Quran says Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his body.

[Sam_777]

Its obviously that this thread has created some troubles/doubts for some Muslims, and it seems someone pushed “Moayid” to register on CAF particularly to comment on it, the last post in the thread was on “March 5, 2009” when “Moayid” registered, so its not easy to find it even with the search function of CAF, and as of this date he never participated in any other thread!

And as I have stated here, the Muslims scholars who come on TVs whom are seen by millions of Muslims ARE the ones who claim its a scientific miracle of Quran, so who will Muslims follow! the opinion of unknown Muslims who post here or the opinion of the famous Muslim scholars!

 

[jakasaki]

You were quick to accuse me of taking the verses from an anti-islamic site but I did NOT.

30:2
2 The Roman Empire **has **been defeated-
3 In a land close by; but they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs, will soon be victorious-
Yusuf Ali
searchtruth.com/chapter_display.php?chapter=30&translator=2&mac=

2 The Romans **are **vanquished,
3 In a near land, and they, after being vanquished, shall overcome
Shakir
searchtruth.com/chapter_display.php?chapter=30&translator=3&mac=

2 The Romans **have been **defeated
3 In the nearer land, and they, after their defeat will be victorious
Pickthal
searchtruth.com/chapter_display.php?chapter=30&translator=4&mac=

2 The Romans have been defeated.
3 **In the nearest land **(Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and Palestine), and they, after their defeat, will be victorious.
Khan
searchtruth.com/chapter_display.php?chapter=30&translator=5&mac=

The site I use for the koran is 100% islamic.

 

[bosnian_muslim]

OMG bible believers try to find faults in the Koran,sam if you STILL believe in the bible then dont think your litle things can create doubts in the muslim hearts

jakasaki,whats wrong with that?? roman empire was bigger then little rome today

 

[jakasaki]

**jakasaki,whats wrong with that?? roman empire was bigger then little rome today **

 

[Moayidd]

Which statement in all my posts shows that I backed out!!!

You and other Muslim members on this thread are exactly doing like what Muhammed told you to do:

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 43, Number 623:
Allah’s Apostle said, “Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one.”

صحيح البخاري:
قال رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏انصر أخاك ظالما أو مظلوما ‏
​

(E) (A)

But I’m expecting such behaviour of Muslim members here particularly after I knew what Jesus said in the Bible “By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?”, (Matthew 7:16).

Once again, slander and personal attacks. Attack my argument don’t attack me.
This is your thread and you made an allegation in it. Back it up or back out of it.
Remember, if I wanted to show real errors in the Bible, I would have absolutely no problem backing them up.

Mohammed (saaws) taught us nothing but good manners, a real religion, and nothing but honesty. You would be well advised to try and follow the honesty part at least.
In your ‘two hearts’ allegation you were so dishonest that you quoted the proof against your own argument and presented it as though it was proof FOR your argument because most can’t read Arabic here.
Now, you are doing precisely the same thing again. You took only ‘half’ of the Hadeeth and presented it as though it was a complete hadeeth. Is that what Jesus taught you ? Jesus maybe but not Isa (As).
This is what you quoted.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 43, Number 623:
Allah’s Apostle said, “Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one.”

صحيح البخاري:
قال رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏انصر أخاك ظالما أو مظلوما ‏
​

This is the REAL and complete Hadeeth:
‏ ‏بَاب ‏ ‏يَمِينِ الرَّجُلِ لِصَاحِبِهِ إِنَّهُ أَخُوهُ ‏ ‏إِذَا خَافَ عَلَيْهِ الْقَتْلَ أَوْ نَحْوَهُ ‏ ‏وَكَذَلِكَ كُلُّ مُكْرَهٍ يَخَافُ فَإِنَّهُ يَذُبُّ عَنْهُ الْمَظَالِمَ وَيُقَاتِلُ دُونَهُ وَلَا يَخْذُلُهُ فَإِنْ قَاتَلَ
حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحِيمِ حَدَّثَنَا سَعِيدُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ حَدَّثَنَا هُشَيْمٌ أَخْبَرَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أَبِي بَكْرِ بْنِ أَنَسٍ عَنْ أَنَسٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ انْصُرْ أَخَاكَ ظَالِمًا أَوْ مَظْلُومًا فَقَالَ رَجُلٌ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَنْصُرُهُ إِذَا كَانَ مَظْلُومًا أَفَرَأَيْتَ إِذَا كَانَ ظَالِمًا كَيْفَ أَنْصُرُهُ قَالَ تَحْجُزُهُ أَوْ تَمْنَعُهُ مِنْ الظُّلْمِ فَإِنَّ ذَلِكَ نَصْرُهُ بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ كِتَاب الْحِيَلِ أَبْوَابٌ بَاب فِي تَرْكِ الْحِيَلِ وَأَنَّ لِكُلِّ امْرِئٍ مَا نَوَى فِي الْأَيْمَانِ وَغَيْرِهَا

Translation: Allah’s Apostle said, “Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one.” A man said, Oh messenger of Allah I will support my Brother is he is oppressed but how do I support him if he is an oppressor? He (Mohammaed saaws) said: By restraining him and preventing him from oppressing (others) and in this you have supported him.

