating youself, or is it you just like being a revolving door ?

Have a look at this thread have a look at the number of times I have asked you who gave Uthman the authority to burn the 7 readings and how many times you have side stepped the issue (even in this response)

What will answering this question solve ? Who said uthman burnt the seven reading ?

Volumn 006, Book 061, Hadith Number 515. (Bukhari and same reported Muslim)
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Yusuf bin Mahk : While I was with 'Aisha, the mother of the Believers, a person from Iraq came and asked, "What type of shroud is the best?" 'Aisha said, "May Allah be merciful to you! What does it matter?" He said, "O mother of the Believers! Show me (the copy of) your Qur'an," She said, "Why?" He said, "In order to compile and arrange the Qur'an according to it, for people recite it with its Suras not in proper order." 'Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read first? (Be informed) that the first thing that was revealed thereof was a Sura from Al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire. When the people embraced Islam, the Verses regarding legal and illegal things were revealed. If the first thing to be revealed was: 'Do not drink alcoholic drinks.' people would have said, 'We will never leave alcoholic drinks,' and if there had been revealed, 'Do not commit illegal sexual intercourse, 'they would have said, 'We will never give up illegal sexual intercourse.' While I was a young girl of playing age, the following Verse was revealed in Mecca to Muhammad: 'Nay! But the Hour is their appointed time (for their full recompense), and the Hour will be more grievous and more bitter.' (54.46) Sura Al-Baqara (The Cow) and Surat An-Nisa (The Women) were revealed while I was with him." Then 'Aisha took out the copy of the Qur'an for the man and dictated to him the Verses of the Suras (in their proper order).

What was burnt were the copies of the Quran that were not in their proper order. As khaleefah he had the authority to establish a copy in its correct order according to what they learnt from the Prophet.

All I want you to do is apply rationality to your scriptures it does not stand up to the cold light of reason given the evidence in the koran and the context of those ayats in the ahadith.

Already done. G-D is one G-D not three that are one or one that is three. Nor did he get beat up by his creatures, died, neither tempted by the Devil and had him take him fro a joy ride or went to the bathroom, ate food.

If you call that worshipong such a man to be G-D to be rational then thats why your a Christian and I am a muslim

if you want to defend your faith and at the same time criticize us for not seeing the koran through your very tinted glasses you are not doing yourself any favors but making yourself look very dishonest indeed.

And I will die defending what we believe in. The only reason they left cause its not worth it, and they do have lives to attend to. Why dont you try going to an Islamic forum and see how long you last there ?

I think I have went over board in waisting our my time with you. You want me to apply rational to my beliefs? Already done that to know Islam teaches Jesus is not G-D, and that G-D is not a man or anthing that is created and their will be no return of a Messiah. But yet you say to apply rational but then try to critcize us for applying the same rational against the foke lore of a man that is suppose to return that is not supported by Quran muchless the ambiguous and inconsistancies of Hadeeths ? How silly. It shows that much rational was being used to weed out what was influenced into muslims tradition after our Prophet(s.a.w.) was taken. Enough rational to know that G-D is not a Triune god, that he doesnt regret or becomes Jealous.

[Loki]

Yes hadeeths are reliable if they pass the litmus test

Funny, from wich time in history does the litmus test date? does that mean that all muslims prior to that time were following corruptions? and acctually all where rotten muslims for using hadith laws wich are unreliable merely because no muslim ever came up with the idea of a litmus test.

As i'm a pretty certain that the everyday muslim never heard of this test, or even Imam for that matter. Or that those that do know it, don't want their hadiths to be judged by a western kaffir theory.

[Loki]

1) Your house is your Mosque, Church, Temple etc where one prays, that should be kept clean, and free from any type of animated or life like images.

you don't have any picture in your house, computer? or on your playstation?

2) Dogs can disturb us when praying, as they can see thing we cannot see, such as Angels and Jinns.

i've never been disturbed by anything in prayer... why are you so weak in faith?

We can only speak on this based on experience rather than trying to explain such a hadeeth which does not explain the reason why Angels dont come into houses where there is a dog or pictures ie animated life like pictures.

you've seen angels not enter?

At my former office we had a guard dog. When ever I went into a room to go pray the dog would break his neck trying to get into the same room I was in and barking up a storm at the door. After I was finished the Dog would stop and go away minding his own business. The dog would be sleeping and would be awaken everytime when I go to make salah in an isolated room when making salah silently.

parrots make noise too, guess we should ban parrots as pets too.

I have a Christian friend who has a dog in his house with pictures in the living room and kitchen. When I go to the guest room that has no images to make salah the dog does not bother me. Then one time his wife decorate the guest room with Christmas images in which I went out side to make salah. All of a sudden the dog, which could not see me, was ranting around in the house wanting get out side and was barking towards my direction. After making salah the dog stopped.

you're as superstitious as muhammed you know.

