There are no mistakes in Quran

[Jabar]

@ A Greased Scotsman Can you avoid the nonsense talk and give me one error in the Quran because you seriously are beating around the bush. I have given my evidence. You have not even given me one actual error. (NO MISCONCEPTIONS OR MISTRANSLATIONS)

 

[YmirGF]

@YmirGF You just said that it is unlikely that i would possibly understand. The same way it is unlikely that you understand what the Quran says. I never called Atheism a religion i stated beliefs, beliefs are not just in religion. How am i delusional when i say people misconcept the Quran when they clearly do. They point out an ´´error´´ but they do not know that they are making misconceptions. Just as you are. Evolution is not real. If you ask scientists about how evolution is real, there is no scientific evidence that in fact it is real. EXACTLY, you see i misconcepted about the fact that you said i used evolution. I admit it. You however misconcept the Quran and still do not admit your misconception. They are actual misconceptions but due to your arrogance you do not agree. Quran remains divine, and with no error. Until you can prove me wrong which i am 100% sure you cannot.

Oh, my friend, I've been studying Islam (from authentic Islamic sources) since Sept.11, 2001. I have learned a lot about Muslims and Islam, but I understand that I have barely scratched the surface. The one thing that I do know - for a fact - is that no single Muslim speaks for Islam since the abolition of the caliphate. Likewise, I'm well aware at the myriad of interpretations that exist in the Muslim world. You bring a hundred "scholars" to bolster your point. I can find another 100 "scholars" who bolster my points.

Yes, there are a lot of misconceptions about Islam and that is mainly because of the myriad of opinions expressed, over the centuries, about what a given ayat means.

One thing I love about the Qur'an is the amusing little "challenge". The point is who judges if something is of merit that would eclipse the Qur'an? Muslims, on the whole, would not accept the judgment of any non-Muslim authorities and no Muslim would ever admit that any work was better or even equal to the Qur'an, so the challenge fails on that alone. The whole point of a challenge is that there are clearly defined guidelines, it is possible to work within those guidelines and that ones efforts will be FAIRLY judged upon completion. The Qur'an "challenge" fails on all three of the last points.

1. The challenge itself is not particularly clear
2. Due to the confusion of the instructions it is not possible to work within meaningful guidelines
3. No work could possibly be judged fairly by Muslims as they are already biased in favor of the Qur'an. (IE. "Quran remains divine, and with no error.")


Do you understand what I am saying here?

Evolution is not real

Given that you think a god authored a book for mere mortals it is somewhat obvious that you have a different definition of reality than a person with reasonably good critical thinking skills.

 

[YmirGF]

@ A Greased Scotsman Can you avoid the nonsense talk and give me one error in the Quran because you seriously are beating around the bush. I have given my evidence. You have not even given me one actual error. (NO MISCONCEPTIONS OR MISTRANSLATIONS)

How about 2:256 "There is no compulsion in religion."

Oddly, during his stint in the Hira cave, Muhammad was most certainly compelled to "read/recite" by the ArchAngel Gabriel... (If the stories can be believed, that is).
If there is no compulsion in religion/faith then why did Gabriel have to compel Muhammad to read/recite? From that first story quite obviously there IS compulsion in religion/faith... so the Qur'an is either wrong or the famous stories about Muhammad meeting Gabriel are wrong.

 

[Jabar]

@YmirGF Exactly i understand what you are saying here. Of course as you said Muslims will agree with what they believe in and Atheists will agree on what they believe in. I respect you a little for calling the Quran a challenge but making it as though it still little challenge to you because others are even worse then you and insult the Quran and say it is no challenge and it is fake. However i disagree with a a few points you made:
Point 1: You say the challenge itself is not very clear. I would disagree. It is easy to perceive as it is just a matter of finding the answer. It is just the people do not put an effort even with the answers and technology at their fingertips. (Translations, misconceptions, etc.) or it is their arrogance. As Allah explained they will disbelieve as they are disbelievers. You would agree that you stick to your own beliefs and disagree with mine as well as i disagree with yours. Evidence does not matter in this debate because it probably will not make you believe differently.
Point 2: It is not the confusion of the instructions it is the way they misconcept the Quran. They believe that it actually intended or stated that when the Word of God was never of that sort.
Point 3: I agree that yes there are some muslims that do not judge carefully and fairly because of the Quran but they are not really doing the right thing. However, if you intend to say i am one of them you are incorrect because i am open to new ideas and look for evidence that proves otherwise but i have not come across any of such sort. You yourself would agree that everyone is entitled to there own opinion. That is what i am entitled to. But that does not mean biased just because of the favor of Quran. Because i am open to all evidence. However, i have not come across anything that can prove the Quran wrong and i base that judgement off of that.
You are saying my own beliefs contradict with other peoples beliefs. But anyone can have their belief but have no evidence or proof behind it. Which is why i am challenging everyone and i have still not been disapproved even with these so called good critical thinkers.

