Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Wisdom Lion

Christianity Is Created By Paul

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

So are you admitting that since the King James Version is the same as the Codex Siniaticus, --- then it is as accurate as the Codex Siniaticus?

Quote: Many bible scholars I've seen say the bible is "98%" accurate but in any case don't realize that the 2% is significant as it means human errors have occurred.

So only 2% inaccuracy in the Bible is hardly enough to change the Message, is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are you admitting that since the King James Version is the same as the Codex Siniaticus, --- then it is as accurate as the Codex Siniaticus?

Quote: Many bible scholars I've seen say the bible is "98%" accurate but in any case don't realize that the 2% is significant as it means human errors have occurred.

So only 2% inaccuracy in the Bible is hardly enough to change the Message, is it?

Those bible scholars haven't taken account the thousands of changes in the Codex.

I was using the 98% quote to illustrate that even 2% human change does not make it God's word. They're arguing as if the 2% is ok when it is not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those bible scholars haven't taken account the thousands of changes in the Codex.

I was using the 98% quote to illustrate that even 2% human change does not make it God's word. They're arguing as if the 2% is ok when it is not

Those Bible scholars? I get the feeling you have no idea which scholars are who, and Dean's ur man.

 

At least you've gone from "thousands" to 2%. spent too much time on Dean, (the Greek letter counter), livescience, (who also does ads for Harry Potter) and obviously not enough on the Quran. Then again, I always heard the Quran was 100% Allah, then a while back a Muslim says it's only 95% and 5% narration. For sure the Bible can't be 98% if the Quran is only 95%. You may have to rethink this.

 

You still haven't answered my questions yet.

 

Wondering, did Dean ever mention how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wisdom,

I suppose I could caution Son about being too impetuous, but you came on strong with a false statement about Paul, and then your ‘copy and paste’ from some unidentified scholars of thousands and thousands of unidentified changes, --- so the impression is that there was not too much ‘wisdom’ involved.

I want to take time to answer the false statements you made about Paul and your criticism of Jesus, --- but in your figures, coming from thousands down to 2% is perhaps more accurate.

However, it seems that you are working with two groups of scholars, --- the ones that say ‘thousands,’ --- and the others that say 2%, but you say of them:

Quote: Those bible scholars haven't taken account the thousands of changes in the Codex.

I was using the 98% quote to illustrate that even 2% human change does not make it God's word. They're arguing as if the 2% is ok when it is not

Response: --- So now you are saying ‘there were thousands of changes in the Codex’ --- yet you say the Codex from 400, is the ‘standard’ for Christianity. --- And the King James from the 1600’s, and the New King James from 1980, are as accurate as the Codex Siniaticus, --- is that not right?

It is the wrong concept to think that the Bible is without discrepancies as it was written over a period of 1500 years, by some 40 different authors, in three different languages, and on three different continents. --- Some is history, some is poetry, some is prophecy, --- but the Message of the Gospel was given to Jesus through the inspiration of God who also gave His Holy Spirit for our ‘guidance’ and ‘enlightenment,’ as it says in Surah 5:

46 And in their footsteps We (God) sent Jesus the son of Mary, ‘confirming the Law’ that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was ‘guidance and light,’ and ‘confirmation’ of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear God.

--- (And to the followers of Jesus it says in the next verse):

47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what God hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what God hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.

And I especially like this verse in Surah 3:

55 Behold! God said: "O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection:

I want to answer your questions and false statements, but we need to base what we believe on the Bible and Quran, rather than on what others say, do we not?

--- Also,I would ask, “Personally, what do you believe?”

Placid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol you two fellows are not grasping what Is being stated

This bible has thousands of changes. Much more than simply "2%"

"Thus, from Dean Burgon's two decades of work, we find a total of 7578 perversions in the Codex Vaticanus, and his equivalent figures for the Codex Sinaiticus reveal even greater differences from the ancient original. For example, he recognised that in the Codex Sinaiticus, 3455 words were 'deleted', 839 words were 'added', 1114 words were 'substituted', 2299 words were 'transposed', and 1265 words were 'modified', making a total of 8972 artificial adjustments to what the Church claims is the 'unadulterated word of God'."

There's likely much more he didn't catch.

The "2%" which I dont believe is two percent is nothing to brag about as the user "placid" is doing. It's pathetic and a disgrace

"but in your figures, coming from thousands down to 2% is perhaps more accurate." -placid

Never once did I agree it's 2% but stated something I've heard some bible scholars say.

But hey when you've realized your life's beliefs are human made you need something to latch on too! Lol :)

The user placid than stated clearly

"It is the wrong concept to think that the Bible is without discrepancies" -placid

Nice using the word "discrepancies" lol. It has human errors, deletions,additions or simply "discrepancies" like you stated.

True religious scripture has "ZERO" errors and human interference and is only from God. That what I believe in as well as logical people.

If you want to believe in human made works decided in council of nicea by average joes, than go for it man

What's revealed here is both of your deceitful natures to attempt to attribute me as saying I believe in the "2%" comment when I stated some bible scholars have stated that to show that even two percent is not something brag about.

