Faith Freedom International

What I wrote about reading the koran equally applies to the drivel Mr. Moghul writes.

Please, Mr. Moghul, the kaffirs all suffer from ADD ( Attention Deficit Disorder ) and will not be able to read your posts without suffering severe trauma to their rationality.

Have pity, Mr. Moghul. Have your say in few simple words. Brevity is the soul of wit.

"As a dog returns to his vomit, so a fool repeats his folly"— Proverbs 26:11

farishta wrote:What I wrote about reading the koran equally applies to the drivel Mr. Moghul writes.

Please, Mr. Moghul, the kaffirs all suffer from ADD ( Attention Deficit Disorder ) and will not be able to read your posts without suffering severe trauma to their rationality.

Have pity, Mr. Moghul. Have your say in few simple words. Brevity is the soul of wit.

"As a dog returns to his vomit, so a fool repeats his folly"— Proverbs 26:11

Better than suffering from the other ADD: Allah Delusion Disorder.

This Mughal guy seems to be a well-meaning decent Muslims. I am sure he lives an ideal Muslim life with his four wives all of whom he married in their prepubescent years. In keeping with Allah's injunctions, he does not spoil them by sparing the rod.

Like all decent well-meaning Muslims, Moghul thinks that kaffirs are gullible dupes who can be easily beguiled into believing that brutal and barbaric violence oozing from the Koran is, in fact, Allah's compassion.

When Allah says “kill the disbelievers wherever you find them” (2:191), he actually means that tell kaffirs such jokes that they die laughing.

The narrative that Mr. Moghul presents in this forum is an example of such an effort.

The-Quranic-System-of-Sustenance

http://islamicdawn.com/wp-content/uploa ... -Trust.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfqduwXVSgQ

Centaur wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfqduwXVSgQ

Dear centaur, the main question regarding authenticity of the quran for all of us human beings to answer is, how do we know with certainty beyond any reasonable doubt that the quran is for sure word of God or that it is not?

The day we answer this question with certainty this debate will end one way or the other. However this question is not going to go away any time soon looking at the level of ignorance we human beings find among ourselves.

People declare their faith in the quran not knowing a thing about the quran just as people are declaring it nonsense without ever being able to understand it properly. They are debating each other over the quran but neither party knows for sure what is the actual message in the quran because they never learned the proper way to understand it properly.

This is why I see no point in debating about the quran if we have never read the quran for its proper understanding. The question is, what people need to do for understanding the quran properly? The answer is, they need to learn the proper way for understanding the quran properly.

It is because everything has its necessities eg the quran talks about life and living or a proper way of life. The question is, what is proper way of life? It is way of life that deals with life and living ie livelihood or daily bread etc. That way it talks about clean fresh air for people to breath, clean fresh water to drink and healthy food to eat. If people have security of livelihood then they have time to do other things as told by God. If not then people will keep on wasting their lives away by trying to get their livelihood. This is why then they will never have time for God or humanity.

Can you therefore see why proper way of life matters or should matter for humanity? Just as life is not without its necessities so the quran is not without its necessities for its proper understanding. This is why before anyone could claim one understands the quranic text properly one has to know the proper way to understand the quranic text properly.

This is why I ask anyone and everyone who claims to understand the quranic text properly to kindly explain the proper way of understanding the quranic text properly to me as well so that I could also understand the quran properly otherwise there is no point in talking about the quran or deen of islam with people who are ignorant about all this unless first they learn things they need to learn.

This is why I try to explain the quranic text as I understand it and I explain the rules upon which my interpretation of the quran is based eg see HERE and HERE

regards and all the best.

Mughal

how do we know with certainty beyond any reasonable doubt that the quran is for sure word of God or that it is not?

We know the Quran cannot come from God because it gets things wrong, proving it is a manmade book.

Its explanation of biological reproduction is fatally flawed, as are its errors of the Jews taking a Jewish scribe as a son of God, and the description of the Trinity, as Allah, Jesus and Mary.

All these errors (and more) prove conclusively the Quran is a manmade book, as men are fallible God is not.


Men do not produce any sexual fluid from between the backbone, and women do not produce any sexual fluid which plays a part in human reproduction.

Quran 86.6-7
Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi - Tafhim al-Qur'an

"Sulb" is the backbone and "tara'ib"the breast- bones, i.e. the ribs. Since the procreative fluid in both man and woman is discharged from that part of the body which is between the back and the breast, it is said that man has been created from the fluid issuing out froth between the back and the breast.”

