DICTATED and BORROWING theory

[fdjohan]

BISMILLAHIRRAHMAANIRRAHIIM
=======================
Peace for all religion on earth
Love your enemies
============
Remember that this is a QURAN - BIBLE debate.
There will be MUSLIMS side and Christians side.
You can't play only on your side.

Apple pie is playing on his side with his "DICTATE THEORY", where he accused Al-Qur'an was dictated by NT just because he found many similar words inside the two Holy books.
But all of this accusation will turn to a WISHFUL THINKING if you can't backed-it up by the history of how that DICTATION happenned. Who did it? When? so many questions from Muslims you have to answer.

Apple Pie's word:

Who cares when the sura was supposedly penned?

There are no “originals” of this sura in existence in the first place.

We Muslims challenge Apple Pie to talk about "ORIGINALITY" of the Al-Qur'an and Bible in this forum and this discission must go to the borrowing theory historical facts.

Again….who cares if Islam’s so called “prophet” wrote the sura?!

He obviously did not…as the earliest fragmented COPIES of the Koran only surfaced 100 years after his supposed life and times.

You are grasping at straws…

We demand Apple Pie to talk about what he said above in this forum.

On top of that, We challenge Apple Pie to talk about the HISTORICAL FACTS about the DICTATED THEORY or BORROWING THEORY.

We need answer from Apple Pie first, since he is one who come with the SEVERE attack of this DICTATED THEORY or BORROWING THEORY

Mature discussion, Solid references - from anywhere you can find.
Peaceful dialog.

We'll wait

Salaam

[Aineo]

A manuscript analysis of the Qur'an does present us with unique problems not encountered with the Bible. While we can find multiple manuscripts for the Bible written 700-900 years earlier, at a time when durable paper was not even used, the manuscripts for the Qur'an within the century in which it was purported to have been compiled, the seventh century, simply do not exist. Prior to 750 A.D. (thus for 100 years after Muhammad's death) we have no verifiable Muslim documents which can give us a window into this formative period of Islam (Wansbrough 1978:58-59). In fact the primary sources which we possess are from 150-300 years after the events which they describe, and therefore are quite distant from those events (Nevo 1994:108; Wansbrough 1978:119; Crone 1987:204). For that reason they are, for all practical purposes, secondary sources, as they rely on other material, much of which no longer exists. We simply do not have any "account from the Islamic' community during the [initial] 150 years or so, between the first Arab conquests [the early 7th century] and the appearance, with the sira-maghazi narratives, of the earliest Islamic literature" [the late 8th century] (Wansbrough 1978:119).
http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/qurmanu.htm

Where then are the original manuscripts? The Qur’anic manuscripts Muslims regard as their earliest; the Topkapi manuscript in Istanbul, Turkey, and the Samarkand manuscript in the Soviet State Library in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, bear the marks of a date of authorship of ~AD 850. They are written in a form of Kufic script which arose in the Abbasid period (~AD 750-850) and are adorned with 9th century embellishments.

The oldest Qur’an, according to forensic dating, is in the British Library. It dates to around AD 790; almost 150 years after Muhammad’s death.

Muslims defend their inability to produce early manuscripts by saying that the Qur’an was originally passed down orally and that early copies have disintegrated. But Muslim tradition itself tells us that the Qur’an was written down 20 years after Muhammad died and we have other Arab literature that has survived from the 7th century. We know that there were secretaries during the Ummayad Dynasty (AD 660-750) and that Muhammad himself worked on a caravan where written records of transactions would have been kept.
http://www.sullivan-county.com/x/prob_koran.htm

Most of what the Qur'an tells Muslims about Mary the mother of Jesus (whose Hebrew name was not Jesus but Yehoshua, which is translated Joshua when referring to a person other than God's Messiah) can be found in deuterocanonical Christian literature that is known to have been written between the 2nd and 5th centuries.

Now, what has Apple Pie posted that is not true?

[Apple Pie]

We need answer from Apple Pie first, since he is one who come with the SEVERE attack of this DICTATED THEORY or BORROWING THEORY

Acting upon the Muslim credo that the Koran “proves” itself; then we have to look no further than what the authors of the text have penned within its collected pages.

Let’s look at this fine example of what occurred…



وَالْكِتَابِ الْمُبِينِ

Waalkitabi almubeeni

43.2 And The Book, the clear/evident.


What is clear and evident…?

The Book.

What is “The Book”…..?



Reviewing the classic definition…

الْكِتَابِ = “alkitabi”

“alkitabi” definition:

Lane references sura 2:2 in his definition:

ذَلِكَ الْكِتَبُ لَا رَيْبَ فِيهِ هُدًى لِلْمُتَّقِينَ

Thalika alkitabu la rayba feehi hudan lilmuttaqeena

That The Book no doubt/suspicion in it, (it is) guidance to the fearing and obeying. (2:2)

“That is the book, or scripture”; as though combining in itself the excellences of all other books or scriptures; or meaning that is preeminently the book, or scripture. The Pentateuch or Mosaic Law; and the Gospel, or Book of the Gospels; the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians. Divine prescript, appointment, or ordinance; judgment, or sentence; fatal decree or predestination.

References:
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume one, p. 74; volume seven, p. 2590


“The Book” is the Holy Bible.

Period.

The Holy Bible is proclaimed as being clear & evident.



So much so, that look what happens...



إِنَّا جَعَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ
Inna jaAAalnahu qur-anan AAarabiyyan laAAallakum taAAqiloona

43.3 Certainly we have made it an Arabic Koran, maybe/perhaps you reason/comprehend.


What is the Koran…..?

قُرْآنَ is so called because it has collected the histories of the prophets, and commands and prohibitions, and promises and threats, and the verses or signs, and the chapters.


Look at what has occurred.

1) The Holy Bible “alkitabi” (OT & NT – written in Hebrew and Greek), is proclaimed as clear and evident
2) The Holy Bible is made into “jaAAalnahu” an Arabic “collection” or Koran


Thus…

It is obviously stated in the Koran itself, that the Holy Bible was converted into Arabic by its authors.

Understand this…

If the Koran was originally in Arabic, then there would have been absolutely no need for the disclaimer of converting it into Arabic….as stated in 43.3.

This statement is absolutely foundational to the correct understanding of the contents of Islam’s book of faith.

Hence, since we now know that the authors who penned the Koranic text (as we know it to be today) translated the prior Biblical scriptures into Arabic – what exactly would you expect to find within its suras….?




But…

Who were the authors that made this bold proclamation….?



Observe these interesting comments by Lane…

Every language without a written literature tends to decay more than to development by reason of foreign influences; and the history of the Arabic exhibits an instance of decay remarkably rapid, and extraordinary in degree. An immediate consequence of the foreign conquests achieved by the Arabs under Mohammad’s first four successors was an extensive corruption of their language; for the nations that they subdued were naturally obliged to adopt in a great measure the speech of the conquerors, a speech which few persons have ever acquired in such a degree as to be secure from the commission of frequent errors in grammar without learning it from infancy….

Such being the case, it became a matter of the highest importance to the Arabs to preserve the knowledge of that speech which had thus become obsolescent, and to draw a distinct line between the classical and the post-classical languages. For the former language was that of the Kur-an and of the Traditions of Mohammad, the sources of their religious, moral, civil, criminal, and political code’ and they possessed, in that language, preserved by oral tradition, - for the art of writing, in Arabia, had been almost exclusively confined to Christians and Jews….

The classical language they called, by reason of its incomparable excellence, “el-loghah,” or “the language:” and the line between this and the post-classical was easily drawn, on account of the almost sudden commencement, and rapid progress, of the corruption.

….I often have found in my knowledge of modern Arabic a solution of a difficulty; but without great caution, such knowledge would frequently have misled me, in consequence of the changes which have taken place in the applications of many words since the classical age.


References:
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume one, pp. vii – viii; xxii - xxiii

It is quite inescapable that Islam’s “prophet”….who is not even mentioned in the Koran… did NOT write the Koran…

Moreover…the authors, who did finally put pen to paper, and translated the Hebrew and Greek into Arabic, were more than likely Christians…..!!!


Thus...it becomes rather apparent why the Koran contains Biblical material such as:

• Salvation through Jesus….sura 103
• Jesus’ Crucifixion….sura 86
• The plurality at the Throne…sura 81
• The Triune God….sura 53



And on, and on, and on….

[fdjohan]

BISMILLAHIRRAHMAANIRRAHIIM
=======================
Hi folks.
Peace for the world.
==================
For Aineo.
That case is not the first time I faced. You better seek more knowledge about it.
There are a lot of arguments we can give. To make it simple, I'd better refer to you all about Samarkand Manuscript, complete with the images.

First of all, please please learn about the 3rd Caliph - Uthman ibn Affan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uthman

Uthman ibn Affan (Arabic: عثمان بن عفان) (c. 574 - June 17, 656) was the third Caliph of the Ummah, and is regarded by the majority Sunni Muslims as one of the "Four Righteously Guided Caliphs." He reigned from 644 until 656.

Second, record from UNESCO.
You all can see it here:
http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-U ... N=201.html

MEMORY OF THE WORLD INTERNATIONAL REGISTER
NOMINATION FORM

Uzbekistan - Holy Koran Mushaf of Othman

PART A - ESSENTIAL INFORMATION

Abstract:

This manuscript, held by the Muslim Board of Uzbekistan, is the earliest existent written version of the Koran. It is the definitive version, known as the Mushaf of Othman, superseding all other versions. The third Caliph Othman, who ordered its compilation, was assassinated while reading it.

1. Identity and Location:

Name of the Documentary Heritage: Holy Koran of Othman (Mushaf of Othman)

Country: The Republic of Uzbekistan

State, Province or Region: Tashkent city

Address: 103, Zarkaynar street, 700002, Tashkent, Uzbekistan

Name of Institution: The Muslim Board of Uzbekistan

2. Legal information:

Owner: The Republic of Uzbekistan

Custodian: The Muslim Board of Uzbekistan, 103, Zarkaynar street, 700002 Tashkent, UZBEKISTAN, Tel: (7+3712) 40.08.41/ 40.39.33.

Legal Status:

Category of ownership: Public Property

Details of legal and administrative provisions for the preservation of the documentary heritage: No specific legal provisions.

Accessibility: The original manuscript is kept securely locked in a glass-fronted safe but is available for consultation by specialists on permission from the Muslim Board. However, users have free access to a facsimile copy in the reading room and three photocopies are also available for consultation.

Copyright status: The Muslim Board of Uzbekistan is the copyright holder. 50 facsimile copies of the Koran were printed in St Petersburg in 1905, of which 25 were sold and the remainder presented to London, Afghanistan, Iran and other countries.

Responsible administration: The Committee for Religious Affairs under the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Uzbekistan, and the Muslim Board of Uzbekistan.

3. Identification:

Description: The Holy Koran of Othman is written on animal skins.
Dimensions: 53x62 cm.
No of pages: approx. 250.
The manuscript is written in Kufi script in large black characters

Bibliographic details: Inventory No 1 in library catalogue.
Two other partially complete contemporary manuscript copies of Othman's Koran are conserved in Sana'a and in Cairo.
50 pages belonging to this manuscript found their way into a private collection in London 200 years ago.

Visual documentation: Slides

History: The Koran, revealed by Allah to prophet Muhammad, was committed to memory by the early Muslims and recorded by scribes on various materials such as scraps of wood or camel bones. After the death of Muhammad, the first Khalif Abu Bakr (632-34) had all known suras recorded in writing by scribes such as the calligrapher Zayd bin Thabit, secretary of Prophet Muhammad. Later, the third Khalif Othman (644-56) ordered the suras (verses) to be gathered into a book with the help of the four best Koranic scholars of the time. The definitive version of the Koran prepared in Medinah in 651, known as the Mushaf of Othman, was declared as a standard, superseding all other versions. Khalif Othman was assassinated while reading the Aya "And if they believe even as ye believe, then are they rightly guided. But if they turn away, then are they in schism, and Allah will be thy protection against them" from this very manuscript, which is stained with his blood.

According to popular tradition, there are two accounts of how the Koran of Othman was brought from Medinah to the territory of present-day Uzbekistan:
Version 1: A relative of Khalif Othman brought the Koran to Maverannahr during a period of internal disorders in the Medinah.
Version 2: Ali Ibn Abi Taleb brought the Koran to Kufa, from where Amir Temur brought it to Samarkand on his return from his conquest of Iraq.
In 1868 the Koran of Othman was delivered to the Russian Emperor by General Von Kaufman and kept in the Imperial Public Library in St Petersburg. After the Revolution of October 1917 the Muslims of Kazan brought Othman's Koran to their city. There were several quarrels between the Muslims of Kazan and the Muslims of Uzbekistan. As a result, the manuscript Koran was returned to Tashkent in 1924. It was stored in the museum of history until 1989, when it was given to the Muslim Board of Uzbekistan.

Bibliography:

A.F. Shubunin, "Kufi style Koran", St Petersburg, 1891.
Muso Djarullo Rostow Don, "History of the Koran and Mushaf", St Petersburg, in Arab language, 1905.
Ilyas Buragoniy, "Sura of Yasin", St Petersburg, in Arab language, 1905.
Ismoil Makhdum Sattiev, "The History of Mushaf of Othman", Uzbekistan, in Arab language, 1971.
"Photocopy of the Holy Koran of Caliph Othman", Edited by Dr. Muhammad Khamidullo, publisher Ms. Aysha Begum, US., 1980.
Khabibullo Saliev, "The Adventure of Mushaf of Othman", Tashkent, 1994.
Ismoil Abdulla, Translation of the "History of the Koran Othman" into Uzbek Language, Tashkent, 1996.

4. Management plan:

Access policy and procedures: Full responsibility is given to the Muslim Board of Uzbekistan and the Committee for Religious Affairs under the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Users who want to have access to the original Koran should have permission from these bodies.

Details of preservation budget: A special budget for the preservation of the Koran does not exist. The Muslim Board of Uzbekistan has a charitable fund for its activities of which a small sum is allocated for preservation of the manuscript collections.

Preservation and managerial policies to control the physical environment of the manuscripts: The one librarian working in the library where the Koran is stored is not a professional expert in the field of preservation, but carries out simple preventative maintenance.

5. Assessment against the Selection Criteria:

The Holy Qur'an of Othman meets following criteria:


Influence: As the earliest and definitive version of the Qur'an, this document has exerted a major influence on the history of the world.


