after five years, i left islam. here's one huge contradiction in the qur`an

[firedragon]

So you agree that RC dating is often inaccurate regard ME manuscripts?




What details have you given that demonstrate that we should accept the dating as very accurate?

I didnt give any details to accept dating as very accurate. But I gave you the calculation based on the contamination level of 1% maximum. Do you even know how to calculate it?

You keep going on about ME manuscripts. Yes, Middle Eastern manuscripts have had problems with dating due to lack of Hemispheric information, dendrochronography data and unstable carbon decay rates. But that is not the case with the Birmingham folios. Also decay rates of the 7th century are chalk and cheese in comparison to the 8th century. It is much more stable and dating has proven extremely reliablt. OURA also probably the most reputed unit in the world with the most accurate historical data of middle eastern regional climate and seasonal data. Most 7th century dating have been proven extremely accurate with correction using Dendochronography. You cant plug and play the same argument for every carbon 14 dating. Calibration has since changed to true halflife. Of course the dating will not provide an accurate date. Its a division, it can never be 0 or 100%. This is why I said that the only way this could go seriously wrong is due to contamination which can be calculated.

There is no point arguing about this Augustus. You can believe what you want but I would prefer not to hear generic arguments over and over again.

Your point is valid, not here.

 

[firedragon]

You cant prove by something you do today, to prove something was done in the past, by that logic we can definitely kick that problem around.

You said you cant believe that someone can memorise the Quran and repeat it with no error, which is why I told you to go see it for yourself.

 

[anonymous9887]

Why did God create us according to your belief ?

1. He created us perfect
2. He created us with the ability to obey him perfectly.
3. He created the earth to be inhabited with perfect offspring and for us to be truly happy under his complete rulership, unlike now that man and satan are doing as they please.
4. He created us to live forever.

 

[anonymous9887]

You said you cant believe that someone can memorise the Quran and repeat it with no error, which is why I told you to go see it for yourself.

That's not what I have said. It is very possible for someone to memorize the Quran. But you can't prove that that generation did. There is no evidence of an early copy of the Qur'an being complete, so how do we know that the rest of the copies of the Qur'an are just additions to the text?

 

[anonymous9887]

It does not prove that. It is equally possible that these Muslims have memorised it after hearing it from someone else, and those from someone else, and so on, in a long, long chain reaching back to the Prophet Muhammad (saws).

First of all:
1. Key word "it's possible". In other words the opposite could be possible.
2. Walk me through the process of them memorizing the Qur'an with pure recitation. How long does it take for the average person to remember?

 

[anonymous9887]

Why? Why are you placing such a great emphasis on written documents? These are just as open to corruption as an oral tradition.

Because this is evidence that we can observe and take a look at. Right now all we have is the current oral tradition. We can get more information from the manuscripts then we can from someone reciting the Qur'an.

 

[anonymous9887]

Who creates 'cripples', in your opinion?

1. It is our imperfect genetics that we inherited.
2. Some of it is environmental, and some of it can't be explained, I would say because we are unable to determine it, but there is a reason behind it.
3. Satan's system causes the problems we have, but god has no hand in making someone crippled.

 

[firedragon]

That's not what I have said. It is very possible for someone to memorize the Quran. But you can't prove that that generation did. There is no evidence of an early copy of the Qur'an being complete, so how do we know that the rest of the copies of the Qur'an are just additions to the text?

Tell you what.

How many chapters would have been there in the Birmingham Quran between the two folios found?

 

[anonymous9887]

Salaam,

'Completely irrelevant'? [my emphasis]

Wassalaam

Yes.
For example if I am saying that someone tried to kill me, but there are no witnesses, how reliable is my testimony without that or evidence?

 

[anonymous9887]

Tell you what.

How many chapters would have been there in the Birmingham Quran between the two folios found?

I think that contains chapters 20 and 21.

 

[anonymous9887]

Salaam,

I don't see how that answers my question, which was about your claim that the Qur'aan is 'completely irrelevant to the time, place and people of the time'. I am asking you to explain what you mean by that (I'm not being anal here).

Wassalaam

Where is the historical evidence besides the Qur'an that can validate.
Not the hadith because they were written 200-300 years later.

 

[anonymous9887]

Kelvin a think your issues is Lack of Knowledge of Quraan.

Think about this for a moment.
Quraan Clearly states :-

"Do they not then consider the Quran carefully? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much contradiction”

[an-Nisa’ 4:82].

Enemies of Al Islam came in thousands try to challenge and Find some contradictions in the Quraan and they ALL FAIL miserably.
Thats why Islam became Number one FAST GROWING RELIGION in the western world and we are whiteness hundreds of Scientists and well educated people embraced Islam.

They other thing which makes me wonder, why did you choose to abandon Islam simply because you found a verse or 2 you didn't understand or/ thought there is Contradiction?
Did you embraced Islam because Of Non contradictions on it or because you had a firm beliefs that GOD IS ONE and Muhammad (may peace and blessing be upon him) is his Messenger ?

