hamba2han's Quranic challange

[inJESUS]

During the compilation of the Quran, did anyone base his criteria on whether the language is human or not? of course not. This whole miraculous language propaganda was alien to the those who compiled it.

 

[inJESUS]

Never sent We a messenger or a prophet before thee but when He recited (the message) Satan proposed (opposition) in respect of that which he recited thereof. But Allah abolisheth that which Satan proposeth. Then Allah establisheth His revelations. Allah is Knower, Wise;

Muhammad did not even distinguish between the language of Allah and language of satan. Satan seems to have met the challenge.

 

[Booklover]

Muslims should respect the graves of non-Muslims. The Islamic point of view does not differentiate between the grave of a Muslim or a non-Muslim. Graves should be treated in the light of the Quranic verse: “Surely we have honored the children of Adam…” (Al-‘Israa’: 70) The application of this verse is so general to include Muslims and non-Muslims.

In this context, we recall the incident that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) stayed behind, after the Battle of Badr, to supervise the burial of all the unbelievers who had been killed in battle.

The bodies were thrown in a common pit.

n any case, the eye-witness accounts of the apostate in question was that the ground threw his body out on no less than 3 separate occassions and they themselves eventually believed that it could not have been the work of human beings.

And so, since they themselves witnessed this strange occurrence on 3 consecutive days, is there a reason then for anyone to doubt their conclusion that it was not done by human beings?

Did anyone actually see the body being thrown out by the earth? Yes, there is plenty of doubt. Just because they found the body outside the grave 3 times, does not mean that anyone, including Muslims themselves, playing the supernatural game, could not have done it. Your reasoning is faulty and childish and shows the desperation of Muslims in trying to prove their claims.

Vickie

 

[inJESUS]

The Verse of Stoning
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 816:

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
'Umar said, “I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book,” and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, “I have memorized this narration in this way.” 'Umar added, “Surely Allah’s Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him.” (See also: Vol. 8, No. 817 and Vol. 9, No. 424; Sahih Muslim, No. 4194)

the stoning verse is :

‘The fornicators among the married men (ash-shaikh) and married women (ash-shaikhah), stone them as an exemplary punishment from Allah, and Allah is Mighty and Wise."’

In Quran it is:

[24:2] The adulteress and the adulterer you shall whip each of them a hundred lashes. Do not be swayed by pity from carrying out GOD’s law, if you truly believe in GOD and the Last Day. And let a group of believers witness their penalty.

please explain why none of the commentators of Muslim history or any of the companions ever thought that verse should be excluded on grounds of lacking eloquence.

We are left with 2 options:

1. The verse was indeed a revelation from Allah (as several of the companions said), therefore the Qur’an is not preserved.

2.Or this verse was not from Allah, i.e. it is from human origin and then the challenge is defeated by this very verse which was so good and eloquent that Umar thought it should be in the Qur’an. If you do not agree: Do you think your judgement of the quality of the Arabic in this verse is better than that of Umar? Why did he think it belonged into the Qur’an?

 

[hamba2han]

Do you have proof that the man lied? Where is the proof?

If this person claimed that he wrote 2 suras, why then couldn’t he have written many more suras to prove once and for all to everyone at the time that he has indeed met the challenge of the Qur’an?

Ever heard of the expression “Possession is 9/10ths of the law”?

At the end of the day, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) had 100% of the Qur’an (all 114 suras of it)… whereas this person who claimed to have written 2 suras of it ended up with exactly 0% of the Qur’an.

Based on modern day law, who between Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and his accuser would the Courts decide is the rightful “copyright owner” of the Qur’an?

 

[Booklover]

If this person claimed that he wrote 2 suras, why then couldn’t he have written many more suras to prove once and for all to everyone at the time that he has indeed met the challenge of the Qur’an?

Ever heard of the expression “Possession is 9/10ths of the law”?

