Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Interfaith Dialogue
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Interfaith Dialogue  
Message Icon Topic: Jesus was crucified according to historia Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 72 Next >>
Author Message
Larry
Male Christian
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2010
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 632
Quote Larry Replybullet Posted: 04 November 2012 at 5:37pm
Hasan,

   You made a good point that when you said when someone doesn't want to answer a question it is a good trick to simply avoid answering it. At least you are consistent. Thank you for proving my point made above, when faced with uncomfortable questions concerning your own faith, you simply refuse to answer and blame the other person for trying to "trick" you into answering. If you can be "tricked" into answering questions about your own faith then maybe your faith is not as strong as you want to believe.

   As far as the "perfection" of the Qur'an goes, there are a few problems presented. First of all, a manuscript far older than a "thousand years" exists in the form of the "Kufan Codex" written by Abdullah Ibn Masud. Masud's "version" of the Qur'an does NOT include surahs 1, 113 and 114, that are in the "modern" day Qur'an. Why?

   There are also technical and written problems within the text of the so-called "Samarquand Codex," which is only partially preserved.

   The prophet said to; "Learn the recitation of Qur'an from four persons";

   1. Abdullah Ibn Masud

   2. Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa, who was killed in battle in 633 A.D.

   3. Ubayy B. Ka'ab

   4. Muadh bin Jabal

   Since these persons were personally known and were close to the prophet Muhammad, how could their "Qur'ans possibly differ, in ANY way, from the one recited by the prophet himself?

   Ubayy B. Ka'ab's version of the Qur'an actually had two additional surahs, Surah Al-Khal and Surah Al-Afd. Ubayy died before Uthman's "standardization" of the Qur'an so he never saw his Qur'an burned by order of Uthman.

   And, as I have repeatedly said, and you have "declined" to answer, Uthman sent a message to Hafsah, Muhammad's widow, asking her to send him the Qur'an in her possession (Which was the "original" Qur'an, compiled just two years after the death of Muhammad), to him so that he could make four "perfect" copies of it and then said he would return the Qur'an to her, unharmed in any way, which he did.

   It was not until Hafsah's death, decades later, that Muslim "authorities" ordered the burning and destruction of this first and most important Qur'an. Supposedly this destruction was ordered because of a lack of phonetic and diacritical markings, even though the actual text was word-for-word exactly the same. For anyone who would believe this nonsense must be living in an alternative universe. Because how could this Qur'an, a single book by itself, cause problems for Muslim readers in many countries, who would never physically see it in the first place? And, since it would never have been published for widespread use, the only people who would see it were those in whose possession this original Qur'an was.

   As I said previously, people do not burn their earliest and original holy books because of minor and "technical" problems within the text, they burn them because there is something in it that needs to be concealed or hidden. Uthman had no problem returning the Codex to Hafsah, MUHAMMAD'S OWN WIFE, who was in a position to know what it contained and she guarded it with her life until she died.

   Because if Uthman ordered the burning and destruction of all other Qur'ans that differed, for whatever reason, with the mushaf he compiled, he surely would have ordered the destruction of Hafsah's Codex, not use it to make his own "official" version. If Uthman could leave this original, and most precious, Qur'an unharmed in the possession of Muhammad's WIFE, then why, decades later, did "Muslim authorities" decree that this very same Qur'an presented a problem that could only be rectified by it's complete and utter destruction?

   Do you have answers for these questions or do you think I am again trying to "trick" you with my questions concerning your own faith?

   And, save the "gifts" for someone who needs them, thank you anyway.

Larry



Edited by Larry - 04 November 2012 at 5:46pm
IP IP Logged
Larry
Male Christian
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2010
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 632
Quote Larry Replybullet Posted: 04 November 2012 at 6:14pm
Hasan,

   I also wanted to address your question as to whether the Bible of a thousand years ago is word-for-word identical to the modern Bible?

   No, it isn't, word-for-word. Ancient writings in ancient languages cannot possibly be "word-for-word" the same because they ARE in different languages. So what do you compare them to?

   There are no actual ORIGINAL, physical remains of the Biblical text of the Bible, Old or New Testament, just as there are NO ORIGINAL COPIES OF THE QUR'AN. You base your beliefs on the work of a "committee" assembled to produce one, singular text for the Qur'an, Uthman's mushaf, at which time ANY variant copies of this Qur'an were ordered to be destroyed.

