hamba2han's Quranic challange

[Ibn_Taymiya]

I don’t think so. There doesn’t seem to be an expression in Arabic that says this. Please tell me so I can get my Arabic friends to check. Somehow I very much doubt what you say.

See that hadith for example, it’s a long hadith, but see the expression:
Book 037, Number 6670:
Assalam-o-'Alaikam and his face was glistening because of delight, and he said: Let there be glad tidings and blessings for you, the like of which (you have neither found nor you will find, as you find today) since your mother gave your birth. I said: Allah’s Messenger. is this acceptance of repentance from you or from Allah? He said: No, (it is not from ma), it is from Allah, and it was common with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) that as he was happy his face brightened up and it looked like a part of the moon and it was from this that we recognised it (his delight).

The same expreesion in bold is the one mentioned in the other hadith:
And it was common that if a man reads the 2 Suras, he is glorified among us.

وكان رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏إذا سر استنار وجهه
‏وكان الرجل إذا قرأ ‏ ‏ البقرة ‏ ‏ وآل ‏ ‏ عمران ‏ ‏جد فينا

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

The hadith says he ran away to join the People of the Book. This means that he joined a Christian or Jewish community somewhere. I don’t see where it says any of them converted to Islam.

Again - you are reading too much into the hadith.

Where did I say so, I wasn’t talking about that hadith at all, I was saying that if this challenge was really met when Islam was weak, Islam would have vanished, as this would have been a great evidence against Islam. Did you read my message?

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

See that hadith for example, it’s a long hadith, but see the expression:
Book 037, Number 6670:
Assalam-o-'Alaikam and his face was glistening because of delight, and he said: Let there be glad tidings and blessings for you, the like of which (you have neither found nor you will find, as you find today) since your mother gave your birth. I said: Allah’s Messenger. is this acceptance of repentance from you or from Allah? He said: No, (it is not from ma), it is from Allah, and it was common with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) that as he was happy his face brightened up and it looked like a part of the moon and it was from this that we recognised it (his delight).

The same expreesion in bold is the one mentioned in the other hadith:
And it was common that if a man reads the 2 Suras, he is glorified among us.

وكان رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏إذا سر استنار وجهه
‏وكان الرجل إذا قرأ ‏ ‏ البقرة ‏ ‏ وآل ‏ ‏ عمران ‏ ‏جد فينا

Firstly the bold part does not give us the timing of when the man, not Muhammad, ‘read’ or ‘recited’ the surahs.

Secondly, the reason why the man was not glorified was because he apostatized.

Thirdly the expression is just a euphemism. Is every man who reads al-Baqarah and al-Imran glorified? I don’t think so.
ibn taymiya:

Where did I say so, I wasn’t talking about that hadith at all, I was saying that if this challenge was really met when Islam was weak, Islam would have vanished, as this would have been a great evidence against Islam. Did you read my message?

Yes, I read your message. That is why I wrote back that he RAN AWAY TO JOIN THE PEOPLE OF THE BOOK.

He wasn’t part of the Arab pagan community. For all you know he locked himself in a monastery somewhere among Christian monks.

So if he was only among fellow People of the Book, why would you think Islam would vanish? For all you know - nobody heard of him until he died. Only the people whom he had contact with heard what he said. Until Anas heard about it from someone. You don’t know where and when Anas heard the report of this Christian.

Like I said: you read too much into the hadith.

 

[Montalban]

I don’t know what’s wrong in killing a man like this, he was a traitor. As for lying, lying in Islam is permitted within battle as a tactic, and for this case he was in a citadel, and there was no way to reach him, if you object on that concept, it’s yours.

Stop! We’ve already agreed that Islam permits murder and lying.

But war is a different case as many rigorous factors are present, and there are many tactics, and see how intelligence works for example, do you think that US and UK intelligence didn’t do that in their war against the Nazis? If they haven’t done so, I think that it would have happened that people might say “Heil Hitler” today. These are all intelligence acts, and that doesn’t mean that Islam condones lying, but this was a license for necessity.

(emphasis added where you contradict yourself.)

