U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-10-2019, 07:17 AM
 
3,233 posts, read 1,085,567 times
Reputation: 296

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
I admit that my statement was not correct concerning that the man who had his head split open from being struck in the head by a hunting bow.
That’s why I had asked you to watch the film. Hamzah did hit the guy but Hamzah was not Muslim yet. And the film does not show his head was split open. Nothing like that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Mohammud's uncle Hamzah, violently struck Abu Jahl and split his head open but this did not kill him. I was wrong to assume that he died or just did not read the Hadith that shows that he lived through the violent assault.
So you have been assuming something that would not be good for Islam. Is that your aim here; negative assumption about Islam?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-10-2019, 07:43 AM
 
3,233 posts, read 1,085,567 times
Reputation: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
But your last statement you made is a very relevant thing to say. The LOGIC is that Mohammud was winning in achieving his plans to bribe and manipulate others around him to join him as he threatened others with a VIOLENT OUTCOME that would potentially follow or befall upon them if they also did not join him.
This is another assumption.
Muhamad bribed nobody instead attempt by Meccans was made to bribe Muhamad through his uncle (the Quraish leader). Muhammad had rejected their bribery by saying to Abu Talib, "O My Uncle, even if you put the Sun in my right hand and Moon in my left, I will not give up this mission (of spreading God's word) until I die".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Hadith of Al Tabari was produced around 200 - 300 years after Mohammad.

But also there are no Quranic Manuscripts existing until 200 - 300 years after Mohammud as well.
Now you want the Qur’an to be equated with the hadith books?
If Tabari is talking about the Qur’an and writing tafsir of the Qur'an then you need to use LOGIC here and understand that the Qur’an existed before Tabari even began to write. This will mess up a lot of what you have written here in your post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
After Mohammad had died - most of the Quran still was not completed or compiled and finished in written manuscripts. -
Every single verse was written down in presence of the messenger and people had memorized them too. Written material was given to various companions for safe-keeping. All the written material that was also memorized was COMPILED into a complete Book after Muhammad had passed away. The written material or the memory of the companions hadn’t died with Muhammad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
the Muslim people who lived around Mohammad had only memorized the larger portion of the Quran.
They had memorized every verse that was revealed as it was revealed as well as was written down as it was revealed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
However shortly after Mohammad’s death, there was a battle where many Muslims who had memorized the Quran were killed in battle.
Yes, they had memorized THE QUR’AN.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
With the fear that other portions of the Quran lost due to the fact they most of it was only in the recitation and only in the memories of the many Muslims who had died in battle, the rest of the Muslims then decided to write the Quran down in Arabic – from their mental ability to remember the Quran’s messages.
This is incorrect and is not complete. They had the verses with them in written form but they were worried that the memorizers were getting less in number. They did not want one form of the evidence to be completely lost. At this stage, they had with them the Qur’an in two forms; individual written verses form and the memorized verses form.

All verses were written down as well as memorized. The question had come up that the written material (in form of individual verses) would not be taken as authentic later on if ALL the memorizers of THE QUR’AN had died.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
But, soon thereafter, more Muslims began to bring disputed and contradictory memories of verses and ideas that conflicted with the recording process and Muslims began to dispute and argue about what should actually be included in the Quran - to finish the manuscript.
Great! Now do use LOGIC here and identify the “recording process”?
And how their memories conflicted with “recording process”?
Think carefully before you answer these two questions because I will keep coming back to this “recording process” just as I kept coming back to that assumed Meccan killed by Muslims.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Also, there were three main groups of Muslims who had compiled three different groupings of memories that they had collected - based on when they felt and believed - should officially be considered “ The Quran “ conflicts about which memorized verses were - = “ Quranic material and real / true messages of Mohammad. “
Three main groups had the same memories in each group? Where did they sit down and decide that we should have the same memories? In three different meeting?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
One version of the memories they had written down had 111 chapters – another version had 116 chapters and another version 114 chapters –
So they already had written chapters of the Qur’an with them as well as in their memory. Good!
Keep that in mind. You are still talking about "recording process" in the 7th century.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
and the leader decided what verses and chapters were valid memories and created the Quran and burned and destroyed everything else that He did not feel was part of the Quran.
How did the leader decide which “verses and chapters” were valid memories to create the Qur’an?
What was his criteria to decide what was valid and what was not valid?
Also, did he burn the memories or the written material?
If he burnt the written material, why did he do so?
What was his reason for burning the written material?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Thereafter the leader sent 9 copies of the completed Quran - out to 9 different parts of the kingdom - these 9 areas were = Basra, Bagdad, Damascus, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Aden, Herat and Nishapur. There were 9 different copies sent to these 9 different providences in the Islamic world.
By this time, what did those Muslims in Basra, Bagdad, Damascus, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Aden, Herat and Nishapur have? No Qur’an?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Original manuscripts of The Quran that had been written down by Muslims based on the recollections of their memories had all been burned and destroyed.
After the Qur’an had been completed in one written book form in the 7th century?
Where did the collection of memories of those Muslims come from that they had them even in written form with them?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Muslims have no original manuscripts of the Quran - they were all burned – because there were so many contradictions and many of them were never accepted to be allowed to be placed into the NEW OFFICIAL COPY that the Muslim people had gathered to make up the Quran - which was mostly memory based messages - and some written memories.
So the NEW OFFICIAL COPY of the Qur’an in the 7th century was without any contradictions. Good!
How did they choose which ones to include?
What criterion was used for the written material to be included in the Qur’an?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
And all other copies and manuscripts - that did not match with this completed official Quran that was decided by the Islamic leaders - were burned. ... With 30 to 50 different people trying to remember what the Quran should say – there would be 30 to 50 different versions of a chapter of the Quran based solely and only based on their ability to memorize it.
But how did then the leader decide on ONE written Qur’an? What was his criteria to decide so?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
All of these cities that received a copy of the Quran are still dominated by Muslim Government and control however these none of these 9 cities possess any of these 9 copies today. This was just in the 7 th century.
The point you are making here is that there was a written copy of the Qur’an in the 7th century and a criteria was used to decide what was authentic then and what was not authentic. Good! We can carry on discussing from there. I hope you will remember all this what you have written here and not move away from it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
ripts - that exist today are still contradictory to one another, they are missing whole chapters and filled with errors according to the Arabic language, is a message that has whole chapter that have been lost. Some of them have huge portions that have been erased and re written over. Muslims have continued to make changes and editions and variations of the Quran.
The Arabic written Qur’an that was completed in the 7 century is still the Arabic Qur’an word by word today all over the world. One Qur’an that is the same in any country of the world. You won’t find one Arabic Qur’an contradicting another Arabic Qur’an with Muslims all over the world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
It was not until the 20 th century that the Government of Saudia Arabia has made another official Quran that is the standard Quran that exists today. The COMPLETED Quran in reality, did not exist until the 20 th century - after 1500 years of changes, editions, erasing and contradicting copies –
This claim has no leg to stand on.
What happened to the Arabic Qur’an in memory of thousands of memorizers as well as in written form in other countries before the 20th century?
Do you think that thousands of Muslim memorizers all over the world changed their memory after the Saudi Arabia produced standard Qur’an in the 20th century?
What happened to their memory of the 7th century Qur’an?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
And - Muslims did not even preserve the Torah and Gospels that they claim all confirmed the Quran.
Do you want to read my responses or keep repeating your complaint that Muslims did not preserve the Torah and Gospels?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Basically there are a few different Quran manuscript groups have variants and contradiction between them and were created at different times - and they contain erasing, corrections, and whole pages that are erased and written over.
Those are not the Qur’an manuscripts. Those are materials with Qur’anic writings on them. You have already claimed that all manuscripts were destroyed after the Qur’an was completed in official/agreed form in the 7th century.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
If You want to see the fact - that The Quran was not completed until the 20 th century - take a look at the facts..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGsMAOevrWg
You have already, in your post, refuted this claim by claiming that there was a written Arabic Qur’an in the 7th century.
This youtube video is nothing but from a joker who knows nothing about the Qur’an.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
NOT EVEN A SINGLE - EVEN - incomplete / or partial Quran - exists even at 200 years after Mohammad.
What did the Muslims have during those 200 years after Muhammad? No memory and no written verses? Just the Torah and Gospels?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
All fragments before 200 – 300 years after Mohammad ...
What did those memorizers memorize if there was no Qur’an at the time? Did their memory come back after 200-300 years later?