Time: The murder of Caliph Othman while reading from this manuscript precipitated the deep Sunni-Shia schism which has divided the Muslim community since then.


Place: The Koran was written in Medinah, birthplace of the first Muslim community.

People: This manuscript is the earliest extant written version of the Koran reviewed to Prophet Muhammed. It is specially associated with the third Caliph Othman, who ordered its compilation, who was assassinated while reading it.

Subject/Theme: The Koran contains a universal code of human conduct. It recounts the creation of the World, the stages of the divine revelation, the place of mankind in the universe and in relation to the Creator.

Form and Style: The Koran is acknowledged to be an inimitable masterpiece of Arabic literature.

Social value: The Koran played a significant role in shaping world history and is regarded as profoundly significant by large numbers of people throughout the world.

6. Consultation:
The owner and custodian were consulted concerning the training or retraining of specialists in the field of conservation of documentary heritage and launching joint preservation/conservation projects.

Independent institutions and experts:

Mr. Khabibullo Saliev
Senior Scientific Expert
The International Center for Islamic Studies
103, Zarkaynar street
Tashkent, 700002
UZBEKISTAN
Tel: (7+3712) 40.36.59/ 40.19.21

7. Nominator:

Name: Muslim Board of Uzbekistan

Relationship to the documentary heritage: Custodian

Contact person:

Mr. Alisher Ikramov Secretary-General
The National Commission of the Republic of Uzbekistan for UNESCO
54, Buyuk Ipak Yuli street
Tashkent, 700137
Uzbekistan
Tel: (7+3712) 67.05.42 / 67.05.46 / 67.05.49 / 67.05.61
Fax: (7+3712) 67.05.38
E-mail: UNESCO@natcom.org.uz

PART B - SUBSIDIARY INFORMATION

8. Assessment of risk:


Environmental conditions: The manuscript is kept in locked case without any special climatic control for temperature and for humidity. It is not usually exposed to daylight.


Physical conditions: The pages are fragile and brittle, necessitating extreme caution in turning the pages.


Preservation budget: No special budget or qualified personnel is available.


Extent and nature of use: Access to the original of the manuscript is severely restricted. Facsimile copy is available for the consultation by readers.

9. Preservation Assessment:

Present physical state: The parchment is brittle with age.

History of preservation: Some restoration were carried by the scholar Umuz Aymani c. 1840.

Current preservation policy in relation to proposed nominated documentary heritage: Restriction on free access and protection from light.

Person or organization responsible for preservation: The Muslim Board of Uzbekistan.

Caliph Uthman(r.a) was killed --on AD 656.
So, the manuscript written years away before he was killed.

Third, the images





To be continued

[fdjohan]

OK.

Apple Pie uses E.W. Lane as his reference. This is a bad start.

Can Cristians make fair judgement? I believe they can.
Please keep in your mind, that I did not start my argument by using MUSLIMS OPPINION. While, Apple Pie's argument is using CHRISTIAN's SIDE point of view, and none of them talk about HISTORICAL INFORMATION.

You'd better understand that this thread is talking about HISTORICAL RECORD, not about "WHAT CHRISTIAN THINK or MUSLIMS THINK".
WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT EXEGESIS OR LEXICON ETC also.

Until this point. Apple Pie GIVES NOTHING about proving his own words and his accusation about DICTATION THEORY on the HISTORICAL RECORD side. Talking about historical record is not talking about OPPINION.
If you can find historical record made my Christian Author, then please show the forum as long as it shows us the proves about the process of TRANSFERING Bible's text to Al-Qur'an.
But not Christian's OPPINION.

I challenge Apple Pie to talk about this OBJECTIVE WAY and please do understand about what we are talking about.
This is a CALL to people in this forum to start making fair judgement.
Unless you can show me that there is no teaching in the Bible about doing justice careless about what religion they are.

Good luck

[Aineo]

fdjohan, I don't find either the Wikipedia or the U.N. as unbiased or even scholarly sources of information. It is easy to find sources where information is spoon fed to those who write the articles. Now, if you can offer something that is more credible I will read it.

[fdjohan]

BISMILLAHIRRAHMAANIRRAHIIM
======================

Let us continue.

Remember that we focus our discussion to he earliest fragmented COPIES of the Koran.
Apple Pie's:

Again….who cares if Islam’s so called “prophet” wrote the sura?!

He obviously did not…as the earliest fragmented COPIES of the Koran only surfaced 100 years after his supposed life and times.

You are grasping at straws…

I'd like to narrow this discussion to Uthman(ra) manuskript which is still exist until now.

Khalif Othman was assassinated while reading the Aya "And if they believe even as ye believe, then are they rightly guided. But if they turn away, then are they in schism, and Allah will be thy protection against them" from this very manuscript, which is stained with his blood.

It was found that there is BLOOD STAIN in the manuscript. That blood stain is belongs to Uthman(ra) him-self.

This is the name used for the copy which 'Uthman kept himself, and it is said he was killed while reading it.
According to some the Umayyads took it to Andalusia, from where it came to Fas (Morocco) and according to Ibn Batuta it was there in the eighth century after the Hijra, and there were traces of blood on it. From Morocco, it might have found its way to Samarkand.

[Ibn Said: al-Tabaqatal-kubra, Cairo, n.d., Vol. 111, (1). pp. 51-2.]

This is just an article to support the argument to seek knowledge about how he was killed.

The short biography of Uthman bin Affan.
Find it here:
http://islamic-world.net/khalifah/khula ... iduun3.htm

Uthman ruled for twelve years. The first six years were marked by internal peace and tranquility, but during the second half of his caliphate a rebellion arose. The Jews and the Magians, taking advantage of dissatisfaction among the people, began conspiring against Uthman, and by publicly airing their complaints and grievances, gained so much sympathy that it became difficult to distinguish friend from foe.

It may seem surprising that a ruler of such vast territories, whose armies were matchless, was unable to deal with these rebels. If Uthman had wished, the rebellion could have been crushed at the very moment it began. But he was reluctant to be the first to shed the blood of Muslims, however rebellious they might be. He preferred to reason with them, to persuade them with kindness and generosity. He well remembered hearing the Prophet (peace be on him) say, "Once the sword is unsheathed among my followers, it will not be sheathed until the Last Day."

The rebels demanded that he abdicate and some of the Companions advised him to do so. He would gladly have followed this course of action, but again he was bound by a solemn pledge he had given to the Prophet. "Perhaps God will clothe you with a shirt, Uthman" the Prophet had told him once, "and if the people want you to take it off, do not take it off for them." Uthman said to a well-wisher on a day when his house was surrounded by the rebels, "God's Messenger made a covenant with me and I shall show endurance in adhering to it."

After a long siege, the rebels broke into Uthman's house and murdered him. When the first assassin's sword struck Uthman, he was reciting the verse,

"Verily, God sufficeth thee; He is the All-Hearing,the All-Knowing" [Qur'an 2:137]

Uthman breathed his last on the afternoon of Friday, 17 Dhul Hijja, 35 A.H. (June. (656 A.C.). He was eighty-four years old. The power of tHe rebels was so great that Uthman's body lay unburied until Saturday night when he was buried in his blood-stained clothes, the shroud which befits all martyrs in the cause of God.

This is to refute :
as the earliest fragmented COPIES of the Koran only surfaced 100 years after his supposed life and times. And Aineo's.

1. The Uthman(ra)'s manuscript / Samarkand manuscrpt is the manuscript that was read by Uthman before he was killed. Proven by the blood stain.

2. The manuscript written at least 20 years after Prophet (saw)'s death.

Let us strict the dialog about the first manuscript ever written.
At this point, Temporary conclution:
1. Apple Pie was wrong about the earlies fragment.
2. Apple Pie still provide nothing about HISTORICAL RECORD who did, how, where and when the NT texts transfered to Al-Qur'an

[fdjohan]

Hi Aineo

fdjohan, I don't find either the Wikipedia or the U.N. as unbiased or even scholarly sources of information.

I just wonder if you give debate.org.uk the same question as you aked me about that unbiased.
We Muslims and you Christians keep requestion UNBIASED information.
I can ask you the same thing " Aineo. I don't find either the debate.org.uk or the www.sullivan-county.com as unbiased.

So, in this discussion, I used one information from UNESCO as one "NEUTRAL" reference which is not CHRISTIAN side or MUSLIMS side.

Other information I gave to forum is about the phisical sign of the manuscript whic is blood stain as you can find from the references I gave you.
I support my arguments with the HISTORICAL RECORD of the day Uthman was killed. And this "his life history" and the phisical sign of that manuscript are PARALLEL.
So that manuscript is the one that kept by Uthman(ra) and written at least 20 years after Prophet's death.
Remember that Uthman(ra) involved in the history of the Prophet(saw).

It is easy to find sources where information is spoon fed to those who write the articles. Now, if you can offer something that is more credible I will read it.

Something that is more credible is not only by read it.

Let us learn more about it Aineo.
I belive this one sitll a "NEUTRAL" website.
Have alook at this website:
http://www.kunstkamera.ru/uthman/eng/film.htm
It's about:

In search of the Qur'an of 'Uthman
(52 minutes, Efim Rezvan & Sasha Abashkin, Alef studio, Russia)

You can download the video here:
http://www.kunstkamera.ru/uthman/mov/pilot_eng.rmvb

You can see the blood stain of Uthman(ra) in that video.

Here:
http://www.kunstkamera.ru/jeynov/eng/quran.htm
You can read:

The QUR'AN

Upon moving to the territory of modern Uzbekistan, the ancestors of the Jeynov Arabs received help and protection from the head of the 'Ishqiyya Sufi brotherhood. Arabs paid for help with the Islamic relics they brought along. Among these relics was an ancient manuscript, which, according to a legend, was stained in the blood of the caliph 'Uthman. The manuscript was considered to be the prototype of all copies of the Qur'an. At present, this manuscript is vital for reconstructing the early history of the Holy Text and understanding the development of Arabic grammar studies. The amazing history of the manuscript is correlated to the history of royal dynasties, states and Sufi brotherhoods.

At this point, Provide the evidence of the manuscript by VIDEO and images as my argument.

The early manuscript so far what I show you is at least 20 years after Prophet's death.[/b]

For those who want to involve in this discussion, please note that I will NOT reply things that are not related to early manuscript ever written and the historical evidences of TEXT transfering from NT to Al-Qur'an.
Just to FOCUS the dialog.

[fdjohan]

We need answer from Apple Pie first, since he is one who come with the SEVERE attack of this DICTATED THEORY or BORROWING THEORY

Acting upon the Muslim credo that the Koran “proves” itself; then we have to look no further than what the authors of the text have penned within its collected pages.

Let’s look at this fine example of what occurred…

وَالْكِتَابِ الْمُبِينِ

Waalkitabi almubeeni

43.2 And The Book, the clear/evident.


What is clear and evident…?

The Book.

What is “The Book”…..?



Reviewing the classic definition…

الْكِتَابِ = “alkitabi”

“alkitabi” definition:

Lane references sura 2:2 in his definition:

ذَلِكَ الْكِتَبُ لَا رَيْبَ فِيهِ هُدًى لِلْمُتَّقِينَ

Thalika alkitabu la rayba feehi hudan lilmuttaqeena

That The Book no doubt/suspicion in it, (it is) guidance to the fearing and obeying. (2:2)

“That is the book, or scripture”; as though combining in itself the excellences of all other books or scriptures; or meaning that is preeminently the book, or scripture. The Pentateuch or Mosaic Law; and the Gospel, or Book of the Gospels; the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians. Divine prescript, appointment, or ordinance; judgment, or sentence; fatal decree or predestination.

References:
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume one, p. 74; volume seven, p. 2590


“The Book” is the Holy Bible.

Period.

The Holy Bible is proclaimed as being clear & evident.



So much so, that look what happens...



إِنَّا جَعَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ
Inna jaAAalnahu qur-anan AAarabiyyan laAAallakum taAAqiloona

43.3 Certainly we have made it an Arabic Koran, maybe/perhaps you reason/comprehend.


What is the Koran…..?

قُرْآنَ is so called because it has collected the histories of the prophets, and commands and prohibitions, and promises and threats, and the verses or signs, and the chapters.


Look at what has occurred.

1) The Holy Bible “alkitabi” (OT & NT – written in Hebrew and Greek), is proclaimed as clear and evident
2) The Holy Bible is made into “jaAAalnahu” an Arabic “collection” or Koran


Thus…

It is obviously stated in the Koran itself, that the Holy Bible was converted into Arabic by its authors.

Understand this…

If the Koran was originally in Arabic, then there would have been absolutely no need for the disclaimer of converting it into Arabic….as stated in 43.3.

This statement is absolutely foundational to the correct understanding of the contents of Islam’s book of faith.

Hence, since we now know that the authors who penned the Koranic text (as we know it to be today) translated the prior Biblical scriptures into Arabic – what exactly would you expect to find within its suras….?




But…

Who were the authors that made this bold proclamation….?



Observe these interesting comments by Lane…

Every language without a written literature tends to decay more than to development by reason of foreign influences; and the history of the Arabic exhibits an instance of decay remarkably rapid, and extraordinary in degree. An immediate consequence of the foreign conquests achieved by the Arabs under Mohammad’s first four successors was an extensive corruption of their language; for the nations that they subdued were naturally obliged to adopt in a great measure the speech of the conquerors, a speech which few persons have ever acquired in such a degree as to be secure from the commission of frequent errors in grammar without learning it from infancy….

Such being the case, it became a matter of the highest importance to the Arabs to preserve the knowledge of that speech which had thus become obsolescent, and to draw a distinct line between the classical and the post-classical languages. For the former language was that of the Kur-an and of the Traditions of Mohammad, the sources of their religious, moral, civil, criminal, and political code’ and they possessed, in that language, preserved by oral tradition, - for the art of writing, in Arabia, had been almost exclusively confined to Christians and Jews….

The classical language they called, by reason of its incomparable excellence, “el-loghah,” or “the language:” and the line between this and the post-classical was easily drawn, on account of the almost sudden commencement, and rapid progress, of the corruption.

….I often have found in my knowledge of modern Arabic a solution of a difficulty; but without great caution, such knowledge would frequently have misled me, in consequence of the changes which have taken place in the applications of many words since the classical age.