Ibn Kathir
Quran86.6-7
He is created from a water gushing forth.) meaning, the sexual fluid that comes out bursting forth from the man and the woman. Thus, the child is produced from both of them….
(Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) "The backbone of the man and the ribs of the woman. It (the fluid) is yellow and fine in texture.

The Quran tells Muslims the Trinity consists of Allah Jesus and Mary, which is wrong, Mary is not part of the Trinity.Mary is considered a human being in Christian doctrine, not a god.

Ibn Kathir 5.73
Surely, they have disbelieved who say: "Allah is the third of three.") Mujahid and several others said that this Ayah was revealed about the Christians in particular. As-Suddi and others said that this Ayah was revealed about taking `Isa and his mother as gods besides Allah, thus making Allah the third in a trinity.

Jews do not, and never have taken one of their respected scribes as a son of Allah, it would be blasphemy for them to do so.

Quran 9.30
The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth.

…

People who write their DR extra big are almost never worth the time.
Tell me why I should look at this. Make a 1 paragraph summary.

The Vairant Quran Channel
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=18970" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMa5tqfdNzw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmUEub1O5FU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


So Muslims, Where Exactly is the Rasm Manuscript?
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=18953" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfgV9cNf1vc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Cornered Muslim Scholar finally admits Quran has changed.
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=18931" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6agQmo5OTc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


THE Qur'an dates from 1924
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=18888" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRkUDjF1RfE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


As I already explained there is nothing wrong with the text of the quran, why not? It is because the quran has been preserved by God through mankind themselves. All this can be clearly proved from the very existing copies of the quran themselves.

The quran we have it today has come to us through two completely independent channels. A)Through channel of HUFFAAZ ie the people who had committed the whole of the quran to their memories and B)through scribes of the quranic text who copied the text of quran from the copies of the quran.

The quran we have in written form was not written down from the memory of people because there is zero evidence for that. Likewise the quran we have in minds of huffaaz was not committed to memory from its written form because there is zero evidence for that also. This is why both means of transmission of the quranic message were fully independent of each other. However they both could help us check them against each other to a great degree to verify that the quran we have today is original ie nothing added or taken away from it.

First of all look at the writing style of the original copies of the quran we have available worldwide. One will see that they do not have wovel marks nor the symbols for individual letters. For example, in ancient writing the quranic text clearly shows that same symbol has been used for more than one letter ie letters BAA, TAA, SAA and NUN are not distinguished by dots as they are now. Or that JEEM, HAA and KHAA use the very same symbol to represent them. The case is very same for DAAL and ZAAL or RAA and ZAA or SEEN and SHEEN or SWAD and DWAD or TWAA and ZWAA or AIN and GHAIN or FAA and QAAF or LAAM and YAA. Any text written even today like that cannot be read by anyone unless one was already familiar with the message written in that text. The question is, could anyone commit from such a text its message? This clearly proves that the quran was not memorised by HUFFAAZ from any written text of the quran.

The next question is, could the quran be written down from the memories of people who have committed it to their memories? My answer is no, not at all. Why not? Because the information the quranic message contains is such that copiers of this information will become confused as to how to write it down properly because there are different ways of writing the very same information down. To help people understand my point here let me try and explain it a bit. We know that we can write a number with a symbol or figure or shape as well as in a word form ie I can write 2 or two. So how will anyone know whether to use a figure or word for a number? This is why some will write a figure and others will use word. No such quranic copies exist in the word which contain such information. They are all the very same in this regard.

The other thing the quran uses is letters and words, For example, in the beginning of some surahs one will see some letter based combinations like 2/1 in the quran which starts with A, L and M. These letters are also meaningful words. When one says ALIF, LAAM, MEEM what is the listener suppose to write down for these letters? A, l, m or ALIF, LAAM , MEEM? Then we have words in Arabic language which have come into it from other languages and therefore they could be written down in various ways by using different letters. Not only that but some arabic words can also be written using different letters eg for some words letters SEEN and SWAD can be interchanged and like some other letters. So the question arises, which way these words should be written? So one can see if each person wrote the quran down from one's memory alone then what ought to happen? That is each person will end up writing it down the way one thinks and then there will be as many versions of the copies of the quran as many the writers of the quranic copies. Do we see in the existing copies of the quran anything like this? No, not atb all. What does that tell us? It tells us, each and every copy of the quran that exists in the word today is copied directly from another already existing written copy of the quran, otherwise the variations I have pointed out could not be avoided. Even then the message of the quran ought to remain the very same. That is because writing three in word form or in figure 3 form makes no difference.