Finally, you have tried the attack on Muhammad and now are trying to attack the Qur’an. The Qur’an is the only book today that is every word in it from God. Not even an iota is going to be changed from it. My grandparents read the same Arabic Qur’an as my parents and I do today. No other book has been preserved better than this book. And I am very fortunate to be a Muslim reading this book today.
All praise is for Allah, the Lord of the worlds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2019, 04:50 PM
 
3,233 posts, read 1,085,567 times
Reputation: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
But the story of the Quran and how it was written is also hundreds of years after Mohammud.
Hadith, Yes, but the Qur’an, No.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Quran, the Hadith and everything written in Islam comes 300 years after Mohammud. If Muslims do not trust Hadith because they are produced 300 years after their prophet, then why trust the Quran ?
Because the Qur’an came to Muslims through Muhammad. It didn’t come to Muslims through Tom, Dick and Harry or Paul, Mark, Matthew, Luke and John of the Arabian or Iranian world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
So really, Muslims did not work to destroy the Hadith that Muslims felt - were corrupted stories.
It’s good that hadith books are there for people to be wrong-footed if they don’t believe the Qur’an.
Why should you believe the hadith books if you don’t believe the Qur’an?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
But instead - The HADITH claims that they did work to destroy ALL other early Quranic Manuscripts that varied or differed from the one they use today as the Quran.
How did the hadith writers in the 9th century know what we use today as the Qur’an in the 21st century?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Also, Muslims did not preserve Allah's word in the Torah and Gospels.
It was for the Children of Israel to preserve them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Why only destroy early Quran Manuscripts and not destroy the Hadith that are corrupted stories ?
Because one can’t claim something is from Allah when it is not from Allah. All Muslims know that hadith books are not claimed to be from Allah.
As for the corrupted stories, Muslims are aware of them. It is peoples, like yourself, that are not aware of them and grab them for their arguments, leaving anything that doesn’t suit their real objective. I don’t go for the corrupted stories.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
And why destroy all Gospels and Torah in the Muslim world that today Muslims have no copies of these either ?
Who told you that Muslims have destroyed all Gospels and Torah in the Muslim world? What do the Christians and Jewish people read in the Muslim countries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
If one was looking for the original manuscripts of The caliph Othman and there are none to be found.
What we read today IS the original Qur’an not only since Uthman but since Abu Bakr too. The only difference is the latter (Abu Bakr) had no pronunciation marks but the former (Uthman) did. The actual words are the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Muslims have claimed that Othman's manuscripts are from the time period in which he lived 577 - 656 but when these manuscripts were looked at and analyzed - they come from the 8 th and 9 th centuries.
Not all from 8th or 9th century. Birmingham manuscripts are the oldest now and written no later than 645. How can you call them 8th or 9th century manuscripts? The Uthman 9 copies may not exist now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
There is no way that these manuscripts could have been from the time period of 577 - 656 - they have not been preserved, sealed. All we have are various Quranic manuscripts that are from the 8 th and 9 th centuries and they are not the same. They are different from one another. They have different verses that have different messages and are not identical. There are no original Manuscripts from the 577 - 656 time period. -
Not even the Birmingham manuscripts?
If any manuscripts vary from the present Qur'an, those are not actual original manuscripts but some writing done later on. There is no difference in the memorized original Qur’an and the present Qur’an.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
These would have to be copied hundreds of years later - after Othman and there are no “ original “ manuscripts. And they are not in agreement. ( AND not one of these ) 8 th and 9 th century manuscripts are complete. They are all incomplete -unfinished = They are in fact believed to have been started or began to be written by a Muslim King / caliph - named Abd al-Malik 685 - 705. They were never finished.
He did not write the Qur’an. Qur’an memorizers existed before him. They would have rejected anything written later and in variance with what they had already memorized.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Also, there is no mention of a man named Mohammad as being a prophet in any Islamic / Muslim sources - until 691 ...
Do you think Abd al-Malik 685-705 invented Muhammad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Also, there is no mention of any people on earth called Muslims or any religion called Islam- until 692 ...
Also, there is no mention of a city called Mecca anywhere in any history on earth - until 741 ..
The dome of the rock was not built - until 691 ...
Are you trying to say that Abd al-Malik invented all this in 692?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
When Othman is to believed to have produced a Quran - he ordered that all the other Qur’anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.” (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 510) - -
Here is the full hadith:
Volume 6, Book 61, Number 510 :
Narrated by Anas bin Malik
Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were Waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. Said bin Thabit added, "A Verse from Surat Ahzab was missed by me when we copied the Qur'an and I used to hear Allah's Apostle reciting it. So we searched for it and found it with Khuzaima bin Thabit Al-Ansari. (That Verse was): 'Among the Believers are men who have been true in their covenant with Allah.' (33.23) (end of hadith)

As you can see, the whole exercise by Uthman was to produce a copy from the ORIGINAL with the Prophet’s wife Hafsa but this time with pronunciation marks on almost each letter so that those non-Arabic speakers could pronounce each word correctly. This job was done meticulously; a great achievement!
Arabic speakers can read the Qur’an, with the correct pronunciation, even without those marks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
So Othman did not preserve the original manuscript but He burned all originals and the copies of what Muslims claim to be his production is dated to incomplete copies from the 8 th and 9 th centuries.
The original was handed back to Hafsa. He did not destroy it. The copy with the pronunciation marks became the Standard Copy despite all the words being the same. The memorizers have memorized the Qur’an in exact same way since it was first revealed through Muhammad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
And these copies are not the same as the - 19 th century Quran that Muslims claim is the Quran today is the only completed manuscript / copy. No complete known copies of any Quran in the 7 th -8 th – 9 th – 10 th -11 th - or 12 th centuries and they all have been changed and altered.
Memorizers have memorized the Qur’an exactly the same way word by word since it’s revelation. If any writing is different it can easily be discarded as fake by the thousands of the Qur’an memorizers. I doubt if any complete written Qur’an in the 7th century could have survived in the written form for full 1400 years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
In fact - The very people who with Othman, demanded that He was burning the book of God by burning all of the Original Manuscripts. = According to one report it was said to Uthman:

“You have burned the book of God.” Uthman replied, “People read (the Qur’an) in different ways. One would say, ‘My Qur’an is better than yours.’ The other would say, ‘No, mine is better.’”


