Contradictions in the Quran

[Loki]

In the bible there are no contradictions only different contexts wich you can rip them out from. To proof this: reading this site http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm would be in place cause it takes far too much time and space to personally refute every aliged contradiction made in the bible. Therefore here's a list of 'contradictions' a fellow Christian studied and refuted with the given arguments.

However, most Muslims' rejection of the Bible is not based on such contradiction lists. For most Muslims this rejection is an integral part of their faith long before they have ever seen any such "contradictions". These lists are usually only used as a convenient means to justify a rejection of the Bible which would otherwise be very difficult to explain rationally.

On the other hand in the quran there are many contradictions and errors, alltough this is not easily admitted cause Muhammed said there weren't any in it... and if there were that it would mean that the Quran is not of God.

"Why don't they contemplate upon the Qur'an. Had it been originated from anyone besides Allah then it would have been beset with inconsistencies and contradictions" [4:82]

So if i find one, i will disprove his authority by his own rule.
I will name TEN!:

1) Wich ONLY answer did they give?
- "Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!" [7:82], [27:56]
- "Bring us the Wrath of Allah if thou tellest the truth." [29:29]

2) Allah isn't sure who gets salvation
- Salvation is for Jews, Christians, and Sabaeans [5:69]
- Salavation is Only for Muslims [3:85]

3) Allah's clock ain't working
- Allah's day is a 1000 years [32:5]
- Allah's day is 50.000 years [70:4]

4) Some angels missing
- Many angels appeared to marry [3:42], [3:45]
- Only one angel appeared to marry [19:17]

5) What's a man really made of?
- A blood clot [96:1-2]
- water [21:30], [24:45], [25:54]
- clay [15:26]
- dust [3:59], [30:20], [35:11]
- or nothing? [19:67]

6) Where does the evil in our lifes come from?
- Satan? [38:41]
- Ourselves?[4:79]
- Allah? [4:78]

7) Angels cannot disobey Allah
- All are commanded [16:49-50]
- Not all are commanded [2:34]

8 ) Death repentance is a impossible possibility
- Pharaoh repented at the site of death and was saved [10:90-92]
- Alltough noone can be saved this way [4:18]

9) Who gets the blame for disbelief
- the disbeliever [6:12]
- Allah [10:100]

10) Persecute unbelievers? or forgive them?
- Persecute the unbelievers [9:29]
- Forgive the unbelievers [45:14]

[Truth Seeker-Joshua]

Loki,
Your points are very well perceived and true. Yet rather than making a muslim respond to "our inturpretations"; as they call them, of their holy book, why don't we just quote the verse that they cant deny?
Or about the men who banded together to inforce the muslim religion upon the acient world?

If we recite the beginning of muslim history, and the facts of their book which they can't deny, no Christian could not believe that the muslims' orgins or beliefs are of evil.
And every muslim on this forum would have trouble "sugar-coating" the historical truth in debate.

[Unite]

Well, you have very limited perspective on this. You declare that you digested the explanations on bible contradictions, but then you suppose Muslims have not (or cannot) explained things you apparently dont understand in Qur'an.

Also, just a small example that shows you are not serious or coming clean. Read the verses again.

8- Death repentance is a impossible possibility
- Pharaoh repented at the site of death and was saved [10:90-92]

10.90. And We took the Children of Israel across the sea, and Fir'aun (Pharaoh) with his hosts followed them in oppression and enmity, till when drowning overtook him, he said: "I believe that Lâ ilâha illa (Huwa): (none has the right to be worshipped but) He," in Whom the Children of Israel believe, and I am one of the Muslims (those who submit to Allâh's Will)."

10.91. Now (you believe) while you refused to believe before and you were one of the Mufsidûn (evil-doers, corrupts, etc.).

10. 92. So this day We shall deliver your (dead) body (out from the sea) that you may be a sign to those who come after you! And verily, many among mankind are heedless of Our Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs , revelations, etc.).

[Loki]

You declare that you digested the explanations on bible contradictions, but then you suppose Muslims have not (or cannot) explained things you apparently dont understand in Qur'an.

With this you say, there are no contradictions in the bible as in the quran. and yes unless i don't see muslim contradictions refuted i can claim that muslims cannot explain this.

most of all, what muslims do is just say that there aren't any and leave it at that.

just a small example that shows you are not serious or coming clean. Read the verses again.

a small example? i gave you ten examples, if you can refute one, doesn't mean you refuted all ten... that's like finding a spelling error in the theory of relativity and then concluding that the rest is equally wrong.

[Unite]

just a small example that shows you are not serious or coming clean. Read the verses again.

a small example? i gave you ten examples, if you can refute one, doesn't mean you refuted all ten... that's like finding a spelling error in the theory of relativity and then concluding that the rest is equally wrong.

The importance of this example is that human beings are not complete and are always prone to deficiciencies in perception and understanding. That is to say, one cannot challenge God with his limited mind and knowledge. Just like the mistake you made in your point here, there might possibly be other mistakes or misunderstandings or your knowldege is not enough to understand. As I know my deficiencies I would not challenge or question Qur'an but try to understand it. This is my view on the issue as a Muslim. And it is for sure that you consciously or unconsciously have the same approach for Bible.

So then, there comes the question i asked in the other topic. What really makes the difference? What is that that will save us? Its answer is not given 2000 or 1400 years ago. It was and is always with us. I'll convey some Sufi views I have.

Knowledge of the Self: A sufi says "Knowledge is to know oneself, if you do not know yourself, then it is just an effort in vain."

This requires inward looking and self interrogation aimed at becoming a sound personality, coherent in behaviours and one that keeps up the justice and sticks to truth in all circumstances, even when this requires going against your own family, fellows etc.

One should start with interrogating himself. He should be able to say "I'm egoist, I envy success of my friends" or "My charities do not go beyond demonstration, or deception of others" and of similar type. Self interrogation is not easy, noone can live without legitimizing his own position. And noone can confess himself that he is a dishounarable person. Even a rapist, murderer finds something to legitimize his acts. Yet, this type of reasoning is of course a trick of Satan.

One has to notice deficiencies and wounds in his heart and behaviours first. And then should have a wish to heal them.

Hedayah (Bestowal of Faith): An important Islamic concept in this picture is "hedayah." Faith in God is not something one can achieve oneself. It is in God's authority. He might make you approach Him, or go away from Him. One may find many verses in the Qur'an to this effect. He may increase your perversion or He may guide you. What is the criterion in His choice?

The criterion is this Knowledge of the Self. A Sufi said "you cannot find truth by searching it, but those who found it are those who searched for it." So we should set out for the purpose, we should open and polish our hearts, we should be open to truth, then He is God who will settle in it. If we do not interrogate ourselves, and polish our hearts anf finally do not have the wish and effort to change ourselves, we will not deserve hedayah.

So journey to God is not an outward but inward journey.

If we deserve faith, He will guide us and extend our knwoledge and capacity to understand. Only then we will be able to differentiate what is true and what is wrong, and stop legitimizing our position at any cost. And that is what will make the difference among people and save them.

These might sound rhetorical, but we are not made up of minds, we also have hearts. And salvation is not just in things we declare with our tongues. It is in all respects of life, about what we think, what we say, the way we behave, and what we actually keep in our hearts. Coherence in all aspects is not easy, but it is the greatest objective of life for us as it will carry us to the true results.

[Loki]

one cannot challenge God with his limited mind and knowledge. Just like the mistake you made in your point here, there might possibly be other mistakes or misunderstandings or your knowldege is not enough to understand.

well that's what muhammed always said, if you don't get it, you must be stupid (without knowledge). so if i find deficiencies in islam, it's because i don't have enough knowledge... that's like a win win situation for muhammed.

As I know my deficiencies I would not challenge or question Qur'an but try to understand it. This is my view on the issue as a Muslim. And it is for sure that you consciously or unconsciously have the same approach for Bible.

So you say it's unfair to critizise each other scriptures? Because you don't persue understanding of the bible, and because i assumenly don't persue understanding of the quran?? acctually i think what makes a person firm in his beliefs, is question your own religion everytime. How else are you able to tell if your religion is firm as a rock, if it is truth, if you don't dare to shake it?

So then, there comes the question i asked in the other topic. What really makes the difference? What is that that will save us? Its answer is not given 2000 or 1400 years ago. It was and is always with us. I'll convey some Sufi views I have.

Are the Suffi's not seen as a religious offshoot sect of islam? some all embracing truth loving mystics, like christians have gnosts and spiritists who claim to be christian too.

Sure i believe truth is universal as well... buddha, zoroaster, gandhi, nagarjuna all said beautifull stuff, even muhammed had a beautifull teaching once in a while... yet so did my grandpa, my friends, philosophers and probably even Hitler must of said something beautifull in his live once... yet that doesn't mean anyone of these people are divinly inspired just because they utter certain 'truth's'... a truth can be universal, yet concerning salvation there can only be one.

Knowledge of the Self: A sufi says "Knowledge is to know oneself, if you do not know yourself, then it is just an effort in vain."

This requires inward looking and self interrogation aimed at becoming a sound personality, coherent in behaviours and one that keeps up the justice and sticks to truth in all circumstances, even when this requires going against your own family, fellows etc.

Yes well i love reading sufi's, bhakti's, zen's, khabbala's... and all sorts of mysticism that likes to emphasize of the Self... spiritual development in regard of a personal relationship with God is something every person must do for himself.

It is in God's authority. He might make you approach Him, or go away from Him.

Well in my religion God isn't responsible for your belief or unbelief... in Christianity ALL are called for. Yet few are chosen.

The criterion is this Knowledge of the Self. A Sufi said "you cannot find truth by searching it, but those who found it are those who searched for it." So we should set out for the purpose,

“If you bring forth what is inside you, what you bring forth will save you. If you don’t bring forth what is inside you, what you don’t bring forth will destroy you.” -- Jesus

in that regard Christianity is more spiritual then Islam... it asks for the Self to persue spirituality, instead of being asked nothing and just wait for God to accept you... or - in my vision - for the nearest mullah, imaan or preachy muslim to manipulate you.

we should open and polish our hearts, we should be open to truth, then He is God who will settle in it. If we do not interrogate ourselves, and polish our hearts anf finally do not have the wish and effort to change ourselves, we will not deserve hedayah.

That is what i would want to say to you...

So journey to God is not an outward but inward journey.

yeahyeah, God judges our thinking and our actions, whoever reigns within himself is more then a king... we don't need suffi's to know all this. christianity isn't like jews and muslims who religionize laws... God opposes this, you see this when Christ is pointing out the hypocrism of the jews who only abide laws and preach in public in order to be seen. Muslims who are inspired by Jewish religion are no better.

If we deserve faith, He will guide us and extend our knwoledge and capacity to understand. Only then we will be able to differentiate what is true and what is wrong, and stop legitimizing our position at any cost. And that is what will make the difference among people and save them.

No, you, you can save yourself!

These might sound rhetorical, but we are not made up of minds, we also have hearts. And salvation is not just in things we declare with our tongues. It is in all respects of life, about what we think, what we say, the way we behave, and what we actually keep in our hearts. Coherence in all aspects is not easy, but it is the greatest objective of life for us as it will carry us to the true results.

Well, that's why christianity differs with all other religions in the world... salvation is not something a man must gain, it is a gift from God for those that are willing to accept Him... Accept Christ, and suffi as much as you like... then you get salvation, and a clear understanding of the Self and it's relationship with the creator

[Unite]

Yes, you saved Christianity!..
Let the readers decide what is worth taking in this topic...

[Servant_of_Christ_Jesus]

I just want to put forth the fact that Christianity is not a religion. All over the New Testament, you will find that Jesus spoke negatively towards religion. Religion is from the Latin meaning to 'bind up'. Jesus didn't come to earth to enslave or lock us up, He came to earth to free us. Christians are not people that follow morals, nor are we part of a do/don't system. Morality is something that the devil himsefl has implemented to make even other people think that they are doing 'good'. Frankly, only God is good, no one else. And we adhere that quality when Christ enters is. From then on, we don't follow a worldy set of morals, we follow Christ! Christ wants us to love our God with all our heart, mind, and soul, and love our neighbour like ourselves. Society deems what is right and wrong, and if they deem anything Christ-like as wrong, then we an see that their form of morals are perverted and ungodly. We do not follow what society does, we follow Christ.

And that is what makes Christianity something so different. Every other world 'religion' is bounded by some set of rules and regulations, i.e., Catholicism. If you were to go to a priest (in some countries) and tell them that communion is actually symbolic, not literal, they would have you killed! Christ never wanted us to kill anyone! "Love your neighbour!"! Christ is love eternal and anything that is NOT a part of love, is not of Christ.

And like Loki said, we do not earn salvation by doing what is 'good' or 'right', we are saved by the grace of the Lord God Almighty. Whoever thinks that they are on their way to heaven via what is good, well, they are wrong, because, only GOD is GOOD! And only through He, and His son, can we, too, become good.

[Loki]

up!, Abdullah wanted a threat about Contradictions in the quran... here it is

[Abdullah]

Hey loki, As you already know, Me and Alpha are going to have a Thread on Qur'an Contradictions, and debate on that topic, and im pretty sure the ones you posted will come up if not then i will answer you later, you should know by now that answering islam is a site that takes thing out of context and twist meanings? I want you to FIND YOUR OWN, not others., do you mind posting a link that shows the rebuttals i posted?

[Loki]

Hey loki, As you already know, Me and Alpha are going to have a Thread on Qur'an Contradictions, and debate on that topic, and im pretty sure the ones you posted will come up if not then i will answer you later, you should know by now that answering islam is a site that takes thing out of context and twist meanings? I want you to FIND YOUR OWN, not others., do you mind posting a link that shows the rebuttals i posted?

these are my own Abdullah... Answering Islam has a whole other and bigger collection.

And i give you great courage in trying to refute the contradictions in the quran, cause you're gonna need it.

On top of that, i heard there was a islam sect who delt with contradictions by making a rule in wich a new revelation from muhammed corrects an older one from him if it's on the same topic... like for instance the persecution of unbelievers.

[Abdullah]

1) Wich ONLY answer did they give?
- "Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!" [7:82], [27:56]
- "Bring us the Wrath of Allah if thou tellest the truth." [29:29]

2) Allah isn't sure who gets salvation
- Salvation is for Jews, Christians, and Sabaeans [5:69]
- Salavation is Only for Muslims [3:85]

3) Allah's clock ain't working
- Allah's day is a 1000 years [32:5]
- Allah's day is 50.000 years [70:4]

4) Some angels missing
- Many angels appeared to marry [3:42], [3:45]
- Only one angel appeared to marry [19:17]

5) What's a man really made of?
- A blood clot [96:1-2]
- water [21:30], [24:45], [25:54]
- clay [15:26]
- dust [3:59], [30:20], [35:11]
- or nothing? [19:67]

6) Where does the evil in our lifes come from?
- Satan? [38:41]
- Ourselves?[4:79]
- Allah? [4:78]

7) Angels cannot disobey Allah
- All are commanded [16:49-50]
- Not all are commanded [2:34]

8 ) Death repentance is a impossible possibility
- Pharaoh repented at the site of death and was saved [10:90-92]
- Alltough noone can be saved this way [4:18]

9) Who gets the blame for disbelief
- the disbeliever [6:12]
- Allah [10:100]

10) Persecute unbelievers? or forgive them?
- Persecute the unbelievers [9:29]
- Forgive the unbelievers [45:14]

These so called contradictions are your own? so if look all these up on the internet i wont find them since they are your own right? ive just realized i when i read urs and Kais thread on contradiction i ttaught it was just loki or kai, oy vey my mistake, i taught u were da same people oops my mistake., it may take me awhile for me to answers yours because im going to debate Alpha first.

[Loki]

These so called contradictions are your own? so if look all these up on the internet i wont find them since they are your own right?

if you look these up on the internet you'll find similar if not the same contradictions no doubt about that, but that would not be a problem for you would it? after all these are all from the same source namely The Quran

but these are my personal favourites

[Aburaees]

Hey loki, As you already know, Me and Alpha are going to have a Thread on Qur'an Contradictions, and debate on that topic, and im pretty sure the ones you posted will come up if not then i will answer you later, you should know by now that answering islam is a site that takes thing out of context and twist meanings? I want you to FIND YOUR OWN, not others., do you mind posting a link that shows the rebuttals i posted?

these are my own Abdullah... Answering Islam has a whole other and bigger collection.

And i give you great courage in trying to refute the contradictions in the quran, cause you're gonna need it.

On top of that, i heard there was a islam sect who delt with contradictions by making a rule in wich a new revelation from muhammed corrects an older one from him if it's on the same topic... like for instance the persecution of unbelievers.

Yes, there are some Islamic groups who teach that some parts of the Qur'an abrogate other parts of the Qur'an. And there is a large number of Hadiths which support this view.

[Abdullah]

On top of that, i heard there was a islam sect who delt with contradictions by making a rule in wich a new revelation from muhammed corrects an older one from him if it's on the same topic... like for instance the persecution of unbelievers.

What group is that? and everyone here should know that HADITHS DO NOT SUPERCEDE the QUR'AN, so if you use to Dissapproave the Qur'an, that is not right, Its QUr'an That dissapproaves hadiths, So n e hadiths out there that do not follow the Qur'an rules, ARE FABRICATED! so i dont wanna hear any arguements. And i dont know which islamic groups you talking about, but i do know that if they are changing the qur'an they are wrong,

[Aburaees]

On top of that, i heard there was a islam sect who delt with contradictions by making a rule in wich a new revelation from muhammed corrects an older one from him if it's on the same topic... like for instance the persecution of unbelievers.

What group is that? and everyone here should know that HADITHS DO NOT SUPERCEDE the QUR'AN, so if you use to Dissapproave the Qur'an, that is not right, Its QUr'an That dissapproaves hadiths, So n e hadiths out there that do not follow the Qur'an rules, ARE FABRICATED! so i dont wanna hear any arguements. And i dont know which islamic groups you talking about, but i do know that if they are changing the qur'an they are wrong,

There is a verse in the Qur'an which mentions abrogation...

Surah 2:106; "If We supersede any verse or cause it to be forgotten, We bring a better one or one similar. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things!"

And there are a number of Hadiths narrated by many different companions which lend interpretation to this verse...

Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 8:
Narrated Ibn Abbas:
Umar said, "Our best Qur'an reciter is Ubai and our best judge is 'Ali; and in spite of this, we leave some of the statements of Ubai because Ubai says, 'I do not leave anything that I have heard from Allah's Apostle while Allah:
"Whatever verse (Revelations) do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten but We bring a better one or similar to it." (2.106)


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 32:
Narrated 'Ata:
That he heard Ibn 'Abbas reciting the Divine Verse:--
"And for those who can fast they had a choice either fast, or feed a poor for every day.." (2.184) Ibn 'Abbas said, "This Verse is not abrogated, but it is meant for old men and old women who have no strength to fast, so they should feed one poor person for each day of fasting (instead of fasting)."


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 33:
Narrated Nafi:
Ibn 'Umar recited:
"They had a choice, either fast or feed a poor for every day.." and added, "This Verse is abrogated."
Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 34:
Narrated Salama:
When the Divine Revelation:
"For those who can fast, they had a choice either fast, or feed a poor for every day," (2.184) was revealed, it was permissible for one to give a ransom and give up fasting, till the Verse succeeding it was revealed and abrogated it.


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 53:
Narrated Ibn Az-Zubair:
I said to 'Uthman bin 'Affan (while he was collecting the Qur'an) regarding the Verse:-- "Those of you who die and leave wives ..." (2.240) "This Verse was abrogated by an other Verse. So why should you write it? (Or leave it in the Qur'an)?" 'Uthman said. "O son of my brother! I will not shift anything of it from its place."


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 54:
Narrated Mujahi:
(regarding the Verse):-- "Those of you who die and leave wives behind. They - (their wives) -- shall wait (as regards their marriage ) for four months and ten days)." (2.234)
The widow, according to this Verse, was to spend this period of waiting with her husband's family, so Allah revealed: "Those of you who die and leave wives (i.e. widows) should bequeath for their wives, a year's maintenance and residences without turning them out, but if they leave (their residence), there is no blame on you for what they do with themselves provided it is honorable.' (i.e. lawful marriage) (2.240).
So Allah entitled the widow to be bequeathed extra maintenance for seven months and twenty nights, and that is the completion of one year. If she wished she could stay (in her husband's home) according to the will, and she could leave it if she wished, as Allah says:
"..without turning them out, but if they leave (the residence), there is no blame on you." So the 'Idda (i.e. four months and ten days as it) is obligatory for her.
'Ata said: Ibn 'Abbas said, "This Verse, i.e. the Statement of Allah: "..without turning them out.." cancelled the obligation of staying for the waiting period in her dead husband's house, and she can complete this period wherever she likes." 'Ata's aid: If she wished, she could complete her 'Idda by staying in her dead husband's residence according to the will or leave it according to Allah's Statement:--
"There is no blame on you for what they do with themselves." 'Ata' added: Later the regulations of inheritance came and abrogated the order of the dwelling of the widow (in her dead husband's house), so she could complete the 'Idda wherever she likes. And it was no longer necessary to provide her with a residence. Ibn 'Abbas said, "This Verse abrogated her (i.e. widow's) dwelling in her dead husband's house and she could complete the 'Idda (i.e. four months and ten days) wherever she liked, as Allah's Statement says:--"...without turning them out..."


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 60:
Narrated Ibn Az-Zubair:
I said to 'Uthman, "This Verse which is in Surat-al-Baqara:
"Those of you who die and leave widows behind...without turning them out." has been abrogated by another Verse. Why then do you write it (in the Qur'an)?" 'Uthman said. "Leave it (where it is), O the son of my brother, for I will not shift anything of it (i.e. the Quran) from its original position."


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 68:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
This Verse:--"Whether you show what is in your minds or conceal it.." (2.284) was abrogated.


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 69:
Narrated Marwan Al-Asghar:
A man from the companions of Allah's Apostle who I think, was Ibn 'Umar said, "The Verse:--"Whether you show what is in your minds or conceal it...." was abrogated by the Verse following it."


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 285:
Narrated Al-Qasim bin Abi Bazza:
That he asked Said bin Jubair, "Is there any repentance of the one who has murdered a believer intentionally?" Then I recited to him:--
"Nor kill such life as Allah has forbidden except for a just cause." Said said, "I recited this very Verse before Ibn 'Abbas as you have recited it before me. Ibn 'Abbas said, 'This Verse was revealed in Mecca and it has been abrogated by a Verse in Surat-An-Nisa which was later revealed in Medina."


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 286:
Narrated Said bin Jubair:
The people of Kufa differed as regards the killing of a believer so I entered upon Ibn 'Abbas (and asked him) about that. Ibn 'Abbas said, "The Verse (in Surat-An-Nisa', 4:93) was the last thing revealed in this respect and nothing cancelled its validity."


Muslim Book 001, Number 0228:
It is reported on the authority of Abu Huraira that when it was revealed to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him): To Allah belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth and whether you disclose that which is in your mind or conceal it, Allah will call you to account according to it. Then He forgives whom He pleases and chastises whom He Pleases; and Allah is over everything Potent" (ii. 284). the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) felt it hard and severe and they came to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and sat down on their knees and said: Messenger of Allah, we were assigned some duties which were within our power to perform, such as prayer, fasting, struggling (in the cause of Allah), charity. Then this (the above-mentioned) verse was revealed unto you and it is beyond our power to live up to it. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Do you intend to say what the people of two books (Jews and Christians) said before you:" We hear and disobey"? You should rather say:" We hear and we obey, (we seek) Thy forgiveness, our Lord! and unto Thee is the return." And they said:" We hear and we obey, (we seek) Thy forgiveness, Our Lord! and unto Thee is the return." When the people recited it and it smoothly flowed on their tongues, then Allah revealed immediately afterwards:" The Apostle believes in that which is sent down unto him from his Lord, and so do the believers. Each one believes in Allah and His Angels and His Books and His Apostles, saying: We differentiate not between any of His Apostles and they say: We hearken and we obey: (we seek) Thy forgiveness, our Lord! and unto Thee is the return" (ii. 285). When they did that, Allah abrogated this (verse) and the Great, Majestic Allah revealed:" Allah burdens not a soul beyond its capacity. It gets every good that it earns and it suffers every ill that it earns. Our Lord, punish us not if we forget or make a mistake." (The Prophet said: ) Yes, our Lord! do not lay on us a burden as Thou didst lay on those before us. (The Prophet said: ) Yes, our Lord, impose not on us (burdens) which we have not the strength to bear (The Prophet said: ) Yes, and pardon us and grant us protection! and have mercy on us. Thou art our Patron, so grant us victory over the disbelieving people" (ii. 286). He (the Lord) said: Yes.


Muslim Book 003, Number 0675:
Abu al. 'Ala' b. al-Shikhkhir said: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) abrogated some of his commands by others, just as the Qur'an abrogates some part with the other.