Both of your lying and deceitful nature is not worthy of any further response as we've seen what time of lying statements you've made.

My comment

" Many bible scholars I've seen say the bible is "98%" accurate but in any case don't realize that the 2% is significant as it means human errors have occurred."

son of placid comment

"At least you've gone from "thousands" to 2%"

placid comment

"but in your figures, coming from thousands down to 2% is perhaps more accurate."

Lying exposed on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wisdom,

I had said in my response:

--- So now you are saying ‘there were thousands of changes in the Codex’ --- yet you say the Codex is the ‘standard’ for Christianity. --- And the King James from the 1600’s, and New King James from 1980, are as accurate as the Codex Siniaticus, --- is that not right?

--- So this shows the accuracy of the Scriptures we have today to what they had in 400 AD. --- Also since the revelations given to Muhammad in 625 AD, 'confirm' the ‘former Scriptures as true’ --- Surah 3:3 --- that is good enough for me.

To check on total accuracy of that which is written by men, notice that the story of Lot and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is recorded once in Genesis 19,--- and it is mentioned 7 times in the Quran, with slightly different details each time.

And, by the way, I have always said trinity was a faulty doctrine, so I gave you the verse, Surah 4:171 that corrected it. --- This shows that Jesus was the Messenger of God, and not one of the Three, so I hope you realize that not all of us are Trinitarians. --- Also in 4:171, it mentions the Three in heaven from the beginning, --- God (the Father of all) --- The Word (Logos though whom all things were created), --- and the Holy Spirit of God.

--- So you likely reject the Word and the Holy Spirit in your understanding of God, --- but this is written in the Quran, is it not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wisdom,I had said in my response:--- So now you are saying ‘there were thousands of changes in the Codex’ --- yet you say the Codex is the ‘standard’ for Christianity. --- And the King James from the 1600’s, and New King James from 1980, are as accurate as the Codex Siniaticus, --- is that not right?--- So this shows the accuracy of the Scriptures we have today to what they had in 400 AD. --- Also since the revelations given to Muhammad in 625 AD, 'confirm' the ‘former Scriptures as true’ --- Surah 3:3 --- that is good enough for me.To check on total accuracy of that which is written by men, notice that the story of Lot and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is recorded once in Genesis 19,--- and it is mentioned 7 times in the Quran, with slightly different details each time.And, by the way, I have always said trinity was a faulty doctrine, so I gave you the verse, Surah 4:171 that corrected it. --- This shows that Jesus was the Messenger of God, and not one of the Three, so I hope you realize that not all of us are Trinitarians. --- Also in 4:171, it mentions the Three in heaven from the beginning, --- God (the Father of all) --- The Word (Logos though whom all things were created), --- and the Holy Spirit of God.--- So you likely reject the Word and the Holy Spirit in your understanding of God, --- but this is written in the Quran, is it not?

Quran 4:171

O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, "Three"; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs."

He has no son. He is only One.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
True religious scripture has "ZERO" errors and human interference and is only from God.

 

And that book does not exist. Unless this book came through the clouds and landed softly in your hands you have nothing perfect to rely on.

Does Dean ever get around to explaining how he got his hands on the ancient originals, or did they come to him in a dream?

Why does every account of Dean contradict the last? Why does his society approve of the KJV?

 

You have been told, things have been explained yet you are the parrot of Shia chat.

You have chosen to ignore what has been challenged, and what has been asked of you, which means you have nothing of yourself.

 

From all accounts it looks like Dean is your God. Livescience if your scripture, and you have no viable input in this forum.

 

Never once did I agree it's 2% but stated something I've heard some bible scholars say.

 

You wrote it but you don't agree, why write it? To prove someone else is lying? Yeah, I've heard enough of you.

 

Y'know, there are real Muslims on this site who have done real study and have a real understanding starting with their own convictions.

They have real wisdom and don't feel the need to proclaim themselves as wise.

 

Hopefully some day,(when you grow up) you can drop your narcissistic behaviours and become a real Muslim too. In the mean time, you are the other problem Muslims have with trying to prove Islam as a proper way of life. 

I'm not attacking you as a person, just the demons that drive you.

GTBMS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And that book does not exist. Unless this book came through the clouds and landed softly in your hands you have nothing perfect to rely on.

Does Dean ever get around to explaining how he got his hands on the ancient originals, or did they come to him in a dream?

Why does every account of Dean contradict the last? Why does his society approve of the KJV?

You have been told, things have been explained yet you are the parrot of Shia chat.

You have chosen to ignore what has been challenged, and what has been asked of you, which means you have nothing of yourself.

From all accounts it looks like Dean is your God. Livescience if your scripture, and you have no viable input in this forum.

You wrote it but you don't agree, why write it? To prove someone else is lying? Yeah, I've heard enough of you.

Y'know, there are real Muslims on this site who have done real study and have a real understanding starting with their own convictions.

They have real wisdom and don't feel the need to proclaim themselves as wise.