So it was Othman who was deciding what was the word of Allah - not Mohammad. Othman took the manuscripts that the people brought to Him and he decided what was the truth and was the error.
People did not bring the manuscripts to Uthman. He only asked for the Hafsa copy without the pronunciation marks. Other manuscripts did not exist there. So how could he burn them?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Hijazi manuscripts. - Quran manuscript - - From the mid to late 8 th century is totally incomplete and has consonantal variations that seem to be taken from different historical periods of The Arabian Language - from different manuscripts of earlier ages and manuscript developments - and many contradictions and changes in comparison to the Quran that exists today. Many, many verses that totally say something entirely different from the modern Quran.
Funny the memorizers did not complain about any of that!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Sana'a manuscript - Quran manuscript - - Discovered in 1975 - it was filmed by German historians and it was filled with many, many pages of contradicting and contradictions and variant texts where whole chapters were out of order and filled with various dating in the chapters one chapter would be from the early 8 th century and the next page would be from the late 8 th century - it is filled with and is made with animal skins that have whole verses that have been erased and re - written altered verses over the erased verses that disagree with was written over it –
No doubt some work of children in a mosque just writing down some Arabic Qur’an at various times after the Qur’an was revealed. Children still do that in mosques even today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
in some places, there have been over three layers that have been erased and written over it. carbon dating, dated it back to the time before Mohammad - possibly in the in the 5 th century - but this is a carbon date of the animal skin and not the ink. The Ink shows to be from the late 7 th century and erased and written over to date ink from the 9 th century.
So what’s the point if that was the practice of children in mosques since the 7th century?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Codex Parisino-petropolitanus – - Quran manuscript - - This is a very small portion of the Quran manuscripts and contains only 26 % of the Quran and is from the 8 th century.
Or 7th century?
And 26% of the which Qur’an? The present Qur’an?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The BnF Arabe 328© and Birmingham - Quran manuscript - - Are a partial fragment of Quran manuscript = this Quran manuscript is incomplete and only a small fraction of the Quran that exist today - – and dated from the 8 th century.
Birmingham manuscripts have been radiocarbon dated to have been written no later than 645. This means written no later than one year into Uthman’s reign and no later than eleven years before his death. This could only mean that the Qur’an existed before the middle of the 7th century and shortly after the prophet died in 632.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Tübingen - Quran manuscript – this Quran manuscripts is incomplete and filled with contradictions and differed from the Quran of today – and dated from the 8 th century.
You have the facts wrong. The Quran fragment from the University of Tübingen in Germany has been dated to a period between 649 AD – 675 AD. This date means the manuscript was written about 20 – 40 years after the Prophet Muhammad’s death. Pieces of the manuscript were analyzed in a lab in Zürich using modern C14-radiocarbon and dated within a 95.4% statistical probability.
This would knock out your 8th century claim.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Kufic manuscripts - this Quran manuscript - is incomplete and filled with contradictions and differed from the Quran of today – and dated from the 8 th century.
You can forget that if it differs from the Qur’an of today. It’s also not the earliest.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Topkapi - Quran manuscript - - only 78 % of it can be read and it has 2270 variant and verses that are different from the other manuscripts and many erasing and words that have been written over to make changes.
It is not the oldest now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Samarkand Kufic Quran - Quran manuscript - - = From the last of the 8 th century - This manuscript only goes to Surah 43 and It is filled with errors and is totally different from the Quran that exists today.
Totally different?
How does it go to the Surah 43 if it is totally different?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
None of them are completed from the time Othman and all of them are complete in the 8 th and 9 th centuries - and they all are contradictory and are changed – differing from one another.
In what way? Give an example or two.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
They all are incomplete and has lots of errors and omissions changes and corrections that express a totally different message - than the Quran that exists today - which is the 1924 manuscript.
Incomplete, lots of errors, omissions, changes and correction does not mean TOTALLY different message than the Qur’an that exists today. If it is TOTALLY different message then it is not the Qur’an.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
All of them have been erased over and changed and adapted in their message. When they use science and technology – they begin to read what was erased and written over in these incomplete and contradicting manuscripts - they find that the Quran was developed and a totally invented message that was built and changed many times over - by various composers over a period of 300 years ..
No sign of any memorizers ever having memorized a TOTALLY different Qur’an than the Qur’an of today since the Uthman copy. All memorized exactly the same word by word and letter by letter till today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
No one knows anything about what the original manuscripts of the Quran actually say - nor if there were even any manuscripts at the time of Mohammad.
The Qur’an has been memorized since the days of the prophet and the caliphs. No variation in any country at any time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Mohammad had absolutely nothing to do with any part of any of the Quran being written - or decided.
I have seen here people claiming that Muhammad wrote the Qur’an himself. Others have claimed that he copied it from the Torah and the Gospels. Other have said that he invented everything. Even you have claimed, “Mohammad claims to be going about reciting the Torah and Gospels and throughout his whole life”. When and where did you hear him reciting the Torah and Gospels?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Muslims did not even preserve a single manuscript of the Torah and Gospels - while they claimed that Mohammad “ demanded “ that we are to look to them and to use the Torah and Gospels to determine if His message was the truth.
I have never “demanded” so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Why would someone not preserve the word of God in the Torah and Gospels, If they claim to be followers of this God ?
The Torah and the Gospels were for the Children of Israel (Jews). There were no other large group of believers at the time than the Jews.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Just because Mohammud is the final and last prophet ever to be sent to earth this means that all other previous messages of all other prophets before him must be just thrown away ?
No. The main message is the same; believe in One God and keep the commandments. The rest is specific for the Children of Israel. Moses was addressing the Children of Israel and so was Jesus preaching even in synagogue/temple.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2019, 02:07 AM
 
3,233 posts, read 1,085,567 times
Reputation: 296
This is worth watching for anyone interested in the revelation of the Qur'an and Islam:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jowQond7_UE
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 03:22 AM
 
19 posts, read 1,808 times
Reputation: 11



Muslims would never ever allow anyone to even think of burning their 19 th century Quran that they possess today -

yet, even though Muhammad had commissioned all of these very people who " HE CALLED TEACHERS " who had written the very first manuscripts - THE EARLY ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS - - to teach the Qur’an, -

Mohammad commanded these specific special certain people to teach the Quran to others - But Muslims today have no problem whatsoever with these very ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS being burned - and the very man who burned the Original Quran - he went about burning and deleting / REMOVING - many other existing chapters and even many entire books of the Quran. - This man, is the very man who Muslims rely on today for the very idea of what they today " call The Quran "

This is exactly why it was of extreme importance that I mention the comparison between the Quranical and the Biblical beginnings - because " they each began, in a completely opposite situation.

