Three of many errors in the Quran

[Fernando]

So there is a very significant shift in position between the two texts, and the most recent is the most relevant.

QS. 45:20 said that the whole Quran is unity, so there's no any move on/shift to, & QS. 9:29 isnt correlated to QS. 9:30.

So everything in the Koran is correct at the same time? Still in Wonderland!

"Alice laughed: "There's no use trying," she said; "one can't believe impossible things."
"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."

And now, it seems, all at the same time too!

[frankie]

An ex Muslim's explanation on his ex faith,QS 9.29 is given a special mention in this short video, of which there are more, from the same person.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UON1DSX7Ye0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Garudaman]

Your version of 9.29 has something added, which is blasphemy according to your god, demanding death in this life and the fires of hell in the next.

QS. 9:29. Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture (who fight against muslim or any other innocent) - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.

that's not addition, since "do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth" can literally means "fight against muslim or any other innocent"!

The tafsir quoted is not MINE

not your tafsir isn't guarantee for true tafsir!

If this tafsir is contrary to the Quran, this alone proves that the Islamic God is not omnipotent, and therefore not a God, as he allows his own scholars to give contrary information to his alleged eternal guidance to mankind.

then why you still Christian? your God doesn't prevent Albigensia Crusade, either.

besides that, the scholar title shouldn't be for people who misinterpreted.

An ex Muslim's explanation on his ex faith,QS 9.29 is given a special mention in this short video, of which there are more, from the same person.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UON1DSX7Ye0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

that video doesn't abolish QS. 45:20 & QS. 4:88-92 facts.

So everything in the Koran is correct at the same time? Still in Wonderland!

the same two things that are true, are must be true at the same time, there's nothing wonderland about it!

[frankie]

Your version of 9.29 has something added, which is blasphemy according to your god, demanding death in this life and the fires of hell in the next.

QS. 9:29. Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture (who fight against muslim or any other innocent) - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.

that's not addition, since "do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth" can literally means "fight against muslim or any other innocent"!

The tafsir quoted is not MINE

not your tafsir isn't guarantee for true tafsir!

If this tafsir is contrary to the Quran, this alone proves that the Islamic God is not omnipotent, and therefore not a God, as he allows his own scholars to give contrary information to his alleged eternal guidance to mankind.

then why you still Christian? your God doesn't prevent Albigensia Crusade, either.

besides that, the scholar title shouldn't be for people who misinterpreted.

An ex Muslim's explanation on his ex faith,QS 9.29 is given a special mention in this short video, of which there are more, from the same person.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UON1DSX7Ye0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

that video doesn't abolish QS. 45:20 & QS. 4:88-92 facts.

So everything in the Koran is correct at the same time? Still in Wonderland!

the same two things that are true, are must be true at the same time, there's nothing wonderland about it!

Garudaman:

that's not addition, since "do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth" can literally means "fight against muslim or any other innocent"!

Where is the proof from Islamic sources for your claim?

[pr126]

the same two things that are true, are must be true at the same time, there's nothing wonderland about it!

It is called duality.

Duality and Political Islam

The Koran defines an Islamic logic that is dualistic. Two things which contradict each other can both be true. In a unitary, scientific logic, if two things contradict each other, then at least one of them is false. Not so in dualistic logic.

[Fernando]

We still seem to have a duality of arguments:
1) Some commands for Muslims, others for non-Muslims
contradicts
2) Some commands are obsolete, others replace them.
Although the former is being proposed by Bill Warner, it sounds more as though it's a Muslim apologist's attempt to absolve Allah of indecisiveness. (While at the same time admitting Islam's power complex.)
Should we be saying there is a quaternity? Or a tree?:

obsolete
/
VERSES
\
Still valid
/------------------\
For Muslims For Others

[piscohot]

Quran 9.30
And the Jews say: "Uzayr (Ezra) is the son of Allah,'' and the Christians say: "The Messiah is the son of Allah.'' That is their saying with their mouths, resembling the saying of those who disbelieved aforetime. May Allah fight them, how they are deluded away from the truth!)

May Allah fight them?

Who is talking here?

Allah is not sure if He is going to fight them or not?

[Fernando]

May Allah fight them?

Who is talking here?

Allah is not sure if He is going to fight them or not?

No, it's just Mo asking Allah to do it. In a moment of forgetfulness, Mo forgot that it was supposed to be Allah who wrote it, not he.

[Garudaman]

Where is the proof from Islamic sources for your claim?

QS. 45:20 & QS. 4:88-92!

