How Do Christians Read The Quran ?

[H2O]

After dilegent reading of some Christian quotes and interpretation of the Quran I have found that they read and understand the Quran wth the same approach as they do the Bible.

To the Contrary Muslims do not read the Quran in this manner.

Most Christians when reading the Quran they understand the first person is Muhammad speaking and the second person is the reader.

Muslims read the Quran as the first person is Allah and narrator speaking to Muhammad or to Muhammad and the belieivers or to the whole mankind etc in which the reader of the Quran is listening to an A to B tranmission of information.

The Christian comprehensive reading goes completely against the grain.

This is one of the major errors in Christian interpretation of the Quran which is approached in the same manner as they approach their Bible.

The nature of the literary characteristics of the Quran vs the Bible are remote from one another. So therefore you cannot approach the Quran with the same reading comprehensive character as you would do with the Bible.

[Apple Pie]

Greetings H2O,

Personally, I interpret the Koran with my Holy Bible.

After all, as you have witnessed for yourself first-hand in all of my posts, the Holy Bible is required to correct, clarify, and detail the Koran in ALL manner of things.

Since the Holy Bible is the source of the Koran, it is most natural that one would want to interpret the Koran by its original….in order to see if it correctly “preserved” God’s true word.

The Koran is a mere imitation attempt (by its authors) to “translate” the Hebrew and Greek words of Biblical scripture, into Arabic.

The Koran is a whip-puppy….as we can all see for ourselves…

Even the Book of Revelation has nearly total control over the structure and content of the Koran…..this is as clear and as pronounced as a Greeks’ nose…



Take care…

[webmaster]

After dilegent reading of some Christian quotes and interpretation of the Quran I have found that they read and understand the Quran wth the same approach as they do the Bible.

To the Contrary Muslims do not read the Quran in this manner.

Most Christians when reading the Quran they understand the first person is Muhammad speaking and the second person is the reader.

Muslims read the Quran as the first person is Allah and narrator speaking to Muhammad or to Muhammad and the belieivers or to the whole mankind etc in which the reader of the Quran is listening to an A to B tranmission of information.

The Christian comprehensive reading goes completely against the grain.

This is one of the major errors in Christian interpretation of the Quran which is approached in the same manner as they approach their Bible.

The nature of the literary characteristics of the Quran vs the Bible are remote from one another. So therefore you cannot approach the Quran with the same reading comprehensive character as you would do with the Bible.

Christians and non-christians approach the bible, the quran and all other books the same way, they read them.

So in reality you don't even read or understand the Quran!

[Omega]

When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.

GOD BLESS!

[Believer]

Some Christians look through parts of the Quran, just to get an idea what you guys believe and stuff. Some of us are doing research to expose the falsehood of your religion, and reading through the Quran is necessary.

[Omega]

Some Christians look through parts of the Quran, just to get an idea what you guys believe and stuff. Some of us are doing research to expose the falsehood of your religion, and reading through the Quran is necessary.

!!!

[Joseph]

re: How do Christians read the Quran.

If you're saying a people's scripture should be read with right attitude, I agree. Furthermore, I will philosophical agree; Tauhid is a valid possibility. Commentaries, though are not speech of Allah, are ordained by him for his will. Seeming Quranic contradictions can be solved with satisfactory or possible answers, and others can only be trusted to Allah. Allah's prerogative to raise a prophet from any place and people. In the greater scheme the message is paramount

How do Muslims read the Bible.

regards, joseph

[H2O]

If you're saying a people's scripture should be read with right attitude, I agree. Furthermore, I will philosophical agree; Tauhid is a valid possibility. Commentaries, though are not speech of Allah, are ordained by him for his will. Seeming Quranic contradictions can be solved with satisfactory or possible answers, and others can only be trusted to Allah. Allah's prerogative to raise a prophet from any place and people. In the greater scheme the message is paramount

Did you ever think that the so called contradictions are translators inaccuracy in coveying the verses correctly, and they also didnt translates key point words that help clearify the text ?

[Joseph]

re: did you ever think

Ditto. Even though Arabic text was the intended, would you agree highlighted quote should still be sufficient to your question, . While here, I will go another step by including Islam criterion for contradiction (paraphrased): If exist a possible answer rendering all data coherent then contradiction has not been proven.

joseph

[H2O]

If exist a possible answer rendering all data coherent then contradiction has not been proven.

Verily contradiction has not been proven do to the FACT critics rely ON translations that have numerious and grave errors in rendition.

[Liberate]

If exist a possible answer rendering all data coherent then contradiction has not been proven.

Verily contradiction has not been proven do to the FACT critics rely ON translations that have numerious and grave errors in rendition.

Why did you tell us you were leaving? Is it so we do not expect any answers to the many questions you owe the people in this forum?

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(That reminds me of another muslim apologetic that use to frequent this forum, do you know humble?).

Imagine a sect like the mormons, the christadelphians, or the jehovah witnesses speaking on behalf of all christianity, this is akin to what you and your sect do on behalf of islam, when we both know the majority of islam will probably see you and your sect as an apostate and we both know what the ruling is on apostates in islam, I wonder if you would be so free in the middle east to have this arrogant sola interpretation on islam, I am curious just how many numbers exist of your sect in florida?.

I am still awaiting your response about the hadith on Abn allah and fish liver being eaten in paradise.

[newseed]

Good to see you again Liberate!

[H2O]

Why did you tell us you were leaving? Is it so we do not expect any answers to the many questions you owe the people in this forum

?

Go back, and read again what I wrote after that. This shows your incompitence in reading.

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

All those translators were also no native arab speakers. And being a born arab speaker is irrelevant. Many people that are born Arabic Speakers do not understand Quranic Arabic. It is not the same as modern Arabic. To make such a statement shows the blaffering ignorance on your behalf about the Arabic Language.

you hardly speak your native language

What is my NATIVE LANGUAGE ? Please I hope your not refering to American English . And if you take my typos and failure to proof read what I type to express this then you will get a suprise when you hear me speak in person. Again I invited many of you to come to Yahoo Islamic Chat 9. We have many Christians anf Jews and even Haters of Islam that come into that room. I hold classes in that room on Quranic Arabic, and guess whom 20% of the students are ? Arabs !

Imagine a sect like the mormons, the christadelphians, or the jehovah witnesses speaking on behalf of all christianity, this is akin to what you and your sect do on behalf of islam, when we both know the majority of islam will probably see you and your sect as an apostate and we both know what the ruling is on apostates in islam, I wonder if you would be so free in the middle east to have this arrogant sola interpretation on islam, I am curious just how many numbers exist of your sect in florida?.

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.

I am still awaiting your response about the hadith on Abn allah and fish liver being eaten in paradise.

Wait a sec, you said I am sect. So what you need to do is go to a muslim who believes in that Hadeeth . Your talking to the wrong muslim, remember you said I am a sect and you infered I dont belong to the MAJORITY OF ISLAM. SO why Quote a hadeeth to me when you know I am going to reject that hadeeth if the Quran does not confirm it ?

[Liberate]

Hi Newseed sent you a msg about the hadith dates

Why did you tell us you were leaving? Is it so we do not expect any answers to the many questions you owe the people in this forum

?

Go back, and read again what I wrote after that. This shows your incompitence in reading.

Ofcourse every christian on this board has terrible reading comprehension ( btw it's spelt incompetence, if you are going to be patronising to every christian on this board by telling us we have terrible reading comprehension, learn to spell, there is a significant gap on a qwerty keyboard from an e to an i that was not a typo). So when you said you were leaving and you would be popping in once a while to stir up things, you really meant you would be in every single day since then just like normal?

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

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?

. 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?

To make such a statement shows the blaffering ignorance on your behalf about the Arabic Language.

I am yet to see a post from you that did not have a patronising comment, all arabic spoken today is based on the quranic arabic, did you forget that islam standardised arabic, something which you even admit to. You only say this because of the serious problems in translating, you gave an analogy that kjv version english standardised the english language, the difference is the rules of english can be applied to the kjv version and you will still comprehend what is being said (even today the message is the same), even though the same can be done with the koran with the rules of arabic what is being said opens up a can of worms, contradictions and blatant errors that needs to be excused by claiming one drivel after another like you just have, that word doesn't really mean cheat, abraham is not a submitter but a submissive, thumma really means after a set period of time...yet the koran is supposed to be revealed in pure simple arabic a child can understand!!

Since your arabic is superior to every known koran translator would you care to interpret for us what sura 2:1, sura 13:1 and sura 29:1 says? or did whoever write that have "terrible reading comprehension"


Yet in the midst of all of this, you keep regurgitating the muslim argument that Jesus called God allah, it doesn't occur to you that if arabic changed over time what about aramaic what makes you think the aramaic we have access to today is the same as Jesus's time. Let me cut to the chase of what you are trying to imply: Don't you believe allah is the true name of God in any language, arabic, hebrew or aramaic yes or no?

Here is what one 'prophet' had to say to aide you in your answer:

""Love the Arabs for three (things): Because I am an Arab, the Qur'an is in Arabic and the language of the people of the paradise is Arabic""

you hardly speak your native language

What is my NATIVE LANGUAGE ? Please I hope your not refering to American English

Didn't you say earlier you were greek and you later confessed you hardly knew a word of greek? but prior to that you tried to pass off as 100% jewish ( as opposed to a proselyte which you later confessed to) who is fluent in aramaic, hebrew, arabic and greek, and were going to play chess with everybody in this forum in those languages

Imagine a sect like the mormons, the christadelphians, or the jehovah witnesses speaking on behalf of all christianity, this is akin to what you and your sect do on behalf of islam, when we both know the majority of islam will probably see you and your sect as an apostate and we both know what the ruling is on apostates in islam, I wonder if you would be so free in the middle east to have this arrogant sola interpretation on islam, I am curious just how many numbers exist of your sect in florida?.

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

.

Need I remind you of what it says in the preface of your sahih bukhari hadiths that is utilised by sunnis those same hadiths you chose to reject even though they are sahih: "The Translation of the Meaning of Sahih Al-Bukhari". It is recommended and approved by all Muslim authorities, including the spiritual heads of Mecca and Medina. "

Maybe whoever said that had "terrible reading comprehension"
The fact that you chose to ignore those hadiths even though the preface says it is incumbent on all muslims shows you are in complete contrast to sunni beliefs, that makes you a dissenting clique aka a sect

Whats all that yapping going to do for you Liberate ? ANd by the way we dont belong to a sect The Quran Prohibits sectarianism.

Didn't you even give me the name of your sect?

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

You don't belong to a sect and you don't believe in sects, but you align yourself with the sunnis as opposed to the shias, maybe at this point I have "terrible reading comprehension".

What do you think a sunni imam will say to you if he finds out you reject sahih hadiths?

I am still awaiting your response about the hadith on Abn allah and fish liver being eaten in paradise.

Wait a sec, you said I am sect. So what you need to do is go to a muslim who believes in that Hadeeth . Your talking to the wrong muslim, remember you said I am a sect and you infered I dont belong to the MAJORITY OF ISLAM. SO why Quote a hadeeth to me when you know I am going to reject that hadeeth if the Quran does not confirm it ?

Seems this is also one of your tactics, let me remind you of one of the rules of debate, whenever you find you have made an error or have been shown to be in error , the decent thing to do is admit to your error, it seems you pick a minute and irrelevant point and make your succeeding post wholely focused on the trivial point like it was the main bone of contention, you were the one that said that there is documentation that jews questioned Mohammed as to his prophethood (you were the one that brought this up, this is your hadith supporting your point of view you will be shown for what you really are if you reject this hadith), that brings us back to Abn allah because he was the one that questioned Mohammed asking him three things to confirm he was a prophet, I asked you if you believe that hadith, by implication since you say there is documentation jews questioned Mohammed about his prophethood you believe that hadith and the contents of that hadith, the answer is a simple yes or no.

[Liberate]

Guess you are pretending I didn't say a word

are you going to give me a reply? or maybe you answered my post but I had "terrible reading comprehension"?


Let me remind you of what you said

He stumbled upon these sayings but was soo blind he didnt recognize the Arabic speaking Jews' absolute use of the name Allah even in their own names.

There is numerous documentation that they tested Muhammad's prophethood to see if he was truely indeed a Messenger of Allah ~ Rasoolullah If they(The Jews) didnt worship the same G-D as Muhammad did then what would be the sense of testing Muhammad (s.a.w) to see if he was truely a Prophet of Allah?

Which hadiths are you talking about?, would you care to show them for your audience?, or is this going to be like getting blood from a stone

[newseed]

I think you missed that part If the hadeeth is not found to contradict Quran or it does not mention such and issue directly or indirectly AND if it contradicts other hadeeths I/we do not accept it.

So the truth is, the Qur'an cannot stand on it's own. If some of those Hadith sayings are not relative to any of the verses in the Qur'an then it shouldn't be used at all.

Not only that, you broke forum rule #4.

[H2O]

So the truth is, the Qur'an cannot stand on it's own. If some of those Hadith sayings are not relative to any of the verses in the Qur'an then it shouldn't be used at all.

Lets get this straight. Who is it always using hadith for there criticism ? Liberate seems to have an obsession with hadeeths. In our first incounter he used hadith while I was using Quran to authenticate his grabage he was extracting.

When have you seen me quote hadiths that are not relative to the issue of the Quran ?

For some reason every time Quran is being quoted on grounds of arguement some Christian goes and gets a hadiths that contradics the issue of the Quran it self.

[Joseph]

H2O

re: do to the FACT

I'm having difficulty with your thread esp. after consenting to the basics which Muslims believe are necessary for reading Quran. Now your saying the reader must assume any encountered Quranic error or contradictions, tenable. In other words, to assume Quran is true before reading rather then by inquiry. Where I was hoping to create for the members an avenue for possible gainful discussion, you have elected instead to create a roadblock.

joseph

[Joseph]

H2O, et al

re: let's get it straight.

I agree.

Somehow I get the impression by you admitting oral reports are unreliable then problem goes away, couple things wrong here. Necessary to admit of which is already established and the problem remains. Stating you quote only the agreeable traditions is irrelevant to question concerning relationship of the assumed uncreated and the created. More accurate illustration of that relationship is, Quran and Sunna. Latter being actual source for interpreting Quran and held legitimately determined by Hadiths. Should a Muslim be willing to garbage the Hadith he may as well do likewise to the Sunna. However, unless you're confirming Liberate's contention of personal brand of Islam, you can no more reject, as false, one contradicting or ludicrous tradition than single Quranic word. How then convenient and expedient for collapsing argument, Islam is suddenly 'Quran only' and to lay blame on Liberate and Newseed. Since you know which reports contradicts the Quran, provide the reference containing the false traditions. Show us your proof if you are truthful, so we may determine whether or not the higher Quran and Sunna depends on the questionable. Or is the challenge just divine prerogative of Muslims.

Dawagandist show little conscious in telling every non-Muslim that Islam Canonical traditions are untrustworthy like the Bible. Nonetheless, the dawaganda has caused an unexpected development, many Muslims identifying themselves conservative even orthodox, reject traditions whenever contrary to their sensibility without considering implications. One thing I am very sure of, most Muslims believe the road to Janna is paved with good intentions.

joseph

[H2O]

I'm having difficulty with your thread esp. after consenting to the basics which Muslims believe are necessary for reading Quran.

I am sorry but I dont know where you are getting this from Joseph.

Muslims read and understand the Quran in the following.

1) Understanding the Quran in its historical context:

Thus, first looking at the claims that no word in the Quran are the words of Muhammad but the direct commands and words transmitted to Muhammad from Allah through The Holy Spirit Angel Gabriel.

This places the reader of the Quran as the third person witnessing the claims of transmission to Muhammad ie. Listening to a conversation being convey from A to B in which the reader is C, as the Quran was revealed dealing with the conditions and situations of the people at that time.

2) Understanding the Purpose/Nature of what was revealed

For just about every Surah that deals with a historical event on the conditions, situations, questions to Muhammad in his time and incounters he had, there are Sahih hadeeth that explain why they were revealed pertaining to a cause. This is to help us understand the nature of the verses.

3) Understanding the application of the commands and Quranic sanctions:

How are the rules applied in the Quran ? We must first have knowledge base of criterior 1 and 2 above. With those we know how the Prophet performed prayers, fasted, made Hajj, feeded the poor, paying the alms, treating neighbors, and delt with people from Social, Economics, Politics, Science, Parenting, to Jurisprudence etc. This is called the Prophets Sunnah that we follow in carrying out Quranic commands.

From this we draw what verses are applied to us that are general and some that are not generally applied unless we find our selves in the same conditions as they ie. that Muslims community in the timeof Muhammad



This is the scientific and fundemental method to understanding the Quran in its perspective for muslims or non muslim. This strickly conforms to be scientific .

Over and over when Christians Quote Quran or hadith most of them are merely following the yapping of another in which none of it is individual study to a direct approach to the Quran or HAdith.

Please note that this is not applied to all christians, there are christian scholars who have followed these scientific standards, and have approached Quran in an unbiased perspective. And have explained the religion in an authentic manner and not distorted it.

I find most Christians that approach the Quran (Usually never doing it without some verse being dictated to them from Christian critics) they do it in a currupt and biased manner. They approached the Quran with the same reading comprehensive dimension to that of the Bible.

In shorter words. You have to approach the Quran first as to how it was revealed. This does not consent to believe in it first, but to approach with a sound mind and heart.

Somehow I get the impression by you admitting oral reports are unreliable then problem goes away, couple things wrong here. Necessary to admit of which is already established and the problem remains. Stating you quote only the agreeable traditions is irrelevant to question concerning relationship of the assumed uncreated and the created. More accurate illustration of that relationship is, Quran and Sunna.

You sound like my professor making no sense to an objectional approach. Sorry Joseph you lost me here bold.

However, unless you're confirming Liberate's contention of personal brand of Islam, you can no more reject, as false, one contradicting or ludicrous tradition than single Quranic word. How then convenient and expedient for collapsing argument, Islam is suddenly 'Quran only' and to lay blame on Liberate and Newseed. Since you know which reports contradicts the Quran, provide the reference containing the false traditions. Show us your proof if you are truthful, so we may determine whether or not the higher Quran and Sunna depends on the questionable. Or is the challenge just divine prerogative of Muslims.

It seems Joseph you have not incountered what we brand as a TRADITIONAL muslim as opposed to those muslims who are ORTHADOX. You maybe getting these two mixed up with each other. But anyhow I would like to post the following post about how Hadeeth are accepted in the ORTHADOX manner.

Yet, on the other hand, you argue against the same idea in Islam, where there are supposed to be around 70 sects, and tons of hadiths, of which you reject so many, or perhaps even all...

We only accept hadiths that do not contradict Quran or contradict them selves unless the thing is overruled by the majority of hadiths but yet must not contradict Quran. This is how a hadith is accepted after tracing its chain of narration to be sahih.

Once it is Sahih then it is to be tested by the Quran and other sahih hadith for conflicts.

Hadiths are not revelation and they are not the divine word of Allah but are commentary to the Quran (Sahih) that gives us insite on why a verse was revealed and show us how the Prophet practiced the aayaats of the Quran.

As you noticed I never use hadith to debate unless a hadith is presented to us by you all first.

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/posting.p ... te&p=38348

[Apple Pie]

Greetings H2O,

So sorry to hear of your posting woes….

However, I would like to review this statement that you posted…

Muslims read and understand the Quran in the following.

1) Understanding the Quran in its historical context:

Thus, first looking at the claims that no word in the Quran are the words of Muhammad but the direct commands and words transmitted to Muhammad from Allah through The Holy Spirit Angel Gabriel.

I would like to see how you support the idea that the Holy Spirit is the angel Gabriel…


Thanks…

[Liberate]

I'm having difficulty with your thread esp. after consenting to the basics which Muslims believe are necessary for reading Quran.

I am sorry but I dont know where you are getting this from Joseph.

Muslims read and understand the Quran in the following.

1) Understanding the Quran in its historical context:

Thus, first looking at the claims that no word in the Quran are the words of Muhammad but the direct commands and words transmitted to Muhammad from Allah through The Holy Spirit Angel Gabriel.

May be his Lord, if he divorces you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, penitent, adorers, fasters, widows and virgin." sura 66:5

transliteration: AAasa rabbuhu in tallaqakunna an yubdilahu azwajan khayran minkunna muslimatin mu/minatin qanitatin ta-ibatin AAabidatin sa-ihatin thayyibatin waabkaran

arabic :

عَسَى رَبّهُ إِنْ طَلَّقَكُنَّ أَنْ يُبْدِلَهُ أَزْوَجًا خَيْرًا مِنْكُنَّ مُسْلِمَتٍ مُؤْمِنَتٍ قَنِتَتٍ تَئِبَتٍ عَبِدَتٍ سَئِحَاتٍ ثَيِّبَتٍ وَأَبْكَارًا

and knowing what you like to do with translations, this is what the neutral online translation says using the rules of arabic : "His Lord might... "

Have a look at the above sura and tell me why allah would refer to himself as "his lord?" Was allah only the lord of Mohammed or was he the lord of all the muslims? Why would allah refer to himself in the third person? And why utilise the uncertainty of "May be?" It is an insult to believe that God would utter such a thing. Why would God use the phrase "May be?" To a rational individual this is Mohammed talking and has nothing to do with God. First of all God does not issue threats to massage a man's ego to put women in their place. Isn't it obvious by now allah/mohammed/jibreel are one and the same, using threats to get what he wants, in this case (sura 66) excusing his extra marital affairs.

This places the reader of the Quran as the third person witnessing the claims of transmission to Muhammad ie. Listening to a conversation being convey from A to B in which the reader is C, as the Quran was revealed dealing with the conditions and situations of the people at that time.

In shorter words. You have to approach the Quran first as to how it was revealed

What do you mean here, how it was revealed was a series of epileptic fits never witnessed in any prophet in the 3,000 + yrs span of judaism and christianity, however demon possession, and occultic phenomena regularly witness such behaviour as ringing bells, heart palpitations, sweating on cold days e.t.c.

. This does not consent to believe in it first, but to approach with a sound mind and heart.

I find it improbable anyone who is aware of how the koran was revealed, the historical context that led to it's creation can seriously believe anyone with an objective view can see that this is from God.

Somehow I get the impression by you admitting oral reports are unreliable then problem goes away, couple things wrong here. Necessary to admit of which is already established and the problem remains. Stating you quote only the agreeable traditions is irrelevant to question concerning relationship of the assumed uncreated and the created. More accurate illustration of that relationship is, Quran and Sunna.

