Muslim gladiator:
Peace be upon who follows the right way,
The Quran said from 1400 years,
The translation of the meanings of the Quran (Surah 21, Verse 1
{[18] Nay, We fling (send down) the truth (this Qur'ân) against the falsehood (disbelief), so it destroys it, and behold, it (falsehood) is vanished. And woe to you for that (lie) which you ascribe (to Allah by uttering that Allah has a wife and a son).}
Kai replies:
I fail to see that falsehood has vanished
Could you please show me from Scripture where it says Allah has a wife; otherwise the Koran is making claims of serious errors against the Christians.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
You Kai Hagbard said
Quote:
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Quote:
Peace be upon who follows the right way,
Your Kai Habard said,
first and most, if the Bible has been corrupted, then the Koran is a book of error:
Quote:
“If you Muhammad are in doubt regarding that which we have revealed to thee, ask THOSE who READ the BOOK from BEFORE YOU” (Sura 10:94).
The Arabic word for book here is 'kitab' which means book, and the word Bible is Latin and means book.
If the Bible is corrupt, why is Muhammad commanded to CONSULT those who were reading the book (Bible) before him.
Is Allah really commanding his last prophet to consult a a corrupted book? Well gladiator you tell me?
And my reply to so simply is
I think your studying for Arabic language is not strong.
Let us look at the translation for the meanings of the Quran for this verse,
(Surah 10, Verse 94)
{[94] So if you (O Muhammad (peace be upon him)) are in doubt concerning that which We have revealed unto you, (i.e. that your name is written in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) then ask those who are reading the Book (the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) before you. Verily, the truth has come to you from your Lord. So be not of those who doubt (it).}
The Quran said {then ask those who are reading the Book (the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) before you} which means those who converted and believed in Islam like the friends of prophet, such as Abdel Allah bin Salm.
Kai replies:
I fail to see that this proves anything despite your attempt, secondly you are interpolating the text; you are being dishonest
And I reply,
First of all Kai Hagbard do not talk about interpolating the text; dishonesty.
Kai replies:
So far the only one having interpolating anything is you bro; just look at your proposition on Paul, the light and the voice; WHO WAS INTERPOLATING WHAT?
Muslim gladiator wrote:
I am not the person who wrote this verse in the Bible like that:
Deuteronomy 33:2 (King James Version)
{2And he said, The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them.}
Then I assured in in another version to be like that,
Deuteronomy 33:2 (American Standard Version)
2 And he said, Jehovah came from Sinai, And rose from Seir unto them; He shined forth from mount Paran, And he came from the ten thousands of holy ones: At his right hand was a fiery law for them.
Then after a while I changed my mind and I translated it to be like that,
{2The LORD came from Mount Sinai.
From Edom, he gave light
to his people,
and his glory was shining
from Mount Paran.
Thousands of his warriors
were with him,
and fire
was at his right hand.}
Where is the term “ten" in ECV Kai Hagbard ??? To solve this problem, there is one of three things we should chose,
Kai replies:
Let me first of all point out that You are dealing with a Translation man! And even a contemporary one!
That can hardly be referred to as academic!
Muslim gladiator wrote:
The First is,
The term "ten" was not existed in the main manuscripts and the translators discovered this error, so they omitted it. And the question here is, why did this term insert in these versions? Who put it? And why a new version like (American Standard Version) still keeps it?
Kai replies:
How do you know whether the term 'ten' was not existent in the main manuscript and how do you know whether it was asserted later or not?
Muslim gladiator wrote:
The second is,
The term "ten" is still in the main manuscripts and the translators for the ECV omitted is in purpose. And in this case we should know why
?
Kai replies:
I do not get your point here! Please clarify the sentence!
Muslim gladiator wrote:
The translators of ECV did not say any thing about the term "ten" in their comment in their Bible. All what they say, "Thousands...right hand: One possible meaning for the difficult Hebrew text".
Kai replies:
Again, ECV is a contemporary version
As for difficult meanings of ancient texts, do you think that modern scholars possess absolute insight into the Koranic Arabic? And if that being the case, would you not assume that you Muslims have a problem; that is of course when we utilize your methodology.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Does that mean until now 2005, the translators can not understand the real meaning of the texts? And if that was one of the possible meanings, what are the other meanings for this verse? And if that was the best way to translate the verse, why other translators for other versions choose something else?
Kai replies:
Yes the translators do understand the meaning, but describing meaning can be flexible, as I will point out in a while.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
The third is,
The term "ten" is existed in some main manuscripts and it is not in others!
And what is really why persons who studied the Bible a long term do not believe in it anymore like, Bart Ehram (The chairman of the religious studies department at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, USA.)
Kai replies:
I shall reply to this further down
Muslim gladiator wrote:
The most interesting thing really, all of the versions still selling in all the entire world as a word of God.
Kai replies:
In other words Muslims are committing great sins in selling their multiple corrupted versions of the Koran across the globe?
