Muhammads knowledge divine or learned?

[outhouse]

Your answer revealed how much knowledge you have. So go to sleep.

Do you hate evolution?

 

[Shad]

This is not an answer to my questions:

Go and count how many times I asked you two clear simple questions.

Do you have the word "مرج" in english?.
How many words in verse 19?.

No its not as I clearly have linked sources and posted replies to your question. Provides sources for your argument. You are dodging your burden of prove by deflecting the burden on to another.

 

[outhouse]

No its not as I clearly have linked sources and posted replies to your question. Provides sources for your argument. You are dodging your burden of prove by deflecting the burden on to another.

From what I have learned

No muslims will give you a straight answer to a simple question.

They have practiced this. They know answers will always paint them in a corner logic and reason keep them in.

 

[YmirGF]

Do you have the word "مرج" in english?

Um, no. It is an Arabic word.

How many words in verse 19?.

There appears to be 3 words in the particular verse, in Arabic.


Now that that is settled, can you explain why so many translators have chosen to translate the verse in a way that does not correspond to your rendering? And your qualifications for brooking their trend is? (Note: You will have to do a lot better than simply saying you read and write Arabic.)

Try this on for size while we are at it.

http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=55&verse=19

 

[outhouse]

Don't try and understand a muslim


muslims know muslims, and they just want to kill each other

 

[Britedream]

Well, Finally You admitted the English language does not have the word "مرج".

No its not

Good, if the english language lacks the word, it lacks the meaning, you can't have a meaning for a word that does not exist.

All you have, are the hit and miss words of the translator trying to give you the sense of the meaning, so you may make a sense of what being said.

Let us look at your quote in your post:

Originally Posted by Shad
Here is 5. You should read your own holy text more often especially if you are talking about presently...

Sahih International
He released the two seas, meeting [side by side];
Muhsin Khan
He has let loosed the two seas (the salt water and the sweet)meeting together.
Pickthall
He hath loosed the two seas. Theymeet.
Yusuf Ali
He has let free the two bodies of flowing water,meeting together:
Shakir
He has made the two seas to flow freely (so that) they meet together:
Dr. Ghali
He merged the two seas (that) together;

Do you see all the words you colored in red to emphasize the meaning of "meet".

Take any word of the translators, wether it release, send , made , etc., put it in a sentence, and ask any reasonable man on the face of the earth, as this ; if two body of waters are released to meet, what will happen, you will find the answer is that, they will mix or merge, yet you kept arguing the verse do not say merge or mix. you lost the sense of the verse.

Now Let me prove to you this is the case with you.

These are the verses that you are arguing about:

19. He merged the two seas, converging together.
20. Between them is a barrier, which they do not overrun.(chapter 55)

now look what the Quran is using in the above two verses and the two below verses for the barrier. The word "Barzakh".

99. Until, when death comes to one of them, he says, “My Lord, send me back.

100. That I may do right in what I have ne- glected.” By no means! It is just a word that he utters. And behind them is a barri- er, until the Day they are resurrected.(chapter 23)

The word "Barazakh" in the verse100, allows human to pass through forward, but not to come back, as the verse says. (it is a barrier for them to come back)

So it is the Quran that is saying, it is "Barazakh", yet, human going through it to the later day.

So if you say That "Barazakh" is a barrier that do not allow passing through, then you will ruin the sense of the meaning in verse 19, and you will be in opposite with verse 19, and verse 100.

*The verses I put were taking from Talal Itani translation.

These are the words of the quran; برزخ ، مرج , So Quran knows best what they mean, and how the Quran is using them is the unparalleled prove of their meaning.

 

[YmirGF]

Take any word of the translators, wether it release, send , made , etc., put it in a sentence, and ask any reasonable man on the face of the earth, as this ; if two body of waters are released to meet, what will happen, you will find the answer is that, they will mix or merge, yet you kept arguing the verse do not say merge or mix. you lost the sense of the verse.

So, you are saying that Muslims who argue that the two bodies of water DO NOT mix are insane? The crux of the matter is what the word meant at the time of the writing... speaking, moaning, raving... etc..

 

[Britedream]

So, you are saying that Muslims who argue that the two bodies of water DO NOT mix are insane? The crux of the matter is what the word meant at the time of the writing... speaking, moaning, raving... etc..

God says, according to your translation. the two seas released to meet.

How can anyone say that they do not mix.

 

[Shad]

Well, Finally You admitted the English language does not have the word "مرج".

