• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

There are no mistakes in Quran

Shad

Veteran Member
http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/there-are-no-mistakes-in-quran.180191/page-23#post-4685823

Your answers failed as you refuse to use lexicons

Built is past tense, extenders or extending is not.

Does say extender or extending. It says Allah was the one that made it spaceious, wide, etc. A completed process

You said 'all what grows the earth', you mean earth grows.

In which asexual organisms exist and require no pair. The verse idea of things need pairs is based on the outdated idea of sexuality as only being male and female

Asexual reproduction does not mean there are no pairs, male and female. Though the organism reproduces without sexual activity, it is still either male or female.

Yes it does due to the parameter of all

Yes. I dont know my own religion.

Apparently you dont since I had to tell you what Satan is considered in your own religion....

But you said Jin. Even in the source you found, going out of your normal corpus quran to find something that suits you, does not say Jinn.

Already shows this to you, you ignored it. Not my problem. I never went outside of it at all.

And We have certainly beautified the nearest heaven with stars and have made [from] them what is thrown at the devils and have prepared for them the punishment of the Blaze.

Did you just forget that devils are Jinn.....


Another failure on your part.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Your answers failed as you refuse to use lexicons



Does say extender or extending. It says Allah was the one that made it spaceious, wide, etc. A completed process



In which asexual organisms exist and require no pair. The verse idea of things need pairs is based on the outdated idea of sexuality as only being male and female



Yes it does due to the parameter of all



Apparently you dont since I had to tell you what Satan is considered in your own religion....



Already shows this to you, you ignored it. Not my problem. I never went outside of it at all.



Did you just forget that devils are Jinn.....



Another failure on your part.

Peace to you.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Oh wow. That one went over my head. Unless... you're quoting the film, aren't you?

My friend. You have just made me stop my writing, my work and end up watching all kinds of old episodes. Plus, my internet connection is prepaid with limited data. You have just made me eat it all up and add new data. Why oh why. Hahaha.

I think that was from the movie. I only vaguely remember though, its been a ver very long time, makes me feel a bit old but reminiscence is fab.

Nevertheless, thanks for adding a spot of laughter.

Cheers.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I've heard in the Quran the Prophet Mohammed said drinking Urine is good for you. I assume this was divine revelation as well for Muslims.

That is not from the Quran, good God.

There was a neighbour who I used to hate because he was richer than me. And he had a better physique. So one day when he was sick I gave him urine. He lapped it up. To justify it I said its a tradition.

Lol.
 

savethedreams

Active Member
That is not from the Quran, good God.

There was a neighbour who I used to hate because he was richer than me. And he had a better physique. So one day when he was sick I gave him urine. He lapped it up. To justify it I said its a tradition.

Lol.


Unless a Muslim is a Quranist, they should, according to many Muslims take the Hadiths seriously. That would be part of it. The Prophet Mohammed did say it and its in a 'holy' book , and it is quoted in Quran to follow this prophet.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Unless a Muslim is a Quranist, they should, according to many Muslims take the Hadiths seriously. That would be part of it. The Prophet Mohammed did say it and its in a 'holy' book , and it is quoted in Quran to follow this prophet.

The thread is about mistakes in the Quran.

You can school me about theology and the science of hadith etc separately and I will appreciate that. But this thread is about Mistakes in the Quran.

Cheers
 

psychoslice

Veteran Member
How could you truly know the mistakes, what have you to measure it against, for me personally its just another version that suited Mohammad and his idea of God, if I made up a story, then how could I say that it is without mistakes, its just a story.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
How could you truly know the mistakes, what have you to measure it against, for me personally its just another version that suited Mohammad and his idea of God, if I made up a story, then how could I say that it is without mistakes, its just a story.

How do you know there are mistakes. Someone told you right? We must all accept the truth brother. WE are mostly driven by what others told us.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
How do you know there are mistakes. Someone told you right? We must all accept the truth brother. WE are mostly driven by what others told us.

Hoping that you or others who in thread are actually discussing with a lot of knowledge even to surprise me, would not get offended or thing otherwise.