Wrong, if you looked at the actions of the Jews in Medina, you will see that this is incorrect, Bani Qaynoqa’ killed a Muslim when he killed one of them after he attacked a Muslim lady, and Bani Al nadeer, tried to kill the Prophet But in our case, they all knew that this man was worthy killing.

Again you agree that in Islam you can murder someone. Did you have any other point to make?

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

Firstly the bold part does not give us the timing of when the man, not Muhammad, ‘read’ or ‘recited’ the surahs.

Secondly, the reason why the man was not glorified was because he apostatized.

Thirdly the expression is just a euphemism. Is every man who reads al-Baqarah and al-Imran glorified? I don’t think so.

Well, you might not understand this, but if you knew Arabic you’ll understand what I mean. Besides the hadith means that this man reached a high rank before he apostatizes. Thirdly, the word meant by “read” is not just to read but to memorize (according to the hadiths’ language), and this was something common within hadiths.

Yes, I read your message. That is why I wrote back that he RAN AWAY TO JOIN THE PEOPLE OF THE BOOK.

He wasn’t part of the Arab pagan community. For all you know he locked himself in a monastery somewhere among Christian monks.

So if he was only among fellow People of the Book, why would you think Islam would vanish? For all you know - nobody heard of him until he died. Only the people whom he had contact with heard what he said. Until Anas heard about it from someone. You don’t know where and when Anas heard the report of this Christian.

Like I said: you read too much into the hadith.

I mean that if this challenge was really met by that man, it could have been met by Arab pagans who couldn’t meet it, and at their time before migration when the Prophet (Peace be upon him) was weak and was only depending on argument, if this was the case, he would have lost his argument, and Islam will vanish because there was no power.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

ibn taymiya:

Well, you might not understand this, but if you knew Arabic you’ll understand what I mean. Besides the hadith means that this man reached a high rank before he apostatizes. Thirdly, the word meant by “read” is not just to read but to memorize (according to the hadiths’ language), and this was something common within hadiths.

So it means he WROTE, read and memorize what he wrote.

The hadith gives no timing at all to when he wrote and read and memorized. You are again reading too much into the hadith.
ibn taymiya:

I mean that if this challenge was really met by that man, it could have been met by Arab pagans who couldn’t meet it, and at their time before migration when the Prophet (Peace be upon him) was weak and was only depending on argument, if this was the case, he would have lost his argument, and Islam will vanish because there was no power.

It only takes one successful meeting of the challenge to disprove the Quran.

Like I said before Muslims would never admit and record such successful meetings of the challenge even if they happened. The only way we know is through a ‘slip up’ which is what this hadith is. Muslims slipped up by not realizing that the Bukhari hadith shows the challenge had been met.

Remember that when al-Baqara and al-Imran were revealed - the Muslims were in Medina - which was almost entirely Muslim except for some Jews. Why would the Meccan Arab pagans need to ‘disprove’ Islam when they were far away in Mecca? You have no evidence at all that the Meccan pagans or any other pagan were even interested in reading the Quran to find the ‘sura-like-it’ challenge. None at all.

Besides, it is all moot - the Arab pagans took it for certain that the Quran is false.

Lastly, I have said this many times already - even if the Arab pagans had successfully met the ‘sura-like-it’ challenge, Muslims would never admit and record the event.

 

[Montalban]

It only takes one successful meeting of the challenge to disprove the Quran.

This is great
And, as the Cock crew, those who stood before
The Tavern shouted - “Open then the Door!
You know how little time we have to stay,
And once departed, may return no more.”

Alike for those who for TO-DAY prepare,
And that after a TO-MORROW stare,
A Muezzin from the Tower of Darkness cries
“Fools! your reward is neither Here nor There!”

Why, all the Saints and Sages who discuss’d
Of the Two Worlds so learnedly, are thrust
Like foolish Prophets forth; their Words to Scorn
Are scatter’d, and their mouths are stopt with Dust.

Oh, come with old Khayyam, and leave the Wise
To talk; one thing is certain, that Life flies;
One thing is certain, and the Rest is Lies;
The Flower that once has blown for ever dies.

Myself when young did eagerly frequent
Doctor and Saint, and heard great Argument
About it and about: but evermore
Came out of the same Door as in I went.