Muslim Book 004, Number 1317:
Al-Bara' b. 'Azib reported: This verse was revealed (in this way):" Guard the prayers and the 'Asr prayer." We recited it (in this very way) so long as Allah desired. Allah, then, abrogated it and it was revealed:" Guard the prayers, and the middle prayer." A person who was sitting with Shaqiq (one of the narrators in the chain of transmitters) said: Now it implies the 'Asr prayer. Upon this al-Bara' said: I have already informed you how this (verse) was revealed and how Allah abrogated it, and Allah knows best. Imam Muslim said: Ashja'i narrated it from Sufyan al-Thauri, who narrated it from al-Aswad b. Qais, who narrated it from 'Uqba, who narrated it from al-Bara' b. 'Azib who said: We recited with the Prophet (may peace be upon him) (the above-mentioned verse like this, i. e. instead of Salat al- Wusta, Salat al-'Asr) for a certain period. as It has been mentioned (in the above-quoted hadith).


Muslim Book 004, Number 1433:
Anas b. Malik reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) invoked curse in the morning (prayer) for thirty days upon those who killed the Companions (of the Holy Prophet) at Bi'r Ma'una. He cursed (the tribes) of Ri'l, Dhakwan, Lihyan, and Usayya, who had disobeyed Allah and His Messenger (may peace be upon him). Anas said: Allah the Exalted and Great revealed (a verse) regarding those who were killed at Bi'r Ma'una, and we recited it, till it was abrogated later on (and the verse was like this):, convey to it our people the tidings that we have met our Lord, and He was pleased with us and we were pleased with Him".


Muslim Book 008, Number 3421:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with, her) reported that it had been revealed in the Holy Qur'an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings and Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) died and it was before that time (found) in the Holy Qur'an (and recited by the Muslims).


Muslim Book 008, Number 3422:
'Amra reported that she beard 'A'isha (Allah he pleased with her) discussing fosterage which (makes marriage) unlawful; and she ('A'isha) said: There was revealed in the Holy Qur'an ten clear sucklings, and then five clear (sucklings).


Muslim Book 043, Number 7173:
Sa'id b. Jubair reported: I said to Ibn Abbas: Will the repentance of that person be accepted who kills a believer intentionally? He said: No. I recited to him this verse of Sura al-Furqan (xix.):" And those who call not upon another god with Allah and slay not the soul which Allah has forbidden except in the cause of justice" to the end of the verse. He said: This is a Meccan verse which has been abrogated by a verse revealed at Medina:" He who slays a believer intentionally, for him is the requital of Hell-Fire where he would abide for ever," and in the narration of Ibn Hisham (the words are): I recited to him this verse of Sura al-Furqan:" Except one who made repentance."

These Hadiths mention the parts where Qur'an abrogates Qur'an, and are all in agreement with the Qur'anic verse 2:106.


There are also the following Hadiths that talk about Qur'anic verses that underwent subtle changes...

(pay particular attention to the Hadiths with the blind-man!)

Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 85:
Narrated 'Alqama:
I went to Sham and offered a two-Rak'at prayer and then said, "O Allah! Bless me with a good pious companion." So I went to some people and sat with them. An old man came and sat by my side. I asked, "Who is he?" They replied, "(He is) Abu-Ad-Darda.' I said (to him), "I prayed to Allah to bless me with a pious companion and He sent you to me." He asked me, "From where are you?" I replied, "From the people of Al-Kufa." He said, "Isn't there amongst you Ibn Um 'Abd, the one who used to carry the shoes, the cushion(or pillow) and the water for ablution? Is there amongst you the one whom Allah gave Refuge from Satan through the request of His Prophet. Is there amongst you the one who keeps the secrets of the Prophet which nobody knows except him?" Abu Darda further asked, "How does 'Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) recite the Sura starting with, 'By the Night as it conceals (the light)." (92.1) Then I recited before him:
'By the Night as it envelops: And by the Day as it appears in brightness; And by male and female.' (91.1-3) On this Abu Ad-Darda' said, "By Allah, the Prophet made me recite the Sura in this way while I was listening to him (reciting it)."


Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 105:
Narrated Alqama:
I went to Sham and was offering a two-Rak'at prayer; I said, "O Allah! Bless me with a (pious) companion." Then I saw an old man coming towards me, and when he came near I said, (to myself), "I hope Allah has given me my request." The man asked (me), "Where are you from?" I replied, "I am from the people of Kufa." He said, "Weren't there amongst you the Carrier of the (Prophet's) shoes, Siwak and the ablution water container? Weren't there amongst you the man who was given Allah's Refuge from the Satan? And weren't there amongst you the man who used to keep the (Prophet's) secrets which nobody else knew? How did Ibn Um 'Abd (i.e. 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud) use to recite Surat-al-lail (the Night:92)?" I recited:--
"By the Night as it envelops By the Day as it appears in brightness. And by male and female." (92.1-3) On that, Abu Darda said, "By Allah, the Prophet made me read the Verse in this way after listening to him, but these people (of Sham) tried their best to let me say something different."


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 116:
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit: That the Prophet dictated to him: "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home) and those who strive and fight in the Cause of Allah."
Zaid added: Ibn Um Maktum came while the Prophet was dictating to me and said, "O Allah's Apostle! By Allah, if I had the power to fight (in Allah's Cause), I would," and he was a blind man. So Allah revealed to his Apostle while his thigh was on my thigh, and his thigh became so heavy that I was afraid it might fracture my thigh. Then that state of the Prophet passed and Allah revealed:-- "Except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame etc)."


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 117:
Narrated Al-Bara:
When the Verse:-- "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home)" (4.95) was revealed, Allah Apostle called for Zaid who wrote it. In the meantime Ibn Um Maktum came and complained of his blindness, so Allah revealed: "Except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame..." etc.) (4.95)


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 118:
Narrated Al-Bara:
When the Verse:--"Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home)," (4.95) was revealed, the Prophet said, "Call so-and-so." That person came to him with an ink-pot and a wooden board or a shoulder scapula bone. The Prophet said (to him), "Write: 'Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and those who strive and fight in the Cause of Allah." Ibn Um Maktum who was sitting behind the Prophet then said, "O Allah's Apostle! I am a blind man." So there was revealed in the place of that Verse, the Verse:--"Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home) except those who are disabled (by injury, or are blind or lame etc.) and those who strive and fight in the Cause of Allah." (4.95)


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 468:
Narrated Ibrahim:
The companions of 'Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) came to Abu Darda', (and before they arrived at his home), he looked for them and found them. Then he asked them,: 'Who among you can recite (Qur'an) as 'Abdullah recites it?" They replied, "All of us." He asked, "Who among you knows it by heart?" They pointed at 'Alqama. Then he asked Alqama. "How did you hear 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud reciting Surat Al-Lail (The Night)?" Alqama recited:
'By the male and the female.' Abu Ad-Darda said, "I testify that I heard me Prophet reciting it likewise, but these people want me to recite it:--
'And by Him Who created male and female.' but by Allah, I will not follow them."


Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 512:
Narrated Al-Bara:
There was revealed: 'Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and those who strive and fight in the Cause of Allah.' (4.95)
The Prophet said, "Call Zaid for me and let him bring the board, the inkpot and the scapula bone (or the scapula bone and the ink pot)."' Then he said, "Write: 'Not equal are those Believers who sit..", and at that time 'Amr bin Um Maktum, the blind man was sitting behind the Prophet . He said, "O Allah's Apostle! What is your order For me (as regards the above Verse) as I am a blind man?" So, instead of the above Verse, the following Verse was revealed:
'Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame etc.) and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah.' (4.95)


Muslim Book 004, Number 1317:
Al-Bara' b. 'Azib reported: This verse was revealed (in this way):" Guard the prayers and the 'Asr prayer." We recited it (in this very way) so long as Allah desired. Allah, then, abrogated it and it was revealed:" Guard the prayers, and the middle prayer." A person who was sitting with Shaqiq (one of the narrators in the chain of transmitters) said: Now it implies the 'Asr prayer. Upon this al-Bara' said: I have already informed you how this (verse) was revealed and how Allah abrogated it, and Allah knows best. Imam Muslim said: Ashja'i narrated it from Sufyan al-Thauri, who narrated it from al-Aswad b. Qais, who narrated it from 'Uqba, who narrated it from al-Bara' b. 'Azib who said: We recited with the Prophet (may peace be upon him) (the above-mentioned verse like this, i. e. instead of Salat al- Wusta, Salat al-'Asr) for a certain period. as It has been mentioned (in the above-quoted hadith).

And there are Hadiths which talk about verses that can no longer be found in the Qur'an...

Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 57:
Narrated Anas:
The Prophet sent seventy men from the tribe of Bani Salim to the tribe of Bani Amir. When they reached there, my maternal uncle said to them, "I will go ahead of you, and if they allow me to convey the message of Allah's Apostle (it will be all right); otherwise you will remain close to me." So he went ahead of them and the pagans granted him security But while he was reporting the message of the Prophet , they beckoned to one of their men who stabbed him to death. My maternal uncle said, "Allah is Greater! By the Lord of the Kaba, I am successful." After that they attached the rest of the party and killed them all except a lame man who went up to the top of the mountain. (Hammam, a sub-narrator said, "I think another man was saved along with him)." Gabriel informed the Prophet that they (i.e the martyrs) met their Lord, and He was pleased with them and made them pleased. We used to recite, "Inform our people that we have met our Lord, He is pleased with us and He has made us pleased " Later on this Quranic Verse was cancelled. The Prophet invoked Allah for forty days to curse the murderers from the tribe of Ral, Dhakwan, Bani Lihyan and Bam Usaiya who disobeyed Allah and his Apostle.


Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 69:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
For thirty days Allah's Apostle invoked Allah to curse those who had killed the companions of Bir-Mauna; he invoked evil upon the tribes of Ral, Dhakwan, and Usaiya who disobeyed Allah and His Apostle. There was reveled about those who were killed at Bir-Mauna a Quranic Verse we used to recite, but it was cancelled later on. The Verse was:
"Inform our people that we have met our Lord. He is pleased with us and He has made us pleased"


Bukhari Volume 8, Book 82, Number 816:
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him."


Bukhari Volume 8, Book 82, Number 817:
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
I used to teach (the Qur'an to) some people of the Muhajirln (emigrants), among whom there was 'Abdur Rahman bin 'Auf. While I was in his house at Mina, and he was with 'Umar bin Al-Khattab during 'Umar's last Hajj, Abdur-Rahman came to me and said, "Would that you had seen the man who came today to the Chief of the Believers ('Umar), saying, 'O Chief of the Believers! What do you think about so-and-so who says, 'If 'Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and-such person, as by Allah, the pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr was nothing but a prompt sudden action which got established afterwards.' 'Umar became angry and then said, 'Allah willing, I will stand before the people tonight and warn them against those people who want to deprive the others of their rights (the question of rulership)."
'Abdur-Rahman said, "I said, 'O Chief of the believers! Do not do that, for the season of Hajj gathers the riff-raff and the rubble, and it will be they who will gather around you when you stand to address the people. And I am afraid that you will get up and say something, and some people will spread your statement and may not say what you have actually said and may not understand its meaning, and may interpret it incorrectly, so you should wait till you reach Medina, as it is the place of emigration and the place of Prophet's Traditions, and there you can come in touch with the learned and noble people, and tell them your ideas with confidence; and the learned people will understand your statement and put it in its proper place.' On that, 'Umar said, 'By Allah! Allah willing, I will do this in the first speech I will deliver before the people in Medina."
Ibn Abbas added: We reached Medina by the end of the month of Dhul-Hijja, and when it was Friday, we went quickly (to the mosque) as soon as the sun had declined, and I saw Sa'id bin Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail sitting at the corner of the pulpit, and I too sat close to him so that my knee was touching his knee, and after a short while 'Umar bin Al-Khattab came out, and when I saw him coming towards us, I said to Said bin Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail "Today 'Umar will say such a thing as he has never said since he was chosen as Caliph." Said denied my statement with astonishment and said, "What thing do you expect 'Umar to say the like of which he has never said before?"
In the meantime, 'Umar sat on the pulpit and when the callmakers for the prayer had finished their call, 'Umar stood up, and having glorified and praised Allah as He deserved, he said, "Now then, I am going to tell you something which (Allah) has written for me to say. I do not know; perhaps it portends my death, so whoever understands and remembers it, must narrate it to the others wherever his mount takes him, but if somebody is afraid that he does not understand it, then it is unlawful for him to tell lies about me. Allah sent Muhammad with the Truth and revealed the Holy Book to him, and among what Allah revealed, was the Verse of the Rajam (the stoning of married person (male & female) who commits illegal sexual intercourse, and we did recite this Verse and understood and memorized it. Allah's Apostle did carry out the punishment of stoning and so did we after him.
I am afraid that after a long time has passed, somebody will say, 'By Allah, we do not find the Verse of the Rajam in Allah's Book,' and thus they will go astray by leaving an obligation which Allah has revealed. And the punishment of the Rajam is to be inflicted to any married person (male & female), who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if the required evidence is available or there is conception or confession. And then we used to recite among the Verses in Allah's Book: 'O people! Do not claim to be the offspring of other than your fathers, as it is disbelief (unthankfulness) on your part that you claim to be the offspring of other than your real father.' Then Allah's Apostle said, 'Do not praise me excessively as Jesus, son of Marry was praised, but call me Allah's Slave and His Apostles.' (O people!) I have been informed that a speaker amongst you says, 'By Allah, if 'Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and-such person.' One should not deceive oneself by saying that the pledge of allegiance given to Abu Bakr was given suddenly and it was successful. No doubt, it was like that, but Allah saved (the people) from its evil, and there is none among you who has the qualities of Abu Bakr. Remember that whoever gives the pledge of allegiance to anybody among you without consulting the other Muslims, neither that person, nor the person to whom the pledge of allegiance was given, are to be supported, lest they both should be killed.
And no doubt after the death of the Prophet we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa'da. 'Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr. I said to Abu Bakr, 'Let's go to these Ansari brothers of ours.' So we set out seeking them, and when we approached them, two pious men of theirs met us and informed us of the final decision of the Ansar, and said, 'O group of Muhajirin (emigrants) ! Where are you going?' We replied, 'We are going to these Ansari brothers of ours.' They said to us, 'You shouldn't go near them. Carry out whatever we have already decided.' I said, 'By Allah, we will go to them.' And so we proceeded until we reached them at the shed of Bani Sa'da. Behold! There was a man sitting amongst them and wrapped in something. I asked, 'Who is that man?' They said, 'He is Sa'd bin 'Ubada.' I asked, 'What is wrong with him?' They said, 'He is sick.' After we sat for a while, the Ansar's speaker said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' and praising Allah as He deserved, he added, 'To proceed, we are Allah's Ansar (helpers) and the majority of the Muslim army, while you, the emigrants, are a small group and some people among you came with the intention of preventing us from practicing this matter (of caliphate) and depriving us of it.'
When the speaker had finished, I intended to speak as I had prepared a speech which I liked and which I wanted to deliver in the presence of Abu Bakr, and I used to avoid provoking him. So, when I wanted to speak, Abu Bakr said, 'Wait a while.' I disliked to make him angry. So Abu Bakr himself gave a speech, and he was wiser and more patient than I. By Allah, he never missed a sentence that I liked in my own prepared speech, but he said the like of it or better than it spontaneously. After a pause he said, 'O Ansar! You deserve all (the qualities that you have attributed to yourselves, but this question (of Caliphate) is only for the Quraish as they are the best of the Arabs as regards descent and home, and I am pleased to suggest that you choose either of these two men, so take the oath of allegiance to either of them as you wish. And then Abu Bakr held my hand and Abu Ubada bin Abdullah's hand who was sitting amongst us. I hated nothing of what he had said except that proposal, for by Allah, I would rather have my neck chopped off as expiator for a sin than become the ruler of a nation, one of whose members is Abu Bakr, unless at the time of my death my own-self suggests something I don't feel at present.'
And then one of the Ansar said, 'I am the pillar on which the camel with a skin disease (eczema) rubs itself to satisfy the itching (i.e., I am a noble), and I am as a high class palm tree! O Quraish. There should be one ruler from us and one from you.'
Then there was a hue and cry among the gathering and their voices rose so that I was afraid there might be great disagreement, so I said, 'O Abu Bakr! Hold your hand out.' He held his hand out and I pledged allegiance to him, and then all the emigrants gave the Pledge of allegiance and so did the Ansar afterwards. And so we became victorious over Sa'd bin Ubada (whom Al-Ansar wanted to make a ruler). One of the Ansar said, 'You have killed Sa'd bin Ubada.' I replied, 'Allah has killed Sa'd bin Ubada.' Umar added, "By Allah, apart from the great tragedy that had happened to us (i.e. the death of the Prophet), there was no greater problem than the allegiance pledged to Abu Bakr because we were afraid that if we left the people, they might give the Pledge of allegiance after us to one of their men, in which case we would have given them our consent for something against our real wish, or would have opposed them and caused great trouble. So if any person gives the Pledge of allegiance to somebody (to become a Caliph) without consulting the other Muslims, then the one he has selected should not be granted allegiance, lest both of them should be killed."


Bukhari Volume 9, Book 92, Number 424b:
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
I used to teach Qur'an to 'Abdur-Rahman bin Auf. When Umar performed his last Hajj, 'Abdur-Rahman said (to me) at Mina, "Would that you had seen Chief of the believers today! A man came to him and said, "So-and-so has said, "If Chief of the Believers died, we will give the oath of allegiance to such-and-such person,' 'Umar said, 'I will get up tonight and warn those who want to usurp the people's rights.' I said, 'Do not do so, for the season (of Hajj) gathers the riffraff mob who will form the majority of your audience, and I am afraid that they will not understand (the meaning of) your saying properly and may spread (an incorrect statement) everywhere. You should wait till we reach Medina, the place of migration and the place of the Sunna (the Prophet's Traditions). There you will meet the companions of Allah's Apostle from the Muhajirin and the Ansar who will understand your statement and place it in its proper position' 'Umar said, 'By Allah, I shall do so the first time I stand (to address the people) in Medina.' When we reached Medina, 'Umar (in a Friday Khutba-sermon) said, "No doubt, Allah sent Muhammad with the Truth and revealed to him the Book (Quran), and among what was revealed, was the Verse of Ar-Rajm (stoning adulterers to death).'" (See Hadith No. 817,Vol.


Muslim Book 005, Number 2282:
Anas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If the son of Adam were to possess two valleys of riches. he would long for the third one. And the stomach of the son of Adam is not filled but with dust. And Allah returns to him who repents.
Muslim Book 005, Number 2283:
Anas b. Malik reported: I heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) as saying this, but I do not know whether this thing was revealed to him or not, but he said to.


Muslim Book 005, Number 2284:
Anas b. Malik reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If there were two valleys of gold for the son of Adam, he would long for an- other one. and his mouth will not be filled but with dust, and Allah returns to him who repents.


Muslim Book 005, Number 2285:
Ibn Abbas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If there were for the son of Adam a valley full of riches, he would long to possess another one like it. and Ibn Adam does not feel satiated but with dust. And Allah returns to him who returns (to Him). Ibn Abbas said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur'an or not; and in the narration transmitted by Zuhair it was said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur'an, and he made no mention of Ibn Abbas.


Muslim Book 005, Number 2286:
Abu Harb b. Abu al-Aswad reported on the authority of his father that Abu Musa al-Ash'ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur'an and he said: You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it:" If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it:" Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise" (lxi 2.) and" that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13).


Muslim Book 004, Number 1433:
Anas b. Malik reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) invoked curse in the morning (prayer) for thirty days upon those who killed the Companions (of the Holy Prophet) at Bi'r Ma'una. He cursed (the tribes) of Ri'l, Dhakwan, Lihyan, and Usayya, who had disobeyed Allah and His Messenger (may peace be upon him). Anas said: Allah the Exalted and Great revealed (a verse) regarding those who were killed at Bi'r Ma'una, and we recited it, till it was abrogated later on (and the verse was like this): "convey to it our people the tidings that we have met our Lord, and He was pleased with us and we were pleased with Him".


Muslim Book 017, Number 4194:
'Abdullah b. 'Abbas reported that 'Umar b. Khattab sat on the pulpit of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: Verily Allah sent Muhammad (may peace be upon him) with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession.


Muslim Book 017, Number 4195:
This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Zuhri with the same chain of transmitters.


Muslim Book 008, Number 3421:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with, her) reported that it had been revealed in the Holy Qur'an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings and Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) died and it was before that time (found) in the Holy Qur'an (and recited by the Muslims).


Muslim Book 008, Number 3422:
'Amra reported that she beard 'A'isha (Allah he pleased with her) discussing fosterage which (makes marriage) unlawful; and she ('A'isha) said: There was revealed in the Holy Qur'an ten clear sucklings, and then five clear (sucklings).

Of course there will be many Muslims who will reject these Hadiths because they would seem to go against the Qur'an.

But the unbiased will take these Hadiths for their historical worth as they constitute a recorded witness/testimony that has been deemed authentic by generations of Muslim scholars down to the very earliest scholars of Hadith.

Many will interpret in the Qur'an that the Qur'an is preserved, but History is a Witness against this particular view.

There are NO HADITHS that contradict the claims made in the above Hadiths. And they certainly aren't contradicted by the Qur'an as a whole. especially in light of Surah 2:106.

Surah 2:106; "If We supersede any verse or cause it to be forgotten, We bring a better one or one similar. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things!"

.

[Loki]

The contradictions in the Qur’an are well recognised and have been extensively documented elsewhere.

But perhaps even more damaging to Islamic beliefs about the Qur’an are the factual errors that litter the text. Mary, rather than the Holy Spirit, is identified as the third person of the trinity in Sura 5:119. She is also called the sister of Aaron (Moses’ brother) despite the fact that the two lived 1,500 years apart in history (S 19:28 ).

We are told in Sura 20:85-87 that a Samaritan was responsible for casting the golden calf of the Exodus, when in fact the Samaritans did not come into existence until after the Jewish exile hundreds of years later. In a similar vein Haman (Esther’s Persian enemy) is identified as a servant of the Egyptian pharoah at the time of Moses.

Once we appreciate that the Bible was not available in Arabic until the mid eighth century, it becomes clear how such glaring fallacies may have found their way into the Qur’an through corrupted oral tradition and hearsay.

[Abdullah]

Explanation of the concept of Naskh (abrogation) in Islam!

The English word “abrogation” literally signifies annulment, nullification or cancellation. However, in Islamic terminology that is used in Glorious Qu'ran, it means expiration of the period of the validity of a practical injunction”. Following are the root letters and words derived from them, with their use in Glorious Qu'ran at four occasions

ن س خ

نَنْسَخ : نُزِل ونُبْطل .

2:106نَنْسَخْ: مَا نَنْسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْ نُنْسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا

22:52فَيَنْسَخُ: فَيَنْسَخُ اللَّهُ مَا يُلْقِي الشَّيْطَانُ ثُمَّ يُحْكِمُ اللَّهُ آيَاتِهِ.

45:29نَسْتَنْسِخُ: إِنَّا كُنَّا نَسْتَنْسِخُ مَا كُنْتُمْ تَعْمَلُونَ.

نسختها : أصلها المكتوب ، والمراد اللوح المحفوظ .

7:15نُسْخَتِهَا: وَفِي نُسْخَتِهَا هُدًى وَرَحْمَةٌ لِلَّذِينَ هُمْ لِرَبِّهِمْ يَرْهَبُونَ.

Readers must know that in Arabic, commonly a noun or a verb has three radical letters. But some nouns and verbs have four or five radical letters. However, many additional letters are added to them in usage.

A radical letter is that which remains intact through all the changes and derivations of the word. An additional letter is that which is subjected to changes in different forms and derivations, as is the case above.

The words, which have three radical letters, are called ath-thulathi (trilateral). Therefore, the occurrence of Naskh (abrogation) is related only to injunctions that are not eternal and are equal with regard to the possibility of their existence or non-existence.

Abrogation can never be taken to mean that Allah commanded or prohibited something and then thought better of it and decided to cancel His former command. This is impossible because it involves attributing ignorance to Allah (Allah forbid). Also it is not possible for Allah to command or prohibit something and then without any change in time, subject or conditions to abrogate His injunction since that would lead to attributing imperfection to Allah. Allah is FREE of any imperfection whatsoever.

What the Naskh/Mansookh signified is that Allah knows that a certain injunction will remain valid for people up to certain time and then cease to be applicable. When that specific time is reached, a new command is sent which seems to either abrogate or change the former injunction but which, in fact, does nothing but mark the expiration of its validity. Since the former command did not have a specific period of validity attached to it, we take the new injunction as a cancellation of the former.

Example:

An employer might command one of his employees to do certain task with the intention of asking him to do some other task after one year, without, however, disclosing his intention to the employee. After the completion of the year, when employer ask the employee to do the other job, the employee might think that employer have changed or amended his orders, even though it is not the case, in fact, employer has not made any changes or amended his plans. Like all other changing phenomena around us, these apparent changes or amendments in the divine injunction are part of Divine Wisdom, whether we know its significance or not.

Therefore, the literal meaning of Naskh is replacement of one thing by another thing. Technical meaning from Islamic point of view is “Lifting the Law of Shariah by reasons of Shariah.”