Muslim gladiator wrote:
I do not want to go so far in this; otherwise I will leave the main subject,
But if you wanted more, you can just simply compare the version between each other. I choused this example because it spoke about a number, which it is so hard to be translated it in another a different way.
I just wanted to give you Kai Habard an example for the meaning of dishonesty and interpolating the text then selling it as a word of God. More examples with evidences from the New Testament are coming in my next articles InshaAllah.
Kai replies:
I just hope then, that you will apply the same criteria upon the various versions of the Korans? Otherwise you are playing biased.
Let me answer you on this whole issue:
I simply fail to see the problem here; it is true that numerology is difficult in the Hebrew language; however if it becomes a problem that translating it becomes difficult and it sometimes does, it does not prove that the Bible is interpolated.
Secondly, you should look at your own Qur’an and ask yourself if you have full insight into the Arabic language! No, you have not, I have recently read articles which claim that the name hoor (the heavenly women) actual refer to raisins, another scholar pointed out that hoor actually refers to a spouse.
Let me in addition point out and challenge you to look into the various translations of the Koran, do all these agree?
No!
Far from it! Why?
Because they are translations!
Do these translations necessarily prove the Koran wrong?
No! Why?
Because they are merely translations? Or versions are you presume.
When I said that numerology can be difficult it is mainly because we are dealing with an ancient language, and numbers are used fairly differently than in the 21st century.
In fact all three translations are in one sense accurate as the Hebrew word
'reb-aw-baw' can accurately be translated 10.000 but it also means many or a multiple number; in fact in the ancient languages the number 10.000 is used in this way; it does not necessarily mean exactly 10.000, but a significant number of something.
Hence KJV and NAS are literally correct in their translations, but the ECV which is a contemporary version which focuses on those individuals who usually don’t bother to read, excludes details; that is why I said, you cannot build your proposition on the ECV.
Does that help in answering your question?
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Now, let me explain the again, and InshaAllah(God Willing) you can get it from this time,
Quran came to us in Arabic, a very clear Arabic.
Kai replies:
I would challenge this proposition bro.
A range of words in the Koran are not Arabic; Arthur Jeffrey points out a range of foreign words in the Qur’an:
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Books/Jef ... /index.htm
These words include, the Qur’an, Isa, Injeel, which have all been plagiarized from Syrian Greek Christianity
Muslim gladiator wrote:
(Surah 26, Verse 125) The translation of the meanings of the Quran:
{195. In the plain Arabic language.}
So as long as you did not understand the translations for the meanings for the Quran, we can just simply go for the main context:
Kai replies:
But I do understand the translation for the meaning of the Koran
Muslim gladiator wrote:
(Surah 10, Verse 94) Quran
فَإِنْ كُنْتَ فِي شَكٍّ مِمَّا أَنْزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ فَاسْأَلِ الَّذِينَ يَقْرَءُونَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْ قَبْلِك َلَقَدْ جَاءَكَ الْحَقُّ مِنْ رَبِّكَ فَلَا تَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْمُمْتَرِينَ
Translation for the meanings for the Quran:
(Surah 10, Verse 94)
{[94] So if you (O Muhammad (peace be upon him)) are in doubt concerning that which We have revealed unto you, (i.e. that your name is written in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) then ask those who are reading the Book (the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) before you. Verily, the truth has come to you from your Lord. So be not of those who doubt (it).}
You accused me with dishonesty and interpolating of the text and that is the main context and my translation. Compare it yourself or ask anyone speaks Arabic and English to help u to translate it.
Kai replies:
You are trusting translations, which is the same way you attempt to debunk the Bible. Yet what we have been telling you all along is that this translation is interpolated, the Arabic text does not possess the text in brackets.
These words have been included by its modern translator to interpret the text and exclude difficulties.
Pickthall’s translation of the Koran does not contain this kind of
interpolations:
And if you (Muhammad) are in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto you, then question those who read Scripture (that was) before you. Verily the Truth from your Lord has come unto you. So be not you of the waverers (Pickhtall, Sura 10: 94).
Yusuf Ali translates it like this:
If thou vert in doubt As to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the book from before thee. Thee truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord, so be in nowise of those who doubt.
Your translation said:
{[94] So if you (O Muhammad (peace be upon him)) are in doubt concerning that which We have revealed unto you, (i.e. that your name is written in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) then ask those who are reading the Book (the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) before you. Verily, the truth has come to you from your Lord. So be not of those who doubt (it).}
So which is the correct version?