Hopefully some day,(when you grow up) you can drop your narcissistic behaviours and become a real Muslim too. In the mean time, you are the other problem Muslims have with trying to prove Islam as a proper way of life.

I'm not attacking you as a person, just the demons that drive you.

GTBMS

Another post with nothing relevant to this topic but rambling, whining like a bitter child.

That book does exist it is the Quran and there is no other version found by anyone where the Arabic is dfferent :)

You can go on the path of following human made beliefs, that's something you will be held accountable for ! :D

This individual stated

"You wrote it but you don't agree, why write it? To prove someone else is lying? Yeah, I've heard enough of you."

The individual says "why write it"

When I clearly stated to show that bragging about it being 2%, or .00001% human interference makes it not God's word anymore. I've stated that a few times now.

But it's known that when some people hear things they don't like to accept they get a tad grouchy :p

The difference between Islam and Christianity is that Muslims believe Allah is Perfect, and His Quran is perfect without errors.

Just like we've finally concluded the Bible does have "DISCREPANCIES" whether thousands or "2%" or even just one single word being changed it is not the word of God anymore and various people have done this.

That is why Allah sent the Quran through the angel Jibrael to the final Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him and his family.

You can become a Muslim right now and see your life change for the better though the change may not be reflected in material worth or becoming rich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"3455 words were 'deleted', 839 words were 'added', 1114 words were 'substituted', 2299 words were 'transposed', and 1265 words were 'modified', making a total of 8972 artificial adjustments to what the Church claims is the 'unadulterated word of God'."

There's more than 700,000 words in the bible and you got a small selection, from who knows where. That's not close to the tot amount in the bible

 

 

It is true there are doubts concerning some passages in the Bible but no serious historians would produce a statement like the one you produce above. We have not got the originals, and since copies could only be produced by writing, of cpourse copy errors could not be avoided. This means on the other hand that we can assume that the passages that are the same in ancient copies likely have their roots in the originals, which according to textual critical mainstream is that the oldest Gospel (Mark) was written 65-80 AD. Except for Paul the earliest evidence that Jesus was crucified. King James Bible was translated 400 years ago, a time when it was still believed that Moses wrote the Torah himself and translators had not the access to historical documents that we have today. Many old document had been forgotten, including the (until further) oldest complete NT, Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. In these codexes the 12 last verses of Mark are missing. Now, does this mean the King James has included 12 added verses? The professors disagree on yhis, but the translator was innocent, being unaware of the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus and the problem. If the verses were added to Mark, this was done even earlier. Modern Bibles put the 12 in brackets with a note.

That copies of old manuscripts show differences is a natural law to historians. To me as a Christian this is no problem. I always regarded the Gospels as human testimonies, and even if the Gospel of Mark for some reason should originally have been without the 12 verses, the message of NT would still be the same. To a Muslim that believes the Quran to be a perfect copy of all revelations, maybe this sounds a bit strange.(?) Now the Quran has got a story too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another post with nothing relevant to this topic but rambling, whining like a bitter child.

That book does exist it is the Quran and there is no other version found by anyone where the Arabic is dfferent :)

You can go on the path of following human made beliefs, that's something you will be held accountable for ! :D

This individual stated

"You wrote it but you don't agree, why write it? To prove someone else is lying? Yeah, I've heard enough of you."

The individual says "why write it"

When I clearly stated to show that bragging about it being 2%, or .00001% human interference makes it not God's word anymore. I've stated that a few times now.

But it's known that when some people hear things they don't like to accept they get a tad grouchy :P

The difference between Islam and Christianity is that Muslims believe Allah is Perfect, and His Quran is perfect without errors.

Just like we've finally concluded the Bible does have "DISCREPANCIES" whether thousands or "2%" or even just one single word being changed it is not the word of God anymore and various people have done this.

That is why Allah sent the Quran through the angel Jibrael to the final Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him and his family.

You can become a Muslim right now and see your life change for the better though the change may not be reflected in material worth or becoming rich.

You want me to become a Muslim? Can I at least choose a better example?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You want me to become a Muslim? Can I at least choose a better example?

The truth is that God's Word is perfect.

Just tell me how it can make sense that God the one that is Most Powerful, The Greatest, The All Knowing, The All Seeing will send down a book for mankind that has any human discrepancies within in for the people who follow this religion?

Allah did not make guaranteed in any of the previous Revelations that he was gonna Protect those books himself. He said He will Protect the Holy Quran

15:9

to top

"Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian."

The Almighty will not send down the final Revelations that is with human interference. Interfering with God's word.

You know how serious that is? Interfering with the exact message of God and either purposefully changing it, or "missing a few comas and combination of words like you all and y'all" a change is a change of the message that Allah gives.

He is the Most Perfect so how can we expect anything less?

You know this. It makes sense. I'm trying to tell you there's something better in this life that you are missing, it is the best thing in your life.

A pious person is kind, virtuous, moral, giving, sincere, mentally and physically fit, thoughtful and seeks knowledge and values knowledge over material things. This doesn't mean living a hermit though as it longs it away from what is against Islam

Such as drinking, dancing at parties,hooking up. That's a path of self destruction morally, conscious and subconsciously.