References:
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume one, pp. vii – viii; xxii - xxiii

It is quite inescapable that Islam’s “prophet”….who is not even mentioned in the Koran… did NOT write the Koran…

Moreover…the authors, who did finally put pen to paper, and translated the Hebrew and Greek into Arabic, were more than likely Christians…..!!!


Thus...it becomes rather apparent why the Koran contains Biblical material such as:

• Salvation through Jesus….sura 103
• Jesus’ Crucifixion….sura 86
• The plurality at the Throne…sura 81
• The Triune God….sura 53



And on, and on, and on….

What is it that you are talking about Apple Pie?
We are not talking about lexicon.
E.W. Lane doesn't provide any historical evidences but merely talk about language, art writing etc.

I guess I typed it clearly:

But all of this accusation will turn to a WISHFUL THINKING if you can't backed-it up by the history of how that DICTATION happenned. Who did it? When? so many questions from Muslims you have to answer.

It's not because I can't reply your posting. I'm just affraid this discussion will go too much far fron the focus.
Please talk about what we are discussing and please provide references as much as you can to the forum especially Muslims. They demand more explanation from you.

Remember, so far I believe I am still in "OBJECTIVE" track.
And you'd better response my postings and the evidences I show you.

Salaam

[Aineo]

There are over 26000 Biblical manuscripts, but none of them are the originals. One blood stained copy of the Qur'an is not physical evidence of its age or even who it belonged to. This is comparable to Catholics churches claiming to have a piece of the cross Jesus was crucified on. It is a traditional belief. Has the manuscript been scientifically dated?

From the U.N. site:

People: This manuscript is the earliest extant written version of the Koran reviewed to Prophet Muhammed. It is specially associated with the third Caliph Othman, who ordered its compilation, who was assassinated while reading it.

Compiled from what? Neither one of your sites disproves what Apple pie has posted.

[Joseph]

fdjohan, I don't find either the Wikipedia or the U.N. as unbiased or even scholarly sources of information. It is easy to find sources where information is spoon fed to those who write the articles. Now, if you can offer something that is more credible I will read it.

Interesting you say that, Aineo. There is regional map inside day planners the UN distributed to its personnel in Iraq and Iraqi agencies. Names of ME countries on the map are included even the smallest county, Lebanon. However the counrty name, Israel, is omitted from day planners.

joseph

[fdjohan]

BISMILLAHIRRAHMAANIRRAHIIM
===================
Hadith of the day:
Sahih Bukhari
Volume 3, Book 47, Number 767:

Narrated Aisha:

I said, "O Allah's Apostle! I have two neighbors; which of them should I give a gift to?" The Prophet said, "(Give) to the one whose door is nearer to you."
========================
Hi folks, I'm back
Peace to you all.
==========

There are over 26000 Biblical manuscripts, but none of them are the originals. One blood stained copy of the Qur'an is not physical evidence of its age or even who it belonged to. This is comparable to Catholics churches claiming to have a piece of the cross Jesus was crucified on. It is a traditional belief. Has the manuscript been scientifically dated?

Please do remember that we are talking about the first manuscript ever written and found. We are not talking about the original of AL-Qur'an or Bible.
Before we continue this discussion please answer my questions:

You used to say:
" I don't find either the Wikipedia or the U.N. as unbiased or even scholarly sources of information."

My question:

1. How do you judge or determine BIASED or UNBIASED the information between debate.org.uk / sullivan-county.com and UNO / UNESCO?

2. Have you ever found the BIASED information from UNESCO since it was formed? Tell me which information and when.

Tell me with mature explanation pls.

From the U.N. site:

People: This manuscript is the earliest extant written version of the Koran reviewed to Prophet Muhammed. It is specially associated with the third Caliph Othman, who ordered its compilation, who was assassinated while reading it.

Compiled from what? Neither one of your sites disproves what Apple pie has posted.

Easy. Uthman(ra) was the one who ordered the compilation of Al-Qur'an.

Please learn more about the compilation here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qur'an

Salaam

[fdjohan]

Hi Joseph

fdjohan, I don't find either the Wikipedia or the U.N. as unbiased or even scholarly sources of information. It is easy to find sources where information is spoon fed to those who write the articles. Now, if you can offer something that is more credible I will read it.

Interesting you say that, Aineo. There is regional map inside day planners the UN distributed to its personnel in Iraq and Iraqi agencies. Names of ME countries on the map are included even the smallest county, Lebanon. However the counrty name, Israel, is omitted from day planners.

joseph

Pls open this web:
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ ... N=201.html

Type "ISRAEL" in the seach box.
How many result you find? 100.
So, Israel omitted from day planners doesn't mean it is not admitted.
Prove me that UNESCO is a BIASED organization.

Salaam

[Joseph]

Type "ISRAEL" in the seach box. How many result you find? 100. So, Israel omitted from day planners doesn't mean it is not admitted. Prove me that UNESCO is a BIASED organization. Salaam

There you go again with, prove to me, as though reality is hinged on fdjohna accepting the evidence. Of course UN acknowledges Israel exist, it is member nation of the organization. Nonetheless, if insulting one nation to appease another is not bias, then just what is?

The article you linked is Uzbekistan nominating for UN archives what it believes to be a national treasure: Nothing more.

joseph

[fdjohan]

Type "ISRAEL" in the seach box. How many result you find? 100. So, Israel omitted from day planners doesn't mean it is not admitted. Prove me that UNESCO is a BIASED organization. Salaam

There you go again with, prove to me, as though reality is hinged on fdjohna accepting the evidence. Of course UN acknowledges Israel exist, it is member nation of the organization. Nonetheless, if insulting one nation to appease another is not bias, then just what is?

I keep saying "prove to me" because many people come with merely REJECTION without any arguments or references.

I don't think their intention to insult since we agree that it is member nation of the organization. Things they did and do are base on the decisions coming from the group of a comitee.
That thing you said is just a way small part of what UNESCO has done to Israel country.

The article you linked is Uzbekistan nominating for UN archives what it believes to be a national treasure: Nothing more.

joseph

But to be nominated is not without any INSPECTIONS.

Salaam

[Joseph]

Until this point. Apple Pie GIVES NOTHING about proving his own words and his accusation about DICTATION THEORY on the HISTORICAL RECORD side. Talking about historical record is not talking about OPPINION.

His argument has been detailed and reference material noted. Instead of trying to kill the messenger make your counter-argument on why borrowing is improbable. This way readers may see which argument is sound and form knowledgeable opinion. All you are doing is appealing to authority of historical record. You have not yet established any so-called historical record as reliable witness.

Apple pie is playing on his side with his "DICTATE THEORY", where he accused Al-Qur'an was dictated by NT just because he found many similar words inside the two Holy books. But all of this accusation will turn to a WISHFUL THINKING if you can't backed-it up by the history of how that DICTATION happenned. Who did it? When? so many questions from Muslims you have to answer.

So? You are playing on your side, the playing field is level. His analysis has found a pattern where many similar words have formed very familiar message. He is making a case for Quran borrowings. It is wishful thinking to believe how, who and when is needed as supporting evidence.

On top of that, We challenge Apple Pie to talk about the HISTORICAL FACTS about the DICTATED THEORY or BORROWING THEORY.

You can challenge him all you like, but his case is not beholden to your criterion.

Apple Pie uses E.W. Lane as his reference. This is a bad start.

Islamic sites recommended Lane's Lexicon

Apple Pie's argument is using CHRISTIAN's SIDE point of view.

Again, so, you take the Muslim side, the playing field is level

You'd better understand that this thread is talking about HISTORICAL RECORD

Apple Pie is treating the Quran as historical record. There is no reason he must accept simply repeated dogmatic assertion of its divine origins.

We Muslims challenge Apple Pie to talk about "ORIGINALITY" of the Al-Qur'an and Bible in this forum and this discission must go to the borrowing theory historical facts.

I have no idea what you are trying to say.

On top of that, We challenge Apple Pie to talk about the HISTORICAL FACTS about the DICTATED THEORY or BORROWING THEORY.

Suppose you talk about them? Set aside the demands and present your counter-argument to forum readers.

joseph

[fdjohan]

BISMILLAHIRRAHMAANIRRAHIIM
=======================
Hi I'm back. Hi Josh

Until this point. Apple Pie GIVES NOTHING about proving his own words and his accusation about DICTATION THEORY on the HISTORICAL RECORD side. Talking about historical record is not talking about OPPINION.

His argument has been detailed and reference material noted. Instead of trying to kill the messenger make your counter-argument on why borrowing is improbable.
This way readers may see which argument is sound and form knowledgeable opinion. All you are doing is appealing to authority of historical record. You have not yet established any so-called historical record as reliable witness.

First, remember that I gave Apple Pie a big chance to prove about what he said. For example, " earliest fragmented COPIES of the Koran only surfaced 100 years after his supposed life and times".
Do you find something wrong with that? This thread is provided to talk more focus about it.
Then I gave you all my arguments that Apple Pie was wrong. If you want to argue me, please do so. But if you come to the word "BIASED" , then let us talk about the rule of "BIASED" or "UN-BIASED".
That word he said about 100 years is coming from him as a support for his a so called "DICTATED".
So since until now at this second he comes with nothing, that "DICTATED THEORY" he made is BASELESS. It will turn to a wishful thinking.
I think this is rational thinking.

Second. IF you can prove your claim by the HISTORICAL EVIDENCES, it will come more strong and solid. You can't come by claiming this and that but when we ask more you'll say "WHO CARES!!".
The teaching of CHRISTIANITY coming from historical process. Your Bible in your hannd formed through the historical process. That's the fact.
Then how come you make too much complain when we ask your arguments in the eye of historical facts? Don't you think Al-Qur'an formed without historical process?

Apple pie is playing on his side with his "DICTATE THEORY", where he accused Al-Qur'an was dictated by NT just because he found many similar words inside the two Holy books. But all of this accusation will turn to a WISHFUL THINKING if you can't backed-it up by the history of how that DICTATION happenned. Who did it? When? so many questions from Muslims you have to answer.

So? You are playing on your side,

Which are from argument in this thread from my side?
There are 2 muslims site, but only telling story about how Uthman(ra) faced his death. This information you can find it everywhere.
Which part that you accuse me as "playing on your side" in this thread?

the playing field is level. His analysis has found a pattern where many similar words have formed very familiar message. He is making a case for Quran borrowings. It is wishful thinking to believe how, who and when is needed as supporting evidence.

Who says simillar words are the prove of everything? That claim that thing if we Muslims worship what your worship.
Come to logical thinking. How come a man who learned and read your NT, picked the verses, and put it in Al-Qur'an, and turned out to reject the NT's teachings? Apple Pie doesn't event show who's that man was. Who was the man who put the NT text to Al-Qur'an? Can Apple Pie show us?
Everything need proves. We are not kids.

On top of that, We challenge Apple Pie to talk about the HISTORICAL FACTS about the DICTATED THEORY or BORROWING THEORY.

You can challenge him all you like, but his case is not beholden to your criterion.

I asked him to talk more about his arguments. WHat backed up his claims.
But this thread is to talk about the historical facts. If Apple Pie fail to explain this part, then everybody will see the weakness of his claims.

Apple Pie uses E.W. Lane as his reference. This is a bad start.

Islamic sites recommended Lane's Lexicon

Please look back. this thread is not talking about lexicon. And as the start, Lane was not talkng about what this thread talking about.

Apple Pie's argument is using CHRISTIAN's SIDE point of view.

Again, so, you take the Muslim side, the playing field is level

Which part is Muslims site in this thread?

You'd better understand that this thread is talking about HISTORICAL RECORD

Apple Pie is treating the Quran as historical record.

Hmm... I see . By saying "WHO CARES!!" when we ask about it?
Which part? by picking Greek texts and push as hard as he can to match them with verses in Al-Qur'an? That's not historical record.
Can you imagine how a "misterious man" picked 13 verses of the Revelations and squeezed them into ONE VERSE for Al-Qur'an?
How come a smart guy like you hava a same idea about this.

There is no reason he must accept simply repeated dogmatic assertion of its divine origins.

We are not talking about dogmatic my dear Christian friend. We are talking about the historical facts.

We Muslims challenge Apple Pie to talk about "ORIGINALITY" of the Al-Qur'an and Bible in this forum and this discission must go to the borrowing theory historical facts.

I have no idea what you are trying to say.

Who cares !! ...just kidding.

On top of that, We challenge Apple Pie to talk about the HISTORICAL FACTS about the DICTATED THEORY or BORROWING THEORY.

Suppose you talk about them? Set aside the demands and present your counter-argument to forum readers.

joseph

Well, I gave my counter arguments already. I'm waiting responses.

Salaam

[Aineo]

Pls open this web:
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ ... N=201.html

Type "ISRAEL" in the seach box.
How many result you find? 100.
So, Israel omitted from day planners doesn't mean it is not admitted.
Prove me that UNESCO is a BIASED organization.

Salaam

What do day planners have to do with this discussion?

I see you did not respond to my question on page one.

From the U.N. site:

People: This manuscript is the earliest extant written version of the Koran reviewed to Prophet Muhammed. It is specially associated with the third Caliph Othman, who ordered its compilation, who was assassinated while reading it.

Compiled from what? Neither one of your sites disproves what Apple pie has posted.

Has this manuscript been dated scientifically or are you simply appealing to some long held tradition?

[Apple Pie]

Apple Pie uses E.W. Lane as his reference. This is a bad start.

Bad start for you…that is….

Can Cristians make fair judgement? I believe they can.

Its Christians…and yes, we can, and we do…

Please keep in your mind, that I did not start my argument by using MUSLIMS OPPINION.

You could have fooled us.

While, Apple Pie's argument is using CHRISTIAN's SIDE point of view, and none of them talk about HISTORICAL INFORMATION.

Please inform us exactly how using sura 43 (a chapter from your very own book of faith) is emanating from the “Christian side” of things….?

Further, Joseph already correctly observed that the Koran is being used as a “historical” record against your so-called argument.

If you cannot trust the historicity of your own book of faith, then what can you trust?

You'd better understand that this thread is talking about HISTORICAL RECORD, not about "WHAT CHRISTIAN THINK or MUSLIMS THINK".

We already understand this.

What is taking you so long?

WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT EXEGESIS OR LEXICON ETC also.

If you don’t like our references, then why did you state this in your opening post of this thread…?