Ok ? I hope everyone has seen your pathological dishonesty and the extents to which you and people like you will go to fake allegations against Islam. BTW, you are a Copt (Egyptian Christian) aren’t you?

Now stop trying to side track the issue and present an allegation of error against the Qur’aan. You have done everything else EXCEPT That so far and this is the 3rd or 4th time I have called you out on this.
Whats the matter Sam ? Can’t you find any ?

The Qur’aan is full of errors and I’m just a newbie no ? So wheres your problem exactly ?
In your next post I will be expecting an Error inthe Qur’an not another desperate attempt to circumvent the issue. You can consult your Egyptian Christian friends on that Coptic site

 

[Moayidd]

You were quick to accuse me of taking the verses from an anti-islamic site but I did NOT.

30:2
2 The Roman Empire **has **been defeated-
3 In a land close by; but they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs, will soon be victorious-
Yusuf Ali
searchtruth.com/chapter_display.php?chapter=30&translator=2&mac=

2 The Romans **are **vanquished,
3 In a near land, and they, after being vanquished, shall overcome
Shakir
searchtruth.com/chapter_display.php?chapter=30&translator=3&mac=

2 The Romans **have been **defeated
3 **In the nearer **land, and they, after their defeat will be victorious
Pickthal
searchtruth.com/chapter_display.php?chapter=30&translator=4&mac=

2 The Romans have been defeated.
3 **In the nearest **land (Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and Palestine), and they, after their defeat, will be victorious.
Khan
searchtruth.com/chapter_display.php?chapter=30&translator=5&mac=

The site I use for the koran is 100% islamic.

Well I hope that thats what you used because I can really respect you for that. This is the right approach even though some sites aren’t Islamic but only pretend to be. Naturally you can also consult anti-Islamic sites to gather more information but the information that comes from those sites must be used with care or course.

Concerning the issue here. What was being predicted was the victory of the Rum not their defeat which happened prior to the revelation of the Verse.
Anyway, as predictions go this one is very thorough. It predicts
(1) The event
(2) the time
(3) The Geographic Location
(4) And the Result

Remember if Mohammad (saaws) had written the Qur’aan why on earth* would he make such a prediction* ? If I were a fraud I would leave this issue alone completely or, If i have to say something about it, I would be very vague and say something like: ‘Despair not for those who beleive in Allah’ or whatever. But why on EARTH would I make such a precise prediction that would completely** expose me as a fraud** when ‘some years’ passed and none of what I said happened ? Everything I had achieved would be undone and I would be the laughing stock of everyone. Think about it.

If you were looking for an explanation for the verses just look at my post again. Take what I typed to an Arabic scholar and have him check the validity of what I said. But trust me, the verses say exactly what I typed above. Adna can be taken to mean ‘closest’ but the primary meaning is "Lowest’ and it is the first definition in Lisaan Al 3arab. Also, what would closest point on earth mean ? It is meaningless unless they lived on a series of disconnected islands.
Finally, If you had to choose between ‘closest’ and ‘lowest’ and then founf out that the subject area was actually the Lowest point on earth which definition of theword do you think the verse would be referring to ? Of all the point on the entire Globe, this point just happened to be the lowest by sheer coincidence?

 

[famdigy]