   This is not the way we deal with sacred writings in Judaism or Christianity. If we did do the same then there would be no reason AT ALL for any future research and study. The Old and New Testaments, as well as the Qur'an, were recorded in writing by people, divinely-inspired perhaps, but they are still people, and there is nothing about people which is holy or absolutely free of any error, only God is like that.

   The finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls opened new avenues of Biblical research and led to more exact translations. And Biblical research has been going on as long as the Old and New Testaments have existed, that is the basis OF Biblical research. New ancient writings continue to be found to this very day and these lead to new scholarship and translations that are more accurate then those of past centuries, the King James Bible is a good example of this.

   But, unlike in Islam, we do not see the PHYSICAL Bible as sacred in itself, it is not a holy thing in it's physical form, the holiness is in the content. Christians are used to writing notes and references onto the pages and margins of their Bibles in order to make certain concepts and points more clear or precise to them, it is not a DESECRATION of the Bible, the ideas, beliefs and teachings are the important thing, not the physical pages they are printed onto. But Muslims see their Qur'ans as holy in their physical form, which is why there is rioting throughout the Muslim world (by a small part of the population) whenever it is alleged that a Qur'an has been burned or otherwise "desecrated." This attitude toward the PHYSICAL Qur'an, could convincingly be argued is constituting shirk. Just as there are no "perfect" translations of the Qur'an into any language other than Arabic, translations will always differ from language to language. And, as I said, there is NO ORIGINAL ARABIC QUR'AN TO COMPARE TODAY'S QUR'AN WITH.

   So, if your belief is based on the idea that each and every word, IN ARABIC, is the same in all of today's Qur'ans as it has always been, then that is up to you. But if you argue that because of that "sameness" that that makes it "proof" that the Qur'an is true and perfect, then you need proof that all Qur'ans written prior to Uthman's mushaf, were true and perfect, but you have no such proof as there are NO pre-existing copies of the Qur'an in existence, they were all burned, every single one of them.

   With the exception of the "Kufan Codex" that is.

Larry

Edited by Larry - 04 November 2012 at 6:27pm
IP IP Logged
Abu Loren
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 June 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1063
Quote Abu Loren Replybullet Posted: 05 November 2012 at 1:18am
Originally posted by Larry

Hasan,

   I also wanted to address your question as to whether the Bible of a thousand years ago is word-for-word identical to the modern Bible?

   No, it isn't, word-for-word. Ancient writings in ancient languages cannot possibly be "word-for-word" the same because they ARE in different languages. So what do you compare them to?

   There are no actual ORIGINAL, physical remains of the Biblical text of the Bible, Old or New Testament, just as there are NO ORIGINAL COPIES OF THE QUR'AN. You base your beliefs on the work of a "committee" assembled to produce one, singular text for the Qur'an, Uthman's mushaf, at which time ANY variant copies of this Qur'an were ordered to be destroyed.

   This is not the way we deal with sacred writings in Judaism or Christianity. If we did do the same then there would be no reason AT ALL for any future research and study. The Old and New Testaments, as well as the Qur'an, were recorded in writing by people, divinely-inspired perhaps, but they are still people, and there is nothing about people which is holy or absolutely free of any error, only God is like that.

   The finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls opened new avenues of Biblical research and led to more exact translations. And Biblical research has been going on as long as the Old and New Testaments have existed, that is the basis OF Biblical research. New ancient writings continue to be found to this very day and these lead to new scholarship and translations that are more accurate then those of past centuries, the King James Bible is a good example of this.

   But, unlike in Islam, we do not see the PHYSICAL Bible as sacred in itself, it is not a holy thing in it's physical form, the holiness is in the content. Christians are used to writing notes and references onto the pages and margins of their Bibles in order to make certain concepts and points more clear or precise to them, it is not a DESECRATION of the Bible, the ideas, beliefs and teachings are the important thing, not the physical pages they are printed onto. But Muslims see their Qur'ans as holy in their physical form, which is why there is rioting throughout the Muslim world (by a small part of the population) whenever it is alleged that a Qur'an has been burned or otherwise "desecrated." This attitude toward the PHYSICAL Qur'an, could convincingly be argued is constituting shirk. Just as there are no "perfect" translations of the Qur'an into any language other than Arabic, translations will always differ from language to language. And, as I said, there is NO ORIGINAL ARABIC QUR'AN TO COMPARE TODAY'S QUR'AN WITH.