With them the Seed of Wisdom did I sow,
And with my own hand labour’d it to grow:
And this was all the Harvest that I reap’d -
“I came like Water, and like Wind I go.”

Into this Universe, and why not knowing,
Nor whence, like Water willy-nilly flowing:
And out of it, as Wind along the Waste,
I know not whither, willy-nilly blowing.

The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.

And that inverted Bowl we call The Sky,
Whereunder crawling coop’t we live and die,
Lift not thy hands to It for help - for It
Rolls impotently on as Thou or I.
-Omar Khayyám

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

So it means he WROTE, read and memorize what he wrote.

The hadith gives no timing at all to when he wrote and read and memorized. You are again reading too much into the hadith.

The hadith tells that it was common that if a man memorized the 2 Suras, that he has a high rank, this clearly means that the 2 Suras were present and he memorized them, for example if I said you, in a particular society, it was common that if someone bought a Jaguar, this means that he is rich, does this mean that the Jaguar wasn’t present and he invented it? Of course it doesn’t mean so, but it means that it was present and he came and bought it. It is the same, it was common that if someone memorized the 2 Suras, this is very great, so this clearly means that the Suras were present when he came, not that he invented them.

It only takes one successful meeting of the challenge to disprove the Quran.

Like I said before Muslims would never admit and record such successful meetings of the challenge even if they happened. The only way we know is through a ‘slip up’ which is what this hadith is. Muslims slipped up by not realizing that the Bukhari hadith shows the challenge had been met.

Remember that when al-Baqara and al-Imran were revealed - the Muslims were in Medina - which was almost entirely Muslim except for some Jews. Why would the Meccan Arab pagans need to ‘disprove’ Islam when they were far away in Mecca? You have no evidence at all that the Meccan pagans or any other pagan were even interested in reading the Quran to find the ‘sura-like-it’ challenge. None at all.

Besides, it is all moot - the Arab pagans took it for certain that the Quran is false.

Lastly, I have said this many times already - even if the Arab pagans had successfully met the ‘sura-like-it’ challenge, Muslims would never admit and record the event.

Don’t you know that Muhammad (Peace be upon him) was living in Mecca before he migrates to Medina, and kept on preaching his people there for 13 years?
If you know this then you will know that they kept on persecuting him within that time, and they were astonished by the Quran that they were afraid to hear it, and this is what God says in the Quran:
26. And those who disbelieve say, `Listen not to this Qur’an, but make noise during its recital that you may have the upper hand.’

They knew well the Quran, and they knew that it was a miracle, and that’s why they tried to avoid it, so if they were really able to meet the challenge, they wouldn’t have avoided it, by they would have confronted it, and they would have been victorious, and Islam would have vanished.
What is your challenge to disprove the Quran? Do you mean this? I am sorry to tell you that you fail, as you are only trying to twist the hadith, and load it what it can’t bear. And the other narration refuted your argument.

 

[Verisimilitude]

It’s yours, I have nothing to do with it, but as for your last sentence, I’d like to tell you that verse:
32. They seek to extinguish the light of ALLAH with their mouths; but ALLAH refuses but to perfect HIS light, though the disbelievers may resent it. 33. HE it is Who has sent HIS Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, that HE may make it prevail over every other religion, even though the idolaters may resent it.

Amazing.

This is your opinion, but it is not necessary to be true.

It is a clear fact, you just don’t like it. Get used to disappointment.

According to the classification, it can be a country or a city. I don’t understand your point in that question.

That’s ok, I understand your response.

When Muslims recover and restore back to their religion, the same as what happened during the Crusades, when Muslims were away from Islam, so they were defeated in the beginning, but when Salaheddine came and Muslims began to recover, we were able to restore Jerusalem.

Are you willing to destroy Jerusalem to win her back?

To protect the dhimmis from external dangers, and as a source of money, don’t you pay taxes to your country, and I hear that they are very high in US, why didn’t you object?

What of the internal danger of Islam itself to people? Islam is an external danger to all free people.