These are my personal experiences. Dogs can see things we cannot. Ever seen a dog barking into mid air or at a wall or chasing somthing you couldnt even see and thought the dog was going crazy ? These are Jinns playing with your pet and having a field day with him.

jinns have nothing better to do? then play with dogs? i thought they had a life. And it hard for me to picture a semi parallel universe you know. what if humans were jinns, how on earth could you live your own lifes and in the process see humans walking all around and in your way who don't notice you. I've seen dogs chase their tails too, they aren't exactly that intelligent to do everything with a reason. My dog barks at birds, in your interpretation he would bark in mid air at flying jinns.

The hadeeth is backed by Quran on the issue of the dog only as a helper etc but not to have just for a pet. As to the Angels not coming into a house with animated life like Images can only be understood by a muslims whom has experienced the phenomina as your place of worship should be pure and clean of imagery as the Angels come down, as we believe, to join the worhsiper in Salah.

A picture is just a combination of colours and dots wich resemble a figure, what if you had psychological testing papers in your house? in wich some see two faces and wich some see a ink dot. How will a angel judge it from a psychological point of view? does he see a ink dot, and there's no problem? or does he sees two faces and starts cursing your house? hey! he may even see a face in real ink dot, even when you don't have any pictures in your house... guess it's a loose loose situation.

And why is it Bukhari is considered the second holiest book in Sunni Islam if it contains hadiths that contradict each other?

The mistake that some muslims make is they dont read what Bukhari said himself about his collection. There are many muslims and scholars who are cautious of ahadeeth and know there is a possiblity of a Sahih being bad.

http://www.mostmerciful.com/bukhari--mu ... adeeth.htm

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/bukhari.html

no, why why ? is it important, you don't need those unreliable scraps of paper to base holy laws on, in fact if all those hadiths were destroyed from existence Islam would survive with it complete quran? (yeah right)

I didnt pick them from a website, I got those hadiths from a MUSLIM book. And there are many, many more.

There are many books written by muslims that doesnt mean some of them are right or wrong. Its take diligent study and labored tasks to root out what is reality. I doubt a Christian will have such ability in doing this with another religion without being influenced by prejudice of his/her own beliefs. Such a task are for those who are seeking to understand and looking for truth, not someone bound to their faith.

you just described yourself and not a christian. Christians at least read other religious books when they start their apologetics wheter that be the avesta, quran, dhammapada or bhagavat gita. Half of the muslims i've seen in here have shunned reading the gospel, yet claim knowing all about it's contence based on a couple of heretical lines against christianity.

I have located a hadith that says a goat ate part of a surah that was lost (wasted), do you reject this hadith? and if you do, on what grounds?

Which is reported by one person. Also we do not believe such a thing was lost as the only copy makes it silly to believe being the Quran was in such demand and stringent effort to be learnt and memorized.

Nice muslims you got there, shows how much the early muslims really believed in being saved by muhammed's teachings. half of the hadith's are full with unreliable stuff and lies. It raises doubt for the authencity of the quran wich also is a compilation made in the same way.

I ask you again H2O if the qiraa were so numerous why did Zaid need to collect leaves and barks and animal skin on which the parts of the koran was written on to collate it, why didn't he just go to a few qiraa to have them recite what they knew,

Sounds like you cant make up your mind. He did collect it from memorizers. How much he collected is unknown, he himself knew a great portion of the Quran, but yet still gathered written materials. From this it sounds like he was confirming the written and oral sources with each other.

Ever occured that he -like confucius- was someone who adhored the ancients and read and collected their tales, that muhammed did the same with abrahamic scriptures (heretical or not) merging it's wisdom with local paganism and gloryfing his own conquests and title comparing himself to the great prophets of Israel...

i agree with his early critics "these are tales of the ancients" and we still have the proof for it today.

You H2O state that you do not believe there is a koran in heaven

No wrong. This is what I said :

The Quran mentions more than on particular material it was recorded on which does not conform to the idea of a heavenly book (Singular) as mentioned called Ummul-Kitaab which in indeed the heavenly

The Quran, The Torah, Zuboor, and Injeel etc all came from Ummul-Kitaab in islamic beliefs. The material the Quran mentions were the actual materials the Quran was written on in the time of our Prophet(s.a.w.) which has nothing to do with a heavenly book which is not physical.

Doesn't God know everything, meaning that it's only obvious that everything ever written is known to God? holy or not. Why the unneccarary emphasis?

Wait a minute what exactly can you convey in arabic that you are unable to convey in english? Does allah only tolerate arabic?

You cannot translate from one language into another word for word. You loose meaning as each language has its own unique character in expressive meaning.

if you got good translators then you don't loose meaning. such is done with millions of books around the world. the bible still has the languages of it's oldest copies available for study for anyone who doesn't believe it's translations. You can understand the bible, it's meanings and it's words without having to make hebrew a global language.

if the koran doesn't mention it it is rejected just as you reject that Mohammed had sexual intercourse with an 8 yr old girl because the koran said marry al-nissa which you automatically take to mean young women therefore Mohammed couldn't have done it with an 8 yr old girl!! (disregarding the law of abrogation which somehow doesn't apply to you because??