1. Should Muhammad be mentioned here at all?
2. Is he to ask to those who read the previous message or those who red it?
3. Those the text really make reference to the Torah and Injeel?
4. Those the passage really make any reference to Muhammad’s being mentioned in the previous revelations?
5. Those the text make any indication of whether these are converts to Islam or not?
According to the Koran, there would be no problem for Muhammad or the Muslims to consult the Jews and the Christians
In other words, Muhammad is doubting and is told to make inquiry with those who read the Book before him:
Since Muhammad and the Muslims were and are not to doubt the previous Revelations as they are red by the Jews and the Christians:
Be courteous when you argue with People of the Book except with those among them who do evil. Say: “ WE BELIEVE in THAT which is revealed to us and WHICH was revealed to you. Our God and your God is one” (Sura 29:46)
Since the Jews and Christians are only founded upon anything if they perform their own revelations:
“Say, O people of the book! You are not founded on anything until you PERFORM the TORAH and the GOSPEL, and what was revealed to you from your Lord” (Sura 5:68-71)
Since Muslims were encouraged to ask the people of the Book:
“The apostles We sent before you were but men whom we inspired with revelations and with Scriptures. Ask the People of the Book if you know not”. (16:43)
Yusuf Ali translates this passage:
And before thee also The messengers We sent were but men, to whom we granted inspirations. If ye realise this not, ask those who posses the message (Yusuf Ali: 16: 43)
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Now about this verse which Christians take it and understand it but give other meanings for it. And I reply, that is not the Bible to do that.
Kai replies:
I don’t understand, please clarify the sentence, sorry bro
Muslim gladiator wrote:
The translation for the meanings for the Quran says,
{ask those who are reading the Book (the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) before you}
let me ask you a question Kai Hagbard, If you gave me a German book to read it, then I told you sorry, I can not speak German, ask someone who speaks German?
Did I mean ask someone from Germany or anyone whatever its nationality who speaks German?
Now, suppose I gave another reply and it was like that,
"Ask German people."
Do I mean just German people or anyone other nationalities speak German?
Kai replies:
I simply don’t see how this illustration fits the with topic, sorry bro! Please elaborate on this!
Muslim gladiator wrote:
The Quran stated the term "The People of the Book" many times in the Quran. Why did not the Quran state this term here? I tried before to explain for you what the verse was supposed to say if the verse was refering to the term “The People of the Book (Christians and Jews) in general.
If you understood the verse well, you would not take this verse as evidence against Islam and lose points.
Quran is very accurate in choosing its words and meanings. Do you still in need for more explanation? Okay.
The verse talks about the doubt of our prophet (Peace and Mercy of Allah be upon him) which might come to his heart about his Prophecy and what God has revealed to him. Have you imagined that God asked our Prophet (Peace and Mercy of Allah be upon him) to go to the People of the Book whom did not confess with his prophecy to ask them if he was real a prophet and his name in their books?
Did God ask our prophet (Peace and Mercy of Allah be upon him) to hurt himself by hearing the People of the Book saying "Sorry, you are not in our Holy Book? Is that the best way of God to fix our prophet (Peace and Mercy of Allah be upon him) on Islam?
Kai replies:
Even though you were correct, that the passage refers to Jews or Christians converted to Islam, the fact still remains that previous Scriptures, which you consider corrupted had to be consulted.
My question would still be: why consult corrupted Scripture. Why did Allah in his power not confirm the issue with Muhammad rather than encourage to get it from fabricated texts.
Yet that is not the case anyway, and you seem to be aware of the problem. It would be disastrous if the Muhammad would have to consult Jews and Christians; you know that, most modern Muslims know that; but the early Muslims did not know that!
And this is exactly my point.
Muhammad believed the previous revelations, the Torah and the Injeel as they were read by the Jews and Christians in his time; that is why he had no problem in consulting them.
Muhammad and the earliest Muslims did not believe in Bible corruption; the whole notion of Bible corruption is a modern idea.
I am glad that you Muslims finally realise that you have a problem, that if you do not follow your prophet and believe the previous Revelations as they were red in his era, you cannot be Muslims; but as you have finally realised if you believe these books, you cannot be Muslims either.
Thanks God I am a Christian
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Of course He would not. The verse meant some people who believed in him and they would say the truth. They saw his name in the Holy Book when they believed in him.
It means simply the people who have been converted to Islam at this time. And I gave a name for one of them ( عَبْد اللَّه بْن سَلَام ) Abdel Allah bin Salam.
Kai replies:
The text nowhere even indicates that the Koran is referring to converts to Islam, It simply encourages Muhammad to ask those who read the Book from before him.
I have CHALLENGED YOU IN A EARLIER POST TO PROVE THIS POINT, and you have NOT SUCCEEDED! Could you please provide me with textual evidence to prove that the individuals were converted to Islam, also prove to me that one of these, which this particular text relates to was Abdel Allah bin Salem? This is the typical speculation of e.g. Yusuf Ali to avoid difficulties!
But how then do you explain this passage:
“The apostles We sent before you were but men whom we inspired with revelations and with Scriptures. Ask the People of the Book if you know not”. (16:43)
Why not ask the Muslim or the converts to Islam, why as the people of the book. If the passage here relates to Muslims why not simply ask themselves?