You sound like my professor making no sense to an objectional approach. Sorry Joseph you lost me here bold.

I guess if the boot was on the other foot, you would be saying "you have terrible reading comprehension" at this stage. Quran is interpreted with hadith, ignore hadith quran cannot stand, instead you have 114 verses with no chronology or historical context whatsoever, a jumbled up mess, which is precisely what you believe in when you chose to ignore hadiths. The hadiths show islam to be nothing more than Mohammed's vivid imagination at best and demonic inspired at worst.

However, unless you're confirming Liberate's contention of personal brand of Islam, you can no more reject, as false, one contradicting or ludicrous tradition than single Quranic word. How then convenient and expedient for collapsing argument, Islam is suddenly 'Quran only' and to lay blame on Liberate and Newseed. Since you know which reports contradicts the Quran, provide the reference containing the false traditions. Show us your proof if you are truthful, so we may determine whether or not the higher Quran and Sunna depends on the questionable. Or is the challenge just divine prerogative of Muslims.

It seems Joseph you have not incountered what we brand as a TRADITIONAL muslim as opposed to those muslims who are ORTHADOX. You maybe getting these two mixed up with each other. But anyhow I would like to post the following post about how Hadeeth are accepted in the ORTHADOX manner.

Yet, on the other hand, you argue against the same idea in Islam, where there are supposed to be around 70 sects, and tons of hadiths, of which you reject so many, or perhaps even all...

We only accept hadiths that do not contradict Quran or contradict them selves unless the thing is overruled by the majority of hadiths but yet must not contradict Quran. This is how a hadith is accepted after tracing its chain of narration to be sahih.

Once it is Sahih then it is to be tested by the Quran and other sahih hadith for conflicts.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 546:
What is the first portent of the Hour? What will be the first meal taken by the people of Paradise? Why does a child resemble its father, and why does it resemble its maternal uncle"

This is Mohammed's response:

"The first portent of the Hour will be a fire that will bring together the people from the east to the west; the first meal of the people of Paradise will be Extra-lobe (caudate lobe) of fish-liver. As for the resemblance of the child to its parents: If a man has sexual intercourse with his wife and gets discharge first, the child will resemble the father, and if the woman gets discharge first, the child will resemble her."

By telling us that there is documentation that the jews tested Mohammed he is indirectly saying he believes this hadith, he is then indirectly saying he believes fish-liver will be eaten in paradise, and the reason why a child resembles the father is because of emission from him first or the mother because of emission from her first, this is nothing more than would be expected from a superstitious mind albeit with a vivid imagination, not from God. But will he now claim this hadith is a fabrication?

Would you care to show us where this hadith contradicts the koran, itself or other hadiths?

Are you sure you are objectively looking for conflicts with the koran and other hadiths or conflicts with your conscience.

Hadiths are not revelation and they are not the divine word of Allah but are commentary to the Quran (Sahih) that gives us insite on why a verse was revealed and show us how the Prophet practiced the aayaats of the Quran.

As you noticed I never use hadith to debate unless a hadith is presented to us by you all first.

Ofcourse you forget islamic 'states' use these hadiths for implementation of shariah law and to affect every aspect of a muslim's life, they do not treat it simply as insight into why a verse was revealed. It is obvious by now you are not a sunni muslim, or a shia, does your group have an official doctrine? or are you a nominal muslim making it up as you go along?

[H2O]

What was the topic of this thread again ?????

O yea thats right its Liberate who always goes off the topic to something else. Why dont you ask the admin to move this to a seperate thread where I will answer it, Other wise I am staying to the topic. We wouldnt want this to happen the second time like it did on "the moon god ~ al-ilah"

[H2O]

May be his Lord, if he divorces you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, penitent, adorers, fasters, widows and virgin." sura 66:5

transliteration: AAasa rabbuhu in tallaqakunna an yubdilahu azwajan khayran minkunna muslimatin mu/minatin qanitatin ta-ibatin AAabidatin sa-ihatin thayyibatin waabkaran

arabic :

عَسَى رَبّهُ إِنْ طَلَّقَكُنَّ أَنْ يُبْدِلَهُ أَزْوَجًا خَيْرًا مِنْكُنَّ مُسْلِمَتٍ مُؤْمِنَتٍ قَنِتَتٍ تَئِبَتٍ عَبِدَتٍ سَئِحَاتٍ ثَيِّبَتٍ وَأَبْكَارًا

and knowing what you like to do with translations, this is what the neutral online translation says using the rules of arabic : "His Lord might... "

Neutral ? Who determined such a thing ? I think you are giving your online bot translator by CIMOS the authority of something that it doesnt have or even claimed. Did you ever read the instruction manual about its realiability ?

It is an automated translation software conceived to help translators but not to replace them. It is capable of providing quickly the rough draft of an understandable and acceptable translation. MLTS produces a high quality draft translation at rate of about 100,000 words per hour. The translator can then proceed to the proof-reading phase and adapt the translated text to the target environment. MLTS uses a semantic analyser and an universal grammer. Translation Memory capabilities are also included in MLTS http://www.cimos.com/index.asp?src=traduction

Your use of this online tool is of no validation being that your not an Arabic Translator cause you dont know Arabic nor speak it nor understand its grammar etc.

Also, it is not a neutral translation due to the fact it is only a rough draft not some thing official or absolute which is still in need and subject to Human translator aid for modification and fixation to its proper adaptability.

Have a look at the above sura and tell me why allah would refer to himself as "his lord?" Was allah only the lord of Mohammed or was he the lord of all the muslims? Why would allah refer to himself in the third person?

"his Lord" This is a personal rather than an impersonal relationship in the matter being spoken of. Through out the Quran Allah speaks of himself in the third person which is nothing rare, thus "his Lord, their Lord, her Lord" is habitually used and not just applied to Muhammad but to various people in the Quran.

Since you believe Jesus is G-D and when he was speaking about "the Father" in the third person was he not according to Christianity refering to himself in the third person who is also the Father ie G-D ?

This shouldnt be anything new to you when Jesus speaks of himself in the third person at many times, So why get all bizzaro when you see that the speaker who is Allah speaking of himself in the third person ?

So therefor the lanuguage usage should not even be a discussion which is mereless your own wanton scrutiny:

Say: "O ye People of the Book! why obstruct ye those who believe, from the path of Allah, seeking to make it crooked, while ye were yourselves witnesses (to Allah's Covenant)? But Allah is not unmindful of all that ye do." 3:99

Now lets continue wiht what else you said:

And why utilise the uncertainty of "May be?" It is an insult to believe that God would utter such a thing. Why would God use the phrase "May be?"

We go back to the Arabic and this is what is found:

'asaa (perhaps/maybe) rabbu (Lord) hu (his) in (if) Tallaqa (he devorced) kunna (you all) an (that) yubdila (He will replace) hu (him) azwaajan (spouses) khairan (better) min (than) kunna (you all).....


"Perhaps his Lord, if he devorced you all, that He will replace for him spouses better than you....."

or

"Perhaps that his Lord will replace for him spouses better than you all if he devorced you...."

'asaa" ~ Perhaps or It maybe is followed by "an" ~ that as a conjuction introducing an achievable action ie. indicating an expected event.

The Arabic word "'asaa" denotes hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked as an opinion or doubt or certainty (Ref. Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon)

In english it denotes doubt, in Arabic it can be any of the three denotations in bold above.

In the context it denotes "certainty" and not "doubt" cause it is aided by "an" ~ that indicating the achievable event which in Arabic is "mansoob".

The Arabic of the Quran indicates if Muhammad desired to devorce his wives, in which he had the choice to do, due to the current circumstances for which his wives were being admonished for, Allah would have replaced them with better wives for him.

Quote:(H2O wrote)
In shorter words. You have to approach the Quran first as to how it was revealed

Liberate wrote:
What do you mean here, how it was revealed was a series of epileptic fits never witnessed in any prophet in the 3,000 + yrs span of judaism and christianity, however demon possession, and occultic phenomena regularly witness such behaviour as ringing bells, heart palpitations, sweating on cold days e.t.c.

Your response to that statement is exactly how most Christians view the Quran, in a prejudice and unbiased view as what you have just expressed being remote from a scientific approach.

I already consulted with you on this epileptic rampage issue of yours from before which you didnt address, but I see you added something new of being demon possessed above:

Quote:
To remind you Tabari's collection of Hadith are not ruled as Sahih. Also in the religon of ISLAM Hadiths are not inspired nor are they the WORDS OF ALLAH, they do not supersede the Quran in Islam.


But they explain a great deal about islam, they explain the verses and the give body to the whole religion without those hadiths you have 114 epileptic utterances you call suras with no chronological basis.


"114 epilptic utterances" ? Hmm lets see. The reports said whenever Muhammad received the revelation of the Quran it was always in public, he would fall down shaking in cold feverish sweat even in cold weather where they had to cover him up in blankets.

Also his weight would increase more than three times its regular that even caused a camel that he was riding to fall to the floor when he was recieving revelation. Thus in the eyes of the pagans led them to think and believe that Muhammad was possesed in which they accused him of.

In the field of medicine and the study of neurology Epilepsy are iregulare discharge impulses of the brain that burst at one time over loading the centural nervuse system causing the Body to go into a state of shock giving temporary uncontiousness.

The type of epilepsy to be identified with the nature of Muhammad's condition would be a Granmal Seizure. However, there is no report of foaming of the mouth nor him loosing his tongue which are two things that occure in a Granmal Seizure. If they were able to subdue his biting of the tongue then there should have been foaming of the mouth.

Also, when having a Granmal Seizure the temperture of the body does not increase to the point of where one would start to sweat but to the contrary the body temperture starts to decrease due to abnormal shock, and then again for him to sweat in cold climate makes it very doubtful.

Another thing when you have Granmal Siezure there is a loss in memory after recovery, not gain. So let us look at some examples of this "epileptic untterance".

Quote:
[91:1] washshamsi wa dhuHaahaa ~ By the Sun and its appearance

[91:2] walqamari idzaa talaahaa ~ By the Moon when it succeeds it

[91:3] wannahaari idzaa jallaahaa ~ By the Day when reveals it

[91:4] wallayli idzaa yaghshaahaa ~ By the Night when it conceals it

[91:5] wassamaa'i wa maa banaahaa ~ By the Sky and what erected it

[91:6] walardhi wa maa TaHaahaa ~ By the Earth and what hurls it

[91:7] wa nafsiwwa maa sawwaahaa ~ By the soul and what proportioned it

[91:8] fa'alhamahaa fujoorahaa wa taqwaahaa ~ and then infused into it it's iniquity and its piety


Notice how the arabic of each verse all rhyme with each other ? the gender in arabic is exact no mistakes at all. Through out the whole Quran this style of rhyme occures at the ending of every verse.

Quote:
[23:13] And indeed We have Created Man (male and female) from an extaction of clay

[23:14] Then We placed him as a sperm into a thing that sojournes and implants

[ 24:15] Then We made the sperm as a thing that clings and then We made the thing that clings as something that is chewed, and then We made the chewing as bones and then We clothed the bones with muscle then He (Allah) brings it out as another creation; and sublime is Allah the best of makers


The same rhyming pross is in the arabic of the above verse but this time it speaks about how we are created. The above is a stage by stage discription of embryo development.

I find it amazing that a man who was suppose to have an epileptic attack started to uttere these words right after. Go an show any Neurologist this and tell him the man who uttered these words did it right after having a granmal seizure, he would laugh at you silly.


"no chronological bases" You are right. If you ever took the time to read the Quran from A-Z, not a part here and there, and understood the character of its non chronological order. Do you know why every chapter in the Quran is called SURAH. Surah means "Step". Thus the Quran has a 114 STEPS. Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 etc...These steps are laid down in lessons. When you go to the next step or chapter it goes more into debt in matters and subjects previously mentioned or new ones. Also the order it is in starts out with longer to shorter verses and words. The vocabulary is harder in the begining that decreases to the end. This is easier for memorization purposes. Thus the composition of the Quran was DELIBERATELY set like this with a PURPOSE void to your understand.

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... c&start=20

Now if you say he was possessed then he had no control and nothing would be of his own doing. So he would get all his information from the demon rather than having to go to someone else to get information from the bible. So this would mean the accusations of him copying from the bible goes out the door if he was possessed by a demon.

The composistion of those verses are seen as deliberate and with purpose to their phenomina. It would take complete concentration and awareness of a human being and to be profoundly educated and versed in the Arabic language to develope something as to which Muhammad uttered that you imply as being the result of epileptic fits and all the circumstances surrounding such phenomina.

I find it improbable anyone who is aware of how the koran was revealed, the historical context that led to it's creation can seriously believe anyone with an objective view can see that this is from God.

Thus we have examined your claims and found them it to be illogical due to the phenominal nature of the Quran.

Quran is interpreted with hadith, ignore hadith quran cannot stand, instead you have 114 verses with no chronology or historical context whatsoever, a jumbled up mess, which is precisely what you believe in when you chose to ignore hadiths. The hadiths show islam to be nothing more than Mohammed's vivid imagination at best and demonic inspired at worst.

Hmm lets see from since I came to this forum I have only been using the Quran in defense and have not once brought forth a hadith other than means to counter act a hadith that is being used against us. An I ignore hadiths that contradict Quran or that contradict other hadiths.

Quote:
Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 546:
What is the first portent of the Hour? What will be the first meal taken by the people of Paradise? Why does a child resemble its father, and why does it resemble its maternal uncle"

This is Mohammed's response:

"The first portent of the Hour will be a fire that will bring together the people from the east to the west; the first meal of the people of Paradise will be Extra-lobe (caudate lobe) of fish-liver. As for the resemblance of the child to its parents: If a man has sexual intercourse with his wife and gets discharge first, the child will resemble the father, and if the woman gets discharge first, the child will resemble her."

By telling us that there is documentation that the jews tested Mohammed he is indirectly saying he believes this hadith, he is then indirectly saying he believes fish-liver will be eaten in paradise, and the reason why a child resembles the father is because of emission from him first or the mother because of emission from her first, this is nothing more than would be expected from a superstitious mind albeit with a vivid imagination, not from God. But will he now claim this hadith is a fabrication?



Would you care to show us where this hadith contradicts the koran, itself or other hadiths?

Are you sure you are objectively looking for conflicts with the koran and other hadiths or conflicts with your conscience.

Hmm interesting. I read "Extra-lobe (caudate lobe) of fish-liver" you read "only fish-liver". All this food talk is making me hungry I think I will go to the Sushi resturant and order some fish-liver, you should try it it taste really good and is healthy for you yummyyy !

and give glad tidings to those who believe and do righteous good deeds that for them is Paradise (Jannah) flowing from beneath it are rivers; everytime they are provided from it of provisional gain they(will)say: " This is what we were provided from before " and with it they are given the resemblance...(2:25)

"And We shall bestow On them, of fruit and meat, Anything they shall desire. ( 52:22)"

The Meat (lahm) of paradise will resemble that of the meat of this world but they will not be the same thing.

We can even go further into to this cause the Quran says we will be given "MEATL/FLESH in Arabic "LAHM", which does not apply to internal organs such a Fish-Liver or the caudate lobe of Fish-Liver.

If the report is accurate about the "caudate lobe of Fish-Liver" then according to Quran it will be something resembling it.

Of course you forget islamic 'states' use these hadiths for implementation of shariah law and to affect every aspect of a muslim's life, they do not treat it simply as insight into why a verse was revealed. It is obvious by now you are not a sunni muslim, or a shia, does your group have an official doctrine? or are you a nominal muslim making it up as you go along?

Islamic State ? Where in the world is one of those ? We know of Muslim Countries, but an islamic state does not exist anymore. And what does fish-liver have to do with Shariah Law

Correct I am not a sunni muslim. The Quran nor the Hadith teach us to call our selves a Sunni, Shia, Salafi etc. muslim. Since your the hadith expert here...lol....please show us where it says to call our selves by such unauthorized titles which have not been taught by our Prophet nor mentioned in the Quran ? So where did it come these titles coem from ? Our prophet wasnt a Sunni etc. He was a Haneef Muslims as the Quran declared our Prophet to be and those who follow him.

[Liberate]

May be his Lord, if he divorces you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, penitent, adorers, fasters, widows and virgin." sura 66:5

transliteration: AAasa rabbuhu in tallaqakunna an yubdilahu azwajan khayran minkunna muslimatin mu/minatin qanitatin ta-ibatin AAabidatin sa-ihatin thayyibatin waabkaran

arabic :

عَسَى رَبّهُ إِنْ طَلَّقَكُنَّ أَنْ يُبْدِلَهُ أَزْوَجًا خَيْرًا مِنْكُنَّ مُسْلِمَتٍ مُؤْمِنَتٍ قَنِتَتٍ تَئِبَتٍ عَبِدَتٍ سَئِحَاتٍ ثَيِّبَتٍ وَأَبْكَارًا

and knowing what you like to do with translations, this is what the neutral online translation says using the rules of arabic : "His Lord might... "

Neutral ? Who determined such a thing ? I think you are giving your online bot translator by CIMOS the authority of something that it doesnt have or even claimed. Did you ever read the instruction manual about its realiability ?

Why is it that the online translator agrees with the majority of accepted quranic translations, and the rules of arabic, what is your qualification as an arabic scholar?, to dismiss what seasoned scholars, and an independent neutral arabic translation utilising the rules of arabic have to say?

It is an automated translation software conceived to help translators but not to replace them. It is capable of providing quickly the rough draft of an understandable and acceptable translation. MLTS produces a high quality draft translation at rate of about 100,000 words per hour. The translator can then proceed to the proof-reading phase and adapt the translated text to the target environment. MLTS uses a semantic analyser and an universal grammer. Translation Memory capabilities are also included in MLTS http://www.cimos.com/index.asp?src=traduction

Your use of this online tool is of no validation being that your not an Arabic Translator cause you dont know Arabic nor speak it nor understand its grammar etc.

Ofcourse nobody understands arabic better than you, tell us again what are your scholarly qualifications in arabic? since you are the greatest arabic translator and interpreter this side of the atlantic. You have dismissed all the accepted english translations of the koran. You even dismissed the widely accepted Yusuf Ali translation, listening to you, someone would leave with the impression that Yusuf Ali didn't understand english properly rather than a Cambridge graduate.

Have a look at the above sura and tell me why allah would refer to himself as "his lord?" Was allah only the lord of Mohammed or was he the lord of all the muslims? Why would allah refer to himself in the third person?

"his Lord" This is a personal rather than an impersonal relationship in the matter being spoken of. Through out the Quran Allah speaks of himself in the third person which is nothing rare, thus "his Lord, their Lord, her Lord" is habitually used and not just applied to Muhammad but to various people in the Quran.

Apply some simple logic to what you are saying, you have a revelation alledgedly from A to B quoted by B apparently directly from A with none of the interjections of B as if A was talking as the first person, yet B choses to talk about the direct words of A in the third person. Can you not see that B is putting words into the mouth of A and claiming that A said it.

Since you believe Jesus is G-D and when he was speaking about "the Father" in the third person was he not according to Christianity refering to himself in the third person who is also the Father ie G-D ?

Are you now agreeing that Jesus is God?

Your argument has no basis if you are trying to find common ground explaining that absurdity in that ayah, by showing me something you do not believe and saying "here this is what I think Mohammed is doing", or are you saying Mohammed is allah?

This shouldnt be anything new to you when Jesus speaks of himself in the third person at many times, So why get all bizzaro when you see that the speaker who is Allah speaking of himself in the third person ?

Would you care to cite the passages where Jesus is talking about Himself in the third person.?

And why utilise the uncertainty of "May be?" It is an insult to believe that God would utter such a thing. Why would God use the phrase "May be?"

We go back to the Arabic and this is what is found:

'asaa (perhaps/maybe) rabbu (Lord) hu (his) in (if) Tallaqa (he devorced) kunna (you all) an (that) yubdila (He will replace) hu (him) azwaajan (spouses) khairan (better) min (than) kunna (you all).....

"Perhaps his Lord, if he devorced you all, that He will replace for him spouses better than you....."

or

"Perhaps that his Lord will replace for him spouses better than you all if he devorced you...."

'asaa" ~ Perhaps or It maybe is followed by "an" ~ that as a conjuction introducing an achievable action ie. indicating an expected event.

The Arabic word "'asaa" denotes hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked as an opinion or doubt or certainty (Ref. Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon)

In english it denotes doubt, in Arabic it can be any of the three denotations in bold above.

In the context it denotes "certainty" and not "doubt" cause it is aided by "an" ~ that indicating the achievable event which in Arabic is "mansoob".

The Arabic of the Quran indicates if Muhammad desired to devorce his wives, in which he had the choice to do, due to the current circumstances for which his wives were being admonished for, Allah would have replaced them with better wives for him.

Are you honestly trying to tell us maybe doesn't mean maybe in arabic?

Quote:(H2O wrote)
In shorter words. You have to approach the Quran first as to how it was revealed

Liberate wrote:
What do you mean here, how it was revealed was a series of epileptic fits never witnessed in any prophet in the 3,000 + yrs span of judaism and christianity, however demon possession, and occultic phenomena regularly witness such behaviour as ringing bells, heart palpitations, sweating on cold days e.t.c.

Your response to that statement is exactly how most Christians view the Quran, in a prejudice and unbiased view as what you have just expressed being remote from a scientific approach.

Now if you say he was possessed then he had no control and nothing would be of his own doing. So he would get all his information from the demon rather than having to go to someone else to get information from the bible. So this would mean the accusations of him copying from the bible goes out the door if he was possessed by a demon.

The composistion of those verses are seen as deliberate and with purpose to their phenomina. It would take complete concentration and awareness of a human being and to be profoundly educated and versed in the Arabic language to develope something as to which Muhammad uttered that you imply as being the result of epileptic fits and all the circumstances surrounding such phenomina.

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?


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.

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.?

Quran is interpreted with hadith, ignore hadith quran cannot stand, instead you have 114 verses with no chronology or historical context whatsoever, a jumbled up mess, which is precisely what you believe in when you chose to ignore hadiths. The hadiths show islam to be nothing more than Mohammed's vivid imagination at best and demonic inspired at worst.

Hmm lets see from since I came to this forum I have only been using the Quran in defense and have not once brought forth a hadith other than means to counter act a hadith that is being used against us. An I ignore hadiths that contradict Quran or that contradict other hadiths.