These points clearly show the quran was not committed to memory from the written copies of the quran nor it was copied down from the memory into writing rather the quran came to us in two independently verifiable ways. This is all true but then the question arises why do copies of the quran differ with each other? It is because God and humanity both are partners in the process of preservation of the quranic text. God makes no mistakes but human beings do. However God has made people capable of detecting their human errors and to mend or correct them. So the promise of God that he has preserved the quran stands true even today. Fact is people made errors during copying the quranic text. Fact is, it is people who have detected the errors made by people. The fact is people also have been correcting the errors they made, so there is no problem with the quranic text even in this regard. Why not?

Let me try and explain it a bit. We human beings know very well that no matter how hard we try we do end up making errors or mistakes when we write down things. However we can also detect our errors. How do we do that? We know error due to their characteristics or features or properties or nature. For example, we may add letters or words or phrases to a text by mistake or we may leave out letters or words or phrases from a text. We may end up adding a piece of information where it does not belong or omit a piece of information from its place. Likewise when it comes to book binding we may end up leaving pages out of a copy of a book or put extra pages in and thereby double some pages in a copy of a book. So there are different ways we end up with making errors. However errors are detectable and correctable. Human errors are not intentional or deliberate so they cannot hide or remain undetected or hidden from everyone forever. No matter what such errors make absolutely no difference to the validity or genuineness of the text when its original form is recreate-able from its other existing or available copies.

So people who are relying on reports in hadis or history books regarding the quran need to reconsider their position and not rely on them because in the face of the clear proof they prove to be faulty or defective. This is why they cannot be used against the quran. However reports that in line with the quran are fine. So my picking and choosing from hadis books or history books in this regard is 100% reliable. So people who try to justify multiple readings of the quranic text are also wrong. There is only and only one correct reading of the quranic text and that is it. Scholars of the quran regardless they are Muslims are nonmuslims must avoid false propaganda against the quran because it is not damaging the quran but humanity by hands of each other.

It is because the quran has been preserved by God through mankind themselves.

??? Some you the quotes you gave actually prove that this assertion in wrong.

In short, burning variant copies does not prove that there were no changes. However, showing you variant Qur'ans DO proove that in favt there were.

manfred wrote:

It is because the quran has been preserved by God through mankind themselves.

??? Some you the quotes you gave actually prove that this assertion in wrong.

In short, burning variant copies does not prove that there were no changes. However, showing you variant Qur'ans DO proove that in favt there were.

Dear manfred, did you bother to analyse or try to understand what i have explained? Please do. It is because none can disprove this solid proof of originality or genuineness of the quranic text try all one can.

In the context I have explained it, it is not possible at all for the variant qurans to exist. In other words, it is a case of either there is the quran that is genuine and original or there is no quran at all. Since we have copies of the quran therefore there is no question of no quran. However what you call the variant qurans are merely copies of the very same quran but with copying errors in them as I have explained. I have also explained how those errors do not affect validity or originality of the quran. You are talking about reports regarding the quran and I am putting before your eyes the actual copies of the quran that exist till today around the world, which none can disprove due to my explanation of its transmission through two independent channels, which only depends upon the quranic text as found in the existing copies of the quran around the world.

I accept human errors during making of the copies of the written quran but not deliberate changes if that is your reason for rejecting my explanation but even in case of copying errors I explained them away as to how they can be corrected by anyone who can understand the nature of these errors and their corrections. So again you cannot truly reject my explanation of things regarding the quran. If you reject my explanation on basis of deliberate changes in the quranic text then you need to prove them beyond any reasonable doubt that they are deliberate because there is a huge difference between unintentional errors which occur when one writes a copy of a text or when one makes deliberate changes to a text to make the text serve one's own purpose. It is because for a start such changes will need to show the purpose of those changes because a purposeless change can never be deliberate, for it serves no purpose. Since over all purpose of the quran does not change due to copying errors in the quranic text so the text in the quran remains genuine and original despite containing copying errors so long as they prove to be so.