   So, if your belief is based on the idea that each and every word, IN ARABIC, is the same in all of today's Qur'ans as it has always been, then that is up to you. But if you argue that because of that "sameness" that that makes it "proof" that the Qur'an is true and perfect, then you need proof that all Qur'ans written prior to Uthman's mushaf, were true and perfect, but you have no such proof as there are NO pre-existing copies of the Qur'an in existence, they were all burned, every single one of them.

   With the exception of the "Kufan Codex" that is.

Larry
 
Larry Larry Larry you seem to be hung up on this burned codex of Hafsa'. Get over yourself and move on and live your life. You even said there are no differences between them, so what you find is an exact copy of the Holy Qur'an from Timbuktu to Timberland. One can't say the same about the Bible, even the many English variants.
IP IP Logged
Larry
Male Christian
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2010
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 632
Quote Larry Replybullet Posted: 05 November 2012 at 10:13pm
Hasan,

   Well, what do you know, another NON-ANSWER from Hasan, hardly a surprise anymore, just a long habit of yours. It used to be merely annoying but has gotten to the point where it is pathetic.

   But I understand, if I was in your shoes I would have trouble explaining these problems with Islam and the Qur'an too.

   Yes, Hasan, I am "hung up" on the "burned" Codex of Hafsah. You rave about the Qur'an being UNCHANGED for 1,400 years but that isn't really true, is it? What you mean is that the present day Qur'an has no changed since Uthman "standardized" the text after consultations with a committee others, and using the memory of Zaid, (a much younger man) rather than one of the original "companions," who criticized this decision by Uthman.

   WHY WAS HAFSAH'S CODEX DESTROYED?

   If there were no differences between Hafsah's Codex and Uthman's standardization then why was the original Qur'an burned? There are a number of "answers" from posters in the past on this subject, none of them convincing. As I said before, books are not burned to increase understanding and scholarship, they are burned when they contain something that the "destroyers" want to hide.

   If the writers (66 of them) of the Old and New Testaments got together and decided on creating one "true" copy, and then burning all other known manuscripts, then the Bible would be just like the Qur'an. But, surprisingly, by having 66 different authors, who lived at different time and, other than a couple of them, did not even know each other, the cohesive and complimentary natures of the Old and New Testament, are nothing short of miraculous.

   And in Judaism and Christianity we don't burn our manuscripts, even when they are not accepted as true holy text, such as the Apocrypha. We treasure our manuscripts, and Biblical scholarship, and search diligently for new ones not yet discovered, such as were found at Nag Hammadi in Egypt and in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

   Sorry, but your "perfect" Qur'an story doesn't fly with me and many others. Your problem, Hasan, is that you cannot defend your own religion and religious history and instead simply refuse to answer. And I know why.

   You have a "prophet" that made no prophecies, a Qur'an with no past history, everything that could substantiate it's early history was deliberately destroyed and nothing to back it up, or prove it's scholarship, other than itself, a less than satisfactory "proof" wouldn't you say?

   The idea that the Old and New Testaments are "corrupt" when they don't support the Qur'an, which is almost all the time, and Biblical quotes that are evidently "non-corrupt" when they do "support" the Qur'an and Islam, is the lamest excuse ever for why the Qur'an has so many discrepancies when compared to both the Old and New Testament, which, by the way, flow smoothly from the Old to the New Testament and prophecies, REAL PROPHECIES, are fulfilled in every case in the New Testament.

   Every single ceremony of the Hajj in Mecca is pre-Islamic pagan Arabian in origin, the "black Stone" idol, the circumnambulations, running between the hills, stoning the devil, etc. There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE of a monotheistic religion existing in the Arabian peninsula before the pagan Arab worship of stones and idols for thousands of years, NONE. But there is evidence of moon and other idol worship (Sabeans for example) for thousands of years before Islam came along. The crescent symbol of the moon god (named Sin in the Bible) is seen all over the ancient Near East, in cylinder seals, stone idols, pagan temples, wall carvings, etc. The Bible even warns against the veneration of these false gods and idols. Muhammad originally included the "Daughters of Allah", Al-Lat, Al-Uzza and Manat in his earliest "revelations," to get the support of his tribe, but dropped them soon after.