I have read the Quran from cover to cover 5 times y the time I was 9 years old. That was only in Arabic. The original language. To be frank I learnt the meaning only much later. But I did. Also I have counted the number of times I read the bible from cover to cover. 31 times in total. Still I say that numbers wont count to anything.

Its a pledge. Please do the same. Dont only listen to others and just blurt things out.

It might not benefit society. It will make you more authentic.

Cheers.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Unless a Muslim is a Quranist, they should, according to many Muslims take the Hadiths seriously. That would be part of it. The Prophet Mohammed did say it and its in a 'holy' book , and it is quoted in Quran to follow this prophet.
It does not mean Hadith which were collected 250/300 years after Muhammad.
Regards
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I would like to say something, maybe for the first time. Maybe, dont curse me or mock me for this unless its some constructive and really insane pun that I would also enjoy. Like why did the chicken go to the male toilet? Thats because thats where all the cocks hangout.

Guys, I understand that many of you think that we Muslims are just reinterpreting the Quran to suit our agenda. But I must say that you have misunderstood us. All of us evolve with time. Science, technology and our thinking patterns of course do evolve. Each society has some influence on one another.

But you must also understand that a word has several meanings and as time passes by we evaluate based on our current knowledge, but provided we dont use current language we are good to go. There are some instances when people have translated the word Kafir as infidels. But what does infidel mean? In my context, it means someone who cheats on his wife. BTW, I did not cheat on my wife, and it will never happen. So in case one of my relatives get married to one of your relatives please dont keep this against me.

We Muslims also reinterpret other things. Like Wife beating. Let me tell you directly that this is an absurd, astounding, egoistic and hypocritical interpretation. I can prove why.

This is a cut and paste from another book of mine.

It is common knowledge that Islam allows women to be beaten. Most traditional translators have interpreted this verse 4:34 to propagate the same. Some even go to the length of quoting a hadith that says beat her with a toothbrush. Picture a man beating a woman with a toothbrush. Traditionally, women were thought to have lesser intellect and the men had a much superior position in societies but the world has seen too many state leaders, authors, philosophers and intellectual women to consider them to be beaten with a toothbrush. These are all translators who were born way after Islamic practices have been established based on evolution of Hadith and other
interpolations where the translators approach the Quran with preconceived notions, thus measuring the yardstick with the cloth.

The verse in concern and its analysis based on the Quran.

Let me furnish the Yusuf Ali translation that lets the respect of a woman down by enforcing a man’s right to beat her.

Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from
their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct , admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all). - Quran 4:34

The word used here for beat is “Idribuhun”. This word has many meanings as Arabic usually is and the meaning changes depending on the context of what you are saying. Take a simple example of the English word beat.

e.g. I beat him and broke his nose
I beat him in the 100 meter race by .2 seconds

You could see the difference in the meaning of the same word when you take the word in context. Now, let’s explore the Arabic word “Idribuhunna”
derived from the root “Daraba”.
The Quran is one book and understanding must be based on the context of the Quran. Islam establishes harmony and tranquility in the man and woman relationship. By showing Quranic evidence I will prove that it is very easy to understand that this verse simply tells you to “separate” and not to “beat”. Other verses that have the same word “Idribuhunna” The Quran has used this word in many other verses and the word has many meanings. It has been translated as give, move, cover, separate and to strike (as in strike their feet on the ground) over 40 times in the Quran as far as my research has found.  So we sealed (Fadarabna – Same root word Daraba) their ears in the cave for many years. – Quran 18:11 When it comes to so many verses the word is never translatable as “Beat” but the egoistic, ignorant, male supremacy in the Muslim men who translated the verse, in combination with illogical and extremely questionable idea of measuring the yardstick with the cloth the great scholars who translated the Quran has been bias and they want to translate the verse as Beat. There are two words used in this that need relooking at. The word Idribuhunna simply means “Separate” and Nushuz means disloyalty (e.g. extra marital affairs)

1. The men are to support the women with what God has bestowed upon them over one another and for what they spend of their money.
2. The upright females are dutiful; keeping private the personal matters for what God keeps watch over.
3. As for those females from whom you fear desertion (Nushuz),

a. then you shall advise them,
b. and abandon them in the bedchamber,
c. and separate (Idribuhunna) from them.
4. If they respond to you, then do not seek a way over them; God is Most High, Great. – Quran 4:34