At the end of the day, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) had 100% of the Qur’an (all 114 suras of it)… whereas this person who claimed to have written 2 suras of it ended up with exactly 0% of the Qur’an.

Based on modern day law, who between Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and his accuser would the Courts decide is the rightful “copyright owner” of the Qur’an?

What has this got to do with anything? What does it prove? If there’s one thing in the Quran that was written by someone else it negates that the Quran is the word of God as Muhammad claimed. All it takes is one mistake, and the Quran is full contradictions, absurdities, to prove that it’s not from God.

Yes, Muhammad is the copyright owner of the Quran, since it’s his own fabrication! Didn’t he also approve changing the wording of the Quran as suggested by another scribe to make it sound better?? If it had really been the word of God he would never have allowed that! Why did Muhammad want this man to be killed??

By the way, you did not answer my question as to whether anyone saw the earth throw the body out of the grave?? Obviously, no one did. When God wants to prove that something came from him, he only does things that humans cannot do. that is how we know that they are from God. Bodies found outside of the graves do not fall into that category, even if it happened 3 or 50 times or whatever, neither does any book! You keep attributing to God things that are perfectly capable of being done by humans but you can’t see the difference apparently.

Vickie

 

[hamba2han]

Didn’t he also approve changing the wording of the Quran as suggested by another scribe to make it sound better??

No, the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) most certainly did not allow any changing of the words of the Qur’an.

By the way, you did not answer my question as to whether anyone saw the earth throw the body out of the grave??

What difference would this make to you? – Even if the people did see it as it happened, would you then believe their story?

 

[Verisimilitude]

What difference would this make to you? – Even if the people did see it as it happened, would you then believe their story?

Catholics/Christians have a history of believeing the eyewitness testimony of reliable people.

 

[Booklover]

No, the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) most certainly did not allow any changing of the words of the Qur’an.

Nonsense! You’re telling porkers again as Rodrigo stated. There was a scribe who did just that. I cannot recall his name, but Muhammad did allow him to change the wording and that’s when the man started to doubt, and this has been discussed before. You I believe submitted a rebuttal stating that the man reverted to Islam later on and went to victory as a military leader or something like that, which story of his becoming a Muslim again is only available on Islamic sites. I wonder why!

What difference would this make to you? – Even if the people did see it as it happened, would you then believe their story?

Personally, none! I wouldn’t believe anything from the followers of a man who claimed that lying was permitted!

Vickie

 

[Booklover]

Catholics/Christians have a history of believeing the eyewitness testimony of reliable people.

You got it right, Verisimilitude! :clapping:

Vickie

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

The man already showed that he fulfilled the sura-like-it challenge by telling everyone that “Muhammad knew nothing except what I wrote for him”. He is telling everyone that he wrote al-Baqarah and al-Imran. You couldn’t tell the difference between those surahs and other surahs - so the ‘sura-like-it’ challenge had been met. Not once. But TWICE.

 

[hamba2han]

Catholics/Christians have a history of believeing the eyewitness testimony of reliable people.

The people who buried the apostate and who witnessed his body lying out of the grave on those 3 consecutive days were not Muslims.

Since they themselves saw the condition of the body and the state of the grave it had been buried in, why then won’t you accept their eventual judgment that it was not possible to have been done by human beings?

What do you know about the body and the grave that they seemingly were not aware of on those 3 consecutive days in question that you should doubt their judgment that it could not have been the work of human beings?

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

The man already showed that he fulfilled the sura-like-it challenge by telling everyone that “Muhammad knew nothing except what I wrote for him”. He is telling everyone that he wrote al-Baqarah and al-Imran. You couldn’t tell the difference between those surahs and other surahs - so the ‘sura-like-it’ challenge had been met. Not once. But TWICE.

