comments on the Qur'an whether good or bad

[anonymous9887]

paarsurrey said: ↑
I will discuss the whole chapter 20, you yourslef referred.
It is not mentioned that the women's sons then left Jesus. Is it? Please
Jesus just denied that the women's sons will be seated on his right and left.

paarsurrey said: ↑
The narration of the NT Gospels is not reliable. That is my point.
Regards

Then please give your reasonable argument.
Regards

You said the the NT is not reliable, give your evidence not another's research that you have not even read.

 

[Yasin-shalal]

Well, Islam is the only religion. Its been there since the beginning of time.

1-Shia Sunni are sects born and borne after the prophet Muhammed by people. Thus, it cant have anything to do with Islam. If its Islamic sects then they should have been there since the beginning.

2-If Muhammed was not a SUnni or Shia, why do we call ourselves with that name? Isnt that more political than religious. If its religious then its your own religion. Nothing to do with the Quran, or previous scripture. Nothing to do with God or any of the prophets.

In the name of God
Salam,
sorry to be so late on response, my PC was (and still is) broken!

1-Response:
Brother, the word "Shia" was used by prophet(pbuh) himself several times. There are authentic Hadiths that prophet(pbuh) says:" O' Ali, you and your Shia ...."
Hence, Shia was there from the beginning!!
You also need to check these verses:
[37:83]Indeed Abraham was among his(i.e., Noah) Shia.

[28:15]He(i.e. Moses) found there two men fighting, this one from among his Shia, and that one from his enemies.

However, you are right on the case of "Sunni". It was made after the death of prophet(pbuh).

2-Response:
We call ourselves "Shia" because we must follow every footstep of Muhammad(pbuh) and obey every order from him(pbuh) and his God.
The Prophet traveled from Madina to Mecca to perform the pilgrimage there. It was in the tenth year of Hijra (ten years after his migration). News of his journey had reached the ears of the Muslims located in various locations. In order to be in the company of the Prophet and perform the rituals of the pilgrimage along with the Prophet, many groups and classes of people had gathered in Mecca. The Prophet completing the pilgrimage delivered several speeches among the crowds. He then decided to return to Madina. The crowds continued to accompany the Prophet. On his journey back the Prophet reached the hilly spot of Jahfa in the desert, also known as Ghadeer Khum. It was here that the Angel of Revelation, Gabreil, descended upon the Prophet with this verse of the Holy Quran (5:67):

"Oh, Messenger. Proclaim what descended to you from your Lord; and if you do not so, you have not proclaimed His message. And Allah protects you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelieving people"
Just think how important the message was that God says"...if you do not so, you have not proclaimed His message..."!!!
According to historians thousands of people were in that gathering (including Abubakr and Umar ibn Khattab).
The Prophet went on the pulpit. The people were all too anxious to know the importance and the magnitude of the reason to as why the Prophet had stopped in that heat of the desert to speak. Not allowing him to postpone it to be made in the ease and the comfort of a town. Every indication was to show that the matter was of great importance. The Prophet predicted the nearness of his death, which he had also said in Mecca too. Then he spoke of his being the Prophet and that of his having acted upon the will of God in announcing the revelations to them and that he had to announce this last issue in completion of the religion. After these words he called Ali Bin Abi Taleb. Ali went next to him on the pulpit. The Prophet then took his hand and lifted it above his head so that as historians say, the whiteness of their armpits showed.
There in the hot searing desert, holding Ali's hand high above his head, automatically stopping all passing caravans, the Holy Prophet's voice rang out;
"To whomsoever I was the guardian, Ali to be his guardian=Man kunto mawlah fahaza Ali'o mawlah" Then the Prophet(pbuh) blessed those who would help Ali and cursed those who would refrain from helping him."

Allameh Amini in his book [1] brings you many references of Ghadeer day and happening. That book is among the top books written by Shia scholars. He devoted his whole life to write that book and has gathered Sunni Muslims' references.
You will also find useful information about Ghadeer in [2].
The historians who had mentioned Ghadeer happening in their books can also be found in [3].
You can also find famous "Muhaddithin" who quote Hadith and religious sayings in [4]. They have talked about Ghadeer.

Sunni brothers believe that our prophet (pbuh) didn't specify any successors. It's not logical that we think he left his Ummah (the group of Muslims) without a leader. Do they regard Abubakr wiser than Muhammad (pbuh)?!!! Because Abubakr specified Umar as his own successor. Abubakr knew that there should be a leader after his death but Muhammad (pbuh) didn't know?!