The Quran was never put together like the Bible was. Not at any time - ever...

The Bible, it did not have the situation where just a few writings and every single available and existing memory about Yahoshua’s life - or - the memories, writing and recollections prophecies, revelations and doctrines and teachings of the apostles were all mostly in an unwritten form and existing as mostly nothing but memories and a few scattered writings.

The Bible was never - Just the memories and few writings that were never all written down and created by gathering together other people’s random memories into one single physical location and every - thing then being written and recorded down - by just a single man - and then that one single man would make a decision about what was to be the completed Bible and what was to be deleted and removed and forgotten.

And afterwards - after the memories that had transmitted into a written form, and of every single last written original manuscript and memory narration that disagreed - were burned, except for only the memories and original manuscripts that this one single man decided what was only " valid teachings and prophecies and revelations and real accountable events " - Uthman alone, - was deciding what was - to be - and - what was - not to be - in the Quran.

Yet Uthman was not visited by an angel, Uthman was not a spiritual man who received signs, wonders, miracles - and He was not a man who was vindicated by Allah in demonstrated proof - to attest that He was divinely inspired and able to determine what was and what was not Quran.

Yet since Uthman - the Islamic world has put to death every single other Uthman that has come along, - who has tried to do anything similar to what He did - - UNTIL WE GET TO THE YEAR 1924 - when Egypt produced a Royal Cairo Edition by taking all of the various incomplete and contradicting existing Qurans and producing a new version of The Quran that is recognized by the majority of all Muslims as the official Arabic edition.

The Egyptian Government did nothing more, nor did anything different than Uthman had done, except, today, we see the many, many contradictory and incomplete manuscripts of the Qurans that the Egyptians did not burn and destroy.

In fact, they did everything exactly as Uthman had done - outside of burning all of the previous ORIGINAL Qurans and all previous ORIGINAL manuscripts that Egypt writers had copied from.

And the reason that every single last manuscript - was burned and destroyed – was only because of the existing overwhelming conflicting discrepancies - complete contradictions, total disagreements, and conflicts and differences and so many disputes, inconsistencies, incongruities and oppositions in that all of the ORIGINAL manuscripts contained, between them all.

As we see here - (Al-Nadim, The First of al-Nadim – A Tenth Century survey of Muslim Culture, p. 79)

These books detail hundreds of discrepancies; for example: different numbers of surahs, and surahs that were arranged differently, different words for the same verse, etc.
There were Qurans with 110 surahs. And there were Qurans with 116 surahs. And there were Qurans with 114 surahs? What are these additional surahs? Which ones should be in the Quran and which one should not be in the Quran?

Did you notice what Al-Nadim had said --- He stated that there are even a number of - “ additional Surahs “ - Meaning there were extra manuscripts - and the VERY TEACHERS that Mohammad had commanded to teach the Quran were arguing and begging Uthman to please “ DO NOT BURN THE WORD OF GOD “ please include the entire Quran - please listen to us and follow Mohammad -

But Uthman simply spued in their faces and he rejected the very commandments that Mohammad “ himself “ had commanded -- Mohammad commanded that these teachers to go and teach the Quran that he had given to each and every one of them - yet Uthman is burning and destroying everything that Mohammad had ever said and did and only selecting the portion that he felt was worthy to be considered Quran.

The conflict, the disagreements and corruption were so great in what the entire Muslim community had, - in presenting their own personal version of what they felt should be called “ Quran “

That when - Muhammad had commissioned all of these very people to teach the Qur’an, but - Uthman only kept one collection that He agreed with - and only one single side of the story line and chose to reject, destroy and totally burn everything that did not agree with what He felt was “ Quran “

why would it matter - if someone who had the original copy of the Qurans manuscripts - when afterwards - when they were commanded to burn the original manuscripts ? - No one knows if the genuine Quran was burnt by Uthman. Uthman never received revelation, prophecy and spiritual confirmation concerning a single thing that he did in his entire life. - - Uthman ordered that all the other Qur’anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.” (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 510)

They all totally disagreed and conflicted with one another in details, in how the stories were narrated. - As we see in the reading of == Ubayy ibn

== Ka`b, and also `Abd Allah ibn Mas'ud, - “ Each Muslim was accusing the other of unbelief." (Labib as-Said, / The Recited Koran: A History of the First Recorded Version, tr. B. Weis, et al., Princeton, New Jersey: The Darwin Press, 1975, p. 23)

Even the - Birmingham manuscripts


Every other researcher, scientist and all other studies outside of this - who have tested them - all other professionals who have also studied many, many other older manuscripts claim that Birmingham manuscripts themselves show conclusive evidence that they have been previously washed out and written over.

= Meaning reused and washed over cleanly and completely. - But just because the original writing was washed out completely - removing all traces of the original writings, it does not change the fact that other professionals and scientists who have studied many, many other Quranical manuscripts, have noticed that the manuscripts look like that the Birmingham manuscripts have been previously washed out. - - also they noticed that had to have been washed out with chemicals.

Arabic society later ( even after Mohammad ) - used no dots or diacritic marks in Arabic writing - history of Arabia language proves this to be a total contradiction. This is just one of the many, many facts that are evident that there are no Quranic manuscripts anywhere found that are earlier than 200 years after Mohammad.

- The Birmingham manuscripts were saturated with a coating of Arabic Gum - and other scientists have ALSO CONCLUDED that the Arabic Gum Coating was later and even more recently - later in time - placed onto the manuscript. They also said that “ scientifically “ - Arabic Gum Coating on a manuscript - will not give an accurate Carbon Date reading on the manuscript - especially when it is saturated into the manuscript skin..

It seems that Muslims want us to believe that Muslims developed the dotting system independently and only in the Quran was it ever used. - long before Arabian culture and language had used these dotting markings - but the evidence does not support that any of these writings are from the time of Mohammad. - when we look at Arabic society outside of Islam.

This is not proof - it is proving the opposite...... We have a Quran ’s manuscript based on Muslims claiming they are from an older period of language.

As - Saud al-Sarhan, director of research at King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, doubts that the folios found in Birmingham were as old as the researchers claimed. Saud al-Sarhan stated clearly that Arabic script included dots and separated chapters and were grammar features that were introduced a century or two later. ( After Mohammad ) - - Saud al-Sarhan - also said that it is a possibility that these folios were washed clean and reused later, as palimpsests.

The Quran manuscripts are that Muslims are claiming are not from the 7 th - 8 th - and the 9 th centuries, are all that Muslims have for proof of anything - it is all assumption, claims, and fantasy. Everything revolves around this claim and the Bible does not have this claim - Everything around / surrounding the Bible supports the Bible - not claims about the Bible - attempting to determine the dating, society, language, locations, and events.. -

This following movie completely shows exactly the facts concerning - The Birmingham Qur'an manuscript.