Good, if the english language lacks the word, it lacks the meaning, you can't have a meaning for a word that does not exist.

All you have, are the hit and miss words of the translator trying to give you the sense of the meaning, so you may make a sense of what being said.

Hence why linguistics was developed, this is their job

Do you see all the words you colored in red to emphasize the meaning of "meet".

Take any word of the translators, wether it release, send , made , etc., put it in a sentence, and ask any reasonable man on the face of the earth, as this ; if two body of waters are released to meet, what will happen, you will find the answer is that, they will mix or merge, yet you kept arguing the verse do not say merge or mix. you lost the sense of the verse.

So you rely on non-expert's opinions for a verse in the Quran? You may but I do not

The word "Barazakh" in the verse100, allows human to pass through forward, but not to come back, as the verse says. (it is a barrier for them to come back)

Fallacy of weak induction. What is true for something may not be true for another, especially comparing water to the spiritual world

So if you say That "Barazakh" is a barrier that do not allow passing through, then you will ruin the sense of the meaning in verse 19, and you will be in opposite with verse 19, and verse 100.

The word transgress says nothing is allowed through, hence a parameter, Non-sequitur since you ignore the verse.

*The verses I put were taking from Talal Itani translation.

These are the words of the quran; برزخ ، مرج , So Quran knows best what they mean, and how the Quran is using them is the unparalleled prove of their meaning.

You have to take a translation which is reject by scholars in order to even give you argument weight. It is also new showing post hoc rationalization.

You're argument still fails as you have to take an obscure translations while ignoring 33 other versions among those made by linguist. Talal is not even a trained linguist but an Engineer. So you whole argument is an argument from authority(non-expert). You are cherry picking which is a fallacy.

Your argument is moot for all the above fallacies used to even get your argument off the ground.

 

[outhouse]

God says, according to your translation. the two seas released to meet.

How can anyone say that they do not mix.

People who see two different colors in the same area of the sea that never change colors.

In that spot, the water does not mix.

Its not too hard to figure out unless you don't have the intellect to realize man write these verses and men make mistakes. If you claim god did, then you have a pretty dumb god, after all if it was god he would not have to copy all Israelites mythology.

 

[Britedream]

Hence why linguistics was developed, this is their job




So you rely on non-expert's opinions for a verse in the Quran? You may but I do not

Fallacy of weak induction. What is true for something may not be true for another, especially comparing water to the spiritual world


The word transgress says nothing is allowed through, hence a parameter, Non-sequitur since you ignore the verse.

You have to take a translation which is reject by scholars in order to even give you argument weight. It is also new showing post hoc rationalization.

You're argument still fails as you have to take an obscure translations while ignoring 33 other versions among those made by linguist. Talal is not even a trained linguist but an Engineer. So you whole argument is an argument from authority(non-expert). You are cherry picking which is a fallacy.

Your argument is moot for all the above fallacies used to even get your argument off the ground.

English language does not have the words ; barazkh, and mereg.

So you can not have a meaning for a word that does not exist. you have the ill thinking as you did with seas meeting but not mixing. you are emiting nonsense.

I already told you how the Quran treat the barazakh, that is translated to be a barrier. If you think that anyone would be better than the quran for deciding its meaning, then you are the most person that has corrupt reasoning beyond imagination.

You adimt that you do not have the words in your language, yet you know what it means, if you do not have the words , you will not have their meaning. you must first have the words.
So your claim that you know the meaning as the quran, is a hot air.

I do not need the translations, you do need them. do you understand. please stop the nonsense.

It a waste of time to reason with you.
try some body else.

 

[Britedream]

People who see two different colors in the same area of the sea that never change colors.

In that spot, the water does not mix.

Its not too hard to figure out unless you don't have the intellect to realize man write these verses and men make mistakes. If you claim god did, then you have a pretty dumb god, after all if it was god he would not have to copy all Israelites mythology.

With all respect your knowledge to me, does not worth the typing you are doing, just go and reflect on what I said about your knowledge earlier.

 

[outhouse]

just go and reflect on what I said about your knowledge earlier.

I don't follow garbage :sorry1:

 

[Britedream]

I don't follow garbage :sorry1:

With all the respect, that is the reality of yours.

 

[outhouse]

With all the respect, that is the reality of yours.

Yes we know you hate education and knowledge and what is taught in credible colleges all around the world, because it shows all the factual holes in your religion.