Mary peace be upon her the mother of Jesus peace be upon him wore hijab. She was a modest woman. Most of the Christians and Jews of this time dressed like that as well but these religious texts did not talk about these specifically

So maybe it's just coincidence that Mary wears hijab and God has prescribed it for women in the Quran?

No, when the original Revelations to Moses, Jesus, David they had all received this as well but was changed by people who were truly evil but Mary peace be upon was not an average woman, but she was pious as her son would be one of the most pious in the history of humanity after Rasool Allah and the 12 Imams because Prophet Muhammad is the final Prophet of the 124,000 Prophets peace be upon all of them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There ya go. At least you sound more like a Muslim now. A Muslim who's ran into a whack of "call ourselves Christians" and can't understand how they can have such a loose religion. Well, they can't. I'd suggest you find a real Christian, not just a cross bearing party animal. Can Islam offer them more than they have? Who knows, they think they have it all. I've been around Florida more than I like and I'd bet you've seen them all. Jesus has long blonde hair that every woman would love, and blue eyes to go with it. It wouldn't matter how pure their bible is, they'll never open it. They know less about Christianity than you do.

 

If you want to make a Muslim outta me you'll first have to explain to me what you have that I'm missing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wisdom,

Quote: Quran 4:171

O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, "Three"; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs."

--- He has no son. He is only One.

Response: --- The first thing to notice in the verse is that Jesus was the MESSENGER OF GOD, and not one of the Three that were from the beginning.

--- As we established before, God is All in All, --- and He does not ‘need’ a Son (this is what brings up the false suggestion in the trinity doctrine that Jesus was God, or ‘a junior god.’)

However, let’s check the Quran and see what it says in Surah 19:

19 He (the angel) said: "Nay, I am only an apostle from thy Lord, (to announce) to thee the gift of a holy son.

--- (Notice this, ‘a holy son.’ --- Since Jesus had no earthly father, it is not wrong to say, ‘God was His Father,’ --- because it says in 21, “It is a matter [so] decreed.”)

20 She said: "How shall I have a son, seeing that no man has touched me, and I am not unchaste?"

21 He said: "So (it will be): Thy Lord saith, 'that is easy for Me: and (We wish) to appoint him as a Sign unto men and a Mercy from Us': It is a matter (so) decreed."

--- (Notice this, ‘a matter so decreed, or determined by God.’)

30 He (Jesus) said (from the cradle): "I am indeed a servant of God: He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet;

31 "And He hath made me blessed wheresoever I be, and hath enjoined on me Prayer and Charity as long as I live;

32 "(He) hath made me kind to my mother, and not overbearing or miserable;

33 "So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)"!

34 Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute.

--- (This is the ‘statement of truth’ that Christians believe so there is no dispute with them.) And notice this, concerning the Son:

35 It is not befitting to (the majesty of) God that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! when He determines a matter, He only says to it, "Be", and it is.

--- (It was out of the ordinary, and ‘seemingly below the dignity of God’ that He should have one who was CALLED His Son, --- BUT, ‘Glory be to Him! when He determines a matter, He only says to it, "Be", and it is.’

--- Notice that God ‘ordained,’ or determined to have a representative on earth who was CALLED His Son.)

36 “Verily God is my Lord and your Lord: --- Him therefore serve ye: this is a Way that is straight.”

This is also said in Surah 3:

50 (Jesus said), “I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear God, and obey me.

51 "It is God Who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him. This is a Way that is straight."

--- And remember this verse that I gave you before from Surah 5:

47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what God hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what God hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.

And just one more thing to notice: ---

19:21 Thy Lord saith, 'that is easy for Me: and (We wish) to appoint him as a Sign unto men and a Mercy from Us': It is a matter (so) decreed."

3:50 (Jesus said), “I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear God, and obey me.

--- (So God decreed or ordained it exactly as it happened, and Jesus was the Sign God sent unto men “And a Mercy from Us (God).”

--- Since it says all of this in the Quran, and, as you say, “The Quran is absolutely true,” --- then how can you get away without believing it?

--- I am not inviting you to be a Christian, but pointing out from the Quran, --- that in following Jesus, we are following “The Way that is straight.”

--- Or do you have a straighter way? --- You would do well to leave us with our Faith, --- and concentrate on your own values.

Sorry, but when you prompt me to defend Christianity from the Quran, then I am glad to do that, --- and to point out, --- “Yes, we too are descended from Abraham, and we strive to follow the Faith given to him.”

Placid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Jesus PBUH is on the path of Muhammad peace and blessing be upon him and his family

If you're not on the path of Muhammad S.A.W than you're not on the path of Jesus PBUH as you are following books that are outdated and contain many things not true about him.

You may admire, respect, love Jesus a lot but he is on a different path than you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Jesus PBUH is on the path of Muhammad peace and blessing be upon him and his family

If you're not on the path of Muhammad S.A.W than you're not on the path of Jesus PBUH as you are following books that are outdated and contain many things not true about him.