This following movie totally and fully and undoubtedly exposed the deception that has been used - to make the claim that these manuscripts are as old as claimed.

A MUST SEE = WATCH NOW !

“””
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYEGG83woLU

The Birmingham Qur'an manuscript that You mentioned are only fragments - { two pages } of what Muslims are claiming are Quranic texts – These manuscripts were carbon dated between the years 568 – 645 AD. - This a time before that Mohammad was even born. However, the ink could have been put on the animal skins during his lifetime or even at a much later date. We do not know.

Can Muslims find one complete Quranic manuscript from 650 AD that matches with the Quran that exists today ? - The answer has always been no.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:00 AM
 
3,233 posts, read 1,085,567 times
Reputation: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Muslims would never ever allow anyone to even think of burning their 19 th century Quran that they possess today –
If there are mistakes in it it will be burnt even today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
yet, even though Muhammad had commissioned all of these very people who " HE CALLED TEACHERS " who had written the very first manuscripts - THE EARLY ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS - - to teach the Qur’an, -
Are you then accepting this fact?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Mohammad commanded these specific special certain people to teach the Quran to others - But Muslims today have no problem whatsoever with these very ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS being burned –
The ORIGINAL was not burnt. Original was kept with Hafsa and was memorized word by word by hundreds by then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
and the very man who burned the Original Quran - he went about burning and deleting / REMOVING - many other existing chapters and even many entire books of the Quran. - This man, is the very man who Muslims rely on today for the very idea of what they today " call The Quran "
He did nothing of the sort you are suggesting here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
This is exactly why it was of extreme importance that I mention the comparison between the Quranical and the Biblical beginnings - because " they each began, in a completely opposite situation.

The Quran was never put together like the Bible was. Not at any time - ever...
Which version of the Bible are you talking about here? The one that was destroyed by the Babylonians or the gospels not included by the bishops in the 3rd and 4th centuries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Bible, it did not have the situation where just a few writings and every single available and existing memory about Yahoshua’s life - or - the memories, writing and recollections prophecies, revelations and doctrines and teachings of the apostles were all mostly in an unwritten form and existing as mostly nothing but memories and a few scattered writings.
Nothing was written during the life of Jesus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Bible was never - Just the memories and few writings that were never all written down and created by gathering together other people’s random memories into one single physical location and every - thing then being written and recorded down - by just a single man - and then that one single man would make a decision about what was to be the completed Bible and what was to be deleted and removed and forgotten.
Where is Gospel of Jesus today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
And afterwards - after the memories that had transmitted into a written form, and of every single last written original manuscript and memory narration that disagreed - were burned, except for only the memories and original manuscripts that this one single man decided what was only " valid teachings and prophecies and revelations and real accountable events " - Uthman alone, - was deciding what was - to be - and - what was - not to be - in the Quran.
You have failed to describe your own proclaimed “recording process”. A few days gap is not going to make me forget it.
What was that “recording process”?
And what was the criteria used?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Yet Uthman was not visited by an angel, Uthman was not a spiritual man who received signs, wonders, miracles - and He was not a man who was vindicated by Allah in demonstrated proof - to attest that He was divinely inspired and able to determine what was and what was not Quran.
He did not determine what was or what was not the Qur’an. He had used the existing Qur’an that was with Hafsa.
I don’t think you are reading my posts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Yet since Uthman - the Islamic world has put to death every single other Uthman that has come along, - who has tried to do anything similar to what He did - - UNTIL WE GET TO THE YEAR 1924 - when Egypt produced a Royal Cairo Edition by taking all of the various incomplete and contradicting existing Qurans and producing a new version of The Quran that is recognized by the majority of all Muslims as the official Arabic edition.
Utterly untrue.
Last time you had claimed the opposite that all contradictory verses were discarded. Now you are saying that these contradictory verses were included. You can’t make up your mind, can you?
Thousands of memorizers have memorized the Qur’an long before 1924. Contradictory item will never be included in the Qur’an. It would be thrown out in no time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Egyptian Government did nothing more, nor did anything different than Uthman had done, except, today, we see the many, many contradictory and incomplete manuscripts of the Qurans that the Egyptians did not burn and destroy.
So if they are the same as present Qur'an in words and verse sequence then that proves that these are from Abu Bakr days and survived through Uthman days.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
In fact, they did everything exactly as Uthman had done - outside of burning all of the previous ORIGINAL Qurans and all previous ORIGINAL manuscripts that Egypt writers had copied from.
So all the full Qur’an manuscripts, including the contradictory ones, existed in Egypt for 1400 years???
I am sure you will soon reject that too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
And the reason that every single last manuscript - was burned and destroyed – was only because of the existing overwhelming conflicting discrepancies - complete contradictions, total disagreements, and conflicts and differences and so many disputes, inconsistencies, incongruities and oppositions in that all of the ORIGINAL manuscripts contained, between them all.
If they were all burnt in 7th century, where did these contradictory ones in Egypt come from?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
As we see here - (Al-Nadim, The First of al-Nadim – A Tenth Century survey of Muslim Culture, p. 79)

These books detail hundreds of discrepancies; for example: different numbers of surahs, and surahs that were arranged differently, different words for the same verse, etc.
There were Qurans with 110 surahs. And there were Qurans with 116 surahs. And there were Qurans with 114 surahs? What are these additional surahs? Which ones should be in the Quran and which one should not be in the Quran?
There has been only one Qur’an that has been memorized word by word and letter by letter by the millions now.

[41.42] Falsehood shall not come to it from before it nor from behind it; a revelation from the Wise, the Praised One.
لَا يَأْتِيهِ الْبَاطِلُ مِنْ بَيْنِ يَدَيْهِ وَلَا مِنْ خَلْفِهِ ۖ تَنْزِيلٌ مِنْ حَكِيمٍ حَمِيدٍ


Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Did you notice what Al-Nadim had said --- He stated that there are even a number of - “ additional Surahs “ - Meaning there were extra manuscripts - and the VERY TEACHERS that Mohammad had commanded to teach the Quran were arguing and begging Uthman to please “ DO NOT BURN THE WORD OF GOD “ please include the entire Quran - please listen to us and follow Mohammad
This can’t be true because Al-Nadim wasn’t there, he wasn’t even born yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
But Uthman simply spued in their faces and he rejected the very commandments that Mohammad “ himself “ had commanded -- Mohammad commanded that these teachers to go and teach the Quran that he had given to each and every one of them - yet Uthman is burning and destroying everything that Mohammad had ever said and did and only selecting the portion that he felt was worthy to be considered Quran.
That’s why they had all accepted the Qur’an because they had all memorized it for years. Nobody could burn their memory. All memorizers have memorized the same Qur’an ALL the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The conflict, the disagreements and corruption were so great in what the entire Muslim community had, - in presenting their own personal version of what they felt should be called “ Quran “
None had full Qur’an in writing with them but only parts of it. The full Qur’an was with Hafsa at the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
That when - Muhammad had commissioned all of these very people to teach the Qur’an, but - Uthman only kept one collection that He agreed with - and only one single side of the story line and chose to reject, destroy and totally burn everything that did not agree with what He felt was “ Quran “
He had copied from only the Qur’an that was with Hafsa; the ORIGINAL Qur’an.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
why would it matter - if someone who had the original copy of the Qurans manuscripts - when afterwards - when they were commanded to burn the original manuscripts ? - No one knows if the genuine Quran was burnt by Uthman.
Uthman did not burn any Qur’an. He sent the ORIGINAL back to Hafsa.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Uthman never received revelation, prophecy and spiritual confirmation concerning a single thing that he did in his entire life. - - Uthman ordered that all the other Qur’anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.” (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 510)
His copy was the same as Hafsa copy with pronunciation marks with each word and most letters, the ORIGINAL was not burnt. He had sent it back to Hafsa.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
They all totally disagreed and conflicted with one another in details, in how the stories were narrated. - As we see in the reading of == Ubayy ibn