Would you care to cite for us which hadiths you believe?

Quote:
Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 546:
What is the first portent of the Hour? What will be the first meal taken by the people of Paradise? Why does a child resemble its father, and why does it resemble its maternal uncle"

This is Mohammed's response:

"The first portent of the Hour will be a fire that will bring together the people from the east to the west; the first meal of the people of Paradise will be Extra-lobe (caudate lobe) of fish-liver. As for the resemblance of the child to its parents: If a man has sexual intercourse with his wife and gets discharge first, the child will resemble the father, and if the woman gets discharge first, the child will resemble her."

By telling us that there is documentation that the jews tested Mohammed he is indirectly saying he believes this hadith, he is then indirectly saying he believes fish-liver will be eaten in paradise, and the reason why a child resembles the father is because of emission from him first or the mother because of emission from her first, this is nothing more than would be expected from a superstitious mind albeit with a vivid imagination, not from God. But will he now claim this hadith is a fabrication?



Would you care to show us where this hadith contradicts the koran, itself or other hadiths?

Are you sure you are objectively looking for conflicts with the koran and other hadiths or conflicts with your conscience.

Hmm interesting. I read "Extra-lobe (caudate lobe) of fish-liver" you read "only fish-liver". All this food talk is making me hungry I think I will go to the Sushi resturant and order some fish-liver, you should try it it taste really good and is healthy for you yummyyy !

I find it very strange your response is to laugh at the hadith?? regardless of the implications of that hadith!!! In the process of defending your religion you chose to laugh at it, reveals a great deal about your character and your motives for being on this forum, why didn't you address the child looking like it's mother or father superstitious nonsense in that hadith or was that a laughing matter to?

Correct I am not a sunni muslim. The Quran nor the Hadith teach us to call our selves a Sunni, Shia, Salafi etc. muslim. Since your the hadith expert here...lol....please show us where it says to call our selves by such unauthorized titles which have not been taught by our Prophet nor mentioned in the Quran ? So where did it come these titles coem from ? Our prophet wasnt a Sunni etc. He was a Haneef Muslims as the Quran declared our Prophet to be and those who follow him.

Apart from you and humble guest how many haneef muslims are there in florida?

[H2O]

Why is it that the online translator agrees with the majority of accepted quranic translations, and the rules of arabic, what is your qualification as an arabic scholar?, to dismiss what seasoned scholars, and an independent neutral arabic translation utilising the rules of arabic have to say?

Lets take a look at them :

066.005
YUSUFALI: It may be, if he divorced you (all), that Allah will give him in exchange consorts better than you,- who submit (their wills), who believe, who are devout, who turn to Allah in repentance, who worship (in humility), who travel (for Faith) and fast,- previously married or virgins.

PICKTHAL: It may happen that his Lord, if he divorce you, will give him in your stead wives better than you, submissive (to Allah), believing, pious, penitent, devout, inclined to fasting, widows and maids.

SHAKIR: Maybe, his Lord, if he divorce you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, penitent, adorers, fasters, widows and virgins.

Were you guessing again like you usually do ? Now lets see what we translated compared to the above:

Perhaps his Lord, if he devorced you all, that He will replace for him spouses better than you....."

or

"Perhaps that his Lord will replace for him spouses better than you all if he devorced you...."

Compared to your bot translator :

May be his Lord, if he divorces you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, penitent, adorers, fasters, widows and virgin." sura 66:5

With the Arabic transliteration accompanied with english meaning in () :

'asaa (perhaps/maybe) rabbu (Lord) hu (his) in (if) Tallaqa (he devorced) kunna (you all) an (that) yubdila (He will replace) hu (him) azwaajan (spouses) khairan (better) min (than) kunna (you all).....

Ali, Pickthal, and Our translation comform with each other in which "an" ~ that a conjuction followed by an imperfectence verb denoting an achievable action to occure that is mansoob of "'asaa" ~ perhaps/maybe denoting certainty rather than doubt "IF" another action was fulfilled in the context.

Your bot translation and Shakir have failed to translate "an" which clearifies "'asaa" ~ perhaps/maybe to denote the certainty of an act that would be done.

Are you honestly trying to tell us maybe doesn't mean maybe in arabic?

Your answer was given:

The Arabic word "'asaa" denotes hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked as an opinion or doubt or certainty (Ref. Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon)

In english it denotes doubt, in Arabic it can be any of the three denotations in bold above.

If you want confirmation you can ask you brother Apple Pie to turn to page 373 of that dictionary that he so galantly uses.

You have dismissed all the accepted english translations of the koran. You even dismissed the widely accepted Yusuf Ali translation, listening to you, someone would leave with the impression that Yusuf Ali didn't understand english properly rather than a Cambridge graduate.

Accepted by who ? Translations of the Quran have not authority upon Arabic speakers not to mention do to the fact when you translate the Quran you lose meaning:

" The Koran is one of the worlds classics which cannot be translated without grave loss." (Ref. A. Guillama, Islam, P. 73)

Adding to this the english language it self falls short and is limited in conveying the proper significant meaning of the Arabic in which Tafsir is need for those who do not speak Arabic for them to obtain a fuller understanding.

As to the three translations that you rely your criticism on:

Translations of the Qur'an

On this Web site, there are three translations[Ali, Pickthal, Shakir] of the Qur'an. Note that any translation of the Qur'an immediately ceases to be the literal word of Allah, and hence cannot be equated with the Qur'an in its original Arabic form. In fact, each of the translations on this site is actually an interpretation which has been translated. The first-time reader is strongly advised to read the introduction to the translations we have made available. Corrections and suggestions are appreciated.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/

Introduction to the translations

Warning!

Please keep in mind that ANY translation of the Qur'an will most definitely contain errors (e.g. see our online list of corrections). We have provided three translations here to emphasize this point. In its natural language (Arabic), the Qur'an is the direct Word of Allah (God) to mankind through the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Any translation of the Qur'an no longer retains that 'official' and perfect status, however it can be tremendously helpful to beginning students wanting to learn more about Islam.

We would strongly encourage those want to learn about Islam to purchase a hardcopy of the Qur'an but with the following conditions:

get one with commentary (tafseer)
make sure the tafseer is scholarly (e.g. references to reasons behind a verse, references to hadith and sunnah, etc.)

Unfortunately, the three translations presented here do NOT meet these simple conditions. To the best of our knowledge, an excellent English translation and commentary of the Qur'an is Maududi's recently published work "The Meaning of the Qur'an". This work took more than forty years to complete, and was published beginning in the mid to late 1980's. We have included Maududi's introduction to each chapter of the Qur'an, but the complete commentary is not online (yet!). Maududi's work is superior to the three works presented here, HOWEVER please note that we are not in any way decrying the tremendous efforts of Ali, Pickthal, or Shakir. May Allah reward them all. http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/qmtintro.html

Their works have been subject to editing and corrections in which they are all followed by edition 1,2,3 etc

Does an Arabic Speaker need to be an Arabic Scholar to correct a translation ? No. Ref.

The first-time reader is strongly advised to read the introduction to the translations we have made available. Corrections and suggestions are appreciated.

Corrections of all three translations done by Arabic Speakers who are not Arabic scholars http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/corrections.html

Why is it that the online translator agrees with the majority of accepted quranic translations, and the rules of arabic, what is your qualification as an arabic scholar?, to dismiss what seasoned scholars, and an independent neutral arabic translation utilising the rules of arabic have to say?

Your bot tanslator could not translate "an" ~ that a conjuction introducing an achievable act of certainty which is mansoob of "'asaa" ~ perhaps.maybe that denoted opinion, doubt, or certainty; nor could it properly translate "kunna" ~ you all (fem. pl. three or more) in which the human translators failed to do.

what is your qualification as an arabic scholar?

tell us again what are your scholarly qualifications in arabic?

Sure. I completed Fus-haa Arabiyyah studies at the Islamic Center of Boca Raton in Quranic Grammar, Linguistics, and Orthography. Our Shaikh and Teacher was Qari Ahmad Tameem from Masjid Al-Azhar who is a graduate mu'alim of the Al-Azhar University the leading University of Classical and Modern Arabic studies.


Re: Let me give you something you can relate to(Liberate wrote):

Which of course has nothing to do with the phenominon relation of the Quran to your insignificant and un-scientifically supported accuasation of assocaiting it with epilepcy.

I find it very strange your response is to laugh at the hadith?? regardless of the implications of that hadith!!! In the process of defending your religion you chose to laugh at it, reveals a great deal about your character and your motives for being on this forum, why didn't you address the child looking like it's mother or father superstitious nonsense in that hadith or was that a laughing matter to?

Hmm lets see

...As for the resemblance of the child to its parents: If a man has sexual intercourse with his wife and gets discharge first, the child will resemble the father, and if the woman gets discharge first, the child will resemble her...."

Well for a fact the male sperm determines the gender of the child. As for whom the child will resemble most it is based on the strongest genes bewteen the male and female.

‏حَدَّثَنَا ‏ ‏عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُنِيرٍ ‏ ‏سَمِعَ ‏ ‏عَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ بَكْرٍ ‏ ‏حَدَّثَنَا ‏ ‏حُمَيْدٌ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏أَنَسٍ ‏ ‏قَالَ ‏
‏سَمِعَ ‏ ‏عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ سَلَامٍ ‏ ‏بِقُدُومِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏وَهْوَ فِي أَرْضٍ يَخْتَرِفُ فَأَتَى النَّبِيَّ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏فَقَالَ إِنِّي سَائِلُكَ عَنْ ثَلَاثٍ لَا يَعْلَمُهُنَّ إِلَّا نَبِيٌّ فَمَا أَوَّلُ ‏ ‏أَشْرَاطِ السَّاعَةِ ‏ ‏وَمَا أَوَّلُ طَعَامِ أَهْلِ الْجَنَّةِ وَمَا يَنْزِعُ الْوَلَدُ إِلَى أَبِيهِ أَوْ إِلَى أُمِّهِ قَالَ ‏ ‏أَخْبَرَنِي بِهِنَّ ‏ ‏جِبْرِيلُ ‏ ‏آنِفًا قَالَ ‏ ‏جِبْرِيلُ ‏ ‏قَالَ نَعَمْ قَالَ ذَاكَ عَدُوُّ ‏ ‏الْيَهُودِ ‏ ‏مِنْ الْمَلَائِكَةِ فَقَرَأَ هَذِهِ الْآيَةَ ‏
‏مَنْ كَانَ عَدُوًّا ‏ ‏لِجِبْرِيلَ ‏ ‏فَإِنَّهُ نَزَّلَهُ عَلَى قَلْبِكَ بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ ‏
‏أَمَّا أَوَّلُ ‏ ‏أَشْرَاطِ السَّاعَةِ ‏ ‏فَنَارٌ تَحْشُرُ النَّاسَ مِنْ الْمَشْرِقِ إِلَى الْمَغْرِبِ وَأَمَّا أَوَّلُ طَعَامٍ يَأْكُلُهُ أَهْلُ الْجَنَّةِ فَزِيَادَةُ كَبِدِ حُوتٍ وَإِذَا سَبَقَ مَاءُ الرَّجُلِ مَاءَ الْمَرْأَةِ نَزَعَ الْوَلَدَ وَإِذَا سَبَقَ مَاءُ الْمَرْأَةِ نَزَعَتْ قَالَ أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّكَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنَّ ‏ ‏الْيَهُودَ ‏ ‏قَوْمٌ بُهُتٌ وَإِنَّهُمْ إِنْ يَعْلَمُوا بِإِسْلَامِي قَبْلَ أَنْ تَسْأَلَهُمْ يَبْهَتُونِي فَجَاءَتْ ‏ ‏الْيَهُودُ ‏ ‏فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏أَيُّ رَجُلٍ ‏ ‏عَبْدُ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏فِيكُمْ قَالُوا خَيْرُنَا وَابْنُ خَيْرِنَا وَسَيِّدُنَا وَابْنُ سَيِّدِنَا قَالَ أَرَأَيْتُمْ إِنْ أَسْلَمَ ‏ ‏عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ سَلَامٍ ‏ ‏فَقَالُوا أَعَاذَهُ اللَّهُ مِنْ ذَلِكَ فَخَرَجَ ‏ ‏عَبْدُ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏فَقَالَ أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ ‏ ‏مُحَمَّدًا ‏ ‏رَسُولُ اللَّهِ فَقَالُوا شَرُّنَا وَابْنُ شَرِّنَا وَانْتَقَصُوهُ قَالَ فَهَذَا الَّذِي كُنْتُ أَخَافُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ‏

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Disp ... 0&Rec=6449

The following is the English Translation by Dr. M. Muhsin Khan

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volumn 006, Book 060, Hadith Number 007.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Anas : 'Abdullah bin Salam heard the news of the arrival of Allah's Apostle (at Medina) while he was on a farm collecting its fruits. So he came to the Prophet and said, "I will ask you about three things which nobody knows unless he be a prophet. Firstly, what is the first portent of the Hour? What is the first meal of the people of Paradise? And what makes a baby look like its father or mother?'. The Prophet said, "Just now Gabriel has informed me about that." 'Abdullah said, "Gabriel?" The Prophet said, "Yes." 'Abdullah said, "He, among the angels is the enemy of the Jews." On that the Prophet recited this Holy Verse:

"Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel (let him die in his fury!) for he has brought it (i.e. Qur'an) down to your heart by Allah's permission." (2.97) Then he added, "As for the first portent of the Hour, it will be a fire that will collect the people from the East to West. And as for the first meal of the people of Paradise, it will be the caudite (i.e. extra) lobe of the fish liver. And if a man's discharge proceeded that of the woman, then the child resembles the father, and if the woman's discharge proceeded that of the man, then the child resembles the mother." On hearing that, 'Abdullah said, "I testify that None has the right to be worshipped but Allah, and that you are the Apostle of Allah, O, Allah's Apostle; the Jews are liars, and if they should come to know that I have embraced Islam, they would accuse me of being a liar." In the meantime some Jews came (to the Prophet) and he asked them, "What is 'Abdullah's status amongst you?" They replied, "He is the best amongst us, and he is our chief and the son of our chief." The Prophet said, "What would you think if 'Abdullah bin Salam embraced Islam?" They replied, "May Allah protect him from this!" Then 'Abdullah came out and said, "I testify that None has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah." The Jews then said, "Abdullah is the worst of us and the son of the worst of us," and disparaged him. On that 'Abdullah said, "O Allah's Apostle! This is what I was afraid of!"

Dr Khan's translation is much more closer to the original than the translation you are using, despite he still renders certain words based on his interpretation rather than translating the actual meaning of the Arabic words.

...And if a man's discharge proceeded that of the woman, then the child resembles the father, and if the woman's discharge proceeded that of the man, then the child resembles the mother...."

"discharge" was translated from the Arabic word "maa'a" that means " water, liquid, fluid" (Ref. Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon)

"proceeded" was translated from the Arabic word "sabaqa" that means "overtake, overcomes, outstrips, advance".

The "maa'a" that come from both male and female to create another human being is mention in the Quran:

86:5 fa ( so then) yandhuri (consider) al (the) insaan (man ie male and female) mimma (from what) khuliqa (created)

86:6 khuliqa (created) min (from) maa'a (liquid) daafiqin (ejected)

86:7 yakhruju (coming out) min (from) bayni (between) al (the) sulbi (backbone) wa (and) al (the) taraaa'ib (ribs)

" So then let man (male and female) consider from what they are created from. They are created from ejected liquid coming out from between the backbone and the ribs "

"Man" is translated from the arabic word "al-insaa" which is dual literally meaning "the two human beings" expressing the two gender of male and female.

The mistake here is when people read this they thinkin of only the gender of male when it is refering to both male and female.

"Liquid" is translated from the arabic word "maa'a" whereas there is no word for semen or sperm in the context.

This liquid that both male and female are created from is ejected comming out from between the backbone and the ribs which is the THORAX area of the spinal.

Where in the world you Christians keep having this illusions of semen and sperm is beyond me.

Whos Thorax does this Liquid come out from. It is the Thorax of both male and female and not just the male in which the Subject is refering to both male and female.

So what is this liquid that lodges in the Thorax of both male and female that we are created from ?

Males produce sperm but what is the sperm created from in the body ?

Females produce ovums which are follicles before ovulation. So what is the follicles created from in the body ?

Before they become living organisms ie cells they where created from something in the body.

This question was left open on another Forum http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... ght=#35518 and no one could respond to it. The Ovum of a woman and the sperm of a man is made of plasma. This plasma is produced from "maa'a" or liquid from between the backbone and the ribs of men and women :




"Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is a clear fluid that circulates in the space surrounding the spinal cord and brain. CSF protects the brain and spinal cord from injury by acting like a liquid cushion. CSF is usually obtained through a lumbar puncture (spinal tap). During the procedure, a needle is inserted usually between the 3rd and 4th lumbar vertebrae and the CSF fluid is collected for testing." http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency ... s/9239.htm


The hadith makes mention that the resemblance of a child favores either its mother or father depending on a "maa'a" liquid from the man or the woman in which his/her liquid "sabaqa" overtake, overcomes, outstrips, advances the other.

This is refering to the strength of the gene protoplasm of the sperm or the ovum. If the genes in the male sperm or female ovum is stronger than or supersedes the other then the child will turn out to resemble him or her.

[Apple Pie]

Greetings H2O,

Looks like you finally have decided to quasi-address Sura 86.

I would like to add a few comments of my own to what you had to say…

Quote:
The Arabic word "'asaa" denotes hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked as an opinion or doubt or certainty (Ref. Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon)

In english it denotes doubt, in Arabic it can be any of the three denotations in bold above.


If you want confirmation you can ask you brother Apple Pie to turn to page 373 of that dictionary that he so galantly uses.

Huh....so much for “burning” your copy of Omar’s Lexicon...

Looks like it’s your ONLY source for the Classic Arabic...and a cherished source at that!! LOL...!

Oh....and please don’t continue pretending that you have Lane’s Lexicon....it’s not very becoming of a Muslim to continue lying.....

Swear it on Mo’s grave...!

"discharge" was translated from the Arabic word "maa'a" that means " water, liquid, fluid" (Ref. Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon)

Since you don’t have E.W. lanes Lexicon…Don’t be afraid to say that you are still using Omar’s Lexicon….after all, you paid your hard earned $ for it….

ماء = “ma-in”

“ma-in” definition:

Water; Sap of plants; Juice. It comes from the root “maha”, which means to hold much water, draw water.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 547

The "maa'a" that come from both male and female to create another human being is mention in the Quran:

Let’s look…


Exegetical Analysis:

Ayah 6…


6. خلق من ماء دافق
Khuliqa min ma-in dafiqin



من = “min”

“min” definition:

Preposition used for expressing starting point, part of a whole, origin as, from, of some, amongst. Determining time mood of action, as, no, upon, from, of.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 542


ماء = “ma-in”

“ma-in” definition:

Water; Sap of plants; Juice. It comes from the root “maha”, which means to hold much water, draw water.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 547




دافق = “dafiqin”

“dafiqin” definition:

Jetting; Flowing with force. That which flow with force. It comes from the root “dafaqa”, which means to flow with force, pour forth, go briskly.

It appears only once in the entire Koran.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 180



Thus, we have this Literal rendering of 86:6…

He was created from water pouring/jetting/flowing forcefully.


Let’s compare ayah 6 to all of the Koranic fluid-based “creation” passages of the Koran.

Exegetical analysis of the twelve “creation” via “nutfatin” ayahs in the Koran:


نطفة = “nutfatin”

“nutfatin” definition:

Drop of semen; Quantity of pure water; Drop of fluid. It comes from the root “natafa”, which means to flow gently, extrude, ooze, exude, drop, pour, trickle. A drop/a male’s or female’s secretion/little water.

References:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 567


The Koran
Complete Dictionary & Literal Translation
Mohamed Ahmed
p. 390






1) He created the human/mankind from a drop/male's or female's secretion/little water, so then he is (a) clear/evident disputer/adversary. (16:4)

Khalaqa al-insana min NUTFATIN fa-itha huwa khaseemun mubeenun



2) His companion/friend said to him and he is discussing/debating with him: "Did you disbelieve with Who created you from dust/earth then from a drop/male's or females' secretion/little water, then He straightened you (into) a man?” (18:37)

Qala lahu sahibuhu wahuwa yuhawiruhu akafarta biallathee khalaqaka min turabin thumma min NUTFATIN thumma sawwaka rajulan




3) You, you the people, if you were in doubt/suspicion from the resurrection/revival, so We created you from dust/earth, then from a drop/males' or female's secretion/little water, then from a blood clot/sperm/semen, then from a piece of something chew able of flesh or other evened/smoothed/kneadable, and other than (that) not evened/smoothed/kneadable, to clarify/explain to you, and We settle/establish in the wombs/uteruses what We will/want to a named/identified term/time, then We bring you out (as) a child/children, then to reach your maturity/strength, and from you who (is) made to die, and from you who is returned to the life time's worst/meanest, so that he not know from after knowledge a thing, and you see/understand the earth/Planet Earth quiet/lifeless, so if We descended on it the water, it shook/moved, and it grew/increased, and it sprouted/grew from every pair delightful/cheering. (22:5)

Ya ayyuha alnnasu in kuntum fee raybin mina albaAAthi fa-inna khalaqnakum min turabin thumma min NUTFATIN thumma min AAalaqatin thumma min mudghatin mukhallaqatin waghayri mukhallaqatin linubayyina lakum wanuqirru fee al-arhami ma nashao ila ajalin musamman thumma nukhrijukum tiflan thumma litablughoo ashuddakum waminkum man yutawaffa waminkum man yuraddu ila arthali alAAumuri likayla yaAAlama min baAAdi AAilmin shay-an watara al-arda hamidatan fa-itha anzalna AAalayha almaa ihtazzat warabat waanbatat min kulli zawjin baheejin



4) Then We created/made him a drop/male's or female's secretion/little water in (a) firm/established bottom. (23:13)

Thumma jaAAalnahu NUTFATAN fee qararin makeenin



5) Then We created the drop/male's or female's secretion/little water (into) a blood clot/sperm/ semen, so We created the blood clot/sperm/semen (into) a piece of something chewable of flesh or other, so We created the piece of something chewable of flesh or other (into) bones, so We dressed/clothed the bones (with) flesh/meat, then We originated/developed him (into) another creation, so blessed (is) Allah, best (of) the creators. (23:14)

Thumma khalaqna ALNNUTFATA AAalaqatan fakhalaqna alAAalaqata mudghatan fakhalaqna almudghata AAithaman fakasawna alAAithama lahman thumma ansha/nahu khalqan akhara fatabaraka Allahu ahsanu alkhaliqeena




6) And Allah created you from dust/earth then from a drop/male's or female's secretion/little water, then He made you pairs/couples, and no female conceives/(is) pregnant with and nor gives birth/drops except with His knowledge, and no long lived/aged be granted long life, and nor be reduced (shortened) from his lifetime except in a Book/fate/term, that truly that (is) on Allah easy/little. (35:11)

WaAllahu khalaqakum min turabin thumma min NUTFATIN thumma jaAAalakum azwajan wama tahmilu min ontha wala tadaAAu illa biAAilmihi wama yuAAammaru min muAAammarin wala yunqasu min AAumurihi illa fee kitabin inna thalika AAala Allahi yaseerun



7) Does not the human/mankind see/understand that We created him from a drop/male's or female's secretion/little water, so then he is a clear/evident disputer/adversary/arguer? (36.77)

Awa lam yara al-insanu anna khalaqnahu min NUTFATIN fa-itha huwa khaseemun mubeenun



8 ) He is who created you from dust/earth, then from a drop/male's or female's secretion/little water, then from a blood clot/sperm/semen, then He brings you out (as) a child/children, then to reach your maturity/strength, then to be old aged, and from you whom (is) made to die from before, and to reach a named/identified (specified) term/time, and maybe/perhaps you reason/comprehend. (40:67)

Huwa allathee khalaqakum min turabin thumma min NUTFATIN thumma min AAalaqatin thumma yukhrijukum tiflan thumma litablughoo ashuddakum thumma litakoonoo shuyookhan waminkum man yutawaffa min qablu walitablughoo ajalan musamman walaAAallakum taAAqiloona



9) From a drop/males or female's secretion/little water, if/when (it be) emitted. (53:46)

Min NUTFATIN itha tumna

تمني = “tumna”

“tumna” definition:

Emitted. It comes from the root “mana”, which means to inspire with desire.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 543-544



10) Did he not be a drop/male's or female's secretion/little water from sperm/semen, emitted? (75:37)

Alam yaku NUTFATAN min manayyin yumna



مني = “manayyin”

“manayyin” definition:

Sperma; Drop of fluid which is emitted; Small drop of semen; Small life germ in sperma. It comes from the root “mana”, which means to inspire with desire.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 543-544



يمني = “yumna”

“yumna” definition:

Is emitted. It comes from the root “mana”, which means to inspire with desire.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 543-544



11) That We, We created the human/mankind from a drop/male's or female's secretion mixtures, We test him, so We made/created him hearing/listening, seeing/knowing. (76:2)

Inna khalaqna al-insana min NUTFATIN amshajin nabtaleehi fajaAAalnahu sameeAAan baseeran


امشاج = “amshajin”

“amshajin” definition:

This word is a plural noun. It means Mingled; Inter-mingled; Mixed; United; Mixture of. It comes from the root “mashaja”, which means to mix up, mingle, unite.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 535



12) From a drop/male's or female's secretion He created him, so He predestined/evaluated/estimated him. (80:19)

Min NUTFATIN khalaqahu faqaddarahu




Key points from the creation via “nutfatin” ayahs:

1) In all cases “nutfatin” refers to a small volume of fluid (i.e. drop of semen/sperm, little water)
2) This small volume of water is also witnessed by “manayyin”
3) The fluid is NOT pouring/jetting/flowing forcefully
4) “Nutfatin” comes from the root “natafa”, which means to flow gently, extrude, ooze, exude, drop, pour, trickle
5) The lack of force behind the fluid emission is also acknowledged by “yumna”,& “tumna”
6) “Nutfatin” is a mixture of fluids as described by “amshajin”
7) From a Male/Female.




Exegetical analysis of the five “creation” via “water” ayahs of the Koran:

ماء = “ma-in”

“ma-in” definition:

Water; Sap of plants; Juice. It comes from the root “maha”, which means to hold much water, draw water.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 547




1) Did those who disbelieved not see that the skies/space and the earth/Planet Earth, they were joined, so We split/ruptured them, and We made/created from the water every thing alive/living, so do they not believe? (21:30)

Awa lam yara allatheena kafaroo anna alssamawati waal-arda kanata ratqan fafataqnahuma wajaAAalna mina ALMA-I kulla shay-in hayyin afala yu/minoona


2) And Allah created every/each walker/creeper/crawler from water, so from them who walks (moves) on its belly, and from them who walks on two feet, and from them who walks on four, Allah creates what He wills/wants, that truly Allah (is) on every thing capable/powerful. (24:45)

WaAllahu khalaqa kulla dabbatin min MA-IN faminhum man yamshee AAala batnihi waminhum man yamshee AAala rijlayni waminhum man yamshee AAala arbaAAin yakhluqu Allahu ma yashao inna Allaha AAala kulli shay-in qadeerun



3) And He is who created from the water a human so He made/put him a relationship/kinship and relations through marriage, and your Lord was/is capable/able/overpowering. (25:54)

Wahuwa allathee khalaqa mina ALMA-I basharan fajaAAalahu nasaban wasihran wakana rabbuka qadeeran


4) Who bettered every thing He created it, and He started/began the human's/mankind's creation from mud/clay. Then He created/made his off spring/descendants from descendent/strain/gene/progeny from humiliated/degraded water. (32:7-8 )

Allathee ahsana kulla shay-in khalaqahu wabadaa khalqa al-insani min teenin Thumma jaAAala naslahu min sulalatin min MA-IN maheenin



5) Did We not create you from despised/insignificant/miserable/wretched water? (77:20)

Alam nakhluqkum min MA-IN maheenin


مهين = “maheenin”

“maheenin” definition:

Despised; Weak; Reviled; Insignificant; Miserable; Wretched; Ignominious. It comes from the root “mahuna” which means to be despised, weak, reviled.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 545



Key points from the creation via “water” ayahs:

1) Man is created from water.
2) Not just any water, but despised/insignificant/miserable/wretched “maheenin” water.
3) Water is NOT flowing.
4) Water is NOT emitted from a human.






Summary:

1) Ayah 6 expands upon ayah 5 and tells us from what mankind was created
2) The water “ma-in” in ayah 6 is described as large in quantity by the root “maha”, which means to hold much water
3) The large volume of water is in motion; pouring/jetting/flowing forcefully
4) Comparing all of the Koranic fluid-based “creation” passages, clearly shows that Sura 86 is not referring to creation via an emitted drop “nutfah”, nor is it referring to creation via stagnant, insignificant water
5) The “creation” of man spoken of in this Sura is unique from everything else mentioned in the entire Koran




Integrated Summary of the Sura title & ayahs 1-6:

1) The Sura title, “alttariqi” unites the following three aspects: One who comes at night; One who knocks; Morning Star
2) Ayah 1 begins by acknowledging and joining all “al” aspects of heaven “ssama” and all “al” aspects of “ttariqi”
3) This sets the stage for the rest of the Sura
4) Ayah 2 asks how you came to the knowledge of “alttariqi”
5) Thus, the premise has been established that “alttariqi” is already known
6) Ayah 3 describes “alttariqi” as a rising star/planet having piercing brightness
7) Ayah 4 further elaborates on “alttariqi” proclaiming that ALL souls gather on it as a guardian
8 ) This gathering of spirits involves a punishment
9) This punishment involves blood
10) Ayah 5 is directly linked to ayah 4 by the sequence marker “fa” on “lyanthuri” proclaiming that not only do ALL souls gather on it as a guardian, but mankind has an intimate connection with “alttariqi”
11) This intimate connection, from which mankind is created is sacred/consecrated
12) To consecrate is to devote irrevocably to the worship of God
13) Ayah 6 expands upon ayah 5 and tells us from what mankind was created
14) The water “ma-in” in ayah 6 is described as large in quantity by the root “maha”, which means to hold much water
15) The large volume of water is in motion; pouring/jetting/flowing forcefully
16) Comparing all of the Koranic fluid-based “creation” passages, clearly shows that Sura 86 is not referring to creation via an emitted drop “nutfah”, nor is it referring to creation via stagnant, insignificant water
17) The “creation” of man spoken of in this Sura is unique from everything else mentioned in the entire Koran
18 ) Both Blood and water have been mentioned



Looks like your exegesis is bankrupt….

Quote:
86:5 fa ( so then) yandhuri (consider) al (the) insaan (man ie male and female) mimma (from what) khuliqa (created)

86:6 khuliqa (created) min (from) maa'a (liquid) daafiqin (ejected)

86:7 yakhruju (coming out) min (from) bayni (between) al (the) sulbi (backbone) wa (and) al (the) taraaa'ib (ribs)

" So then let man (male and female) consider from what they are created from. They are created from ejected liquid coming out from between the backbone and the ribs "

"Man" is translated from the arabic word "al-insaa" which is dual literally meaning "the two human beings" expressing the two gender of male and female.

The mistake here is when people read this they thinkin of only the gender of male when it is refering to both male and female.

"Liquid" is translated from the arabic word "maa'a" whereas there is no word for semen or sperm in the context.

This liquid that both male and female are created from is ejected comming out from between the backbone and the ribs which is the THORAX area of the spinal.

Where in the world you Christians keep having this illusions of semen and sperm is beyond me.

Whos Thorax does this Liquid come out from. It is the Thorax of both male and female and not just the male in which the Subject is refering to both male and female.

So what is this liquid that lodges in the Thorax of both male and female that we are created from ?

Males produce sperm but what is the sperm created from in the body ?

Females produce ovums which are follicles before ovulation. So what is the follicles created from in the body ?

Before they become living organisms ie cells they where created from something in the body.



This question was left open on another Forum http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... ght=#35518 and no one could respond to it. The Ovum of a woman and the sperm of a man is made of plasma. This plasma is produced from "maa'a" or liquid from between the backbone and the ribs of men and women :

Let’s close the “open” issue once and for all…


Exegetical Analysis:

Ayah 7…

7. يخرج من بين الصلب والترائب
Yakhruju min bayni alssulbi waalttara-ibi




يخرج = “Yakhruju”

“Yakhruju” definition:

He comes out. Appears, emerges, brings out. It comes from the root “kharaja”, which means to go out, go forth, come forth, deport, attack, rebel against.

References:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 150

The Koran
Complete Dictionary & Literal Translation
Mohamed Ahmed
p. 419




بين = “bayni”

“bayni” definition:

Between; Before. It comes from the root “bana”, which means to be distinct and separate, far away, remote from, divorced, clear, obvious, explain.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 70-71




صلب = “ssulbi”

“ssulbi” definition:

Backbone; Loins; Spine. It comes from the root “salaba”, which means to put to death by crucifixion, extract marrow from bones.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 318

The Koran
Complete Dictionary & Literal Translation
Mohamed Ahmed
p. 71




Reviewing “al” again…

ال= “al”

“al” definition:

The definite article. In Arabic it is used to give the meaning of Most, All, Complete, Maximum, Whole, and to donate comprehensiveness, that is to say all aspects or categories of a subject, or to denote perfection and includes all degrees and grades.

It is also used to indicate something which has already been mentioned or a concept of which is in the mind of the writer or reader.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 25


الصلب = “al” + “ssulbi” = “alssulbi” = backbone/loins/spine







ترائب = “ttara-ibi”

“ttara-ibi” definition:

Plural noun. Breast bone; Upper part of girls chest. The rib bones. It comes from the root “tariba”, which means to have much earth, be full of earth, have dust in his hands, be destitute.

References:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 74

The Koran
Complete Dictionary & Literal Translation
Mohamed Ahmed
p. 55

والترائب = “wa” + “al” + “ttara-ibi” = “waalttara-ibi” = and the breast bone/rib bones


Thus, we have this Literal rendering of 86:7…

He comes out/emerges/appears from between the backbone/loins/spine and the breast bone/rib bones.


Let’s examine all of the ayahs in the Koran that mention crucifixion:

And their saying: "We have killed the Messiah, Jesus, Mary's son, Allah's messenger, and they have not killed him, and they have not crucified him/placed him on a cross, and but (it) resembled/was vague/was doubtful to them, and that those who disagreed/disputed in (about) him (are) in doubt/suspicion from him, (there is) no knowledge for them with (about) him, except following the assumption , and they have not killed him surely/certainly. (4:157)

Waqawlihim inna qatalna almaseeha AAeesa ibna maryama rasoola Allahi wama qataloohu wama salaboohu walakin shubbiha lahum wa-inna allatheena ikhtalafoo feehi lafee shakkin minhu ma lahum bihi min AAilmin illa ittibaAAa alththanni wama qataloohu yaqeenan

وماصلبوه = “wama salaboohu”

“wama salaboohu” definition:

They did not cause death by crucification. It comes from the root “salaba”, which means to put to death by crucifixion, extract marrow from bones.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 318



But (the) reward (of) those who embattle/fight Allah and His messenger, and they strive/endeavor in the earth/Planet Earth corruption/disorder, that they be killed or they be crucified, or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposites, or they be expelled/exiled from the land, that (is) for them shame/scandal/disgrace in the present world, and for them in the end (other life is) a great torture. (5:33)

Innama jazao allatheena yuhariboona Allaha warasoolahu wayasAAawna fee al-ardi fasadan an yuqattaloo aw yusallaboo aw tuqattaAAa aydeehim waarjuluhum min khilafin aw yunfaw mina al-ardi thalika lahum khizyun fee alddunya walahum fee al-akhirati AAathabun AAatheemun

يصلبوا = “yusallaboo”

“yusallaboo” definition:

They will crucify till death. It comes from the root “salaba”, which means to put to death by crucifixion, extract marrow from bones.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 318


"You my two companions/friends (of) the prison/jail, but, one of you so he gives drink an intoxicant (to) his lord, and but the other, so he be crucified/placed on a cross , so the birds eat from his head, the matter/affair which in it you ask for an opinion/clarification was passed judgment/ordered." (12:41)

Ya sahibayi alssijni amma ahadukuma fayasqee rabbahu khamran waamma al-akharu fayuslabu fata/kulu alttayru min ra/sihi qudiya al-amru allathee feehi tastaftiyani

فيصلب = “fayuslabu”

“fayuslabu” definition:

Will be crucified till death. It comes from the root “salaba”, which means to put to death by crucifixion, extract marrow from bones.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 318


"I will cut off/amputate your hands and your feet from opposites, then I will crucify you/place you on crosses all/all together." (7:124)

LaoqatiAAanna aydiyakum waarjulakum min khilafin thumma laosallibannakum ajmaAAeena

He said: "You believed to him before that I permit for you, that he truly (is) your biggest/greatest who taught/instructed you the magic/sorcery, so I will cut off/sever your hands and your feet from opposites (sides), and I will crucify you in the palm trees' trunks/stems, and you will know which of us (is) stronger (in) torture and more lasting." (20:71)

Qala amantum lahu qabla an athana lakum innahu lakabeerukumu allathee AAallamakumu alssihra falaoqattiAAanna aydiyakum waarjulakum min khilafin walaosallibannakum fee juthooAAi alnnakhli walataAAlamunna ayyuna ashaddu AAathaban waabqa


He said: "You believed to him before that I permit/allow for you, that he truly is your greatest/teacher and leader who taught/instructed you the magic/sorcery, so you will/shall know I will cut off/sever your hands and your feet from opposites (sides), and I will crucify you/place you on crosses all/all together." (26:49)

Qala amantum lahu qabla an athana lakum innahu lakabeerukumu allathee AAallamakumu alssihra falasawfa taAAlamoona laoqattiAAanna aydiyakum waarjulakum min khilafin walaosallibannakum ajmaAAeena

ولاصلبنكم = “walaosallibannakum”

“walaosallibannakum” definition:

I will surely crucify till death. It comes from the root “salaba”, which means to put to death by crucifixion, extract marrow from bones.

Reference:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 318



Summary round-up of ALL of the Koranic Crucifixion ayahs…


From 86:7…
صُّلْب = “ssulbi” = Backbone; Loins; Spine = from the root, SALABA



Compare to the other Koranic ayahs referencing Crucifixion…


From 4:157…
مَا صَلَبُوهُ = “ma salaboohu” = They did not cause death by crucification = from the root, SALABA


From 5:33…
يصلبوا = “yusallaboo” = They will crucify till death = from the root, SALABA


From 12:41…
فيصلب = “fayuslabu” = Will be crucified till death = from the root, SALABA



From 7:124, 20:71, 26:49 …

ولاصلبنكم = “walaosallibannakum” = I will surely crucify till death = from the root, SALABA


References:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 318

The Koran
Complete Dictionary & Literal Translation
Mohamed Ahmed
p. 71



As you can see for yourself, ALL the Crucifixion ayahs in the Koran have the same root “salaba”.

I have to wonder, first of all, why you failed to compare 86:7 to the other ayahs in the Koran that mention the same thing. Remember that proper exegesis includes examining where the word, or in this case, root, is used elsewhere in scripture.

Additionally, you have not even bothered to look at how it relates to the direct context of the ayahs that surround it in Sura 86…..why is that?




Key point from all of the crucifixion ayahs:

1) Every time crucifixion is mentioned in the Koran, the word used to describe the event can be traced back to the same root word “salaba” as utilized in ayah 7





Summary:

1) Ayah 7 tells us from where mankind was “created”
2) It describes the source of the water “ma-in” that is in motion
3) This source of the water comes from “between the backbone/loins/spine and the breast bone/rib bones
4) “alssulbi” which is rendered backbone/loins/spine, comes from the root “salaba”, which means TO PUT TO DEATH BY CRUCIFIXION,
5) Furthermore, investigating all the Koranic passages dealing with the crucifixion, trace their origins back to the root “salaba”
6) The definite article “al” in addition to signifying all aspects of a subject, can also be used to denote something which has already been mentioned or a concept of which is in the mind of the reader or writer
7) This water is described as coming from the human anatomy
8 ) This water, from which mankind is created, comes from “alttariqi”
9) “alttariqi” has been given human attributes





Integrated Summary of the Sura title & ayahs 1-7:

1) The Sura title, “alttariqi” unites the following three aspects: One who comes at night; One who knocks; Morning Star
2) Ayah 1 begins by acknowledging and joining all “al” aspects of heaven “ssama” and all “al” aspects of “ttariqi”
3) This sets the stage for the rest of the Sura
4) Ayah 2 asks how you came to the knowledge of “alttariqi”
5) Thus, the premise has been established that “alttariqi” is already known
6) Ayah 3 describes “alttariqi” as a rising star/planet having piercing brightness
7) Ayah 4 further elaborates on “alttariqi” proclaiming that ALL souls gather on it as a guardian
8 ) This gathering of spirits involves a punishment
9) This punishment involves blood
10) Ayah 5 is directly linked to ayah 4 by the sequence marker “fa” on “lyanthuri” proclaiming that not only do ALL souls gather on it as a guardian, but mankind has an intimate connection with “alttariqi”
11) This intimate connection, from which mankind is created is sacred/consecrated
12) To consecrate is to devote irrevocably to the worship of God
13) Ayah 6 expands upon ayah 5 and tells us from what mankind was created
14) The water “ma-in” in ayah 6 is described as large in quantity by the root “maha”, which means to hold much water
15) The large volume of water is in motion; pouring/jetting/flowing forcefully
16) Comparing all of the Koranic fluid-based “creation” passages, clearly shows that Sura 86 is not referring to creation via an emitted drop “nutfah”, nor is it referring to creation via stagnant, insignificant water
17) The “creation” of man spoken of in this Sura is unique from everything else mentioned in the entire Koran
18 ) Both Blood and Water have been mentioned
19) Ayah 7 tells us from where mankind was “created”
20) It describes the source of the water “ma-in” that is in motion
21) This source of the water comes from “between the backbone/loins/spine and the breast bone/rib bones
22) “alssulbi” which is rendered backbone/loins/spine, comes from the root “salaba”, which means TO PUT TO DEATH BY CRUCIFIXION,
23) Furthermore, investigating all the Koranic passages dealing with the crucifixion, trace their origins back to the root “salaba”
24) The definite article “al” in addition to signifying all aspects of a subject, can also be used to denote something which has already been mentioned or a concept of which is in the mind of the reader or writer
25) This water is described as coming from the human anatomy
26) This water, from which mankind is created, comes from “alttariqi”
27) “alttariqi” has been given human attributes









As usual….you are falling flat on your face……….again………



Take care…

[H2O]

Quote:
Quote:
The Arabic word "'asaa" denotes hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked as an opinion or doubt or certainty (Ref. Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon)

In english it denotes doubt, in Arabic it can be any of the three denotations in bold above.


If you want confirmation you can ask you brother Apple Pie to turn to page 373 of that dictionary that he so galantly uses.


Huh....so much for “burning” your copy of Omar’s Lexicon...

Looks like it’s your ONLY source for the Classic Arabic...and a cherished source at that!! LOL...!

Oh....and please don’t continue pretending that you have Lane’s Lexicon....it’s not very becoming of a Muslim to continue lying.....

Swear it on Mo’s grave...!

Since you don’t have E.W. lanes Lexicon…Don’t be afraid to say that you are still using Omar’s Lexicon….after all, you paid your hard earned $ for it….

Evidence Presented



You stooped Low on that one.

I will remind the people in here of Applie Pie's statement:

Greetings H2O,

Personally, I interpret the Koran with my Holy Bible.

After all, as you have witnessed for yourself first-hand in all of my posts, the Holy Bible is required to correct, clarify, and detail the Koran in ALL manner of things.

Since the Holy Bible is the source of the Koran, it is most natural that one would want to interpret the Koran by its original….in order to see if it correctly “preserved” God’s true word.

The Koran is a mere imitation attempt (by its authors) to “translate” the Hebrew and Greek words of Biblical scripture, into Arabic.

The Koran is a whip-puppy….as we can all see for ourselves…

Even the Book of Revelation has nearly total control over the structure and content of the Koran…..this is as clear and as pronounced as a Greeks’ nose…



Take care…

So this how he reads the Quran.

I would also like to let the reader know that Dictionary he is using is an Ahmadiyyah Of Lahore Dictionary produced by one who claims his father is The Messiah who already has returned.

Also the same dictionary is dependant on Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon which is superior to it in authority.