That is why Allah (SWT) says in Glorious Qur’an 16:101:

وَإِذَا بَدَّلْنَا آيَةً مَكَانَ آيَةٍ وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا يُنَزِّلُ قَالُوا إِنَّمَا أَنْتَ مُفْتَرٍ بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

And when We change a Verse (of the Qur’ân,) in place of another - and Allâh knows best what He sends down - they (the disbelievers) say: "You (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم) are but a Muftari! (Forger, liar)." Nay, but most of them know not.


"وَإِذَا بَدَّلْنَا آيَة مَكَان آيَة"

بِنَسْخِهَا وَإِنْزَال غَيْرهَا لِمَصْلَحَةِ الْعِبَاد

"وَاَللَّه أَعْلَم بِمَا يُنَزِّل قَالُوا"

أَيْ الْكُفَّار لِلنَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

"إنَّمَا أَنْتَ مُفْتَرٍ"

كَذَّاب تَقُولهُ مِنْ عِنْدك

"بَلْ أَكْثَرهمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ"

حَقِيقَة الْقُرْآن وَفَائِدَة النَّسْخ

And if We happen to exchange a revelation, which has already, served its purpose for another revelation which is appropriate for the new circumstance, and Allah knows exactly what to reveal and when, they - the infidels - accuse you (O Muhammad) of forgery. Indeed most of them do not know the facts nor do they reflect.

Conclusion!

Is it not most extraordinary spectacle that Mr. Farooq Ibrahim should write on the subject of “abrogation” without proper knowledge and education, and ask for any confidence in his statements, who sets out as he does with copy and paste portions of Islamic/Qu'ranic teachings by merely using English translation, calling upon the people to believe that it is true and fair representation, when the leading part and/or controlling feature of the whole Qu'ranic teachings about Naskh is carefully suppressed by Mr. Farooq Ibrahim. The alleged conversion of Mr. Farooq Ibrahim to Christianity is not an issue here, but nevertheless, entertains the idea that Mr. Farooq Ibrahim’s decision to convert to Christianity was purely based on ignorance with confused mind rather making an informed choice by comparison with proper knowledge and understanding of both religions i.e. Islam and Christianity and/or Bible and Glorious Qu'ran. As the issue of abrogation is actually problematic in the Bible for having adulterated scriptures (OT & NT).


ALL your Anti-Islam information is from CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES, <--- They are deaf, dumb and blind, worse then animals

[Abdullah]

Explanation of the concept of Naskh (abrogation) in Islam!

The English word “abrogation” literally signifies annulment, nullification or cancellation. However, in Islamic terminology that is used in Glorious Qu'ran, it means expiration of the period of the validity of a practical injunction”. Following are the root letters and words derived from them, with their use in Glorious Qu'ran at four occasions

ن س خ

نَنْسَخ : نُزِل ونُبْطل .

2:106نَنْسَخْ: مَا نَنْسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْ نُنْسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا

22:52فَيَنْسَخُ: فَيَنْسَخُ اللَّهُ مَا يُلْقِي الشَّيْطَانُ ثُمَّ يُحْكِمُ اللَّهُ آيَاتِهِ.

45:29نَسْتَنْسِخُ: إِنَّا كُنَّا نَسْتَنْسِخُ مَا كُنْتُمْ تَعْمَلُونَ.

نسختها : أصلها المكتوب ، والمراد اللوح المحفوظ .

7:15نُسْخَتِهَا: وَفِي نُسْخَتِهَا هُدًى وَرَحْمَةٌ لِلَّذِينَ هُمْ لِرَبِّهِمْ يَرْهَبُونَ.

Readers must know that in Arabic, commonly a noun or a verb has three radical letters. But some nouns and verbs have four or five radical letters. However, many additional letters are added to them in usage.

A radical letter is that which remains intact through all the changes and derivations of the word. An additional letter is that which is subjected to changes in different forms and derivations, as is the case above.

The words, which have three radical letters, are called ath-thulathi (trilateral). Therefore, the occurrence of Naskh (abrogation) is related only to injunctions that are not eternal and are equal with regard to the possibility of their existence or non-existence.

Abrogation can never be taken to mean that Allah commanded or prohibited something and then thought better of it and decided to cancel His former command. This is impossible because it involves attributing ignorance to Allah (Allah forbid). Also it is not possible for Allah to command or prohibit something and then without any change in time, subject or conditions to abrogate His injunction since that would lead to attributing imperfection to Allah. Allah is FREE of any imperfection whatsoever.

What the Naskh/Mansookh signified is that Allah knows that a certain injunction will remain valid for people up to certain time and then cease to be applicable. When that specific time is reached, a new command is sent which seems to either abrogate or change the former injunction but which, in fact, does nothing but mark the expiration of its validity. Since the former command did not have a specific period of validity attached to it, we take the new injunction as a cancellation of the former.

Example:

An employer might command one of his employees to do certain task with the intention of asking him to do some other task after one year, without, however, disclosing his intention to the employee. After the completion of the year, when employer ask the employee to do the other job, the employee might think that employer have changed or amended his orders, even though it is not the case, in fact, employer has not made any changes or amended his plans. Like all other changing phenomena around us, these apparent changes or amendments in the divine injunction are part of Divine Wisdom, whether we know its significance or not.

Therefore, the literal meaning of Naskh is replacement of one thing by another thing. Technical meaning from Islamic point of view is “Lifting the Law of Shariah by reasons of Shariah.”

That is why Allah (SWT) says in Glorious Qur’an 16:101:

وَإِذَا بَدَّلْنَا آيَةً مَكَانَ آيَةٍ وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا يُنَزِّلُ قَالُوا إِنَّمَا أَنْتَ مُفْتَرٍ بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

And when We change a Verse (of the Qur’ân,) in place of another - and Allâh knows best what He sends down - they (the disbelievers) say: "You (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم) are but a Muftari! (Forger, liar)." Nay, but most of them know not.


"وَإِذَا بَدَّلْنَا آيَة مَكَان آيَة"

بِنَسْخِهَا وَإِنْزَال غَيْرهَا لِمَصْلَحَةِ الْعِبَاد

"وَاَللَّه أَعْلَم بِمَا يُنَزِّل قَالُوا"

أَيْ الْكُفَّار لِلنَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

"إنَّمَا أَنْتَ مُفْتَرٍ"

كَذَّاب تَقُولهُ مِنْ عِنْدك

"بَلْ أَكْثَرهمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ"

حَقِيقَة الْقُرْآن وَفَائِدَة النَّسْخ

And if We happen to exchange a revelation, which has already, served its purpose for another revelation which is appropriate for the new circumstance, and Allah knows exactly what to reveal and when, they - the infidels - accuse you (O Muhammad) of forgery. Indeed most of them do not know the facts nor do they reflect.

Conclusion!

Is it not most extraordinary spectacle that Mr. Farooq Ibrahim should write on the subject of “abrogation” without proper knowledge and education, and ask for any confidence in his statements, who sets out as he does with copy and paste portions of Islamic/Qu'ranic teachings by merely using English translation, calling upon the people to believe that it is true and fair representation, when the leading part and/or controlling feature of the whole Qu'ranic teachings about Naskh is carefully suppressed by Mr. Farooq Ibrahim. The alleged conversion of Mr. Farooq Ibrahim to Christianity is not an issue here, but nevertheless, entertains the idea that Mr. Farooq Ibrahim’s decision to convert to Christianity was purely based on ignorance with confused mind rather making an informed choice by comparison with proper knowledge and understanding of both religions i.e. Islam and Christianity and/or Bible and Glorious Qu'ran. As the issue of abrogation is actually problematic in the Bible for having adulterated scriptures (OT & NT).

ALL your Anti-Islam information is from CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES, <--- They are deaf, dumb and blind, worse then animals

[Abdullah]

Here are your answers to So called Qur'an Contradictions, go here

http://www.jesus-christ-forums.com/home/viewtopic ... 7042#57042

[Loki]

i don't see any answers to the ones i posted,

where can i find my first proven contradiction rebuted? tell me

better yet, paste it!

[Abdullah]

maybe if you actaully gone to the links and read it, u would get ur answers, and here is your answer to your first claim

http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/qi014.html
http://www.answering-christianity.com/q ... re_lot.htm

know that, even ur anti-islamic accepted the answer ,

[sardab]

double post

[sardab]

In the bible there are no contradictions only different contexts wich you can rip them out from. To proof this: reading this site http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm would be in place cause it takes far too much time and space to personally refute every aliged contradiction made in the bible. Therefore here's a list of 'contradictions' a fellow Christian studied and refuted with the given arguments.

.......

On the other hand in the quran there are many contradictions and errors, alltough this is not easily admitted cause Muhammed said there weren't any in it... and if there were that it would mean that the Quran is not of God.

Loki, cant you see your own contradiction here. You are not really interested in if there explanations for alleged contradictions in the Bible. You just believe in it, and you think there are explanations and then you accept by heart when you see possible explanations.

Likewise, we do not believe there are contradictions in the Qur'an, and we think there are explanations....we are as firm as you on this...

So how can one understand which of them represents truth? With our limited human views, we just cant tell without God's guidance. Once we believe in one of them, we just keep the faith that God cannot make any mistakes or leave contradictions in His Word.

This implies, we are not sent to the Earth solely to decide which Book is the Word of God, and which are not. Think for a second why would God send His revealation to humanity. Answer is to guide them and assist them so that they live their lives with peace of mind and heart and in a harmonious society. And that is best achived by seeking refuge in Him. (Do you have any objections to that?)

This in turn requires that you should seek the truth of Message, not in what you were born into, but in what appeals to you and your needs more! In this regard, what you should fight is not Islam or any other religion but your own "self," because you might just be rejecting God's guidance by rejecting an aspect of His Message that appeals to you.

This might not be a straightforward process, but still you can be honest and sincere in accepting good aspects of other religions.

Some of you here behave in such a way that, Muhammad should not be a good person, or Qur'an should not be a complete book, so that the Message they represent be not truth. In a way you seek pretexts to reject the Message. This attitude is wrong, because that may mean you close a door God can guide you.

Imo, the best attitude is to accept religions as they are. If they have any appeal on you, you may accept them or not accept them. In this light, acknowledging any goodness in Islam does not make you a Muslim in an instant, but can make you a better person in God's presence, so that He may guide you to the true path.

My approach is this. I believe Bible is corrpupted, because Qur'an says so. But I do not need to invest on that to show you how it is corrupted. Actually I think when people become loose of Christianity they see these contradictions themselves.

In fact, when I accept Christianity as you tell and represent it, I do not think it would do any good for me in my life, nor it has any appeal in my mind with its theology. One simple approach.

Both Christianity and Islam, in early times, spreaded mostly among lower classes first and then upper classes joined. Message had appeal on lower classes first, because of their needs and expectaions for a relieve. Thats how God helps and guides people. Just do not get the channels clogged, by following your "self"s.

[Loki]

Loki, cant you see your own contradiction here. You are not really interested in if there explanations for alleged contradictions in the Bible. You just believe in it, and you think there are explanations and then you accept by heart when you see possible explanations.

I've seen and read all alliged contradictions in the bible... and the fact is absurd that a muslim would use such a list too dissprove the bible to be of God when the Quran equally has such a list... in wich it would dissproof it's religion with it.

On top of that the biblical contradictions are weak, since it's a collection of more then 66 books over a period of 1400 years and of wich the revelation is progressive... in that regard it's very easy to get things out of context. While the quran is one book, written in one man's lifetimes and isn't progressive but eternal from the very first word... that would make the contradictions in the quran far more harsher arguments against it's divininess then forsay the alliged contradictions in the bible compilation wich stands out in unity.

Likewise, we do not believe there are contradictions in the Qur'an, and we think there are explanations....we are as firm as you on this...

so you think the contradiction argument is a moot point then? we both are 'even' then?

So how can one understand which of them represents truth? With our limited human views, we just cant tell without God's guidance. Once we believe in one of them, we just keep the faith that God cannot make any mistakes or leave contradictions in His Word.

this doesn't end and stop with literal contradictions... it's the muslim's wrong to believe that a mere book can be a miracle. I don't belief that, so i don't put my faith in a peace of ink on a peace of paper as a miracle. The arguments of christianity to be divine are far more overwhelming then the quran if only you did the research. Just take a look at the bible prophecies for example... you'll see how God is still directing this word to his will as he prophecied us and it shows that Islam has no place in his Will.

http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/default.htm

This implies, we are not sent to the Earth solely to decide which Book is the Word of God, and which are not. Think for a second why would God send His revealation to humanity. Answer is to guide them and assist them so that they live their lives with peace of mind and heart and in a harmonious society. And that is best achived by seeking refuge in Him. (Do you have any objections to that?)

acctually we should persuede truth... and not just settle with possible lies.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Timothy 3:16-17

"Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like: He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock." Luke 6:47-48

God in the bible dares you to question and reproof him.. He acctually says, seek all you want a house build on a rock is unshakeable "I have nothing to hide"

Now regarding Islam:

“Believers, ask not questions about things which if made plain to you may cause you trouble when the Qur’an is revealed. Some people before you asked questions, and on that account lost their faith.” [5.101]

according to Bukhari Volume 3, Book 41, Number 591: Narrated Al-Mughira bin Shu'ba it is said that Allah hates it when you talk about religion

Muhammed asked his believers to be stupid, i ask myself what was he so afraid of that they might find out?

and the main reason you need to seek out truth is because of this:

“For what a man would like to be true, that he more readily believes” -- Francis Bacon

Cause if hitler started a religion would you respect it as well? then understand me, that when a 6th century hitler starts a religion i won't respect it either.

This in turn requires that you should seek the truth of Message, not in what you were born into, but in what appeals to you and your needs more! In this regard, what you should fight is not Islam or any other religion but your own "self," because you might just be rejecting God's guidance by rejecting an aspect of His Message that appeals to you.

are you not born into Islam my friend? when did you look outside your box? i studied Islam, i studied and still are studying other oriental and non-oriental religions, christian denominations and their histories. In christianity God is Love... in Islam God is a conquerer... in Christianity it's kingdom is not of this earth, in Islam it is.

This might not be a straightforward process, but still you can be honest and sincere in accepting good aspects of other religions.

All the good aspects of Islam are only copied from Christianity and Judaism... in that regard i prefer the original above the wannabe!

Some of you here behave in such a way that, Muhammad should not be a good person, or Qur'an should not be a complete book, so that the Message they represent be not truth. In a way you seek pretexts to reject the Message. This attitude is wrong, because that may mean you close a door God can guide you.

or close a door in wich Satan would guide me to the world of manon that Muhammed so dearly loved.

Imo, the best attitude is to accept religions as they are. If they have any appeal on you, you may accept them or not accept them. In this light, acknowledging any goodness in Islam does not make you a Muslim in an instant, but can make you a better person in God's presence, so that He may guide you to the true path.

the arrogance to think that i am not following the true path is allready one reason not to aknowledge a religion that thinks that it owns christianity and Judaism... while Islam is nothing more then a mere heresy, Christianity owns Islam (and it's a heritage we'd rather pass then accept)

My approach is this. I believe Bible is corrpupted, because Qur'an says so. But I do not need to invest on that to show you how it is corrupted. Actually I think when people become loose of Christianity they see these contradictions themselves.

Why not? you believe that because some crazy merchant merely says it? are you that naieve? if i said that i am a prophet of God and that you computers are evil? would you stop chatting then? see you don't need proof that i am a prophet or that what i am saying is true... then by all means destroy your computer please, Allah wills it, because i have said it!

In fact, when I accept Christianity as you tell and represent it, I do not think it would do any good for me in my life, nor it has any appeal in my mind with its theology. One simple approach.

like Bacon said, people only believe what he would love to be true... i think many things in christianity are very hard to follow, and christianity is a burden in wich we volunteerly suffer... every sin that roams in my body is one that i gradually need to overcome with the guidance of the holy spirit... some of us are drunk on certain sins and keep repeating them making it even harder.

if you wanna live for this world only, you will loose the next one... simple as that

Both Christianity and Islam, in early times, spreaded mostly among lower classes first and then upper classes joined. Message had appeal on lower classes first, because of their needs and expectaions for a relieve. Thats how God helps and guides people. Just do not get the channels clogged, by following your "self"s.

acctually Muhammed was the first muslim, and he was a wealthy bussinessman, policitian... only his closesth friends were his earliest 'supporters' of his message... practiclly every other person ridiculed him... When he came to power he sended out letters to other kings (not lower class people) to convert to islam or pay the consequences... the lower people (the pagans, christians and jews) in the arabian pensulina never accepted his message and stayed with their religions untill muhammed forced them to convert due to systematic persecution and wars.

In christianity, the message appealed to all classes... everyone who came into close contact with christ (other then with muhammed who was ridiculed all the time) almost instantly converted. This included even rich men (Luke 18:21-22) too the very poor. Neither was this religion (unlike islam) ever forced unto people... people freely accepted it without a prophet or caliphs sending them death threats if they didn't. Time for you to do your studies my friend.

[sardab]

Some of you here behave in such a way that, Muhammad should not be a good person, or Qur'an should not be a complete book, so that the Message they represent be not truth. In a way you seek pretexts to reject the Message. This attitude is wrong, because that may mean you close a door God can guide you.

or close a door in wich Satan would guide me to the world of manon that Muhammed so dearly loved.

Like above, you just copied my paraghraphs and wrote the opposite of my points. I think you just not understand I try to tell you that we can support our religion as firm as you support yours.

If God did not create religions for specific ethnicities, and we know He didnt, He will guide His servants to His true path, and I was trying to explain how might that be. The question remains unanswered is what Christianity offers, namely how would one embrace Christianity, in this specific example; apart from that one should accept a man named Jesus declared he is God.

Even by today's standarts, thats not applicable. Let me ask you something. Just think Christianity was sent just today, and Jesus came to you saying he is God. What are the chances you will accept Him, given you were not born into this faith of yours and you hear the idea the first time. Would you create rationalisations like "this is progressive revealation" or would you just rule him out saying he is insane?

Islam calls you to nothing that strains your logic and common sense. If Muhammad came today he would achieve likewise. And calling him hitler is another rationalisation of yours. It is not that you do not believe in him, because he is like hitler. It is jsut that you tag him hitler because you dont wanna believe in him.

Your rationalisations follow your decisions, not vice versa. If you are sincere it would be hidayah, if not it would be that God increase your disbelief, because there's no balance in between. Or if there was, that would equally be named "insanity." God is involved and intervenes into this life, more than you can imagine.

And finally, you cannot control God, but you can control your self. Open your heart, and let Him guide you.

[Liberate]

Some of you here behave in such a way that, Muhammad should not be a good person, or Qur'an should not be a complete book, so that the Message they represent be not truth. In a way you seek pretexts to reject the Message. This attitude is wrong, because that may mean you close a door God can guide you.

or close a door in wich Satan would guide me to the world of manon that Muhammed so dearly loved.

Like above, you just copied my paraghraphs and wrote the opposite of my points. I think you just not understand I try to tell you that we can support our religion as firm as you support yours.

You cannot support your religion other than to claim your esteemed imams, mullahs, the biographers of your prophet, hadith narrators, matn, isnads, and chroniclers of the entire religion are idiots, fools, liars and lies when it comes to the very nature of what a prophet representing the same God as the christian and the jews acts like, in other words your entire religion is based on unsubstantiated pack of lies which you pick and chose what to believe from, when unable to prove that Mohammed was not a paedophile who fondled and violated the womb of a pre-puberty little girl still playing with her dolls, that he didn't rape safiyah after decapitating her husband's head killing her father, her uncle and banishing her entire ethnic group out of Khaiber he just had to have sex with her that same day while a man watched the tent? this is normal behaviour for a woman who has lost her entire family she wanted to do it with him, it was a mercy on her?, that it is normal behaviour for an al kamil al insan whose behaviour transcends all time for all eternity to take his son's wife for himself and thereby banish adoption from all of islam just because he wanted to have his son's wife, this is what the merciful allah revealed?

Islam calls you to nothing that strains your logic and common sense.

Please don't make me laugh, you think everybody is born with the knowledge that Mohammed is the prophet of allah? you think anybody who has never heard of a prophet instinctively knows that God only understands arabic and Mohammed is a prophet of God??

If Muhammad came today he would achieve likewise. And calling him hitler is another rationalisation of yours. It is not that you do not believe in him, because he is like hitler. It is jsut that you tag him hitler because you dont wanna believe in him.

Mohammed is like hitler not because we do not believe in him that is a given (there is no proof any previous prophet frothed at the mouth rolling on the floor complaining of ringing bells in an epileptic seizure of a fit and claimed this is how God sent divine revelations, this is superstitious nonsense to believe in the absurdity of this when the alledged prophet does not have a prophecy to his name), Mohammed is like hitler because he raped captured women, he fondled and violated the womb of a 9 year old little girl that had not yet reached puberty and was still playing with her dolls, there is evidence he was a repeat offender stating he liked to "fondle young girls", because he took his son's wife for himself comitting incest a thing the God of both previous revelations forbids, because he practiced hatred of an entire ethnic group (like hitler) Mohammed's last words were apparently " May allah curse the christians and the jews"

Your rationalisations follow your decisions, not vice versa. If you are sincere it would be hidayah, if not it would be that God increase your disbelief, because there's no balance in between. Or if there was, that would equally be named "insanity." God is involved and intervenes into this life, more than you can imagine.

And finally, you cannot control God, but you can control your self. Open your heart, and let Him guide you.

Save the sufi superstitious nonsense for fairy stories, if somebody came to you after raping women and killing their entire families, fondling little pre-pubery girls playing with their dolls and needing a wet nurse, frothing in the mouth in an epileptic fit claiming he is a prophet without a prophecy to his name, would you accept this schizophrenic sex molester of a madman as a prophet of God? suppose he then adds the incentive of killing you if you don't accept him? would you accept him then? what if he starts to rape your wife? and starts decapitating the limbs of your family? will you accept him then? I suggest you open your mind to the madness you are in, there is no religious leader that is as debauched as your prophet, not the dalai lama, not the baha'u'llah, not Guru nanak, he even promised intoxicants and houris (where the root word whore is derived from) as an incentive to his followers, thank God indeed for the internet now apostates can abandon this insanity which they are doing to the tune of 6 million a year when given the context of this abomination you call a religion. Mohammed's greatest trick was to ascribe the tautology of God to justify his actions as if God sanctioned it satan couldn't have planned it better, hence suicide bombers in the gaza strip, Iraq, Saudi arabia blow themselves off killing women and children chanting "God is great", innocent abductees have their heads and limbs sawn off hearing "God is great" yes God is great what relevance is there saying this when doing an ungodly act? It is you that needs to open your mind that you are worshipping satan.

[sardab]

When one does not want to embrace truth, satan will be of great help to create reasons. Do not think I will address such one, when he salivates out his hatred deep within.

[Loki]

When one does not want to embrace truth

define on what conditions you see islam as truth?
you got a rotten 'prophet'/warlord, a plagiarized/edited quran and hundreds of theological contradiction with the preseding religions (judaism-christianity) it claims to belong too. It has every indication of being a false religion... too think and believe that such still contains truth is an insult to your intelligence.

satan will be of great help to create reasons.

Wich prophet originanly fully revealed that satan will try and obstruct God's will as much as possible? Jesus! wich religion obstructed and rejected God's will (aka Christianity). Yes my friend Islam (and so many other false prophets like prophet manes, prophet joseph smith, lord caitaneya -- from hara krishna viewpoint, haille sellasy,...).

“and beware for there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” --Jesus

Do not think I will address such one, when he salivates out his hatred deep within.

admit that you have no leg to stand on, against the accusations against islam... just like all muslims who can't defend their bankrupt religion. First say the christians don't understand the quran, then copy paste obsolete arguments from islam sites and if all that don't work you can always call the christian 'anti-islamic' and they think you won the debate by a subtle personal remark at your debaters integrity wich in itself isn't a argument cause who says a person who is 'anti' islam has no arguments to support himself?

then again, better for muslim apologetic to remain silent and thought of as a fool, then to speak and remove all doubt.

[sardab]

Both you and your friend slyly evade a question I ask in my post above. Try to answer that first. What if Jesus came today?

You say you studied all religions available on the Earth, here is a materpiece of your vast knowledge!!

Both Christianity and Islam, in early times, spreaded mostly among lower classes first and then upper classes joined. Message had appeal on lower classes first, because of their needs and expectaions for a relieve. Thats how God helps and guides people. Just do not get the channels clogged, by following your "self"s.

acctually Muhammed was the first muslim, and he was a wealthy bussinessman, policitian... only his closesth friends were his earliest 'supporters' of his message... practiclly every other person ridiculed him... When he came to power he sended out letters to other kings (not lower class people) to convert to islam or pay the consequences... the lower people (the pagans, christians and jews) in the arabian pensulina never accepted his message and stayed with their religions untill muhammed forced them to convert due to systematic persecution and wars.

In christianity, the message appealed to all classes...everyone who came into close contact with christ (other then with muhammed who was ridiculed all the time) almost instantly converted. This included even rich men (Luke 18:21-22) too the very poor. Neither was this religion (unlike islam) ever forced unto people... people freely accepted it without a prophet or caliphs sending them death threats if they didn't. Time for you to do your studies my friend.

Let's see. Apparently I was not talking about an Indian type cast system. Early Christians were not of the ruling class of Roman Empire, it take long time and persecution. The same with Islam. Agrarian Madinah people preceded rich traders of Mecca. The same with Moses. He preached to Pharoah and his people but finally he had to take Jews out of Egypt leaving them back. These are basic facts.