== Ka`b, and also `Abd Allah ibn Mas'ud, - “ Each Muslim was accusing the other of unbelief." (Labib as-Said, / The Recited Koran: A History of the First Recorded Version, tr. B. Weis, et al., Princeton, New Jersey: The Darwin Press, 1975, p. 23)
Then you don’t know what was the criteria used for “recording process”.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Even the - Birmingham manuscripts


Every other researcher, scientist and all other studies outside of this - who have tested them - all other professionals who have also studied many, many other older manuscripts claim that Birmingham manuscripts themselves show conclusive evidence that they have been previously washed out and written over.

= Meaning reused and washed over cleanly and completely. –
How do they know if they had been washed out cleanly and COMPLETELY? Did they have special x-ray eyes? Birmingham University claimed that the tests show that there was nothing written under the writings.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
But just because the original writing was washed out completely - removing all traces of the original writings, it does not change the fact that other professionals and scientists who have studied many, many other Quranical manuscripts, have noticed that the manuscripts look like that the Birmingham manuscripts have been previously washed out. - - also they noticed that had to have been washed out with chemicals.
So the OTHER manuscripts are the basis for your claim. Great!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Arabic society later ( even after Mohammad ) - used no dots or diacritic marks in Arabic writing - history of Arabia language proves this to be a total contradiction. This is just one of the many, many facts that are evident that there are no Quranic manuscripts anywhere found that are earlier than 200 years after Mohammad.
That’s why many Qur’an parchments are similar to pre-Uthman written Qur’an manuscripts. This includes Birmingham parchments. They have to have been written before Uthman became caliph.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
- The Birmingham manuscripts were saturated with a coating of Arabic Gum - and other scientists have ALSO CONCLUDED that the Arabic Gum Coating was later and even more recently - later in time - placed onto the manuscript. They also said that “ scientifically “ - Arabic Gum Coating on a manuscript - will not give an accurate Carbon Date reading on the manuscript - especially when it is saturated into the manuscript skin..
Good! Perhaps that’s why it gave accurate date in Oxford tests. Thanks for that information.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
It seems that Muslims want us to believe that Muslims developed the dotting system independently and only in the Quran was it ever used. - long before Arabian culture and language had used these dotting markings - but the evidence does not support that any of these writings are from the time of Mohammad. - when we look at Arabic society outside of Islam.
Muslims do not want you to believe anything about Islam or the Qur’an. Islam or the Qur’an is not for you but for Muslims who believe the Qur’an.
It makes no difference to me whether you believe the Qur’an or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
This is not proof - it is proving the opposite...... We have a Quran ’s manuscript based on Muslims claiming they are from an older period of language.
Muslims are not forcing you to accept anything they say. The Birmingham parchments were not tested by Muslims.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
As - Saud al-Sarhan, director of research at King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, doubts that the folios found in Birmingham were as old as the researchers claimed. Saud al-Sarhan stated clearly that Arabic script included dots and separated chapters and were grammar features that were introduced a century or two later. ( After Mohammad ) - - Saud al-Sarhan - also said that it is a possibility that these folios were washed clean and reused later, as palimpsests.
He “doubts”. Did he test them? “Doubt” is not a proof.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Quran manuscripts are that Muslims are claiming are not from the 7 th - 8 th - and the 9 th centuries, are all that Muslims have for proof of anything - it is all assumption, claims, and fantasy. Everything revolves around this claim and the Bible does not have this claim - Everything around / surrounding the Bible supports the Bible - not claims about the Bible - attempting to determine the dating, society, language, locations, and events.. –
You want to stick to the Bible? Fine with me. I will stick to the Qur’an that has been memorized word for word and letter by letter for the past 1400 years anywhere in the world. How many memorizers of the Bible do you have?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
This following movie completely shows exactly the facts concerning - The Birmingham Qur'an manuscript.

This following movie totally and fully and undoubtedly exposed the deception that has been used - to make the claim that these manuscripts are as old as claimed.

A MUST SEE = WATCH NOW !

“””
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYEGG83woLU

The Birmingham Qur'an manuscript that You mentioned are only fragments - { two pages } of what Muslims are claiming are Quranic texts – These manuscripts were carbon dated between the years 568 – 645 AD. - This a time before that Mohammad was even born. However, the ink could have been put on the animal skins during his lifetime or even at a much later date. We do not know.
The writing is the same as ORIGINAL text without pronunciation marks. The later text would be the same as Uthman copy with the pronunciation marks with the letter. This indicates to me that these parchments are from either Abu Bakr or Umar days. Only in that period the Qur’an was written without the pronunciation marks as on these parchments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Can Muslims find one complete Quranic manuscript from 650 AD that matches with the Quran that exists today ? - The answer has always been no.
This is what I had stated in one of my previous posts:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khalif View Post
Memorizers have memorized the Qur’an exactly the same way word by word since it’s revelation. If any writing is different it can easily be discarded as fake by the thousands of the Qur’an memorizers. I doubt if any complete written Qur’an in the 7th century could have survived in the written form for full 1400 years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY059NFwrOc


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0Q19RT6LYc


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBonpvDgu6I


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaMy_MacLYo


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klr3Jy2e3mk
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 03:56 PM
 
3,233 posts, read 1,085,567 times
Reputation: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The Birmingham Qur'an manuscript that You mentioned are only fragments - { two pages } of what Muslims are claiming are Quranic texts –
Is there anyone who is claiming that it is NOT Quranic text?

And is it two pages or four pages?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
These manuscripts were carbon dated between the years 568 – 645 AD. -
Did Muslims do it?
Who had these pages for the last 8 decades? Muslims or non-muslims?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
This a time before that Mohammad was even born.
Muhammad was born, lived his life and passed away not before and not after this time period. He lived every single day of his life during that stated time period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
However, the ink could have been put on the animal skins during his lifetime or even at a much later date. We do not know.
That's right; you don't know. Therefore, your argument against is a futile one.