I do pay taxes, and they are not so high. Here are a few things my taxes have been used for.
USS Comfort
$50 billion later, taking stock of US aid to Egypt
JERUSALEM, ISRAEL - The United States and Israel signed a deal for an unprecedented $30 billion of military aid over 10 years
Ships
Planes

Truth must be protected by power, but truth in itself is not enough. Of course I am not talking about your faith, I am talking generally.

Here is a little truth for you.

Of course, I am talking about your faith. It is an evil that will be opposed.

 

[inJESUS]

.

They knew well the Quran, and they knew that it was a miracle,** and that’s why they tried to avoid it**

 

[french]

Hi

Your above signatures sounds like you are a Protestant; yet you say you are a Catholic!

Is it not surprising?

What is the difference between you and a normal Catholic, so that we may get used to you?

Thanks

Spiritually, really nothing… I believe in Purgatory, eternal hell, the Truth of the Catholic Church, all that. My view of the Soul is a little more on the mystical Jewish side, but I think the Church would have no problem with that.

Politically, I am neo liberal. I choose to try and not to judge people (although I do have a problem of doing so) and such. I am a modern neo liberal! So, that is really all.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

ibn taymiya:

The hadith tells that it was common that if a man memorized the 2 Suras, that he has a high rank, this clearly means that the 2 Suras were present and he memorized them, for example if I said you, in a particular society, it was common that if someone bought a Jaguar, this means that he is rich, does this mean that the Jaguar wasn’t present and he invented it? Of course it doesn’t mean so, but it means that it was present and he came and bought it. It is the same, it was common that if someone memorized the 2 Suras, this is very great, so this clearly means that the Suras were present when he came, not that he invented them.

No it doesn’t. So it says a man has a high rank if he memorized the 2 suras. How do you know the unnamed Christian did not have a ‘high rank’ when he was still a scribe for Muhammad?

You don’t know when the hadith was referring. It gives no idea at all as to the timing. You are just grasping at straws.

I ignored the rest of your post that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Honestly, ibn Taymiya. How does this give us the timing of when the man wrote or read the 2 surahs?

The hadith says:
"There was a man writing for the Prophet(Peace be upon him), and he had read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, and it happened (the custom at their time) that if the man from us read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, he was known to be very great among us

It just says that this scribe was very great among the Muslims. When he wrote the surahs is not given here.

You are truly grasping at straws and are reading far far too much in the hadith as usual.

Please try to just read the hadith carefully and literally. Don’t add things into the hadith that aren’t there. I find this habit of yours rather strange.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

I just tried to google your hadith and found out that the ‘great among us’ did not refer to the man but other people who memorized al-Baqarah ten verses at a time.

This is what the hadith says,

Abdullah ibn Umar, for example, was reported by Imam Malik in ‘al-Muwatta’ as having spent eight consecutive years completely memorizing and learning the Surah of al-Baqarah. It was also reported that the Companions used to say, “it is considered to be a great thing that one of us learns the Surahs of al-Baqarah and aali-Imran (The Cow and the Family of Imran).” And that, “They used to learn the Qur’an from the Prophet (SAWS), ten verses at a time, and that they will not go beyond them until they have learned all possible knowledge and actions in them.”

quranicstudies.com/article86.html

Obviously the hadith was talking about 2 different issues:

1, the man wrote for Muhammad and had read al-baqarah and al-imran.

and

1. abdullah ibn umar was the great ‘one among us’ who learnt al-baqarah and al-imran.

This scribe was NOT abdullah ibn umar. You have got the wrong man.

 

[french]

The “surah like it” “challenge” also depends on what surah you choose to make something similar too.

For example, surah al baqara is not poetic at all… whereas the meccan surahs are a lot more poetic. So the question arises… What surah should one compare it to? The small, very poetic surahs of mecca, or the long, not poetic at all verses of medina?

If you read the quran in chronological order, you see a change in the style over time… it actually becomes less and less poetic.

We also must accept the fact that the islamic mentality is much different then ours.

For example, I know 3 ex muslim arabic speakers… Yes, 3!!! Baruch HaShem for that.

Anyways, and these 3… Every one… They all say that when they were muslim, they thought the quran was beautiful. But once they left islam or became skeptical and such, when they read it, they just did not find it anything spectacular. They found it just some typical book.