It was rejected because the majority of sources contradict such a hadeeth of her being that age.

i ljust love this one... please, entertain me H20. wich other sources?

which you have been unwilling to show us it's beliefs and which no one knows what it will cough up when faced with yet another immoral issue) with an attitude like that how can you possibly find fault with any immoral law or action of alledge prophet with a fill in the gaps the way you want it mentality.

It was something practice by people in general even in the USA. You are simply being cultural biased. Even if it was true I still would have no probelm with it cause it was something practice among all nations of people and religions.

If muhammed was a man who represented Allah's laws, he had to uphold them and refrain from abominations. If God spoke to a tribe of cannibals then you must not expect the cannibal to keep on eating others, merely because it's cultural.

[Liberate]

I have a Christian friend who has a dog in his house with pictures in the living room and kitchen. When I go to the guest room that has no images to make salah the dog does not bother me. Then one time his wife decorate the guest room with Christmas images in which I went out side to make salah. All of a sudden the dog, which could not see me, was ranting around in the house wanting get out side and was barking towards my direction. After making salah the dog stopped.

This is where a psychiatrist can help

BTW where is this doctrine in the koran?

You do know this doctrine of not keeping dogs is not supported in the koran don't you? If it is where is it? Why do you believe it? what happened to your doctrine of only believing it if it is supported in the koran? I smell a hypocrite.

And why is it Bukhari is considered the second holiest book in Sunni Islam if it contains hadiths that contradict each other?

The mistake that some muslims make is they dont read what Bukhari said himself about his collection.

would this some be 90% of islam?

Let us refresh what this discussion is about:
I showed you a Bukhari hadith that states Zaid collected the koran from leaves barks, animal skin and the memory of men who knew it (qira/quraa).

Sure lets refresh, lets see how well you can refresh your delima memory.

I ask you again H2O if the qiraa were so numerous why did Zaid need to collect leaves and barks and animal skin on which the parts of the koran was written on to collate it, why didn't he just go to a few qiraa to have them recite what they knew,

Sounds like you cant make up your mind. He did collect it from memorizers. How much he collected is unknown, [If you don't know how much he collected how can you say he collected all of it from memorizers?] he himself knew a great portion of the Quran[This he never said or even implied], but yet still gathered written materials. From this it sounds like he was confirming the written and oral sources with each other. [No mention whatsoever that the written materials were being collected to backup what already was known from the qiraa, it seems only westernised muslims are willing to lie so much for their religion]

Ibn Kathir states that 450 of these memorisers died at the battle of Yamama a significant number

You have done such a great job before posting references up. Why cant you do it with Ibn Katheer on this issue and how Ibn Katheer came up with 450 when the hadeeths are saying 70. But before we ellaborate on this you said something else that we would like to hit with one stone.

You go into an irrelevant argument showing me a website url that says 70 of the ansar died at the battle of yamama it doesn't occur to you that the ansar and the memorisers at yamama were completely different people,

Absolutely not. The Qurraa who were killed in the battle of Yamama were the Ansar. There is NO hadeeth that reported 450, and we would like to see where Ibn Katheers source for 450 when the hadeeths narrate contrary.

not all ansar were qira, you even proved this with your definition of who the ansar were I was trying to show you that the companions of 70 ansar does not contradict the number of 450 MEMORISERS (not all were ansar some of those ansar accoridng to some sources were jews) according to Ibn Kathir.

And again,post for us Ibn Katheer and his reference of 450 Died. The Qurra that died were but Ansar.

“During the battle of Yamama, 450 reciters of the Quran were killed.” (The True Guidance, An Introduction To Quranic Studies, part 4 [Light of Life - P.O. BOX 13, A-9503 Villach, Austria], p. 47- citing Ibn Kathir’s Al-Bidaya wa al-Nibaya, chapter on Battle of Yamama)

You can try and divert attention from the real argument by arguing with numbers or semantics, the argument stands...

the logical answer according to the sources H2O is parts were lost, parts were missing the majority of memorisers were dead it was a salvage job, you are being spoon fed lies about this superior mental ability of the arabs who transmitted perfect copies en mass from an illiterate people.

A logical answer according to your bias and prejudice wantoness. There are plenty of people today that know entire Quran by heart. My Shiekh is a Hafeezh,and I have heard him recite Quran from a to z. So expressing that such a thing is impossible to be done is just one of your disbeliefs.

Which sect in islam is your sheikh representative of?

You showed hadeeth that have no support from another much less contradicted by others that have support.

Which madzhab is this teaching from and when did it originate?

Is it only westernised muslims that represent less than 5% of islam that espouse this teaching?