I will continue on with my dialogue with others of this Forum, and I will leave Allah to deal personally with you Apple Pie for your distortion of the Quran where you made it clear you interpret it with the Bible meaning to twist its words to comform to your Ideology, and at the same time this same person does not even speak or know anything about Arabic

Say: "O ye People of the Book! why obstruct ye those who believe, from the path of Allah, seeking to make it crooked, while ye were yourselves witnesses (to Allah's Covenant)? But Allah is not unmindful of all that ye do." 3:99

[Liberate]

Why is it that the online translator agrees with the majority of accepted quranic translations, and the rules of arabic, what is your qualification as an arabic scholar?, to dismiss what seasoned scholars, and an independent neutral arabic translation utilising the rules of arabic have to say?

Your bot translation and Shakir have failed to translate "an" which clearifies "'asaa" ~ perhaps/maybe to denote the certainty of an act that would be done.

Are you honestly trying to tell us maybe doesn't mean maybe in arabic?

Your answer was given:

The Arabic word "'asaa" denotes hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked as an opinion or doubt or certainty (Ref. Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon)

In english it denotes doubt, in Arabic it can be any of the three denotations in bold above.

what exactly does the 3 denotations above say:
"denotes hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked"

...as an opinion

... or doubt

... or certainty


Is this not the definition of maybe? What has changed? Are you taking us for idiots? You have an allah that speaks in the third person using uncertainty narratives but this is supposed to be God.

Are you trying to play games with the meaning of maybe? Do you honestly think we are this gullible?

So this sounds like God to you: The creator of the known universe, when alledgedly speaking as the first person says this:

Maybe (denotes uncertainty) his(third person possessive pronoun) lord...

You have dismissed all the accepted english translations of the koran. You even dismissed the widely accepted Yusuf Ali translation, listening to you, someone would leave with the impression that Yusuf Ali didn't understand english properly rather than a Cambridge graduate.

Accepted by who ? Translations of the Quran have not authority upon Arabic speakers not to mention do to the fact when you translate the Quran you lose meaning:

Does it not occur to you then that allah has failed in sending his message to mankind, when 90%+ of his converts do not understand the language they chant five times a day, and will lose meaning if it is translated in any other language.

" The Koran is one of the worlds classics which cannot be translated without grave loss." (Ref. A. Guillama, Islam, P. 73)

Adding to this the english language it self falls short and is limited in conveying the proper significant meaning of the Arabic in which Tafsir is need for those who do not speak Arabic for them to obtain a fuller understanding.

Now you are admitting you need a tafsir to understand it, if I were to show you some of the unbelievable nonsense in your tafsirs you are going to start acting that you are quran only again as you are doing with the hadiths.

what is your qualification as an arabic scholar?

tell us again what are your scholarly qualifications in arabic?

Sure. I completed Fus-haa Arabiyyah studies at the Islamic Center of Boca Raton in Quranic Grammar, Linguistics, and Orthography. Our Shaikh and Teacher was Qari Ahmad Tameem from Masjid Al-Azhar who is a graduate mu'alim of the Al-Azhar University the leading University of Classical and Modern Arabic studies.

It seems you didn't answer my question, what qualifications do you have as an arabic scholar? I didn't ask for the qualifications of your tutor, did the islamic Center of Boca Raton award you a doctorate or the equivalent in translating and speaking arabic? How many years have you been speaking arabic?

Re: Let me give you something you can relate to(Liberate wrote):

Which of course has nothing to do with the phenominon relation of the Quran to your insignificant and un-scientifically supported accuasation of assocaiting it with epilepcy.

Did you read a word of it?

You assess that the koran is a phenomenon because of the way it was revealed.

What makes you think this has anything to do with God?

I asked you what previous prophet of Judaism or christianity thought of committing suicide after an encounter with God or an angel of God, or where did the God of the christians or jews send poetry as inspiration via epileptic fits in any previous revelation (from a God that changeth not)? These are the simple questions any rational individual will ask if we are worshipping the same God, especially when the message from the God of the christian and the jews is resounding that this is a God that changeth not. Why the sudden change to arabic only, epileptic fits only, revelations via one man only, who is sanctioned to rape, kill and loot yet he is without sin.

I show you an analogy of a few religions after islam, that believe in the unity of God and perform charitable acts, and ask you what you make of them hundreds of years after islam, are they all worshipping the same allah?

What makes you think islam is worshipping the same God as the christians or the jews?, especially when it insults the prophets and followers of this religion and God that He could not protect any of His messages, from Adam all the way to the disciples of Jesus.

I find it very strange your response is to laugh at the hadith?? regardless of the implications of that hadith!!! In the process of defending your religion you chose to laugh at it, reveals a great deal about your character and your motives for being on this forum, why didn't you address the child looking like it's mother or father superstitious nonsense in that hadith or was that a laughing matter to?

This liquid that both male and female are created from is ejected comming out from between the backbone and the ribs which is the THORAX area of the spinal.

The audacity to speak such dribble means you must take us for idiots

16:4 He has created man from a sperm-drop
32:8 He made his seed from a quintessence of despised fluid
35:11 ... then from a little fluid
53:46 From a sperm-drop when lodged (in its place)
56:58 Do you then see? The (human Seed) that ye emit
75:37 Was he not a drop of sperm emitted (in lowly form)?
76:2 We created Man from a drop of mingled sperm
80:19 From a sperm-drop He hath created him
86:6-7 He is created from a drop emitted - proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.

These are some of your creation accounts according to Mohammed, all state that man is created from sperm, that it is emitting from between the backbone and the ribs.

]"Now let man but think from what he is created! He is created from a drop emitted - Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs:" S. 86:5-7

Dr. William Campbell explains why this passage is incompatible with modern medical knowledge relating to the production of semen:


Here we find that Man is made from a 'gushing fluid' that issues from the adult father during the 'now' of the reproductive act, from a specific physical place 'between the loins and the ribs.' (other translations have backbone instead of loins)
Since the verse is speaking of the moment of adult reproduction it can't be talking about the time of embryonic development. Moreover, since 'sulb' is being used in conjunction with 'gushing fluid', which can only be physical; and 'tara'ib' which is another physical word for chest or thorax or ribs, it can't be euphemistic. Therefore, we are left with the very real problem that the semen is coming from the back or kidney area and not the testicles.

Here is a tafsir on sura 86 to help you understand what you believe in:

(He is created from a water gushing forth.) meaning, the sexual fluid that comes out bursting forth from the man and the woman. Thus, the child is produced from both of them by the permission of Allah. Due to this Allah says,


[يَخْرُجُ مِن بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَآئِبِ ]


(Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) meaning, the backbone (or loins) of the man and the ribs of the woman, which is referring to her chest. Shabib bin Bishr reported from `Ikrimah who narrated from Ibn `Abbas that he said,


[يَخْرُجُ مِن بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَآئِبِ ]


(Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) "The backbone of the man and the ribs of the woman. It (the fluid) is yellow and fine in texture. The child will not be born except from both of them (i.e., their sexual fluids).'' Concerning Allah's statement,


[إِنَّهُ عَلَى رَجْعِهِ لَقَادِرٌ ]

Maybe at this point the tafsir is an israeliyyat or whoever wrote it "had terrible reading comprehension"

The hadith makes mention that the resemblance of a child favores either its mother or father depending on a "maa'a" liquid from the man or the woman in which his/her liquid "sabaqa" overtake, overcomes, outstrips, advances the other.

This is refering to the strength of the gene protoplasm of the sperm or the ovum. If the genes in the male sperm or female ovum is stronger than or supersedes the other then the child will turn out to resemble him or her.

For someone who alledgedly studied embryology I find it unbelievable to hear you SAY ovum and sperm is produced from between the backbone and the ribs.

Let us elaborate exactly what Mohammed was talking about:

Read very carefully the following hadith, see the similarity between the hadith with Abn allah:

Thauban, the freed slave of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him), said: While I was standing beside the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) one of the rabbis of the Jews came and said: Peace be upon you, O Muhammad. I pushed him back with a push that he was going to fall. Upon this he said: Why do you push me? I said: Why don't you say: O Messenger of Allah? The Jew said: We call him by the name by which he was named by his family. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: My name is Muhammad with which I was named by my family. The Jew said: I have come to ask you (something). The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Should that thing be of any benefit to you, if I tell you that? He (the Jew) said: I will lend my ears to it. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) drew a line with the help of the stick that he had with him and then said: Ask (whatever you like). Thereupon the Jew said: Where would the human beings be on the Day when the earth would change into another earth and the heavens too (would change into other heavens)? The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: They would be in darkness beside the Bridge. He (the Jew) again said: Who amongst people would be the first to cross (this bridge)? He said: They would be the poor amongst the refugees. The Jew said: What would constitute their breakfast when they would enter Paradise? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: A caul of the fish-liver. He (the Jew) said. What would be their food after this? He (the Holy Prophet) said: A bullock which was fed in the different quarters of Paradise would be slaughtered for them. He (the Jew) said: What would be their drink? He (the Holy Prophet) said: They would be given drink from the fountain which is named "Salsabil". He (the Jew) said: I have come to ask you about a thing which no one amongst the people on the earth knows except an apostle or one or two men besides him. He (the Holy Prophet) said: Would it benefit you if I tell you that? He (the Jew) said: I would lend ears to that. He then said: I have come to ask you about the child. He (the Holy Prophet) said: The reproductive substance of man is white and that of woman yellow, and when they have sexual intercourse and the male's substance prevails upon the female's substance, it is the male child that is created by Allah's Decree, and when the substance of the female prevails upon the substance contributed by the male, a female child is formed by the Decree of Allah. The Jew said: What you have said is true; verily you are an Apostle. He then returned and went away. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: He asked me about such and such things of which I have had no knowledge till Allah gave me that. (Sahih Muslim, Book 003, Number 0614)

Compare with the hadith with Abn Allah

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 546:
What is the first portent of the Hour? What will be the first meal taken by the people of Paradise? Why does a child resemble its father, and why does it resemble its maternal uncle"

This is Mohammed's response:

"The first portent of the Hour will be a fire that will bring together the people from the east to the west; the first meal of the people of Paradise will be Extra-lobe (caudate lobe) of fish-liver. As for the resemblance of the child to its parents: If a man has sexual intercourse with his wife and gets discharge first, the child will resemble the father, and if the woman gets discharge first, the child will resemble her."

What do you think Mohammed is talking about gender or resemblance?

[Apple Pie]

Greetings H2O,

Looks like I uncovered the fatal flaw(s) in your argument….once again…

I appreciate your lack of a response….as now we know definitively who has the overwhelming best argument and support for their position….and it isn’t you…..

I appreciate you showing us the step-by-step loading of a CDROM into the “puter”…

I will remind the people in here of Applie Pie's statement:
Apple Pie wrote:
Greetings H2O,

Personally, I interpret the Koran with my Holy Bible.

After all, as you have witnessed for yourself first-hand in all of my posts, the Holy Bible is required to correct, clarify, and detail the Koran in ALL manner of things.

Since the Holy Bible is the source of the Koran, it is most natural that one would want to interpret the Koran by its original….in order to see if it correctly “preserved” God’s true word.

The Koran is a mere imitation attempt (by its authors) to “translate” the Hebrew and Greek words of Biblical scripture, into Arabic.

The Koran is a whip-puppy….as we can all see for ourselves…

Even the Book of Revelation has nearly total control over the structure and content of the Koran…..this is as clear and as pronounced as a Greeks’ nose…



Take care…


So this how he reads the Quran.

Correct…

I would also like to let the reader know that Dictionary he is using is an Ahmadiyyah Of Lahore Dictionary produced by one who claims his father is The Messiah who already has returned.

Don’t forget to tell everyone that this is the Lexicon that you first told me to “burn”; then, at the very same time as you were saying this, you had a copy of it Fed-exed to your apartment; and, ever since it arrived at your doorstep, you have been quoting freely from it in “support” of your position(s).

Can you please explain just how that Muslim reasoning works?

Also the same dictionary is dependant on Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon which is superior to it in authority.

Omar’s Lexicon (the one that you adamantly said that I should burn) integrates the highest quality Classic Arabic Lexicons into a nice readable format.

As you have already discovered for yourself, Omar’s work already incorporates the best of E.W. Lane’s Lexical work.

Please tell me…..which is the better deal….Omar’s Lexicon for $20…or Lane’s Lexicon for $150….?

They both support my position….just face the music….be a man…..

I am enjoying your utter silence in rebutting my exegeses. You now fully understand the predicament that your Koran places you in….

I’m glad that I’m not in your shoes right about now……lol….

It has to be mighty painful for a Muslim to come to grips with the comprehension that his Koran proclaims the divinity of Jesus!

Better get used to it…

I will continue on with my dialogue with others of this Forum, and I will leave Allah to deal personally with you Apple Pie for your distortion of the Quran where you made it clear you interpret it with the Bible meaning to twist its words to comform to your Ideology, and at the same time this same person does not even speak or know anything about Arabic

As you can see for yourself, the exegesis’s that I just gave shows that the Koran (all by itself) contains more than enough information to substantiate my position.

It is clear that I didn’t even have to utilize the Biblical scriptures in order to prove my point.

Your own Koran is all that is required to destroy your pathetic arguments…

I own you…




And, now, courtesy of H20, let’s look at what else he likes to do around his apartment…


Start making the dough in the kitchen… 30-Jun-2004




Zoom shot of that dough… 30-Jun-2004




Separate dough into five pieces… 30-Jun-2004




Roll these puppies out… 30-Jun-2004




Carefully lift the pan… 30-Jun-2004



Whoa…watch out for that knife!… 30-Jun-2004




You really shouldn’t have….! 30-Jun-2004




Have fun…

[H2O]

what exactly does the 3 denotations above say:
"denotes hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked"

...as an opinion

... or doubt

... or certainty


Is this not the definition of maybe? What has changed? Are you taking us for idiots? You have an allah that speaks in the third person using uncertainty narratives but this is supposed to be God.

Are you trying to play games with the meaning of maybe? Do you honestly think we are this gullible?

So this sounds like God to you: The creator of the known universe, when alledgedly speaking as the first person says this:

Maybe (denotes uncertainty) his(third person possessive pronoun) lord...

Being that the answer was already there why ask such a question "Are you honestly trying to tell us maybe doesn't mean maybe in arabic?" when it was right there in front of your face. Your question indciated you didnt know it had such denotations then now you agree to its three denotations

You agree that "'asaa" maybe/perhaps denotes " hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked as an opinion, or doubt, or certainty " but then you render it above as (denotes uncertainty) and why not (denotes certainty). You have no clearification on your side to determine if it denotes an opinion, doubt, or certainty. I have shown its mansoob that clearify its denotation as "certainty".

Does it not occur to you then that allah has failed in sending his message to mankind, when 90%+ of his converts do not understand the language they chant five times a day, and will lose meaning if it is translated in any other language.

Nope. Thats why we have a responsibility to teach those who do not know. Why does Allah make some rich and some stay poor or in between ? Imagine that. If Islam dominates the earth that means Arabic also will be the dominating language. One religion, one language, one brotherhood, one G-d etc. Think about it.



[quotte]Quote:
" The Koran is one of the worlds classics which cannot be translated without grave loss." (Ref. A. Guillama, Islam, P. 73)


Quote:
Adding to this the english language it self falls short and is limited in conveying the proper significant meaning of the Arabic in which Tafsir is need for those who do not speak Arabic for them to obtain a fuller understanding.


Liberate wrote:
Now you are admitting you need a tafsir to understand it, if I were to show you some of the unbelievable nonsense in your tafsirs you are going to start acting that you are quran only again as you are doing with the hadiths. [/quote]

Did you see in bold who the Tafsir is for ?

Quote:
16:4 He has created man from a sperm-drop
32:8 He made his seed from a quintessence of despised fluid
35:11 ... then from a little fluid
53:46 From a sperm-drop when lodged (in its place)
56:58 Do you then see? The (human Seed) that ye emit
75:37 Was he not a drop of sperm emitted (in lowly form)?
76:2 We created Man from a drop of mingled sperm
80:19 From a sperm-drop He hath created him
86:6-7 He is created from a drop emitted - proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.


These are some of your creation accounts according to Mohammed, all state that man is created from sperm, that it is emitting from between the backbone and the ribs.

No those are the creation accounts according to the interpretation of the translators that are subject to error.

Translations of the Qur'an

On this Web site, there are three translations[Ali, Pickthal, Shakir] of the Qur'an. Note that any translation of the Qur'an immediately ceases to be the literal word of Allah, and hence cannot be equated with the Qur'an in its original Arabic form. In fact, each of the translations on this site is actually an interpretation which has been translated. The first-time reader is strongly advised to read the introduction to the translations we have made available. Corrections and suggestions are appreciated.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/

Now you are debating with an Arabic speaker. My reference is the Quran in Arabic not a translation. Now what do those verses mean to me when I read them in their original ? Here it is as follows with its Tafsir:

16:4 He created man (male and female) from a nutfah (a thing that trickles) [ie a sperm]

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : ["nutfah" is a feminine verbal noun derived from the root "natafa" meaning to trickle dribble or drop. Male and female "al-insaan" is created from this thing that determines their gender]

32:8 and then He made his (Adam and his Wife) progeny from an extract from contemptible water

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : [ the progeny of man is created from an extract drawn from contemptible water or fluid in the human body. There is nothing stating directly or inderectly that this is semen]

35:11 and Allah created you all from dust, and then a nutfah (a thing that strickles), and then He made you all as pairs..

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : [ The evolution of the creation of mankind is here spoken of. Allah began his creation of dust and thus his body is composed of dust which is one of the constituents of his body as we see when the body decomposes after death it become as dust once again. The dust element of the body is used to produce the nutfah along with other constituent elements such as water.Then from nutfah the pairs of male and female are created from which determines the gender.]

53:46 from a nutfah (a trickler ie. sperm) when emited

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : [ The study of the male repoductive system shows that the sperm is emited from at least 3 parts of the male. 1) from the Scotum 2) Prostate glands 3) and then the penis which druing emition passes through the Epididymis from the Scrotum that pushes it out to the prostate glands that adds fluid ie semen to it and then through the Urethra of the Penis.]




56:58 then do you see what you emit ?

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : [ The question in this verse is addressed to both male and female of something to which they both emit. Being that females are also addressed here it negates reference to semen of a man but to something else. This is obviously refering to the male and female gametes that are both emited but cannot be seen with the naked eye. The Ovum is emited from the ovary which is called ovalation. As to the male sperm please see the Tafsir on verse 53:46]

75:37 was he (man ie male and female) not a nutfah (a trickler ie. sperm) from semen emited ?

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : [ Allah turns the attention of man to the thing that trickles (Nutfah) ie sperm in which they were created from. The sperm is FROM the semen in which males emit. This is a clearification that the nutfah (the trickler) is not the same as the manee (semen) in which the language denotes the Nutfah is in the Semen that man is created from]

76:2 Verily We, We created man (male and female) from a nutfatin amshaajin (a trickling germ / a trickler a germ) for Us to test him so We made for him hearing and sight.

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : [ The nutfah is now called a germ or "a trickling germ" in the reading of the Quran distinguishing it from "semen" or any discharged fluid of either male or female]

80:19 (he is created) from a nutfah (a trickler ie sperm) then He(Allah) proportioned him

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : [ "proportioned" Arabic "qaddar" means to decree or determine a thing. Man's life is proportioned with good and evil in balance as trials for him in which he will be tested with. His time of birth and death are all decreed for him]

86:(5)6-7 So then let man (male and female) consider from what they are created from. They are created from ejected liquid coming out from between the backbone and the ribs.

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : [This liquid that both male and female are created from is ejected comming out from between the backbone and the ribs which is the THORAX area of the spinal. Whos Thorax does this Liquid come out from ? It is the Thorax of both male and female and not just the male in which the Subject is refering to both male and female. The Ovum of a woman and the sperm of a man is made of plasm. This plasm is produced from "maa'a" or liquid or what is known as spinal fluid that circulates through the back bone that is also absorbed through veins.]

For someone who alledgedly studied embryology I find it unbelievable to hear you SAY ovum and sperm is produced from between the backbone and the ribs.

And you have mistaken me or you were not paying attention to what I said. I think you are bringing your own personal debated issues with other muslims into this. I mentioned no such thing:

The hadith makes mention that the resemblance of a child favores either its mother or father depending on a "maa'a" liquid from the man or the woman in which his/her liquid "sabaqa" overtake, overcomes, outstrips, advances the other.

This is refering to the strength of the gene protoplasm of the sperm or the ovum. If the genes in the male sperm or female ovum is stronger than or supersedes the other then the child will turn out to resemble him or her.

It is the plasm of the gene I made reference to that is produced from the liquid in the back bone. I dont know how you have your glasses on but I made no such remark as you implied.

Dr. William Campbell explains why this passage is incompatible with modern medical knowledge relating to the production of semen:

Dr. Willaim's error in the first place is that 86:5-7 as we have explained it above has nothing to do with semen. There is no word for semen there in those verses. He relied on an inaccurate translation. Why dont you go use your bot translator that you have been so accustom of using . Seems you only use that online translator when if favors you but if it doesnt favor you you dont use it.

Read very carefully the following hadith, see the similarity between the hadith with Abn allah:

Liberate this is getting off the topic like you did before on the the moon god al-ilah thread. This thread is about "How do Chritians Read The Quran" not about hadith. If you want to debate me on islam in general I would be more than glad to cure your sickness. Lets take this to http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 8966#38966 it a new thread I opened just for you cause I know you habits of not sticking to the topic. Other than that I will answer no more of your hadith delusions on this thread which is about Christian understanding of the Quran not hadith. And thus I will only answer Question dealing with the Quran only in reagards to Christian understanding..

[Apple Pie]

h20,

You can run....but you can't hide.....

[webmaster]

h20,

You can run....but you can't hide.....

Hide from what?

[Apple Pie]

The Truth...

[webmaster]

And, now, courtesy of H20, let’s look at what else he likes to do around his apartment…


Start making the dough in the kitchen… 30-Jun-2004

That wasn't his apartment from what he stated. He used a friends website to post some lexicon pictures and you traced it back by removing the image and looking at website itself. I also have done it and do it all the time. Sometimes it is helpful in figuring out who in the world are these people posting these images.