You may admire, respect, love Jesus a lot but he is on a different path than you.

The references Placid gave you are from the Quran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wisdom,

Quote: He doesn't accept the Quran. But the Quran is the Truth and it is Eternal

Response: --- I have said before that I believe that Muhammad was the Prophet that God called to destroy idolatry in Arabia and to bring the people back to the worship of One God. And he announced this accomplishment in year ten of the Hijrah when the idolaters were gone and all of the remaining people had accepted Islam, --- and this brought a temporary peace. --- This was shortly before he died in the same year.

I believe everything that I quoted from the Quran above, because that is the truth of the Gospel Message. --- You say the Quran is true, then I should believe it shouldn’t I? --- And I have said that I believe all of the Revelations from Gabriel to Muhammad, because they ‘verify’ the OT and the Gospel (the former Scriptures).

But I don’t say that everything in the Quran is inspired, because when I mention the seven accounts of Lot with slight difference in the details, --- I don’t think, that from your ‘perfectionist’ point of view, --- you could accept that, could you?

So the best you can do is ‘deny it’ and not look up those seven accounts, --- or you can look at them, --- and then come down to where the rest of us live and accept the fact that everything that man has touched can have errors.

You can find this in history that Imam Ali had the original Quran that came from Muhammad and after Muhammad’s death, when he finalized it, he took it to Abu Bakr and Umar, --- and they refused it saying “We have our own.” --- So Ali said, “Then you will never see this again.”

Abu Bakr had a collection of Surahs and they called in other Surahs that people had, and they had to rely on some who had memorized the Quran, --- and it was in the hands of different people for another 15 years or more, before Caliph Uthman finally called in all the Surahs and compiled the Arabic Quran.

Mr Pickthall records this in the intro to his translation:

Quote: All the Surahs of the Quran had been recorded in writing before the Prophet’s death, and many Muslims had committed the whole Quran to memory. But the written Surahs were dispersed among the people; and when, in a battle which took place in the Caliphate of Abu Bakr (that is to say, within two years of the Prophet’s death) a large number of those who knew the whole Quran by heart were killed, then a collection of the whole Quran was made and put in writing. In the Caliphate of Uthman all existing copies of Surahs were called in, and an authoritative version, based on Abu Bakr’s collection and the testimony of those who had the Quran by heart, was compiled exactly in the present form and order, which is regarded as traditional and as the arrangement of the Prophet himself, the Caliph Uthman and his helpers being comrades of the Prophet and the most devout students of the revelation. The Quran has been very carefully preserved. --- End of quote.

Isn’t it strange that the ‘comrades’ did not include Ali who was still there? He reluctantly became Caliph after Uthman.

--- And online you can find ‘The original Quran by Imam Ali’ --- and there are a few differences. --- You see, having known about these things, I don’t dwell on them but respect the Quran that God has approved for Muslims.

Placid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are various sites online on the first compiled Quran.

--- Info on the Quran compiled by Ali:

Quote: There is no dispute among Muslim scholars, whether they are Sunni or Shia,

concerning the fact that the Commander of Believers, Ali (as), possessed a

special transcript of the text of Quran which he had collected himself, and

he was THE FIRST who compiled Quran. There are a great number of traditions

from Sunni and Shia which states that after the death of the Holy Prophet

(PBUH&HF), Imam Ali sat down in his house and said that he had sworn an

oath that he would not put on his outdoor clothes or leave his house until

he collects together the Quran.

After he compiled this transcript, Imam Ali (as) took it and presented it

to the rulers who came after the Holy Prophet, and said: "Here is the book

of Allah, your Lord, in the order that was revealed to your Prophet."

but they did not accept it and replied: "We have no need of this. We have

with us what you possess." Thereupon, Imam Ali (as) took the transcript

back and informed them that they will never see it again. It is reported

that Imam Ali recited the latter part of the following verse of Quran:

"And when Allah took a Covenant from the People of the Book to

clarify it to mankind and not to hide its (clarification); but

they threw it away behind their backs and purchased with it some

miserable gain! and what an evil was the bargain they made!"

(Quran 3:187)

By "its clarification", Imam Ali meant the unique divine commentaries. --- End of quote.

However, Mr Pickthall records that the two leaders, Abu Bakr and Umar didn’t have the complete Quran: (But they made a collection later.)

Quoted above in Post 89 from the Intro to the Pickthall Translation

From the compiling of Ali’s Quran:

Quote: As you know the Chapter al-Alaq is not at the beginning of the present

Quran. Also Muslims agree that the verse (5:3) was among one of the

last revealed verses of Quran (but not the very last one), yet it is not

toward the end of the present Quran. This clearly proves that although

the Quran that we have available is complete, it is not in the order

that has been revealed. These few misplacements were done by some

companions on purpose at worst, or out of ignorance at least. --- End of quote.

In the intro to Surah 5, Mr Pickthall suggests that verse 3 (or the announcement of their religion of Al-Islam) was part of Muhammad’s address at his ‘Farewell Pilgrimage’ in year 10, when he declared that his Mission was finished, that of removing idolatry, and restoring Faith in One God.