Refrences

[1] Al-Ghadir by Allameh Amini.

[2]http://www.shiasite.org...

[3] Here are the historians:
"Bilazari in Ansab Al-ashraf
"Ibn Qutaybah in Al-Imama wa al-Siyasa
"Tabari in his book
"Egyptian Ibn zulagh
"Khateeb Baghdadi
And many other historians. You will find 24 historians in Allameh Amini's book.

[4] Here are Muhaddithin
"Imam Shafi'i (A Sunni scholar)- Abu 'Abdullah Muhammad ibn Idriss- al nahaya of ibn athir
"Imam Hanbali (A Sunni scholar)- Ahmad ibn Hanbal-Musnad and Managheb.
And many other Muhaddithin

 

[firedragon]

1-Response:
Brother, the word "Shia" was used by prophet(pbuh) himself several times. There are authentic Hadiths that prophet(pbuh) says:" O' Ali, you and your Shia ...."
Hence, Shia was there from the beginning!!
You also need to check these verses:
[37:83]Indeed Abraham was among his(i.e., Noah) Shia.

[28:15]He(i.e. Moses) found there two men fighting, this one from among his Shia, and that one from his enemies.

However, you are right on the case of "Sunni". It was made after the death of prophet(pbuh).

I know this brother. I know this.

2-Response:
We call ourselves "Shia" because we must follow every footstep of Muhammad(pbuh) and obey every order from him(pbuh) and his God.
The Prophet traveled from Madina to Mecca to perform the pilgrimage there. It was in the tenth year of Hijra (ten years after his migration). News of his journey had reached the ears of the Muslims located in various locations. In order to be in the company of the Prophet and perform the rituals of the pilgrimage along with the Prophet, many groups and classes of people had gathered in Mecca. The Prophet completing the pilgrimage delivered several speeches among the crowds. He then decided to return to Madina. The crowds continued to accompany the Prophet. On his journey back the Prophet reached the hilly spot of Jahfa in the desert, also known as Ghadeer Khum. It was here that the Angel of Revelation, Gabreil, descended upon the Prophet with this verse of the Holy Quran (5:67):

SO you believe Islam was introduced by the prophet Muhammed!

Sunni brothers believe that our prophet (pbuh) didn't specify any successors. It's not logical that we think he left his Ummah (the group of Muslims) without a leader. Do they regard Abubakr wiser than Muhammad (pbuh)?!!! Because Abubakr specified Umar as his own successor. Abubakr knew that there should be a leader after his death but Muhammad (pbuh) didn't know?!

Brother, I am a Muslim too. I know this. Of course. But its just that, I dont believe in any successors at all. No one is divine, No one, Only Allah. The Deity.

 

[firedragon]

You said the the NT is not reliable, give your evidence not another's research that you have not even read.

OMG Paul.

Okay tell me, how many books are there in the NT? 27? 29?
What are the differences?
If there is a difference, which one do you deem is the REAL NT?
How many manuscripts exist?
What are the differences?
How many people authored the bible?
Whats the reason for the different theologies in the four canonical gospels?
Whats the difference between synoptic gospels and John? Why?
Who wrote the Gospels?
Why does the NT mention Hades? Who the hell is he?
Why did scribes intentionally add stuff to the so called Gods revelation?

Reliable? Theres more mate.
You will not answer. I plead with you, if you can please do.

 

[Yasin-shalal]

Well, Islam is the only religion. Its been there since the beginning of time.

Shia Sunni are sects born and borne after the prophet Muhammed by people. Thus, it cant have anything to do with Islam. If its Islamic sects then they should have been there since the beginning.

If Muhammed was not a SUnni or Shia, why do we call ourselves with that name? Isnt that more political than religious. If its religious then its your own religion. Nothing to do with the Quran, or previous scripture. Nothing to do with God or any of the prophets.

I know this brother. I know this.



SO you believe Islam was introduced by the prophet Muhammed!



Brother, I am a Muslim too. I know this. Of course. But its just that, I dont believe in any successors at all. No one is divine, No one, Only Allah. The Deity.

You know and you ignore! How come?

 

[firedragon]

You know and you ignore! How come?

I know it. I dont believe it.

I believe in God. Not human made theologies. No, Islam was not invented by the prophet Muhammed for me to believe in peoples divisions after him. The Quran calls us Shia, which is an arabic word with a meaning. There are over 6k verses in the Quran with thousands of words. I translate them and follow the Quran. I dont call myself with any other name but the most commonly used ones, by God himself, in the Quran. I dont worship anyone but God. By worship I mean to believe in a divinity.