This is the REAL and complete Hadeeth:
‏ ‏بَاب ‏ ‏يَمِينِ الرَّجُلِ لِصَاحِبِهِ إِنَّهُ أَخُوهُ ‏ ‏إِذَا خَافَ عَلَيْهِ الْقَتْلَ أَوْ نَحْوَهُ ‏ ‏وَكَذَلِكَ كُلُّ مُكْرَهٍ يَخَافُ فَإِنَّهُ يَذُبُّ عَنْهُ الْمَظَالِمَ وَيُقَاتِلُ دُونَهُ وَلَا يَخْذُلُهُ فَإِنْ قَاتَلَ
حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحِيمِ حَدَّثَنَا سَعِيدُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ حَدَّثَنَا هُشَيْمٌ أَخْبَرَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أَبِي بَكْرِ بْنِ أَنَسٍ عَنْ أَنَسٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ انْصُرْ أَخَاكَ ظَالِمًا أَوْ مَظْلُومًا فَقَالَ رَجُلٌ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَنْصُرُهُ إِذَا كَانَ مَظْلُومًا أَفَرَأَيْتَ إِذَا كَانَ ظَالِمًا كَيْفَ أَنْصُرُهُ قَالَ تَحْجُزُهُ أَوْ تَمْنَعُهُ مِنْ الظُّلْمِ فَإِنَّ ذَلِكَ نَصْرُهُ بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ كِتَاب الْحِيَلِ أَبْوَابٌ بَاب فِي تَرْكِ الْحِيَلِ وَأَنَّ لِكُلِّ امْرِئٍ مَا نَوَى فِي الْأَيْمَانِ وَغَيْرِهَا

Translation: Allah’s Apostle said, “Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one.” A man said, Oh messenger of Allah I will support my Brother is he is oppressed but how do I support him if he is an oppressor? He (Mohammaed saaws) said: By restraining him and preventing him from oppressing (others) and in this you have supported him.

Sadly, this is a common behavior among Islam bashing Christians, nothing personal Sam. Many of your brothers and sisters quote only what suits them to show Islam in a bad light and conceal the rest. Giving the average reader the impression that Islam is as they say. This is why we encourage you to learn about Islam from Islamic sources rather than anti-muslim ones.

 

[Moayidd]

Its obviously that this thread has created some troubles/doubts for some Muslims, and it seems someone pushed “Moayid” to register on CAF particularly to comment on it, the last post in the thread was on “March 5, 2009” when “Moayid” registered, so its not easy to find it even with the search function of CAF, and as of this date he never participated in any other thread!

And as I have stated here, the Muslims scholars who come on TVs whom are seen by millions of Muslims ARE the ones who claim its a scientific miracle of Quran, so who will Muslims follow! the opinion of unknown Muslims who post here or the opinion of the famous Muslim scholars!

You can stop pretending any moment now and you can also stop trying to throw smoke screens. Just address my post directly and show me an Error in the Qur’aan. You can also stop your desperate and dishonest efforts which are nothing but presenting half truths and relying on memebers not being able to read Arabic.
Don’t think you will scare us away by slander either

Still waiting for just ONE of your allegations of error in the Qur’aan.

 

[Moayidd]

Sadly, this is a common behavior among Islam bashing Christians, nothing personal Sam. Many of your brothers and sisters quote only what suits them to show Islam in a bad light and conceal the rest. Giving the average reader the impression that Islam is as they say. This is why we encourage you to learn about Islam from Islamic sources rather than anti-muslim ones.

And they are not very good at it either. What amazes me is that they don’t appear to have any problem with being SO dishonest!!
While sam might just be a casual very amateurish Islam hater, his betters aren’t any different. Ibn Sina, Shorrosh and that Zakarias individual they ALL lie without the slightest problem they also never confront you or discuss anything in a dialog. They prefer to post lies and never give anyone the opportunity to refute them (of course). A kind of cyber hit and run.
Also amazingly they chose accuracy and consistency of the Qur’aan as their strategy. A very unwise choice bearing in mind the state the Bible is in.
If they must Lie and fake errors about the Qur’aan what does that tell you ? They couldn’t find any REAL errors!! They have become living proof for the lack of errors - how ironic

 

[Moayidd]

Moayidd, I admire your patience with Sam, he’s been in my ignore list long time ago.

please stay in this forum.

Thanks Hadi,
I’m not really responding to him though, he is insignificant really. I’m really responding so that the non-Arabic members of this board who may have believed him now know just what kind of a person he is and what kind of non-sense he posts. But if it was him I was considering, i would never have responded beyond my first post here.

Inshaa’allah I will check this board once a day but my usual place is ummah.com so if you find I’m not here and you need some assistance just drop me a message there in comparative religion.

 

[Lothair]

The Rum (Roman Empire) was defeated at the Lowest part of Earth, and they will return victorious in some years.
A- How did the Qur’aan know that the part of land was the lowest part on earth ( adn[a] al-ar[d]i)

Here, the word means ‘near’ not ‘lowest’. It came to mean ‘lowest’ to support Islamic claims like the one we are reading here. I’ll go into more detail if necessary.

B- How and why would Mohammad (saaws) know this would happen in that time frame ?