The only sure way of knowing something about the Qur'an is that it has been memorized from the outset by many people and it is a uniform memorization all over the world now. That's how it has been preserved for centuries.
We, Muslims, are not looking for old manuscripts of the Qur'an. We don't need them when we have every word and every letter of the Qur'an in the memory of millions all over the world just as the Arabic Qur'an is the same all over the world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 04:04 PM
 
3,233 posts, read 1,085,567 times
Reputation: 296
By the way, that professor from Holland seemed to be quite lacking in knowledge about who Hafsa was. He said she was the daughter of Abu Bakr. He was totally wrong there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:38 PM
 
19 posts, read 1,808 times
Reputation: 11
Thank you again, Khalif - for taking time to respond.

Concerning the Birmingham documents ..

It seems that Muslims are expecting other to accept that because we really don’t know about what was erased

Because = we really don’t know about what was removed and how many hundreds and hundreds of years that could have possibly passed before someone came along and white washed the original ink and re – wrote the Quran Scriptures on top of the old document

- we are supposed to close our eyes and hold our breath and imagine, pretend and fantasize that this was written at the time of Mohammud.. ?

The CLAIM made by Muslims is that the animal skin itself used in making the document was killed - around 568, this time - is just two years before Mohammad was born in 570 - 632

Mohammad was born in - 570 and after 40 years later - in 610, Mohammad announced himself as a messenger. Then the Quran was CLAIMED in the HADITH { which you reject } to have been collected and written around - 645.

But the problem is, the Arabians did not use the diacritical marks and the accent markings such as the doting and markings - that we see in the documents - UNTIL 660 – 714.

The entire two pages are filled with ink marking and letters beneath the first layer of writing that have been wiped clean and new ink has added onto the white washed parchment.
You can imagine, pretend, fantasize and hope that this was written during the life of Mohammud but there is not proof. If there were no letters written over the first layer of text that had been washed out of the text and written over with new letters, this still would not prove anything.
the Arabians did not use the diacritical marks and the accent markings such as the doting and markings - that we see in the documents - UNTIL 660 – 714.

The manuscripts do not match perfectly with the Quran that is used today, therefore, it should have already been burned instead of imagining and pretend and fantasizing that it is something written during the life of Mohammud.

The BBC reporters also did not mention that the fact that the documents were soaked, saturated and coated in a coating in Arabic Gum. Or sap. This also is deceiving to the testing procedure.
There is no reason to not admit - that Muhammad had commissioned people as " TEACHERS " to teach the Qur’an, -

There is nothing uncertain about this Islamic claim, why would you take time to respond to this fact and fabricate as narrative as if to place a cloud of hesitation on my part to have ever doubted that this a claim found in Islam ?

Your entire post is based ONLY / all around and upon information found in the Hadith about the history of the Quran and how it was written but yet You deny the other Hadith information.

You want to doubt the Hadith while you use the same Hadith to support other claims but only concerning the selective, hand-picked portions of the Hadith that support your particular leaning about how the Quran existed in history. Without the Hadith, you would not know anything about the history of the Quran,

This is the nature of Islam, you notice that Muslims did not translate or produce a Torah nor Gospel in Arabic, they simply rely upon the Christians and Jews to tell Muslims what the manuscripts are saying, yet simultaneously they claim thas the Bible is the word of Allah.

then they blame the Jews for allowing it to be corrupted while the Jews were thrown out of their homeland in AD 70 and spent the next 2000 years in hiding, running for their lives and persecuted and being killed by the millions and millions. Meanwhile, Muslims dominated and controlled and were in charge of their homeland - yet the did not preserve a single page of the Bible in Arabic - yet they call it the word of Allah. It just shows the nature of Islam.

Everything in Islam is based on Imagination and fantasy with not a single shred of solid evidence.
Furthermore, Christians do not claim that anything was written during the time of Yahoshua because Christians accept the fact that this cannot be proven with evidence. Yet Muslims do claim that they have manuscripts that date close to the time of Mohammud and they also have no real evidence.

This is called lying, to make a claim based on manuscripts that have letters that were not invented and developed until many years after Mohammud - and to make this claim when there are ink letters in the document that have been white washed out - erased and new ink that did not exist during Mohammuds lifetime is found in the document that they claim is during Mohammud’s life.
Also, the entire document is coated in a glue, gum or a sap like coating that completely throws off the instruments used to perform carbon dating.

The document is coated in a glue, gum or a sap like coating that is saturated into the document. This is not proving anything, except that Muslims will base the reality of a physical object upon untruthful, unprovable and altered information while they ignore the reality of what surrounds the documents composition and erasings and rewritten letters that it has been re written over with
there is no sure method - to date ink in carbon dating on an animal skin.

So we are to accept that because we really don’t know about what was erased
Because = we really don’t know about what was removed and how many hundreds and hundreds of years that could have passed before someone came along and white - washed the original ink and re – wrote the Quran Scriptures on top if the old document - we are supposed to close our eyes and hold our breath and imagine, pretend and fantasize that this was written at the time of Mohammud..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:38 AM
 
3,233 posts, read 1,085,567 times
Reputation: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Thank you again, Khalif - for taking time to respond.

