hello my dear friend i am completly not agree with you in this thought that muhammad(PBUH) was killer there are many facts that reject ur words for example when muslims came to makka de didnt kill any non muslims although non muslims persucuted them at begining of jihad and this was the reason that islam rapidly founded place in the hearts of people of that time.plz for further detail refer to history of Islam.
Quran during Muhammed times is different than the one we have today, so shall it be called corrupted
…
Abu-bakr did not write Qoran that disciples of prophet memorized but assambled and gathered versus that were written by Sahabe(companions of prophet)s under control of prophet. A versus to be acceptable must be written by all Sahabes.Quran during Muhammed times is different than the one we have today, so shall it be called corrupted
1) During the time of Muhammed, some of the Quran had been written by his disciples when Muhammed used to recite them, they were written using early Arabic ancient script (no pointing and no vowel marks) on papyrus and leather fabric, however, some versus of Quran were not written at all but his disciples were memorizing them.
2) After Muhammed death Abu-Bakr ordered all versus of Quran to be written.
3) During Uthman time (after around 14 years of Muhammed death), Uthman burnt all versions of Quran and wrote his own version:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/Mashq_script.jpg
4) During the 5th Umayyad Caliph (after around 70 years of Muhammed death), pointing and vowel marks were added to the original text:
http://www.usna.edu/Users/humss/bwheeler/images/Quran/kufi2_2dAH.jpeg
5) Authentic hadiths:
***Sahih Muslim, Book 017, Number 4194:
***** Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 817:
**A particular verse of the stoning punishment for stoning (male cleric) & (female cleric) was revealed to Muhammad, but now it’s not found in Quran.
http://www.cmje.org/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/082-sbt.php
6) Yemen’s manuscript:
"Puin is not alone in his enthusiasm. “The impact of the Yemeni manuscripts is still to be felt,” says Andrew Rippin, a professor of religious studies at the University of Calgary, who is at the forefront of Koranic studies today. "Their variant readings and verse orders are all very significant. Everybody agrees on that. These manuscripts say that the early history of the Koranic text is much more of an open question than many have suspected: the text was less stable, and therefore had less authority, than has always been claimed."
theatlantic.com/past/issues/99jan/koran.htm
There are prophets in the Bible who killed people.
my friend becouse your question has no fixity therefore i said to refer to history if you have any fact that ascertain your words that Mohammad SAW was a killer so please mention the prove
Sorry miladafg, but it seems YOU need to read both Quaran and hadith before telling someone to read the history of Islam.
Amen, I’m shocked you didn’t add PBUH after his name. This man was a war general, mass murderer, with a total lack of compassion.
Why would I? I am not a Muslim.
Assuming that a killer cannot be a prophet would require rejecting biblical prophets.
That is a false claim!!!, Abu-bakr wrote the Quran because he and the other 3 caliphs were afraid that the Sahaba who were memorizing the Quran might die and the versus will vanish with them, that is why Abu-bakr ordered the Quran to be written and assembled in one book.
:tsktsk: No, you are mistaken, check this link:
First things first. Point A. Least you continue to forget.
It’s got nothing to do with me. Rejecting any prophet who kills means rejecting biblical prophets. Is that what you intend?
I’m on point A above. Your comments here only prove Point A. You have not a clue what my intention is/was, so why exactly are you speaking for me in regards to my intent [which you don’t know by admission]
By the time the Quran was compiled. Many of the Sahabes had died in a battle. Since bit and pieces are orally remembered by different sahabe, some verses and information on the Quran were lost with them. There were testimonies of Aisha where some of the verses were written in leaves and animal skin that were destroyed or damaged (eaten by goats for example). Nomadic Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula were not exactly an archive for storage of reading materials.
A simple different placement of vowels and pointings could alter the meaning of the Arabic words entirely. Since these were done about seventy years later, there was no guarantee that the scribes who put in the vowels would not make mistake as compared to the original.
Did it ever occur to you that the recited versions and copies were the one that Uthman selected?
I am asking your intention, but the logic does not really depend on it. You said you do not believe a prophet kills. Some biblical prophets killed. In order to maintain that a person who kills cannot be a prophet, reason would demand that you also reject biblical prophets. If, on the other hand, you accept biblical prophets who killed, the belief that a man who kills cannot be a prophet is untenable.
Case in point, but again. This thread is on Surah 10:94 which is why I excused myself and left this thread. As not to distract it. Can we move on or do you also need the last word?