Why do you believe in an extra-quranic, man-made, NEW theology? Islam was is the only one authorised by God, the system of peace and submission. Millat Ibrahima.

Zalikal kithaba la raiba fee hi hudhallil muttaqeen.

Salam Akhee.

 

[anonymous9887]

OMG Paul.

Okay tell me, how many books are there in the NT? 27? 29?
What are the differences?
If there is a difference, which one do you deem is the REAL NT?
How many manuscripts exist?
What are the differences?
How many people authored the bible?
Whats the reason for the different theologies in the four canonical gospels?
Whats the difference between synoptic gospels and John? Why?
Who wrote the Gospels?
Why does the NT mention Hades? Who the hell is he?
Why did scribes intentionally add stuff to the so called Gods revelation?

Reliable? Theres more mate.
You will not answer. I plead with you, if you can please do.

You can pull these arguments all you want.
But again these questions have been answered it's out there.
Why are you asking me these questions if you already know the answers?
There are still bible believing scholars out there why?
I'm getting into that type of study so I'll see for myself.


Now can you answer these questions please.
Are the oldest copies of the Qur'an complete? The oldest manuscript.
What date do scholars give it?

 

[paarsurrey]

You can pull these arguments all you want.
But again these questions have been answered it's out there.
Why are you asking me these questions if you already know the answers?
There are still bible believing scholars out there why?
I'm getting into that type of study so I'll see for myself.

Now can you answer these questions please.
Are the oldest copies of the Qur'an complete? The oldest manuscript.
What date do scholars give it?

Bible is a dead book in the sense that it does not give claim and reasons for what the Christians attribute to it. Jesus also gives no answer on the issues, as to claim and reasons, so the Christians always has to put words in the mouth of Jesus.
Therefore, the Christians are wrong to believe in Bible, it has been corrupted by the narrators/clergy/church and the translators. Bible is a very dilute word of God, it is like a few drops of milk in a 100 KG of water, we cannot say the whole of it is milk. Right?
Regards

 

[anonymous9887]

Bible is a dead book in the sense that it does not give claim and reasons for what the Christians attribute to it. Jesus also gives no answer on the issues, as to claim and reasons, so the Christians always has to put words in the mouth of Jesus.
Therefore, the Christians are wrong to believe in Bible, it has been corrupted by the narrators/clergy/church and the translators. Bible is a very dilute word of God, it is like a few drops of milk in a 100 KG of water, we cannot say the whole of it is milk. Right?
Regards

I would accept your arguments if you brought something solid to the table that you personally studied.

 

[paarsurrey]

I would accept your arguments if you brought something solid to the table that you personally studied.

Jesus never uttered/believed Trinity and gave no reasons/arguments for its truthfulness. This is something solid on the table. Right?
Regards

 

[firedragon]

I would accept your arguments if you brought something solid to the table that you personally studied.

How about one.

All four gospels have no author.
They have evolving theories.
Trying to deity Jesus you will quote John more than the synoptic bibles.
The others are synoptic for a reason.

There were so many points given. But since you have defend your father Paul you are ignoring them and asking other questions. I know that it's because you don't have a choice.

 

[anonymous9887]

1.How many days did it take for Allah to create the world?
2. Are Jews and Christians fellow 'people of the book' who will go to paradise, or are they 'the worst of creatures'?
3. Were all things made of water or clay?
4.What came first, heaven or earth?
He it is Who hath created for you all that is on earth.
Then He turned to the heaven, and made them into seven heavens. -- Sura 2:29

Sura 41:9-12 also gives details on the creation process and confirms that the earth was created first and then the heavens. But then we read also:

Are you the harder to create, or is the heaven that He built?
He raised the height thereof and ordered it;
and He has made dark the night thereof, and He brought forth the morn thereof.
And after that, He spread out the earth. -- Sura 79:27-30

5. Did Nuh's son die? Or no?

(Remember) Noah, when he cried (to Us) aforetime:
We listened to his (prayer) and delivered
him and his family from great distress.
-- Sura 21:76



So the Ark floated with them on the waves (towering) like mountains,
and Noah called out to his son, who had separated himself (from the rest):
"O my son! embark with us, and be not with the unbelievers!"

The son replied: "I will betake myself to some mountain: it will save me from the water."
Noah said: "This day nothing can save, from the command of Allah,
any but those on whom He hath mercy!" And the waves came between them,
and the son was among those overwhelmed in the Flood.
-- Sura 11:42-43

There are quite a few in there.