 

[paarsurrey]

No historians or archaeologists today have presented any evidences to the biblical characters that I have already mentioned and many more that I haven't mentioned (like Isaac, Jacob, Joshua and his brothers, Ruth, etc), that these people exist.

Historian never claim that they are always 100% correct or they have covered all the events happening all the time in the world? Do they? Please
Regards

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

You are talking about two different discussions.

Incorrect, re-read how we got to this point.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

What events does the Quran have about Muhammed? Show me the verse.

By the way, I have stopped using terms like Brother and Bro, at least as much as I can so please dont be offended it a sentence sounds rude. From where I come, it is hard to construct a sentence without using words like that. But some people get anal about them.

Uhm...Im asking you if you can prove that Archangel Gabriel came to Muhammad.

That's nice of you, but not necessary.

 

[Jabar]

@YmirGF Or either you are misconcepted. There is no compulsion in acceptance of religion in the Quran. DO not misconcept the verse or if you looked at a different translation then it is a mistranslation you read. There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.

 

[Jabar]

@YmirGF The Arabic word taghut or taaghoot (ar. طاغوت, ṭāġūt, pl. ṭawāġīt) means to "cross the limits, overstep boundaries," or "to rebel." In Islamic theology, the word refers to idolatry or to the worship of anything except Allah. Allah is saying whoever disbelieves in idolatry and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworth handhold with no break in it.
Allah S.W.A.T is saying whoever disbelieves. So when he said there is no compulsion in religion. He was telling us that there is no compulsion in the acceptance of religion because of what he stated afterword. But people obviously misconcept it. It also says the right path is known from the wrong. This all proves that you misconcepted what Allah said.

 

[Jabar]

@YmirGF Good point though brother.

 

[YmirGF]

@YmirGF The Arabic word taghut or taaghoot (ar. طاغوت, ṭāġūt, pl. ṭawāġīt) means to "cross the limits, overstep boundaries," or "to rebel." In Islamic theology, the word refers to idolatry or to the worship of anything except Allah. Allah is saying whoever disbelieves in idolatry and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworth handhold with no break in it.
Allah S.W.A.T is saying whoever disbelieves. So when he said there is no compulsion in religion. He was telling us that there is no compulsion in the acceptance of religion because of what he stated afterword. But people obviously misconcept it. It also says the right path is known from the wrong. This all proves that you misconcepted what Allah said.

No, I got what Allah supposedly was saying. That much is pretty obvious. The niggling point is in how Muhammad was treated by Gabriel. It makes a bit of a mockery of the whole idea, but I understand that "There should only be compulsion when all else fails" doesn't sound quite so appealing to the reader.

Oh, and a wee tip on usage of the English language. There is no such word, in English, as misconcept. The word you are intending to use is "misconception".
2nd note: Are you really only 15? I have wrinkles older than that.

 

[Jabar]

@YmirGF Haha. It was a test to Muhammad. After he woke up he felt as though he had the words in his heart. He was not treated bad, this was a test. Yeah i made a misconception on the word selection there. Thank you for correcting me. Yes i am 15, haha maybe they are older then that. But take into consideration that i have studied religion basically all my life. I do not think this really is relevant but i am 6 feet in height with a full grown beard.

 

[Jabar]

@YmirGF Btw you did not know what Allah said because look: Oddly, during his stint in the Hira cave, Muhammad was most certainly compelled to "read/recite" by the ArchAngel Gabriel... (If the stories can be believed, that is).
If there is no compulsion in religion/faith then why did Gabriel have to compel Muhammad to read/recite? From that first story quite obviously there IS compulsion in religion/faith... so the Qur'an is either wrong or the famous stories about Muhammad meeting Gabriel are wrong.