The contradiction are matter of opinion, so it's a lost cause.

 

[firedragon]

I think that contains chapters 20 and 21.

Sorry. It contains bits of 18, 19 and 20. Thats 25 chapters in between without considering the french folios. Which means at least those would have been there originally. Thats the most conservative thinking. If thought more broadly, there has to have been 69 chapters originally. This is with your argument that since only fragments are available, there could have been additions later.

 

[firedragon]

I think that contains chapters 20 and 21.

Let me ask you a question. Whats the earliest manuscript of the Bible and what percentage is that of the bible?

Can you provide a 1st century or 2nd century bible manuscript that has 100% of the bible?

 

[anonymous9887]

Let me ask you a question. Whats the earliest manuscript of the Bible and what percentage is that of the bible?

Can you provide a 1st century or 2nd century bible manuscript that has 100% of the bible?

Well here is the problem with the Qur'an. The Qur'an comes from one source one place.
We have many manuscripts of the same event written in different places at different times. We have many more testifying of our manuscripts more than the Quran, but we are discussing the Qur'an.

If I said right now hypothetically speaking "the bible is fake" now what? I would still raise these questions on the Qur'an. These are problems.
There is no evidence of perfect recitation and there are no complete manuscripts not a single one.

 

[firedragon]

Well here is the problem with the Qur'an. The Qur'an comes from one source one place.
We have many manuscripts of the same event written in different places at different times. We have many more testifying of our manuscripts more than the Quran, but we are discussing the Qur'an.

Not really. The bible had copies emerging from various places. The same case with the Quran. I asked this question to make it clear that when you go into manuscripts, they are centuries old and most of them will be partial and fragmentary.

That is not enough of an argument to say the Original Quranic message is lost.

If I said right now hypothetically speaking "the bible is fake" now what? I would still raise these questions on the Qur'an. These are problems.
There is no evidence of perfect recitation and there are no complete manuscripts not a single one.

Who said the bible is fake? Thats not the point. The point is your claim.

Anyway mate you saying there is not a single complete manuscript of the Quran. What you mean is the earliest manuscripts are not complete.

Do you believe that if you take all the early manuscripts you cant easily construct the full Quran?
Also, the manuscript in the topkapi museum has almost the full quran. 99%. Just two folios missing.
The Al-Hussaini mosque in egypt has a manuscript that is also almost the full Quran. 99%.
Tareq Rajab Museum in Kuwait has a fully complete manuscript of the Quran. It is dated 393 years after Hijra.

Can you claim anything close to this to the bible? Is there one complete manuscript dated that early? How about 99%?

I know that Codex Sinaiticus, Vaticanus are nearly complete manuscripts of the bible. But do you know the differences between them? Also the difference in the current bible or bibles?

You cannot in any language say that the Quran doesnt have ANY complete manuscripts because it does.

 

[YmirGF]

You cannot in any language say that the Quran doesnt have ANY complete manuscripts because it does.

Mental note for @Paul Chavez Never bring a butter knife to a gun fight.

@Paul Chavez @firedragon

 

[firedragon]

Yes.
For example if I am saying that someone tried to kill me, but there are no witnesses, how reliable is my testimony without that or evidence?

Thats not the example. The example is, if some claims to have killed you, but you are alive and well, the claim is false. Because you are there and can be verified physically.

Same with the Quran.

 

[firedragon]

Mental note for @Paul Chavez Never bring a butter knife to a gun fight.

You have a habit of making me either chuckle or hungry. In this case you achieved both. Shuks.

 

[anonymous9887]

Not really. The bible had copies emerging from various places. The same case with the Quran. I asked this question to make it clear that when you go into manuscripts, they are centuries old and most of them will be partial and fragmentary.

That is not enough of an argument to say the Original Quranic message is lost.



Who said the bible is fake? Thats not the point. The point is your claim.

Anyway mate you saying there is not a single complete manuscript of the Quran. What you mean is the earliest manuscripts are not complete.

Do you believe that if you take all the early manuscripts you cant easily construct the full Quran?
Also, the manuscript in the topkapi museum has almost the full quran. 99%. Just two folios missing.
The Al-Hussaini mosque in egypt has a manuscript that is also almost the full Quran. 99%.
Tareq Rajab Museum in Kuwait has a fully complete manuscript of the Quran. It is dated 393 years after Hijra.

Can you claim anything close to this to the bible? Is there one complete manuscript dated that early? How about 99%?

I know that Codex Sinaiticus, Vaticanus are nearly complete manuscripts of the bible. But do you know the differences between them? Also the difference in the current bible or bibles?

You cannot in any language say that the Quran doesnt have ANY complete manuscripts because it does.

First of all the manuscripts that you are naming are from after 700. We don't know who compiled the Topkapi, uthman died around 660 so who wrote it. Why is there variants no matter how small, from the Original and the Topkapi. And yet there is no secular evidence of your god who created crippled children. Sura 3:6

Actually vaticanus is complete and so is sinaiticus, we have more information than necessary in those manuscripts.