Analysis of 4:34
1. It is the man’s responsibility or duty to provide for the woman. That is not to say that women cannot seek employment or that she must stay at home but that it is the man’s responsibility and he must take it upon himself. The Quran preaches equity.
2. Women are to be bound by the duty of protecting the privacy and chastity of a man woman relationship. It is the man’s prerogative to expect the woman to be loyal as much as she expects from him. Is that not obvious?
3. If the woman desserts you or is being disloyal,
a. you must try advising them,
b. If that doesn’t work you must stop your sexual activities with her
c. Then separate from her.
4. If the woman responds to this process by changing her ways, then don’t let her down because God knows best.

This is the more logical and obvious interpretation of this verse. But if you are bizarre in mind and come from a women beating society, with that preconceived notion, you could interpret it as beat the woman. But from the Quranic point of view and context, you cannot beat your wife. Quran establishes the nature of the relationship between a man and a woman in the following verse.

Among His signs is that He created for you spouses from among yourselves, in order to have tranquillity and contentment with each other. He places in your heart love and care towards your spouses. In this, there are signs for people who think." (30:21)

Phew, If you have read so far, you have too much patience. You might be taken for granted by those who dont really respect you, or respect themselves. Errm, Yes, I did mean that as a joke.

So you hopefully see that we are reinterpreting the Quran in the context of the Quran. For years, the Quran was interpreted based on Hadith. I dont have a problem with Hadith, as long as you or I as intelligent human beings dont use unauthentic B.S against the claimed authentic document. I say again, "Claimed"/

I know that anyone who does not call himself Muslims will not believe that the Quran is an authentic book. That does not matter. Purely from the Muslims point of view, their theological foundation is the Quran. If you wish to break that foundation thats a different topic and has to be taken separately. I am just posting as a Muslim.

There are many, I say again may other things that we are analysing. So when you say that we have reinterpreted the Quran to suit science, please also think that we can. It is one word.

Please dont take this wrong when I use an example. The bible says that the earth is circular. You simply cannot reinterpret it to mean spherical.

I mean, if some story says that some birds drop off children and thats how we are born, you cant reinterpret it. But you can easily, based on the context of the whole book, not just a verse or a chapter, a word like daraba. Men do not have any right to beat women. Thats bull****.
Egoistic and idiotic individuals have intentionally translated it that way because they want their women to be subservient.

Well, I know that some of us who are simply bias and arrogant will not acknowledge, but thats the world we live int.

So be it.

Cheers and hope you have a great week end.

I surely will.

Peace;
 
Last edited:

Shad

Veteran Member
I would like to say something, maybe for the first time. Maybe, dont curse me or mock me for this unless its some constructive and really insane pun that I would also enjoy. Like why did the chicken go to the male toilet? Thats because thats where all the cocks hangout.

Guys, I understand that many of you think that we Muslims are just reinterpreting the Quran to suit our agenda. But I must say that you have misunderstood us. All of us evolve with time. Science, technology and our thinking patterns of course do evolve. Each society has some influence on one another.

You are as Tasfir support my claims of widen rather than your claim expander. Perhaps you should start reading the exegesis within your own religion prior to the modern reworking of it.

But you must also understand that a word has several meanings and as time passes by we evaluate based on our current knowledge, but provided we dont use current language we are good to go. There are some instances when people have translated the word Kafir as infidels. But what does infidel mean? In my context, it means someone who cheats on his wife. BTW, I did not cheat on my wife, and it will never happen. So in case one of my relatives get married to one of your relatives please dont keep this against me.

A meaning that changes after the fact. This is just post hoc rationalization.

We Muslims also reinterpret other things. Like Wife beating. Let me tell you directly that this is an absurd, astounding, egoistic and hypocritical interpretation. I can prove why.

No you ignore what the word means as it makes Islam look horrible.

This is a cut and paste from another book of mine.