[Garudaman]

Two things which contradict each other can both be true

yeah, but there's no any contradiction at all, fight criminals (QS. 4:88-92) is same with fight criminals (QS. 9:29)!

[Garudaman]

May Allah fight them?

Who is talking here?

Allah is not sure if He is going to fight them or not?

No, it's just Mo asking Allah to do it. In a moment of forgetfulness, Mo forgot that it was supposed to be Allah who wrote it, not he.

http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp? ... 9&verse=30" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=qtl#(9:30:20" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

actually, it's just the matter of translation/interpretation, originally there's no "may" at all, but just "Allah destroy them"!

[manfred]

actually, it's just the matter of translation/interpretation, originally there's no "may" at all, but just "Allah destroy them"!

Yes, it is technically what is called a "jussive", a kind of COMMAND or a PLEA in formal grammar.

It can be used in direct commands to someone, but also in things like blessings or curses for example" Oh, that God bring peace to the world" or "May this wicked man no profit from his deeds...." or similar such phrases. A simple form is "Could you stop this?" a sort of slightly more polite form of an imperative "Stop that!".

In this verse it expresses the strong wish, or even "command" or "order", that Allah should destroy them. It is a kind of a "curse".

So how to express that in English? You could do that with the word "may" or you could say "Allah destroy them", as long as you leave out the "s" ("Allah destroys them" is quite different.)

So, who does the pleading? Does Allah plea with himself?

[frankie]

Garudaman:

Ibn Kathir gives the definition of surah 9.30 which rests on the incorrect assumption that the Jews took a renowned Jewish scholar as “the son of Allah “together with the Christians who take Jesus as “the son of Allah” the penalty of which is to be fought against, to be brought into submission to Allah’s laws.

This proves that Allah cannot be the God of the Bible, as the God of the Bible does not prescribe warfare against anyone who does not believe in him.

This means Islam is based on a false assumption, i.e.a lie, because Allah claims to be the same God who gave Jesus His authority to preach, as all previous Bible prophets did, to repent from sin and to obey Yahweh’s Commandments, not Allah’s commands.

Ironically, it is an alleged prophet of Islam, Jesus the Messiah, who claimed to be the Son of God, for which He was condemned to death, as to do so was seen as blasphemy to the Jews, proving Ezra could not have been called “the son of god “ by the Jews,because anyone doing so would have lost his life.

Mark 14:61-65New International Version (NIV)
61 But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.
Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”
62 “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
63 The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked. 64 “You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?”
They all condemned him as worthy of death. 65 Then some began to spit at him; they blindfolded him, struck him with their fists, and said, “Prophesy!” And the guards took him and beat him.


The Quran is therefore wrong when it says the Jews take Ezra as a “son of Allah “they don’t, the Quran proves by its own admission it cannot come from a divine source, as an omnipotent being would not turn such a fundamental error into a religious “truth “and by doing so, not only has mis led countless millions to believe something which is not true, but has advocated and condoned violence towards Non Muslims, for the sole reason of their not accepting Allah as the only god, thereby violating the commands of the very god it claims to represent.
Ibn Kathir 9.30
Fighting the Jews and Christians is legislated because They are Idolators and Disbelievers
Allah the Exalted encourages the believers to fight the polytheists, disbelieving Jews and Christians, who uttered this terrible statement and utter lies against Allah, the Exalted. As for the Jews, they claimed that `Uzayr was the son of God, Allah is free of what they attribute to Him. As for the misguidance of Christians over `Isa, it is obvious. This is why Allah declared both groups to be liars,
http://quranx.com/Tafsir/Kathir/9.30" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Garudaman]

actually, it's just the matter of translation/interpretation, originally there's no "may" at all, but just "Allah destroy them"!

Yes, it is technically what is called a "jussive", a kind of COMMAND or a PLEA in formal grammar.

It can be used in direct commands to someone, but also in things like blessings or curses for example" Oh, that God bring peace to the world" or "May this wicked man no profit from his deeds...." or similar such phrases. A simple form is "Could you stop this?" a sort of slightly more polite form of an imperative "Stop that!".

In this verse it expresses the strong wish, or even "command" or "order", that Allah should destroy them. It is a kind of a "curse".

So how to express that in English? You could do that with the word "may" or you could say "Allah destroy them", as long as you leave out the "s" ("Allah destroys them" is quite different.)

So, who does the pleading? Does Allah plea with himself?

then its should be "Allah destroys them"? then done!