What was your response? You wrote: "In christianity, the message appealed to all classes" What is this? A slogan of a demonstration? Does Islam's message differ in this respect? Your slogan has nothing to do with my point.

You wrote: "everyone who came into close contact with christ (other then with muhammed who was ridiculed all the time) almost instantly converted." Funny! You do not know what you say! The "passion" is just a bunch of lies then!

Sorry I do not see any merit in your knowledge. You just do not hesitate to twist basic facts, when they do not fit your desires. And you do it in such awkward way. You ridicule yourself.

Let me guess...You behave like you betted on Christianity and it should win at any cost, even when that requires cheating about the rivals. Thats why you attack Islam in such a twisted way, because you do not really trust your own religion.

There are much lies and misunderstandings you can stick to when it comes to understanding Islam. You claim more authority over Islamic sources than Muslims, which is real stupidity. Stop pseudo scholarship on Islam, give an ear to us when we tell you what Islam is. Or just remain silent, so that others think you are man!

[H2O]

In the bible there are no contradictions only different contexts wich you can rip them out from. To proof this: reading this site http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm would be in place cause it takes far too much time and space to personally refute every aliged contradiction made in the bible. Therefore here's a list of 'contradictions' a fellow Christian studied and refuted with the given arguments.

I really didnt want to do this, but I will do this and wait for the responses to show the prejudice of some of you. I am not being wanton in this and my intentions is not to disprove the Bible of being the word of G-d. After I see the responses from some of the zealous prejudice christians I will state my purpose of stooping to such level in criticism of the Bible so bare with me here.

KI1 4:26 And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.

CH2 9:25 And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen; whom he bestowed in the chariot cities, and with the king at Jerusalem.

Was it forty thousand or four hunderd ?

PRO 4:7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.

ECC 1:18 For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.

1 Cor.1:19: "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and wil bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."

Does he want us to be wise or does he want us to be stupid ? Loki was just talking about this in Islam according to what he thinks he understands. After reading those last verses one would be afraid of aquiring knowledge. Yup Jesus said to be like sheep, sheep are stupid they just follow.

ISA 14:21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.

DEU 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

Wow ! G-d commands to punish people by slaughtering the children of his ememies but yet in his own commandments he decreed against such a thing.

Num.31:14, 17, 18: "And Moses was wroth...And Moses said unto them, "Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman, ... But all the women children ... keep alive for yourselves."

Not claiming this is a contradiction. Moses is here telling to KILL every male among the little ones (young boys) and kill every woman (particular women), but all women and children to keep alive for themselves. Amazing isnt it ? I wonder why Moses hasn t been labeled like how Christians Labeled our prophet. I swear if we were to say this was a hadeeth and change the name from Moses to Muhammad they would have many perverted things.

Matt.5:1,2: "And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying...."

Luke6:17,20: "And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people...came to hear him.. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said..."

Was it a mountian he went or plain ?

Matt.27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."

Luke23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

John19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

Hmm so what was it he said at the last moment of his supposed death on the cross or tree ?

II SAMUEL 24:13: So God came to David, and told him, and said unto him, shall SEVEN YEARS OF FAMINE come unto thee in thy land? or will thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue. thee?

I CHRONICLES 21:11: SO God came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Choose thee. Either THREE YEARS OF FAMINE or three months to be destryed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee;

I am confused here.

II SAMUEL 24: And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Isreal and Judah.

I CHRONICLES 21: And SATAN stood up against Isreal, and provoked David to number Israel.

Who told David to do what G-d or the Devil ?

"And he cast down the pieces of silver into the temple and departed, and went out and hanged himself." (Matt. 27:5)

"And falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out." (Acts 1:18)

Huh ! which way did he die ?

"And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." (2 Kings 2:11)

"No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, ... the Son of Man." (John 3:13)

Ehm ! Something wrong here.

SA2 6:23 Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.

SA2 21:8 But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite:

I guess she adopted ?

KI2 24:8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.

CH2 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.

Umm ! Which was it ?

ACT 9:7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

ACT 22:9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

You still want us to believe Paul's mystical encounter ?

MAR 1:12 And immediately the spirit driveth him into the wilderness.

JOH 1:35 Again the next day after John stood, and two of his disciples;

This is my favorite one. One account states he went immediately to the wilderness after his baptism for 40 day/40 night being tempted of the devil in which another account not mentioned here goes into details of the temptation as he was by himself, but the account above has him doing things completely differentafter the baptism to the next day to the next day to the next where he meet the Sameritan Woman at the well etc. During these times he is suppose to be in the wilderness with the shaytan taking flying lessons.

scarlet - Matthew 27:28

purple John 19:2

what color was the rob placed on Jesus again ?

vinegar - Matthew 27:34

wine with myrrh - Mark 15:23

The man that was being crucified, supposedly Jesus, was given a liquid. Is vinegar and wine with myrrh the same ?

Here is a link with more contradictions http://islamway.com/english/images/libr ... ctions.htm

Feel free to asnwer them all. I am presenting this the same exact way Loki and some others have done with Quran. Anyhow we are waiting for some replies.

Both you and your friend slyly evade a question I ask in my post above. Try to answer that first. What if Jesus came today

slyly <~~~~ cute

You say you studied all religions available on the Earth, here is a materpiece of your vast knowledge!!

I dont believe he did either. Not in a direct approach but through a christian perspective. Did he actaully take up the Thalmud and read it ? No ! Did he actually pick up the Bhagavad Gita and read it ? No. Did he actually pick up The Dhammapada and read it ? No. Did he ever pick up and read for himself cover to cover and studied The Analects, The Five Classics, Tao-te-ching, The Upanishads, The Veda, and mereless to say the Quran ? No.

So his studies of world religion is merely premature adn dictated to him through Christian bias views. It would take him over 6 years just to learn the fundamentals of all the major religions through deligent study of their book and with the Quran and hadeeth would take someone the same amount of time just to study. I been there, done it and know the time it takes to invest in such a task. Fortunate with me in those times I didnt have to work, take care of children etc that would distract such studies which would have prolonged the completion even more.

[Loki]

I really didnt want to do this, but I will do this and wait for the responses to show the prejudice of some of you. I am not being wanton in this and my intentions is not to disprove the Bible of being the word of G-d. After I see the responses from some of the zealous prejudice christians I will state my purpose of stooping to such level in criticism of the Bible so bare with me here.

let me first say that the book of the bible is not seen as a 'miracle' by christians... so any scriptual difficulty found in it will not make the message of the bible any less divine or inaccurate. Since it is the most accurate book on earth according to scriptual evidence and history, let's not forget this.

Aliged contradictions in the quran are far more embarrasing to the muslim... since muhammed (or whoever compiled it) dared them to seek contradictions in the quran

"Why don't they contemplate upon the Qur'an. Had it been originated from anyone besides Allah then it would have been beset with inconsistencies and contradictions" [4:82]

and if there was anyone in there it would dissprove the quran fully, including it's message. Muslims threat their scripture that way, but christians and jews threat their scripture more historically and material as what they are... but non the less not doubting the integrity and truthfullness of the message.

"Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." -- John 14:23

"Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away." --Luke 21:33

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." -- Matthew 24:14

The divine in the bible lays in it message, not in it's ink. Now let's continue

KI1 4:26 And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.

CH2 9:25 And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen; whom he bestowed in the chariot cities, and with the king at Jerusalem.

Was it forty thousand or four hunderd ?

If we look objectively, we see that these verses are easily harmonized by assuming that the Chronicles author is omitting information given by the Kings author, while offering information not given by Kings. Kings tells us about stalls for horses--horses only, while Chronicles tells us about (presumably different, and perhaps larger) stalls in which both horses and chariots were kept together. We thus see that the Chronicles author evidently chose not to tell its readers about the forty thousand stalls which housed only horses. There's nothing wrong with that, the apologists say; the Chronicles authors probably figured that diligent readers who really cared would look back to Kings to get the full picture, and vice versa.

For every contradiction i will return you a quranic one... just not to keep this debate one sided

Allah's clock ain't working:
- Allah's day is a 1000 years [32:5]
- Allah's day is 50.000 years [70:4]

was it thousand or a fifty thousand years?

PRO 4:7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.

ECC 1:18 For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.

1 Cor.1:19: "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and wil bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."

these apparent opposites is that both are true, and indeed, they can be. Wisdom brings the benefits of deeper understanding, but the burden of such an understanding can be terrible at times, too.

Indeed, this could easily be a both/and situation. For example, wisdom causes me to rejoice in the plan of God. But it also causes me sorrow in knowing that not all will partake of that plan.

Where does the evil in our lifes come from?
- Satan? [38:41]
- Ourselves?[4:79]
- Allah? [4:78]

Will Allah put himself in hell for allowing us to sin? will we be responsible for our sins, or will it be all allah's fault?

ISA 14:21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.

DEU 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

Wow ! G-d commands to punish people by slaughtering the children of his ememies but yet in his own commandments he decreed against such a thing.

Are children punished for the sins or the parents?

Exod. 20:5 tells us that God is to be feared, as He has the ability to visit the sins of the fathers on the children.

Ezek. 18:20 tells us this will not happen if the children repent and turn away from the ways of their fathers. Not a contradiction.

Persecute unbelievers? or forgive them?:
- Persecute the unbelievers [9:29]
- Forgive the unbelievers [45:14]

Num.31:14, 17, 18: "And Moses was wroth...And Moses said unto them, "Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman, ... But all the women children ... keep alive for yourselves."

Not claiming this is a contradiction. Moses is here telling to KILL every male among the little ones (young boys) and kill every woman (particular women), but all women and children to keep alive for themselves. Amazing isnt it ? I wonder why Moses hasn t been labeled like how Christians Labeled our prophet. I swear if we were to say this was a hadeeth and change the name from Moses to Muhammad they would have many perverted things.

The Midianites had enticed Israel into idol worship, God (as is His right to do so) decided to punish these people. He especially focused His wrath on the women because they were the worse offenders as they used sex to achieve their goal. At first, the Israeli people kept all the women alive even though God said they should die as befitting their choices...their crime...their sin. Moses commanded the death of the women, but decided (in my opinion against God's better judgement) to keep the girls alive to take as wives. If you were to read the OT you would find that the role of a wife in Israel did not allow rape to befall on them (unlike in the Koran). Wives in the OT had much more rights than women in any other culture or society.

and male among the little ones is ussually translated as boys... referring to the male gender that if you think of it logically would have been the case.

Wich ONLY answer did they give?:
- "Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!" [7:82], [27:56]
- "Bring us the Wrath of Allah if thou tellest the truth." [29:29]

Matt.5:1,2: "And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying...."

Luke6:17,20: "And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people...came to hear him.. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said..."

Was it a mountian he went or plain ?

Matthew's account does not say that this was Jesus' first appearance. It is certainly possible that Matthew simply passes over the earlier appearances and focuses on the call to go into Galilee. In fact, notice how Matthew's account is not exhaustive. In 28:16, he mentions that Jesus had indicated what mountain in Galilee the disciples were to go to, yet he does not mention this when he quotes Jesus in verse 10.

Who gets the blame for disbelief?:
- the disbeliever [6:12]
- Allah [10:100]

Matt.27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."

Luke23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

John19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

Hmm so what was it he said at the last moment of his supposed death on the cross or tree ?

first:
No, it doesn't say those are his final words. It says He says these things before dying. For all we know it could have been hours before.

secondly:
Concering John 19:30 you are totally incorrect on this one. He states certain words (which are different and contradictory in each account), then "gives up the spirit/ghost." Surely you know that giving up the ghost means dying? They definitely state that he dies right after these words are uttered. If he said anything else, don't you think it would've been important enough to include in the Bible? You are correct, however, in stating that they don't use the word "final." It just takes a little bit of sense to see that these things occur one after the other, since that is the way they are written.

Allah isn't sure who gets salvation:
- Salvation is for Jews, Christians, and Sabaeans [5:69]
- Salavation is Only for Muslims [3:85]

II SAMUEL 24:13: So God came to David, and told him, and said unto him, shall SEVEN YEARS OF FAMINE come unto thee in thy land? or will thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue. thee?

I CHRONICLES 21:11: SO God came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Choose thee. Either THREE YEARS OF FAMINE or three months to be destryed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee;

I am confused here.

Certainly, with a hurried look, 2 Samuel 24:13 and 1 Chronicles 21:11 seem to be contradictory. However, I would suggest that the questioner slow down and read the Scriptures more carefully (and in context), for these texts are in full agreement.

David's choices of punishment for his sin before the Lord were:
- 1 - three years of famine;
- 2 - three months to be destroyed before his enemies;
- 3 - three days of pestilence in the land.

In the 1 Chronicles 21 account, these three choices are given to David. Notice, that the latter two choices are parallel in the 2 Samuel 24 account, but the first choice is different, both in the number of years mentioned and in the way the punishment is worded. The Lord there does not invite David to chose 3 years of famine, but rather asks, "...shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land?"

In 2 Samuel 21:1, it is written, "...there was a famine in the days of David three years, year after year; and David enquired of the LORD. And the LORD answered, It is for Saul, and for his bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites." Three years of famine had already occurred. Add to this the current year (the time which passed from 2 Samuel 21:1 to 2 Samuel 24:13), and then the three years of famine as recorded in 1 Chronicles 21:11, and you have seven years of famine

Death repentance is a impossible possibility:
- Pharaoh repented at the site of death and was saved [10:90-92]
- Alltough noone can be saved this way [4:18]

II SAMUEL 24: And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Isreal and Judah.

I CHRONICLES 21: And SATAN stood up against Isreal, and provoked David to number Israel.

Who told David to do what G-d or the Devil ?

According to 2 Samuel 24:1, God incited David to take a census. In 1 Chronicles 19:13, it was Satan who incites David. Contradiction? The solution to this problem is easy. Both God and Satan incited David. You can find a good examle of this in the Book of Job. In Job, God recomends and allows Satan to test Job. (Job 1:6-12) The same thing occured to David.

Some angels missing:
- Many angels appeared to marry [3:42], [3:45]
- Only one angel appeared to marry [19:17]

"And he cast down the pieces of silver into the temple and departed, and went out and hanged himself." (Matt. 27:5)

"And falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out." (Acts 1:18)

Huh ! which way did he die ?

According to Matthew 27:5 Judas Iscariot hanged himself. Acts 1:18 says Judas died by falling headlong and his body burst open. They seem like two different deaths however, they are the same. Judas hanged himself and sometime later his decaying body was discovered after it had fallen and burst open.

What's a man really made of?:
- A blood clot [96:1-2]
- water [21:30], [24:45], [25:54]
- clay [15:26]
- dust [3:59], [30:20], [35:11]
- or nothing? [19:67]

"And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." (2 Kings 2:11)

"No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, ... the Son of Man." (John 3:13)

Ehm ! Something wrong here.

Here one has to read John 3:13 in context.

"If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how shall you believe if I tell you heavenly things? And no one has ascended into heaven, but he who descended from heaven, even the Son of Man."

Jesus, setting forth his own superior authority, says, substantially, "No human being can speak from personal knowledge, as I do, who came from heaven. No man hath ascended up to heaven to bring back tidings." So we, speaking of the secrets of the future world, should very naturally say: "No man has been there to tell us about them." In saying this, we do not deny that any one has actually entered the eternal world, but merely that any one has gone thither, and returned to unfold its mystery.

Angels cannot disobey Allah:
- All are commanded [16:49-50]
- Not all are commanded [2:34]

SA2 6:23 Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.

SA2 21:8 But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite:

I guess she adopted ?

acctually they are

What does 2 Sam. 21:8-9 say?

"But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite: And he delivered them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them in the hill before the LORD: and they fell [all] seven together, and were put to death in the days of harvest, in the first [days], in the beginning of barley harvest."

This would appear to be a real contradiction except for the phrase "whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai."

The phrasing tells you that these sons are not Michal's in the normal sense of the term because she did not "bear" these children. I.E. these sons are adopted children."

Heaven and earth? wich was created first?:
- First earth and then heaven [2:29]
- heaven and after that earth [79:27-30]

KI2 24:8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.

CH2 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.

Umm ! Which was it ?

It is possible that at the age of eight, Jehoiachin was exalted by his father to reign along side him for the remaining years of his life (10 years), and upon the death of his father (2 Kings 24:5), at the age of eighteen, Jehoiachin began to reign alone (the three months that are mentioned as his reign). It appears that he 'apprenticed' under his father, learning his father's evil ways, and then repeating them (2 Chronicles 36:9; 2 Kings 24:9; 23:37).

Where is Allah and his throne?:
- Allah is nearer than the jugular vein [50:16]
- but he is also on the throne [57:4]
- which is upon the water [11:7]
- and at the same time so far away, that it takes between 1,000 and 50,000 years to reach him [32:5, 70:4].

ACT 9:7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

ACT 22:9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

You still want us to believe Paul's mystical encounter ?

Literally, that clause in 22:9 may be translated, “They did not hear the sound.” The NIV correctly translates the verse, because the verb “to hear” with the genitive case may mean “to hear a sound” and with the accusative case “to hear with understanding.” The genitive case is employed in 9:7, and the accusative is used in 22:9. So the travelers with Saul heard the sound (9:7) but did not understand what Christ said (22:9)."

Inquiry in paradise?:
-"neither will they question one another" [23:101]
- but nevertheless they will be "engaging in mutual inquiry" [52:25]
- "and they will ... question one another" [37:27].

MAR 1:12 And immediately the spirit driveth him into the wilderness.

JOH 1:35 Again the next day after John stood, and two of his disciples;

This is my favorite one. One account states he went immediately to the wilderness after his baptism for 40 day/40 night being tempted of the devil in which another account not mentioned here goes into details of the temptation as he was by himself, but the account above has him doing things completely differentafter the baptism to the next day to the next day to the next where he meet the Sameritan Woman at the well etc. During these times he is suppose to be in the wilderness with the shaytan taking flying lessons.

After His baptism, Jesus spent some time with the disciples and then went into the desert. John the Apostle's account of the baptism of Jesus is not a focus on chronological events. Instead, it is focusing on the ministerial aspect of Christ's mission. John focuses on the issue of baptism and the commission of Christ and the blessing of the Father. Mark simply states that Jesus went into the wilderness after His baptism. Each account is about the same thing, but each addresses the issue in a very different manner and extracts different information from the events. Mark is succinct and mentions events several more events than John. There is no contradiction because there is no conflict in what is said.

Can slander of chaste women be forgiven?:
- Yes [24:5]
- No [24:23]

scarlet - Matthew 27:28

purple John 19:2

what color was the rob placed on Jesus again ?

The most likely solution to this apparent contradiction is that the robe was both purple and scarlet (e.g. it was striped or patterned in some way). It's also possible that more than one article of clothing was involved, and that one was purple while the other was scarlet.

Will christians enter paradise?:
- Yes [5:69]
- No [3:85]

vinegar - Matthew 27:34

wine with myrrh - Mark 15:23

The man that was being crucified, supposedly Jesus, was given a liquid. Is vinegar and wine with myrrh the same ?

[/quote]

Most probably, both gall and myrrh were added to the vinegar. The text does not explicitly state this, nor does it exclude the possibility. Nevertheless, "The ancients used to infuse myrrh into wine to give it a more agreeable fragrance and flavour."1 This means that it is quite possible that the vinegar already had myrrh in it, as would be expected among Roman soldiers, and gall was later added. Technically, the inclusion of both gall and vinegar is very possible.

From among all nations or from Abraham's seed?:
- all prophets came from Abraham's seed. [29:27]
- Allah raised messengers from among every people. [16:63]

I dont believe he did either. Not in a direct approach but through a christian perspective. Did he actaully take up the Thalmud and read it ? No ! Did he actually pick up the Bhagavad Gita and read it ? No. Did he actually pick up The Dhammapada and read it ? No. Did he ever pick up and read for himself cover to cover and studied The Analects, The Five Classics, Tao-te-ching, The Upanishads, The Veda, and mereless to say the Quran ? No.

I said i was still studying, and never said this is gonna end any time soon. this does not mean that i have no knowledge ot other relgions other then christianity... excusing my humbleness i know alot more about other religions then the average person. but i will in no way call myself an expert, let this be clear.

So his studies of world religion is merely premature adn dictated to him through Christian bias views. It would take him over 6 years just to learn the fundamentals of all the major religions through deligent study of their book and with the Quran and hadeeth would take someone the same amount of time just to study. I been there, done it and know the time it takes to invest in such a task. Fortunate with me in those times I didnt have to work, take care of children etc that would distract such studies which would have prolonged the completion even more.

it does not take 6 years to understand the main theologies of a certain religion (especially when the religion claims it's a clear message it's bringing)... it only takes 6 years to get fully brainwashed into it... but that is not my goal to get brainwashed into every religion i study... you demand me to become a muslim when i study islam, to become a buddhist when i study buddhism... frankly my friend i can't do that, i am a christian and i judge from my christian perspective... their is no indepedent stand you can't take in, when studying anything, even the atheist studies from his atheist standpoint... tell me H20 you really had no character, nothing wich you stood for, when you studied Islam? maybe that was the reason you converted in the first place?

[sardab]

I really didnt want to do this, but I will do this and wait for the responses to show the prejudice of some of you. I am not being wanton in this and my intentions is not to disprove the Bible of being the word of G-d. After I see the responses from some of the zealous prejudice christians I will state my purpose of stooping to such level in criticism of the Bible so bare with me here.

Yes brother, the prejudice is seen in the response actually. There's a clear difference (inequality) in their treatment of Bible and Qur'an, and they cannot base this on a plausible logic. Why should one can apply context to Bible, but not to Qur'an. Why should one can explain a verse with another verse of Bible, but cant do that with Qur'an?

Yet, I think, nothing we say will be decisive, unless God gives a person hidayah.

Both you and your friend slyly evade a question I ask in my post above. Try to answer that first. What if Jesus came today

slyly <~~~~ cute

Given my English, you'll see more of these I guess.

[Loki]

Yes brother, the prejudice is seen in the response actually. There's a clear difference (inequality) in their treatment of Bible and Qur'an, and they cannot base this on a plausible logic. Why should one can apply context to Bible, but not to Qur'an. Why should one can explain a verse with another verse of Bible, but cant do that with Qur'an?

What's so wrong about my answer? is telling you the truth that dissrespecting to you? christians do not see the 'book' the bible as a nature defying miracle... muslims do see it that way, and the sultans of the ottoman empire forbade Gutenbergs printingpress up to the end of the 20th century, merely because copying books in the exact way were a abonimantion and a humilation to the 'miracle of the quran'. Secondly is such that material peace of wood neccerary for a muslims salvation in the end times... anyone not having one in their right hand will be doomed forever. In that regard christians do not threat the bible in such high standings... we believe that the word of God must be protected (without assuming that it allready is) therefore we study, correct and reproof the bible... while such a scriptual study in islam would be again a abonimation, even if the muslims ever found a death sea scrolls or should i say Yemeni Scriptures, they wouldn't dare comparing it to their own material like the christians did... but just would call and disregard it as heretic quran before they ever read it not thinking that with this reasoing that one could be the true one, and theirs the 'heresy'. Jesus said his words will not pass away, the gospel will be preached all over the world, etc... he never emphasized on the importance of a book. The word was spread orally, scriptually and is possible to be spread 'in every language' even using the internet.

The quran taking up this peace of ink and paper into the ranks of a miracle... makes it FAR more embarrasing when i bring up contradictions in the quran... especially because Allah claimed there weren't in it... either means Allah's a fluke or some dude edited your quran.

While the bible is open for reproof and correction, the quran isn't.

Both you and your friend slyly evade a question I ask in my post above. Try to answer that first. What if Jesus came today

You didn't ask me that question, you asked liberate that.

Imagine both relgions never excisted.

If Jesus came today and he undisputetly healed cancer, lepracy, calmed the winds, walked on water, provoced hostile demonic activity by his presence, ressurected from the dead and on top of that used these to proof his authority, with it calling upon the people to repent for the second comming etc... i would be amazed stopped in my tracks! leaving everything behind... and believing every word of it.

If Muhammed came today and made war with Israel, India... Spain, persecuted unbelievers and other relgions... discriminated non muslims and women, claimed himself prophet without any proof, he would be seen as a murdering madman tyrant who'd probably be responsible for a third world war... and his army would be annihalited by allied forces he'd try to conquer... eventually killing Muhammed and destroying his palaces... forcing his women to flee to a far out country for not being persecuted by their own countrymen.

[sardab]

You didn't ask me that question, you asked liberate that.

You are right. my mistake.

Imagine both relgions never excisted.

If Jesus came today and he undisputetly healed cancer, lepracy, calmed the winds, walked on water, provoced hostile demonic activity by his presence, ressurected from the dead and on top of that used these to proof his authority, with it calling upon the people to repent for the second comming etc... i would be amazed stopped in my tracks! leaving everything behind... and believing every word of it.