It is common knowledge that Islam allows women to be beaten. Most traditional translators have interpreted this verse 4:34 to propagate the same. Some even go to the length of quoting a hadith that says beat her with a toothbrush. Picture a man beating a woman with a toothbrush. Traditionally, women were thought to have lesser intellect and the men had a much superior position in societies but the world has seen too many state leaders, authors, philosophers and intellectual women to consider them to be beaten with a toothbrush. These are all translators who were born way after Islamic practices have been established based on evolution of Hadith and other
interpolations where the translators approach the Quran with preconceived notions, thus measuring the yardstick with the cloth.

Post hoc rationalization. Your logic is so flawed that you think a verse which has an increasing level of severity of acts ends with a tap. "Wife, first I am going to lecture you. If that fails I am going to sleep away from you. If both those fail I will tap you with a toothbrush" "Oh husband, the lecture and leveling the bed did not convince me but your tapping did!"

]Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from
their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct , admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all). - Quran 4:34

Failure in logic and more post hoc rationalization translations. The bracket comments show that the translator is inserting words to make it sound more reasonable.

[/quote]The word used here for beat is “Idribuhun”. This word has many meanings as Arabic usually is and the meaning changes depending on the context of what you are saying. Take a simple example of the English word beat.

e.g. I beat him and broke his nose
I beat him in the 100 meter race by .2 seconds [/quote]

Translations do not work this way. You can not reference a different meaning of a word in another language then reverse translate this to Arabic.

You could see the difference in the meaning of the same word when you take the word in context. Now, let’s explore the Arabic word “Idribuhunna”
derived from the root “Daraba”.
The Quran is one book and understanding must be based on the context of the Quran. Islam establishes harmony and tranquility in the man and woman relationship. By showing Quranic evidence I will prove that it is very easy to understand that this verse simply tells you to “separate” and not to “beat”. Other verses that have the same word “Idribuhunna” The Quran has used this word in many other verses and the word has many meanings. It has been translated as give, move, cover, separate and to strike (as in strike their feet on the ground) over 40 times in the Quran as far as my research has found.  So we sealed (Fadarabna – Same root word Daraba) their ears in the cave for many years. – Quran 18:11 When it comes to so many verses the word is never translatable as “Beat” but the egoistic, ignorant, male supremacy in the Muslim men who translated the verse, in combination with illogical and extremely questionable idea of measuring the yardstick with the cloth the great scholars who translated the Quran has been bias and they want to translate the verse as Beat. There are two words used in this that need relooking at. The word Idribuhunna simply means “Separate” and Nushuz means disloyalty (e.g. extra marital affairs)

Yet every lexicon and translation still uses beat and strike as in violence not your word twisting.

http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=34 Again ignoring lexicons which actually address this verse.

Separate is prior to the beating. Yet all translation show the hit means physical violence. You ignore the context of the verse and go to other sources which makes your argument. Quoting out of context is a fallacy. The rest of your analysis fails on your refusal to use context in question then insert a different context to argue your point.

This is the more logical and obvious interpretation of this verse. But if you are bizarre in mind and come from a women beating society, with that preconceived notion, you could interpret it as beat the woman. But from the Quranic point of view and context, you cannot beat your wife. Quran establishes the nature of the relationship between a man and a woman in the following verse.

Your logic is flawed as severity increases, lexicons disagree with out and so do mainstream translations. Your argument amounts to 1: Not having a source. 2. All translations but your own is wrong. 3. All lexicons are wrong.

So you hopefully see that we are reinterpreting the Quran in the context of the Quran. For years, the Quran was interpreted based on Hadith. I dont have a problem with Hadith, as long as you or I as intelligent human beings dont use unauthentic B.S against the claimed authentic document. I say again, "Claimed"/

I see translating the text in modern light in order for it to confirm to modern standards as the standards of the text are outdated, barbaric is many cases and show the mind of a man.

I know that anyone who does not call himself Muslims will not believe that the Quran is an authentic book. That does not matter. Purely from the Muslims point of view, their theological foundation is the Quran. If you wish to break that foundation thats a different topic and has to be taken separately. I am just posting as a Muslim.

You heard it here. Ideology is first, ignore lexicons which address this verse, ignore the translations, ignore the language, ignore the context, ignore tafsir, ignore hadith. Remember Lane's Lexicon that you said to read. Maybe you should as well since the root word means physical beating/striking as a majority in the lexicon.