Also bonus question: even if there were no contradictions that wouldn't man it was from God, since I hope the maths textbooks I used at school had no contradictions either, but they are certainly not God-given!!

I was wondering if you new about these quranic manuscripts I'm about to mention and if you have tested the reliability of the manuscripts.

For the following I'm looking for:
-What date are these manuscripts
- are the manuscripts all alike or are they different if so how many variants
- are the manuscripts all complete

MANUSCRIPTS
- Topkapi
- Ma'il Qur'an
- Petropolitanus
- Husseini
- Sana
- Sammarqand

You seem very knowledgeable, so I thought I would ask you.

 

[paarsurrey]

Paul Chavez said: ↑
You can pull these arguments all you want.
But again these questions have been answered it's out there.
Why are you asking me these questions if you already know the answers?
There are still bible believing scholars out there why?
I'm getting into that type of study so I'll see for myself.

Now can you answer these questions please.
Are the oldest copies of the Qur'an complete? The oldest manuscript.
What date do scholars give it?

paarsurrey said: ↑
Bible is a dead book in the sense that it does not give claim and reasons for what the Christians attribute to it. Jesus also gives no answer on the issues, as to claim and reasons, so the Christians always has to put words in the mouth of Jesus.
Therefore, the Christians are wrong to believe in Bible, it has been corrupted by the narrators/clergy/church and the translators. Bible is a very dilute word of God, it is like a few drops of milk in a 100 KG of water, we cannot say the whole of it is milk. Right?
Paul Chavez said: ↑
I would accept your arguments if you brought something solid to the table that you personally studied.

Jesus never uttered/believed Trinity and gave no reasons/arguments for its truthfulness. This is something solid on the table. Right?

Please
Regards

 

[anonymous9887]

How about one.

All four gospels have no author.
They have evolving theories.
Trying to deity Jesus you will quote John more than the synoptic bibles.
The others are synoptic for a reason.

There were so many points given. But since you have defend your father Paul you are ignoring them and asking other questions. I know that it's because you don't have a choice.

Sure if it makes you happy.

 

[firedragon]

Sure if it makes you happy.

Wow. An Exegesis finally.

 

[anonymous9887]

Wow. An Exegesis finally.

I will answer part of the question with this comment on the reason for p52.
1. I'm not sure how you stand on the manuscripts or fragments closer in date to Muhammad or the author of a book? I believe these to carry more authority. This is why I looked at p52 it's the oldest, and would carry more authority.
2. What happens if the older fragments don't match the later manuscripts? Which is given more priority and why?

 

[anonymous9887]

Wow. An Exegesis finally.

No matter how small the scripture, but it still has information closer to John.

 

[firedragon]

No matter how small the scripture, but it still has information closer to John.

How many years after Jesus was John? Who wrote John? How many years after that is P52?

Also I would like to know why you said you look at P52 for information when there are much complete bibles available.

P52 has only 14 lines in total. We have found about 1.3 million lines so far, and you go to the smallest speck for information and studying the theology?

Thats bogus. You hurried too much.

 

[firedragon]

I will answer part of the question with this comment on the reason for p52.
1. I'm not sure how you stand on the manuscripts or fragments closer in date to Muhammad or the author of a book? I believe these to carry more authority. This is why I looked at p52 it's the oldest, and would carry more authority.
2. What happens if the older fragments don't match the later manuscripts? Which is given more priority and why?

P52 has seven lines in front and seven lines on the back. Paleographers have constructed a full gospel of John based on the fragment to make an assumption of the volume. The size.
But even in that tiny speck of a P, there is a variant. Even if you take some of the oldest most respected manuscripts like Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, there are over 3000 variants. Take Alexadrinus, even the books are different.

Not the case with the Birmingham manuscript which is deemed the oldest. Though it is dated 645 latest it could very well be produced much earlier. Even during the prophet Muhammeds lifetime. Once the french connection is established and collated, we will have more folios for better assessment but there are no variants between this and later Hijazi scripts. Variants are supposed by scholars based on changing of dots. Why the hell would you change dots? Thats absurd, done by skeptics.

Anyway there is no point bombarding with info.

 

[anonymous9887]

How many years after Jesus was John? Who wrote John? How many years after that is P52?

Also I would like to know why you said you look at P52 for information when there are much complete bibles available.

P52 has only 14 lines in total. We have found about 1.3 million lines so far, and you go to the smallest speck for information and studying the theology?

Thats bogus. You hurried too much.

It's no problem to me, I have to look at the oldest. I like to go to early manuscripts. But again I'm not a scholar and I'm still continually learning.