If Muhammed came today and made war with Israel, India... Spain, persecuted unbelievers and other relgions... discriminated non muslims and women, claimed himself prophet without any proof, he would be seen as a murdering madman tyrant who'd probably be responsible for a third world war... and his army would be annihalited by allied forces he'd try to conquer... eventually killing Muhammed and destroying his palaces... forcing his women to flee to a far out country for not being persecuted by their own countrymen.

I have some observations on your response.

While you exhibit the importance you attach to miracles, it is interesting that you make no mention of the Message, for both prophets. This, I guess, is an implication of the underleying mentality of Christians in general. For you, what matters is supernatural signs and prophecies, the strength of the Message is of secondary importance. Your attitude implies as if we humans have no corresponding faculties that can get and validate the Message of God. Miracles are important but will they alone really help? Let's test.

A prophet can show a miracle. Yet, accepting it being a miracle, but not a supernatural ability (there are such people who can show such) requires believing in his prophethood. And that requires that you are open to God's message in the first place. You know, people asked for miracles to validate the prophethood, but when they were shown they turned back. There were many disbelievers of prophets despite their miracles. Miracles had effect only on those who were eager to accept the Message. So, what matters is the Message and openness to it, miracles are of secondary importance. Prophets had miracles to support their cause, but not everyone around them believed.

As a matter of fact, while you mention miracles, I really doubt that you would accept Jesus if he came with something hard to digest for you. So going back to my original point, you would really have hardship accepting him being God (I say this for the sake of the issue, he would not claim such thing). Perhaps you would consider that an insult to your human faculties, because despite your claim you would normally look at the message first, not to the supernaturalities.

To summarize, miracles have supplemantary value to the Message and they are not decisive. If they were decisive, that would contrast the meaning of being put to test. The Message precedes miracles. From this point of view, Christians' strong emphasis on miracles (which we also accept) and prophecies (interpreted to desire) are attempts of rationalisation of their current positions. Thats the only thing they can rely on, because the religion has no effective message or strong theology.

My second observation is about the ad hominem remarks you make about Muhammad, while omitting the underlying mentality and motives behind his actions. I would put it this way, emphasizing the Message he brings. If he came to preach us One God, and called us to justice and morality, and acted in the way he preached, and fought himself against injustices I would accept him; because I can get his message through my faculties given by God, and I can know he comes from God, as he brings the Word of God, Qur'an.

see you all on monday...

[Loki]

While you exhibit the importance you attach to miracles, it is interesting that you make no mention of the Message, for both prophets. This, I guess, is an implication of the underleying mentality of Christians in general. For you, what matters is supernatural signs and prophecies, the strength of the Message is of secondary importance. Your attitude implies as if we humans have no corresponding faculties that can get and validate the Message of God. Miracles are important but will they alone really help? Let's test.

acctually i see the importance of miracles and prophecies as external witnessess of his message to be indications of a higher power. miracles are a decisive factor... not the ultimate reason to submit... and not the only one either, yet allthou you may dispute the miracles (like the jews did calling it demonic or how the anti christ will use miracles as well to deceive) it still has more decivive factors in the prophet's advantage if he has UNDISPUTED (as in by science) miracles to show... then a man who commes empty handed claiming the same divinity.

A prophet can show a miracle. Yet, accepting it being a miracle, but not a supernatural ability (there are such people who can show such) requires believing in his prophethood.

It does, people where healed if they believed in Jesus... the blind man was asked if he believed in the Son of God, and the woman was healed for touching Jesus' robe and was healed because of her faith.

and all miracles are things that transgress nature.

mir·a·cle (mr-kl) KEY
NOUN:
An event that appears inexplicable by the laws of nature and so is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of God:

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry?id=m0325000

a book and some ink on it, is not a miracle... if that would be the case, then i can do miracles too

And that requires that you are open to God's message in the first place. You know, people asked for miracles to validate the prophethood, but when they were shown they turned back.

True, but they were really shown miracles and they still doubted... Jesus also emphasized this to the apostles regarding their small beliefs in trying to do an exorcism "after all you have seen, you still have that little faith?" again miracles is not the only reason eithers... but it's a very decisive factor... as how miracles where things that spread Jesus name troughout Israel, how he converted entire masses of people by doing supernatural events.

There were many disbelievers of prophets despite their miracles. Miracles had effect only on those who were eager to accept the Message. So, what matters is the Message and openness to it, miracles are of secondary importance. Prophets had miracles to support their cause, but not everyone around them believed.

Does that mean to you, merely because it doesn't always convince everybody miracles are not neccerary to proof prophethood? And alot of prophets brought a Message... do i need to name drop all prophets who brought a Message? Prophet Manes, Prophet Joseph Smith, Prophet Akhenaton, Prophet Nanak, Prophet Baha'u'llah, Prophet Charles Manson, etc... What seperates muhammed from them?? nothing ! then why are they seen as lesser prophets? or their Messages as lesser truth?

And The Message of Islam is a very rotten message, The Bible has to be ignored or corrupted to be used to justify terrorism. The Qur'an has to be ignored or corrupted to keep one from being a terrorist. Exposing Christ's message and life pleases Christians; it doesn't embarrass them. But Muhammad was an entirely different sort of man.

As a matter of fact, while you mention miracles, I really doubt that you would accept Jesus if he came with something hard to digest for you. So going back to my original point, you would really have hardship accepting him being God (I say this for the sake of the issue, he would not claim such thing). Perhaps you would consider that an insult to your human faculties, because despite your claim you would normally look at the message first, not to the supernaturalities.

acctualy i, like any other person has a soft spot for claims of the supernatural... and i have done my studies in the occult as well, and have seen how dark forces rule unknowningly in our lifes and how satan's legion is to be taken very spiritual and literally in my opinion. I also have seen that you as in wich ever other thing you study need to firm research from those that are against it as well. If you see Uri Geller bending spoons i advise you to read the amazing James Randi, or when you see James Van Praagh speaking to the dead on Larry King i advise you to read about 'cold reading'... i am a very sceptic person when it commes down to miracles and i am intrigued because the truth is mixed with the quacks. The catholics (what i like them before, above protestants) invest claims of miracles with science... and if all scientific and psycholigical explenations are ruled out for describing the event, only then it is seen as a miracle... Doubting Thomas also was a sceptic... maybe i am a bit like him, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."... and Jesus showed it too him. If a prophet comes on earth and does miracles, he will need to baffle science in order to win my vote... if he were a prophet of God he wouldn't have no problem doing that and wouldn't turn away from the request.

To summarize, miracles have supplemantary value to the Message and they are not decisive. If they were decisive, that would contrast the meaning of being put to test.

acctually the ressurection in of Christ was very decisive at the time for the Apostles it was a self fullfilling prophecy and miracle proving and confirming that every word of his message was truth... before that the apostles were scattered and hiding like cowards in fear of repercussions by the Jews. When they saw Jesus ressurected and saw him it changed them completly... from cowardly apostles to brave and faithfull apostles who preaced and spread the message untill they were martyred the most cruel dead.

The Message precedes miracles. From this point of view, Christians' strong emphasis on miracles (which we also accept) and prophecies (interpreted to desire) are attempts of rationalisation of their current positions. Thats the only thing they can rely on, because the religion has no effective message or strong theology.

isn't rationalisation a good thing? and for sure the prophecies are not (interpreted to desire) more then 100 prophecies are about Jesus, and fit the picture, that is overwhelming! Even Jews sometimes completly skip the part of Isaiah

Isaiah 53
1 Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?

2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

4 Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.

5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed.

6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.

7 He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.

8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away.
And who can speak of his descendants?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was stricken.

9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.

10 Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.

11 After the suffering of his soul,
he will see the light of life and be satisfied;
by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.

12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,
and he will divide the spoils with the strong,
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.

Tell me how such a detailed prophecy can be fit to interpretation? (and that's only one of many) it's not like how your mullah's try doing with ripping the bible from it's context, claiming a prophecy about the levitians to muhammed or making muhammed the holy spirit(God).

My second observation is about the ad hominem remarks you make about Muhammad, while omitting the underlying mentality and motives behind his actions.

Doesn't matter if muhammed came today, he would be seen as the next best megalomaniac dictator... and a giant threat to world peace.

Muhammed: Bukhari:V4B53N412 “Allah’s Apostle said on the day of the conquest of Mecca, ‘There is no migration now, only Jihad, holy battle. And when you are called for Jihad, you should come out at once.’”
Hitler: the morning he invaded Poland: “There is no more emigration now, only war.”

Muhammed: Muslim:C9B1N33 “The Prophet said: ‘I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and they establish prostration prayer, and pay Zakat. If they do it, their blood and property are protected.’”
Leopold 2: "first threat them gently and with respect - and if then they do not pay taxes (jizyah), then use force" how Leopold II ruled Congo

Muhammed: “Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.” Qur’an 8:39
Joseph Stalin: "If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves."

Your prophet is speaking in accordance with the greatest monsters of human history.... nice al-insan al-kamil you got their my friend.

I would put it this way, emphasizing the Message he brings. If he came to preach us One God, and called us to justice and morality, and acted in the way he preached, and fought himself against injustices I would accept him

how would you follow a prophet who sleeps with a 9 year old? steals the wife from his son? kills a little slave girl for laughing at him? makes up the rule for only having 4 wifes and then in the next breath breakes it by marrying another? womanizing, killing all dogs in the arabian pensulina, decapitating unbelievers, stoning adultresses, amputating the thiefs hands, forcing his peacefull believers to make war... contradicting himself all the time, blaspheming and making war with the other religions and still claiming to be tolerant.

The five oldest and most trusted Islamic sources don't portray Muhammad as a great and godly man. They confirm that he was a thief, liar, assassin, mass murderer, terrorist, warmonger, and an unrestrained sexual pervert engaged in pedophilia, incest, and rape. He authorized deception, assassinations, torture, slavery, and genocide.

I guess maybe the Taliban regime was pure Islam after all.

; because I can get his message through my faculties given by God, and I can know he comes from God, as he brings the Word of God, Qur'an.

how do you know that he comes from God? that is the only firm question i asked every muslim !! and not one can answer it !!!

isn't that embarassing?!

[sardab]

deleted

[sardab]

how do you know that he comes from God? that is the only firm question i asked every muslim !! and not one can answer it !!!

isn't that embarassing?!

I've been explaining that all along. Muslims and Christians have very different mindsets on this. You more seek outer references, we more seek inner references. Outer references are important but only through faculties God put in you, you can correctly understand and evaluate those outer references.

In that regard, rationalization may be good or bad thing. It is essential as it is what makes us sane creatures. But you can rationalize everything. If you use this ability in the way satan used, to legitimize your conjectures over God's orders, then you are in sheer trouble.

So what makes difference is the "peaceful mind" (aql al saleem). There are objective qualities one can possess that will please God. You know the meaning of justice and acting right and being consistent whatever your religion is. And you can act accordingly. If you take that approach, that means you take God's guidance over yours and therefore deserve it. With such peaceful mind, your initiative will be "understanding" the wisdom and reasons behind God's words or plans, because this process will be a guided one.

Otherwise, if you say "i'm this and this is what i'm supposed to be" by using your mind to legitimize your position, that is not good. This attitude might be seen cross religiously or within a single religion. Remember the attempts to legitimize homosexuality within religions.

About Islam, you say nothing new. If you want to help us to truth, you should address our understanding of Islam, not try to exert on us a wicked understanding of Islam. You are wasting your time. I have not seen here any sound claim against Islam on a theoretical basis. Actually there was one on a theoretical basis (legalism), but it is not sound.

We have different understanding of Jesus and original Christianity, but we are not trying to exert this on you. We are addressing the beliefs that you currently hold. Because discussion on outer sources is not fruitful.

Btw, this is my last message on this topic, otherwise this will not end.

[Loki]

how do you know that he comes from God? that is the only firm question i asked every muslim !! and not one can answer it !!!

isn't that embarassing?!

I've been explaining that all along. Muslims and Christians have very different mindsets on this. You more seek outer references, we more seek inner references. Outer references are important but only through faculties God put in you, you can correctly understand and evaluate those outer references.

acctually my friend that is the claim of any bankrupt religion, you are aware that bahai's claim the same about baha'u'llah? or mormons about Joseph Smith? so the muslims who converted to baha'u'llah rightfully felt what was truth according to your reasoning?

Then why not embrace bahai'ism? other muslims felt 'truth'... and you can't discard their prophet, because you do not have any arguments for calling a prophet in the first place!

In that regard, rationalization may be good or bad thing. It is essential as it is what makes us sane creatures. But you can rationalize everything. If you use this ability in the way satan used, to legitimize your conjectures over God's orders, then you are in sheer trouble.

Well isn't that hypocrit, you got a religion founded upon terror and war... known by history to be so, and known by your own scriptures to be so! and you think that i am satanic for merely pointing that out to you?! truth is not a attribute of the devil but of God... you are the one trying to hide the truth, not me.

So what makes difference is the "peaceful mind" (aql al saleem). There are objective qualities one can possess that will please God. You know the meaning of justice and acting right and being consistent whatever your religion is. And you can act accordingly. If you take that approach, that means you take God's guidance over yours and therefore deserve it. With such peaceful mind, your initiative will be "understanding" the wisdom and reasons behind God's words or plans, because this process will be a guided one.

but islam doesn't teach you to have a peacefull mind...

Qur’an 48:11 “The desert Arabs who lagged behind [in fighting] will say to you (Muhammad): ‘We were engaged in (looking after) our flocks and our families.’ We have prepared for them a Blazing Fire!”

Qur’an 48:17 “There is no blame for the blind, nor is it a sin for the lame, nor on one ill if he joins not in the fighting. But he who retreats, (Allah) will punish him with a painful doom.”

Islam doesn't know the meaning of justice:

Stealing:
Bukhari: V9B87N127 “The Prophet said, ‘I have been awarded victory by terror so the treasures of the earth are mine.’”

Qur’an 8:1 “They ask you about the benefits of capturing the spoils of war. Tell them: ‘The benefits belong to Allah and to His Messenger.’”

Qur’an 8:69 “So enjoy what you took as booty; the spoils are lawful and good.”

Qur’an 9:103 “Take alms out of their property in order to cleanse and purify them, and invoke Allah for them; surely this is a relief for them.”

Tabari IX:36/Ishaq:596 “‘Prophet, this group of Ansar have a grudge against you for what you did with the booty and how you divided it among you own people.’ ‘Ansar, what is this talk I hear from you? What is the grudge you harbor against me? Do you think ill of me? Did I not come to you when you were erring and needy, and then made rich by Allah?”

Bukhari:V9B84N59 “When the Prophet died, Arabs reverted to disbelief. Umar said, ‘Should we fight these people?’ Bakr said, ‘By Allah! I will fight whoever differentiates between prayers and Zakat, as Zakat is to be taken from property according to Allah’s Orders. If they refuse to pay me even so little as a kid they used to pay, I will fight with them for withholding it.’”

Sexual perverted Allah and Pedofelia:

Qur’an 24:58 “Believers, let your slave girls, and those who have not come to puberty, ask permission (before they come in your presence) on three occasions: before dawn, while you take off your clothes at midday, and after the night prayer. These are your times of undress—times of privacy for you. Outside those times it is not wrong for them to move about: Thus does Allah make clear the Signs.”

Bukhari:V1B4N1229-33 “Aisha [who was 9] said, ‘I used to wash semen off the Prophet’s [who was 53] clothes. When he went for prayers I used to notice one or more spots on them.’” (isn't coitus interruptus forbidden in Islam?)

Ishaq:311 “The Apostle saw Ummu’l when she was a baby crawling before his feet and said, ‘If she grows up, I will marry her.’ But he died before he was able to do so.”

Qur’an 33:51 “You may have whomever you desire; there is no blame.”

Islam doesn't know the meaning of acting right either.

Morality:

Qur’an 3:14 “Beautified for men is the love of the things they covet, desiring women, hoards of gold and silver, attractive horses, cattle and well-tilled land. These are the pleasures of this world’s life.”

Ishaq:288 “The Quraysh said, ‘Muhammad and his Companions have violated the sacred month, shed blood, seized property, and taken men captive. Muhammad claims that he is following obedience to Allah, yet he is the first to violate the holy month and to kill.’”

If you are a muslim, then you would follow the quran/hadiths including the thing i've quoted... wich would make you a very disgusting person. Alltough if you choose to live another life then that of the quran then you are not a muslim. Either muhammed got his religion wrong and then no muslims is right, or Muhammed got it right and the modern muslims are getting it wrong due to the influece of christianity and secularism.

Otherwise, if you say "i'm this and this is what i'm supposed to be" by using your mind to legitimize your position, that is not good. This attitude might be seen cross religiously or within a single religion. Remember the attempts to legitimize homosexuality within religions.

heh? don't understand a word of what you're trying to say.

About Islam, you say nothing new. If you want to help us to truth, you should address our understanding of Islam, not try to exert on us a wicked understanding of Islam. You are wasting your time. I have not seen here any sound claim against Islam on a theoretical basis. Actually there was one on a theoretical basis (legalism), but it is not sound.

I only and always quoted your quran... if you have different beliefs then muhammed then it must mean in your opinion that muhammed got islam wrong... cause if muhammed's not right, then it's highly unlikely the muslims of today get it right

We have different understanding of Jesus and original Christianity, but we are not trying to exert this on you. We are addressing the beliefs that you currently hold. Because discussion on outer sources is not fruitful.

what i am preaching/teaching/defending IS original christianity... and whatever perverted ideas muhammed gave you about jesus are laughable if you haven't got a thing to back up that wich you say is truth other then saying "well it feels like truth"... that doesn't make it my friend! their are neo-nazi's out there who believe that mein kampf feels like truth as well!

Btw, this is my last message on this topic, otherwise this will not end.

truth stands out as a rock,
wheter you are here,
or when you're not

[H2O]

Oops ! I almost forgot about this thread

For every contradiction i will return you a quranic one... just not to keep this debate one sided

No problem we will answer these allegations the same as you answered the allegation against the Bible without us having to alienate our readers. Just as we have not contested against your explanation please respect the same with our explanation of your alleged contradictions.

Allah's clock ain't working:
- Allah's day is a 1000 years [32:5]
- Allah's day is 50.000 years [70:4]

was it thousand or a fifty thousand years?

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

He regulates the command from the heavens to the earth and then it (The Command) ascends to him in a day that is measured as a thousand years of what is your reckoning [32:5]

Here the subject is “the command” that Allah regulates throughout the heavens and the Earth that returns back to him in a day which is one thousand years of our time.

..The angels and the spirit ascend to him (Allah) in a day which is measured as fifty thousand years [70:4]

The subject here is “the angels” and “the spirit” not “the command” that is mentioned in 32:5. Also the “fifty thousand years” is not specified if it is of our time or not. Let’s add another verse to this:

….and verily a day before your Lord is like a thousand years from what is your reckoning [22:47]

As we have shown 32:5 and 70:4 are completely two different subjects whereas also the “fifty thousand years” mentioned does not specify if the time period is of our reckoning or not which leads to assumptions not understanding that the verse is speaking of a non physical existence where time, space, and velocity is different from our own state of existence.

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding

Where does the evil in our lifes come from?
- Satan? [38:41]
- Ourselves?[4:79]
- Allah? [4:78]

Will Allah put himself in hell for allowing us to sin? will we be responsible for our sins, or will it be all allah's fault?

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

And remember our servant Job (Ayyub) when he cried to his Lord, “The devil has afflicted me with toil and suffering [38:41]

Wherever you all are death will find you even if you are in enforced towers and if good (hasanah) befalls them they will say “this is from Allah”, and if evil (sayyiah) befalls them they will say “this is from you (Muhammad)” Say (to them Muhammad) “All is from Allah” ………… [4:78]

Whatever good befalls you then it is from Allah; and whatever evil befalls you it is from your self and We have sent you (Muhammad) as a Messenger for all mankind [4:79]

Arabic Definitions:

Sayyiah ~ sin, bad or evil i.e. the deeds of people

Hasanah ~ good i.e. the deeds of people

In 4:78 the Arabic phrases “min ‘indi-llah” ~ “from Allah” and “min indi’ka” ~ “from you” compared to the Arabic phrases in verse 4:79 “min Allah” ~ “from Allah” and “min safsik” ~ “from your self” have different implications.

If our readers have noticed there is an Arabic word in the Arabic phrases in 4:78 that is not translated into English. The Arabic word is “’indi” [meaning in the presence of, before] in “min indi-llah” etc which is impersonal that literally means “from before Allah” and not “from Allah” (min Allah) himself.

The evil and good deeds, sayyiah wa hasanah, that we do are always before or in the presence of Allah whereas when these things befall us they come from his presence of what we have done and not personally from Allah (min Allah) himself. For those that do good deeds they receive double reward, one from his presence i.e. what which we have done and the other personally from himself.

However whatever evil comes upon us from what is before Allah of our own deeds or trials they only befall us by his permission in which they are allowed to happen.

[64:11] No kind of calamity can occur, except by the leave of Allah: and if anyone believes in Allah, (Allah) guides his heart (aright): for Allah knows all things.

For Ayyub his calamity was a trial that was permitted by Allah to happen that was a test.

Every soul shall taste death and we test you all with evil (sharr) and good (khair) as a trial [21:35]

Arabic Definitions:

sharr ~ affliction ,calamity, tribulation, disease

khair ~ good, blessings, grace, healthy

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding.

Persecute unbelievers? or forgive them?:
- Persecute the unbelievers [9:29]
- Forgive the unbelievers [45:14]

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[9:29] Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

[14:14] Tell those who believe, to forgive those who do not look forward to the Days of Allah: it is for Him to recompense (for good or ill) each People according to what they have earned.

9:29 is blunt to the point that those who tend to live in a Muslim or Islamic state that are not Muslim must pay the Jizyah ( a non Muslim tax) just like how you would have to pay taxes in any other country if you intent to live there. If you do not pay the tax those who refuse to pay it will be fought against. This is a common rule in any country; if you don’t pay the tax they take action against you. Do you expect to live in a country without paying taxes ?

Jizyah ~ a tax paid by non-Muslims living in a Muslim State. Since the non-Muslims are exempt from military service and taxes imposed on Muslims, they must pay this tax to compensate. It guarentees them security and protection. If the State cannot protect those who paid jizyah, then the amount they paid is returned to them.

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

Being that non Muslims cannot pay the Zakat which is also a Tax that Muslims have to pay ordered by Allah in the Quran then they are to pay the Jizyah to avoid religious infringement of the zakat. If they pay the taxes they are to be lift alone in peace.

45:14 has nothing to do with persecution of unbelievers. The verse in its context is referred to Sinful dealers of falsehood to forgive them.

[45:7] Woe to each sinful dealer in Falsehoods:
[45:8] He hears the Signs of Allah rehearsed to him, yet is obstinate and lofty, as if he had not heard them: then announce to him a Penalty Grievous!
[45:9] And when he learns something of Our Signs, he takes them in jest: for such there will be a humiliating Penalty.
[45:10] In front of them is Hell: and of no profit to them is anything they may have earned, nor any protectors they may have taken to themselves besides Allah: for them is a tremendous Penalty.
[45:11] This is (true) Guidance: and for those who reject the Signs of their Lord, is a grievous Penalty of abomination.
[45:12] It is Allah Who has subjected the sea to you, that ships may sail through it by His command, that ye may seek of His Bounty, and that ye may be grateful.
[45:13] And He has subjected to you, as from Him, all that is in the heavens and on earth: behold, in that are Signs indeed for those who reflect.
[45:14] Tell those who believe, to forgive those who do not look forward to the Days of Allah: it is for Him to recompense (for good or ill) each People according to what they have earned.
[45:15] If anyone does a righteous deed, it endures to the benefit of his own soul; if he does evil, it works against (his own soul). In the end will ye (all) be brought back to your Lord

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding

Wich ONLY answer did they give?:
- "Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!" [7:82], [27:56]
- "Bring us the Wrath of Allah if thou tellest the truth." [29:29]

Each Surah Chapter of the Quran summarizes events dealing with the same topic. As you read one surah to other so on and so on it becomes more informative as it summarizes the events in progression.

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[7:80] We also (sent) Lut: he said to his people: "Do ye commit lewdness such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you?
[7:81] "For ye practise your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds."
[7:82] And his people gave no answer but this: they said, "Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!"
[7:83] But We saved him and his family, except his wife: she was of those who lagged behind.

[27:54] (We also sent) Lut (as a Messenger): behold, he said to his people, "Do ye do what is shameful though ye see (its iniquity)?
[27:55] "Would ye really approach men in your lusts rather than women? Nay, ye are a people (grossly) ignorant!"
[27:56] But his people gave no other answer but this: they said, "Drive out the followers of Lut from your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!"
[27:57] But We saved him and his family, except his wife: her We destined to be of those who lagged behind.

[29:28] And (remember) Lut: behold, he said to his people: "Ye do commit lewdness, such as no people in Creation (ever) committed before you.
[29:29] "Do ye indeed approach men, and cut off the highway? And practice wickedness (even) in your councils?" But his people gave no answer but this: they said: "Bring us the Wrath of Allah if thou tellest the truth."
[29:30] He said: "O my Lord! help Thou me against people who do mischief!"

Lot, a Prophet of Allah, did not warn his people one time but multiple of times in which his people responded to his warnings. For every time Lut admonished his people they gave a response at that particular time of his admonishment. If the reader pays attention to Lots words they vary in warning with more stringency with progressiveness.