You H2O state that the verse Nay! This is a Glorious Qur’an, (Inscribed) in the Al-Luah Al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)! (Qur’an 85:21-22) does not refer to a heavenly book but to pages the koran was written on

Wrong I made no mention of such a thing: Lets recap your memory:

..This we disagree with being that the verse as it is in connection with the various materials the Quran was recorded on such as Tablets and Pages (Parchments etc) as mentioned in the Quran are two different materials mentioned in plurality that cannot be allocated to Ummul-Kitab which is one heavenly book.

Where did you get out of our statement that Tablet is refering to pages ?

Which brings us straight back to our dilemma where are these pages?

"Pages" can be refering to parchments the Quran was written on or any soft material for writting that was used.

"Tablet" In Arabic is "Lauh" can be either, board, plate, sheet, slab, or slate of hard materials used for writting to record ie "Mahfoozh"

What were writting pages made of back then ?

Do you see the fallacy of having said koranic ayat when the koran hasn't been compiled yet? or do you accept that when it mentions the koran it is only talking of a partial koran?

The Quran was written within 23 years. As each revelation was revealed it was order by the prophet to his scribes to write it down. Selective material were being used such as tablets and pages ie boards, stones, parchments and palmleaves in which copies were distributed out into the muslim community to be learnt, taught, and memorized before the other revelation was revealed.

What are pages ? a Page or pages do not give the notion of a book. I think you need to refresh on your English.

Tell us H2O what does this verse mean in relevance to your misdirection above:

Nay! This is a Glorious Qur’an, (Inscribed) in the Al-Luah Al-Mahfuz (The Preserved Tablet)! (Qur’an 85:21-22)

What does it mean when it says preserved tablet, preserved where? If it is not in heaven then it is on earth if it is on earth and preserved where is it? If it can't be found how can it be preserved? Is this when this is a terrible translation?

Fundamental parts like Jesus coming back you reject and reinterpret claiming Jesus suddenly died and was taken to some heavenly realm already dead (with no reason other than your own personal conjecture that no one can find the grave of Mary so Jesus must be buried somewhere near Mary) H2O your views on mainstream islam is alien to 95% of islam, and yet you act like are without error, even when your fellow muslims have confronted you over your very strange views.

Your percentage is a grave exageration. And the return of Jesus is NOT a fundamental belief in islam. Do you mind showing us where in the Quran it clearly states Jesus will return ?

And do you mind posting up teh people that you claim confronted me whom from what I remember agree that the return of Jesus is symbolical not literal. Go ahead make you move and post the muslims you claim said such a thing. Again you exagerating.

Pls read what I typed, did he not confront you over your indirect insults to scholars and imams deeming their works foolishness? Did he not ask you on what authority you had to be dismissing hadiths of bukhari and muslim? I suspect you sent him a private message that such public squibble in front of the kuffor was not good for your islamic unity because he abandoned the thread.

Show me which sect in islam that does not regard Jesus as coming back (apart from the NOI and the ahmaddiya) so we know whose beliefs you are plagiarising.

Wait a minute what exactly can you convey in arabic that you are unable to convey in english? Does allah only tolerate arabic?

You cannot translate from one language into another word for word. You loose meaning as each language has its own unique character in expressive meaning.

What can you express in arabic that you are unable to express in english? This is a very simple question.

Remember H2O this is pure arabic even a child can understand, what can you express in it that you are unable to express in english as a last revelation for all mankind, if the message can not be understood or translated then what kind of a revelation is this?

I asked you to show me where you obtained the tafsir of samiy al mujalid? to this day you never showed anyone of us where you got that tafsir from, is this the attitude of someone who believes he has the onus on truth?

And it is obviously from those long over exausted threads you did get it.

What do you mean?
You refused to show me where you got that tafsir from, I suspect you had something to hide in refusing to show me where you got that tafsir from, it looks like you interpolated your own beliefs as to what the tafsir ought to say, and refused to show it to me because you would be exposed.

I am still waiting for you to show me where you copied and pasted that tafsir of samiy mujalid abdullah from

How do you define if it has no support?

You are the critic not me. So tell us how you difine something that has not support and is contradicted by other hadeeth ?

Your religion buddy, I judge a religion based on it's religious material, your esteemed scholars and imams subscribe to the hadiths of Bukhari and Muslim and make it incumbent on all muslims (including you) on the advice of the spiritual heads of Mecca and Medina, if you are unable to follow the edicts of your religion and want to be a megalomaniac renegade that is your choice but to claim your view is the right view with no support makes you a laughing stock.

if the koran doesn't mention it it is rejected just as you reject that Mohammed had sexual intercourse with an 8 yr old girl because the koran said marry al-nissa which you automatically take to mean young women therefore Mohammed couldn't have done it with an 8 yr old girl!! (disregarding the law of abrogation which somehow doesn't apply to you because??

It was rejected because the majority of sources contradict such a hadeeth of her being that age.

Which sources?
where?
You mean the ones in your conscience?

your madhzab says so?