Mature discussion, Solid references - from anywhere you can find.

Get a grip.

Until this point. Apple Pie GIVES NOTHING about proving his own words and his accusation about DICTATION THEORY on the HISTORICAL RECORD side.

To back up your statement you would have to disprove what we stated.

It is clear that you cannot do this.

Hence, you have no leg to stand on……again….

Talking about historical record is not talking about OPPINION.

When are you going to practice what you preach?

Or….is it more fun to talk endlessly about excuses why things cannot be as they are…?

If you can find historical record made my Christian Author, then please show the forum as long as it shows us the proves about the process of TRANSFERING Bible's text to Al-Qur'an.
But not Christian's OPPINION.

Done.

I challenge Apple Pie to talk about this OBJECTIVE WAY and please do understand about what we are talking about.

Again…what part of sura 43 is escaping your intellect?

Sura 43 tells you point blank that the history of the Koran emanated from the Holy Bible that was translated into Arabic.

This is inescapable.

Your Koran was copied from the Hebrew and Greek Biblical scriptures.

You already turned your head and looked the other way once…are you going to do it yet again…and again…?

Have more respect for your origins.

[fdjohan]

BISMILLAHIRRAHMAANIRRAHIIM
====================
Greetings folks
I got plenty of time now.
Hi aineo

Pls open this web:
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ ... N=201.html

Type "ISRAEL" in the seach box.
How many result you find? 100.
So, Israel omitted from day planners doesn't mean it is not admitted.
Prove me that UNESCO is a BIASED organization.

Salaam

What do day planners have to do with this discussion?

I revisit first page. I can't see when I talked about day planners.
Joseph comes with it. Not me. So you better talk to him

I see you did not respond to my question on page one.

You come with the word BIASED or UNBIASED.
How come this discussion will continue if 2 of us keep claiming each other part as BIASED. I have 2 logical questions about it. So please response.

From the U.N. site:

People: This manuscript is the earliest extant written version of the Koran reviewed to Prophet Muhammed. It is specially associated with the third Caliph Othman, who ordered its compilation, who was assassinated while reading it.

Compiled from what? Neither one of your sites disproves what Apple pie has posted.Has this manuscript been dated scientifically or are you simply appealing to some long held tradition

Those manuscripts being nominated as MEMORY OF THE WORLD PROGRAMME by UNESCO are pass through forensic examination.

3. Documents that include colours, such as illuminated manuscripts and maps, and items that may require forensic type examination require full-colour digitisation.

(MEMORY OF THE WORLD PROGRAMME GENERAL GUIDELINES TO SAFEGUARD DOCUMENTARY HERITAGE
Page : 63
Prepared for UNESCO, on behalf of IFLA, by Stephen Foster and Roslyn Russel, Australian Heritage Projects Jan Lyall, National Library of Australia
Duncan Marshall)

Salaam

[fdjohan]

BISMILLAHIRRAHMAANIRRAHIIM
====================
Peace Apple Pie

Apple Pie uses E.W. Lane as his reference. This is a bad start.

Bad start for you…that is….

No Apple Pie.

First, I gave you a chance to explain to us that your claim as a so called "Dictated theory" made up base on historical facts or record.
That E.W. Lane words from you was not talking about it.

Second, I am not starting with MUSLIMS writing. But with neutral sources.
There are no proves UNESCO working in Muslims side.

That's why I call a bad start. Can you start something with neutral sources?

Can Cristians make fair judgement? I believe they can.

Its Christians

…and yes, we can, and we do…

Ow..thankGodness

Please keep in your mind, that I did not start my argument by using MUSLIMS OPPINION.

You could have fooled us.

By what? explanation please.

While, Apple Pie's argument is using CHRISTIAN's SIDE point of view, and none of them talk about HISTORICAL INFORMATION.

Please inform us exactly how using sura 43 (a chapter from your very own book of faith) is emanating from the “Christian side” of things….?

Is that related to historical evidences?

Further, Joseph already correctly observed that the Koran is being used as a “historical” record against your so-called argument.

If you cannot trust the historicity of your own book of faith, then what can you trust?

Gosh, I have to explain again
What is that you call historical evidences? by playin' MATCHING words between 2 books? I don't think so. Where is the sound of history for that?
I just don't understand why a smart guy like Joseph call that as historical.
Shall we discuss more about the word "HISTORICAL " now?

You'd better understand that this thread is talking about HISTORICAL RECORD, not about "WHAT CHRISTIAN THINK or MUSLIMS THINK".

We already understand this.

Good. But you start with E.W.Lane and his view.

What is taking you so long?

So long what? I don't understand.

WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT EXEGESIS OR LEXICON ETC also.

If you don’t like our references, then why did you state this in your opening post of this thread…?

Mature discussion, Solid references - from anywhere you can find.

Get a grip.

Yes. Solid references - from anywhere you can find --about everything related to what this thread talking about .

Sorry I use your big words. I don't think that polite isn't it?

Until this point. Apple Pie GIVES NOTHING about proving his own words and his accusation about DICTATION THEORY on the HISTORICAL RECORD side.

To back up your statement you would have to disprove what we stated.

It is clear that you cannot do this.

Hence, you have no leg to stand on……again….

can you back up your claim by historical evidences or not?

Talking about historical record is not talking about OPPINION.

When are you going to practice what you preach?

Or….is it more fun to talk endlessly about excuses why things cannot be as they are…?

Why are you so hot when we want more of your explanation. If you can explain, well just go ahead and do it.
Do you think we'll just go SILENT when you attack our beloved Holy book?

If you can find historical record made my Christian Author, then please show the forum as long as it shows us the proves about the process of TRANSFERING Bible's text to Al-Qur'an.
But not Christian's OPPINION.

Done.

Which part is done?

I challenge Apple Pie to talk about this OBJECTIVE WAY and please do understand about what we are talking about.

Again…what part of sura 43 is escaping your intellect?

We are not talking about verses...OMG
Why is it so difficult to understand?

Sura 43 tells you point blank that the history of the Koran emanated from the Holy Bible that was translated into Arabic.

This is inescapable.

Your Koran was copied from the Hebrew and Greek Biblical scriptures.

You already turned your head and looked the other way once…are you going to do it yet again…and again…?

Have more respect for your origins.

This is not a thread about it. Please make a new thread, and inshaALLAH i will come.

So now, are you gonna say that :
"I cannot back up my "DICTATED" claims from historical evidences"?

Salaam

[Aineo]

Those manuscripts being nominated as MEMORY OF THE WORLD PROGRAMME by UNESCO are pass through forensic examination.

3. Documents that include colours, such as illuminated manuscripts and maps, and items that may require forensic type examination require full-colour digitisation.

(MEMORY OF THE WORLD PROGRAMME GENERAL GUIDELINES TO SAFEGUARD DOCUMENTARY HERITAGE
Page : 63
Prepared for UNESCO, on behalf of IFLA, by Stephen Foster and Roslyn Russel, Australian Heritage Projects Jan Lyall, National Library of Australia
Duncan Marshall)

Salaam

Okay, so lets see the results of the forensic examination including carbon dating or how the manuscript was dated.

[Joseph]

First, remember that I gave Apple Pie a big chance to prove about what he said. For example, " earliest fragmented COPIES of the Koran only surfaced 100 years after his supposed life and times". Do you find something wrong with that? This thread is provided to talk more focus about it.

He is applying the widely held judgment of scholars, both Muslim and secular scholar, that not a single extant manuscript of Quran is dated earlier than 150 years after Mohammed's death. If you do not accept the verdict of scholars, this would not make it a problem for Apple Pie's case. It has been noted here your belief the Samarqand codex was Uthmans personal Quran is traditional, not reality. If you want to make the case the time period between the developed Quran and Mohammed was too short for borrowing to have occurred then submit more evidence than tradition.

Second. IF you can prove your claim by the HISTORICAL EVIDENCES, it will come more strong and solid. You can't come by claiming this and that but when we ask more you'll say "WHO CARES!!".

What is this historical evidence you keep taking about? If you have it, use it in your argument to disprove borrowing.

The teaching of CHRISTIANITY coming from historical process. Your Bible in your hannd formed through the historical process. That's the fact. Then how come you make too much complain when we ask your arguments in the eye of historical facts? Don't you think Al-Qur'an formed without historical process?

Christians know the Bible has a history, we do not make the claim it fell out of the sky. Christians complain when Muslims what to impose their criterion on the Bible then they become upset (like you are) when the Quran is subjected to analysis. The development of Quran is exactly what Apple Pie speaking on.

Which are from argument in this thread from my side? There are 2 muslims site, but only telling story about how Uthman(ra) faced his death. This information you can find it everywhere. Which part that you accuse me as "playing on your side" in this thread?

You do not use any information except for what supports your agenda. And just because anywhere you can find information on UFO's doesn't mean they exist. Yes sir, what a prince you are and I just fell off the turnip truck.

Who says similar words are the prove of everything? That claim that thing if we Muslims worship what your worship. Come to logical thinking. How come a man who learned and read your NT, picked the verses, and put it in Al-Qur'an, and turned out to reject the NT's teachings? Apple Pie doesn't event show who's that man was. Who was the man who put the NT text to Al-Qur'an? Can Apple Pie show us? Everything need proves. We are not kids.

No we are not children so quit making arguments(?) that would insult even the intelligence of a child. Your demands the perpetrator be indentified, his motives and character be explained before plagiarizing can be proven, is stonewalling, nothing more. However you need look no further than Islam's hero, Dr. Maurice Bucaille, for example of man without conviction.

Please look back. this thread is not talking about lexicon. And as the start, Lane was not talking about what this thread talking about.

Neither is Old English Lexicon talking about Shakespeare but nevertheless a tool for interpreting his works. You've made no point here.

Which part is Muslims site in this thread?

I said, side, not site. And if you meant to say, side, then you have no credibility whatsoever

Hmm... I see. By saying "WHO CARES!!" when we ask about it? Which part? by picking Greek texts and push as hard as he can to match them with verses in Al-Qur'an?

That is correct, who cares. You cannot bring any person from that era for trial and punishment. He or they are now nothing but dust. In your judgment Apple Pie is pushing the interpretation, but your judgment is not the only one which matter. The extent of your argument is imposing fictional conditions and mythical historical evidence on Apple Pie's case.

Can you imagine how a "misterious man" picked 13 verses of the Revelations and squeezed them into ONE VERSE for Al-Qur'an? How come a smart guy like you hava a same idea about this.

It would helpful to keep track of things you have said and what Muslims say about Quran and Arabic language; In reply to Newseed, the sliminess of Quran is a hallmark, in reply to me, you claimed the entire Bible (Torah and Injil) is summarized in Quran. Muslims want people to believe Arabic is magically language to translate the word sense in another language would take an entire page or pages of words (much like you did on matter of Holiness). Not least of all, the wonderful brevity of Quran. Of course, all this magic suddenly disappears when they are effectively used against Quran.

Well, I gave my counter arguments already. I'm waiting responses.

I believe that you really believe counter argument was made.

joseph

[Joseph]

Where is the sound of history for that? I just don't understand why a smart guy like Joseph call that as historical.

Either you truly do not understand the gist of what is being said or are deliberately being an obstructionist. I do not pride myself an intellect or logician nor do I wish to be one. I am only of average intelligence, but average intelligence is enough to ascertain the premises of most arguments. Only in your head was mention of my name equated with evidence. Attempting to distract readers is no way to defend your faith. Make your argument on why Apple Pie cannot use the Quran as historical record.

Gosh, I have to explain again, What is that you call historical evidences? by playin' MATCHING words between 2 books? I don't think so.

Examining a major publication and comparing it with other publications for borrowing of ideas is fact of life. Explain yourself again? That would imply you have previously given an explanation of just what is historical evidence: Only in your mind.

Shall we discuss more about the word "HISTORICAL " now?

This may be possible if you begin discussing what you always suggest, but never do. You authored the topic so you are more than welcome to discuss what historical means.

joseph

[fdjohan]

Those manuscripts being nominated as MEMORY OF THE WORLD PROGRAMME by UNESCO are pass through forensic examination.

3. Documents that include colours, such as illuminated manuscripts and maps, and items that may require forensic type examination require full-colour digitisation.

(MEMORY OF THE WORLD PROGRAMME GENERAL GUIDELINES TO SAFEGUARD DOCUMENTARY HERITAGE
Page : 63
Prepared for UNESCO, on behalf of IFLA, by Stephen Foster and Roslyn Russel, Australian Heritage Projects Jan Lyall, National Library of Australia
Duncan Marshall)

Salaam

Okay, so lets see the results of the forensic examination including carbon dating or how the manuscript was dated.

Wait Aineo, where is your answer about the BIASED-UN-BIASED thing?
It's your turn to response.

Salaam

[Aineo]

For the purposes of this thread UNESCO is not a biased organization, which is not to say that the UN is not unbiased. Political pressure can be used on any organization whose purpose is political.

Now, where is the forensic evidence that attests to the age of your manuscript?

[fdjohan]

BISMILLAHIRRAHMAANIRRAHIIM
======================

First, remember that I gave Apple Pie a big chance to prove about what he said. For example, " earliest fragmented COPIES of the Koran only surfaced 100 years after his supposed life and times". Do you find something wrong with that? This thread is provided to talk more focus about it.

He is applying the widely held judgment of scholars, both Muslim and secular scholar, that not a single extant manuscript of Quran is dated earlier than 150 years after Mohammed's death. If you do not accept the verdict of scholars, this would not make it a problem for Apple Pie's case. It has been noted here your belief the Samarqand codex was Uthmans personal Quran is traditional, not reality. If you want to make the case the time period between the developed Quran and Mohammed was too short for borrowing to have occurred then submit more evidence than tradition.

You challenge me to talk about that. ok. Now tell me your rule of discussion.

Second. IF you can prove your claim by the HISTORICAL EVIDENCES, it will come more strong and solid. You can't come by claiming this and that but when we ask more you'll say "WHO CARES!!".

What is this historical evidence you keep taking about? If you have it, use it in your argument to disprove borrowing.

why is it so difficult to understand?
1. The evidences of the Prophet(saw) read NT.
2. He doesn't believe the Prophet wrote it. OK. Then he has to tell who was the misterious man that put the NT to Al-Qur'an. We need evidences.
3. The proves of the DICTATION process. How it happenned.