When a copying error occurs in a text it can be corrected by comparing it to other copies which are still around because it is almost impossible that the same error will occur in all existing copies of the text. Even if that happens, the error may not cause a word to be a proper word in a language in which the text is written. Even if it does then it may not make grammatical sense in a sentence. Even if it does it is bound to be out of its proper context. So one can see how many stages an error has to pass before it could be accepted as a deliberate error. So kindly do think things through thoroughly.

Such like are the solid reasons that forced me to look into the quran in detail. See how the quran stands on its own? This is why the quran is a stand alone book ie an outstanding book.

regards and all the best.

Mughal did you bother watching the clips you quoted. They you would KNOW for sure that your claims about the Qur'an are nonsense.We know that a) there were variant copies of the Qur'an, some so different that they were burnt. b) we also know from the hadith that the Qur'an we have today is incomplete. c) we also have variant copies to this day, like it or not.

Pompous and arrogant replies do not change simple facts.

As to the errors being "deliberate", who cares? If there are variant copies and we have sources telling us that parts have been lost, then we can be quite sure the the "preservation" is a load of nonsense.

manfred wrote:Mughal did you bother watching the clips you quoted. They you would KNOW for sure that your claims about the Qur'an are nonsense.We know that a) there were variant copies of the Qur'an, some so different that they were burnt. b) we also know from the hadith that the Qur'an we have today is incomplete. c) we also have variant copies to this day, like it or not.

Pompous and arrogant replies do not change simple facts.

As to the errors being "deliberate", who cares? If there are variant copies and we have sources telling us that parts have been lost, then we can be quite sure the the "preservation" is a load of nonsense.

Dear manfred, I have watched the clips and as I see things, you are rejecting actual verifiable facts because of baseless stories calling them genuine. Nonetheless you have every right to hold onto your opinion but one day may be you will change your mind about the quran when you study it properly and understand the argument for validity and genuineness of the quran.

The incomplete copied of the quran you call different versions of the quran have been already explained in detail by me on this forum in my various posts on various threads. The so called copies of the quran which were not as complete or perfect as the copies that were complete and perfect during the lifetime of the messenger of God could be explained in different ways. You see we are human beings with survival responsibilities so we are not able to give any particular thing all of our time. Because we have only a part of a time for any particular thing so no matter how many things we start we can only complete some of them at the most.

Likewise people who take upon themselves to serve cause of God do so whenever they can. People need to sleep, earn their living, have a bit of rest and do things they need to do ie go to bathroom and cook and clean and eat etc etc. So if anyone starts writing a book or copying a book he may not be able to complete it for all sorts of reasons. Therefore we cannot call that partly written book a different version of the main book. It simply put is an incomplete piece of work. So some people who have reported about it may not have a genuine explanation for it and others may have tried to misuse the information for their own agendas. This is why those reports which go against concrete facts before our very eyes about the quran cannot be accepted as genuine so they cannot be used against the quran as we have it.

Moreover the reports themselves either contradict each other or they give us different versions of stories so accepting some because they go against the quran and rejecting others because they support quran is not the right use of the criterion in this regard. I rather accept the reports which support the quran as we have it and reject all the rest which go against it if they cannot be explained properly any other way that makes sense. The quran is a stand alone book in this regard that is why it can be used as a criterion in this case but reports on their own could be true or false and need a genuine criterion to be judged by.

regards and all the best

LOL... I am rejecting "verifiable facts"? Tell me one of them.

manfred wrote:LOL... I am rejecting "verifiable facts"? Tell me one of them.

I did dear manfred. Please read my posts again and again if you have not come across it ie the existence of the copies of the quran and the existence of huffaaz prove beyond a shadow of doubt the quran was transmitted via two completely separate channels. Had this not been the case we ought to find in the existing copies of the quran so many that kind of variations as I have pointed out which do not exist in existing copies of the quran at all. So what is your explanation for that? None at all.

regards and all the best.

Muslims could not produce a single manuscript from 7th or 8th century that matches today's Quran , let alone an Uthmanic manuscript of Quran.

And even the most widely circulated 1924 govt canonized hafs version approved after drowning all other differing Qurans into the Nile, has still got different variations in terms minor textual differences.
This could be a minor difference in most cases that does not change the meaning a lot but still goes against the repetitive Islamic lie that its has been preserved to the letter and to the dot blah blah. And that just for th Hafs reading, before considering walsh, Duri etc.

You would think any other people from ancient past would have achieved a better standardized book after all that burning and drowning whenever they thought a difference had appeared.

Mughal wrote:

manfred wrote:LOL... I am rejecting "verifiable facts"? Tell me one of them.