No, mathamtics says so In which on the other thread we had this debate on we posted the links for you but it seems that wasnt enough.

Nowhere did any of your arguments contradict the stated age of Aisha when Mohammed had sex with her, I dare you to show for your audience where your alledged mathematical theory of Aisha's age is supported or even remotely justified with what you spouted I'll reiterate what I told you:

Personally I don't think you have much ground to stand on, first you are dismissing the hadiths that say she was 9 years old, some of it narrated by Aisha herself, second if she was 14 years old at the battle of Uhud she must have been with the prophet beforehand we can speculate how far back she was with him, third wasn't Aisha suppose to have been married at a young age so she can tell us thousands of ahadith? that puts all those hadiths in jeopardy as forgeries do you want to go along that path? Fourth before you convince us convince your imams, they are the ones sanctioning marriage of preteen girls.

Tabari IX:128 When the Prophet married Aisha, she was very young and not yet ready for consummation.

which you have been unwilling to show us it's beliefs and which no one knows what it will cough up when faced with yet another immoral issue) with an attitude like that how can you possibly find fault with any immoral law or action of alledge prophet with a fill in the gaps the way you want it mentality.

It was something practice by people in general even in the USA. You are simply being cultural biased. Even if it was true I still would have no probelm with it cause it was something practice among all nations of people and religions.

You would have no problem with pedofilia?

I cannot believe you would say such filth.

Several muslims have abandoned islam based on this alone, it takes a certain mindset to sanction pedofilia, it seems your mindset is on auto defense mode of whatever the prophet does pedofilia or not.

Your prophet is supposed to be the best example for all mankind for all eternity whose actions transcends all cutural values for all time, if his best example is to rape women and kill their husbands and have sex with 8 yr old girls and call it following the same God as christianity and judaism, and you to tell me you have no problem with it, I don't know what to think of you.

This is not what you are doing you are contradicting esteemed scholars and imams, and re translating the koran according to what you want it to say contrary to what those who were closer to Mohammed believed

You make it sound like you read ALL scholars work. Most of Scholar work is in Arabic in which the minority are in englsih. So how could you make a statement when you your self are not a scholars to have read the scholars works ?

Coming from someone who has made mistakes on basic islamic beliefs you are one to be patronizing. Which scholars are you talking about?, post the relevant websites give me the arabic if there is no english translation ( I find it amusing why you would say such a thing is the religion so hidden in mystery that most of it is not translated yet? Is this religion from God for 1400 yrs the subjects have been guarding aspects of their religion? is this some kind of cult? or is the real truth modern sheikhs who claim they know it all keep espousing new doctrine all the time gaining radical converts in the west who promote their doctrine with arrogance)

We have more access to what scholars say adn you do not. You sources are limited to waht is available online ours are not.

So help us out and show us where you are getting your doctrine first and when that doctrine was initiated.

Not supported how?

Did you search for it?

Did your pre conceived notion already disregard it before comparison?

If you cannot follow the edicts of a religion other than reinterpret it to your own liking, maybe the religion is not for you.

The Edicts of our religion does not teach us to follow things blindly by accepting them without question if it is not understood

Where are the edicts of your religion H2O?

Which madzhabs are you getting your beliefs from?

For the last several months I have been trying to find out where you are getting your beliefs from they do not match up with the sunnis or the shias 95% of islam, you have so far refused to show us where you are getting your beliefs from does your sheikh have a sect within islam? would you care to tellus what it is?

. The religion is all for me, do you have another considered religion ? Please dont make me laugh, I would rather be shot than to believe in what you believe in.

I agree with you because you are making it up as you go along.

Wow is all I have to say you mean you subjected yourself to authority???anyone reading your posts would get the feeling you regard yourself as the greatest koranic translator, reinterpreter and hadith rejecter this side of the atlantic even if Mohammed himself was to come to you and say this is what said verse means you are more likely to tell him to shut up that he doesn't understand arabic.

WE have done that which other translators have not done. Put their works up for criticism and test by other scholars and to work with others rather than independantly to get back a contructive imput on the project.

It is very revealing you did say scholars had you amend your translations did you not? That is why it is taking you months to transfer one sura, what parts did the scholars not like in your translations? Do they agree on what you said about Jesus being dead and not coming back? Do they agree on what you say about saudi oil prophecy in sura 9:28?

And I am only a hadeeth rejecter when a hadeeth does not pass the Litmus Test ir confirmation from Quran and other isnad ahadeeth.

Where are your madzhabs to say this on when did this school of thought originate from? Which imam or scholar says this?

A hadeeth Rejecter such as the Rahsad Khalifah possie do not believe in Hadeeth period and all together. How does this apply to us ?

Would you care to show us where in islam the ruling to reject hadiths comes from which madzhabs say this and when was it implemented?

Did you not indicate you were a member of the Rahsad Khalifah at one time?