In Arabic Lut said to his people in 7:80-81

Ata’toon-al’faaHishata maa sabaqakum bihaa min aHadim-min-al-‘aalaameena innakum lata’ toonar-rijaala shahwatam-min doonis-saa’a bal antum Qawmum-musrifoon

In Arabic Lut’s people responded in 7:82

Akhri joohum-min Qaryatikum innahum unaasuy-yataTah’haroon

In Arabic Lut said to his people in 27:54-55

Ata’toon-al’faaHishata wa antum tubsiroona a’innakum lata’toonar-rijaala shahwatam-min doonis-saa’a bal antum Qawmun tajhaloon

In Arabic Lut’s people responded in 27:56

Akhrijoo aala lootim-min Qaryatikum innahum unaasuy-yataTah’haroon

In Arabic Lut said to his people in 29:28-29

Innakum lata’toon-al’faaHishata maa sabaQakum bimaa min aHadim-min-al-‘aalaameena a’innakum lata’toonar-rijaala wa taQTa-‘uoonas-sabeela wa ta’toona fee naadeekum-ul’munkar

In Arabic Lut’s people responded in 29:29

a’tinaa bi ‘adhaab-illlaahi in kunta minas-saadiqeeen

The wording in Luts admonishment to his people starts to vary in which his people responses starts to vary according to and then the final admonishment is more stringent in which his people final ask for him to bring proof, in which Lut says to Allah:

My Lord help me against the people of perversion 29:30

After this request, which is not mentioned in any other surahs, his Lord answered his prays and sent messengers to destroy the city.

It is clear that Lot’s admonishment and his people’s responses are progressive at different time intervals before they were destroyed. Its called three strikes and they were out !

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding

Who gets the blame for disbelief?:
- the disbeliever [6:12]
- Allah [10:100]

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[6:10] Mocked were (many) Messengers before thee(Muhammad); but their scoffers were hemmed in by the thing that they mocked.
[6:11] Say (Muhammad): "Travel through the earth and see what was the end of those who rejected Truth
[6:12] Say(Muhammad): "To whom belongeth all that is in the heavens and on earth?" Say(Muhammad): "To Allah. He hath inscribed for Himself (the rule of) Mercy. That He will gather you together for the Day of Judgment, there is no doubt whatever. It is they who have lost their own souls that will not believe
[6:13] To Him belongeth all that dwelleth (or lurketh) in the Night and the Day. For He is the One Who heareth and knoweth all things."

[10:99] If it had been thy Lord's Will, they would all have believed, all who are on earth! Wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe
[10:100] No soul can believe, except by the Will of Allah, and He will place Doubt on those who will not understand(‘aql)

In Arabic “bi’idhnillah” ~ by Allah’s permission or will” The prefix “b(i)” is the preposition showing the possessive case. “idhni” means permission, will, authority that is given to exercise an act :

idhn ~ signifying Permission; leave; or concession of liberty, to do a thing; and sometimes command: and likewise will; as in the phrase bi’idhnillah ~ by the will of God: or, accord. To El-Harallee, the withdrawal, or removal, of prevention or prohibition, and the giving of power or ability, in respect of being and creation; or. Accord. To Ibn-El-Kemal, the rescission of prohibition, and concession of freedom of action, to him who has been prophibited by law: or, accord. To Er-Raghib, the notification of the allowance or permission of a thing, and of indulgence in respect of it;…..or, as explained in the Ksh, facilitation; an explanation founded upon the opinion that the actions of men are by their own effective power, but facilitated by God; and in this sense, Esh-Shihab regards it as a metaphor, or a non-metaphorical trope:…..

Edward Lane’s Lexicon of Classical Arabic

‘aql ~ signifies also Intelligience, understanding, intellect, mind, reason, or knowledge; or knowledge of the qualities of things, of their goodness and their badness, and their perfectness and their defectiveness; or the knowledge of the better of the two good things, and of the worse of two bad things, or of affairs absolutely; or a faculty whereby is the discrimination between the bad and the good;…..

Edward Lane’s Lexicon of Classical Arabic

Allah willed for a human being to choose between right and wrong whom was gifted with free will. The will to believe or not to believe is all by Allah’s permission [bi’idhnillah] and those whom do not exercise there faculty of “aql” to determine right and wrong, believe and unbelief Allah will place upon such a person doubt which is the recompense of his/her faith and deeds.

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding

Allah isn't sure who gets salvation:
- Salvation is for Jews, Christians, and Sabaeans [5:69]
- Salavation is Only for Muslims [3:85]

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[5:69] Those who believe (in the Qur-an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians and the Christians - any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness - on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

[3:83] Do they seek for other than the religion of Allah? While all creatures in the heavens and on earth have, willing or unwilling, bowed to His Will (accepted Islam), and to Him shall they all be brought back.
[3:84] Say: "We believe in Allah, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Ibrahim, Isma'il, Ishaq, Ya'qub, and the Tribes, and in (the Books) given to Musa, 'Isa, and the Prophets, from their Lord: we make no distinction between one and another among them, and to Allah do we bow our will (in Islam)."
[3:85] If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all spiritual good).

In 5:69 the verb tense is not correct. In the first part “Those who believe” from the Arabic “innalladheena aaminuu” the verb tense is correct “aaminuu” ~ believes or believeth is in the imperfect tense identifying the believing Muslims of Muhammad’s time, and those to come, when the revelation was revealed

In the phrase “who believe in Allah….” Referring to the Jews, Christians, and Sabeans the tense here is wrong. The Arabic in which it was translated from is “man aamina billaah” [who believe in Allah] the tense “aamina” translated as “believe” in the imperfect tense is wrong. The tense of “aamina” is in the perfect tense referring to those Jews, Christian and Sabeans before our Prophet i.e. “..who believed in Allah etc..”

aamina ~ is originally a’amana; the second hamza being softened meaning He rendered him secure, or safe; he rendered him secure, or free from fear…..meaning He believed it or in it, namely a thing and “aamina billah” He believed in God….

Edward Lane’s Lexicon of Classical Arabic

This is what this verse means. Which does not apply to Christians and Jews after this revealed to our Prophet.

As for 3:83 we Muslims believe that all the Prophets of Allah before Muhammd from Adam etc Noah etc Abraham etc Lot etc David etc Solomon etc to Jesus and John the Baptist were all Muslims and their religion was Islam originally before they changed it to a name ascribed to person, place, or thing they follow.

The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Nuh - that which We have sent by inspiration to thee (Muhammad) - and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and 'Jesus: namely, that ye should remain steadfast in Religion, and make no divisions therein: to those who worship other things than Allah, hard is the (way) to which thou callest them. Allah chooses to Himself those whom He pleases, and guides to Himself those who turn (to Him). [42:13]

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding

Death repentance is a impossible possibility:
- Pharaoh repented at the site of death and was saved [10:90-92]
- Alltough noone can be saved this way [4:18]

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[10:90] We took the Children of Israel across the sea: Fir'aun and his hosts followed them in insolence and spite. At length, when overwhelmed with the flood, he said: "I believe that there is no god except Him Whom the Children of Israel believe in: I am of those who submit (to Allah in Islam)."
[10:91] (It was said to him:) "Ah now! but a little while before, wast thou in rebellion! and thou didst mischief (and violence)!
[10:92] "This day shall We save thee in thy body, that thou mayest be a Sign to those who come after thee! but verily, many among mankind are heedless of Our Signs!"

[4:18] Of no effect is the repentance of those who continue to do evil, until death faces one of them, and he says, "Now have I repented indeed;" nor of those who die rejecting faith; for them have we prepared a punishment most grievous.

In 10:90-91 mentions nothing of Pharaoh (Firaun) being forgiven. He repented as he saw his own life coming to an end in which he was made as an example for humanity if they try to fight against Allah as his body was saved as promised in the Quran which is now in the Cairo Museum who’s name was Merneptah, Ramses the II 13th son whom succeeded him.

[11:97] Unto Fir'aun and his Chiefs: but they followed the command of Fir'aun, and the command of Fir'aun was no right (guide).
[11:98] He (Pharaoh) will go before his people on the Day of Judgment, and lead them into the Fire (as cattle are led to water): but woeful indeed will be the place to which they are led!
[11:99] And they are followed by a curse in this (life) and on the Day of Judgment: and woeful is the gift which shall be given (unto them)!

[40:45] Then Allah saved him (Moses) from (every) ill that they plotted (against him), but the brunt of the Penalty encompassed on all sides the People of Fir'aun.
[40:46] In front of the Fire will they be brought, morning and evening: and (the Sentence will be) on the Day that Judgment will be established: "Cast ye the People of Fir'aun into the severest Penalty!"

[28:40] So We seized him (Pharaoh) and his hosts, and We flung them into the sea: now behold what was the End of those who did wrong!
[28:41] And We made them (but) leaders inviting to the Fire; and on the Day of Judgment no help shall they find.
[28:42] In this world We made a Curse to follow them: and on the Day of Judgment they will be among the loathed (and despised).

The Quran makes it clear that Phoraoh was not forgiven as he will lead his people into the Hell Fire on the Day of Judgment.

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding

Some angels missing:
- Many angels appeared to marry [3:42], [3:45]
- Only one angel appeared to marry [19:17]

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[3:42] and when the angels said: "O Maryam! Allah hath chosen thee and purified thee, chosen thee above the women of all nations.
[3:43] "O Maryam! worship thy Lord devoutly; prostrate thyself, and bow down (in prayer) with those who bow down."
[3:44] "This is part of the tidings of the things unseen, which We reveal unto thee (O Prophet!) by inspiration: thou wast not with them when they cast lots with arrows, as to which of them should be charged with the care of Maryam: nor wast thou with them when they disputed (the point).
[3:45] and when the angels said: "O Maryam! Allah giveth Thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Al-Masih 'Isa. The son of Maryam, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah;

[19:17] She placed a screen (to screen herself) from them; then We sent to her Our Spirit, and he appeared before her as a man in all respects.
[19:18] She said: "I seek refuge from thee to (Allah) Most Gracious: (come not near) if thou dost fear Allah."
[19:19] He said: "Nay, I am only a Messenger from thy Lord, (to announce) to thee the gift of a holy son."

If everyone noticed it was Allah’s spirit and the Angels that gave her glad tiding of her blessed son to be born in which the event is a progressive summarization. 3:42-45 does not mention when this was said by the Angels. 19:17-19 makes it clear that Maryam first received the glad tidings of her son from Allah’s Rooh, a messenger, the Arabic does not mention angel.

The Problem:

It is obvious the critic is using Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s translation to claim there are contradictions in the Quran. We will like to clarify the errors in the translation that are misleading.

In 3:42,45 Yusuf Ali rendered the Arabic “wa idh” as “Behold!”. The Arabic has no such meaning of expression. “wa idh” that begins 3:42,45 means “and when” denoting an unspecified time period in the past .

Also in 19:17 Yusuf Ali translated the Arabic Phrase “fa’arsalnaa ilayhaa rooHanaa” as “then We sent to her Our angel”. This is wrong. There is no word in that phrase for “Angel” in the Arabic. The proper meaning is “and then We sent to her our Spirit” as the Arabic word “RooH in the Arabic text means “spirit” and not “angel” which is “Mal’ak or Malak” in Arabic which is singular of “Malaaa’ikah” plural.

Is the Spirit accompanied by Angles when they go on errands? Lets here what the Quran says:

[70:4]The angels and the spirit ascend to him (Allah) in a day which is measured 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.

[97:1] We have indeed revealed this (Message) in the Night of Power:
[97:2] and what will explain to thee what the Night of Power is?
[97:3] The Night of Power is better than a thousand months.
[97:4] Therein come down the angels and the Spirit by Allah's permission, on every errand:
[97:5] Peace!... This until the rise of Morn! errand

It is also clear that the Spirit is accompanied by Angels on their errands. Also the words given the Maryam by the Spirit are not the same words the angels pronounced to her. The announcement by the Angels to Maryam came after the announcement of the Spirit to her in progression.

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding.

What's a man really made of?:
- A blood clot [96:1-2]
- water [21:30], [24:45], [25:54]
- clay [15:26]
- dust [3:59], [30:20], [35:11]
- or nothing? [19:67]

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

Proclaim in the name of your Lord who created,
He created man(male and female) from ‘alaq
Proclaim as your Lord is the most bountiful,
He taught with Pen,
He taught man (male and female) what they knew not 96:1-5

‘alaq the original meaning of the word is “a clinger or something that clings” the later term “blood like clot” is a modern medical term. The original meaning to what was understood in the time of our Prophet and will be used here.

[21:30] Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of Creation), before We clove them asunder? We made from maa’a every living thing. Will they not then believe?

[24:45] And Allah has created every animal from maa’a: of them there are some that creep on their bellies; some that walk on two legs; and some that walk on four. Allah creates what He wills: for verily Allah has power over all things

[25:54] It is He Who has created the human being from maa’a: then has He established relationships of lineage and marriage: for thy Lord has power (over all things).

maa’a means water, liquid, fluid.

[15:26] We created man (male and female) from sounding clay, from mud moulded into shape;

[3:59] The similitude of 'Isa before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him (Adam) from dust, then said to him "Be": and then he became.

[3:20] Among His Signs is this, that He created you from dust; and then, behold, ye are men scattered (far and wide)!

[35:11] And Allah did create you from dust; then from a sperm-drop; then He made you in pairs. And no female conceives, or lays down (her load), but with His knowledge. Nor is a man long-lived granted length of days, nor is a part cut off from his life, but is in a Decree (ordained). All this is easy for Allah.

[19:67] But does not man call to mind that We created him from before while he was nothing?

We gather from above that man is created from the following

1) Nothing (lam yaku shayan)
2) Dust (turaab)
3) Water/Liquid/Fluid (maa’a)
4) Mud (Teen)
5) Dried clinking clay like pottery (SalSal)
6) Sperm (Nutfah)
7) A thing that clings (‘alaq)

Critics call this a contradiction. So when science says we are created from protoplasm, minerals, XY Chromosomes, sperm, and ovum is this a contradiction? The Quran, the word of Alllaah, mentions the evolutionary origin of the creation of man .

Before creation there was nothing as there was no dust or water. Allah created dust and water and from these two elements he combined them to make mud, in which the mud was molded like clay in the form of a human being as he desired. The Clay was furnished i.e. heated until it was dried like pottery which made a clinking sound. Allah then blew into the SalSal of his Spirit and gave the being called Man life. From the Soul of the Man Allah created the soul of his wife and infused it into another SalSal he created with that soul and spirit from him self. From these two he created more human beings with a sperm and an ovum which became a thing that clings to the womb of its mother and thus began the reproduction of the human race.

Thus is the evolutionary origin of the creation of man as taught in the Quran.

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding.

Angels cannot disobey Allah:
- All are commanded [16:49-50]
- Not all are commanded [2:34]

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[16:49] And to Allah doth obeisance all that is in the heavens and on earth, whether moving (living) creatures or the angels: for none are arrogant (before their Lord).
[16:50] They all revere their Lord, high above them, and they do all that they are commanded.

[2:34] And behold, We said to the angels: "Bow down to Adam:" and they bowed down: not so Iblis: he refused and was haughty: he was of those who reject Faith.

The Critic assumes that 2:34 implies that Iblis was an Angel, jumping to conclusion without first understanding the conecpt of Angles as taught in the Quran. In Surah 7 the topic gets a little bit more informative.

[11] It is We Who created you and gave you shape; then We bade the angels bow down to Adam, and they bowed down; not so Iblis; he refused to be of those who bow down.
[12] (Allah) said: "What prevented thee from bowing down when I commanded thee?" He said: "I am better than he: Thou didst create me from fire, and him from clay."
[13] (Allah) said: "Get thee down from it: it is not for thee to be arrogant in it: get out, for thou art of the meanest (of creatures)."
[14] He said: "Give me respite till the day they are raised up."
[15] (Allah) said: "Be thou amongst those who have respite."
[16] He said: "Because Thou hast thrown me out of the Way, lo! I will lie in wait for them on Thy Straight Way:
[17] "Then will I assault them from before them and behind them, from their right and their left: nor wilt Thou find, in most of them, gratitude (for Thy mercies)."
[18] (Allah) said: "Get out from it, disgraced and expelled. If any of them follow thee, Hell will I fill with you all.
[19] "O Adam! dwell thou and thy wife in the Garden, and enjoy (its good things) as ye wish: but approach not this tree, or ye run into harm and transgression."
[20] Then began Satan to whisper suggestions to them, in order to reveal to them their shame that was hidden from them (before): he said: "Your Lord only forbade you this tree, lest ye should become angels or such beings as live forever."
[21] And he swore to them both, that he was their sincere adviser.
[22] So by deceit he brought about their fall: when they tasted of the tree, their shame became manifest to them, and they began to sew together the leaves of the Garden over their bodies. And their Lord called unto them: "Did I not forbid you that tree, and tell you that Satan was an avowed enemy unto you?"
[23] They said: "Our Lord! we have wronged our own souls: if Thou forgive us not and bestow not upon us Thy Mercy, we shall certainly be lost."
[24] (Allah) said: "Get ye all down, with enmity between yourselves. On earth will be your dwelling-place and your means of livelihood for a time."
[25] He said: "Therein shall ye live, and therein shall ye die; but from it shall ye be taken out (at last)."

If the reader closely examined the context, Iblis was expelled and disgraced from something and was told to get out and down from that which he was in. It is obviously it was not heaven or a place being spoken of as he was not thrown out heaven yet until after he mislead Adam.

Before this time, he was still in heaven tempting Adam after his expulsion, after which they all were finally decreed to come down to the Earth to stay for a time.

Behold! We said to the angels, "Bow down to Adam": they bowed down except Iblis. He was one of the Jinns, and he broke the Command of his Lord. Will ye then take him and his progeny as protectors rather than Me? and they are enemies to you! Evil would be the exchange for the wrong-doers! [15:50]

The Quran teaches us that Iblis was by nature a Jinn which is a race of beings, but was indirectly referred to as an Angel. Ibliss (shaytaanirrajeem) being a Jinn which are created from fire had the status of an Angel in which he was expelled from which informs us that he was not an Angel by nature which are created from noor ~ light. Allah had favored him and gave him an elevated position.

Let us reflect back to the Spirit mentioned from before. The Spirit is always mentioned with the Angels “… the Spirit and the Angels…” whom is never called directly an Angel, but a Messenger, Truthful Spirit or the Holy Spirit which are titles given to Gabriel in the Quran. Gabriel himself is traditionally known as an Angel who is a RooH ~ Spirit while the actual Angels are created from Noor ~ Light. Gabriel as taught in the Quran is by nature a Rooh whom is an Angel by status.

Gabriel, a Rooh, and Iblis, a Jinn, are never called directly in the Quran an Angel but had or has the status of.

We didn’t even need to mention this for as much that Surah 16:49,50 verb tense is imperfect, which does not reflect the past but the present and future actions at and from the time it was revealed whereas Iblis (shaytaanirrajeem) no longer had the status of an angel.

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding.

Heaven and earth? wich was created first?:
- First earth and then heaven [2:29]
- heaven and after that earth [79:27-30]

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[2:29] It is He Who hath created for you all things that are on earth; then He turned to the heaven and made them into seven firmaments. And of all things He hath perfect knowledge.

[79:27] What! Are ye the more difficult to create or the heaven (above)? (Allah) hath constructed it:
[79:28] On high hath He raised its canopy, and He hath given it order and perfection.
[79:29] Its night doth He endow with darkness, and its splendour doth He bring out (with light).
[79:30] And the earth, moreover, hath He extended (to a wide expanse);

This is something that shouldn’t even be worth explaining seeing that someone is dyslexic. The earth was formed first before its firmament, which is called a canopy, was created. Obviously someone couldn’t distinguish of when the Quran is speaking about the firmament i.e. canopy of the Earth apart from the firmament beyond the Earth’s canopy. In the Quran when the Earth is mentioned with the firmament it is speaking of the firmament of the Earth and not the firmaments beyond its own firmament i.e.space and the universes.

Surah 79:30 does not mention anything of the “creation” of the Earth after the canopy was constructed, rather, its speaks about the expansion of the Earth not its creation.

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding

Where is Allah and his throne?:
- Allah is nearer than the jugular vein [50:16]
- but he is also on the throne [57:4]
- which is upon the water [11:7]
- and at the same time so far away, that it takes between 1,000 and 50,000 years to reach him [32:5, 70:4].

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[50:16] It was We Who created man, and We know what dark suggestions his soul makes to him: for We are nearer to him than (his) jugular vein.

[57:4] He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days, and is moreover firmly established on the Throne (of authority), He knows what enters within the earth and what comes forth out of it, what comes down from heaven and what mounts up to it. And He is with you wheresoever ye may be. And Allah sees well all that ye do.

[11:7] He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days - and His Throne was over the Waters - that He might try you, which of you is best in conduct. But if thou wert to say to them, "Ye shall indeed be raised up after death," the Unbelievers would be sure to say, "This is nothing but obvious sorcery!"

[32:5]He regulates the command from the heavens to the earth and then it (The Command) ascends to him in a day that is measured as a thousand years of what is your reckoning

[70:4]..The angels and the spirit ascend to him (Allah) in a day which is measured as fifty thousand years

We wood like to mention to our readers that the critic has all of a sudden become physical minded when trying to understand the divine existence of Allah in the Quran. Would he do this to his own book? No. In the Quran the first thing that is taught is that we cannot grasp or conceive Allah and that nothing is like him. These are the rules in the Quran concerning Allah’s existence.

[6:103]No vision can grasp Him. But His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things.
The above is rule number one.

[112:4] And there is not one thing comparable to Him
The above is rule number two

[3:7]He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book; in it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book: others are mutashaabihaat. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is mutashaabihaat. Seeking discord and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its true meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding

What is Mutashaabihaat ? The following is given from the Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon of Classical Arabic :

Mutashaabihaat ~ in the Kur 3:5 means Verses that are equivocal, or ambiguous; i.e. susceptible of different interpretations: or verses unintelligible; such as the commencements of many chapters: ot the mutashaabih in the Kur is that of which the meaning is not to be learned from its words; and this is of the two sorts; one is that of which the meaning is known by referring it to what is termed muHkam; and the other is that of which the knowledge of its real meaning is not attainable in any way: or it means what is not understood without repeated consideration.

Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon of Classical Arabic.

Allah says in 50:16 that He is closer to us than our own juggler vain. This is beyond grasping, our finite minds cannot even fathom the idea of something being closer to us than out own juggler vain that is the life cord in our body.

In 57:4 the Arabic for “and is moreover firmly established on the Throne” thumma-stawaa ‘alaa-al-‘arsh which is mutashaabihaat. Where as Edward Lane sums up in his Lexicon about the use of the word “istawaa” when applied to Allah

Thumma-stawaa ilaas-samaaa’i is metaphorical said of God, in the Kur 2:27 and 41:10; meaing :: Then He directed himself by his will to the heaven or elevated regions, or upwards, or to the heavenly bodies…

Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon of Classical Arabic

The usage of thumma-stawaa when applied to Allah is solely metaphorical but yet we have critics trying to interpret such a statement as being literal much physically to his own understand of the physical reality.
thumma-stawaa alaa-al-‘arsh is mutashaabihaat which can mean “He stood over the throne, or He established the throne, or He established himself upon the throne, or He is established upon the throne” in which case all are ambiguous meanings that are metaphorical.

In 11:7 it says His throne “WAS” not “IS” over “al’maa’a” ~ The Water, Liquid, Fluid neither does it say the al’maa’a was on the Earth. When compared with another verse from the Quran that explains the throne’s reality we find the following:

[2:255]Allah! There is no god but He, the Living, the Self-subsisting, Eternal. No slumber can seize Him nor sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on earth. Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth? He knoweth what (appeareth to His creatures as) Before or After or Behind them. Nor shall they compass aught of His knowledge except as He willeth. His Throne doth extend over the heavens and the earth, and He feeleth no fatigue in guarding and preserving them for He is the Most High, the Supreme (in glory).

The throne WAS over the water/ liquid / fluid which is NOW over the heavens and the Earth. Also Allah says the Heavens and the Earth was together.

Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of Creation), before We clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe 21:30.

Allah says the Earth, which is mass, and the heavens, which are gasses, was together at one time. Scientifically speaking, the only way for mass and gases to be together is in ab etremely hot liquid form. It was thus when Allah’s throne was over al’maa’a ~ The Liquid, properly speaking, is when all creation was in a liquid form.

- and at the same time so far away, that it takes between 1,000 and 50,000 years to reach him [32:5, 70:4].

If everyone paid attention closely it was not too long ago our critic claimed in the beginning these verses contradicted each other. But now he recognizes them as space, time, and distance co ordinations and not as a contradiction any more. The critic is still physical minded here and still tries to explain verses that are beyond grasping and are nonphysical with a carnal mind. Lets help him out:

[2:115]To Allah belong the East and the West: whithersoever ye turn, there is Allah's countenance. For Allah is All-Embracing, All-Knowing.