Concerning the Birmingham documents ..written in

It seems that Muslims are expecting other to accept that because we really don’t know about what was erased
Why are you blaming Muslims when the claims about these manuscripts are made by the non-muslims who own them?
We are not asking you or any other to accept anything. It is you who are trying to reject everything about Islam. First it was the word Allah, then Muslims killed a Meccan first, then Muhammad tried to destroy Meccan business then Muhammad never existed until about 691 and now the Qur’an was written 200 to 300 years after Muhammad.
What’s wrong with the non-muslims when it’s them who claim these to be the Qur’an parchments or manuscripts that they hold and the other non-muslims don’t like what the first non-muslims are saying about the Qur’an.
Don’t you think that you need to talk to each other first before you come here to blame the Muslims for it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Because = we really don’t know about what was removed and how many hundreds and hundreds of years that could have possibly passed before someone came along and white washed the original ink and re – wrote the Quran Scriptures on top of the old document
First, according to the Birmingham University, there was no other washed ink underneath in their testing.
Second, the skin is washed thoroughly and prepared (stretched etc) at the beginning if it is used for writing anything on it. Therefore, the washing must have been done 1400 years ago soon after the animal had died.
Third, If skin had been washed recently, centuries after the first assumed writing, the skin would not stand the vigorous washing. It would break up immediately.
Fourth, the University claim is that there was no trace of anything written underneath the writing.
Fifth, what happened to the gum if it was washed thoroughly to remove any assumed previous ink?
Sixth, can you imagine why a Muslim would sell these manuscripts to a non-muslim if these are the original manuscripts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
- we are supposed to close our eyes and hold our breath and imagine, pretend and fantasize that this was written at the time of Mohammud.. ?
Nobody is saying that. You are only imagining that it is being said so. I don’t expect you to believe anything about Islam and the Qur’an.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The CLAIM made by Muslims is that the animal skin itself used in making the document was killed - around 568, this time - is just two years before Mohammad was born in 570 - 632
Not Muslims but the non-muslims who hold the parchments and did the tests on the parchments are saying so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Mohammad was born in - 570 and after 40 years later - in 610, Mohammad announced himself as a messenger.
Well, if he received the message and was commanded to deliver it, his uncle couldn’t have announced himself as a messenger, could he?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Then the Quran was CLAIMED in the HADITH { which you reject } to have been collected and written around - 645.
No. Hadith books don’t say that. You have got this quite wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
But the problem is, the Arabians did not use the diacritical marks and the accent markings such as the doting and markings - that we see in the documents - UNTIL 660 – 714.
False claim!
Uthman had done that well before that time period you mention here. So they were well versed in these markings long before that time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The entire two pages are filled with ink marking and letters beneath the first layer of writing that have been wiped clean and new ink has added onto the white washed parchment.
Who has told you so? According to the University, there was nothing underneath the writings. No trace. The professor who made that claim had not done any tests. He was only imagining so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
You can imagine, pretend, fantasize and hope that this was written during the life of Mohammud but there is not proof.
It won’t make any difference to me or to my belief if these parchments were written in the 20th century. Can you say the same if these were written in 634?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
If there were no letters written over the first layer of text that had been washed out of the text and written over with new letters, this still would not prove anything.
Then why are you arguing about it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
the Arabians did not use the diacritical marks and the accent markings such as the doting and markings - that we see in the documents - UNTIL 660 – 714.
They had used them, and more, even before Uthman copy which was prepared before this mentioned time period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The manuscripts do not match perfectly with the Quran that is used today, therefore, it should have already been burned instead of imagining and pretend and fantasizing that it is something written during the life of Mohammud.
You are right, the manuscript does not match PERFECTLY the present Qur’an. Both are written on different materials and one is pre-Uthman and the other post Uthman writing. There are no pronunciation marks on the letters as they are in the present Qur’an. Had it been written as the Qur’an manuscripts after the Uthman copy, there would have been marks similar to the present Qur’an.
But of course you won't know that unless you know something about the "recording process".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The BBC reporters also did not mention that the fact that the documents were soaked, saturated and coated in a coating in Arabic Gum. Or sap. This also is deceiving to the testing procedure.
When was the Arabic gum used? Who used it?
As for the tests, you take it up with either the Oxford University or the University of Birmingham. Tell them that their test results are not acceptable by you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
There is no reason to not admit - that Muhammad had commissioned people as " TEACHERS " to teach the Qur’an, -
The Qur’an teacher was Muhammad. He taught as he himself was taught.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
There is nothing uncertain about this Islamic claim, why would you take time to respond to this fact and fabricate as narrative as if to place a cloud of hesitation on my part to have ever doubted that this a claim found in Islam ?
What claim?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Your entire post is based ONLY / all around and upon information found in the Hadith about the history of the Quran and how it was written but yet You deny the other Hadith information.
The same can apply to you as you do accept some information from the hadith books and are rejecting the other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
You want to doubt the Hadith while you use the same Hadith to support other claims but only concerning the selective, hand-picked portions of the Hadith that support your particular leaning about how the Quran existed in history. Without the Hadith, you would not know anything about the history of the Quran,
Nor would you!
You are accusing me of doing exactly what you are doing about information from hadith books. In fact, you have used one hadith but only a part of it. I had to remind you what the full hadith is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
This is the nature of Islam, you notice that Muslims did not translate or produce a Torah nor Gospel in Arabic, they simply rely upon the Christians and Jews to tell Muslims what the manuscripts are saying, yet simultaneously they claim thas the Bible is the word of Allah.
The word “Bible” is not in the Qur’an. I don’t make any claim about “Bible”.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
then they blame the Jews for allowing it to be corrupted while the Jews were thrown out of their homeland in AD 70 and spent the next 2000 years in hiding, running for their lives and persecuted and being killed by the millions and millions.
Did Muslims throw Jews out of their homeland in AD 70?
Did Muslims kill them by the millions and millions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Meanwhile, Muslims dominated and controlled and were in charge of their homeland - yet the did not preserve a single page of the Bible in Arabic - yet they call it the word of Allah. It just shows the nature of Islam.
This is not a clever comment. I have told you more than once by now that the Bible (Torah and the Gospel of Jesus) was for the Jews. Jesus was born in a Jewish family. It was for the Children of Israel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Everything in Islam is based on Imagination and fantasy with not a single shred of solid evidence.
Yeah, all fantasy and illusion. Muhammad never existed. The Qur’an never existed and Muslims don’t exist. It’s all imagination. You can’t see me; I am an invisible ghost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Furthermore, Christians do not claim that anything was written during the time of Yahoshua because Christians accept the fact that this cannot be proven with evidence.
That’s why there were many gospels in the fourth century. The two main ones were Gospel of Paul and Gospel of Jesus. I won’t ask what happened to the Gospel of Jesus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Yet Muslims do claim that they have manuscripts that date close to the time of Mohammud and they also have no real evidence.
Muslim have never claimed that they have original manuscripts of the Qur’an. It is the non-muslims who are making this claim about what they are finding and keeping.
I have already stated that it is unlikely that any of the original written Qur’an copies have survived over the 1400. Muslims did not keep the manuscripts other than written copies of the Qur’an. And those written copies could not have survived intact for 1400.
The Qur’an is preserved through millions of hafiz (huffaz/memorizers) from the outset.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
This is called lying, to make a claim based on manuscripts that have letters that were not invented and developed until many years after Mohammud - and to make this claim when there are ink letters in the document that have been white washed out - erased and new ink that did not exist during Mohammuds lifetime is found in the document that they claim is during Mohammud’s life.
Tell that to the non-muslim researchers and owners of the manuscripts! If anything, it is them who may be lying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Also, the entire document is coated in a glue, gum or a sap like coating that completely throws off the instruments used to perform carbon dating.
Tell that to Oxford University and University of Birmingham that certain sap has COMPLETELY thrown off your instruments. Let me know how far you get with this complaint!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
The document is coated in a glue, gum or a sap like coating that is saturated into the document. This is not proving anything, except that Muslims will base the reality of a physical object upon untruthful, unprovable and altered information while they ignore the reality of what surrounds the documents composition and erasings and rewritten letters that it has been re written over with
University has said that there was nothing underneath. No previous writings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
there is no sure method - to date ink in carbon dating on an animal skin.
The Arabic writing on the parchments is not of the Uthman Qur’an but of Abu Bakr compiled Qur’an without pronunciation marks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
So we are to accept that because we really don’t know about what was erased
You don’t know if there was anything erased. You are only guessing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposcemathem View Post
Because = we really don’t know about what was removed and how many hundreds and hundreds of years that could have passed before someone came along and white - washed the original ink and re – wrote the Quran Scriptures on top if the old document - we are supposed to close our eyes and hold our breath and imagine, pretend and fantasize that this was written at the time of Mohammud..
Don’t do it then. Who is forcing you to do that?
Perhaps your agenda is the other way around; you want me to think that Allah was a pagan god, Muhammad was a trouble maker, the Qur’an never existed for the past 1450 years and Muslims should give up their religion. You would certainly close your eyes, hold your breath, and imagine/pretend or fantasize disappearing of all Muslims from the planet earth. You would like that, won’t you?

I am still waiting for you to explain about the "recording process" you had mentioned. Any idea?

Last edited by Khalif; Today at 07:47 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top