He and others suggest that verses 4-5 are of the same time, --- So this would constitute a new Law in 5:3, and new liberty in 4-5, would it not?

Placid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the intro to Surah 5, Mr Pickthall suggests that verse 3 (or the announcement of their religion of Al-Islam) was part of Muhammad’s address at his ‘Farewell Pilgrimage’ in year 10, when he declared that his Mission was finished, that of removing idolatry, and restoring Faith in One God.

 

Hi Placid

 

I am not sure about [5:4] or [5:5] and I do not know much about their historical context.

 

But I do know with absolute certainty that according to Shia traditions, [5:3] was revealed when the Prophet had made the following announcement at a place call GHADIR-e-KHUM just two months before his death.

 

ALI IS THE MAULA OF EVERYONE WHOSE MAULA I AM.

 

I have left the word MAULA un-translated because that word is at the heart of the Shia-Sunni dispute.

 

The word MAULA has more than 20 different meanings, two of which are  MASTER and FRIEND.. `

 

Shias says that the Prophet meant MASTER whereas Sunnis say he meant FRIEND.

 

As for verse [5:3], which consists of 3 parts, according to Shia beliefs, the middle part  reads as follows.

 

"This day are those who disbelieve in despair. So fear them not, fear Me!

This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favor unto you, and have chosen Islam for you as religion".

 

 

And this verse to Shias, this day was the day when the Prophet made the announcement of Imam Ali's being MAULA.

 

The verse says that God had completed His favor and Islam was perfected and this happened by the announcement of Imam Ali as the Prophet's successor.

 

Pickthall and Maulana Muhammad Ali will probably not agree with what I have told you but I have told you exactly what the Shia interpretation of that middle part of the verse is.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 

However, they might agree with the following. Because it is accepted by both Shias and Sunnis.  

 

And while we are at it. it may be noted that the Prophet had also made an announcement about Imam Ali's succession at the very beginning of his mission, when he invited his relatives to a meal, to proclaim the new faith.

 

At that point he had asked if anyone in the audience would help him. And the only person who raised his hand three times and was told to sit down was a young lad - the 11/12 year old Ali.

 

At that moment, the Prophet had also declared Imam Ali as his successor. I do not know if Pickthall mentions it but it is available in all famous Sunni books. Sunnis accept this event but for some strange reason do not take it to mean much.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Back to the topic of the verse [5:3], it was revealed when the Prophet's mission was complete and his mission was completed when the Prophet  made the announcement of Imam Ali's succession at GHADIR-e-KHUM.

 

I suppose Pickthall or Maulana Muhammad Ali would not accept the Shia interpretation of [5:3]. 

 

But I have told you what the Shia view is.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Did I express myself well or was it a little complicated?

 

Sorry if I have not been able to explain properly.

 

The Shia-Sunni dispute is extremely complicated.

 

Not easy to understand in a jiffy!   

 

Regards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already know the Quran is not in order. It doesn't have to be though as every line is relevant in itself and is as important as the next line though ayats were not changed just chapters. Doesn't change any wording though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread, which is dedicated to Paul, is probably the wrong place for all this discussion. But since the subject of [5:3] was raised in this thread, I had to explain what the Shia view is.   

   

However, there is something I had forgotten to say in my last post but it is very relevant to the topic.  So here it is now.

 

Verse [5:3] was revealed just after the announcement.

 

But there was also a verse revealed just before the announcement. And this was [5:67].

 

This verse reads as follows:-

 

[5:67] Prophet, proclaim what has been sent down to you from your Lord. And if you don't, then you would have failed to convey His message.  And God will protect you from the wicked. And God does not guide unbelievers.

 

In this verse [5:67] the Prophet was told to announce the succession of Imam Ali.

Then the Prophet made the announcement.

Then in [5:3], after the announcement had been made, Islam was declared to have been perfected.  

 

And this announcement was to be so crucial that if the Prophet did not do it, he would have failed to deliver the message.

 

 

In other words, the verse is saying that if the Prophet did not announce the leadership (succession) of Imam Ali, he (the Prophet) would have failed in his mission entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already know the Quran is not in order. It doesn't have to be though as every line is relevant in itself and is as important as the next line though ayats were not changed just chapters. Doesn't change any wording though.

 

When you say "Quran" are you referring to the Hafs or Warsh version? They are the two most popular, although Hafs is number one.

 

Interesting, when compared to an older manuscript, the Gold Koran (goldkoran.mse.jhu.edu/), we see that the Hafs version only matched with 32% of the verses compared, while the Warsh version produced a 53% match with the Gold Koran.

 

What was it you were saying about ... 2%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you say "Quran" are you referring to the Hafs or Warsh version? They are the two most popular, although Hafs is number one.

 

Interesting, when compared to an older manuscript, the Gold Koran (goldkoran.mse.jhu.edu/), we see that the Hafs version only matched with 32% of the verses compared, while the Warsh version produced a 53% match with the Gold Koran.