He ‘revealed’ this verse in about 6AH [628AD]. The Persians had taken Jerusalem 15 years earlier and only took a few provinces from the Romans. A peace treaty was signed a peace deal the following year [629AD]. I need to point out that a few Roman legions had been defeated at the Dead Sea, not the Roman Empire.

I’m still awaiting the alleged errors.

You have seen the errors, and haven’t really dealt with them.

 

[jakasaki]

This is my last post in this thread regarding the Roman Empire.

The Western Roman Empire started to die out 400AD - to 470AD

This is centuries before the koran was written.

The Eastern Roman Empire died out around 1450AD

And so when the statement in the koran states that the Roman Empire has been defeated is hogwash.

If it’s talking about the Western Empire, well then the statement is true, but unfortunately, like many things in the koran it does not say which empire it’s talking about and it’s not saying when it was defeated or by whom… but the Eastern Empire was still going and it continued for many centuries.

 

[Moayidd]

Here, the word means ‘near’ not ‘lowest’. It came to mean ‘lowest’ to support Islamic claims like the one we are reading here. I’ll go into more detail if necessary.

I’m not sure why you can insist on such a definition. Let me quote Lissan Al 3arab again. Lisaan Al 3arab is THE lexicon to use with when real lingusitic meanings are need.

دُونُ: نقيضُ فوقَ، وهو تقصير عن الغاية، ويكون ظرفاً.
Doon: The reverse/opposite of Fawq (above/up)…
Doon is the stem/root of Adna. The primary meaning of Adna is lowest. Nothign was made to mean lowest. This is the very first line in that Section.
There it is: baheth.info/all.jsp?term=%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%86

From the Qur’aan
004.003 If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.
004.003 Wa-in khiftum all[a] tuqsi[t]oo fee alyat[a]m[a] fa(i)nki[h]oo m[a] [ta]ba lakum mina a(l)nnis[a]-i mathn[a] wathul[a]tha warub[a]AAa fa-in khiftum all[a] taAAdiloo faw[ah]idatan aw m[a] malakat aym[a]nukum [tha]lika adn[a] all[a] taAAooloo

Yusuf Ali translates it to more suitable but it means ‘Less than/Lower than’. Take a look a the verse and tell me if it can possibly mean ‘closer than’ ? It is closer than to prevent you from doing Justice ? Or it is less than not doing justice ?

005.108** That is most suitable**: that they may give the evidence in its true nature and shape, or else they would fear that other oaths would be taken after their oaths. But fear Allah, and listen (to His counsel): for Allah guideth not a rebellious people:
005.108 [Tha]lika** adn[a]** an ya/too bi(al)shshah[a]dati AAal[a] wajhih[a] aw yakh[a]foo an turadda aym[a]nun baAAda aym[a]nihim wa(i)ttaqoo All[a]ha wa(i)smaAAoo wa(A)ll[a]hu l[a] yahdee alqawma alf[a]siqeen(a)

Same translation license by the same translator, but Adna here means :this is lower/less than them coming/arriving with a testimony. Can it mean closer here ?

Now lets look at the same word in a different tense - the stem in this case (Doon);

002.107 Knowest thou not that to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth? And besides Him ye have neither patron nor helper.
002.107 Alam taAAlam anna All[a]ha lahu mulku a(l)ssam[a]w[a]ti wa(a)l-ar[d]i wam[a] lakum min dooni All[a]hi min waliyyin wal[a] naeer(in)

Doon here means Below. You have no helpers/Gaurdians below Allah. Naturally any guardian you seek, whether it be a person of authority or even an Nagel will be Below Allah.

002.165 Yet there are men who take (for worship) others besides Allah, as equal (with Allah): They love them as they should love Allah. But those of Faith are overflowing in their love for Allah. If only the unrighteous could see, behold, they would see the penalty: that to Allah belongs all power, and Allah will strongly enforce the penalty.
002.165 Wamina a(l)nn[a]si man yattakhi[th]u min dooni All[a]hi and[a]dan yu[h]ibboonahum ka[h]ubbi All[a]hi wa(a)lla[th]eena [a]manoo ashaddu [h]ubban lill[a]hi walaw yar[a] alla[th]eena {th}alamoo i[th] yarawna alAAa[tha]ba anna alquwwata lill[a]hi jameeAAan waanna All[a]ha shadeedu alAAa[tha]b(i)

Here doon means the same thing, there are those amongst you that take **below ** Allah entities as his equals.

Please don’t suggest that Muslims chose a specific word to suit their purposes. Just take the word to an Arabic Scholar at any Univeristy near you and ask him what the word Adna means. This should suffice if you can’t beleive the Qur’aan, myself or even Lisaan Al 3arab.
I’m not sure whose else’s definition you will accept in this case.