   But there are many manuscripts and other written forms in clay tablets, etc., that attest to the worship of a single, all-powerful and true God in Israel more than 3,500 years ago. And the Temple Mount in Jerusalem was home to the first Temple of Solomon (destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon) and the second later Temple of King Herod, destroyed in 70 A.D. And Jerusalem has ALWAYS been the direction of prayers by Jews to this very day,.

   The original qibla was named as Jerusalem by the prophet himself. Once the Arabian Jews rejected Muhammad's "prophethood" and "revelations" (they knew a false prophet when they saw him) this qibla suddenly changed to Mecca, and a convenient and timely "revelation" then occured which attempted to explain this sudden difference in perfect holy revelation from God Himself.

   The life of the prophet included raiding peaceful caravans (even in the "prohibited" times of the year) for their money and goods, injuring and killing men in the process, acquiesing to or ordering the murder of 800 Jewish men and boys of the Quryaza tribe, marrying Aisha at 6 years old and consummating this marriage three years later, had "revelations" that applied specifically to Muhammad and his immediate family, even to the amounts of money that each would receive from tribute of conquered people, etc., There is even a whole Surah that deals with Muhammad's tribe, the Quryash, in the Qur'an itself, "revelations" that dealt with how many wives and concubines the "messenger" was allowed, even taking the women of one or more of his own "companions," charging "protection money" Jizyah, from conquered peoples just so they could continue to worship their own religions, while preaching that "There is no compulsion in religion, truth stands out clear from error."

   These are not the actions one would expect from someone that is considered the perfect representation of a true and just "prophet" and the "ideal man."

   Hasan, you can say all you want as long as you want and as loudly as you want (or simply ignore the question and insult the questioner) and you are still going to end up trying to explain away all the problems, discrepancies, history of your holy "book" and biography of your "prophet," etc. If this is your idea of the "true religion" then I am quite content with my faith as a Christian.

   I have no intention of continuing this particular thread with you because of your never-ending excuses and bizarre claims. You are intellectually lazy and you do not answer even the simplest and most basic questions about your faith, while demanding answers from others, but you always were the cosummate hypocrite.

   By the way, do you believe that at the end of time the "Black Stone" will have develop actual "eyes" to see and a "tongue" to tell about those who have touched it with "true sincerity?"

   Or that the "stone" has the power to erase the sins of those who touch it?

   Or that the "stone" was pure white when it came from Allah but turned black from the sins of men?

   A "stone" with magical powers, if this isn't the definition of "shirk" I don't know what would be.

Larry

Edited by Larry - 05 November 2012 at 11:11pm
IP IP Logged
Abu Loren
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 June 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1063
Quote Abu Loren Replybullet Posted: 08 November 2012 at 11:01am
Originally posted by Larry

Hasan,

   I'm confused
Larry
 
Larry you are mixing up my replies with that of Hasan you fo ol.
IP IP Logged
Caringheart
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1969
Quote Caringheart Replybullet Posted: 08 November 2012 at 7:07pm
I've made that mistake before.  Big%20smile  Remember?
You politely told me, "I am not Hasan."
I apologized for my mistake.  Embarrassed


Edited by Caringheart - 08 November 2012 at 7:14pm
IP IP Logged
Larry
Male Christian
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2010
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 632
Quote Larry Replybullet Posted: 09 November 2012 at 12:16am
Originally posted by Abu Loren


Originally posted by Larry

Hasan,

   I'm confusedLarry
Larry you are mixing up my replies with that of Hasan you fo ol.


   Whatever, loser, I was starting to respond to a post by Hasan and evidently clicked the "post reply" while I was editing the text. Go play your "gotcha" little kid games with someone else.
IP IP Logged
Abu Loren
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 June 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1063
Quote Abu Loren Replybullet Posted: 11 November 2012 at 2:27am
Originally posted by Larry

 
   Whatever, loser, I was starting to respond to a post by Hasan and evidently clicked the "post reply" while I was editing the text. Go play your "gotcha" little kid games with someone else.
 
Laughing out loud.
IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 72 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com