WE Muslims demand that explanation and we have right to ask.

The teaching of CHRISTIANITY coming from historical process. Your Bible in your hannd formed through the historical process. That's the fact. Then how come you make too much complain when we ask your arguments in the eye of historical facts? Don't you think Al-Qur'an formed without historical process?

Christians know the Bible has a history, we do not make the claim it fell out of the sky.

Then why do you make so much complain if we want explanation from the historical side?

Christians complain when Muslims what to impose their criterion on the Bible then they become upset (like you are) when the Quran is subjected to analysis. The development of Quran is exactly what Apple Pie speaking on.

Do you all see Apple Pie talking about development? development of what? What is the term exactly that you mean. This discussion is not finish yet. You cannot see clearly what the thing called EXACTLY josh.

Which are from argument in this thread from my side? There are 2 muslims site, but only telling story about how Uthman(ra) faced his death. This information you can find it everywhere. Which part that you accuse me as "playing on your side" in this thread?

You do not use any information except for what supports your agenda. And just because anywhere you can find information on UFO's doesn't mean they exist. Yes sir, what a prince you are and I just fell off the turnip truck.

And why don't you make the same complain to your Christian friends in this thread josh? this one nothing but just to show us how difficult to find a Christian with a fair judgement.

Who says similar words are the prove of everything? That claim that thing if we Muslims worship what your worship. Come to logical thinking. How come a man who learned and read your NT, picked the verses, and put it in Al-Qur'an, and turned out to reject the NT's teachings? Apple Pie doesn't event show who's that man was. Who was the man who put the NT text to Al-Qur'an? Can Apple Pie show us? Everything need proves. We are not kids.

No we are not children so quit making arguments(?) that would insult even the intelligence of a child.

So if you are mature, backed up your accusation. A kid will do anything without even feeling guilty. Am I wrong josh?

Your demands the perpetrator be indentified, his motives and character be explained before plagiarizing can be proven, is stonewalling, nothing more. However you need look no further than Islam's hero, Dr. Maurice Bucaille, for example of man without conviction.

Ok then, bring that Maurice Bucaille together with you josh.

Please look back. this thread is not talking about lexicon. And as the start, Lane was not talking about what this thread talking about.

Neither is Old English Lexicon talking about Shakespeare but nevertheless a tool for interpreting his works. You've made no point here.

Ups I made a big point. I can show people in this forum how DICTATED THEORY turned to a cartoon humour.

Which part is Muslims site in this thread?

I said, side, not site. And if you meant to say, side, then you have no credibility whatsoever

Ok I repeat "Which part is Muslims SIDE in this thread?"

Hmm... I see. By saying "WHO CARES!!" when we ask about it? Which part? by picking Greek texts and push as hard as he can to match them with verses in Al-Qur'an?

That is correct, who cares. You cannot bring any person from that era for trial and punishment. He or they are now nothing but dust. In your judgment Apple Pie is pushing the interpretation, but your judgment is not the only one which matter. The extent of your argument is imposing fictional conditions and mythical historical evidence on Apple Pie's case.

Well, so far he fails to explain the his claim in the eye of historical evidences.

Can you imagine how a "misterious man" picked 13 verses of the Revelations and squeezed them into ONE VERSE for Al-Qur'an? How come a smart guy like you hava a same idea about this.

It would helpful to keep track of things you have said and what Muslims say about Quran and Arabic language; In reply to Newseed, the sliminess of Quran is a hallmark, in reply to me, you claimed the entire Bible (Torah and Injil) is summarized in Quran. Muslims want people to believe Arabic is magically language to translate the word sense in another language would take an entire page or pages of words (much like you did on matter of Holiness). Not least of all, the wonderful brevity of Quran. Of course, all this magic suddenly disappears when they are effectively used against Quran.

You talk too long but nothing about thing thing called LOGIC.
Hei man, We got brain dude. don't push people to eat your illogical thinking and accusation.
Imagine !! a misterious man (Apple Pie failed to indicate) squeezed 13 verses of Revelation to just one short arabic word.
That's just not logic.

Well, I gave my counter arguments already. I'm waiting responses.

I believe that you really believe counter argument was made.

I see nothing yet.

Salaam

[fdjohan]

Wait Aineo. I am not satisfied for you answer. I need fair discussion.

For the purposes of this thread UNESCO is not a biased organization, which is not to say that the UN is not unbiased. Political pressure can be used on any organization whose purpose is political.

Prove to me that UNESCO put that manuscript as a nomination base on POLITICAL PRESSURE

Now, where is the forensic evidence that attests to the age of your manuscript?

We will talk about it after you explain the question above.
Actually you didn't answer me anything:

My question:

1. How do you judge or determine BIASED or UNBIASED the information between debate.org.uk / sullivan-county.com and UNO / UNESCO?

2. Have you ever found the BIASED information from UNESCO since it was formed? Tell me which information and when.

3. Prove to me that UNESCO put that manuscript as a nomination base on POLITICAL PRESSURE

Fair play my friend. Answer that.

Salaam

[Joseph]

DELETED POST

[Aineo]

fdjohan, prove that the manuscript you are appealing to is as old as you maintian it is with forensic scientific proof. Now, if you cannot furnish forensic proof of your allegation then just say so.

[fdjohan]

You talk too long but nothing about thing thing called LOGIC. Hei man, We got brain dude. don't push people to eat your illogical thinking and accusation. Imagine !! a misterious man (Apple Pie failed to indicate) squeezed 13 verses of Revelation to just one short arabic word. That's just not logic.

Getting rattled, aren't you? You thought it would be easy to chase everyone off the board and stifle any negative discussion about Islam by just shooting off your mouth.

You are talking about your self right?

Code: Select all

 Only defense you have left is claiming to have a brain. [i]Prove to me[/i] you have a brain. 

Not to be follower of people that can't think logic proves me I have brain.
How about you?

[fdjohan]

fdjohan, prove that the manuscript you are appealing to is as old as you maintian it is with forensic scientific proof. Now, if you cannot furnish forensic proof of your allegation then just say so.

I am ready for my answer don't worry.
This is your turn to take responsibility to answer my 3 questions. Those are coming from your own comments. Don't play by merely your own side.

Salaam

[Aineo]

fdjohan, prove that the manuscript you are appealing to is as old as you maintian it is with forensic scientific proof. Now, if you cannot furnish forensic proof of your allegation then just say so.

I am ready for my answer don't worry.
This is your turn to take responsibility to answer my 3 questions. Those are coming from your own comments. Don't play by merely your own side.

Salaam

The U.N. is biased since while supposedly enforcing the oil for aid program in Iraq it in fact helped bypass its own sanctions. Any person who has followed the political mechanizations of the U.N. know it is a biased organization.

Now, if you have your answer post it.

[Joseph]

DELETED POST

[Joseph]

... Only defense you have left is claiming to have a brain. Prove to me you have a brain.

I regret making the comment, it is withdrawn.

joseoh

[fdjohan]

BISMILLAHIRRAHMAANIRRAHIIM
=====================
Hi folks sorry I have to finish my work first.
Hi Aineo

fdjohan, prove that the manuscript you are appealing to is as old as you maintian it is with forensic scientific proof. Now, if you cannot furnish forensic proof of your allegation then just say so.

I am ready for my answer don't worry.
This is your turn to take responsibility to answer my 3 questions. Those are coming from your own comments. Don't play by merely your own side.

Salaam

The U.N. is biased since while supposedly enforcing the oil for aid program in Iraq it in fact helped bypass its own sanctions. Any person who has followed the political mechanizations of the U.N. know it is a biased organization.

Now, if you have your answer post it.

You have to show to forum the LINK or URL about that news you said. "Merely TALK" is not accepted here.
Until now, You have no TEETH to CLAIM UNESCO as a BIASED organization. You have no prove, you have no evidence, you look confuse to defense your own comment.
If you can't answer these questions, you are defeated Aineo.

You have no 4 Un ANSWERED Questions

1. How do you judge or determine BIASED or UNBIASED the information between debate.org.uk / sullivan-county.com and UNO / UNESCO?

UN-ANSWERED!!

2. Have you ever found the BIASED information from UNESCO since it was formed? Tell me which information and when.

UN-ANSWERED!!

3. Prove to me that UNESCO put that manuscript as a nomination base on POLITICAL PRESSURE

UN-ANSWERED!!

4. SHOW TO FORUM the URL or links about this news you gave us (we will see if this one is JUST your OPPINION)
"The U.N. is biased since while supposedly enforcing the oil for aid program in Iraq it in fact helped bypass its own sanctions. Any person who has followed the political mechanizations of the U.N. know it is a biased organization."
======================================

Still about Memory of the World Programme.

Aineo talked about BRITISH LIBRARY. And you people have to know that BRITISH LIBRARY acknowledge and one of the SUPPORTER of UNESCO Memory of the World Programme.

1. Find it in British Library Wesite:
http://www.bl.uk/about/policies/endange ... hreat.html

“Documentary heritage reflects the diversity of languages, peoples and cultures. It is the mirror of the world and its memory. But this memory is fragile. Every day, irreplaceable parts of this memory disappear for ever.” UNESCO Memory of the World Programme.

2. IFLA = International Federation of Library Associations, is one of the consultant of International Advisory Committee (for Memory of the World Programme).
And you have to know that IFLA Founded in Edinburgh in September 1927 during the International Congress of Libraries (the 50th Anniversary Conference of the British Library Association),
============================================
SO, IF AINEO CLAIMS THIS "MEMORY OF THE WORLD PROGRAMME" AS BIASED, BRITISH LIBRARY WILL BE THE PART OF THIS BIASED ACTIVITY.
=============================================
MUSHAF OF OTHMAN WAS SELECTED AS PART OF "WORLD MEMORY PROGRAMME" as documentary heritage.
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/0 ... 31585e.pdf

Memory of the World Through UNESCO’s Memory of the World rogramme, an international advisory committee maintains a registry to protect and
digitize documentary heritage of universal value. Priceless pieces include the Schubert Collection of the Vienna City Library, the oldest written version of the Koran, known as the Mushaf of Othman, as well as the most comprehensive collection of Chinese traditional music.
============================================

To be selected as part of "WORLD MEMORY PROGRAMME", must passed through CRITERIAS.
http://www.unesco.org/webworld/mdm/admi ... OW_FIN.PDF.

5.4
SELECTION ASSESSMENT
5.4.1 Nominations are to be assessed for the Memory of the World Register by the International Advisory Committee against the Selection Criteria for the Register.

Under tight supervision of the EXPERTS and knowlegable about it

5.4.2 The International Advisory Committee shall ensure that registration decisions are made with due regard to appropriate expertise or knowledge about the values of nominated documentary heritage.

5.4.3 A key part of the process to assess any nomination is a contextual assessment of comparable documentary heritage. Memory of the Region/Nation Registers, where they exist, should provide a basis for such contextual assessments.

To be selected, International Advisory Committee must consult the relevant organization.

5.4.4 In reaching a decision, the International Advisory Committee may seek the views of any person or organization with expertise or knowledge about the values of nominated documentary heritage. In particular, this may include the Commissions on Preservation and Access (American and European), FIAF, FIAT/IFTA, FID, IAML, IASA, ICA, ICCROM, ICOM, IFLA, IIC and other relevant organizations.

===================================
Explaination:
FIAF = The International Federation of Film Archives (FIAF)
http://www.fiafnet.org/uk/

FIAT/IFTA = International Federation of Television Archives
http://www.fiatifta.org/

FID = The International Federation for information and Documentation

IAML = International Association of Music Libraries, Archives and Documentation Centres
http://www.iaml.info/council_minutes_index.php

IASA = The International Association of Sound and Audiovisual Archives
http://www.iasa-web.org/

ICA = International Council on Archives
http://www.ica.org/

ICCROM = International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property

http://www.iccrom.org/


ICOM = International Council of Museum
http://icom.museum/


IFLA = International Federation of Library Associations
http://www.ifla.org/

About IFLA
Founded in Edinburgh in September 1927 during the International Congress of Libraries (the 50th Anniversary Conference of the British Library Association), IFLA <www.ifla.org> was established as a small association of mainly national library associations and academic libraries. Today, IFLA's purpose is to promote international understanding, cooperation, discussion, research and development in all fields of library activity, including bibliography, information services and the education of personnel, and provide a body through which librarianship can be represented in matters of international interest.

IIC = The International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works
http://www.iiconservation.org/info/info.php
===================================
MUSHAF OF OTHMAN WAS SELECTED BECAUSE IT WAS PASSED THROUGH THE CRITERIAS, UNDER THE EXAMINATION OF EXPERTS, INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF MUSEUM AND INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF LIBRARY ASSOCIATIONS (which is include BRITISH LIBRARY).
=================
Aineo used British Library as his first argument against UNESCO and their "WORLD MEMORY PROGRAMME", which is selected "Mushaf of Uthman" as one part of it. He claimed UNESCO as BIASED.
Now he knows that British Library SUPPORTS Unesco for this programme.

Conclusion:

1. NOT ONLY UNESCO, BUT BRITISH LIBRARY ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE "MUSHAF OF UTHMAN".

2. AINEO'S CLAIMS AS UNESCO IS BIASED, IS REFUTED.
(proved by a lot of expertise involved).

3. WITHOUT ANY EXAMINTIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT, THE "MUSHAF OF UTHMAN" COULD NOT BE SELECTED.

Salaam

[fdjohan]

ABOUT MEMORY OF THE WORLD PROGRAMME
======================================
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_of_the_World

Memory of the World
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

UNESCO's Memory of the World Programme is an international initiative launched in 1992 in order to guard against collective amnesia calling upon the preservation of the valuable archive holdings and library collections all over the world ensuring their wide dissemination.

The Memory of the World Register lists documentary heritage which has been identified by the International Advisory Committee in its meetings in Tashkent (September 1997), in Vienna (June 1999), in Cheongju City (June 2001), in Gdansk (August 2003) and in Lijiang (June 2005) and endorsed by the Director-General of UNESCO as corresponding to the selection criteria for world significance.

Since 2005 UNESCO also presents the Jikji prize to further promote the objectives of the Memory of the World Programme.