This is just Arabic, my own language and an area in in which I have much experience - which isn’t even needed in this case.

He ‘revealed’ this verse in about 6AH [628AD]. The Persians had taken Jerusalem 15 years earlier and only took a few provinces from the Romans. A peace treaty was signed a peace deal the following year [629AD]. I need to point out that a few Roman legions had been defeated at the Dead Sea, not the Roman Empire.

I read this very fabrication on some anti-Islamic site before. Let me try This approach: Don’t you think All the enemies of Mohammad (saaws) and Islam at the time would have said something ? You know like ‘hold on, this is this isn’t right’.
Lets not be so naive in our opinions and how we form them.
Do you ‘really’ and truly think he would have gotten away with **that **? Surely it would have been better for him to have said nothing at all than do this act of utter silliness.
Remember, he wasn’t obliged to say anything at all.
His enemies accused him of many things: Being a poet at first then when they realized this was beyond poetry, they accused him of invoking Jinn then they realized Jinn doesn’t do this either so they just went to war against him but never was he accused of giving false facts in the Qur’aan except once - the use of the word Kubbara (for elderly) and they chose a referee who proved Mohammad (saaws) (actually the Qur’aan) right before he even knew what the point of difference was. Its all documented and theres no documentation of anyone ever accusing him of giving false information in the Qur’aan so this explanation of yours is just doesn’t fit.
For example, concerning splitting the moon they accused him of being a magician, what does this tell you ? That the moon really was split otherwise they would have gone home laughing and called him a fraud. But calling him a Magician means they witnessed it and it happened.

The point is the Romans were defeated at that battle even if I accept your assessment of their numbers. What the site you got this from doesn’t say is that for all practical purposes the Roman empire was thought to never have been able to rise again after their defeat at the hands of the Persians. But they rose and they defeated the Persians at a decisive battle at the lowest point on earth.

You have seen the errors, and haven’t really dealt with them.

What errors ? Are you referring to the ones I explained above ? If not then kindly tell me what errors I have seen ?

 

[Moayidd]

This is my last post in this thread regarding the Roman Empire.

The Western Roman Empire started to die out 400AD - to 470AD

This is centuries before the koran was written.

The Eastern Roman Empire died out around 1450AD

And so when the statement in the koran states that the Roman Empire has been defeated is hogwash.

If it’s talking about the Western Empire, well then the statement is true, but unfortunately, like many things in the koran it does not say which empire it’s talking about and it’s not saying when it was defeated or by whom… but the Eastern Empire was still going and it continued for many centuries.

Why is it suddenly every non-Muslims last post ?

Well with a posting like that perhaps it is just as well that its your last post.
All the verse says is: Huzimat Al rum - the Roman empire was defeated (at a battle) and they will be victorious in some years. It doesn’t say they will obliterate the Persian empire once and for all at that battle. And if it meant that the Roman empire was gone forever then hwo would it be back to win the next battle ? After all Its gone isn’t it ?
Two armies squared off and one won that battle. Some years later they will square off again and the other army will win that battle. Look at the verse, does say anything else like one empire would fall that day forever ?
I’m sorry If i had to make that clear and didn’t. I assumed it was rather obvious.

You wanted the verse to say the Eastern Roman empire was defeated ? What next ? The Eastern Roman empire under the leader ship of Centurion such and such was defeated ?
Well no it won’t because just like the Qur’aan is not a book of Science it is also not a history book. But when it does refer to either field it is accurate. The Rum, east or west, the entire army or part of it WAS defeated as stated when stated and where stated. The verse doesn’t say the Rum empire will Fall for ever nor that the Persian empire will cease to exist because of that Battle.

 

[Moayidd]

Its obviously that this thread has created some troubles/doubts for some Muslims, and it seems someone pushed “Moayid” to register on CAF particularly to comment on it, the last post in the thread was on “March 5, 2009” when “Moayid” registered, so its not easy to find it even with the search function of CAF, and as of this date he never participated in any other thread!

And as I have stated here, the Muslims scholars who come on TVs whom are seen by millions of Muslims ARE the ones who claim its a scientific miracle of Quran, so who will Muslims follow! the opinion of unknown Muslims who post here or the opinion of the famous Muslim scholars!

I hadn’t seen this part before. All this analysis over why I joined. I came across this site through google and not intentionally and frankly, there is nothing to worry/trouble Muslims, specially not here. I can see some Muslims not knowing answers and this is just normal but troubled ? Aren’t you a bit too optimistic ?
No Sam, no one called me here and no one is troubled yet here I am waiting for you to present just one Error in the Qur’aan in Arabic for the 5th or 6th time and you produced nothing.