This man is very clear to be a liar, Surat al Baqarah and Al Imran (Sura 2,3) were revealed in Medina, and many Suras were revealed in Mecca before this man even became a Muslim as this man was from Bani Al Naggar a tribe in Medina. So how can Muhammad (Peace be upon him) don’t know these other Suras? Besides, do you know that the challenge to produce a Surah like the Quran is present in Surat Al Baqarah?
23. And if you are in doubt as to what WE have sent down to OUR servant, then produce a chapter like it, and call upon your helpers besides ALLAH, if you are truthful.
This was a claim by that man for the sake of Jews and Christians, but it was a blatant lie.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

ibn taymiya:

This man is very clear to be a liar, Surat al Baqarah and Al Imran (Sura 2,3) were revealed in Medina, and many Suras were revealed in Mecca before this man even became a Muslim as this man was from Bani Al Naggar a tribe in Medina.

So? We’re only saying that this unnamed Christian wrote 2 surahs. Not the others.

I’d like to see the evidence that this man was from Bani al Naggar, not that it matters.
ibn taymiya:

So how can Muhammad (Peace be upon him) don’t know these other Suras?

We’re not saying that. We’re saying that Muhammad did not know al-Baqarah and al-Imran except what this scribe wrote for him. Please note that al-Imran particularly is concerned about Christianity and hence it is not far-fetched that a Christian should have written that surah.
ibn taymiya:

Besides, do you know that the challenge to produce a Surah like the Quran is present in Surat Al Baqarah?

So?
ibn taymiya:

1. And if you are in doubt as to what WE have sent down to OUR servant, then produce a chapter like it, and call upon your helpers besides ALLAH, if you are truthful.
   This was a claim by that man for the sake of Jews and Christians, but it was a blatant lie.

Yes we know the Quran is a blatant lie. You don’t have to tell us that.

 

[Verisimilitude]

The people who buried the apostate and who witnessed his body lying out of the grave on those 3 consecutive days were not Muslims.

What else did those people write/record that can be studied to see if they are reliable witnesses?

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

So? We’re only saying that this unnamed Christian wrote 2 surahs. Not the others.

I’d like to see the evidence that this man was from Bani al Naggar, not that it matters.

You’d better see the other narration in Sahih Muslim, as it explains the hadith more:
Book 038, Number 6693:
Anas b. Malik reported: There was a person amongst us who belonged to the tribe of Bani Najjar and he recited Sura al-Baqarah and Surat Al-i-'Imran and he used to transcribe for Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him). He ran away as a rebel and joined the People of the Book. They gave it much importance and said: He is the person who used to transcribe for Muhammad and they were much pleased with him. Time rolled on that Allah caused his death. They dug the grave and buried him therein, but they found to their surprise that the earth had thrown him out over the surface. They again dug the grave for him and buried him but the earth again threw him out upon the surface. They again dug the grave for him and buried him but the earth again threw him out upon the surface. At last they left him unburied.

So the hadith tells that he was one of the scribes, who was writing for Muhammad (Peace be upon him), and that he recited Al Baqara and Al Imran, which means that he was taught them, not that he taught them to the Prophet (Peace be upon him). So his claim is falling and no one believed it except naive people of the book.

We’re not saying that. We’re saying that Muhammad did not know al-Baqarah and al-Imran except what this scribe wrote for him. Please note that al-Imran particularly is concerned about Christianity and hence it is not far-fetched that a Christian should have written that surah.

The hadith doesn’t say that, the hadith tells that he recited Al Baqara and Al Imran, i.e. memorized them, and that he was writing to the Prophet (Peace be upon him). As for Al Imran talking about Christians, these verses were very late when Christians of Najran came to the Prophet (Peace be upon him) and asked him about Issa (Peace be upon him) as you can see in the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir. Besides, talking about Christians was a section in the Sura that presents about 30%, and other Suras were talking about the same issue as Maryam which was before Al Imran, so I see that you have high imagination.

So?

Was that so-called writer challenging himself?

Yes we know the Quran is a blatant lie. You don’t have to tell us that.