The same could be said about the Jews and the Torah… I love the Torah. But it is nothing extraordinary in terms of beauty and all. Yet many Jews constantly say “Just look at the Torah… It is so perfect!!”

I guess one will get that mentality, and really just believe what the status quo teaches. They accept what they hear from others, without questioning and such.

If the quran were something extraordinary, then 20% of the arab world would not be Christian. 10% of the arab Christians live in the West, so all may not speak arabic… But 10% live in arabic speaking middle east countries (such as Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq.)

In Iraq, Syria, and Egypt, learning the quran is required. Yet Coptic Churches are still booming, and people are not leaving Christianity!

 

[paarsurrey]

The “surah like it” “challenge” also depends on what surah you choose to make something similar too.

For example, surah al baqara is not poetic at all… whereas the meccan surahs are a lot more poetic. So the question arises… What surah should one compare it to? The small, very poetic surahs of mecca, or the long, not poetic at all verses of medina?

If you read the quran in chronological order, you see a change in the style over time… it actually becomes less and less poetic.

We also must accept the fact that the islamic mentality is much different then ours.

For example, I know 3 ex muslim arabic speakers… Yes, 3!!! Baruch HaShem for that.

Anyways, and these 3… Every one… They all say that when they were muslim, they thought the quran was beautiful. But once they left islam or became skeptical and such, when they read it, they just did not find it anything spectacular. They found it just some typical book.

The same could be said about the Jews and the Torah… I love the Torah. But it is nothing extraordinary in terms of beauty and all. Yet many Jews constantly say “Just look at the Torah… It is so perfect!!”

I guess one will get that mentality, and really just believe what the status quo teaches. They accept what they hear from others, without questioning and such.

If the quran were something extraordinary, then 20% of the arab world would not be Christian. 10% of the arab Christians live in the West, so all may not speak arabic… But 10% live in arabic speaking middle east countries (such as Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq.)

In Iraq, Syria, and Egypt, learning the quran is required. Yet Coptic Churches are still booming, and people are not leaving Christianity!

Hi

Though I differ with the most of the contents of your post, yet I would say it is good post.

Thanks

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

Honestly, ibn Taymiya. How does this give us the timing of when the man wrote or read the 2 surahs?

The hadith tells that the scribe memorized Al Baqarah and Al Imran, then it says:
“it is considered to be a great thing that one of us learns the Surahs of al-Baqarah and aali-Imran (The Cow and the Family of Imran).”
If you looked within the link you gave, it is not telling the hadith, it is an article quoting a part of the hadith, this was what exacly said in the narration I quoted, so it’s a clear proof that the 2 Surahs existed before the man comes, otherwise, the sentence has no meaning. I hope that you understood this.

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

but who says they avoided it? who said they were unable to meet the challenge? can we read about a challenge they presented in order to assess?

Do yuo realize what the quran says? it says they will NOT be able to match it. Judgment already executed, brainwashing already established. If you were to find a better writing that the Quran, you will convince yourself it is not, otherwise you will be contradicting the Quran. So who is the judge that no one met the challenge? the Muslims who wrote the tradition?and did you really expect them to write that the challenge have been met or to even admit it to themselves?

Well, you may have had a point in this if this was when Muhammad (Peace be upon him) became powerful, but the Suras telling this were in Mecca, when he was weak and that so-called “brainwashing” can’t be applied. If the Arabs thought that the challenge could have been met, they would have had a great evidence that will refute Islam, and they had the power over Muhammad (Peace be upon him) to suppress Islam, and Islam would have vanished, but this didn’t happen.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Ibn Taymiya:

The hadith tells that the scribe memorized Al Baqarah and Al Imran, then it says:
“it is considered to be a great thing that one of us learns the Surahs of al-Baqarah and aali-Imran (The Cow and the Family of Imran).”
If you looked within the link you gave, it is not telling the hadith, it is an article quoting a part of the hadith, this was what exacly said in the narration I quoted, so it’s a clear proof that the 2 Surahs existed before the man comes, otherwise, the sentence has no meaning. I hope that you understood this.