I did dear manfred. Please read my posts again and again if you have not come across it ie the existence of the copies of the quran and the existence of huffaaz prove beyond a shadow of doubt the quran was transmitted via two completely separate channels. Had this not been the case we ought to find in the existing copies of the quran so many that kind of variations as I have pointed out which do not exist in existing copies of the quran at all. So what is your explanation for that? None at all.

regards and all the best.

Trained monkeys who waste their time and life memorising a silly book today proves nothing at all about how the Qur'an came into existence.

As to ANYONE at all of the companions of Mohammed remembering the whole of the Qur'an is utter nonsense, as even the hadith admit.
The reason why there are no variations in the modern Qur'an is very simple. It has been repeatedly revised and edited, and as far as possible all variants burnt. The last time in 1926....

The Qur'an is at best a corrupt opus containing some of the preaching of Mohammed, with much material missing and other things added later.

And it certainly has nothing whatever to do with God. He is completely innocent of the crime to create such a vile text.

What I can agree is that the Qur'an is a collection from fragments of text, of oral traditions, (with variants suppressed), and of editor's remarks and additions.

I asked you to tell me what verifiable facts I reject, and you avoid a reply.

manfred wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 17, 2020 9:23 am

LOL... I am rejecting "verifiable facts"? Tell me one of them.

Dear manfred, you are rejecting facts due to lack of your understanding about them. People like brubakar or jay misth or david etc etc have no idea what they are talking about when they make silly assumptions about the quranic text on basis of quranic manuscripts.

In my above posts I have explained clearly why the origin of the quranic text has to be from the final messenger of God and not later people. I have proven beyond a shadow of doubt that the quran came to us from the messenger of God by way of two independent channels ie memorised recitation and written form. It is because the written copies of the quran could not be used for memorisation due to the text making no sense as to how it should be read due to being written with missing characters. You see arabic is supposed to be written using 28 letter symbols but instead the writing style used in ancient copies is only using 15 symbols. When you cannot distinguish 2 or more letters from each other then how can you write and read such a text unless you use your memory with it as to what the text is supposed to be saying?

In english if instead of 26 symbols we only used 14, will u be able to make sense of the written text? Try it out if you are in doubt. No one can make any sense of any text in any language written like that ie using half of the alphabet symbols of that language. So read what I have explained in my above posts again to see why I claimed what I claimed.

Similar will be problem for writing down a text from the memory. It is because we write words using various spelling for the same words. In arabic we can use SEEN as well as SWAAD for various words. So if people wrote the quran from their memories, each person will have written it down his own way ie some will have used one kind of spellings for the very same word and others will have used other kind of spellings for it. Also some words are written as words as well as numbers. If I asked you to write down ALIF, what will you write down? letter alif or word alif or number one because in arabic letter alif also represents number one as well? Can you see the problems when one has to write a text from his memory? It is like spelling word realise with s or realize with z. If each person copies some piece of information from his memory independent of others then each person will write the text using his own spellings so no two people will be able to have exactly the same text in this regard. But in arabic things get yet more complicated.

So if no one can copy a text from his memory exactly the same as others independently of others and no one can memorise a text from the writing independent of memory because the text cannot even be read in that case then that means the quran we have today came directly from the final messenger of God otherwise each and every text will have been very different from all others in these aspects. Likewise each person will have memorised a very different text from all others.

Now while I am at it, let me also try to explain the issue of burnt or destroyed quranic copies by uthman the 3rd caliph of islam. First of all look at the alleged uthmanic text. It is written using missing letter symbols as I have explained above. How could a text written this way which cannot even be read unite a people? Even if one says it could be read in different ways then again a text which could be read in so many different ways, how could it unite the people if it was written for that purpose to begin with? Moreover when a people divide into groups they can only unite of they have a formula for unity. If that formula for muslims was the quran then if the quran itself was disputed between muslims then how could they unite on basis of the disputed quran? I did explain all this years ago on this forum.

Yet another issue is errors in the existing copies of the quran. As I have already explained they do not matter at all because they can be detected and corrected. One may say well if God allowed these errors in the quranic copies by humans then that means the claim of the quran that God has protected it is false. Not at all because God clearly says no one can change his words ever. What God is saying is that none can deliberately or forcefully change his words. He knows people he has created are prone to making unintentional errors all the time. But he has made them able to detect and correct those errors also.

regards and all the best.