The list of documentary heritage consist of the following objects:

Uzbekistan
Holy Koran Mushaf of Othman (1997)
The Muslim Board of Uzbekistan, Tashkent

Collection of the Al-Biruni Institute of Oriental Studies (1997)
Academy of Sciences, Tashkent

===========

[Aineo]

fdjohan, I can search the Internet and find a whole lot more to back up the authenticity of the Bible as well as the scientific forensic evidence to prove the assigned dates of the manuscripts than you can for the Qur'an. All you have done is show that various organizations have not questioned the dating of your manuscript.

So what you have shown me is you cannot substantiate the age of your manuscript and have chosen to overload this thread with rhetoric, not facts.

[fdjohan]

BISMILLAHIRRAHMAANIRRAHIIM
========================

fdjohan, I can search the Internet and find a whole lot more to back up the authenticity of the Bible as well as the scientific forensic evidence to prove the assigned dates of the manuscripts than you can for the Qur'an. All you have done is show that various organizations have not questioned the dating of your manuscript.

I think this one is clear enough.

5.4.2 The International Advisory Committee shall ensure that registration decisions are made with due regard to appropriate expertise or knowledge about the values of nominated documentary heritage.

The Mushaf of Othman selected by people with appropriate expertise or knowledge about the values of nominated documentary heritage.

I think you know what the word EXPERT mean.
Not just that, the Museum organization and Library organization also INVOLVED. There is no reason sayin' "have not questioned the dating of your manuscript" because the Mushaf selected base on their desicion.

So what you have shown me is you cannot substantiate the age of your manuscript and have chosen to overload this thread with rhetoric, not facts.

I just doubt you understand about the word fact in this case.
IFLA partnered British Library work together with UNESCO for this Memory world Programme and acknowledge the Mushaf Uthman you say as NOT a FACT.
You pick something about Britsh library saying about the oldest Qur'an you say as the fact.
How come one Library desicion more acceptable than a GROUP of library? so you cofuse about the word FACT.

How you judge between FACT and not a FACT?
Just by saying: " "have not questioned the dating of your manuscript" we can say you are confuse about the word FACT.
Without making examination about the DATING of manuscript, the Mushaf won't be selected. Unesco will publish the mushaf in CDROM format to people all over that world as a world heritage. And for this they do not resposible about the dating of manuscript?
I don't think so.

Salaam
_________________

[unity]

I delete this post as its entire text has been plagiarized from Zakir Nike

If you want to dialoge then better starting interacting with the replies bro; and refrain from simply posting website material.

You are also breaking the rules by not providing a link to the source, the name of the author and publishers, I guess in this case the name of the website.

This will be the first warning bro.

I have been willing to debate you several times here, but you simply seem to run away.

Moderator Kai Hagbard

[Kai Hagbard]

Now are you going to respond to the replies we have given you, on several of the threads.

[unity]

This is probably the fourth time I am approaching you about not breaking the rules of this forum.

In this case rule 6; I suggest that you read the forum rules before you do any more posting.

I am therefore deleting the part of this post which you have posted on another thread, and which has been plagiarized from Zakir Naik,


This is the second warning I will give you about, dialoging and interacting with us on the matter and not simply post plagiarized material, which is banned on this forum.

This is therefore the second warning. If you continue I need to contact that Administration about having you banned;

I do not wanna do that, as I want to dialoge with you and help you leave Islam (when you discover the truth) and find the true path in Jesus Christ.

I will leave the rest, the unplagiarized part of your post below:

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

Unity wrote:

brothers i have short essay to prove that quran is original and that it is correcting bible on many events with accuracy. a copied book does not correct the source it is copied from





quran can not be corrupted has it has only version unlike bible where no versions or gospel of jesus occurs but bible has only traslations that too numerous in which no two are identical , yet all claiming that each one is true and original


Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from God," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. (2:79)

[Aineo]

I find unity's comments concerning the various translations of the Bible interesting in view of the fact that I have yet to read any translation of the Qur'an that totally agrees with any other translation. Then there are the Muslim leaders that interpret the Qur'an to justify sectarian violence within Islam.

Also unity, I suggest you consider Kai's warnings since I warned you in a PM about your threads, so you have actually received three warnings. You are a heartbeat away from being banned.

[unity]

thankyou for your eagerness for calling me to your side
brother we muslims believe in jesus pbuh practically and his commandments such as not eating pork, shuning alcohal,beliving in one god and many more things.


Abstaining from alcohol
Al-Qur'an 5:90
Proverbs 20:1
Ephesians 5:18

Pork is prohibited
Leviticus 11:7-8
Deuteronomy 14:8
Isaiah 65:2-5


Circumcision
Acts 7:8
John 7:22
Luke 2:21



we are very clear about concept of god alhamdulilah . if following jesus is to be called christianity then we are more christian than many modern day christians.
we believe that god is one and not one in trinity.

God is One

The following verse from the book of Deuteronomy contains an exhortation from Moses (pbuh):

"Shama Israelu Adonai Ila Hayno Adna Ikhad".
It is a Hebrew quotation which means:
"Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord"
[The Bible, Deuteronomy 6:4]


Unity of God in the Book of Isaiah
The following verses are from the Book of Isaiah:

"I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour."
[The Bible, Isaiah 43:11]


"I am Lord, and there is none else, there is no God besides me."
[The Bible, Isaiah 45:5]


"I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me."
[The Bible, Isaiah 46:9]


Old Testament condemns idol worship


Old Testament condemns idol worship in the following verses:

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth

If Christian is a person who follows the teachings of Christ (pbuh) and not one who worships Christ (pbuh). (We are more Christian than the Christians themselves).


Muslim is a person who submits his will to Allah.
Jesus (pbuh) said, "not my will but thy will be done." i.e. Muslim.
John 5:30

many priest and preachers have seen the true light and guidance from god and have accepted relegion of islam that is relegion of jesus and mohammed peace be upon them. the fact is that islam happens to be fastest growing relegion in the world today.my question here is which sword is forcing people to come to relegion of islam today?
the choice is yours to believe in one god or three gods
there is no compulsion in relegion
i love you brother and since i love you brother i have to call you to worship one true lord
thanks



http://islamtomorrow.com/yusuf/
http://www.islamicinvitationcentre.com[/url]

[Aineo]

unity, you keep avoiding direct questions. I asked for proof from the Qur'an that Allah told Muhammad the Bible is corrupt so like a child you post Bible referrences that you think support your thesis while ignoring those Scriptures that do not support your thesis such as:

Deuteronomy 14:24-26
24 And if the distance is so great for you that you are not able to bring the tithe, since the place where the LORD your God chooses to set His name is too far away from you when the LORD your God blesses you, 25 then you shall exchange it for money, and bind the money in your hand and go to the place which the LORD your God chooses. 26 And you may spend the money for whatever your heart desires, for oxen, or sheep, or wine, or strong drink, or whatever your heart desires; and there you shall eat in the presence of the LORD your God and rejoice, you and your household. NAS

God did not prohibit the use of alcohol, He warned against the abuse of alcohol.

The dietary laws applied to the Jews, not gentiles.

Leviticus 11:1-2
11:1 The LORD spoke again to Moses and to Aaron, saying to them, 2 "Speak to the sons of Israel, saying, 'These are the creatures which you may eat from all the animals that are on the earth. NAS

As to circumcision:

Jeremiah 4:4
4 "Circumcise yourselves to the LORD
And remove the foreskins of your heart,
Men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem,
Lest My wrath go forth like fire
And burn with none to quench it,
Because of the evil of your deeds." NAS

What good does circumcision do for any man if that man ignores God's will and teaches others to do the same?

Jeremiah 31:31-40
31 "Behold, days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them, "declares the LORD. 33 "But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days," declares the LORD, "I will put My law within them, and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 "And they shall not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they shall all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them," declares the LORD, "for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more."

35 Thus says the LORD,
Who gives the sun for light by day,
And the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night,
Who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar;
The LORD of hosts is His name:
36 "If this fixed order departs
From before Me," declares the LORD,
"Then the offspring of Israel also shall cease
From being a nation before Me forever."
37 Thus says the LORD,
"If the heavens above can be measured,
And the foundations of the earth searched out below,
Then I will also cast off all the offspring of Israel
For all that they have done," declares the LORD.

38 "Behold, days are coming," declares the LORD, "when the city shall be rebuilt for the LORD from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate. 39 "And the measuring line shall go out farther straight ahead to the hill Gareb; then it will turn to Goah. 40 "And the whole valley of the dead bodies and of the ashes, and all the fields as far as the brook Kidron, to the corner of the Horse Gate toward the east, shall be holy to the LORD; it shall not be plucked up, or overthrown anymore forever." NAS

The New Covenant replaced the Old Covenant of the Law and was instituted on the Day of Pentecost. So when Muslims who claim to follow God work for the destruction of God's people the Jews they defy the God of the Bible who gave us His only begotten son to be the Savior of all who believe and accept by faith God’s predestined plan for the salvation of mankind.

Also Christians do not believe there is more than one God, which is why we see Allah as a figment of Muhammad's or some other man's creation since the god of the Qur'an is not the same as the God of the Bible.

In regard to idol worship, just what do you consider the black stone in the Ka'ba?

[unity]

dear brother, if i can recollect and summarise your post then you may have said that you have been absolved from following OT commandments
let me see what the man jesus pbuh himself says about this matter



Many people in the Gospel asked that very same question
directly to Jesus and let's see what the reply was;


"And behold, one came up to him, saying, "Teacher, what good deed
must I do, to have eternal life?"


"And he said to him, "Why do you ask me about what is good? One
there is who is good. If you would enter life, keep the
commandments." Matthew 19:16-17

Here according to Jesus, to enter Heaven, we follow the
commandments.


why would Jesus mislead this man
if the 'only way to heaven was through the blood of Jesus'?


Was Jesus misleading this man by teaching that Works will open the
Gates of Heaven?


"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for
theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5:10


Here Jesus says that Martyrs will go to Heaven, those who die and
suffer for a good cause will go to Heaven.


Is Jesus again being misleading since all Christians claim that the one
and only way to Heaven is through the blood of Jesus as the church
teaches.


Here again a Lawyer asked the Important Question, How to enter
Heaven;


And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying,
"Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?"


Jesus said "What is written in the law? How do
you read?"


And he answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your
heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all
your mind; and your neighbor as yourself."


And he said to him, "You have answered right; do this, and you will
live." Luke 10:25-28


The lawyer asked the teacher Jesus how to have eternal life and
Jesus replied "Read"... "The Law"..... "Obey the Law" believe in
God and love your neighbor.


Why in front of all these people would Jesus not tell them the
so-called only way that the Christians of today are saying 'no way to heaven except
through the blood of Jesus', why would Jesus contradict today's
Christians?


Are Christians freed from the Law as the modern Christians teach?


"Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and
teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he
who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom
of heaven." Matthew 5:19


Why would Jesus Teach this if he came so that his blood can relax
the Law, why is it when he was on earth, he Taught Not to Relax the
Law? And Those who follow the Laws will be the Highest in
Heaven.


"Not every one who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the
kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in
heaven." Matthew 7:21


Salvation according to some Christians comes from taking Jesus as
your god and accepting the claimed blood sacrifice, while on the
Other Hand, Jesus seems to be saying the Opposite. Why is that?
Aren't Christians supposed to follow the Teachings of Jesus,


As far as Salvation is concerned, Muslims are
following the Teachings of Jesus, why haven't the
Christians started yet ?


"For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother,
and sister, and mother." (Mark 3:35) If Jesus is god, why would he claim that
who ever follows the Commandments would be the brother or
mother of god ? Does god have a mother of brother?


"Jesus said to him, "If you would be perfect, go, sell what you
possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven;
and come, follow me." Matthew 19:21


Giving to directly to the Poor, one of the 5 Pillars of Islam, Jesus is
Teaching Piety to Enter Heaven.


"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a
needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Matthew
19:24


This Verse was very revealing to me, Jesus is repeatedly saying, a
rich man will not enter Heaven.


Some Christians of today claim that Jesus died for all sins, yet Jesus
repeatedly taught that greed will prevent you from entering Heaven.
What about those Christians who are rich? Aren't they saved
according to the 10% collecting church?


Now according to the church and Christians of modern day, 'who ever
believes in the blood of Jesus and accepts Jesus as god, then that is
the only way that person is saved, not through works.


Now let's see if Jesus again contradicts the church;


"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears my word and believes Him
who sent me, has eternal life; he does not come into judgment, but
has passed from death to life." John 5:24


It is Clear that according to Jesus the way to Heaven is to believe in
God (who Sent Jesus) and to hear (follow) the words of Jesus.


Does Jesus want us to believe in his blood Or to believe that he
is from God?


"Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; he who comes to me
shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst. John
6:35


Therefore Jesus is Telling them that if they believe in him (While he
was Alive) that they will receive paradise.


"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the
works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I
go to the Father." John 14:12


Truly, Honestly, I give you my Word Jesus Says: the Human who
does Works as I do (Jesus followed the Laws of Moses) then that
human will follow me to the Father (God).


"Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, "I am the light of the world; he
who follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of
life." John 8:12


What does a light do? it guides, directs, it shows you the Right Path,
A light does not symbolize one to be sacrificed, but instead, one to
Guide.


All Muslims believe in Jesus
"There is not one of the People of the Scripture but will believe in
him before his death, and on the Day of Resurrection he will be a
witness against them" Qur'an 4:159


Therefore I am Puzzled as to why Jesus would name off all these
specific Teachings and Keys to enter Heaven except the one that the
Christians teach (his blood).


According to Jesus, Muslims are blessed and will be in Heaven
because they believe God sent Jesus and they follow works, I pray
that Christians will at least follow the words of Jesus and may "his
teachings" lead them to Truth.


" But those among them who are well-grounded in knowledge, and
the believers, believe in what hath been revealed to thee and what
was revealed before thee: And (especially) those who establish
regular prayer and practise regular charity and believe in Allah
and in the Last Day: To them shall We soon give a great reward."
{Translation of the Holy Qur'an 4:162}


This is not to say that we can work our way into Heaven which is a common misunderstanding of Christians towards Islam.


This is to clarify that we can not Faith our way directly into Heaven which is a common misunderstanding of Christians towards Christianity.