[webmaster]

16:4 He has created man from a sperm-drop

Now you are debating with an Arabic speaker. My reference is the Quran in Arabic not a translation. Now what do those verses mean to me when I read them in their original ? Here it is as follows with its Tafsir:

16:4 He created man (male and female) from a nutfah (a thing that trickles) [ie a sperm]

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : ["nutfah" is a feminine verbal noun derived from the root "natafa" meaning to trickle dribble or drop. Male and female "al-insaan" is created from this thing that determines their gender]

From Quran AN-NAHL (THE BEE) 16

4 He created mankind from a sperm drop, yet he is a clear adversary.
No offensive here in the bold H20 but

This is getting worse then what the KJV and pre-tribs do with the bible.

Shouldn't the faith of
removing any words of the Quran
or
adding any words to the Quran
which makes up the simple faith of the religion itself,
add up to this 1 simple point below?

For I testify unto every man
that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book,
If any man shall add unto these things,
God shall add unto him the plagues
that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away
from the words of the book of this prophecy,
God shall take away his part out of the book of life,
and out of the holy city,
and from the things which are written in this book.

Simple warning and to the point!

[H2O]

From Quran AN-NAHL (THE BEE) 16

4 He created mankind from a sperm drop, yet he is a clear adversary.
No offensive here in the bold H20 but

This is getting worse then what the KJV and pre-tribs do with the bible.

Shouldn't the faith of
removing any words of the Quran
or
adding any words to the Quran
which makes up the simple faith of the religion itself

I only have one problem with the verse you quoted and that is the translation of "nutfah" it is either "sperm" or "trickler" as it is a feminine verbal noun, not semen, sperm drop, or anything dealing with fluid or liquid. This is mere interpretation of the word rather that translating the word for what is actually says accord to its word form.

I do not think translators intentionally changed anything of the meaning. I would say when it come to explanation of the Quran such as dealing with Womens rights etc is interpreted based on their culture.

Much of the translations of the Quran are affected by cultural bias and tation which does not hold equal to the original in which the original can only clearify the accuracy of the translation.

When it come down to the science of the Quran those scholars were NOT grounded in science in order to fully understanding them that gave inaccurate renderings according to their understanding. This issue has already been address by other Scholars of Islam .

In Islam we as muslims have a different attitude towards scholars than in Christianity and Judaism, due to the fact they are subject to error and they can be corrected by those who are NOT scholars www.it-is-truth.org/ . Their opinons do matter and are taken as long as there is no inconsistancies. There are even reports from Hadeeth that our Prophet WARNED his follower that the religious knowledge will decrease which was mistakenly understood by some of the companions to mean the muslim scholars will die out in which the prophet clearified saying no but that they will start to teach NONSENCE which indicates only the true knowledge of the religion will be taught by few.

Due to this we have right to be more skeptical about what Islamic scholars teach in which we have found many comforming to western concepts that taint Islam

It does not take one to be a scholar graduate to correct another scholar in Islam. It only takes mere proof and evidence from any sane muslim who is at least acquinted with the Arabic language and the subject of science being related to.

For I testify unto every man
that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book,
If any man shall add unto these things,
God shall add unto him the plagues
that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away
from the words of the book of this prophecy,
God shall take away his part out of the book of life,
and out of the holy city,
and from the things which are written in this book.

Webby you quoted from the book of revelations of the bible( you can quote any words from the bible and I can tell you where its passage is ) .

I hope this encourages many of you to read the Quran fro your selves and the read or understand the Quran through prejudice perspectives of other Christians.

Oh webby I do understand that warning indeed. Some of those plagues have been discribed by many Christians and scholars alike to have com to pass, now where does this leave the authenticity of the bible ?

[Apple Pie]

Greetings H2O,


I found this comment by you quite interesting…

It does not take one to be a scholar graduate to correct another scholar in Islam. It only takes mere proof and evidence from any sane muslim who is at least acquinted with the Arabic language and the subject of science being related to.

I’m glad to hear you say this, now we can all understand how my exegesis’ have corrected and clarified your position…


Take care….and…no hard feelings….

[H2O]

It does not take one to be a scholar graduate to correct another scholar in Islam. It only takes mere proof and evidence from any sane muslim who is at least acquinted with the Arabic language and the subject of science being related to.

any sane muslim
any sane muslim
any sane muslim
any sane muslim
any sane muslim
any sane muslim
any sane muslim
any sane muslim
any sane muslim
any sane muslim
any sane muslim
any sane muslim
any sane muslim
any sane muslim
not any sane or insane christian
not any sane or insane christian
not any sane or insane christian
not any sane or insane christian
not any sane or insane christian
not any sane or insane christian
not any sane or insane christian
not any sane or insane christian
not any sane or insane christian
not any sane or insane christian
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
must be at least acquinted with the Arabic Language
not a pre-kindagarden student(alif, ba'a, ta'a)
not a pre-kindagarden student(alif, ba'a, ta'a)
not a pre-kindagarden student(alif, ba'a, ta'a)
not a pre-kindagarden student(alif, ba'a, ta'a)
not a pre-kindagarden student(alif, ba'a, ta'a)
not a pre-kindagarden student(alif, ba'a, ta'a)
not a pre-kindagarden student(alif, ba'a, ta'a)
not a pre-kindagarden student(alif, ba'a, ta'a)
not a pre-kindagarden student(alif, ba'a, ta'a)
not a pre-kindagarden student(alif, ba'a, ta'a)
not a pre-kindagarden student(alif, ba'a, ta'a)

[Apple Pie]

You sound..................angry.......

[Liberate]

what exactly does the 3 denotations above say:
"denotes hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked"

...as an opinion

... or doubt

... or certainty


Is this not the definition of maybe? What has changed? Are you taking us for idiots? You have an allah that speaks in the third person using uncertainty narratives but this is supposed to be God.

Are you trying to play games with the meaning of maybe? Do you honestly think we are this gullible?

So this sounds like God to you: The creator of the known universe, when alledgedly speaking as the first person says this:

Maybe (denotes uncertainty) his(third person possessive pronoun) lord...

Being that the answer was already there why ask such a question "Are you honestly trying to tell us maybe doesn't mean maybe in arabic?" when it was right there in front of your face. Your question indciated you didnt know it had such denotations then now you agree to its three denotations

When did I say this?
What on earth makes you think I am unaware that maybe denotes uncertainty?
Why are you trying to put words in my mouth?

You agree that "'asaa" maybe/perhaps denotes " hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked as an opinion, or doubt, or certainty " but then you render it above as (denotes uncertainty) and why not (denotes certainty). You have no clearification on your side to determine if it denotes an opinion, doubt, or certainty. I have shown its mansoob that clearify its denotation as "certainty".

What you have done with the context is say because it says that in "Maybe his lord if he divorces you that..." is proof that it denotes certainty, certainty of what? certainty that maybe allah will grant him virgins if he divorces his wives? The whole sentence contains two conditional clauses in maybe and if, are you really taking us for idiots?

Let me elaborate on what the problem is:

Maybe [Denoting uncertainty] his lord [third person possessive pronoun but this is from allah as the first person], if [conditional clause] he divorces you that allah will grant him better wives, virgins, obedient, submitters.


Perhaps [Denoting uncertainty] his lord [third person possessive pronoun alledgedly coming from allah as the first person speaker], if [Conditional clause] he divorces you that allah will grant him better wives, virgins, obedient, submitters.

Please apply some logic to the above, and tell me if this sounds like God to you? Would God conduct a conversation as the first person with statements such as:

Maybe his lord will do it if he divorces you...

Does it not occur to you then that allah has failed in sending his message to mankind, when 90%+ of his converts do not understand the language they chant five times a day, and will lose meaning if it is translated in any other language.

Nope. Thats why we have a responsibility to teach those who do not know.

Teach them what? that every tafsir hadith and quran that they have been exposed to is in error and only your interpretation is the correct one and you have the monopoly on the truth and interpretation of the quran?

Why does Allah make some rich and some stay poor or in between ?

What are you talking about here? First off let us be clear on something I do not believe we worship the same God, something else I should let you on, you have not proven ONE point in all the discussions we have had, I am just amazed at the level of deception you are prepared to stoop to ( if you honestly believe I am buying in your own personal interpretation of the quran I suggest you think again), to avoid facing what is staring you in black and white.

Imagine that. If Islam dominates the earth that means Arabic also will be the dominating language. One religion, one language, one brotherhood, one G-d etc. Think about it.

That reminds me of this:

"
Revelation 13

15He was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that it could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed.

16He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead,

17so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.

if your god can only send it's message in an ambiguous language 90%+ of it's converts do not understand and it loses it's meaning being interpreted, then your god is arabic and only understands arabic. This is not God.

Quote:
" The Koran is one of the worlds classics which cannot be translated without grave loss." (Ref. A. Guillama, Islam, P. 73)


Quote:
Adding to this the english language it self falls short and is limited in conveying the proper significant meaning of the Arabic in which Tafsir is need for those who do not speak Arabic for them to obtain a fuller understanding.


Liberate wrote:
Now you are admitting you need a tafsir to understand it, if I were to show you some of the unbelievable nonsense in your tafsirs you are going to start acting that you are quran only again as you are doing with the hadiths.

Did you see in bold who the Tafsir is for ?

What difference does it make?
The tafsir is for those who do not understand arabic according to you, so what do you think the tafsir is explaining to them?

Quote:
16:4 He has created man from a sperm-drop
32:8 He made his seed from a quintessence of despised fluid
35:11 ... then from a little fluid
53:46 From a sperm-drop when lodged (in its place)
56:58 Do you then see? The (human Seed) that ye emit
75:37 Was he not a drop of sperm emitted (in lowly form)?
76:2 We created Man from a drop of mingled sperm
80:19 From a sperm-drop He hath created him
86:6-7 He is created from a drop emitted - proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.


These are some of your creation accounts according to Mohammed, all state that man is created from sperm, that it is emitting from between the backbone and the ribs.

No those are the creation accounts according to the interpretation of the translators that are subject to error.

Now you are debating with an Arabic speaker. My reference is the Quran in Arabic not a translation. Now what do those verses mean to me when I read them in their original ? Here it is as follows with its Tafsir:

16:4 He created man (male and female) from a nutfah (a thing that trickles) [ie a sperm]

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : ["nutfah" is a feminine verbal noun derived from the root "natafa" meaning to trickle dribble or drop. Male and female "al-insaan" is created from this thing that determines their gender]

32:8 and then He made his (Adam and his Wife) progeny from an extract from contemptible water

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : [ the progeny of man is created from an extract drawn from contemptible water or fluid in the human body. There is nothing stating directly or inderectly that this is semen]

35:11 and Allah created you all from dust, and then a nutfah (a thing that strickles), and then He made you all as pairs..

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : [ The evolution of the creation of mankind is here spoken of. Allah began his creation of dust and thus his body is composed of dust which is one of the constituents of his body as we see when the body decomposes after death it become as dust once again. The dust element of the body is used to produce the nutfah along with other constituent elements such as water.Then from nutfah the pairs of male and female are created from which determines the gender.]

53:46 from a nutfah (a trickler ie. sperm) when emited

Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah : [ The study of the male repoductive system shows that the sperm is emited from at least 3 parts of the male. 1) from the Scotum 2) Prostate glands 3) and then the penis which druing emition passes through the Epididymis from the Scrotum that pushes it out to the prostate glands that adds fluid ie semen to it and then through the Urethra of the Penis.]

Now the tafsir has the translation wrong, and you interpret the tafsir with your own interpolations to match with what you want the koran to say.

Absolutely amazing, so let me get this straight the tafsir is for those who do not understand arabic, but the interpretation of the tafsir you suddenly deem is incorrect even though the tafsir is for those who do not understand arabic, so the people who are reading the tafsir that is suppose to aid their understanding as they do not understand arabic according to you are in a lose lose situation because the tafsir interpretation is wrong!!!. Is not the tafsir suppose to have the same message as the quran? regardless if it is an arabic speaker or a non arabic speaker that is reading it, where do you get off with this ego that the tafsir has no hold on you?

WHERE ARE YOUR ARABIC SCHOLAR QUALIFICATIONS TO DISMISS ALL QURANIC TRANSLATIONS, HADITHS AND TAFSIRS AS A WRONG TRANSLATION?

For someone who alledgedly studied embryology I find it unbelievable to hear you SAY ovum and sperm is produced from between the backbone and the ribs.

And you have mistaken me or you were not paying attention to what I said. I think you are bringing your own personal debated issues with other muslims into this. I mentioned no such thing:

So then let man (male and female) consider from what they are created from. They are created from ejected liquid coming out from between the backbone and the ribs "

"Man" is translated from the arabic word "al-insaa" which is dual literally meaning "the two human beings" expressing the two gender of male and female.

The mistake here is when people read this they thinkin of only the gender of male when it is refering to both male and female.

"Liquid" is translated from the arabic word "maa'a" whereas there is no word for semen or sperm in the context.

This liquid that both male and female are created from is ejected comming out from between the backbone and the ribs which is the THORAX area of the spinal.

Where in the world you Christians keep having this illusions of semen and sperm is beyond me.

Whos Thorax does this Liquid come out from. It is the Thorax of both male and female and not just the male in which the Subject is refering to both male and female.

So what is this liquid that lodges in the Thorax of both male and female that we are created from ?

Males produce sperm but what is the sperm created from in the body ?
Females produce ovums which are follicles before ovulation. So what is the follicles created from in the body ?
Before they become living organisms ie cells they where created from something in the body.

The above is your quote, the fact that you even proceeded the back bone and the ribs nonsense in bold font tells me you are just another illogical fundamentalist muslim that is taking your audience for idiots.

[H2O]

Main Entry: 1may·be
Pronunciation: 'mA-bE also 'me-
Function: adverb
: PERHAPS

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary

Main Entry: 1per·haps
Pronunciation: p&r-'haps, 'praps
Function: adverb
Etymology: per + hap
: possibly but not certainly : MAYBE

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary

Main Entry: pos·si·bly
Pronunciation: -blE
Function: adverb
1 : in a possible manner : by any possibility
2 : by merest chance : PERHAPS

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?b ... &x=24&y=16

Main Entry: pos·si·ble
Pronunciation: 'pä-s&-b&l
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin possibilis, from posse to be able, from potis, pote able + esse to be -- more at POTENT, IS
1 a : being within the limits of ability, capacity, or realization b : being what may be done or may occur according to nature, custom, or manners
2 a : being something that may or may not occur b : being something that may or may not be true or actual <possible explanation>
3 : having an indicated potential <a possible housing site>
synonyms POSSIBLE, PRACTICABLE, FEASIBLE mean capable of being realized. POSSIBLE implies that a thing may certainly exist or occur given the proper conditions <a possible route up the west face of the mountain>. PRACTICABLE implies that something may be effected by available means or under current conditions <a practicable route up the west face of the mountain>. FEASIBLE applies to what is likely to work or be useful in attaining the end desired <commercially feasible for mass production>.

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?b ... a=possible

The Arabic word "'asaa" denotes hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked as an opinion or doubt or certainty (Ref. Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon)

Perhaps his Lord, if he devorced you all, that He will replace for him spouses better than you....."

So without looking at the Arabic it could either be doubt[uncertain] or certainty. It can be either one or the other.

The Arabic words "anna" "an" both convey "that" but have two different significance in the Arabic language.

Both are conjuntions in which "anna" "that" is the equivalent of "that" in English

The Arabic "an" "that" with verb (yubdila ~ He will) in the subj. indicating an action not yet realized, an expected or possible event which is mansoob of "'asaa" ~ perhaps denoting the certainty of a thing more than likely to happen.

In the Arabic it indicates that IF Muhammad (s.a.w.) had devorced his wives it was more than likely in certainty that Allah would have given him wives better than them.

We find it to be a mere polite, rather than harsh, way of a warning towards the wives of the prophet.

H20 wrote:
..Males produce sperm but what is the sperm created from in the body ?
Females produce ovums which are follicles before ovulation. So what is the follicles created from in the body ?
Before they become living organisms ie cells they where created from something in the body.

Liberate wrote:
The above is your quote, the fact that you even proceeded the back bone and the ribs nonsense in bold font tells me you are just another illogical fundamentalist muslim that is taking your audience for idiots

Duh !

[Liberate]

Do you honestly think I am impressed by you showing me english definitions of what maybe is?


Is this your way of debate to go into wanton irrelevant dribble that have no logical bearing on the subject at hand.

Your god says "maybe[a conditional clause] his lord [what is this third person possessive pronoun doing here if this is coming from the first person?if [a second conditional clause] he divorces his wives that allah[/b[b]][allah is still a third person] will give him virgins, obedient, submitters."

In the Arabic it indicates that IF Muhammad (s.a.w.) had devorced his wives it was more than likely in certainty that Allah would have given him wives better than them.

Do you even realise the logical implications of your entire argument?
Maybe if he divorces his wives allah will grant him virgins submitters and obedient ones <-- all this coming from the first person? Does this sound like such a statement came from the first person who is suppose to be divine? with two conditional clauses?

I suggest you learn what propositonal clauses are and their uses:

The two words have no difference in terms of meaning. You use 'maybe' and 'perhaps' to indicate that something is possible, although you are not sure about it.

Source (English doctor): http://www.nationmultimedia.com/edu/edu ... 8/dr.shtml

Does the above sound like God? Would God say something He is not sure about in addition to a conditional clause?

" Maybe if you stopped talking unbelievable dribble that people will take you seriously"

According to you:

In the Arabic it indicates that IF you had stopped talking unbelievable dribble it was more than likely in certainty that we will take you seriously.

Is our taking you seriously a certainty or is it dependent on two clauses a conditional clause 'if' and a propositional clause 'maybe'/'perhaps' 'perchance' /'possibly'?

We find it to be a mere polite, rather than harsh, way of a warning towards the wives of the prophet.

I suggest you read the hadiths surrounding that incident, your so called prophet was having sex with his christian slave girl paying her no dowry (rape) amidst his promise to Hafsah that he wouldn't do it again after she caught him in the middle of it.

H20 wrote:
..Males produce sperm but what is the sperm created from in the body ?
Females produce ovums which are follicles before ovulation. So what is the follicles created from in the body ?
Before they become living organisms ie cells they where created from something in the body.

Liberate wrote:
The above is your quote, the fact that you even proceeded the back bone and the ribs nonsense in bold font tells me you are just another illogical fundamentalist muslim that is taking your audience for idiots

Duh !

Were you only reading the large font sized 'ovum' quote of yours?

Here let me quote it again just in case you didn't read the entire quote in context the first time round:

So then let man (male and female) consider from what they are created from. They are created from ejected liquid coming out from between the backbone and the ribs "

"Man" is translated from the arabic word "al-insaa" which is dual literally meaning "the two human beings" expressing the two gender of male and female.

The mistake here is when people read this they thinkin of only the gender of male when it is refering to both male and female.

"Liquid" is translated from the arabic word "maa'a" whereas there is no word for semen or sperm in the context.

This liquid that both male and female are created from is ejected comming out from between the backbone and the ribs which is the THORAX area of the spinal.

Where in the world you Christians keep having this illusions of semen and sperm is beyond me.

Whos Thorax does this Liquid come out from. It is the Thorax of both male and female and not just the male in which the Subject is refering to both male and female.

So what is this liquid that lodges in the Thorax of both male and female that we are created from?

Males produce sperm but what is the sperm created from in the body ?

Females produce ovums which are follicles before ovulation. So what is the follicles created from in the body ?

Before they become living organisms ie cells they where created from something in the body

The above is your quote, the fact that you even proceeded the back bone and the ribs nonsense in bold font tells me you are just another illogical fundamentalist muslim that is taking your audience for idiots

What do you mean when you tell us that sperm is created from a liquid produced in the thorax, but the quran is not referring to semen when it says you are created from water gushing forth" in contradiction with the tafsir?

what do you mean when you tell us ovum is created from a liquid produced in the thorax and that the quran is not referring to 'sexual fluids' of the woman in contradiction with the tafsir?

This is your tafsir if you want to say it doesn't apply to you because your knowledge of arabic is greater than whoever wrote the tafsir, I suggest you devise a proper name for your cult make your own masjids and start proclaiming to every sunni muslim whose masjids you use that their religion is wrong and you have the onus on truth.

(He is created from a water gushing forth.) meaning, the sexual fluid that comes out bursting forth from the man and the woman. Thus, the child is produced from both of them by the permission of Allah. Due to this Allah says,



(Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) meaning, the backbone (or loins) of the man and the ribs of the woman, which is referring to her chest. Shabib bin Bishr reported from `Ikrimah who narrated from Ibn `Abbas that he said,


(Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) "The backbone of the man and the ribs of the woman. It (the fluid) is yellow and fine in texture. The child will not be born except from both of them (i.e., their sexual fluids).'' Concerning Allah's statement,

What and where is this liquid that is in the thorax that produces sperm and ovum? You are saying you didn't say sperm and ovum is produced from between the backbone and the ribs, when it is implied with the nonsense above, where are your scientific journals that support your singular assertion that sperm and ovum are produced from a liquid in the thorax ( showing me pictures of male and female reproductive systems as if it supports your point of view means you are taking your audiences for idiots)

[Joseph]

H20, et al

re: What was the topic of this thread again?????

Topic title is, How do Christians read the Quran. Had you intended only to lecture, say so. Nonetheless if you know of any credal statement for Quran, as courtesy share the information with the readers, before lecturing. As for semantic problem of traditional and orthodox, word meanings can be disciplined if genuine discussion is desired. Until you see fit to do more than guess the brand of Islam encountered, I will assume reality of difference is only in your head.

Just so JCF members will know, obstruction to productive discussions will not come from myself. Muslims, who have contacted me for email discussions, find my agreement for investigating Islam and Christianity, more than fair. None were first asked to reciprocate philosophically the Trinity as valid possibility. I did recommend consistency, but there was no hammer waiting over heads when some inconsistency occurs. And made it clear, I would not put-up with special pleading. Any Muslim here believing aforementioned considerations in earlier and present post, are unsatisfactory, please let me know why. I am ready and willing to listen.

re: Sorry Joseph you lost me here bold.

My stupidity for assuming you understood crux of the Quran and Sunna, and apologizes for giving undue credit. For readers' benefit, I will clarify.

reference material: "Dawagandist show little conscious in telling every non-Muslim that Islam Canonical traditions are untrustworthy like the Bible"...Muslims use the terms, Sunna and Hadith, interchangeably unless specifying

Islam holds the Quran and Sunna as inseparable i.e. both revelations have well-nigh equal authority, though the relationship is rarely mentioned in the propagation of Islam. Believed second only to Quran in perfection, light and truth, the Sunna necessarily embodies the spirit of Mohammed. The Sunna is known through the Hadith and the Hadith contains the Sunna. So if one dismiss the traditions then Sunna is thrown out by default and Quran is left wanting. Supposedly in Islam there is a "scientific," method for Sunna and interpretations, and not to be confused with mere theological science. Whatever the method is called, I am certain it is bewildering. Unless more information is received, it's correct to state the Sunnah is created(invented), contradictory and complex. Following is my summary on relationship of the Quran and Sunna.