Garudaman:

Ibn Kathir gives the definition of surah 9.30 which rests on the incorrect assumption that the Jews took a renowned Jewish scholar as “the son of Allah “together with the Christians who take Jesus as “the son of Allah” the penalty of which is to be fought against, to be brought into submission to Allah’s laws.

as QS. 45:20 & QS. 4:88-92 said, Ibn Kathir is wrong!

[Hombre]

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!

The Jews consider Uzair a very pious person. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia the title of son of God is used for pious people.... Dummy

Quran 86.5-7, Now let man but think From what he is created! He is created from A drop emitted—Proceedings from between the backbone (sulb) and the ribs (tara’ib).

According to Arabic meaning, the “sulb” to refer to a part of the male body and the “tarâ’ib” to a part of the female.

Lucky I caught it. This idiot's bloody ignorance is more then normal. While he brings "Jewish Encyclopedia" as his source - I doubt if he read a single word there.

Although It does mention UZIEL. - no "Uzair" and no is written in that encyclopedia. This is just another evidence Muhammad's distortion of names places and events which he took from HB and and placed it in his Quran.

Nowhere in any Jewish manuscript the word "Son of God" is mentioned - rather "children of God" is mentioned many times, which refers more in term of religious context - not in biological terms.

[frankie]

actually, it's just the matter of translation/interpretation, originally there's no "may" at all, but just "Allah destroy them"!

Yes, it is technically what is called a "jussive", a kind of COMMAND or a PLEA in formal grammar.

It can be used in direct commands to someone, but also in things like blessings or curses for example" Oh, that God bring peace to the world" or "May this wicked man no profit from his deeds...." or similar such phrases. A simple form is "Could you stop this?" a sort of slightly more polite form of an imperative "Stop that!".

In this verse it expresses the strong wish, or even "command" or "order", that Allah should destroy them. It is a kind of a "curse".

So how to express that in English? You could do that with the word "may" or you could say "Allah destroy them", as long as you leave out the "s" ("Allah destroys them" is quite different.)

So, who does the pleading? Does Allah plea with himself?

then its should be "Allah destroys them"? then done!

Garudaman:

Ibn Kathir gives the definition of surah 9.30 which rests on the incorrect assumption that the Jews took a renowned Jewish scholar as “the son of Allah “together with the Christians who take Jesus as “the son of Allah” the penalty of which is to be fought against, to be brought into submission to Allah’s laws.

as QS. 45:20 & QS. 4:88-92 said, Ibn Kathir is wrong!

Garudaman:

If Ibn Kathir is wrong on this one verse, how many more has he got wrong?

Ibn Kathir is one of Islam's most authoritative of Muslim commentators, and you are claiming he is wrong??

Who are Muslims likely to take as Islamically factual, you, or their most respected scholars?

Even if Ibn Kathir was wrong, the Quran is still in error, Jews have never, and would never claim one of their own scholars to be "son of god "as it is blasphemous to do so,and no amount of denial can ever change it.

[piscohot]

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!

The Jews consider Uzair a very pious person. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia the title of son of God is used for pious people.... Dummy

Why would Allah object to someone being described as a 'pious', SAM?

The comparison is clear here that according to Allah, Uzair is to the Jews what Jesus is to the Christians.
Stop lying, SAM.

[Nosuperstition]

"You say "wraps" means the earth is a ball. Can you only wrap a ball?"

Allah first made the outer crest of earth in a non-spherical carpet style and then wrapped it around the spherical inner core.He knows in advance that kafirs such as yourself will try to disturb the beliefs of devout muslims with questions such as these.A devout muslim will be able to understand this fact.

OK, "between the backbone and the ribs" clearly describes only one possible place, I think, the chest cavity

.

Now one becomes sexually active due to flow of testosterone and other harmones that are initiated by the brain and when they activate your sexual organs.Now these harmones pass through the chest while flowing through the blood.That means the cause of your birth also follows from that chest cavity.Therefore believing muslims will not be swayed even by this supposed error in the quran.

[manfred]

Now these harmones pass through the chest while flowing through the blood

Babies come from "hormones"? And I sometimes pass through a bus, going on at the front, staying a while, and then leaving at the middle. I know I am over eighty and male, but all this passing, could I get pregnant?

[Nosuperstition]

Now these harmones pass through the chest while flowing through the blood

Babies come from "hormones"? And I sometimes pass through a bus, going on at the front, staying a while, and then leaving at the middle. I know I am over eighty and male, but all this passing, could I get pregnant?

Old maan,it is a translation error,might be in the Quran it says the source of the semen or the activation for the semen passes through the ribs and the backbone.Allah has not made available an exact copy of the Quran in Arabic available to you.Go figure out.