Islam is a real religion, an extremely consistent religion with foundations and with answers to everything. Everything you ask is answered in Islam. I’ll start a thread on this here soon to show what a real Religion is like. I may even start a thread on the absolute accuracy of the Qur’aan so that members here get a feel of what a real book of God is about. My only real enemy is time.
I was hoping you would at least attempt a shot at an allegation of error in the Qu’raan in Arabic but it looks like you already know that there are none and won’t venture there.

 

[Lothair]

I am waiting for you to present just one Error in the Qur’aan in Arabic for the 5th or 6th time and you produced nothing.

There are many syntactical, grammatical, theological and historical blunders in the Quran. Muslims gloss over or ignore them. Here is an example. There are over 100 non-Arabic words in the Quran, so its not even in one consistant language.

Islam is a real religion, an extremely consistent religion with foundations and with answers to everything.

Every religion makes this exact same claim.

Everything you ask is answered in Islam. I’ll start a thread on this here soon to show what a real Religion is like.

That is one that I would like to comment on. Let me know when you have decided to begin.

I may even start a thread on the absolute accuracy of the Qur’aan so that members here get a feel of what a real book of God is about.

I can give many examples of poetic verse from the classical era of the Enlightenment that is also ‘absolutely accurate’. Does that make the ‘Declaration of Indepence’ a revelation from God? Or how about Beowolf? Canterberry Tales by Chaucer? I could go on.

I was hoping you would at least attempt a shot at an allegation of error in the Qu’raan in Arabic but it looks like you already know that there are none and won’t venture there.

There were several given. Your dogmatic refusal to accept them is irrelevant.

 

[Lothair]

I’m not sure why you can insist on such a definition. Let me quote Lissan Al 3arab again. Lisaan Al 3arab is THE lexicon to use with when real lingusitic meanings are need.

I’ll use Lane’s Lexicon, thank you!

The word ‘adna’ is indeed drawn from the root [DNW] but is does not mean, in any verse of the Quran, ‘lowest’. That is a fiction. This word can be found in 12 verse of the Quran. In each case it means ‘lower’ [2:61]; ‘more suitable’ [4:3]; ‘low’ [7:169] and in the verse we are discussing, ‘nearer’ [30:3]. In no instance can this be considered evidence that the Quran anticipated the geography of the Dead Sea. In fact, neither the Dead Sea region or any of its environs is mentioned in this verse. It looks like the compiler of the Quran couldn’t remember where the battle actually took place! He/they could only recall that it was between the Romans and the Persians. Not very miraculous.

From the Qur’aan
004.003 If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.

I am glad that you used 4:3 as your proof text for 30:2-3. That would make the Dead Sea region ‘a more suitable land’ not ‘the lowest land’. Your exegetical methods are ferverishly infantile.

Yusuf Ali translates it to more suitable but it means ‘Less than/Lower than’. Take a look a the verse and tell me if it can possibly mean ‘closer than’ ? It is closer than to prevent you from doing Justice ? Or it is less than not doing justice ?

Yes, it can mean ‘closer than’. The defeat was believed to be closer to Mecca or Medinah than the later victory, but the compilers of the Quran don’t appear to be certain as to the location. Yusef Ali tanslates it ‘more suitable’ but it means ‘lowest’? Sorry that you find Ali so unreliable, but he isn’t the only one who agree with me. Also, which is it? Does the word mean ‘less/lower than’ or ‘lowest’? There is a big difference. Please make up your mind! I agree that the altitude of Jerusalem is lower than Mecca, but it wouldn’t take a miracle to see that.

005.108** That is most suitable**: that they may give the evidence in its true nature and shape, or else they would fear that other oaths would be taken after their oaths. But fear Allah, and listen (to His counsel): for Allah guideth not a rebellious people:
Same translation license by the same translator, but Adna here means :this is lower/less than them coming/arriving with a testimony. Can it mean closer here?

In 5:108, adna means ‘better’; ‘more suitable’;’ easier; likelier’, but it does not mean ‘lowest’ at all.

002.107 Knowest thou not that to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth? And besides Him ye have neither patron nor helper.

Nope, you got it wrong, again. This time, ‘dooni’ is distinguishing between those helpers people call on besides Allah and Allah himself. t has nothing to do with direction or altitude. You are just making stuff up. In 2:107, ‘dooni’ does mean ‘near’. The verse is saying that there are no protectors ‘near Allah’ and Allah alone is the helper!

