Greetings H2O,
Thanks for your reply.
Let’s take a gander at it…
"
istawaa ilaa assamaa'i" means " the sky was erected up or mounted up up" assamaa'i is in the possesive case which is the object of the verb istawaa, Not Allah(He) "turned or aimed or mounted up to the sky" .
Please tell use where is " HE" coming from, where is the pronoun in arabic ?
I used "He" to express the one who is causing the erecting of the sky, you show "He" is the doer of the action, so therefor where is "HE" in the arabic ?
If we take "He" out of my translation it still denotes who it is that is causing the erection of the sky in the context
Quote:
Say (Muhammad) ! Do you then disbelieve in Him who created the “ardh” in two days and you make rivals for Him ? That is the Lord of the worlds. He placed on it (the ardh) anchored mountains on top of it and he blessed into it and he ordained into it its nourishment into four days equally for the inquirers. And then the sky was erected up while it was smoke/gas/fumes (dukhaan), then He said to it (dukhaan) and to the ardh (?): Come together willingly or unwillingly ! They both said “ We come together willingly ! “
Now please tell us in your translation where is the pronoun "He" refering to Allah that is the doer of the action ? Would you mind to explain this to the audience ?
Quote:
“istawa” definition:
To establish, become firm or settled, turn to a thing, to direct one’s direction to a thing, mount. It comes from the root “sawiya”, which means to be worth, equivalent to.
Seems you been busy picking and choosing words that you only want to show.
Istawaa also means to erect or to stand upright
Al-Mawrid
Arabic Dictionary
page 104
The root word "sawaa" also carried the same meaning with the meanings you gave
Al-Mawrid
Arabic Dictionary
page 650
The function of "ilaa" following after "istawaa" is clearifying whom the action is being done to which is "assamaa'i" that is the object of the verb "istawaa".
Where is your grammar ?
With all due respect, I clearly showed you the entire classical lexical reference for ““istawa”, with all of its variants…none of which were even close to the ones which you had “googled” from your Modern Arabic webpaste…
Thus, you are free to see the Lexical support for the translation which I use…
Secondly, it appears that you are already in agreement with my definition of “ila”…
Furthermore, Al-Mawrid is a Modern Arabic dictionary. Please tell me why you would want to exegete the Koran (written ~1200 years ago) with a Modern Arabic dictionary?
When is that Masters degree ever going to kick-in?
Additionally, you have run away from the main thrust of my argument….show me how your “erecting” of the skies can possibly occur after accretion…?
But…your eyesight will probably begin to falter as you are reading this, and then there will be little use in responding to me….am I correct?
Sure I am….I’ve seen you do it time after time….we all have…
Quote:
Say (Muhammad) ! Do you then disbelieve in Him who created the “ardh” in two days and you make rivals for Him ? That is the Lord of the worlds. He placed on it (the ardh) anchored mountains on top of it and he blessed into it and he ordained into it its nourishment into four days equally for the inquirers.
Do you read 2+4= or do you read 2+[]=4 ?
OIC, thats why you used your distorted translation that has no grammar applied to it to come up with 2+4 in that sentence.
"فِي أَرْبَعَةِ أَيَّامٍ سَوَاء" ~ fee arba'ati ayyaamin sawaa'a ~ into four days equally , is not saying 2 and then another 4 days etc. The verse indicated the earth was created in two days then after placing mountains, blessing and ordainment into it, it equaled out to 4 days.
فَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَى عَلَى اللّهِ كَذِبًا أَوْ كَذَّبَ بِآيَاتِهِ أُوْلَئِكَ يَنَالُهُمْ نَصِيبُهُم مِّنَ الْكِتَابِ حَتَّى إِذَا جَاءتْهُمْ رُسُلُنَا يَتَوَفَّوْنَهُمْ قَالُواْ أَيْنَ مَا كُنتُمْ تَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللّهِ قَالُواْ ضَلُّواْ عَنَّا وَشَهِدُواْ عَلَى أَنفُسِهِمْ أَنَّهُمْ كَانُواْ كَافِرِينَ
Translate that .
With all due respect, you sound angry….
Why do you repeatedly flat-out ignore 90% of my posts and then pigeon-hole yourself into disputing over “minor” points of which you think that you might possibly be “qualified” to answer…?
If you want to debate me then please have the common courtesy to do it in a systematic, sequential, point by point, and professional manner.
You just can’t seem to do this and it is indicative of juvenile behavior…or, someone very insecure in their understanding of the text under discussion…
Let’s face it…you don’t know your science…nor do you know your classic Arabic…
I hate to say it, but your "degree" is a rip-roaring, falling-down, banging the floorboards, laughing out loud, joke...
You have to running on pure adrenaline at this point…
Thanks…