There are many, I say again may other things that we are analysing. So when you say that we have reinterpreted the Quran to suit science, please also think that we can. It is one word.

One word in a verse which has centuries of support in the beating definition and only a modern movement for your own view

You are appealing to peoples emotions, nothing more. Your argument is unsupported.
 
Last edited:

firedragon

Veteran Member
You are as Tasfir support my claims of widen rather than your claim expander. Perhaps you should start reading the exegesis within your own religion prior to the modern reworking of it.



A meaning that changes after the fact. This is just post hoc rationalization.



No you ignore what the word means as it makes Islam look horrible.

This is a cut and paste from another book of mine.



Post hoc rationalization. Your logic is so flawed that you think a verse which has an increasing level of severity of acts ends with a tap. "Wife, first I am going to lecture you. If that fails I am going to sleep away from you. If both those fail I will tap you with a toothbrush" "Oh husband, the lecture and leveling the bed did not convince me but your tapping did!"



Failure in logic and more post hoc rationalization translations. The bracket comments show that the translator is inserting words to make it sound more reasonable.
The word used here for beat is “Idribuhun”. This word has many meanings as Arabic usually is and the meaning changes depending on the context of what you are saying. Take a simple example of the English word beat.

e.g. I beat him and broke his nose
I beat him in the 100 meter race by .2 seconds [/quote]


No scholar, lexicon or God can say that Daraba does not mean to separate, put a barrier. You should check the lexicons again. Your posts are with no knowledge in the language, only backward logic that appeals to the same kind.

If you would like to do the same rendering as those false tradition mongering Arabs who intentionally screw meanings, you are the same.

Peace.
 

Aquitaine

Well-Known Member
Name me one biological mistake? One chemistry and one cosmology related.

Thanks.

I've updated my list now that I'm off mobile. Just to recap, so far I have seen the following errors:

Biology
Al-Tariq (86:5-7),
Sperm coming from the tip of the spine.
Sad (38:71-72),
First human (lolwut) made from clay.
As-Saffat (37:11),
Humans being made from sticky clay.
Al-Mu'Minun (23:12),
Yet again humans being made from clay.
Al-Furqan (25:54),
Humans are now made from water.

Chemistry
Al-Furqan (25:53),
Saltwater and Freshwater do not mix.

Physics
-Cosmology
As-Saffat (37:6-7),
Stars being used to help defend the nearest "Heaven" from devils.

I look forward to being told that I have misinterpreted these verses, and that Arabic is an immensely complex and flexible language with many interchangeable meanings for each word; something which negates any purpose in trying to literally interpret scripture anyway.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
The word used here for beat is “Idribuhun”. This word has many meanings as Arabic usually is and the meaning changes depending on the context of what you are saying. Take a simple example of the English word beat.

e.g. I beat him and broke his nose
I beat him in the 100 meter race by .2 seconds


I guess you do not understand how verbs and nouns work. A verb's definition changes according the noun it is linked to. So the verb "hitting" or "beat" becomes modified by the noun "road". In this case the object is not a road thus the modification is no longer applicable. In the verse' case the noun is the wife not a road. All you are doing is shift the noun from one context to another, nothing more. This is an out of context fallacy. Try again

Congratulation on your inability to understand basic grammar.


No scholar, lexicon or God can say that Daraba does not mean to separate, put a barrier. You should check the lexicons again. Your posts are with no knowledge in the language, only backward logic that appeals to the same kind.

Yet it is in Lane's Lexicon as beating when linked to a person. As does the lexicon for the Quran. As I said it is in both lexicons. Seems like you do not understand grammar combined with a refusal to use lexicons for the obvious reason it shows you are wrong.

If you would like to do the same rendering as those false tradition mongering Arabs who intentionally screw meanings, you are the same.

Yes that must be it. For centuries Arabs purposely used the definition of physical violence until your modern ad hoc rescue shows this to be in error. Hilarious. You have admitted that the verse was about violence for centuries by pointing out the previous values, tradition, justified it as violence and accept that definition. You also display unwittingly that your argument is modern thus can be concluded as a rationalization using modern values to save the verse from scrutiny.
 
Last edited:
Top