The uncreated, non-contradicting and "clear" text, depends on the created, contradicting and complex method for understanding the "simple" religion.

Now, how do Muslims deal with Sunna difficulties. Many simply use a magic formula much like the following, "We believe in the Taurat, Zabur and Injil, but we don't believe in the Bible." Which is, "We believe in the Sunna but don't use Hadith contradicting the Quran." Perhaps latter formula could be true, but neither are Sunna contradictions to be disregarded, although a Muslim can do so at his/her own peril. The ruling and warning comes from the keepers of Islam and not something I invented. Furthermore, imo, crux of the relationship can and does get worse. On an Islamic site, I came upon the following question being asked by a Muslim.

Question. "Recently I read that Imam Malik ibn Anas judged that certain forms of Sunna (or hadith, however you choose to look at it) could abrogate the Qur'an. This was found in the Chapter in Imam Malik in "The Four Imams" published by Dar at Taqwa....I am curious to find out what possible legal reasoning Malik could have had for this Idea."

Answer should have been quite simple. But I'm interested in how Muslims here would answer and matching the answers with ones he received.

joseph

[H2O]

What and where is this liquid that is in the thorax that produces sperm and ovum? You are saying you didn't say sperm and ovum is produced from between the backbone and the ribs, when it is implied with the nonsense above, where are your scientific journals that support your singular assertion that sperm and ovum are produced from a liquid in the thorax ( showing me pictures of male and female reproductive systems as if it supports your point of view means you are taking your audiences for idiots)

In my post, that seems to go over your head, it was a question as to what is the sperm and the ovum created from not where they come from .

So what is this liquid that lodges in the Thorax of both male and female that we are created from?

Males produce sperm but what is the sperm created from in the body ?

Females produce ovums which are follicles before ovulation. So what is the follicles created from in the body ?

Before they become living organisms ie cells they were created from something in the body

They were questions as what was the sperm and ovum created from which do not say that the sperm or ovum proceeded from out of the Backbone and the Ribs ie the Thorax.

No one could answer it so I ellaborated on it :

So what is this liquid that lodges in the Thorax of both male and female that we are created from ?

Males produce sperm but what is the sperm created from in the body ?

Females produce ovums which are follicles before ovulation. So what is the follicles created from in the body ?

Before they become living organisms ie cells they where created from something in the body.

This question was left open on another Forum http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... ght=#35518 and no one could respond to it. The Ovum of a woman and the sperm of a man is made of plasm. This plasm is produced from "maa'a" or liquid from between the backbone and the ribs of men and women :

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 8884#38884

Thus was further ellaborated on in Tafsir Al-Mujaalid Samiy Abdullah as to Surah 86:5-7 :

"This liquid that both male and female are created from is ejected coming out from between the backbone and the ribs which is the THORAX area of the spinal. Whos Thorax does this Liquid come out from ? It is the Thorax of both male and female and not just the male in which the Subject is refering to both male and female. The Ovum of a woman and the sperm of a man is made of plasm. This plasm is produced from "maa'a" or liquid or what is known as spinal fluid that circulates through the back bone that is also absorbed through veins"

Do you even realise the logical implications of your entire argument?
Maybe if he divorces his wives allah will grant him virgins submitters and obedient ones <-- all this coming from the first person? Does this sound like such a statement came from the first person who is suppose to be divine? with two conditional clauses?

Maybe if ? There are two seperate clauses and now because of your predjudice prognostic outlook you are now trying to make them as one.


Perhaps his Lord(1st clause), if he (Muhammad) devorced you all(interjected 2nd clause), that He(Allah) will replace for him(Muhammad) spouses better than you (continuation and completion of the first clause)....."

The order of rendition of the clauses:

"Perhaps that his Lord will replace for him spouses better than you all if he devorced you...."

The grammatical indication in Arabic that is void in english was explained :

The Arabic words "anna" "an" both convey "that" but have two different significance in the Arabic language.

Both are conjuntions in which "anna" "that" is the equivalent of "that" in English

The Arabic "an" "that" with verb (yubdila ~ He will) in the subj. indicating an action not yet realized, an expected or possible event which is mansoob of "'asaa" ~ perhaps denoting the certainty of a thing more than likely to happen.

In the Arabic it indicates that IF Muhammad (s.a.w.) had devorced his wives it was more than likely in certainty that Allah would have given him wives better than them.

We find it to be a mere polite, rather than harsh, way of a warning towards the wives of the prophet.

As for Allah speaking of himself in the third person is nothing new. Through out the entire Quran Allah speaks of himself in the third person and in the first person.

Muhammad (s.a.w.) is also spoken of in the third person (his) in that verse that you are so wantonly scrutinizing.

You automatic assert that it is Muhammad who is speaking in his own words cause you dont believe he is a prophet and that the words he utttering are being transmitted from Allah. We believe the complete oposite.

Now in the atheistic view and understanding it would be Angel Gabriel who is speaking through Muhammad to his wives as he was the one that brought the message from Allah to Muhammad (based on the claims of the Quran) in which both Allah(s.w.t.) and Muhammad(s.w.a.) are spoken of in the third person.

[2:97] Say, "Anyone who opposes Gabriel should know that he has brought
down this (Quran) into your heart(Muhammad), [b]in accordance with GOD's will, confirming
previous scriptures, and providing guidance and good news for the believers."

[16:102] Say(Muhammad), "The Holy Spirit has brought it (Quran) down from your Lord, truthfully, to assure those who believe, and to provide a beacon and good news for the submitters."


[26.191] And most surely your Lord(Muhammad) is Mighty, the Merciful.
[26.192] And most surely this is a revelation from the Lord of the worlds.
[26.193] The Spirit of Truth has descended with it,
[26.194] Upon your heart (Muhammad) that you may be of the warners
[26.195] In plain Arabic language

[/b]

Gabriel is called by the honorable titles The Holy Spirit and The Spirit of Truth

It is also interesting to know that the name " Gabriel" in Arabic (Gbryl) has the same gematrical value of the word "Al-Ruh' " (the Spirit), both being 245. G=3 , B=2, R=200, Y=10 and L=30, therefore 3+2+200+10+30 = 245. While the word Al-Ruh' (The spirit) has , A=1, L=30, R=200, U (waw)= 6 , H'=8, therefore 1+30+200+6+8 = 245 ........In conclusion, the "Holy Spirit" in the Quran refers to the angle Gabriel and has nothing to do with Trinity or part of a Trinity. Trinity is denounced in the strongest language in the Quran.

http://www.submission.org/jesus/holy_spirit.html

[Apple Pie]

Greetings H2O,

I’d like to comment on yet another one of your falsities…

Gabriel is called by the honorable titles The Holy Spirit and The Spirit of Truth

Let’s start with the basics.

The "Holy Spirit" is NOT another name for Gabriel. Period.

There is not a single verse in the entire Koran where it explicitly refers to Gabriel as the Holy Spirit.


The Holy Spirit is God.

The Holy Bible explicitly teaches this. Both the Old and New Testaments clearly teach that the Holy Spirit is an eternal divine Person, not a created entity like the angels.

The Old Testament clearly presents the Holy Spirit as God, having all the attributes of Deity and personhood.

Let’s look at what the OT has to say:

The Holy Spirit is Called God

THE SPIRIT OF JEHOVAH HAS SPOKEN BY ME, AND HIS WORD is on my tongue. THE GOD OF ISRAEL SAID, the Rock of Israel spoke to me: One ruling over man righteously, who rules in the fear of God, (2 Sam 23:2-3)


The Holy Spirit is the Creator

And the earth being without form and empty, and darkness on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moving gently on the face of the waters, (Gen 1:2)

The Spirit of God made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life. (Job 33:4)


The Holy Spirit is Omnipresent

And I shall come down and speak with you there; AND I WILL TAKE OF THE SPIRIT WHICH IS UPON YOU, AND WILL PUT IT ON THEM; and they will bear the burden of the people with you, that you may not bear it yourself alone. (Num 11:17)

And Moses went out and spoke to the people the words of Jehovah and gathered seventy men of the elders of the people, and caused them to stand around the tabernacle. And Jehovah came down in the cloud and spoke to him, AND TOOK OF THE SPIRIT WHICH WAS ON HIM, AND PUT IT ON THE SEVENTY MEN OF THE ELDERS. AND IT HAPPENED, AS THE SPIRIT RESTED ON THEM, that they prophesied, but they did not continue. And two of the men were left in the camp, the name of the one being Eldad, and the name of the second Medad; AND THE SPIRIT RESTED ON THEM, and they were among those written, but did not go out to the tabernacle. And they prophesied in the camp. (Num 11:24-26)

WHERE SHALL I GO FROM YOUR SPIRIT? Or where shall I flee from Your face? If I go up to Heaven, You are there; if I make my bed in Sheol, behold, You are there! If I take the wings of the morning, dwelling in the uttermost part of the sea, even there Your hand shall lead me; and Your right hand shall seize me. If I say: Surely the darkness shall cover me; even the night shall be light around me. Even the darkness will not be dark from You, but the night shines as the day; as is the darkness, so is the light. (Psalm 139:7-12)


The Holy Spirit Manifests Personal Traits

AND THEY ANGERED HIM at The Waters of Provocation, and it went ill for Moses because of them; FOR THEY PROVOKED HIS SPIRIT, and he spoke rashly with his lips. (Psalm 106:32-33)

WHO HAS METED OUT THE SPIRIT OF JEHOVAH, or a man His counsel taught Him? (Isa 40:13)

BUT THEY REBELLED, AND PROVOKED HIS HOLY SPIRIT, so He was turned to be their enemy; He fought against them. (Isa 63:10)

AND THE SPIRIT LIFTED ME up and brought me to the eastern gate of the house of Jehovah, the gate which faces eastward. And, behold, at the opening of the gate were twenty five men. And I saw among them Jaazaniah the son of Azzur, and Pelatiah, the son of Benaiah, leaders of the people. AND HE SAID TO ME, Son of man, these are the men who plot evil and advise wicked advice in this city, who say, It is not near, let us build houses; she is the pot, and we are the flesh. So prophesy against them, prophesy, son of man! AND THE SPIRIT OF JEHOVAH FELL ON ME and said to me, Speak, So says Jehovah: So you have said, house of Israel, for I Myself know the elevations of your spirit. (Eze 11:1-5)

But many years You had patience with them, and testified against them BY YOUR SPIRIT, by Your prophets. Yet they would not give ear. And You gave them into the hand of the peoples of the lands. (Neh 9:30)


The Holy Spirit is Israel's Redeemer

Then His people remembered the days past of Moses and His people, saying, Where is He who brought us up from the sea with the shepherd of His flock. Where is HE WHO PUT HIS HOLY SPIRIT WITHIN HIM; who led them by Moses' right hand, with His glorious arm, dividing the water before them, to make for Him an everlasting name? He led them through the deeps; like the horse in the wilderness, they did not stumble. As the cattle go down into the valley, so THE SPIRIT OF JEHOVAH CAUSED HIM TO REST; so You led Your people, to make a glorious name for Yourself. (Isa 63:11-14)


The Holy Spirit is the Author of the New Birth and the Cause of Regeneration

AND THE SPIRIT OF JEHOVAH will be powerful on you, and you will prophesy with them; AND YOU WILL BE TURNED INTO ANOTHER MAN. (1 Sam 10:6)

YOU SEND OUT YOUR SPIRIT, AND THEY ARE CREATED; AND YOU RENEW THE FACE OF THE EARTH. (Psalm 104:30)

Because the palace is forsaken; the crowd of the city is forsaken; mound and tower are instead caves, until forever; a joy of wild asses; pasture for flocks; UNTIL IS POURED OUT ON US THE SPIRIT FROM ON HIGH, and the wilderness becomes a fruitful field; and the fruitful field is reckoned as a forest. (Isa 32:14-15)

For I will take you from the nations and gather you out of all the lands and bring you into your land. Then I will sprinkle clean waters on you, and you shall be clean. I will cleanse you from all your defilement and from all your idols. And I will also give you a new heart, and I will put a new spirit within you. And I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give to you a heart of flesh. AND I WILL PUT MY SPIRIT WITHIN YOU and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you shall keep My judgments and do them. And you shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers. And you shall be a people to Me, and I will be God to you. (Eze 36:24-28 )


The Holy Spirit Empowers and Distributes God's Gifts to Believers

And Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying: Behold, I have called by name Bezaleel, the son of Uri, the son of Hur, to the tribe of Judah. AND I HAVE FILLED HIM WITH THE SPIRIT OF GOD IN WISDOM, AND IN INTELLIGENCE, AND IN KNOWLEDGE, AND IN ALL WORKMANSHIP, to devise designs, to work in gold and in silver and in bronze, and in cutting of stones for finishings, and in carving of wood, to work in all workmanship. And behold! I have given with him Aholiab the son of Ahisamach of the tribe of Dan; and in the heart of every wise-hearted one I have given wisdom; and they shall make all which I have commanded you: (Exo 31:1-6)

And Moses said to the sons of Israel, Behold! Jehovah has called by name Bezaleel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah. AND HE HAS FILLED HIM WITH THE SPIRIT OF GOD, IN WISDOM, IN INTELLIGENCE, AND IN KNOWLEDGE, AND IN ALL WORKMANSHIP, (Exo 35:30-31)

And Joshua the son of Nun was full of THE SPIRIT OF WISDOM, for Moses had laid his hands on him. And the sons of Israel listened to him and did as Jehovah commanded Moses. (Deut 34:9)

The NT is also in agreement with the OT, and clearly teaches that the Holy Spirit is fully God, having all the attributes of Deity and personhood as evidenced here:

1. The Holy Spirit is called God. Acts 5:3-4
2. The Holy Spirit is called Lord/Jehovah. 2 Corinthians 3:17-18
3. The Holy Spirit is eternal. Hebrews 9:14
4. The Holy Spirit is Omnipresent, Omniscient and Omnipotent. John 14:16-17; Romans 8:11; 1 Corinthians 2:10-12, 3:16, 6:19, 12:7-14; Galatians 5:22-23
5. The Holy Spirit is a Person, having intellect, emotions and will. Luke 12:11-12; Acts 10:19-20; 11:12, 28; 13:2; 21:10-11, 28:25-27; Romans 5:5, 8:26-27, 15:30; 1 Corinthians 12:11; Ephesians 4:30; Hebrews 3:7-11, 10:15-17; Revelation 1:4; 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22; 14:13, 22:17
6. The Holy is the Author of the new birth and the Cause of regeneration. John 3:5-6, 7:37-39; Acts 2:1-4, 8:14-17, 10:44-48, 11:15-18; Galatians 5:25


These passages clearly prove that the Holy Spirit IS NOT the angel Gabriel.

Rather, THE HOLY SPIRIT IS GOD.

This is further proven by these passages….

And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin who had been betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. And entering, the angel said to her, Hail, one having received grace! The Lord is with you. You are blessed among women! And seeing this, she was disturbed at his word, and considered what kind of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, Do not fear, Mary, for you have found favor from God. And behold! You will conceive in your womb and bear a Son, and you will call His name Jesus. (Luke 1:26-31)

This One will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob to the ages, and of His kingdom there will be no end. But Mary said to the angel, How will this be since I do not know a man? AND ANSWERING, THE ANGEL SAID TO HER, THE HOLY SPIRIT WILL COME UPON YOU, AND THE POWER OF THE MOST HIGH WILL OVERSHADOW YOU, AND FOR THIS REASON THAT HOLY ONE BEING BORN OF YOU WILL BE CALLED SON OF GOD. (Luke 32-35)

The Angel Gabriel distinguishes between the Holy Spirit and himself, showing quite clearly that Gabriel and the Holy Spirit ARE NOT one and the same.

In light of the preceding points, it becomes rather impossible to prove from the Holy Bible that the Holy Spirit is the angel Gabriel.

Let’s look at these Koranic passages:

When/if your Lord said to the angels: "That I am creating (a) human/humans from black (foul mud) dry mud/clay smoothened/rotted." "So when/if I straightened him, and I BLEW IN HIM FROM MY SOUL/SPIRIT, so fall/land/come to him prostrating." (15:28-29)

Who bettered every thing He created it, and He started/began the human's/mankind's creation from mud/clay. Then He created/made his off spring/descendants from descendent/strain/gene/progeny from humiliated/degraded water. Then He straightened Him, AND HE BLEW IN HIM FROM HIS SOUL/SPIRIT, and He made/put for you the hearing/listening, and the eye sights/knowledge, and the hearts , little (is) what you thank/be grateful. (32:7-9)

When your Lord said to the angels: "That I am creating a human from mud/clay." "So if I straightened him, and I BLEW IN HIM FROM MY SOUL/SPIRIT, so fall/come to him prostrating." (38:71-72)

These passages indicate that after fashioning man, God presumably gave him life by breathing his Spirit into him, echoing Genesis 2:7.

This implies that, at least in these contexts, the Spirit is God’s life-giving Agent. This being the case, how can the Spirit be Gabriel without this implying that God used a finite creature to assist him in the creation of man?

Continuing further, we are told in these verses, that Mary conceived Jesus by God’s Spirit:

And who remained chaste/(protected) her genital parts , so WE BLEW INTO HER FROM OUR SOUL/SPIRIT, and We made/created her and her son (as) an evidence/sign to the creations all together/(universes). (21:91)

And Mary Amran's daughter who remained chaste (protected) her genital parts between her legs, so WE BLEW IN IT FROM OUR SOUL/SPIRIT , and she confirmed/was truthful with her Lord's words/expressions, and His Books , and she was from the worshipping humbly (66:12)

We are also told that God’s Spirit appeared to Mary in the form of a man:

So she took from other than them a divider/protection, so WE SENT TO HER OUR SOUL/SPIRIT, SO HE SIMULATED/REPRESENTED TO HER (AS AN) UPRIGHT/AVERAGE HUMAN. (19:17)

These passages indicate that the Spirit is not a force but a divine personality.

The context of this last passage shows that the Spirit, which visibly appeared, is actually the very same Spirit referred to in 21:91 and 66:12:

She said: "That I, I seek protection by the merciful from you, if you were fearing and obeying." He said: "Truly I am your Lord's messenger to GRANT/PRESENT FOR YOU A PURE/RIGHTEOUS BOY." (19:18-19)

The Spirit says that he has come to GIVE Mary a son, implying that this is the one whom Allah breathed into Mary in order to create Jesus.

The claim that Gabriel breathed into Mary would logically make Gabriel the speaker in 21:91 and 66:12.

According to these passages the One speaking states that he will breathe his Spirit into Mary. Nowhere do the passages even hint to someone else being used to impregnate Mary.

Seeing that Muslims claim that the Koran is the word of Allah, implying that Allah is the One speaking here, logically makes Gabriel Allah!

This also means that Gabriel has a Spirit that he uses to create and impart life.

This would therefore make Gabriel the Creator, since Muslims claim that Allah was the one who created Jesus by breathing his Spirit into Mary’s womb!

Otherwise the text would imply that Allah actually breathed Gabriel into both Mary and Adam since, as Muslims claim, the Spirit of Allah is actually Gabriel.

Furthermore, seeing that Muslims do not equate Gabriel with Allah inevitably leads to more than one Creator. Yet the Koran clearly states that there is no other Creator besides Allah.

Therefore, the only plausible explanation is that the Spirit of Allah is not the angel Gabriel.

Another verse supplying additional proof that the Spirit is not Gabriel is the following:

You will not find a nation believing by Allah and the Day the Last/Resurrection Day, they love/show affection (befriend) who angered Allah and His messenger, and even if they were their fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or their father's near relations/tribe, those Allah wrote/decreed in their hearts/minds the faith/belief, and HE SUPPORTED THEM WITH A SOUL/SPRIT FROM HIM, and He makes them enter/enters them treed gardens/paradises, the rivers/waterways flows from beneath it immortally/eternally in it, Allah accepted/approved of them, and409they accepted/approved of Him, those are Allah's group/party , is (it) not that Allah's group/party , they are the successful/winners? (58:22)

Believers are strengthened by a SOUL/SPIRIT from Him, i.e. a spirit from God. In order for the Spirit to be able to strengthen believers everywhere implies that the Spirit is omnipresent.

Yet only God is omnipresent which essentially means that the Spirit is God.

We see that the Spirit is of the divine essence, incomprehensible, omnipresent, personal, and the source of Life, qualities belonging to God alone.

These qualities clearly show that the Spirit of God, the Holy Spirit, the Faithful Spirit cannot be the angel Gabriel since Gabriel is neither omnipresent nor divine.

The Koran clearly demonstrates that the Holy Spirit IS NOT Gabriel.

There IS NOT a single verse in the entire Koran which states that Gabriel is the Holy Spirit or the Faithful Spirit, or even God’s Spirit.