Dear Ibn Taymiya
Do you remember giving us the Musnad Ahmad hadith? Do you stand by it? Why don’t you tell us the rest of the hadith?

Here it is in Arabic in case you don’t remember:

حَدَّثَنَا يَزِيدُ بْنُ هَارُونَ أَخْبَرَنَا حُمَيْدٌ عَنْ أَنَسٍ أَنَّ رَجُلًا كَانَ يَكْتُبُ لِلنَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَقَدْ كَانَ قَرَأَ الْبَقَرَةَ وَآلَ عِمْرَانَ وَكَانَ الرَّجُلُ إِذَا قَرَأَ الْبَقَرَةَ وَآلَ عِمْرَانَ جَدَّ فِينَا يَعْنِي عَظُمَ فَكَانَ النَّبِيُّ عَلَيْهِ الصَّلَاة وَالسَّلَامُ يُمْلِي عَلَيْهِ غَفُورًا رَحِيمًا فَيَكْتُبُ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا فَيَقُولُ لَهُ النَّبِيُّ عَلَيْهِ الصَّلَاة وَالسَّلَامُ اكْتُبْ كَذَا وَكَذَا اكْتُبْ كَيْفَ شِئْتَ وَيُمْلِي عَلَيْهِ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا فَيَقُولُ أَكْتُبُ سَمِيعًا بَصِيرًا فَيَقُولُ اكْتُبْ اكْتُبْ كَيْفَ شِئْتَ فَارْتَدَّ ذَلِكَ الرَّجُلُ عَنْ الْإِسْلَامِ فَلَحِقَ بِالْمُشْرِكِينَ وَقَالَ أَنَا أَعْلَمُكُمْ بِمُحَمَّدٍ إِنْ كُنْتُ لَأَكْتُبُ مَا شِئْتُ فَمَاتَ ذَلِكَ الرَّجُلُ فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ إِنَّ الْأَرْضَ لَمْ تَقْبَلْهُ و قَالَ أَنَسٌ فَحَدَّثَنِي أَبُو طَلْحَةَ أَنَّهُ أَتَى الْأَرْضَ الَّتِي مَاتَ فِيهَا ذَلِكَ الرَّجُلُ فَوَجَدَهُ مَنْبُوذًا فَقَالَ أَبُو طَلْحَةَ مَا شَأْنُ هَذَا الرَّجُلِ قَالُوا قَدْ دَفَنَّاهُ مِرَارًا فَلَمْ تَقْبَلْهُ الْأَرْضُ حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ بَكْرٍ السَّهْمِيُّ حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدٌ عَنْ أَنَسٍ قَالَ كَانَ رَجُلٌ يَكْتُبُ بَيْنَ يَدَيْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَدْ قَرَأَ الْبَقَرَةَ وَآلَ عِمْرَانَ وَكَانَ الرَّجُلُ إِذَا قَرَأَ الْبَقَرَةَ وَآلَ عِمْرَانَ يُعَدُّ فِينَا عَظِيمًا فَذَكَرَ مَعْنَى حَدِيثِ يَزِيدَ

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Dear Ibn Taymiya
Please remember that your entire argument depends on this translation of Musnad Ahmad. This is what you wrote:

Rodrigo
I have just found another narration for that hadith that totally destroys your question, the narration in Musnad Ahmad, I don’t know a translation, but here is a google translation, I know it is very bad but I will try to rephrase it:

The man writes of the prophet peace be upon him was read out, and the Cow Imran The man, if he read Al Omran cow us very mean bone .hadith.al-islam.com/Display/D…um=11769&doc=6

The hadith says:
"There was a man writing for the Prophet(Peace be upon him), and he had read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, and it happened (the custom at their time) that if the man from us read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, he was known to be very great among us

This clearly means that they used to recite the 2 Suras before this man comes.

Why don’t you tell us what the rest of the hadith says?

It is also important that this bit, “if the man from us read Al Baqarah and Al Imran, he was known to be very great among us” is translated correctly as you imply that both these surahs were already written before the Christian scribe started to work for Muhammad.

Thank you.
Rodrigo