It is said well by Jesus's younger brother and disciple (James) who said;


"Faith without works is Dead" {Jas 2:26}


And then the Truth is confirmed in the Holy Qur'an:


"..But the prayer of those without Faith is nothing but (futile wandering) in (mazes of) error! " {Holy Qur'an 40:50}


"For Him (alone) is prayer in Truth: any others that they call upon besides Him hear them no more than if they were to stretch forth their hands for water to reach their mouths but it reaches them not: for the prayer of those without Faith is in vain." {Holy Qur'an 13:14}

further regarding your question of black stone in kaaba, i think you may know that it is kissed just because our prophet pbuh kissed it and nothing more. kissing a stone or invoking a stone are two different things. many people kiss things like book,does it signfy worshipping the object?
which idolworshipper will ever stand upon the idol itself? no one is the answer.
but you may know that muslims in earlier time used to climb on the top of kaaba which holds black stone and call for prayer(azaan)
so this is a misconception as there are lot many more.
we pray to one god only and it is major sin to invoke anyone else besides ALLAH

by the way you are to follow teachings of christ practically and not just pay lip service. he came for jews and not gentiles.he came to reaffirm teaching of moses pbuh.
the relegion of god was always islam meaning to submit to will of almighty and thereby establishing peace.
all prophets were muslims in real sense.
let us not be confused if you are propagating belief that god is one then why do christians say that god is in trinity ? so how can you be different from hindus who say god comes to earth in form of human for salvation of human beings.
if this was the case what was need to send prophets and messengers such as abraham,david moses peace be upon them all?

thanks

[Aineo]

I see you are either being obtuse or lack a full understanding the Bible. I have already posted that while on this earth Jesus was sent only to the sons of Israel. Now, lets take a closer look at two of the Scriptures you pulled out of context:

Matthew 19:16-22
16 And behold, one came to Him and said, "Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?" 17 And He said to him, "Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments." 18 He said to Him, "Which ones?" And Jesus said, "You shall not commit murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; 19 Honor your father and mother; and You shall love your neighbor as yourself. " 20 The young man said to Him, "All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?" 21 Jesus said to him, "If you wish to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me." 22 But when the young man heard this statement, he went away grieved; for he was one who owned much property. NAS

Jesus only listed 5 of the 10 commandments and added a commandment not found in the 10, "love your neighbor as yourself".

Now lets look at Luke 10.

Luke 10:25-37
25 And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and put Him to the test, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 26 And He said to him, "What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?" 27 And he answered and said, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself." 28 And He said to him, "You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live." 29 But wishing to justify himself, he said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" 30 Jesus replied and said, "A certain man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho; and he fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went off leaving him half dead. 31 "And by chance a certain priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. 32 "And likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 "But a certain Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, 34 and came to him, and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 "And on the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return, I will repay you.' 36 "Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers' hands?" 37 And he said, "The one who showed mercy toward him." And Jesus said to him, "Go and do the same." NAS

If you know anything about the relationship between the Jews and the Samaritans you would understand the significance of what Jesus taught. The Samaritan loved his neighbor who was considered his enemy. So what good work did Jesus praise? It sure was not killing your enemy who was not part of your religious belief or one considered an apostate by Orthodox Jews.

Muslims do not follow the teachings of Jesus. Jesus said:

Matthew 5:43-48

43 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy.' 44 "But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you 45 in order that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 "For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax-gatherers do the same? 47 "And if you greet your brothers only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 "Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. NAS

Do Muslims love their enemies? The answer is a resounding NO! Muslim terrorists routinely kill Muslims and non-Muslims in the name of Muhammad and Islam. If Muslims followed the teachings of Jesus they would not have rioted over some silly cartoons that depicted Muhammad with missles in his turbine. They would have prayed for those who depicted a man (not Allah) as a terrorist.

Now lets take a look at some other things Jesus said that you have chosen to ignore.

Matthew 22:36-40
36 "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" 37 And He said to him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' 38 "This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 "The second is like it, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' 40 "On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets." NAS

When Muslims do not love their neighbors, which includes those who reject Islam they are not following Jesus, they are denying His words. Please note that Jesus said the whole Law and the Prophets depends on only two commandments one of which is not found in the Law.

Now what about eating unclean foods as defined by the Law? Jesus said:

Mark 7:17-23
18 And He said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him; 19 because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated? "(Thus He declared all foods clean.) 20 And He was saying, "That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man. 21 "For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, 22 deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. 23 "All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man." NAS

What did God say about those who maintian the traditional teachings of the Jews?

Isaiah 29:13-14

13 Then the Lord said,

"Because this people draw near with their words
And honor Me with their lip service,
But they remove their hearts far from Me,
And their reverence for Me consists of tradition learned by rote,
14 Therefore behold, I will once again deal marvelously with this people, wondrously marvelous;
And the wisdom of their wise men shall perish,
And the discernment of their discerning men shall be concealed. " NAS

You appeal to keepping laws learned by rote while totally ignoring that what God wills is that all men come to know His only begotten Son Jesus Christ and accept Him as their Lord and Savior, not some man who promoted lying and killing those who reject Islam. You appeal to the Commandments, which includes this one:

Exodus 20:16

16 "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. NAS

Now what did Muhammad teach?

Lying in Islam

Tell me unity since you judge Christianity based on the actions of Christians, why shouldn't Christians judge Islam based on Osama ben Lauden and all those Muslims who promote murder; rape women, girls, and boys; and bomb Mosques?

You are self-deceived if you think you follow the teachings of Jesus Christ and Yehovah.

[unity]

Brother you have quoted some verses and I appreciate that it mentions some of the commandments but I am afraid if that means abrogation of other commandments.

For me as I understand from following verse Jesus pbuh very categorically said
Matthew 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to destroy the Law or the prophets. I have come not to destroy, but to fulfill.”
Instead, he confirmed the teachings preceding him, which was the Law set by Prophet Moses (Peace and blessing be upon him). A guidance that is sanctioned by and is also analogous with that of Islam, having been anchored upon monotheism, its inherent bedrock which happens to be every other prophet's battlecry and message.
Further the verses you have provided clearly and categorically states that Jesus pbuh is not claiming divinity .rather he is pointing to the god in heaven ant himself and he is addressed as teacher and not god almighty.

16 And behold, one came to Him and said, "Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?" 17 And He said to him, "Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.

43 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy.' 44 "But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you 45 in order that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous

Regarding your second misconception that islam does not prescribe good teachings.
If you may read then your misconception may be cleared god willing.
They are as follows:
I. BELIEF IN THE ONENESS OF GOD (ALLAH):
Jesus was very explicit in his words about the “Unity of God” instead of the “Holy Trinity” which he never said nor preached in his lifetime:
1. Matthew 4:10 Then Jesus said to him, “Away with you Satan! it is written:” you shall worship the Lord your God, and him only you shall serve”.
2. Mark 12:29 Jesus answered him. “The first of all the commandments is: Hear O Israel! The Lord our God, the Lord is one”.
3. Isiah 43:10-11 “Before me there was no God formed, nor shall there be after me. I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no savior.”
4. John 17:3 “And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and of Jesus Christ whom you have sent”.
II. GOOD DEEDS:
A. Carrying out Prayer (Prostration):
The only people in the whole world today who pray like Jesus (Peace and blessing be upon him), and all the other prophets are the Muslims:
1. Matthew 26:39 “He (Jesus) went a little farther and fell on his face, and prayed, O my father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will”.
2. Psalm 55:17 “Evening and morning and at noon, I will pray and cry aloud: and He shall hear my voice”.
3. Numbers 20:6 “So Moses and Aaron went from the presence of the assembly to the door of the tabernacle of meeting, and they fell on their faces. And the glory of the Lord appeared to them”.
B. FASTING:
Islam obliges Muslims to fast just as Jesus and the prophets did during their tenure in the world:
1. Matthew 4:2 “And when he (Jesus) had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward hungry”.
2. Exodus 34: 28 “And he (Moses) was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water”.
3. Matthew 6:16 “Moreover when you fast, be not as the hypocrites, with a sad countenance; for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear to men to be fasting. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward”.
C. CHARITY:
Islam obliges Muslims to pay charity, just as Jesus urged his constituents in his time:
1. Matthew 6:3-4 “But when you do a charitable deed, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, that your charitable deed may be in secret; and your father who sees in secret will himself reward you openly.”
D. PILGRIMAGE TO MACA/BACA:
Muslims perform pilgrimage (Hajj) like the prophets before them to the first house of worship (Ka’bah) in Maca, also known as Baca, which was built by Abraham, the father of all the prophets and his son Ishmael.
1. Psalm 84:5-6 “Blessed is the man whose strength is in You, Whose heart is set on pilgrimage. As they pass through the valley of Baca, They make it a spring; the rain also covers it with pools”.
E. GREETINGS:
Muslims greet each other by saying: Peace be with you (As-salam ‘Alaykum), the same way Jesus (Peace and blessing be upon him) greeted people during his ministry on earth:
1. Luke 24:36 “Now as they said these things, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and said to them, “Peace to you”.
2. John 20:19 “Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them, “Peace be with you”.

There are many more things which followers of jesus pbuh should be doing like:

Abstaining from prohibited food
Al-Qur'an 5:5
Al-Qur'an 2:173, 5:3, 6:145, 16:115


Dead meat
Leviticus 17:15
Deuteronomy 14:21


Blood
Genesis 9:4, Leviticus 17:14, Deuteronomy 12:16,
I Samuel 14:33, Acts 15:29


Pork is prohibited
Leviticus 11:7-8
Deuteronomy 14:8
Isaiah 65:2-5


Food on which names beside Allah have been invoked
Acts 15:29; Revelation 2:14


Being Honest in your Business


Helping Neighbours
Al-Qur'an 107:1-7


Abstaining from Backbiting
Al-Qur'an 104:1-3
Al-Qur'an 49:11-12


Obeying and Respecting Parents
Al-Qur'an 17:23, 24


Celibacy or Monasticism is prohibited in Islam
Sahih Bukhari: Vol. 7 Book of Nikah, Chapter No. 3, Hadith No. 4


Loving, being Kind and Just to your Wife
Al-Qur'an 4:19


Abstaining from Adultery
Al-Qur'an 17:32

Dressing Modestly


Al-Qur'an 24:30
Mathew 5:27-28


Al-Qur'an 24:31

) (iii Timothy 2:9 e.g. of Mary
Corinthians 11:5-6

Circumcision
Acts 7:8
John 7:22
Luke 2:21

In short, every Muslim should follow all the Commandments of Allah (swt) and His Messenger Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and abstain from the things they have prohibited.

Regarding your calling mohammad as a liar I will inshaallah post another matter to clear this misconception as well. But here I am producing just a extract of what a Christian historian says about him.
Prophet Muhammad - The Most Influential Man in History
from the book by Michael Hart
The following is from Michael Hart's book and lists Prophet Muhammad as the most influential man in History. A Citadel Press Book, published by Carol Publishing Group
Ranking of the twenty from the list of 100:
1. Prophet Muhammad
2. Isaac Newton
3. Jesus Christ
4. Buddha
5. Confucius
6. St. Paul
7. Ts'ai Lun
8. Johann Gutenberg
9. Christopher Columbus
10. Albert Einstein
11. Karl Marx
12. Louis Pasteur
13. Galileo Galilei
14. Aristotle
15. Lenin
16. Moses
17. Charles Darwin
18. Shih Huang Ti
19. Augustus Caesar
20. Mao Tse-tung