Since you wrote it from the top of your head (could it be possible that you made an error H2O? are you this conceited?). The neutral translator saw al qAhwatu in what you typed if you think you are not the one who might have made a mistake against a bot when you are the one who said you wrote it off the top of your head, then someone needs a lesson in humility, I find it hard to believe you will subject your koranic translations to any scholar with an attitude like this.

Do you mind telling us where you see al qAhwatu, to be mentioned. Get some help you going to need it. We did not mention al qahwat = coffee in our statement.

Again the neutral literal translator gives:

‎he said a prophet said for ‎ ‎he prayed to on him and he granted salvation ‎ ‎coffees the Islam on five testimony that there is not god except to that ‎ ‎Mohammad ‎ ‎prophet for وَإِقَامِ prayer and the giving of charity and pilgrimage and fasting ramadan ‎

I make no apologies for the bot's literal translation of the arabic ofcourse this is a trivial issue but no doubt you will hold on to to divert attention to the more serious implication of allah praying for his prophet, substantiated in the hadiths:

“When my father was eighty years of age, he recited the following verse from the codex of Aisha: ‘Verily, Allah and His angels pray for the Prophet. O ye who believe, pray for him and earnestly desire peace for him and for those who pray in the front rows.’”

She adds:

“This verse had been there before the codices underwent change at the hands of Uthman.” (True Guidance, pp. 61-62- citing al-Suyut’s al-Itqan on nasikh wa mansukh [abrogating and the abrogated])

Help us out H2O why does a neutral translator using the rules of arabic translate that ayat as allah praying for his prophet and evidence shows hadiths existed that show allah praying for his prophet used to be in the koran, is this mere coincidence or another conpsiracy theory by muslims for muslims who knew 1400 yrs in the future their stories would come to haunt islam, you cannot hide a bomb like this under patronising insults.

In other words you have no proof and are unwilling to provide any proof that Mushin Khan's translation of Bukhari vol 9 book 89 number 309 included parentheses.

Already provided the proof from teh Arabic which was confirmed by a Arabic speaking Christian and confirmed by other translators.

Show us what Mushin Khan put down for Bukhari vol 9 book 89 from a website (surely this can't be hard)

te]Without the clarification in bold above H2O you are trying to pass off both threads as relating to the same discussion when you told us in July you became a haneef because of the prophecy of Saudi oil in the koran, and over two months later you then decide to find circular reasons as to why Mohammed is a prophet...in other words Mohammed is a prophet because the koran which he did not write didn't see a word of and is recorded in several muslim traditions as having undergone several amendments from what Mohammed alledgedly said says he is a prophet without a prophecy of alledge prophet...

Again I said :

Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.

So in my case, not speaking for no other muslim but my self and those whom may agree with me, how does Muhammad qualify as a Prophet of اللّــه G-D that satisfies me ?

Tell us H2O when did you write your later post compared to the post you first sent?, in which forum did you write that later post compared to the post you first sent, which subject did you write that later post compared to the post you first sent?
In which post did you tell us you became a haneef muslim and what reason you gave as to you becoming a haneef muslim?

Do you know the difference between "why I am a muslim" and "what I like about the koran"? Do you know the difference between the definition of a prophet according to both judaism and christianity and believing a book said prophet never saw without a prophecy to it's name, considering the reason you gave as to why you became a muslim in the first place was because it had prophecies that were tested according to Deuteronomy 18:

You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD?” If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 09:51 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:


...When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him. Deuteronomy 18:20-22




Omega I havent forgot about this verse. As a matter of fact this was the verse I used to test the Quran with as final confirmation before becoming a Haneef. Now lets put it to the test.

Help us out H2O what are we suppose to make of your admissions above as of July you used the verse in Deut 18 to decide wether to become a muslim because it contained prophecies? which prophecies? saudi oil prophecy which you later deny? which other prophecy then if you are reluctant further down the line to admit you believe it contains a Saudi Oil prophecy? Then why are you a muslim? You have given us no other valid reason as to why you are a haneef if according to what you said you became a muslim using the verse from Deut 18. Are you going to admit you didn't become a muslim because of any prophecies? which puts your statement as of july as nothing but lies? Do you realise how ridiculous an argument you have made?

Your right( Liberate) 9:28 doesnt mention any about oil. It mention a prophecy of the Arabs of the Region becoming rich, in which after the establishment of, they became rich, without it they would probably be just like afghanistan.

[/quote]

And again and again. You just dont have enough confidence in your self to have to keep on repeating youself, or is it you just like being a revolving door ?

Lets take this step by step:

H2O: Your right( Liberate) 9:28 doesnt mention any about oil
So far H2O is saying sura 9:28 doesn't mention anything about oil

H2O: It mention a prophecy of the Arabs of the Region becoming rich,

He then states that it is a prophecy of the arabs becoming rich

H2O: in which after the establishment of, they became rich,

He then tells us "in which after the estalishment of" ESTABLISHMENT OF WHAT H2O?