 

What was it you were saying about ... 2%?

 

 

This is wrong and false, I don't think you're lying but I think you didn't understand what you're reading.

 

 

Warsh and Hafs are recited all over the world and they are most certaintly not 50 percent different, you can youtube both recitations and listen for yourself.

 

Quran- Warsh

 

Quran- Hafs 

 

 

 

The differences are nothing.....they are superficial and have nothing to do with the meaning. 

When you say "Quran" are you referring to the Hafs or Warsh version? They are the two most popular, although Hafs is number one.

 

Interesting, when compared to an older manuscript, the Gold Koran (goldkoran.mse.jhu.edu/), we see that the Hafs version only matched with 32% of the verses compared, while the Warsh version produced a 53% match with the Gold Koran.

 

What was it you were saying about ... 2%?

 

 

When you say bible which books are you talking about?

 

The one from the council of nicea?

 

The multiple books before the council?

 

The books of the protestants?

 

Gnostic gospels?

 

The many other gospels that have not even made it into the codex of today?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to make a Muslim outta me you'll first have to explain to me what you have that I'm missing.

 

Islam. You believe in the Divine Revelation of the Qur'an but are you upholding its laws and regulations? Do you pray the Salah 5 times a day? Fast during the entire Month of Ramadhan? and so on?

 

we can't accept its Divine Revelation and then ignore its explicit instructions. We no longer have to adhere to entire Sharia (Law of Moses) as the Law of Muhammad has come and the Qur'an has final authority over the previous scriptures (Torah, Injeel, Psalsm, etc, NOT the New Testament). The Law of the Prophet will remain with us until the day of judgement. We are obliged to follow it and adhere to it. Messengers may have had different sharia's with slightly different laws and regulations for its community but there is no new law coming. The last one has come. 

Edited by Ali Musaaa :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such beautiful recitations, beautiful because it is the Word of Allah and second because Allah has blessed them with good voices for recitation.

No other religion's religious texts can be recited in such a way, the Miracle of Islam makes it so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ibn-Ahmed Aliyy Herz, on 11 Mar 2014 - 7:27 PM, said:

This is wrong and false, I don't think you're lying but I think you didn't understand what you're reading,

Warsh and Hafs are recited all over the world and they are most certaintly not 50 percent different, you can youtube both recitations and listen for yourself.

I think you didn't unserstand what I was saying. These two, not compared to each other, but to the GoldKoran. It's older, closer to the original, maybe. When compared to each other the Hafs has 6236 verses(not including 112 Basmallas) while Warsh had 6214, (not including 113 Basmallas) according to the King Fahad Print records. Not lying, and not so sure I could read it wrong.

As for "Listening for myself...I don't do Arabic. one vid is fifty seconds long, the other over three minutes and if you say they're the same...

 

 

The differences are nothing.....they are superficial and have nothing to do with the meaning.

Y'know, that's what Christians say about the Bible.

That might be good enough for you but Wisdom Lion says that's not good enough. Even the teensiest, weensiest little bitty letter change in the bible and he has it counted and calls it perversions. He and Dean aren't the only ones who count stuff. I'm not disagreeing with you about differences being superficial, I'm just saying...

 

 

When you say bible which books are you talking about?

The one from the council of nicea?

The multiple books before the council?

The books of the protestants?

Gnostic gospels?

The many other gospels that have not even made it into the codex of today?

 

Usually I'm talking the King James Version just because it was my first study, but I still study a complete Bible of the Hebrew and ancient Greek, direct translation with expansion of every word. Yes, I find superficial differences. Some not so superficial.

What's Interesting is that the KJV was printed shortly after the Douay-Rheims version. The King James was a clarification of half a dozen English translations before it, compared to the oldest Greek and Hebrew manuscripts they had at that time. The Douay-Rheims however was fashioned after the Latin Vulgate, which was a translation of the same old manuscripts. What is really interesting is that the Douay-Rheims and the KJV are almost identical, short of the historical books the Douay-Rheims decided to keep the translations came out almost word for word in English.

I will not vouch for any translations, or versions printed since then if it's okay with you ;).

 

 

Considering this thread was supposed to tell us how Paul invented Christianity, I am still waiting an answer on how Paul dreamed up the pork in my stomach.

Maybe you can elaborate?

Edited by Son of Placid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul was not the only preacher, there were many other preachers who wrote gospels and who differed greatly with Paul. Pauline Christianity happened to be the one that was preserved and taught. There are many groups back then all claiming to represent Christianity with their own gospels.

 

So the issue is two, the objective codification of creed and the objective acceptance of gospels.

 

What criteria did the council of nicea use to choose which gospels they were going to use and which creed they were going to accept?

Edited by Ibn-Ahmed Aliyy Herz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Islam. You believe in the Divine Revelation of the Qur'an but are you upholding its laws and regulations? Do you pray the Salah 5 times a day? Fast during the entire Month of Ramadhan? and so on?