[55:26] All that is on earth will perish:
[55:27] But will abide (forever) the countenance of thy Lord, Full of Majesty, Bounty and Honour

[57:3] He is the First and the Last, the Evident and the Hidden: and He has full knowledge of all things.
[57:4] He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days, and is moreover firmly established on the Throne (of authority), He knows what enters within the earth and what comes forth out of it, what comes down from heaven and what mounts up to it. And He is with you wheresoever ye may be. And Allah sees well all that ye do.

These are the things we have collected from the Quran about Allah’s presents.
1) His countenance is in front of us wherever we turn
2) All will perish on earth except his countenance
3) He is always with us, sees us, and surrounds us
4) He is closer to us that our own juggler vain
5) He is hidden
6) We are far from him but he is near to us

These statements tell us that Allah is beyond our very own physical reality and they are merely imposable to grasp as they are speaking of a reality beyond our own.

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding

Inquiry in paradise?:
-"neither will they question one another" [23:101]
- but nevertheless they will be "engaging in mutual inquiry" [52:25]
- "and they will ... question one another" [37:27].

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[23:91] No son did Allah beget, nor is there any god along with Him: (if there were many gods), behold, each god would have taken away what he had created, and some would have Lorded it over others! Glory to Allah! (He is free) from the (sort of) things they attribute to Him!
[23:92] He knows what is hidden and what is open; too high is He for the partners they attribute to Him!
[23:93] Say: "O my Lord! if Thou wilt show me (in my lifetime) that which they are warned against,
[23:94] "Then, O my Lord! put me not amongst the people who do wrong!"
[23:95] And We are certainly able to show thee (in fulfilment) that against which they are warned.
[23:96] Repel evil with that which is best: We are well-acquainted with the things they say.
[23:97] And say: "O my Lord! I seek refuge with Thee from the suggestions of the Evil Ones;
[23:98] "And I seek refuge with Thee, O my Lord! lest they should come near me."
[23:99] (In Falsehood will they be) until, when death comes to one of them, he says: "O my Lord! send me back (to life),
[23:100] "In order that I may work righteousness in the things I neglected" - "By no means! It is but a word he says." - Before them is a Partition till the Day they are raised up.
[23:101] Then when the Trumpet is blown, there will be no more relationships between them that day, nor will one ask after another

[52:21] And those who believe and whose families follow them in Faith, to them shall We join their families: nor shall We deprive them (of the fruit) of aught of their works: (Yet) is each individual in pledge for his deeds.
[52:22] And We shall bestow on them, of fruit and meat, anything they shall desire.
[52:23] They shall there exchange, one with another, a (loving) cup free of frivolity, free of all taint of ill.
[52:24] Round about them will serve, (devoted) to them, youths (handsome) as Pearls well-guarded.
[52:25] They will advance to each other, engaging in mutual enquiry.
[52:26] They will say: "Aforetime, we were not without fear for the sake of our people.

If every one noticed Surah 23 in the context of verse 101 is not speaking about the people of paradise. It is the people of the hell fire that shall not question one another.

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding

Can slander of chaste women be forgiven?:
- Yes [24:5]
- No [24:23]

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[24:4] And those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses, (to support their allegations), flog them with eighty stripes; and reject their evidence ever after: for such men are wicked transgressors;
[24:5] Unless they repent thereafter and mend (their conduct): for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

[24:23] Those who slander chaste women, indiscreet but believing, are cursed in this life and in the Hereafter: for them is a grievous Penalty,
[24:24] On the Day when their tongues, their hands, and their feet will bear witness against them as to their actions.

If the slanderer repents and amends he will be forgiven. Surah 24:4-5 in context is referring to those who repent and amend after their wrong they are forgiven. Surah 24:23-24 makes no mention of those who repent and amend. The absents of this refers to those who do not repent or amend for their wrong they will be cursed in the life and will be punished in the hereafter.

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding
Will christians enter paradise?:
- Yes [5:69]
- No [3:85]

Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[5:69] Those who believe (in the Qur-an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians and the Christians - any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness - on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

This verse was already explained from before.

In 5:69 the verb tense is not correct. In the first part “Those who believe” from the Arabic “innalladheena aaminuu” the verb tense is correct “aaminuu” ~ believes or believeth is in the imperfect tense identifying the believing Muslims of Muhammad’s time when the revelation was revealed

In the phrase “who believe in Allah….” Referring to the Jews, Christians, and Sabeans the tense here is wrong. The Arabic in which it was translated from is “man aamina billaah” [who believe in Allah] the tense “aamina” translated as “believe” in the imperfect tense is wrong. The tense of “aamina” is in the perfect tense referring to those Jews, Christian and Sabeans before our Prophet i.e. “..who believed in Allah etc..”

aamina ~ is originally a’amana; the second hamza being softened meaning He rendered him secure, or safe; he rendered him secure, or free from fear…..meaning He believed it or in it, namely a thing and “aamina billah” He believed in God….

Edward Lane’s Lexicon of Classical Arabic

This is what this verse means. Which does not apply to Christians and Jews after this revealed to our Prophet.

It seems our critic has ran out of bullets and has now resorted in using empty shells:

[3:83] Do they seek for other than the religion of Allah? While all creatures in the heavens and on earth have, willing or unwilling, bowed to His Will (accepted Islam), and to Him shall they all be brought back.
[3:84] Say: "We believe in Allah, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Ibrahim, Isma'il, Ishaq, Ya'qub, and the Tribes, and in (the Books) given to Musa, 'Isa, and the Prophets, from their Lord: we make no distinction between one and another among them, and to Allah do we bow our will (in Islam)."
[3:85] If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all spiritual good)

This was also already explained from before

As for 3:83 we Muslims believe that all the Prophets of Allah before Muhammd from Adam etc Noah etc Abraham etc Lot etc David etc Solomon etc to Jesus and John the Baptist were all Muslims and their religion was Islam originally before they changed it to a name ascribed to person, place, or thing they follow.

The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Nuh - that which We have sent by inspiration to thee (Muhammad) - and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and 'Jesus: namely, that ye should remain steadfast in Religion, and make no divisions therein: to those who worship other things than Allah, hard is the (way) to which thou callest them. Allah chooses to Himself those whom He pleases, and guides to Himself those who turn (to Him). [42:13]
The Quran teaches the same religion of salvation he revealed to us is the same religion that was revealed to Moses and Jesus whose followers became known as Jews and Christians.

There is no contradiction, but a misunderstanding

From among all nations or from Abraham's seed?:
- all prophets came from Abraham's seed. [29:27]
- Allah raised messengers from among every people. [16:63]
Let’s take a look at what these verses say:

[29:27] And we gave (Ibrahim) Ishaq and Ya'qub, and ordained among his progeny Prophethood and Revelation, and We granted him his reward in this life; and he was in the Hereafter (of the company) of the Righteous.

[16:63] By Allah, We (also) sent Messengers to nations before thee(Muhammad): but Satan made, (to the wicked), their own acts seem alluring: he is also their patron today, but they shall have a most grievous penalty.

First of all, Surah 29:27 makes no mention that ALL PROPHETS are descendants of Abraham. Also Surah 16:63 is speaking about Prophetic Messengers. In Islam, as taught in the Quran, all Prophets were not Messengers. Some were Prophetic Messengers and others were just merely prophets.

[sardab]

Great contribution brother! I'd like to thank you for my part.

[Loki]

Oops ! I almost forgot about this thread

For every contradiction i will return you a quranic one... just not to keep this debate one sided

No problem we will answer these allegations the same as you answered the allegation against the Bible without us having to alienate our readers. Just as we have not contested against your explanation please respect the same with our explanation of your alleged contradictions.

because you so nicely asked, i will respect it.

alltough i do raise a few questions with your explenations the most prominent are these two:

1) with you all the sudden believing in free will and not in predestination to suit an explenation.

2) and the pharaoh who lays in Cairo who muslims believe is the one from Moses' time is that of the Pharaoh Merneptah not of Ramses II. So again like many times before, worshipping a straw man as a miracle. (as if the balseming of a pharaoh in Egypt would of been that hard to predict, moreso it was a mere statement of an assured historical event)

'cause Merneptah's forces went up to "Canaan" to attack "Israel," which is stated in the last section of the Mernepath Stele. Some of the best scholarship today indicates that the exodus under Moses was some 50 years earlier than Merneptah, and that the pharaoh of Moses' day was actually Ramesses II

[H2O]

1) with you all the sudden believing in free will and not in predestination to suit an explenation.

We have not all of a sudden believed in free will. This is an Islamic fundamental teaching. We believe in Limited Free Will as no human being has absoulte free will whereas G-d alone has absolute free will.

As for predistination, we are going to bump head here on this subject which has even been a controvesy among religions to define. If science can barely understand TIME then how are we to properly explain predistination. To be technical we believe in Taqdeer which means ordainment or preordainment. This word has been misnomered as "predestination"

Allah teaches us in the Quran that we are responsable for our own fate which determines our own resulting outcome.

2) and the pharaoh who lays in Cairo who muslims believe is the one from Moses' time is that of the Pharaoh Merneptah not of Ramses II. So again like many times before, worshipping a straw man as a miracle. (as if the balseming of a pharaoh in Egypt would of been that hard to predict, moreso it was a mere statement of an assured historical event)

'cause Merneptah's forces went up to "Canaan" to attack "Israel," which is stated in the last section of the Mernepath Stele. Some of the best scholarship today indicates that the exodus under Moses was some 50 years earlier than Merneptah, and that the pharaoh of Moses' day was actually Ramesses II

The Stele has already been marked as being not trust worthy of an account. Christian scholars even admitted this. The Stele also speaks negative about Hebrews, do you believe it ?

Merneptah I

(1234?-1214 B.C.), the fourth king of the nineteenth Egyptian dynasty and the supposed Pharaoh of the Exodus, was the thirteenth son of Rameses II whom he succeeded in or about 1234 B.C., being then long past middle age. His rule lasted some twenty years, during which he carried on considerable building operations in the Delta, and notably at Tanis (Zoan), where, indeed as elsewhere, he usurped a number of some of his predecessors' monuments. His original works are comparatively few and insignificant. His name is constantly found on the monuments of his father; it appears also in Nubia, and in the old quarries in the Sinaitic peninsula. In his third year, he quelled a revolt to the northeast, possibly excited by the Hittites' and in his fifth year, he repelled an invasion of Egypt by the Lybians and their allies, which victory is boastfully described on a black granite stela found in 1896 in his funeral temple at Thebes, and bearing the earliest known reference to Israel. He is commonly regarded as the Pharaoh of the Exodus on the following grounds.

On the one hand, Egyptian discoveries have shown that Rameses II founded the cities represented in Exodus., i, 11, as built by the oppressed Hebrews, and therefore point to him as the Pharaoh of the oppression.
On the other hand, Ex., ii, 23; iv, 19, imply that the immediate successor of that Pharaoh was on the throne when Moses returned to Egypt where he soon delivered his people. Whence it is not unnaturally inferred that Merneptah I, Rameses son and successor, is the Pharaoh of the Exodus.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10208b.htm

The Criminal and Enemy Of Alllaah

Where are the HARD CORE FACTS ? Of course there is a man, a french surgeon and scientist who examined Merneptah I's body whose death was by drowning whereas Ramses II. died from old age having Rheumatoid Arthritis.

5. Pharaoh Merneptah's Mummy

The mummified body of Merneptah, son of Ramesses II and Pharaoh of the Exodus-all the evidence points to this-was discovered by Loret in 1898 at Thebes in the Kings' Valley whence it was transported to Cairo. Elliot Smith removed its wrappings on the 8th of July, 1907: he gives a detailed description of this operation and the examination of the body in his book The Royal Mummies (1912). At that time the mummy was in a satisfactory state of preservation, in spite of deterioration in several parts. Since then, the mummy has been on show to visitors at the Cairo Museum, with his head and neck uncovered and the rest of body concealed under a cloth. It is so well hidden indeed, that until very recently, the only general photographs of the mummy that the Museum possessed were those taken by E. Smith in 1912.

In June 1975, the Egyptian high authorities very kindly allowed me to examine the parts of the Pharaoh's body that had been covered until then. They also allowed me to take photographs. When the mummy's present state was compared to the condition it was in over sixty years ago, it was abundantly clear that it had deteriorated and fragments had disappeared. The mummified tissues had suffered greatly, at the hand of man in some places and through the passage of time in others.

This natural deterioration is easily explained by the changes in the conditions of conservation from the time in the late Nineteenth century when it was discovered. Its discovery took place in the tomb of the Necropolis of Thebes where the mummy had lain for over three thousand years. Today, the mummy is displayed in a simple glass case which does not afford hermetic insulation from the outside, nor does it offer protection from pollution by micro-organisms. The mummy is exposed to fluctuations in temperature and seasonal changes in humidity: it is very far from the conditions which enabled it to remain protected from any source of deterioration for approximately three thousand years. It has lost the protection afforded by its wrappings and the advantage of remaining in the closed environment of the tomb where the temperature was more constant and the air less humid than it is in Cairo at certain times of the year. Of course, while it was in the Necropolis itself, the mummy had to withstand the visits of grave plunderers (probably very early on) and rodents: they caused a certain amount of damage, but the conditions were nevertheless (it seems) much more favourable for it to stand the test of time than they are today.

At my suggestion, special investigations were made during this examination of the mummy in June 1975. An excellent radiographic study was made by Doctors El Meligy and Ramsiys, and the examination of the interior of the thorax, through a gap in the thoracic wall, was carried out by Doctor Mustapha Manialawiy in addition to an investigation of the abdomen. This was the first example of endoscopy being applied to a mummy. This technique enabled us to see and photograph some very important details inside the body. Professor Ceccaldi performed a general medico-legal study which will be completed by an examination under the microscope of some small fragments that spontaneously fell from the mummy's body: this examination will be carried out by Professor Mignot and Doctor Durigon. I regret to say that definitive pronouncements cannot be made by the time this book goes to print. [ November, 1975 for the First French edition.]

What may already be derived from this examination is the discovery of multiple lesions of the bones with broad lacunae, some of which may have been mortal-although it is not yet possible to ascertain whether some of them occurred before or after the Pharaoh's death. He most probably died either from drowning, according to the Scriptural narrations, or from very violent shocks preceding the moment when he was drowned-or both at once.

The connection of these lesions with the deterioration whose sources have been mentioned above renders the correct preservation of the mummy of the Pharaoh somewhat problematical, unless precautionary and restorative measures are not taken very soon. These measures should ensure that the only concrete evidence which we still possess today concerning the death of the Pharaoh of the Exodus and the rescue of his body, willed by God, does not disappear with the passage of time.

It is always desirable for man to apply himself to the preservation of relics of his history, but here we have something which goes beyond that: it is the material presence of the mummified body of the man who knew Moses, resisted his pleas, pursued him as he took flight, lost his life in the process. His earthly remains were saved by the Will of God from destruction to become a sign to man, as it is written in the Qur'an. [ The mummy of Ramesses II, who was another witness to Moses's story, has been the subject of a study comparable to the one carried out on the mummy of Merneptah; the same restoration work is required for it.]

Those who seek among modern data for proof of the veracity of the Holy Scriptures will find a magnificent illustration of the verses of the Qur'an dealing with the Pharaoh's body by visiting the Royal Mummies Room of the Egyptian Museum, Cairo!



Translators' Note:
The results of these medical studies carried out in Cairo, 1976, were read by the author before several French learned societies, including the 'Académie Nationale de Médecine' (National Academy of Medecine), during the first part of 1976. The knowledge of these results led the Egyptian Authorities to take the decision to transport the mummy of Ramesses II to France. Thus it arrived for treatment in Paris on the 26th September 1976.

Dr. Maurice Bucaille, PHD sergeon

http://www.ymofmd.com/books/tbqs/21narr ... 20Pharaohs

The above link provided also speaks about the Stele and its untrustworthy record. Please read the whole subject as I have only post the findings of the Body of Merneptah that he died from drowning.

[Loki]

1) with you all the sudden believing in free will and not in predestination to suit an explenation.

We have not all of a sudden believed in free will. This is an Islamic fundamental teaching. We believe in Limited Free Will as no human being has absoulte free will whereas G-d alone has absolute free will.

As for predistination, we are going to bump head here on this subject which has even been a controvesy among religions to define. If science can barely understand TIME then how are we to properly explain predistination. To be technical we believe in Taqdeer which means ordainment or preordainment. This word has been misnomered as "predestination"

acctually it is not a controversy among religions to define:
Christianity and Judaism teach free will. only Calvanism, Some ancient heresies and Islam teach predation... the christian disputes about predestination are almost only with calvinists.

free will in christianity is seen, "as God's knows all the results of what we have chosen, yet the choices remain with us, God's will in christianity, is doing Jesus' works trough the holy spirit, those that do not are doing man's will" end of story, free will defined in one sentence! can't be that hard.

Islam is confused about predestination and free will because it contradicts himself all the time, and that is my friend the only reason why you have a hard time explaining Islam's perspective on free will. That for a clear religion! shame on Allah!

2) and the pharaoh who lays in Cairo who muslims believe is the one from Moses' time is that of the Pharaoh Merneptah not of Ramses II. So again like many times before, worshipping a straw man as a miracle. (as if the balseming of a pharaoh in Egypt would of been that hard to predict, moreso it was a mere statement of an assured historical event)

'cause Merneptah's forces went up to "Canaan" to attack "Israel," which is stated in the last section of the Mernepath Stele. Some of the best scholarship today indicates that the exodus under Moses was some 50 years earlier than Merneptah, and that the pharaoh of Moses' day was actually Ramesses II

The Stele has already been marked as being not trust worthy of an account. Christian scholars even admitted this. The Stele also speaks negative about Hebrews, do you believe it ?

Who says the Stele is not "thrustworthy" quote me your scholars who say the mernepath stele is 'irrelevant historical garbage'. And The Mernepath stele is Egyptian i acctually expect them to talk negative about hebrews!

Merneptah I

(1234?-1214 B.C.), the fourth king of the nineteenth Egyptian dynasty and the supposed Pharaoh of the Exodus, was the thirteenth son of Rameses II whom he succeeded in or about 1234 B.C., being then long past middle age. His rule lasted some twenty years, during which he carried on considerable building operations in the Delta, and notably at Tanis (Zoan), where, indeed as elsewhere, he usurped a number of some of his predecessors' monuments. His original works are comparatively few and insignificant. His name is constantly found on the monuments of his father; it appears also in Nubia, and in the old quarries in the Sinaitic peninsula. In his third year, he quelled a revolt to the northeast, possibly excited by the Hittites' and in his fifth year, he repelled an invasion of Egypt by the Lybians and their allies, which victory is boastfully described on a black granite stela found in 1896 in his funeral temple at Thebes, and bearing the earliest known reference to Israel. He is commonly regarded as the Pharaoh of the Exodus on the following grounds.

On the one hand, Egyptian discoveries have shown that Rameses II founded the cities represented in Exodus., i, 11, as built by the oppressed Hebrews, and therefore point to him as the Pharaoh of the oppression.
On the other hand, Ex., ii, 23; iv, 19, imply that the immediate successor of that Pharaoh was on the throne when Moses returned to Egypt where he soon delivered his people. Whence it is not unnaturally inferred that Merneptah I, Rameses son and successor, is the Pharaoh of the Exodus.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10208b.htm

The Criminal and Enemy Of Alllaah

Where are the HARD CORE FACTS ? Of course there is a man, a french surgeon and scientist who examined Merneptah I's body whose death was by drowning whereas Ramses II. died from old age having Rheumatoid Arthritis.

"six months after the passing of his father Ramses II, Merenptah was brutally assassinated. His House valiantly fought on, but eventually succumbed to the combined forces of those determined to satisfy their own typecasting and take the throne for themselves...

... Examination of Menerptah's mummy revealed multiple traumas to the head, one to the clavicle on the right side, a four-inch hole in the abdomen, and a shattered right forearm."
-- http://www.domainofman.com/book/chap-32.html

now what? H20

and according to wikipedia, the mernepath stele is not seen as untrustworthy but as debateable!

"There are two debates by scholars surrounding the details of the Stele.
1) There is disagreement over whether or not Merneptah actually did campaign in Canaan and didn't just merely recount what was there
2) The other debate surrounds "Israel". As the stele mentions just one line about Israel it is difficult for scholars to draw any information at all about Israel."
-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah_Stele

But neither of those debates matter now since Merneptah didn't drown in the first place. All legs you had to stand on, are gone... you're on the floor again H20.

[H2O]

"six months after the passing of his father Ramses II, Merenptah was brutally assassinated. His House valiantly fought on, but eventually succumbed to the combined forces of those determined to satisfy their own typecasting and take the throne for themselves...

... Examination of Menerptah's mummy revealed multiple traumas to the head, one to the clavicle on the right side, a four-inch hole in the abdomen, and a shattered right forearm."
-- http://www.domainofman.com/book/chap-32.html

We have a problem here Loki. When since the source you quoted above voids out or has weight over the words of someone whom physically examined the body of Merneptah along with other scientist ?

Your source contradicts some elite sources even the same source Wiki you used in support of your arguement :

He died a natural death in high age. He was succeeded by his son Amenmesse, possibly a son of queen Takhat. His tomb is number KV8 in the Valley of the Kings, but his mummy was not found within this tomb. In 1898 it was discovered along with 18 others in the mummy cache within the tomb of Amenhotep II (KV35).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah

He died after a reign of 9 years and was buried in a tomb (KV8) that was even open in antiquity - it was visited by ancient Greeks! Naturally, the contents were entirely destroyed long ago, although Merneptah's mummy was eventually found in the tomb of Amenhotep II by Victor Loret in 1898.

http://www.secker.fsbusiness.co.uk/kmerneptah.htm

By the time Ramesses II died, he had apparently outlived twelve of his sons. His 13th son, Merenptah ascended the throne of Egypt. Merenptah was old himself by this time, probably nearly sixty years old, and his reign was rather dull, as well as short lived (perhaps only nine or ten years) in comparison with that of his father's reign. According to the Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, he ruled from 1213 until 1203 BC.

http://www.crystalinks.com/dynasty19a.html

According to the Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, he ruled from 1213 until 1203 BC, while Clayton provides a reign from 1212 until 1202 BC.

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/merenptah.htm

Your source is obsolete as to the date of his rule and his death. I have one more source to show you coming directly from the words of a Christian whom supports his arguements with Acheologist and Scripture of your Bible to determine which Pharaoh its was that was drowned.

For a very long time Merneptah, the successor to Ramesses II, was held to be the Pharaoh of the Exodus. Maspero, the famous Egyptologist of the beginning of this century did, after all, write in his Visitor's Guide to the Cairo Museum (Guide du visiteur du Musée du Caire), 1900, that Merneptah "was probably, according to the Alexandrian tradition, the Pharaoh of the Exodus who is said to have perished in the Red Sea." I have been unable to find the documents on which Maspero based this assertion, but the eminence of this commentator requires us to attach the greatest importance to what he claims.

http://www.masmn.org/documents/Books/Ma ... ce/069.htm

This christian researcher concluding with the following :

The preceding data alone are enough to establish the following:
a) There can be no question of the Exodus before a 'Ramesses' had come to the throne in Egypt (11 Kings of Egypt had this name).

b) Moses was born during the reign of the Pharaoh who built the cities of Ramesses and Pithom, i.e. Ramesses II.

c) When Moses was in Midian, the reigning Pharaoh (i.e. Ramesses II) died. The continuation of Moses's story took place during the reign of Ramesses II's successor, Merneptah..............

.....It is known that Ramesses II reigned for 67 years (1301-1235 B.C. according to Drioton and Vandier's chronology, 1290-1224 B.C. according to Rowton). For Merneptah, his successor, the Egyptologists are unable, however, to provide the exact dates of his reign. Nevertheless, it lasted for at least ten years because, as Father de Vaux points out, documents bear witness to the tenth year of his reign. Drioton and Vandier give two possibilities for Merneptah: either a ten-year reign, 1234-1224 B.C., or a twenty-year reign 1224-1204 B.C. Egyptologists have no precise indications whatsoever on how Merneptah's reign came to an end: all that can be said is that after his death, Egypt went through a period of serious internal upheavals lasting nearly 25 years.

Even though the chronological data on these reigns are not very precise, there was no other period during the New Kingdom concordant with the Biblical narration when two successive reigns (apart from Ramesses II-Merneptah) amounted to or surpassed eighty years. The Biblical data concerning Moses's age when he undertook the liberation of his brothers can only come from a time during the successive reigns of Ramesses II and Merneptah [ The period spanning the two reigns Sethos I-Ramesses II, which is said to have lasted roughly eighty years, is out of the question: Sethos I's reign-which was too short for this-does not square with the very long stay in Midian which Moses made as an adult and which took place during the reign of the first of the two Pharaohs he was to know.]. All the evidence points towards the fact that Moses was born at the beginning of Ramesses II's reign, was living in Midian when Ramesses II died after a sixty-seven year reign, and subsequently became the spokesman for the cause of the Hebrews living in Egypt to Merneptah, Ramesses II's son and successor. This episode may have happened in the second half of Merneptah's reign, assuming he reigned twenty years or nearly twenty years. Rowton believes the supposition to be quite feasible. Moses would then have led the Exodus at the end of Merneptah's reign. It could hardly have been otherwise because both the Bible and the Qur'an tell us that Pharaoh perished during the pursuit of the Hebrews leaving the country.

http://www.masmn.org/documents/Books/Ma ... ce/069.htm

I am quoting his work cause he quotes elite Egyptologists and Archeologists. Go back and read the entire research and then come back with your response, the same I would recommend for our readers.