H2O: they became rich, without it they would probably be just like afghanistan

Pls help us out H2O they became rich

with WHAT ?

without it

WHAT?

they would proably be just like afghanistan

..then H2O have you not admitted that it is a prophecy of saudi oil. that Saudi arabia became rich from the prophecy of oil, is that not then a prophecy of Saudi Oil??

Are you trying to play semantic games with the meaning of words in english like you try to do with the arabic?

Have a look at this thread have a look at the number of times I have asked you who gave Uthman the authority to burn the 7 readings and how many times you have side stepped the issue (even in this response)

What will answering this question solve ? Who said uthman burnt the seven reading ?

Where are the seven readings now H2O?

Volumn 006, Book 061, Hadith Number 515. (Bukhari and same reported Muslim)
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Yusuf bin Mahk : While I was with 'Aisha, the mother of the Believers, a person from Iraq came and asked, "What type of shroud is the best?" 'Aisha said, "May Allah be merciful to you! What does it matter?" He said, "O mother of the Believers! Show me (the copy of) your Qur'an," She said, "Why?" He said, "In order to compile and arrange the Qur'an according to it, for people recite it with its Suras not in proper order." 'Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read first? (Be informed) that the first thing that was revealed thereof was a Sura from Al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire. When the people embraced Islam, the Verses regarding legal and illegal things were revealed. If the first thing to be revealed was: 'Do not drink alcoholic drinks.' people would have said, 'We will never leave alcoholic drinks,' and if there had been revealed, 'Do not commit illegal sexual intercourse, 'they would have said, 'We will never give up illegal sexual intercourse.' While I was a young girl of playing age, the following Verse was revealed in Mecca to Muhammad: 'Nay! But the Hour is their appointed time (for their full recompense), and the Hour will be more grievous and more bitter.' (54.46) Sura Al-Baqara (The Cow) and Surat An-Nisa (The Women) were revealed while I was with him." Then 'Aisha took out the copy of the Qur'an for the man and dictated to him the Verses of the Suras (in their proper order).

What is the purpose of the hadith you have shown us? What does this have to do with the seven different readings? The thread is who gave Uthman the authority to set fire to the other 6 of the 7 readings of the koran?

The Qur'an has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so recite of it that which is easier for you. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 6, p.510).

Ibn Abbas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Gabriel taught me to recite in one style. I replied to him and kept asking him to give more (styles), till he reached seven modes (of recitation). Ibn Shihab said: It has reached me that these seven styles are essentially one, not differing about what is permitted and what is forbidden. (Sahih Muslim, Vol. 2, p.390).

The hadith you showed to indicate that the quran was revealed in it's proper order during the time of Mohammed, the hadith doesn't explicitly say so...

Narrated Uthman ibn Affan:

Yazid al-Farisi said: I heard Ibn Abbas say: I asked Uthman ibn Affan: What moved you to put the (Surah) al-Bara'ah which belongs to the mi'in (surahs) (containing one hundred verses) and the (Surah) al-Anfal which belongs to the mathani (Surahs) in the category of as-sab'u at-tiwal (the first long surah or chapters of the Qur'an), and you did not write "In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful" between them?

Uthman replied: When the verses of the Qur'an were revealed to the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him), he called someone to write them down for him and said to him: Put this verse in the surah in which such and such has been mentioned; and when one or two verses were revealed, he used to say similarly (regarding them). (Surah) al-Anfal is the first surah that was revealed at Medina, and (Surah) al-Bara'ah was revealed last in the Qur'an, and its contents were similar to those of al-Anfal. I, therefore, thought that it was a part of al-Anfal. Hence I put them in the category of as-sab'u at-tiwal (the seven lengthy surahs), and I did not write "In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful" between them. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 3, Number 0785)

Notice the bit in large font? Who gave Uthman the authority to put his own notions of where a sura went if he was following the orders already decreed by Mohammed?

Ofcourse we both know your automatic response is this hadith is it is fabricated, but ask yourself this, what on earth do the people in the isnad have to gain by incriminating their own faith and lying about it?

What does Uthman ibn affan have to gain damning his own religion?

If you are telling us there were muslims out to incriminate and destroy their own religion who would be found out only in the 20th century (then these muslims are better prophets than your 'prophet') then the argument also goes that muslims also lied in compiling the koran (the positive parts H2O that you readily swallow) and got away with it, and their lies have died with them.

If you are going to tell us you reject hadiths if their matn are not supported by multiple chains (where is this doctrine in islam from H2O, when did it arise would you care to show us?), then you need to throw your koran in the trash because several isnads disagree with the orders of suras and how it was compiled and who by...uthman..abu bakr...and of course your shia brothers in the faith who think Ali did it.

This is what your religion says Uthman did without prophetic advice:

He transcribed the texts (suhuf) into a single codex (mushaf waahid), he arranged the suras, and he restricted the dialect to the vernacular (lugaat) of the Quraysh on the plea that it (the Qur'an) had been sent down in their tongue. (As-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.140).

