You're like a kid that needs a hand to cross the street. Why do you think that sura 96 is known to be the opening sura (etc)?skynightblaze wrote:Quran doesnt mention the order and hence if quran alone approach is to be followed then Quran is only first 4 chapters and 3 verses from chapter 5 after which it needs to be discarded.... The information about ordering of verses is not found in the quran at all.
The first to present it in some chronological order was Theodor Noldeke back in 1860... based on both external & internal evidences.
From him, at the very least, we could differentiate between 3 Meccan periods and the Medina ones.
http://www.truthnet.org/islam/Watt/Chapter7.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Further researches made a reliable, chronological account. So chapter 5 is indeed the 112th sura, followed by sura 9.
Even the Last Sermon is tawatur, yet contains three different versions of Muhammad's sayings. Umar himself declared that he wouldskynightblaze wrote:That ahadith (on stoning) is a mutawatir as well as Tawatur typ. Oh your source is quran.
be accused by the people of adding to Allah's word if to put it. So the end criteria even for tawatur hadiths is their Koranic accord.
The stoning verse isn't there so, most obviously, he lacked the required two testimonies, thus ALL these hadiths are forgeries.
Now, as I've said, stoning IS koranically allowed but -for the Jews alone- since it's a Torah precept Muhammad had to apply when judging
them (5.48-49; B.4.56.829). The very word 'hadith' comes from the Hebrew 'hadash' (novelty, new). Religious novelties are forbidden in
Islam! They were compiled so to copy the Jewish Mischna, not by Arab natives... but by far removed Khorasan people in north-east Iran.
http://www.quranic.org/quran_article/11 ... adiths.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Omar carried on his reaction against Abu Hurayra and Kab who continued transmitting hadiths.
And this is why both Omar and Uthman chastised hadiths writings, both of them ordering their burning.
That's why too we have no -authoritative- hadiths before about 250 years after Muhammad. Full stop!
First, there was TWO recensions: the first under Abu Bakr which gave the Hafsa codex and then a 2nd one, ordered by Uthman.skynightblaze wrote:The committee which you named came into picture after 20 years. I am asking you why Umar didnt collect the quran himself .
Second, your question is ludicrous. The task required years and Umar had, first of all, to rule over vast conquered territories...
So he was rejected by his own tribe, yet to form the 'tribe of Allah' in Medina. But his native Bedouin's background remained.skynightblaze wrote:Muhammad himself disassociated from his tribe by ridiculing the God of pagans.
You and Darth railed over Reza Aslan, but you talked without checking...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_god_but_God" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
From which the quotes were taken...The book was chosen 'Best Book of the Year' in its category by The Financial Times. The Los Angeles Times dubbed it a “favorite book
of the year”. Journalist Fareed Zakaria called the book "a textured, nuanced account that presents a living, breathing religion shaped
by centuries of history and culture." Islamist author Noah Feldman called it "elegant, accessible, and informed by historical scholarship"
and "a wonderful view into the rich world of early Islam."
http://www.provethebible.net/T2-Hist/Is ... Arabia.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Which mentality is confirmed by our very wikiislamIn pre-Islamic Arabia, caravan raiding was a legitimate means for small clans to benefit from the wealth of larger ones. It was in no way
considered stealing, and as long as no violence occurred and no blood was shed, there was no need for retribution ... It was the Shaykh's
responsibility to maintain peace and stability in his community by ensuring the proper retribution for all crimes committed within the tribe.
Crimes committed against those outside the tribe were not only unpunished, they were not really crimes. Stealing, killing, or injuring
another person was not considered a morally reprehensible act per se
http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/Mind_of_t ... Chapter_II" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
skynightblaze wrote:Even to look unto Allah and last day we need to know how muhammad lived so again your attempt has failed.The Cat wrote: 33.21: Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him
who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much.
In a far twisted logic, a good example for him who looketh unto Allah, remembering Him much
BECOMES... Look for the Siras, the Tafsirs, the Hadiths and Muhammad's Sunna!!!
Read again the underline part.skynightblaze wrote:Muhammad was asked to follow Abraham and hence muslims cant follow Muhammad. A team leader is asked to follow the Project Manager and hence a junior level programmer cant follow the team leader.The Cat wrote:16.123: And afterward We inspired thee (Muhammad, saying):
Follow the religion of Abraham, as one by nature upright. He was not of the idolaters.
So why follow Muhammad, himself ordered to follow Abraham?
That's the shitty logic of the Sunnites you keep parroting.
The word translated 'religion' is Millata, meaning path, trace, way of example. The word 'nature upright' is the Arabic Hanifa (Hanif).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanif" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
--It confirms that Islam is much older than the Koran.
--2.124 gives the title of IMAM solely to Abraham; Isaac, Jacob (21.72-73) and Moses (46.12)!
Which was -wrongly- translated so to hide it...
46.12: When before it there was the Scripture of Moses, an example and a mercy (Imāmāan), a world leader;
and this is a confirming Scripture in the Arabic language...
Not even close to be 'A statement of the Truth' (19.34), let alone 'a revelation (by birth) for mankind' (19.21)
in the likeness of Adam! That which Muhammad himself is commanded not to waver (3.59/3.60).
The very title of Imam is never accorded to Muhammad, the deviant, only exemplary in his redemptive trust unto Allah.
I'm not even talking about those un-koranic imam Shafi'i; imam Bukhari, etc. All blasphemous titles!
Muhammad can't be, as a person, someone to follow anywise. That's why there's NO Shahada in the Koran!
2:272: The guiding of them is not thy duty (O Muhammad), but Allah guideth whom He will.
41.43: Naught is said unto thee (Muhammad) save what was said unto the messengers before thee.
46.9: Say: I am no new thing among the messengers, nor know I what will be done with
me or with you. I do but follow that which is inspired in me, and I am but a plain warner.
88.21-22: Remind them, for thou art but a remembrancer, Thou art not at all a warder over them.
And as a secular leader he is to rule through councils (3.159; 4.59; 42.38), and over non-Muslims according to their own books (5.48).
I know that I'm hitting some cognitive dissonance, as that of the Muhammadans' idol worship of Muhammad.
But, in my own way, I am much more a threat to nowadays 'Islam' than your crude hatred will ever be...
Shirk and Idolatry in Islam (The Cat): viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1062" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;