Here are ALL the references to Gabriel in the Koran:

Say: "Who was an enemy to GABRIEL, so that he descended it on your heart/mind with Allah's permission, confirming to what (is) between his hands, and (a) guidance and a good news to the believers." Who was an enemy to Allah, and His angels, and His messengers, and GABRIEL, and Michael, so then Allah (is) an enemy to the disbelievers. (2:97-98 )

If you repent to Allah, so your hearts/minds had inclined/listened, and if they cooperated/supported each other on (against) him, so then Allah, He is his guardian/ally , and GABRIEL, and (the) correct/righteous (of) the believers, and the angels after that (are) a supporter/helper. (66:4)

Here are the Koranic references to the Spirit:

And We had given/brought Moses The Book and We sent from after him with the messengers, and Wegave/brought Jesus Mary's son, the evidences and We supported him with THE HOLY/SANCTIMONIOUS SOUL/SPIRIT, so if whenever a messenger came to you with what yourselves do not desire you become arrogant, so a group you denied and a group you kill. (2:87)

Those are the messengers, We preferred/favored/blessed some/part of them over some/part, from them who spoke/conversed/talked (with) Allah, and He rose some/part of them steps/stages/degrees. And We gave Jesus ,Mary's son, the evidences, and We supported him with THE HOLY/SANCTIMONIOUS SOUL/SPIRIT , and if Allah wanted/willed, those from after them would not (have) fought/killed each other from after the evidences came to them, and but they differed/disagreed/disputed, so from them who believed, and from them who disbelieved, and if Allah willed/wanted, they would not (have) fought/killed each other, and but Allah does/makes what He wants/wills/intends. (2:253)

When Allah said: "You Jesus Mary's son, remember My blessing on you and on your mother, when I supported you with the HOLY/SANCTIMONIOUS SOUL/SPIRIT, you speak/converse (to) the people in the crib/cradle and aged approximately between thirty to fifty years , and when I taught/instructed/informed you The Book , and the wisdom , and the Torah/Old Testament, and the New Testament/Bible, and when you create as a shape/form (of) the bird/birds with My permission, so you blow in it, so it will be flying/birds, with My permission, and you cure and heal the blind/born blind, and the leper with My permission, and when you bring out the deads with My permission, and when I prevented/stopped Israel's sons and daughters from you, when you came to them with the evidences, so those who disbelieved from them said: "That that (is) except clear/evident magic/sorcery." (5:110)

Say: "THE HOLY/SANCTIMONIOUS SOUL/SPRIT descended it from your Lord with the truth to affirm/strengthen those who believed, and guidance, and a good news to the Moslems/submitters/surrenderers." (16:102)

And that it truly is descent (from) Lord (of) the creations all together/(universes). THE SOUL/SPIRIT, the faithful/loyal, descended with it. (26:192-193)

Raiser/honourer (of) the steps/stages/degrees, (owner) of the throne, HE THROWS THE SOUL/SPIRIT FROM HIS ORDER/COMMAND on (to) whom He wills/wants from His worshippers/slaves to warn/give notice (of) the Meeting Day/Resurrection Day. (40:15)

These next three passages make a distinction between the angels (of which Gabriel is obviously one) and the Spirit:

THE ANGELS AND THE SOUL/SPIRIT ascend/climb to Him in a day/time its value/estimation/ measure was/is fifty thousand years. (70:4)

A DAY/TIME THE SOUL/SPIRIT AND THE ANGELS STAND (in) a row/arranged , they do not speak/talk ,except who the merciful permitted/allowed for him, and he said right/correct. (78:38 )

THE ANGELS DESCEND AND THE SOUL/SPIRIT in it, by their Lord's permission/pardon from every matter/affair. (97:4)

This again implicitly supports the position that Gabriel IS NOT the Spirit.

Had the Spirit been Gabriel there would be no need to distinguish him from the angels.

Now YOU can understand why the Koran claims that The SPIRIT of God is Jesus.


Also, how about going back to the beginning?

Please tell me why the Koran had to slavishly copy this story from the Holy Bible. It appears that YOU completely (and most conveniently) forgot to even bring this up.

WHY?

It is clear for ALL to verify that the NT stated this story hundreds of years BEFORE the Koran decided that it also wanted a piece of the pie.(apple pie, that is…)


Here it is once more for your viewing pleasure:

And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin who had been betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. And entering, the angel said to her, Hail, one having received grace! The Lord is with you. You are blessed among women! And seeing this, she was disturbed at his word, and considered what kind of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, Do not fear, Mary, for you have found favor from God. And behold! You will conceive in your womb and bear a Son, and you will call His name Jesus. (Luke 1:26-31)

This One will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob to the ages, and of His kingdom there will be no end. But Mary said to the angel, How will this be since I do not know a man? AND ANSWERING, THE ANGEL SAID TO HER, THE HOLY SPIRIT WILL COME UPON YOU, AND THE POWER OF THE MOST HIGH WILL OVERSHADOW YOU, AND FOR THIS REASON THAT HOLY ONE BEING BORN OF YOU WILL BE CALLED SON OF GOD. (Luke 32-35)



Key Points:

1) Gabriel visits Mary. Gabriel is an angel. Gabriel is NOT the Holy Spirit.

2) Gabriel informs Mary that the HOLY SPIRIT will come upon her. Again, Gabriel is NOT the Holy Spirit.

3) For this reason Jesus will be called the Son of God.


Can you see how the Koran messed up the original?

Once again the Holy Bible is required to CORRECT & CLARIFY the Koran.



Thanks for your understanding…

[webmaster]

Jewish views of the Holy Spirit

Jewish views of the Holy Spirit
The midrash literature contains many statements about the Holy Spirit. It is written that the Holy Spirit, being of heavenly origin, is composed, like everything that comes from heaven, of light and fire. When it rested upon Phinehas his face burned like a torch (Midrash Lev. Rabbah 21). When the Temple was destroyed and the people Israel went into exile, the Holy Spirit returned to heaven; this is indicated in Eccl. 12:7: "the spirit shall return unto God" (Midrash Eccl. Rabbah 12:7). The spirit talks sometimes with a masculine and sometimes with a feminine voice (Eccl. 7:29); i.e., as the word "ruah" is both masculine and feminine, the Holy Spirit was conceived as being sometimes like a man and sometimes like a woman.

According to Jewish tradition, the Holy Spirit dwells only among a worthy generation, and the frequency of its manifestations is proportionate to the worthiness. There was no manifestation of it in the time of the Second Temple (Talmud, Yoma 21b), while there were many during the time of Elijah (Tosefta to the Talmud Sotah, 12:5). According to Job 28:25, the Holy Spirit rested upon the Prophets in varying degrees, some prophesying to the extent of one book only, and others filling two books (Midrash Lev. Rabbah 15:2). Nor did it rest upon them continually, but only for a time.

The Holy Spirit isn't the angel Gabriel.

(Holy Spirit dwelleth with you)
Matthew 10
1. And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.

Future tense about Pentecost and after(Holy Spirit shall be in you).
Matthew 10
19. But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.
20. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.

Future tense about Pentecost(Holy Spirit shall be in you)
John 7
39. But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was NOT yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.

Future tense about Pentecost(Holy Spirit shall be in you) and present tense(dwelleth with you).
John 14
16. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17. Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him: but ye know Him; for He dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

whom the world cannot receive,
because it seeth Him not,
neither knoweth Him:

but ye know Him;
for He dwelleth with you,
and shall be in you.


for He(Holy Spirit) dwelleth with you,
and shall be IN you.

Big difference in the 2.

The stages of development, the highest of which is the Holy Spirit, are as follows: zeal, integrity, purity, holiness, humility, fear of sin, the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit conducts Elijah, who brings the dead to life (Yer. Shab. 3c, above, and parallel passage). The pious act through the Holy Spirit (Midrash Tanhuma, Vayeki, 14); whoever teaches the Torah in public partakes of the Holy Spirit (Midrash Canticles Rabbah 1:9, end; comp. Midrash Lev. Rabbah 35:7). When Phinehas sinned the Holy Spirit departed from him (Midrash Lev. Rabbah 37:4)

Jewish tradition divides the books of the Hebrew Bible into three categories, based on the level of prophecy that their authors are said to have reached.

The visible results of the activity of the Holy Spirit, according to the Jewish conception, are the books of the Bible, all of which have been composed under its inspiration. All the Prophets spoke "in the Holy Spirit"; and the most characteristic sign of the presence of the Holy Spirit is the gift of prophecy, in the sense that the person upon whom it rests beholds the past and the future. According to the Talmud, with the death of the last three prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Holy Spirit ceased to manifest itself in Israel; but the Bat Kol (heavenly voice) was still available.

The Torah (five books of Moses) is said to be written by Moses from a direct verbal revelation of God.
The Nevi'im (prophets) are books written by people who received a high level of prophecy.
The Ketuvim (writings, hagiopgrapha) are written by authors with a lesser level of prophecy known as divine inspiration, Ruach HaKodesh.

Though the nature of the Holy Spirit is really nowhere described, the name indicates that it was conceived as a kind of wind that became manifest through noise and light.

Of special interest is a distinction made by ancient Jewish authorities between the "Spirit of the Lord" (which is the most common way of referring to the Holy Spirit in the Tanakh) and the Shekinah, the presence of God. This distinction is made in the Talmud, which gives a list of things found in the first Temple in Jerusalem, but missing in the second Temple. This list included the Holy Spirit and the Shekinah. The difference is not clearly understood, but it seems that the Shekinah glory was somehow more tangible than the Spirit. This may have referred to God's actual dwelling within the Holy of Holies, and God's presence emanating outward from it in a special way, as opposed to the presence of the Holy Spirit, which was in many locations throughout the world, and especially in individuals. In the Tanakh, however, this indwelling of the Spirit is reserved for kings, prophets, high priests, etc. and is not given to the common believer).

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Holy_Spirit

[Liberate]

What and where is this liquid that is in the thorax that produces sperm and ovum? You are saying you didn't say sperm and ovum is produced from between the backbone and the ribs, when it is implied with the nonsense above, where are your scientific journals that support your singular assertion that sperm and ovum are produced from a liquid in the thorax ( showing me pictures of male and female reproductive systems as if it supports your point of view means you are taking your audiences for idiots)

In my post, that seems to go over your head, it was a question as to what is the sperm and the ovum created from not where they come from .

If you think you are in a position to be condescending I suggest that you read and think about what you are typing to me.

So then let man (male and female) consider from what they are created from. They are created from ejected liquid coming out from between the backbone and the ribs "

Your quote above from the koran.

"Man" is translated from the arabic word "al-insaa" which is dual literally meaning "the two human beings" expressing the two gender of male and female.

The mistake here is when people read this they thinkin of only the gender of male when it is refering to both male and female.

"Liquid" is translated from the arabic word "maa'a" whereas there is no word for semen or sperm in the context.

You next attempt to tell us that this fluid refers to a phantom liquid and not to semen as opposed to the tafsir.

This liquid that both male and female are created from is ejected comming out from between the backbone and the ribs which is the THORAX area of the spinal.

You then tell us in the quote above that this liquid is coming from the thorax area between the backbone and the ribs AND THIS LIQUID IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CREATION OF MALES AND FEMALES.

Where in the world you Christians keep having this illusions of semen and sperm is beyond me.

Whos Thorax does this Liquid come out from. It is the Thorax of both male and female and not just the male in which the Subject is refering to both male and female.

You stress even more in the quote above that this liquid is coming from the thorax of not just males but females.

So what is this liquid that lodges in the Thorax of both male and female that we are created from?

Males produce sperm but what is the sperm created from in the body ?

Females produce ovums which are follicles before ovulation. So what is the follicles created from in the body ?

Before they become living organisms ie cells they where created from something in the body

So what is this liquid that lodges in the Thorax of both male and female that we are created from?

Males produce sperm but what is the sperm created from in the body ?

Females produce ovums which are follicles before ovulation. So what is the follicles created from in the body ?

Before they become living organisms ie cells they were created from something in the body

You then ask us rhetorical questions as to where sperm and ova are produced in the quote above? did you forget that in your previous post you had already mentioned this same fluid comes from the thorax AND THE LIQUID PRODUCES SPERM AND OVA?

Do you even realise the logical implications of your entire argument?
Maybe if he divorces his wives allah will grant him virgins submitters and obedient ones <-- all this coming from the first person? Does this sound like such a statement came from the first person who is suppose to be divine? with two conditional clauses?

Maybe if ? There are two seperate clauses and now because of your predjudice prognostic outlook you are now trying to make them as one.

The only person who is prejudiced and not looking at the statement with an ounce of logic is you:

The two words have no difference in terms of meaning. You use 'maybe' and 'perhaps' to indicate that something is possible, although you are not sure about it.


Source (English doctor): http://www.nationmultimedia.com/edu/edu ... 8/dr.shtml

Does the above sound like it came from God? Would God say something He is not sure about in addition to a conditional clause?

" Maybe if you stopped talking unbelievable dribble that people will take you seriously"

According to you:

In the Arabic it indicates that IF you had stopped talking unbelievable dribble it was more than likely in certainty that we will take you seriously.

Is our taking you seriously a certainty or is it dependent on two clauses a conditional clause 'if' and a propositional clause 'maybe'/'perhaps' 'perchance' /'possibly'?

You are now saying I am grouping Maybe and if as one clause, and you say that they are two separate clauses. How does this help you in the slightest?


"maybe[a conditional clause] his lord [what is this third person possessive pronoun doing here if this is coming from the first person?if [a second conditional clause] he divorces his wives that allah[/b[b]][allah is still a third person] will give him virgins, obedient, submitters."


PLEASE TELL US IF MAYBE OR PERHAPS IS IN THE ARABIC OF THAT VERSE?

Would you care to give us your definition of maybe, and tell us how you equate a propositional clause like maybe with the actions of God?

http://www.submission.org/jesus/holy_spirit.html

Do you know who this group are that you are quoting?
I suggest you speak to humble guest about this particular group before you make a greater mockery of your beliefs.

[H2O]

The Holy Spirit isn't the angel Gabriel.

In the Quran The Holy Spirit ~ The Spirit of Truth is Angel Gabriel in our beliefs. Those are nothing more than designated titles of the Angel who is also called a Rasool ~ messenger in the Quran.

[19.16] And mention Marium in the Book when she drew aside from her family to an eastern place;
[19.17] So she took a veil (to screen herself) from them; then We sent to her Our spirit, and he appeared to her as a man.
[19.18] She said: Surely I seek refuge with Arrahmaan (Allah) from you, if you are one guarding (against evil).
[19.19] He said: I am only a messenger of your Lord: That I will give you a pure boy (note: not begotton son ~ walad but ghulam ~ a male child having no association with Allah).
[19.20] She said: When shall I have a boy and no mortal has yet touched me, nor have I been unchaste?
[19.21] He said: Even so; your Lord says: It is easy to Me: and that We may make him a sign to men and a mercy from Us, and it is a matter which has been decreed.

This is the same angel that Allah aided Jesus with in his prophetic mission distinguished from the spirit Allah blew into the womb of Maryam. The spirit that Allah blew into Maryam was the spirit of life in which all men recieve.

[32.6] This is the Knower of the unseen and the seen, the Mighty the Merciful,
[32.7] Who made good everything that He has created, and He began the creation of man from dust.
[32.8] Then He made and then He made his (Adam and his Wife) progeny from an extract from contemptible water
[32.9] Then He made him complete and breathed into him of His spirit, and made for you the ears and the eyes and the hearts; little is it that you give thanks.

Jesus was received the same spirit of life like all men:

[21:91] And (remember) her who guarded her chastity: We breathed into her of Our Spirit, and We made her and her son a Sign for all peoples.

[12] And Maryam, the daughter of 'Imran, who guarded her breach (private part); and We breathed fee-hi (into him ~ Jesus as an embryo) from Our spirit; and she testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of his Revelations, and was one of the devout (Servants).

The Spirit that man receives in the wombs of their mothers and the Spirit that they are strengthened or aided with are different.

58:22Thou wilt not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, loving those who resist Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred. For such He has written Faith in their hearts, and strengthened them with a spirit from Himself. And He will admit them to Gardens beneath which Rivers flow, to dwell therein (forever). Allah will be well pleased with them, and they with Him. They are the Party of Allah. Truly it is the Party of Allah that will achieve Felicity.

This Spirit of aid, strength, and help to righteous men and women is Angel Gabriel whom is sent with other angels when he descends by the command and will of Allah.

[70:4]The angels and the Spirit ascend unto Him in a Day the measure whereof is (as) fifty thousand years
[78:38]The Day that the Spirit and the angels will stand forth in ranks, none shall speak except any who is permitted by (Allah) Most Gracious, and he will say what is right.
[97:4]Therein come down the angels and the Spirit by Allah's permission, on every errand:

Thus whenever we see Christians talk about the belief in trinity we see it as being polytheistic.

[webmaster]

I have given 2 religions which support that the Holy Spirit is not an angel. You in return give me quotes from some man in the desert with no other scriptures to back up what he said.


The Father is all the fulness of the Godhead invisible!
The Son is all the fulness of Godhead manifested!
The Holy Spirit is all the fulness of the Godhead acting immediately upon the creature!


John 4:24: "God is Spirit."

Meaning:
The Samaritan woman's question,
"Where is God to be found?" On Mt. Zion or Gerizim?
Christ's answer:
God is not to be confined to any one place (cf. Acts 7:48; 17:25, 1 Kings 8:27).
God must be worshipped in spirit as distinguished from place,
form, or other sensual limitations (4:21); and in truth as distinguished from false conceptions resulting from imperfect knowledge (4:22).


Light on "God is Spirit," from other Scriptures.

Luke 24:39: "A spirit hath not flesh and bones," i. e., has not
body, or parts like human beings; incorporeal; not subject to human
limitations.

Light Derived from Cautions Against Representing God by Graven
Images:

Deut. 4:15-23; Isa. 40:25; Exod. 20:4. Study these passages carefully
and note that the reason why images were forbidden was because no
one had ever seen God, and consequently could not picture how He
looked, and, further, there was nothing on the earth that could
resemble Him.

Definition of "God is Spirit" in the Light of All This:

God is invisible, incorporeal, without parts, without body,
without passions, and therefore free from all limitations; He is
apprehended not by the senses, but by the soul; hence God is above
sensuous perceptions. 1 Cor. 2:6-16 intimates that without the
teaching of God's Spirit we cannot know God. He is not a material
Being. "LaPlace swept the heavens with his telescope, but could
not find anywhere a God. He might just as well have swept a kitchen
with his broom." Since God is not a material Being, He cannot be
apprehended by physical means.

Questions and Problems with Reference to the Statement that "God
is Spirit."

A) 'What is meant by statement that man was made "in the image of
God"?

Col 3:10; Eph. 4:24 declare that this "image" consists in "righteousness,
knowledge, and holiness of truth." By that is meant that the image
of God in man consisted in intellectual and moral likeness rather
than physical resemblance.


B) What is meant by the anthropomorphic expressions used of God?

For example: God is said to have hands, feet, arms, eyes, ears He
sees, feels, hears, walks, etc. Such expressions are to be understood
only in the sense of being human expressions used in order to bring
the infinite within the comprehension of the finite. How otherwise
could we understand God saving by means of human expressions, in
figures that we all can understand!

How are such passages as Exod. 24:10 and 33:18-23 in which it is
distinctly stated that men saw the God of Israel, to be reconciled
with such passages as John 1:18; "No man hath seen God at any time,"
and Exod. 33:20: "There shall no man see me and live"?

Answer:

A) Spirit can be manifested in visible form:

John 1:32: "I saw tho Spirit descending from heaven like a dove
(or in the form of a dove)." So throughout the ages the invisible
God has manifested Himself in visible form. (See Judges 6:34: The
Spirit of the Lord clothed Himself with Gideon.)

B) On this truth is based the doctrine of "The Angel of the Lord"

in the Old Testament: Gen 16:7, 10, 13. Note here how the Angel of
the Lord is identified with Yahweh Himself, cf. vv. 10, 13. Also
Gen. 22:12--"The angel of the Lord.... not withheld from _me_."
In 18:1-16, one of the three angels clearly and definitely identifies
himself with Jehovah. Compare chapter 19, where it is seen that
only two of the angels have come to Sodom; the other has remained
behind. "Who was this one, this remaining angel? Gen.18:17, 20
answers the question; v. 22 reads: "And Abraham stood yet before
the Lord. In Exod. 13:21 it is Yahweh, while in 14:19 it is the Angel that
went before Israel. Thus was the way prepared for the incarnation, for
the Angel of the Lord in the Old Testament is undoubtedly the second
person of the Trinity. This seems evident from Judges 13:18 compared
with Isa. 9:6, in both of which passages, clearly referring to Christ, the
name "Wonderful" occurs. Also the omission of the definite article "the"
from before the expression "the Angel of the Lord," and the substitution
of "an" points to the same truth. This change is made in the Revised
Version.

C) What was it then that the elders of Israel saw when it is said they saw the "God of Israel"?

Certainly it was not God in His real essence, God as He is in
Himself, for no man can have that vision and live. John 1:18 is
clear on that point: "No man hath seen God at any time." The emphasis
in this verse is on the word "God," and may read, "GOD no one has
seen at any time." In 5:37 Jesus says: "Ye have neither heard his
voice at any time, nor seen his shape." From This it seems clear
that the "seeing" here, the which has been the privilege of no man,
refers to the essence rather than to the person of God, if such
a distinction can really be made. This is apparent also from the
omission of the definite article before God, as well as from the
position of God in the sentence. None but the Son has really seen
God as God, as He really is. What, then, did these men see?

Evidently an appearance of God in some form to their outward
senses; perhaps the form of a man, seeing mention is made of his
"feet." The vision may have been too bright for human eyes to gaze
upon fully, but it was a vision of God. Yet it was only a
manifestation of God, for, although Moses was conversing with God,
he yet said: "If I have found grace in thy sight, show me thy face."
Moses had been granted exceeding great and precious privileges in
that he had been admitted into close communion with God, more so
than any other member of the human race. But still unsatisfied he
longed for more; so in v. 18 he asks to see the unveiled glory of
God, that very thing which no man in the flesh can ever see and
live; but, no, this cannot be. By referring to Exod. 33:18-23 we
find God's answer: "Thou canst not see my face.... thou shalt see
my back parts, but my face shall not be seen." (Num. 12:8 throws
light upon the subject, if compared with Exod. 33:11.)

"The secret remained unseen; the longing unsatisfied; and the
nearest approach to the beatific vision reached by him with whom
God spake face to face, as friend with friend, was to be hidden in
the cleft of the rock, to be made aware of an awful shadow, and to
hear the voice of the unseen."

http://www.gutenberg.net/dirs/etext04/gdotb10.txt

[H2O]

I have given 2 religions which support that the Holy Spirit is not an angel. You in return give me quotes from some man in the desert with no other scriptures to back up what he said.

Thats my job. We are only to warn thats it nothing else just as our Prophet was only a warner. What you do with the info is between you and your Lord who created you.

[5:19] O People of the Book! now hath come unto you, making (things) clear unto you, Our Messenger(Muhammad), after the break in (the series of) Our Messengers, lest ye should say: "There came unto us no bringer of glad tidings and no warner (from evil)"; but now hath come unto you a bringer of glad tidings and a warner. And Allah hath power over all things.

[4:171]O People of the Book! commit no excesses in your religion: nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Al-Masih 'Isa the son of Maryam was (no more than) A Messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Maryam, and a Spirit(of life) from Him: so believe in Allah and His Messengers. Say not "three": desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is One God: glory be to Him: (far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.

[5:73] Indeed those who blaspheme say: Allah(G-d) is the third of three : for there is no god except One God. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.