Either you respect yourself when discussing, or you will see me describing your beliefs with what you don’t like. This is a caution.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Ibn Taymiya:

You’d better see the other narration in Sahih Muslim, as it explains the hadith more:
Book 038, Number 6693:
Anas b. Malik reported: There was a person amongst us who belonged to the tribe of Bani Najjar and he recited Sura al-Baqarah and Surat Al-i-'Imran and he used to transcribe for Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him). He ran away as a rebel and joined the People of the Book. They gave it much importance and said: He is the person who used to transcribe for Muhammad and they were much pleased with him. Time rolled on that Allah caused his death. They dug the grave and buried him therein, but they found to their surprise that the earth had thrown him out over the surface. They again dug the grave for him and buried him but the earth again threw him out upon the surface. They again dug the grave for him and buried him but the earth again threw him out upon the surface. At last they left him unburied.

Not that it matters but thanks.
ibn taymiya:

So the hadith tells that he was one of the scribes, who was writing for Muhammad (Peace be upon him), and that he recited Al Baqara and Al Imran, which means that he was taught them, not that he taught them to the Prophet (Peace be upon him). So his claim is falling and no one believed it except naive people of the book.

Not true. The Bukhari hadith says, ‘Muhammad knows nothing except what I wrote for him’.

That additional information (not found in the Muslim hadith) tells us that he indeed wrote the 2 surahs.
ibn taymiya:

The hadith doesn’t say that, the hadith tells that he recited Al Baqara and Al Imran, i.e. memorized them, and that he was writing to the Prophet (Peace be upon him). As for Al Imran talking about Christians, these verses were very late when Christians of Najran came to the Prophet (Peace be upon him) and asked him about Issa (Peace be upon him) as you can see in the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir. Besides, talking about Christians was a section in the Sura that presents about 30%, and other Suras were talking about the same issue as Maryam which was before Al Imran, so I see that you have high imagination.

No. Al-Imran was written in early Medinan period and you don’t know when the Christian scribe left Medina.

It is irrelevant that Muhammad heard about Mary before this scribe as nobody is saying that he ONLY heard about Mary from this scribe. What we’re saying is that he wrote al-Imran.
ibn taymiya:

Was that so-called writer challenging himself?

No. He already knew he was the author but had to please his master. When he could - he ran away.
ibn taymiya:

Either you respect yourself when discussing, or you will see me describing your beliefs with what you don’t like. This is a caution.

Of course I respect myself. Don’t expect me to respect islam though. I have suffered through it too much already.

Oh… about your caution - fire away. I’m an atheist by the way. Just to let you know so you don’t waste your time slamming Christianity on my account.

 

[inJESUS]

nobody commented on my last posts; i think they are relevant to the discussion…any (name removed by moderator)ut?

 

[Verisimilitude]

Either you respect yourself when discussing, or you will see me describing your beliefs with what you don’t like. This is a caution.

As I have observed, Rodrigo Bivar is if nothing else honorable with respect to discussing the differences in faith systems though he is a proclaimed atheist (though I wishe he would note it on the profile )

The very tenets of Islam is a description of my (Catholic) belief that is offensive. I have never gone to an Islamic site to convince Mohammedeans they are wrong much like the many who come here to preach.

Atheists, Hindu…whatever, do not say “I accept everything that came before, but what came before is recorded wrong, so accept my version” like Islam does. No other faith has ‘holy’ words that say kill the unbeliever and subjugate those you don’t kill.

 

[hamba2han]

To all non-Muslims, regardless of what you believe, this is a timely reminder yet again.

Always remember that convincing yourself that Islam is not the Truth is NOT the proof that your own faith is.

Those who are scrutinizing the Qur’an with the intention of finding any perceived errors or discrepancies within it really do need to examine their own scriptures with the same standards that they set for the Qur’an in order to determine whether or not these scriptures would pass muster as well.

Also, I just cannot believe that an atheist would use a Catholic forum to attack Islam… for that is just so totally nonsensical that it beggars belief.