[Loki]

He died a natural death in high age. He was succeeded by his son Amenmesse, possibly a son of queen Takhat. His tomb is number KV8 in the Valley of the Kings, but his mummy was not found within this tomb. In 1898 it was discovered along with 18 others in the mummy cache within the tomb of Amenhotep II (KV35).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah

He died after a reign of 9 years and was buried in a tomb (KV8) that was even open in antiquity - it was visited by ancient Greeks! Naturally, the contents were entirely destroyed long ago, although Merneptah's mummy was eventually found in the tomb of Amenhotep II by Victor Loret in 1898.

http://www.secker.fsbusiness.co.uk/kmerneptah.htm

By the time Ramesses II died, he had apparently outlived twelve of his sons. His 13th son, Merenptah ascended the throne of Egypt. Merenptah was old himself by this time, probably nearly sixty years old, and his reign was rather dull, as well as short lived (perhaps only nine or ten years) in comparison with that of his father's reign. According to the Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, he ruled from 1213 until 1203 BC.

http://www.crystalinks.com/dynasty19a.html

According to the Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, he ruled from 1213 until 1203 BC, while Clayton provides a reign from 1212 until 1202 BC.

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/merenptah.htm

these sources nowhere contradict, they merely said Merenptah had a short reign, nowhere is being said that he drowned or was assassinated.

Except Wikipedia is contradicting with the natural death, but that is only because it is debatable wheter or not the trauma's too the body where given post or ad mortem. Nowhere a drowning is indicated...

Plus a natural death wouldn't fall under drowning either, that would contradict yours and mine!

[Aburaees]

I have one more source to show you coming directly from the words of a Christian whom supports his arguements with Acheologist and Scripture of your Bible to determine which Pharaoh its was that was drowned.

For a very long time Merneptah, the successor to Ramesses II, was held to be the Pharaoh of the Exodus. Maspero, the famous Egyptologist of the beginning of this century did, after all, write in his Visitor's Guide to the Cairo Museum (Guide du visiteur du Musée du Caire), 1900, that Merneptah "was probably, according to the Alexandrian tradition, the Pharaoh of the Exodus who is said to have perished in the Red Sea." I have been unable to find the documents on which Maspero based this assertion, but the eminence of this commentator requires us to attach the greatest importance to what he claims.

http://www.masmn.org/documents/Books/Maurice_Bucaille/The_Bible_The_Quran_and_Science/069.htm

This christian researcher concluding with the following :

The preceding data alone are enough to establish the following:
a) There can be no question of the Exodus before a 'Ramesses' had come to the throne in Egypt (11 Kings of Egypt had this name).

b) Moses was born during the reign of the Pharaoh who built the cities of Ramesses and Pithom, i.e. Ramesses II.

c) When Moses was in Midian, the reigning Pharaoh (i.e. Ramesses II) died. The continuation of Moses's story took place during the reign of Ramesses II's successor, Merneptah..............

.....It is known that Ramesses II reigned for 67 years (1301-1235 B.C. according to Drioton and Vandier's chronology, 1290-1224 B.C. according to Rowton). For Merneptah, his successor, the Egyptologists are unable, however, to provide the exact dates of his reign. Nevertheless, it lasted for at least ten years because, as Father de Vaux points out, documents bear witness to the tenth year of his reign. Drioton and Vandier give two possibilities for Merneptah: either a ten-year reign, 1234-1224 B.C., or a twenty-year reign 1224-1204 B.C. Egyptologists have no precise indications whatsoever on how Merneptah's reign came to an end: all that can be said is that after his death, Egypt went through a period of serious internal upheavals lasting nearly 25 years.

Even though the chronological data on these reigns are not very precise, there was no other period during the New Kingdom concordant with the Biblical narration when two successive reigns (apart from Ramesses II-Merneptah) amounted to or surpassed eighty years. The Biblical data concerning Moses's age when he undertook the liberation of his brothers can only come from a time during the successive reigns of Ramesses II and Merneptah [ The period spanning the two reigns Sethos I-Ramesses II, which is said to have lasted roughly eighty years, is out of the question: Sethos I's reign-which was too short for this-does not square with the very long stay in Midian which Moses made as an adult and which took place during the reign of the first of the two Pharaohs he was to know.]. All the evidence points towards the fact that Moses was born at the beginning of Ramesses II's reign, was living in Midian when Ramesses II died after a sixty-seven year reign, and subsequently became the spokesman for the cause of the Hebrews living in Egypt to Merneptah, Ramesses II's son and successor. This episode may have happened in the second half of Merneptah's reign, assuming he reigned twenty years or nearly twenty years. Rowton believes the supposition to be quite feasible. Moses would then have led the Exodus at the end of Merneptah's reign. It could hardly have been otherwise because both the Bible and the Qur'an tell us that Pharaoh perished during the pursuit of the Hebrews leaving the country.

http://www.masmn.org/documents/Books/Maurice_Bucaille/The_Bible_The_Quran_and_Science/069.htm

I am quoting his work cause he quotes elite Egyptologists and Archeologists. Go back and read the entire research and then come back with your response, the same I would recommend for our readers.

Is this Christian you are quoting Maurice Bucaille? I thought he was a Muslim.

.

[H2O]

Is this Christian you are quoting Maurice Bucaille? I thought he was a Muslim.

No he is not. He declaired himself as a Christian in his writings. "...our Lord Jesus..." he uses this much and associated himself with the Bible as "...our book..". I have read his work, he is purely Christian. His book is available online for reading per the link I provided for reference.

Why he never became muslim is beyond me. I have ran into many learnt Christian men in colledge like himself especially in world theology classes whom believe the Quran is from G-d but they believe the original confirmation of their Lord Jesus as son of G-d or G-d himself was altered.

This may sound plastic to you but it would be the same way we muslims look i.e. believe in the Bible ~ the textual original word for word of G-d and the Prophets of the Bible but we are not Christians or Jews in that manner.

[Loki]

Here's answering Islam researching Maurice Bucaille's beliefs

http://answering-islam.org.uk/Campbell/bucaille.html

and Here Dr Willaim Campbell is proposing to read the book of Dr. Maurice Bucaille from a christian perspective... without "the many inaccuracies, both in regard to the scientific "facts" it presents and in regard to the history of the Christian Scriptures"
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Campbell/index.html

Two sides to every story

[H2O]

Loki are we argueing the science in the Quran or are we trying to establish scientific facts of who was the Pharaoh that was drowned ? I did not use Maurice to support the scientific indication of the Quran, I have never used him as a reference for support.

I already stated I am quoting Maurice cause of his sources dealing with this specific topic "I am quoting his work cause he quotes elite Egyptologists and Archeologists" which are pinned to the wall facts he used in support to establish a finding of who the Pharaoh was. Prove him wrong, find someone else who says contrary whom is a autopsy surgeon that has examined the Bodies of the Pharaohs.

So if you would stick to the topic, and read what the man says on this issue, and prove contrary.

[Loki]

Loki are we argueing the science in the Quran or are we trying to establish scientific facts of who was the Pharaoh that was drowned ? I did not use Maurice to support the scientific indication of the Quran, I have never used him as a reference for support.

I already stated I am quoting Maurice cause of his sources dealing with this specific topic "I am quoting his work cause he quotes elite Egyptologists and Archeologists" which are pinned to the wall facts he used in support to establish a finding of who the Pharaoh was. Prove him wrong, find someone else who says contrary whom is a autopsy surgeon that has examined the Bodies of the Pharaohs.

So if you would stick to the topic, and read what the man says on this issue, and prove contrary.

i'd rather read those archeologist myself without Maurice his opinion interferring, cause his book is aliged filled with scientific errors by other christians (see answering islam). I'll research Mernetaph's death independently and in full tomorrow when i have more time... untill then!

[Liberate]

No he is not. He declaired himself as a Christian in his writings. "...our Lord Jesus..." he uses this much and associated himself with the Bible as "...our book..". I have read his work, he is purely Christian. His book is available online for reading per the link I provided for reference.

Why he never became muslim is beyond me...

I must admit H2O like in many of your posts I burst out laughing when I read this bit, let me give you the reason why Bucaille never became a muslim see his bank balance increased exponentially as he declared the miracles of the poison and antidote on the fly's wings, you should be aware by now that the bank balances of the scientists that alledgedly declare the miracles of islam especially in saudi arabia increase exponentially yet none of them ever becomes a muslim, this should tell you what is happening.

[Loki]

"The king probably died around 1202 BC, but his mummy was not found within his tomb. In the 19th century, this apparently added to the speculation about him being the Pharaoh of the Exodus, since that king's body would have probably been washed away in the Red Sea. However, that theory was confounded when, in 1898, his mummy was discovered among 18 others in the mummy cache discovered in the tomb of Amenhotep II"
-- http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/merenptah.htm

"In the skull of the mummy of Merneptah is a round hole made by a sharp, pointed instrument. To explain this injury it was thought that a surgical operation had been performed on Merneptah's head during his lifetime, or that it was made after his death. But this hole is apparently the result of the mortal wound at the hands of his assassins."
[G. Elliot Smith, `The Royal Mummies', Catalogue general des Antiquites Egyptiennes du Musee de Caire (Cairo, 1912), p. 68.]
[James Harris and Kent Weeks, `X-raying the Pharaohs', New York, 1973, p.157.]
-- http://www.specialtyinterests.net/israel.html

"He died a natural death in high age."
-- http://www.neareasternarchaeology.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Merneptah
-- http://www.baghdadmuseum.org/ref/index.php?title=Merneptah
-- http://merneptah.biography.ms/
-- http://lexicorient.com/e.o/merneptah.htm

I exhausted every search engine and biography of Mernetaph and that's all information it had concerning his death, nowhere even speculating a drowning... but rather natural death or a assassination.

the sad thing about all this information is that it's worthless, because all of them are contradicting each other. Making it impossible to know who is speaking with knowledge and who isn't, the only thing they all seem to agree on is that he's dead. Then for that reason it is fairly easy to handpick your (good or bad) source information and put it in your own context like Muir did... similar to Michael Moore methods who are also easily believed if you don't check his sources or disregard contradicting theories. (neither am i impressed by your references to 'elite' archeologists... archeologists tend to disagree with one another as well... just like Dr Khaliffa isn't seen as a historical authority by the majority either)

Yet overall, nowhere from non-muslim sources (or should i say a non-muir source) is indicated that he drowned... It adds to the assumption that muir is reaching and twisting and that muslims are a gullible lot who don't double check sources.

Yet i advise to read Answering Islam about the contradiction... who has far better research then me, and more sources at hand
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Quran/Contra/qi025.html

[H2O]

Yet overall, nowhere from non-muslim sources (or should i say a non-muir source) is indicated that he drowned... It adds to the assumption that muir is reaching and twisting and that muslims are a gullible lot who don't double check sources.

Now Loki, The Bible and the Quran say "The Pharaoh" who confronted Moses when he returned to deliver Israel drowned. The Bible expressed that the evil man remained at the bottom of the sea, the Quran says contrary that his body was preserved as a sign for mankind in the future.

Which Pharoah was it that drowned then Loki ? Right now you cant say anyone cause the same reports you use can be used against you that express no trace of drowning, if you reject Maurice's autopsy report then guess what, Both the Bible and the Quran's report about the drowning of a Pharaoh whom persicuted Israel is a myth.

In fact it makes the Bible more of a myth on the Subject cause it says Pharoah was drowned and is at the bottom of the sea wheres all the Pharaohs' bodies have have been founded in tombs which are now in the Cario Museum.

Whom does credit go to ?

The Quran gets two thumbs up as it says Pharaoh's body was saved, Today they have all the Pharaohs' bodies of that time in which one was confirmed by a Dr of PHD Autopy Sergeon to have drowned who is more qualified than a body examiner whereas all sources exist for the validation of proof.

The Bible two thumbs down, per your findings, Pharaoh's body is lost at the bottom of the ocean with all of his hosts as they all were drowned whereas all the Pharaohs' bodies have been found of that time and no traced of anyof them being drowned.

For the sake of your own faith you would have to support Maurice's report cause the Bible supports him.

[Loki]

For the sake of your own faith you would have to support Maurice's report cause the Bible supports him.

For the sake of truth (wich my religion is build on) i will not lie about historical facts to fit my agenda.

I have searched all over the net for Muir's assumptions to be validated and found nothing of the sort, not one... i am even willing to continue this with library material for i am sure that mernetaph's cause of death has anywere near any confirmation indicating a drowning.

I do not put my faith at stake here but my integrity, if i lie to suit my faith, then i've lost it...

something happend to a pharaoh in the red sea as described in the bible... who, what and how are still not all determined and will probably never be, and i take peace with that.

[H2O]

Woe there Loki,

H2O did not call you a lier there. We think you misunderstood him. Its not your integrity that is being questioned here it is the Bible's integrity on the report if you tend to take the side with the sources that you used.

However, from what you have express after seaching you ran into numerous contradictions as to how he died. Yes and please do continue your study on the subject at your local Library whereas the internet sources are limited.

These are the facts:

1) Ramses II was Pharaoh of Moses' time

2) Merneptah, the successor and son of Ramses II., was also Pharaoh of Moses's time

3) Both Pharaoh's reigned during the life time of Moses

4) No other Pharaoh reigned during Moses' time in Egypt

5) After Merneptah's death Egypt fell as a ruling power over the region

A) Ramses II. died from old age whom suffered from arthritis (undisputed by professional authorities)

B) Merneptah, the succesor and son of Ramses II., is said to have died from old age, to have been assasined, to have been drowned ( in dispute by profesional authorities)

Bare in mind Loki you qouted sources that are also against what the Bible teaches as a historical fact, thus you would be incriminating your self on the subject but however you made it clear you dont trust neither proffessional sources until you further investigate the subject.

Intellegent move, since you know now your answers cannot conflict with the Bible - which will be used against you.

Lets share some knoweldge on this issue since both books are up for stakes here.

1) All the sources presented by you Loki more than likely are atheists whom more than likely will use science to prove the Bible wrong.

2) The source we qouted, Maurice, is a Christian as he professes to be.

Either way this goes from any side there is going to be allegations of prejudice from our sources.

Now lets use our source against each other:

"In the skull of the mummy of Merneptah is a round hole made by a sharp, pointed instrument. To explain this injury it was thought that a surgical operation had been performed on Merneptah's head during his lifetime, or that it was made after his death. But this hole is apparently the result of the mortal wound at the hands of his assassins."
[G. Elliot Smith, `The Royal Mummies', Catalogue general des Antiquites Egyptiennes du Musee de Caire (Cairo, 1912), p. 68.]

This source, an atheist (we assume), is in doubt of what caused this hole in the back of the head.

Where there other injuries to the body and how big was the hole in the back of the head ?

Merneptah had suffered much at the hands of tomb robbers. He had cuts to his cheek and forehead and his chin was cut to the bone. He had a deep cut in the right part of his throat, and a large axe-blow had shattered the right collarbone, passing through the chest and smashing a rib and part of the sternum. The right forearm was hanging on by what remained of the king's muscles. Almost all the king's abdomen had been hacked away, the blows even cutting pieces from the spine. The toes of the left foot were broken and two of them were missing. There was also a fist-sized hole in the back of the king's head.

http://www.secker.fsbusiness.co.uk/merneptah.htm

We have a better picture of this injury. The hole in the back of the head was big enough for a fist to fit which negates the possibilty of a knife or small object that would have been used by the alleged assasin which also negates the alleged surgery he may have had.

We also read that there are other injuries all over the body that could have been caused by a knife and by an ax. His assasin must have been the Scorpion king to do this type of damage, an ax in one hand and a sword in the other with his right eyebrow raised . Ehm just joking.

Merneptah being killed by an assasin is far fetched.

We also know that grave robber ram sacked the tomb he was in, whereas he was not in the tomb he was suppose to be in, and of course they would be armed with sharp tools. These injuries could have been caused by grave robbers whom were removing gold and jewelry that the Pharaoh was dressed in under his shroud.

Finally, the athesis never considered drowning could have cause these injuries. Most of you are saying or thinking how in the world can drowning cause a hole in the back of the head that is fist size and caused other injuries all over the body ?

If your are a beach bumb and a Surfer then you would clearly understand that it could be cause by drowing.

For those of you who dont know not a thing about surfing then heres your first lesson.

In Surfing there is a term used as "Whipe Out" or "Crashed" or "Crash and Burn" Hey Dude ! This depends where your from in the US. All of the terms mean the same in the surfing world.

"Whipe Out" is when a wave tosses you from your surf board while duck diving or while you are riding. If you are an amature the water force from the wave will throw you to bottom of the sandbar or reef that can result in broken bones and survere injuries on sharp objects.

Lets take a look at the red sea they crossed





Above is some light on the subject of what Moses crossed and what Merneptah tried to cross. The red sea that Moses crossed is at least 100 feet deep.

Merneptah got the father whipe out.

The sea according to both Quran and Bible departed or seperated for Moses and Israel to walk through so they could get to the other side.

We now have these two GIANT water wall structures like waves standing over 100 feet high while Moses, Israel, Pharaoh and his hosts are pacing through the bottom of the ocean's floor. When Moses his people crossed in safety to the other side Pharaoh was still trying to make it through while still pacing at the bottom of the ocean's floor, then suddenly the walls like a huge title wave from both side (a double impact) over 100 feet comes crushing down on them while they stand at the bottom of the ocean's floor where there is a Corol REEF.

Ouch ! We can imagine what he went through with his body being hurled at the bottom of the Ocean's floor like a rag colliding into the reefs. No one can survive and make it out from such a direct impact, and to make it worse a DOUBLE IMPACT, without a scratch. A 15 foot wave is enough to cause injuries.

[Loki]

H20, with all do respect but you're reaching

any man hit by such tidal waves would be torn apart. Many things do not make sence concerning Mernetaph's death and are unable to be resolved anytime soon.

First claim: He was a very old man (73) or something when he died... many sources indicate a natural death
Second claim: The mummy shows a heavy mutilated body with head trauma's, broken bones and deep cuts
Third claim: The mummy drowned yet no source except Muir's sources have confirmed this.

and i'll try to go to the librabry this week

and it's for sure not the bible's intergrity that i'm putting at stake, the bible is speaking truth... is historical research doing that?

For one example this site is questioning the historians with the arguments that this concerns a later period of times
http://www.specialtyinterests.net/israel.html#hints

In revised history Merneptah [Hophra, Apries] ruled from about 580-568 BC, the period of coregency with Ramses II, and sole from ca. 568/69-558 BC. The stele describes the situation as it existed in Palestine following the Babylonian campaigns into the region. The same period, the same events moved Merneptah and Jeremiah to use similar expressions in describing what happened

i suggest you read the site, his arguments are impressive.

It also concedes with Mernetaph's assasination:

Ramses II's successor was Pharaoh Merneptah whose throne name was Binere-meramun Merneptah-hotphi(r)mae. `Hotphirmae' should be repaired to read `hophramae'. The letter `t' in `hotep' (beloved) was not sounded just like in `Amenhotep' as compared to `Amenophis' in Greek. This way `Hotphir' was transliterated `Hophra' in Hebrew and `Apries' in Greek. Jeremiah said of this pharaoh:

"This is what the LORD says: 'I am going to hand Pharaoh Hophra king of Egypt over to his enemies who seek his life, just as I handed Zedekiah king of Judah over to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, the enemy who was seeking his life.' " -- Jeremiah 44:30

Who knows, with historical research confirming this, maybe in ten years from now, in the light of new discoveries this will be a conundrum in history, and our flood talks be in vain.

what we find in historical research is swift and replacable untill a next groundbreaking discovery commes along... the bible may know what happend truthfully, but that doesn't mean historical research has determined what happend yet... and i do not wich to alter any of the two, too fit someone's interpretation. It's better to your research at best, giving you the most truth even if it isn't complete you must take peace with that and not altering it to fit your agenda.

[Joseph]

This may sound plastic to you..."

Untrue, even littered plastic has value, while no value can be found in anything you've said. Nonetheless, since you're offering supposed discussion with acquaintances as food for thought, I will offer the same to you.

Among all stations there are Muslims who do not believe in Mohammed (How they reject Mohammed while accepting Quran is anyone's guess). Muslims who believe the Quran is corrupted and/or created. Muslims who believe the crucifixion of Jesus is indisputable fact. Muslims who believe the integrity of Bible is unquestionable; Jesus did indeed claim Divinity, the Spirit of God can be no other than God. Some of those "purely" Muslims I personally know, others I know of, and none are needed to validate Christianity. Islam needs and seek all the help it can get.

joseph

[sardab]

Wow, we have a harsh one here!

I'll say for the least that Islam is not gained through the place or origin one was born, or what is written on one's id. Islam is in the faith one holds.

So I'm sure you unquestinably know such people who do not deny the so-called divinity of Jesus or integrity of Bible. Yet, what is unquestinably very questinable is their faith. They are not Muslims by standarts of Qur'an or Muhammad.

And Muslims accepting Qur'an but not Muhammad is the most stupid thing I've ever heard! Give these lies to fish! And you also jump down the water if possible, especially since you say in the other topic that "Muslims believe the Ahadith and Quran are inseparable. "

[john doe]

And Muslims accepting Qur'an but not Muhammad is the most stupid thing I've ever heard! Give these lies to fish! And you also jump down the water if possible, especially since you say in the other topic that "Muslims believe the Ahadith and Quran are inseparable. "

Excuse me please; do you think that the Shi’ites actually embrace Mohammed

[sardab]

And Muslims accepting Qur'an but not Muhammad is the most stupid thing I've ever heard! Give these lies to fish! And you also jump down the water if possible, especially since you say in the other topic that "Muslims believe the Ahadith and Quran are inseparable. "

Excuse me please; do you think that the Shi’ites actually embrace Mohammed

I guess you learnt nothing about Islam back in Iraq. Shiites regard Ali, Hasan, Husayn and imams because they are from the ahl al bayt, that is, from the family of Mohammad!!

[john doe]

I guess you learnt nothing about Islam back in Iraq. Shiites regard Ali, Hasan, Husayn and imams because they are from the ahl al bayt, that is, from the family of Mohammad!!

Please don’t make me laugh any harder lool

oh! this is too much to handle

[john doe]

And Muslims accepting Qur'an but not Muhammad is the most stupid thing I've ever heard! Give these lies to fish! And you also jump down the water if possible, especially since you say in the other topic that "Muslims believe the Ahadith and Quran are inseparable. "

Excuse me please; do you think that the Shi’ites actually embrace Mohammed

I guess you learnt nothing about Islam back in Iraq. Shiites regard Ali, Hasan, Husayn and imams because they are from the ahl al bayt, that is, from the family of Mohammad!!

Sorry for getting carried away, you really should try and learn more about your own history.

its funny, i was told by the shiites that Ali was "the chosen one" and not Mo............. care to elaborate?

[Joseph]

Wow, we have a harsh one here!...

...And Muslims accepting Qur'an but not Muhammad is the most stupid thing I've ever heard! Give these lies to fish! And you also jump down the water if possible, especially since you say in the other topic that "Muslims believe the Ahadith and Quran are inseparable. "

I gathered from reading some of your posts, you have an overdeveloped sense of intellect. And judging from above reply you're also cognitively impaired and in denial. However, the following statement may help you improve in all areas. Unless, of course, statement inference came from stupid lies, and therefore should be given to fish.

"We do not proclaim any Muslim an unbeliever on account of any sin, however great, unless it be that he regards his sin as permissible. Nor does he forfeit the name of belief; we continue to call him a believer in essence. It is possible to be a sinful believer without being an unbeliever."

joseph

[sardab]

"We do not proclaim any Muslim an unbeliever on account of any sin, however great, unless it be that he regards his sin as permissible. Nor does he forfeit the name of belief; we continue to call him a believer in essence. It is possible to be a sinful believer without being an unbeliever."

Now, that excerpt does not help you in any way.

That's reiteration of a standart Islamic concept. If you believe Qur'an bans alcohol but take it, you are a sinner but still Muslim. If you refuse that Qur'an bans alcohol, or claim that such bans are irrelevant then you are not only a sinner but also unbeliever. You cannot chose parts of Islam to believe.

[Loki]

Now, that excerpt does not help you in any way.

That's reiteration of a standart Islamic concept. If you believe Qur'an bans alcohol but take it, you are a sinner but still Muslim. If you refuse that Qur'an bans alcohol, or claim that such bans are irrelevant then you are not only a sinner but also unbeliever. You cannot chose parts of Islam to believe.

How do you call the muslims in paradise, swimming in rivers of wine?

hypocrits?

[Joseph]

Now, that excerpt does not help you in any way.

Help me?!...Let me make it clear. I do not care you call Quran, stupid lies. Also I do not care you call fellow Muslims, unbelievers, based solely upon strength of your words against them.

...That's reiteration of a standart Islamic concept.

What I quoted is Islamic doctrine. Reiterating is what you are doing, quite poorly and strained.

joseph