Doon here means Below. You have no helpers/Gaurdians below Allah. Naturally any guardian you seek, whether it be a person of authority or even an Nagel will be Below Allah.

As I stated, ‘dooni’ in 2:107 speaks of nearness of position, not altitude.

002.165 Yet there are men who take (for worship) others besides Allah, as equal (with Allah): They love them as they should love Allah. But those of Faith are overflowing in their love for Allah. If only the unrighteous could see, behold, they would see the penalty: that to Allah belongs all power, and Allah will strongly enforce the penalty.
Here doon means the same thing, there are those amongst you that take **below ** Allah entities as his equals.

Another excellent example for me, thank you! Again the Quran is stating that there are no other gods besides Allah in position or power, and none of the ‘gods’ are **near **him in exaltation *.

Please don’t suggest that Muslims chose a specific word to suit their purposes. Just take the word to an Arabic Scholar at any Univeristy near you and ask him what the word Adna means. This should suffice if you can’t beleive the Qur’aan, myself or even Lisaan Al 3arab.
I’m not sure whose else’s definition you will accept in this case.

I’ll use Lane’s Lexicon.

This is just Arabic, my own language and an area in in which I have much experience - which isn’t even needed in this case.

You don’t read Arabic. I am sure of that now.

I read this very fabrication on some anti-Islamic site before. Let me try This approach: Don’t you think All the enemies of Mohammad (saaws) and Islam at the time

would have said something ? You know like ‘hold on, this is this isn’t right’.

They did. He killed them, but some of their words can be found in the pages of the Quran.

The point is the Romans were defeated at that battle…

One region was taken by the Persians. You are making your assessment of their demise conform to your Quran, rather then letting history speak for itself. Heraclius’ fleet carried the Roman armies to face the Persians, and the Emperor certainly didn’t think his empire was dead.

What errors ? Are you referring to the ones I explained above ? If not then kindly tell me what errors I have seen ?

I am not sure if you noticed, but I have eaten you alive here.*

 

[jakasaki]

Excellent post Lothair!

I keep learning so much from you!

 

[Moayidd]

There are many syntactical, grammatical, theological and historical blunders in the Quran. Muslims gloss over or ignore them. Here is an example. There are over 100 non-Arabic words in the Quran, so its not even in one consistant language.

Truth doesn’t come from Anti-Islamic sites nor anti-Islamic people. As I said you can consult them but then you have to consult other neutral sources too otherwise what will you end up with ? Lies. If thats what you want I can’t stop you but if you want truth then let me answer your post.

There are no grammatical mistakes what so ever in the Qur’aan. I even answered one of the here when Sam gave the URL for an Coptic (anti-Islamic) site which listed them.

It isn’t easy explaining them to a non-Arabic speaker but most fall into one of two categories, (1) called the missing identity. That is when the Identity of the Object is implied but not stated. and (2) Delayed information (Khabar)
an example of (1)
‘Those who disbelieved will find…’
The missing identity here is Allah since this is what they disbelieved in. This is not a grammatical error as you can clearly see.
an example of (2)
Jack hit john with a stick
Jack, with the stick, hit John. ← this is Khabar Muta’khir (delayed information).
Most people expect to read statement sin the first form but sometimes they are written in the second form.
Now tell me, are any of the above grammatical errors ?
Let me just tell you WHERE anti-Islamic people/sites got their list of grammatical errors. They got them from Arabic books on the excellence of Quraanic style which explained the above forms and the literary maturity and Arabic books on Grammar explaining the grammatical correctness of these forms.

Again, as with anything i say, you do not have to believe me, take what I say here to a professor of Arabic at the closest University to your location and ask them if what I type is correct or not. Its really very simple.

Here is an example.
There are over 100 non-Arabic words in the Quran, so its not even in one consistant language.

You made a statement saying ther are over 100 Blunders in the Qur’aan. Kinldy name ONE. Thats all Im asking - name ONE.I can;t be fairer than that can I ? I await your ONE blunder.

Also you said ‘Here is an example’. Where is the example ? A statement, a false one at that is an example ? An example is a verse in the Qur’aan showing one such blunder.
I await that one Blunder from the list of hundreds from you.

Every religion makes this exact same claim

Yes but I wont be making a claim. I will be showing you, not just ‘claiming’.
Not every Religion will be able to show you what I intend on showing you.

That is one that I would like to comment on. Let me know when you have decided to begin.