 

[Undefine Existence]

It is due to wrong understanding of Quran, much propagated by the opposing websites.
If one studies Quran oneself:

• intently
• unbiased
• with an open mind
• and with correct approach

One won't find any mistakes in Quran.
Thread open for discussion to everybody.
Regards

I know that in the back of your mind even you don't believe such a thing. You feel you should but you don't. Inside your much smarter. Break through the mental prison. See past a book.

 

[gnostic]

11:61 It is He Who hath produced you from the earth

The Genesis say as much that God created the earth. But so have other religions, like from Sumerian-Akkadian-Babylonian and the Egyptian myths. So this Qur'aic verse (11:61) provided nothing new, and certainly not unique.

And it still doesn't EXPLAIN anything.

If you think there is science in the Qur'an, then it should HOW did Allah create the Earth? Does the Qur'an explain that? It is a BIG FAT NO!
"God did it" is not intelligent answer; it is simply you expressing your superstitious belief.

Now, if Allah actually explain HOW he made the Earth, then I would be more suitably impress, or even be AWE-STRUCK. But I am not impress of 10-word verse. The word "produced" doesn't explain how.

Or dry clay (Arabic Salsaal)?
15:26,28,33 We created man from sounding clay
17:61 ... Thou didst create from clay
32:7 He began the creation of man from clay
Did we come from nothing?
19:67 We created him before out of nothing
No, we did not!
52:35 Were they created of nothing?
Did we come from mud?
23:12 We created man from a product of wet earth (loam) (Pickthall)
23:12 Man We did create from a quintessence (of clay)
38:71 I am about to create a mortal out of mire

Or water?
25:54 It is He Who has created man from water (see also 21:30, 24:45)

Could it be dust?
3:59 He created (Jesus) out of dust
30:20 He created you from dust
35:11 Allah did create you from dust ....

And once again, I am not impress with any of the above quotes from the Qur'an.

Genesis also say that man was created from dust, but we are not made of dust, because dust is by-product waste.
And man being made out of clay, also demonstrate the Qur'an idiot book, and it is not even original.

In the Epic of Gilgamesh, the gods created Enkidu from, who would become Gilgamesh's companion, is found as early as the Old Babylonian version (19th-16th century BCE).

Around the same time, the Epic of Atrahasis, the Old Babylonian version of Noah, predated Genesis Flood story by at least 800 years. In this, the gods created group of men (and women, of course), to help with building cities, temples and irrigate the farmland.

And guess what, Jabar?

They were made out of clay too?

In fact, these clay-turn-to-men were actually made from clay and the blood of sacrificed god - Ilawela, the god of intelligence.

Do you not see why I am not at all impress with the Qur'an?

And these two epics are not even the oldest myth about men being created from clay.

In the clay tablet about Enki and Ninmah.

The goddess Nammu lead other birth goddesses to produce men out of clay. Later at celebratory feast, the god Enki and goddess Ninmah got into argument into who could create a better group of humans.

Enki produce healthy humans, while Ninmah produce enuch and deformed humans.

And even your quotes about people being made out of water ), are not original in the Qur'an (21:30, 24:45).

I have already mentioned the slain god Ilawela in the Epic of Atrahasis, in which the gods use his blood mixed with clay to produce life.

But there is a papyrus dated to 15th century BCE, in which it say that humans were made from the tears of the sun god Re (or Ra).

The Qur'an just showed that the Arabs of that time, including Muhammad haven't grown out of their superstitious fairy-tales phase yet. The Qur'an is no more believable than those ancient myths.

If the Qur'an explain in detail its creation, then I would be impressed, but so far everything you quoted, including posts 811 to 814, demonstrate only how truly unintelligent and uninspiring this book really is.

 

[gnostic]

When one believes that God created the universe, understanding animals will be such an easy task dont you think?

Yeah, sure...if I was was a four-year old, I would be super-duper impressed of talking animals, which I could see all the time, in cartoons, animation, in the Kiddie channel. Awesome!

But I am not a kid, and I don't believe in fairytale. And the Qur'an is not better than a fairytale.

 

[gnostic]

• Quran is a Joke

I have already given you that, firedragon. The one about Solomon, being able to control winds and jinns, and talk to animals. Hilarious. I always get a good laugh when I read

I am not going to repeat my reasoning about Solomon again.