Fanaticism and fundamentalism have always hated education. because the truth is not avoided in favor of mythology.



Why cant you answer any questions in a straight forward manner? hiding something?


Why do no educated credible historians in the WHOLE world not use your book for historical truths?



And why is it so hard for you to admit your book has mythology in it?

 

[Britedream]

Yes we know you hate education and knowledge and what is taught in credible colleges all around the world, because it shows all the factual holes in your religion.


Fanaticism and fundamentalism have always hated education. because the truth is not avoided in favor of mythology.



Why cant you answer any questions in a straight forward manner? hiding something?


Why do no educated credible historians in the WHOLE world not use your book for historical truths?



And why is it so hard for you to admit your book has mythology in it?

I truly feel sorry for you, you are misled by your thought in many things.

 

[outhouse]

you are misled by your thought in many things.

that's funny, your the one who will not recognize credible education and sources

and does not have one bit of credible evidence in support of anything

 

[Shad]

English language does not have the words ; barazkh, and mereg.

So you can not have a meaning for a word that does not exist. you have the ill thinking as you did with seas meeting but not mixing. you are emiting nonsense.

I already told you how the Quran treat the barazakh, that is translated to be a barrier. If you think that anyone would be better than the quran for deciding its meaning, then you are the most person that has corrupt reasoning beyond imagination.

You adimt that you do not have the words in your language, yet you know what it means, if you do not have the words , you will not have their meaning. you must first have the words.
So your claim that you know the meaning as the quran, is a hot air.

I do not need the translations, you do need them. do you understand. please stop the nonsense.

It a waste of time to reason with you.
try some body else.

I never corrupted anything, I am merely stating what experts has done while you require a non-expert which is a fallacy. The one source you use is not even credible...

 

[outhouse]

God Is Not Great - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hitchens asserts that there is no evidence for any of the "miraculous" claims about Muhammad, and that the Koran's origin was not supernatural. Hitchens contends that the religion was fabricated by Muhammad or his followers and that it was borrowed from other religious texts, and the hadith was taken from common maxims and sayings which developed throughout Arabia and Persia at the time. Hitchens also identifies similarities between Islam and Christianity, as well as identifying plagiarisms of the Jewish faith.


So I am far from alone, in knowing about the plagiarism that took place

 

[Jp16]

The accepted theory is that Muhammad was given the Quran over a span of 23 years by the angel Gabriel first appearing to him in the cave.

Here is the primary issue followed by a secondary point:

Muhammad was a known trader & one of the many places he traveled was Syria. For the Christians reading this allow me to explain. Syria is the home of Damascus where Paul is alleged to have had his vision. Thus it stands to reason that Muhammad would have been exposed to oral stories of the Torah & the Bible


Bismillah,

Thanks for asking this question. Please consider some of my thoughts of this issue:

1. In those days, the Bible and Torah was not easily available. Even until the time of Martin Luther the sacred knowledge was consealed to the masses. This was one of his critizisms. For a non Jew or Christian to be able to learn the sacred books was just not possible.

2. The amount of information mentioned in the Quran about the stories of old Prophets that are also mentioned in the Bible and the Torah are many and very accurate (as Muslims we of course believe that were they differ, the Bible has gone through change). My point is that He must have been a scholar of the Bible and Torah which doesnt make any sense.

3. It was not known to his people that he had these information. His relatives and society would have known that he had studied these religions.

4. The Quran is the most perfect Arabic literature. The arabs were unable to compete with the Quran (of course since it is from the All Mighty, non can compete with it). There is a challenge in the Quran to compete with it in its beauty, its style and importance. However non has met this challenge in over 1400 years. Muslims and non-Muslims agree upon this. Now what does this has to do with the subject? It adds to the fact that he must have been a scholar of the sacred books and now also be able to translate this information into arabic and put it together in a way which is really not possible for a human, and without anyone finding out what he is doing.

5. The Quran contain many verses that speaks about natural phenomen. Some are very interesting when compared to recent scientific discoveries. Of them is the water-cycle, isotosis and the Big Bang, which are described very accurately. This again adds to him having to be way ahead of the knowledge of his time in all the different sciences.

In the end there is only so much a humanbeing can do. Even if The Prophet Muhammad was the most intelligent person to have ever lived (I believe he was), we cannot justify all of this in one person living 1400 years ago. I mean how can the structure of a mountain even be meassured at that time, not to speak about the Big Bang. It is therefore clear to me that he was a Prophet sent by God.

I hope that answers the question