I promise to do so soon. What a holybook is, why so many Laws, If there is a God why do we suffer, what Prophets said, what JESUS said, what the Injeel (the Gospel of Jesus) is, why there are differences and similarities between Religions, why there is abrogation in all books and so on. You know, the kind of questions everyone asks but never gets an answer to.

I can give many examples of poetic verse from the classical era of the Enlightenment that is also ‘absolutely accurate’. Does that make the ‘Declaration of Indepence’ a revelation from God? Or how about Beowolf? Canterberry Tales by Chaucer? I could go on.

You are thinking about an entirely different **level **of accuracy than exists in the Qur’aan. Also, those you mentioned don’t provide Law, Theology, Conduct, revelation and knowledge at many different levels. As I said, you are thinking of an entirely different kind of accuracy than the Qur’aan provides. If it was so easy as you are trying to imply then why doesn’t this seemingly easy accuracy exist in the Bible (Torah or NT) ? As you can see literature and novels are a different kind of animal than holybooks.

There were several given. Your dogmatic refusal to accept them is irrelevant.

You keep saying this or stating it, all I as is that you show me ONE.
Actually I wasn’t even asking you to do so because you are not an Arabic speaker and will only end up by showing me a translation error. I was asking Sam because he speaks Arabic and can’t pretend to see an error in the Arabic verses.

May I ask you to stop ‘stating’ and start 'showing’. At least your friend here made an attempt by providing incorrect dates for the battles of the Rum and the Persians.

Again, show me one error in the Arabic Qur’aan - just one and let me show you how you are wrong. Find an Arabic speaker and have them help you with this.

 

[Moayidd]

Part (1)

I’ll use Lane’s Lexicon, thank you!

Lane** isn’t** an Arab and made mistakes. He mistunderst the meaning of the word ‘MafaatiH’ for example and thought it meant ‘MafateeH’ (keys). You can check for yourself.
Also Lisaan al 3arab is THE Arabic lexicon to use. Even amongst other Arabic Lexicons.There is no disputing that. Would you consult Websters dictionary when looking up the meaning of a word in English or a dictionary written by an Arab ?
Anyway,

The word ‘adna’ is indeed drawn from the root [DNW] but is does not mean, in any verse of the Quran, ‘lowest’. That is a fiction. This word can be found in 12 verse of the Quran. In each case it means** ‘lower’ [2:61]**; ‘more suitable’ [4:3]; ‘low’ [7:169] and in the verse we are discussing, ‘nearer’ [30:3]. In no instance can this be considered evidence that the Quran anticipated the geography of the Dead Sea. In fact, neither the Dead Sea region or any of its environs is mentioned in this verse. It looks like the compiler of the Quran couldn’t remember where the battle actually took place! He/they could only recall that it was between the Romans and the Persians. Not very miraculous.

Let me quote you: ‘it means ‘lower’ [2:61];’ Can we pause here for a moment.
Lower doesn’t mean lowest ! Ok,
(1) this is the lower of these two points
(2) This is the Lower point of the earth,
(1) is a relative statement which is what you assume to be the only meaning.
But what does **(2)**mean to you ? When something is at the Lower point of the earth ? There is no point on Earth that is Lower IE it is the Lowest point on the Earth. And this is Just English. If you understood Arabic you wouldn’t need such an explanation because you would be familiar with Arabic words and how they are to be understood.
The verse says ‘Fi Adna Al Ard’ - ‘In the lowest part of Earth’ - It cannot be read and understood in any other way in Arabic unless you take Adna to mean closest which is fine but not accurate. If you go with LOW then the verse can only be saying ‘the lowest part of the earth’. As I showed you before, ‘closest’ doesn’t make sense in the verse.

How can a point on continuous land be considered the closest point to another ? There are an infinite number of points between them and the very next point will always be closer. Did you consider that ? Also, You argue that there are two meanings, ‘lowest’ and ‘closest’ and we have that point actually BEING the lowest point on earth but you insist ‘closest’ is intended ?
You mean out of the infinite number of points on earth, the Qur’aan refers to the actual Lowest physical point (1 in 1 trillion probability) but what was intended was ‘closest’ ?

The dead sea isn’t mentioned? This is quite funny really. It was referred to by a much more accurate description - The Lowest point on earth. The dead Sea might dry up (And actually is doing so now) and then the Qur’aanic verse would be inaccurate wouldn’t it ?

It looks like the compiler of the Quran couldn’t remember where the battle actually took place! He/they could only recall that it was between the Romans and the Persians. Not very miraculous

Let me remind you of the facts again.
The verses named the (1) exact location, (2) the timing of the battle (3) the parties and (4) the outcome of the battle.