MUHAMMAD, No. 1
The 100, a Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History
by Michael H. Hart
My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels. Of humble origins, Muhammad founded and promulgated one of the world's great religions, and became an immensely effective political leader. Today, thirteen centuries after his death, his influence is still powerful and pervasive. The majority of the persons in this book had the advantage of being born and raised in centers of civilization, highly cultured or politically pivotal nations. Muhammad, however, was born in the year 570, in the city of Mecca, in southern Arabia, at that time a backward area of the world, far from the centers of trade, art, and learning. Orphaned at age six, he was reared in modest surroundings. Islamic tradition tells us that he was illiterate. His economic position improved when, at age twenty-five, he married a wealthy widow. Nevertheless, as he approached forty, there was little outward indication that he was a remarkable person. Most Arabs at that time were pagans, who believed in many gods. There were, however, in Mecca, a small number of Jews and Christians; it was from them no doubt that Muhammad first learned of a single, omnipotent God who ruled the entire universe. When he was forty years old, Muhammad became convinced that this one true God (Allah) was speaking to him, and had chosen him to spread the true faith. For three years, Muhammad preached only to close friends and associates. Then, about 613, he began preaching in public. As he slowly gained converts, the Meccan authorities came to consider him a dangerous nuisance. In 622, fearing for his safety, Muhammad fled to Medina (a city some 200 miles north of Mecca), where he had been offered a position of considerable political power. This flight, called the Hegira, was the turning point of the Prophet's life. In Mecca, he had had few followers. In Medina, he had many more, and he soon acquired an influence that made him a virtual dictator. During the next few years, while Muhammad's following grew rapidly, a series of battles were fought between Medina and Mecca. This was ended in 630 with Muhammad's triumphant return to Mecca as conqueror. The remaining two and one-half years of his life witnessed the rapid conversion of the Arab tribes to the new religion.
When Muhammad died, in 632, he was the effective ruler of all of southern Arabia. The Bedouin tribesmen of Arabia had a reputation as fierce warriors. But their number was small; and plagued by disunity and internecine warfare, they had been no match for the larger armies of the kingdoms in the settled agricultural areas to the north. However, unified by Muhammad for the first time in history, and inspired by their fervent belief in the one true God, these small Arab armies now embarked upon one of the most astonishing series of conquests in human history. To the northeast of Arabia lay the large Neo-Persian Empire of the Sassanids; to the northwest lay the Byzantine, or Eastern Roman Empire, centered in Constantinople. Numerically, the Arabs were no match for their opponents. On the field of battle, though, the inspired Arabs rapidly conquered all of Mesopotamia, Syria, and Palestine. By 642, Egypt had been wrested from the Byzantine Empire, while the Persian armies had been crushed at the key battles of Qadisiya in 637, and Nehavend in 642. But even these enormous conquests, which were made under the leadership of Muhammad's close friends and immediate successors, Ali, Abu Bakr and 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, did not mark the end of the Arab advance. By 711, the Arab armies had swept completely across North Africa to the Atlantic Ocean There they turned north and, crossing the Strait of Gibraltar, overwhelmed the Visigothic kingdom in Spain.
For a while, it must have seemed that the Moslems would overwhelm all of Christian Europe. However, in 732, at the famous Battle of Tours, a Moslem army, which had advanced into the center of France, was at last defeated by the Franks. Nevertheless, in a scant century of fighting, these Bedouin tribesmen, inspired by the word of the Prophet, had carved out an empire stretching from the borders of India to the Atlantic Ocean-the largest empire that the world had yet seen. And everywhere that the armies conquered, large-scale conversion to the new faith eventually followed. Now, not all of these conquests proved permanent. The Persians, though they have remained faithful to the religion of the Prophet, have since regained their independence from the Arabs. And in Spain, more than seven centuries of warfare, finally resulted in the Christians reconquering the entire peninsula. However, Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two cradles of ancient civilization, have remained Moslem, as has the entire coast of North Africa. The new religion, of course, continued to spread, in the intervening centuries, far beyond the borders of the original Moslem conquests. Currently it has tens of millions of adherents in Africa and Central Asia and even more in Pakistan and northern India, and in Indonesia. In Indonesia, the new faith has been a unifying factor. In the Indian subcontinent, however, the conflict between Moslems and Hindus is still a major obstacle to unity.
How, then, is one to assess the overall impact of Muhammad on human history? Like all religions, Islam exerts an enormous influence upon the lives of its followers. It is for this reason that the founders of the world's great religions all figure prominently in this book. Since there are roughly twice as many Christians as Moslems in the world, it may initially seem strange that Muhammad has been ranked higher than Jesus. There are two principal reasons for that decision. First, Muhammad played a far more important role in the development of Islam than Jesus did in the development of Christianity. Although Jesus was responsible for the main ethical and moral precepts of Christianity (insofar as these differed from Judaism), St. Paul was the main developer of Christian theology, its principal proselytizer, and the author of a large portion of the New Testament. Muhammad, however, was responsible for both the theology of Islam and its main ethical and moral principles. In addition, he played the key role in proselytizing the new faith, and in establishing the religious practices of Islam. Moreover, he is the author of the Moslem holy scriptures, the Koran, a collection of certain of Muhammad's insights that he believed had been directly revealed to him by Allah. Most of these utterances were copied more or less faithfully during Muhammad's lifetime and were collected together in authoritative form not long after his death. The Koran therefore, closely represents Muhammad's ideas and teachings and to a considerable extent his exact words. No such detailed compilation of the teachings of Christ has survived. Since the Koran is at least as important to Moslems as the Bible is to Christians, the influence of Muhammad through the medium of the Koran has been enormous. It is probable that the relative influence of Muhammad on Islam has been larger than the combined influence of Jesus Christ and St. Paul on Christianity.
On the purely religious level, then, it seems likely that Muhammad has been as influential in human history as Jesus. Furthermore, Muhammad (unlike Jesus) was a secular as well as a religious leader. In fact, as the driving force behind the Arab conquests, he may well rank as the most influential political leader of all time. Of many important historical events, one might say that they were inevitable and would have occurred even without the particular political leader who guided them. For example, the South American colonies would probably have won their independence from Spain even if Simon Bolivar had never lived. But this cannot be said of the Arab conquests. Nothing similar had occurred before Muhammad, and there is no reason to believe that the conquests would have been achieved without him. The only comparable conquests in human history are those of the Mongols in the thirteenth century, which were primarily due to the influence of Genghis Khan. These conquests, however, though more extensive than those of the Arabs, did not prove permanent, and today the only areas occupied by the Mongols are those that they held prior to the time of Genghis Khan. It is far different with the conquests of the Arabs. From Iraq to Morocco, there extends a whole chain of Moslem nations united not merely by their faith in Islam, but also by their Arabic language, history, and culture.
The centrality of the Koran in the Moslem religion and the fact that it is written in Arabic have probably prevented the Arab language from breaking up into mutually unintelligible dialects, which might otherwise have occurred in the intervening thirteen centuries. Differences and divisions between these Arab states exist, of course, and they are considerable, but the partial disunity should not blind us to the important elements of unity that have continued to exist. For instance, neither Iran nor Indonesia, both oil-producing states and both Islamic in religion joined in the oil embargo of the winter of 1973-74. It is no coincidence that all of the Arab states, and only the Arab states, participated in the embargo. We see, then, that the Arab conquests of the seventh century have continued to play an important role in human history, down to the present day. It is this unparalleled combination of secular and religious influence which I feel entitles Muhammad to be considered the most influential single figure in human history.

The following is from Michael Hart's book and lists Prophet Muhammad as the most influential man in History. A Citadel Press Book, published by Carol Publishing Group
Ranking, list of 100 most influential persons in history:
1. Prophet Muhammad
2. Isaac Newton
3. Jesus Christ
4. Buddha
5. Confucius
6. St. Paul
7. Ts'ai Lun
8. Johann Gutenberg
9. Christopher Columbus
10. Albert Einstein
11. Karl Marx
12. Louis Pasteur
13. Galileo Galilei
14. Aristotle
15. Lenin
16. Moses
17. Charles Darwin
18. Shih Huang Ti
19. Augustus Caesar
20. Mao Tse-tung
21. Genghis Khan
22. Euclid
23. Martin Luther
24. Nicolaus Copernicus
25. James Watt
26. Constantine the Great
27. George Washington
28. Michael Faraday
29. James Clerk Maxwell
30. Orville Wright and Wilbur Wright
31. Antoine Laurent Lavoisier
32. Sigmund Freud
33. Alexander the Great
34. Napoleon Bonaparte
35. Adolf Hitler
36. William Shakespeare
37. Adam Smith
38. Thomas Edison
39. Anthony van Leeuwenhoek
40. Plato
41. Guglielmo Marconi
42. Ludwig van Beethoven
43. Werner Heisenberb
44. Alexander Graham Bell
45. Alexander Fleming
46. Simon Bolivar
47. Oliver Cromwell
48. John Locke
49. Michelangelo
50. Pope Urban II
51. Umar ibn al-Khattab
52. Asoka
53. St. Augustine
54. Max Planck
55. John Calvin
56. William T.G. Morton
57. William Harvey
58. Antoine Henri Becquerel
59. Gregor Mendel
60. Joseph Lister
61. Nikolaus August Otto
62. Louis Daguerre
63. Joseph Stalin
64. Rene Descartes
65. Julius Caesar
66. Francisco Pizarro
67. Hernando Cortes
68. Queen Isabella I
69. William the Conqueror
70. Thomas Jefferson
71. Jean-Jacques Rousseau
72. Edward Jenner
73. Wilhelm Conrad Rontgen
74. Hohann Sebastian Bach
75. Lao Tzu
76. Enrico Fermi
77. Thomas Malthus
78. Francis Bacon
79. Voltaire
80. John F. Kennedy
81. Gregory Pincus
82. Sui Wen Ti
83. Mani
84. Vasco da Gama
85. Charlemagne
86. Cyprus the Great
87. Leonhard Euler
88. Niccolo Machiavelli
89. Zoroaster
90. Menes
91. Peter the Great
92. Mencius
93. John Dalton
94. Homer
95. Queen Elizabeth
96. Justinian I
97. fJohannes Kepler
98. Pablo Picasso
99. Mahavira
100. Niels Bohr
Honorable Mentions and Interesting Misses:
• St. Thomas Aquinas
• Archimedes
• Charles Babbage
• Cheops
• Marie Curie
• Benjamin Franklin
• Gandhi
• Abraham Lincoln
• Ferdinand Magellan
• Leonardo da Vinci

The non-Muslim verdict on Muhammad (PBUH) If a man like Muhamed were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness.
George Bernard Shaw
People like Pasteur and Salk are leaders in the first sense. People like Gandhi and Confucius, on one hand, and Alexander, Caesar and Hitler on the other, are leaders in the second and perhaps the third sense. Jesus and Buddha belong in the third category alone. Perhaps the greatest leader of all times was Mohammed, who combined all three functions. To a lesser degree, Moses did the same.
Professor Jules Masserman
Head of the State as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but, he was Pope without the Pope's pretensions, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a police force, without a fixed revenue. If ever a man had the right to say that he ruled by a right divine, it was Muhummed, for he had all the powers without their supports. He cared not for the dressings of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life.
Rev. R. Bosworth-Smith
Muhammad was the soul of kindness, and his influence was felt and never forgotten by those around him.
Diwan Chand Sharma, The Prophets of the East, Calcutta 1935, p. l 22.
Four years after the death of Justinian, A.D. 569, was born at Mecca, in Arabia the man who, of all men exercised the greatest influence upon the human race . . . Mohammed . . .
John William Draper, M.D., L.L.D., A History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, London 1875, Vol. 1, pp. 329-330
In little more than a year he was actually the spiritual, nominal and temporal rule of Medina, with his hands on the lever that was to shake the world.
John Austin, "Muhammad the Prophet of Allah," in T.P. 's and Cassel's Weekly for 24th September 1927.
Philosopher, Orator, Apostle, Legislator, Warrior, Conqueror of ideas Restorer of rational beliefs, of a cult without images; the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire, that is Muhammed. As regards all standards by which human greatness may be measured, we may well ask, is there any man greater than he?
Lamartine, Historie de la Turquie, Paris 1854, Vol. 11 pp. 276-2727
It is impossible for anyone who studies the life and character of the great prophet of Arabia, who knows how he taught and how he lived, to feel anything but reverence for that mighty Prophet, one of the great messengers of the Supreme. And although in what I put to you I shall say many things which may be familiar to many, yet I myself feel whenever I re-read them, a new way of admiration, a new of reverence for that mighty Arabian teacher.
Annie Besant, The Life and Teachings of Muhammad, Madras 1932, p. 4
Muhummed is the most successful of all Prophets and religious personalities.
Encyclopedia Britannica
I have studied him - the wonderful man - and in my opinion far from being an anti-Christ he must be called the saviour of humanity.
George Bernard Shaw in "The Genuine Islam"
By a fortune absolutely unique in history, Mohammed is a threefold founder of a nation, of an empire, and of a religion.
Rev. R. Bosworth-Smith in "Mohammed and Mohammedanism 1946."

I hope THIS MAY CLEAR MISCONCEPTION ABOUT messengers of god .

Thanks

[Kai Hagbard]

Hi again Unity

I really appreciate that you abide by the rules and debate in a way suitable for this forum.

Just one point on the Mosaic Law in connection with Christianity and the New Testament.

I notice that Muslims frequently bring up the issue that Christians are to follow the Law, in accordance with the requirement of the New Testament, or in this case the Gospel; so let's focus on Jesus and the Gospels.

Muslims frequently refer to Matthew 5: 17-19 to prove their point:

17. Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
18. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
19. Anyone who breaks on the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the Kingdom of heaven.

The argument by Muslims is usually that Jesus does not abrogate the Law, and that Christians are still to follow every slightest aspect of it.

Yet this is not what the text is implying at all; let’s look at it carefully:

17. Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Jesus is clear that he did not come to remove the Law, but to fulfil it; in other words bringing in the perfection of its standard.

If you read the commands and teachings of Jesus in Matthew 5, you will see what he means. Fulfilling also fulfils the prophecy of the prophets, that a new Law coming; look at Jeremiah 31: 31-34:

31 "The time is coming," declares the LORD,
"when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
32 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they broke my covenant,
though I was a husband to [d] them, [e] "
declares the LORD.
33 "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time," declares the LORD.
"I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
34 No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,'
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest,"
declares the LORD.
"For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more."

This is the New Law coming, it is not a book, it is the Spirit of God, entering our lives and transforming us and guiding us to live according to God’s standard. This is why he does not include the Torah only but also the prophets, in which the prophecy is given.

So of course the Law is not abolished but made perfect

18. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

And that is true! We still possess the Torah, yet neither passage states that we are to follow it, to its every aspect.

You get the point brother Unite? We possess the Law, but it does not imply that we need to follow its every aspect; because the perfection of the Law has come with Jesus Christ, the Spirit of God who enters our life. The Law of God does not pass away or get corrupted! HOW CAN MAN CORRUPT THE VERY WORD OF GOD? This is what Jesus states here!

19. Anyone who breaks on the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the Kingdom of heaven.

I have met Muslims who say: ‘see here it explicitly states that Christians are to follow every detail of the Law.’

However, look at the passage again, which commandments is he referring to?

He is not saying follow the Torah, but ‘these commandments’ which are the commandments of Jesus in the passage, not every aspect of the Torah.

This is confirmed in Matthew 19: 1-9 when the Pharisees come to Jesus about a rule in the Law, in which a man could divorce his wife by providing her a letter of divorce.

Jesus here prohibits the specific command, since it was for a time being, and does not imply the standard of God. The true standard of God is the rule found before sin entered the realm of mankind and which Christianity turns back. As Christians we criticise Islam because it goes back to the Mosaic Law which applied to certain time and a circumstance when the true standard would be unacceptable and non-clear to a barbaric society and circumstance.

Hence here Jesus himself reveals that Christians are not to follow every aspect of the Law since they concerned the nation of Israel (not Christianity).

When you look at Christianity you need to look at what is referred to as the Kingdom, and this will answer your question:

‘The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the kingdom of God is being preached…’ (Luke 17: 16-17)

Hence we are presently not in the time of the Law but in the time when the Kingdom of God is being proclaimed

Does that answer some questions?

[unity]

kai,

i like the way you want to escape from commandments such as prohibition of alcohal. i think it was a good commandment to control evil.
Drinking of alcohal is mother of all evils and it leads the door open for satan to create chain of evils and takes man away from faith and god.
that is why islam prohibits alcohal in totality.
you may have to find a way how to negotiate this problems of alarming proportion as you must be knowing there are millions and millions of drunkrds in u.s.a supposed to be most civilised country in the world.
if we could stop alcohal consumption we can improve lives of millions and bring end to moral corruption.

[Kai Hagbard]

eh bro, you are misunderstanding me

My last post was not a reference to Alcohol, I agree with you that alcohol to many can be a path to devastation.

If you look at the post again, you will see that it merely looked at the New law of Jesus Christ in comparison to the Mosaic Law.

What I pointed out was the weakness of the first Law, to merely be a source of commands, without any transforming effect. While the New Law (The Kingdom) is not a Law of the same structure, but same standard, and effects us internally, as it transforms our life.

I also pointed out that the Law was meant specifically for the Nation of Israel, for a certain time. Jesus himself, pointed out that his message and the New Law brought a much higher standard than before.

This second Law is even more strict and pure than the previous one.