Pls tell us H2O where are the seven readings of the preserved and unaltered quran in existence today allah allegedly sent to Mohammed?

What was burnt were the copies of the Quran that were not in their proper order. As khaleefah he had the authority to establish a copy in its correct order according to what they learnt from the Prophet.

Says who?... would you care to show us the hadiths that support your above proposition?

All I want you to do is apply rationality to your scriptures it does not stand up to the cold light of reason given the evidence in the koran and the context of those ayats in the ahadith.

Already done. G-D is one G-D not three that are one or one that is three. Nor did he get beat up by his creatures, died, neither tempted by the Devil and had him take him fro a joy ride or went to the bathroom, ate food.

This is not your fundamental problem even your koran says the jews wanted to kill Jesus, tell us H2O what exactly did He do that the jews wanted to kill Him? He must have done or said something surely? Nobody wants to kill another individual for no apparent reason? Is it because He did miracles? He healed the sick? raised the dead? They would like to kill Him for that? Did He bring them back to the worship of one God? They would like to kill Him for that? were they worshipping baal during His time? Think H2O, what on earth would the jews want to kill Jesus for?

If you call that worshipong such a man to be G-D to be rational then thats why your a Christian and I am a muslim

Since you believe God can be anywhere and see everything, tell us H2O in your pure rational mind that requires God to have a wife to have a Son, how can God be one if He can see everything and hear everything and be everywhere at the same time?

if you want to defend your faith and at the same time criticize us for not seeing the koran through your very tinted glasses you are not doing yourself any favors but making yourself look very dishonest indeed.

And I will die defending what we believe in.

From the mannner in which you applauded the murder of Theo van Gogh I have no doubt if you had the opportunity you would place a suicide belt and blow yourself up if your imams whispered it in your ear you seem a prime candidate to be initiated into a radical sect of islam from christianity to judaism to islam...

The only reason they left cause its not worth it, and they do have lives to attend to. Why dont you try going to an Islamic forum and see how long you last there ?

Believe me I have visited islamic forums and to tell you the truth most of their responses have to do with foul mouthed insults nothing to do with the subject at hand.

How many times have you visited islamic forums and told them that Jesus is dead and not coming back?, and there is no anti-christ and it is all figurative, Jesus walking behind your imam and breaking the cross, having a wife and living on earth for 40 extra years getting buried next to Mohammed is also figurative, and your prophecy of saudi oil? Lets see how long you last as they laugh at you, maybe thats why you would rather show your theories to christians at least that way if they laugh at you they are kuffor anyway it doesn't hurt as bad right?

I think I have went over board in waisting our my time with you. You want me to apply rational to my beliefs? Already done that to know Islam teaches Jesus is not G-D, and that G-D is not a man or anthing that is created and their will be no return of a Messiah.

Help us out here, 90% of islam is sunni what do the sunnis believe as to Jesus coming back? 5% of islam is shia what do the shias believe as to Jesus coming back? The remaining 5% are made up of the ahmaddiya, the NOI the wahabis e.t.c it seems you are sectioned along with the 5% made up of the NOI who do not believe Jesus is coming back, in fact they believe allah came in the early 20th century and there is no paradise!!!

But yet you say to apply rational but then try to critcize us for applying the same rational against the foke lore of a man that is suppose to return that is not supported by Quran muchless the ambiguous and inconsistancies of Hadeeths ? How silly.

I believe I have already shown you what 95%+ of islam believe concerning the return of Jesus, I have asked several shias and sunnis and not one of them has told me they do not believe Jesus is coming back. Where are you getting this doctrine from H2O? do you have a set pattern of beliefs or are you unabble to detract the fact that you are picking and choosing what you want to believe from several slices of islam?

It shows that much rational was being used to weed out what was influenced into muslims tradition after our Prophet(s.a.w.) was taken.

Taken? You are trying to imply he was miraculously raptured or something similar? Sorry to disappoint you your prophet wasn't taken he was killed, thats what your religion says, he was poisoned by a jewish woman, doesn't surprise me considering the jewish women he raped, the one he had sexual intercourse with the same day after decapitating her husband's head, killing her father her husband several of her relatives, not even allowing her to mourn for the deaths which he caused, he just had to have sex with her after annhilating her entire family ignoring his own law of iddah what kind of immoral behaviour is this to be associated with the God of heaven???

Enough rational to know that G-D is not a Triune god, that he doesnt regret or becomes Jealous.

But allah abrogates or forgets or replaces it with something better or similar, sanctions incest solely for his prophet which is a sin in both previous revelations ...cannot make a prophecy to save his prophet and sends revelations by having his prodigy of a prophet froth at the mouth, complain of ringing bells, rolls on the floor complaining of heart palpitations, profuse sweating but this is suppose to be continuous with the same God of the christian and the jews???