But here is another joke: Allah creating man (Adam) out of clay.

Iblis (Satan) and Adam is another joke (Qur'an 7). Iblis getting jealous because Allah demanded everyone (angels and jinns) to prostrate before Adam. And Ibis claiming he is made out of smokeless fire while man is made out of clay.

As to Muhammad in the Qur'an. Then let me be quite clear about this: The Night Journey (Isra and Mi'raj) is not only inaccurate, but a silly joke.

He claimed to have travel to the furthest mosque, which most Muslim scholars believe it to be Jerusalem, except there have never been a mosque there during Muhammad's time, and never before that.

Second, the ruin remains of the Jewish temple was destroyed in 70 CE, is a second temple, built during the late 6th century BCE, and expanded by Herod the Great in the late 1st century BCE.

The first temple, said to be built by Solomon, but was actually built in the 2nd half of 8th century BCE, was destroyed in 586 BCE.

So what did Muhammad visited? He visit nothing, and have been no where near Jerusalem. It is just more fairytale invented by Muhammad.

And the Hadith expanded on Muhammad's silly story (Isra and Mi'raj), by saying that he flew there on winged steed. Muslims have wild imagination, but that's all it is.

More reason for me to think the Qur'an is an idiot book.

 

[Shad]

What you say is is people have no issue with 4:34 as it is. Of course. They are not aware.

Of course since they already accept what the word means and do not need people that do not understand Arabic telling them otherwise.

Sajoo and Ghani or not Arabic scholars anyway.

Neither are you nor a single source you have used.

But I am sure if you show them the verse and ask them if it can be interpreted as go away, with out looking at hadith, they would agree.

AKA ignore the evidence against the view your support and ignore the mistakes in Arabic you have made.

Ms. Ghani is a very respected lady. I am sure she will understand the point, though you dont seem to.

Doubtful since she writes about problems of women in Muslim nations

What does Taj Hashmi say?

Read his work on ethic, women and Islam.

Both are the same. If any one has the stupidity to say no, my GOd, I dont know what to say. Its the same word. It is the pronunciation of the Arabic letter Lad. Some write it Dad. Or Dhad. But its not the same as Lam, Dhal. Probably the most complicated pronunciation in the Arabic alphabet.

So you early complaint was nothing

Now, show me they are different and how I can contradict between Laraba and Daraba, them both being the same word, same Arabic letters.

I have posted what you said a few times already. Read my post and you wouldn't have missed it

Thus, you have rejected four scholars based on one argument, they all did the same thing as me.

No I rejected them for the same reasons you have used. None are scholars of the Quran, thanks for your standards btw. Also they use the same premise, Mo never hit his wives, as a point yet in hadith he did. This is why you want to reject ahadith, since it make the premise nonsense. They make same mistake in Arabic you have presented, after all your argument is based on their work. Which I pointed out weeks ago. All 4 use the same argument Hassan mentioned. Both ignore Lane's Lexicon when it identifies a different, and later, verse so should how the work can mean what you claim. However 4:34 is not such a verse.

 

[Shad]

I would like to see your research for the conclusions.

• Inaccurate Events about Muhammed in the Quran
• Quran is a Joke

Never said the Quran was a joke. If anything your interpretation of it is. There are other examples in which people hit women if you look.

http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/muslim/004-smt.php#004.2127
http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/abudawud/011-sat.php#011.0002139-2142
http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/082-sbt.php#008.082.828

 

[Shad]

Thus you reject scholars who understand the Quran from its own merit.

Nope I have reject argument based on poor knowledge of Arabic. None of these scholars meets even your criteria which amusing vanishes when someone supports your view. Also their error in what Mo never hit anyone, he did see my previous posts

And you support those who use dubious and hearsay based documents written centuries later.

Not dubious since many were endorsed by one of primary Islamic universities on the planet, none of your authors have that. Many of my source know Arabic as a professional and native tongue while your sources do not. One took 3 years of Arabic yet Shakir spoke Arabic from childhood. You own source rely on their ignorance of these sources, after all one of their premises is that Mo didn't hit anyone yet he did even in ahdaith So they rely on the same source, they just happen to be ignorant of these sources against their views

Bravo.

Oh please. Your own standards vanish when you find fringe scholars that agree with you but do not meet your own criteria you used against my argument. Amusing double-standards and a break down in your logic.