 

we can't accept its Divine Revelation and then ignore its explicit instructions. We no longer have to adhere to entire Sharia (Law of Moses) as the Law of Muhammad has come and the Qur'an has final authority over the previous scriptures (Torah, Injeel, Psalsm, etc, NOT the New Testament). The Law of the Prophet will remain with us until the day of judgement. We are obliged to follow it and adhere to it. Messengers may have had different sharia's with slightly different laws and regulations for its community but there is no new law coming. The last one has come. 

Ali Musaaa, I love you like a brother. We should meet some day.

The Quran hasn't really given us,(Christians) any more laws. Hadith has decided a whole bunch of "laws" for you like Rambam decided 613 more "laws" for Jews. Christianity from the time of the Nicene creed has made laws/doctrines that are not in accordance with the very Bible they compiled. None the less reading the Bible as it is written, "Pray without ceasing" came about. Yes 5 times a day (just not at the same determined times), and more when needed, like you know, .

 

 

Zakat, I was told, "while you can't afford it, give of your time, so I did but still feel I owe more to God than I'll ever be able to pay. The day will come when my Master says whether I am good enough or not, but it won't be based on how well I know the Torah, nor the NT, nor the Quran, but on how much I am willing to learn and strive for that personal relationship. Jihad = struggles, which we all have. We should strive to detail where we've been caught up, and where we have learned.I'm grateful to have been able to worship with a Muslim with the approval of Allah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul was not the only preacher, there were many other preachers who wrote gospels and who differed greatly with Paul. Pauline Christianity happened to be the one that was preserved and taught. There are many groups back then all claiming to represent Christianity with their own gospels.

 

So the issue is two, the objective codification of creed and the objective acceptance of gospels.

 

What criteria did the council of nicea use to choose which gospels they were going to use and which creed they were going to accept?

Who cares? Bring your gospels forth and contradict Paul. That's what I'm here waiting for.

 

Wisdom says Paul came to me in a dream and filled my stomach with pork. I need some reference to prove that I am such  kafir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ali Musaaa, I love you like a brother. We should meet some day.

The Quran hasn't really given us,(Christians) any more laws. Hadith has decided a whole bunch of "laws" for you like Rambam decided 613 more "laws" for Jews. Christianity from the time of the Nicene creed has made laws/doctrines that are not in accordance with the very Bible they compiled. None the less reading the Bible as it is written, "Pray without ceasing" came about. Yes 5 times a day (just not at the same determined times), and more when needed, like you know, .

 

 

Zakat, I was told, "while you can't afford it, give of your time, so I did but still feel I owe more to God than I'll ever be able to pay. The day will come when my Master says whether I am good enough or not, but it won't be based on how well I know the Torah, nor the NT, nor the Quran, but on how much I am willing to learn and strive for that personal relationship. Jihad = struggles, which we all have. We should strive to detail where we've been caught up, and where we have learned.I'm grateful to have been able to worship with a Muslim with the approval of Allah.

 

Naww, love you too  :wub:  God willing we do.

 

Well, the fact that the Hadīth is from the Prophet is a pretty good reason to uphold those laws. The Prophet isn't some nobody (as we are aware). His word is final and obedience to him, like any prophet, is mandatory. The bulk of Islamic Law comes from the Hadith because the Prophet was the living example of the Qur'an. It is through the Prophet and by his own declaration, the extension of the Ahl al-Bayt, we learn the rules and regulations of the Religion of God. They expand on the principles of the Qur'an and make matters clear to us. 

 

No religion has scrutinised itself like Islam has. Muslims wanted to know exactly what the Prophet said and did and developed a system unprecedented in human history to do so.I think you should read some books by scholars on the subject of hadith. I can provide some in if you wish. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warsh and Hafs are recited all over the world and they are most certaintly not 50 percent different, you can youtube both recitations and listen for yourself.

 

Good Lord, brother and salams

 

I have never heard of those names before.

 

What are they?

 

How do they differ from one another? 

 

Could you please explain to me what they are?

 

Could you please give at least one example of the differences. 

 

In India, Pakistan and all many other countries to the east of India, no one has ever heard those names.

 

There is only one standard Arabic version.

 

How come you speak of more than one version? ,  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Lord, brother and salams

 

I have never heard of those names before.

 

What are they?

 

How do they differ from one another? 

 

Could you please explain to me what they are?

 

Could you please give at least one example of the differences. 

 

In India, Pakistan and all many other countries to the east of India, no one has ever heard those names.

 

There is only one standard Arabic version.

 

How come you speak of more than one version? ,  

 

 

Imagine a dialect were only a limited number of words are pronounced differently and the rest of the words are the same and carry the exact same meaning. Thats the distinction between Warsh and Hafs. Its just a different way to pronounce some words [ie., to recite the Qur'an]. The meaning remains unchanged. 

 

One example includes the word: 'Mu'minoon'. The Tribe of the Propet did not pronounce this word the way most of us do now. They pronounce it as: 'Moominoon'. The former is read with the Hafs Qira'at and the latter is done with the Warsh Qira'at. Both carry the exact same meaning and are the exact same word, just pronounced slightly different. 

Edited by Ali Musaaa :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...