Apostates in Islam: to kill or not to kill?

[Cyrene]

i totally agree with what you said, i have nothing to reply to

Oh come on, the Eastern Roman Empire conquered almost all the territories of the Western Roman Empire and lasted almost an extra 1000 years.

just a clarification here, i wasn't talking about the Eastern Roman conquest of Western Roman Territories, but about the Muslim Invasions, in just 8 years, Syria, Jordan, Israel/Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt and North Africa was out of their control, except for a few towns in Tunisia and Northern Algeria, which eventually would fall along with the Mediterranean Islands. to whom? not to the Sassinid Empire or any other strong nation, but to Barefoot Arabs Rushing out of the Desert.

an Eastern Roman Empire wouldn't let that happen.

[ShockBlast]

i totally agree with what you said, i have nothing to reply to



just a clarification here, i wasn't talking about the Eastern Roman conquest of Western Roman Territories, but about the Muslim Invasions, in just 8 years, Syria, Jordan, Israel/Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt and North Africa was out of their control, except for a few towns in Tunisia and Northern Algeria, which eventually would fall along with the Mediterranean Islands. to whom? not to the Sassinid Empire or any other strong nation, but to Barefoot Arabs Rushing out of the Desert.

an Eastern Roman Empire wouldn't let that happen.

Barefoot Arabs? Come on, it was much more then that.The Eastern Roman Empire was a formidable force.The fact that the Muslim invasions achieved so much it to the credit of the Muslims themselves, not to the discredit of the ERE.

The fact that the North German Federation and later Nazi Germany stomped France doesn`t mean the French aren`t good fighters, it just goes to show that the Germans were much better prepared.

It might have originated in the Arab desert but the forces angrenated in the conflict weren`t just some simple Berber or Arab tribesmen.

[clone]

for me apostates in abrahamic religions shoulnt not be punished. why its doesnt matter what you do but why.
its another thing for me someone who doesnt believe in christianity because he doesnt believe that god exist and another thing someone who believes that god exist but choses not to believe

[Hobbes]

someone who believes that god exist but choses not to believe

Do people like that exist?

[Cyrene]

maybe

[clone]

Do people like that exist?

people for example who truly believe phrases like this "better rule in hell that serve in heaver"
no only they wouldnt belive in god even if he came in front of them but the fact that they belive in this phrase showes their bad character

[Shaxx]

1-call it whatever you want, that won't change the fact that they were written 30 years after his Death, not much as some suggest.

Right, because if anything makes text more accurate, it is recalling the event it describes three decades after it happened before writing it down. This is a giant gap for human error. There is a reason people write things down, it is so they do not forget things.

Source on the frailty of human memory.

Second source.

2-no mate, the Qur'an in Arabic doesn't contain these blanks, to translate it to English, it was LITERALLY translated then added the Words that makes the English one have the same meaning as the original one.

an example is that verse you tried to make fun of, in Arabic it means there is Severe Torment for unbelievers and good pleasure for the Believers, Arabic tries to shorten sentences, so it removes Unnecessary words. that's a fact get over it.

They do not seem unnecessary, at least when translated. The translations are often wrong or could be interpreted in different ways on the interpreter's side and the reader's. Now considering that only 290 million people can speak Arabic and only half of those can even read it and there are 1.6+ billion Muslims in the world, this seems to be a major issue. If there is a god-creature and it is the one in Islam, it seems to have seriously mismanaged it's holy text. Which is an unlikely mistake for such a thing, do you know who would do this? Humans would.

Source (for the amount of people who can actually speak Arabic).

Furthermore, how many Muslims are even literate? On average 6 out of 10 Muslims cannot read a language of any kind.

Source.

Someone interprets a verse and others just blindly follow and do what they are told by a person, not a god. Organized religion is engineerable without a god-creature.

This is it's nature because it is our nature.

3- The Qur'an is complete, God and his prophet never ordered us to write what the prophet said, the Hadiths are only for Details.

How is a book complete without it's details?

Qur'an 6:38
"Nothing have we omitted from the Book"

Qur'an 41:3
"A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail;- a Qur'an in Arabic, for people who understand;"

The Qur'an disagrees with you.

that's what you wish, these Hadiths were considered weak before al-qaeda existed.

That is my point. Everything in the Qur'an and the Hadith is considered true, yes? Things are either true or they are not. This is not your interpretation but it is theirs.

This is religion, you see what you want to see, they see what they want to see. Both are rooted in superstition.

what? do you think they have another Qur'an? if they intrepret it in an illogical way that's their problem.

It is everyone's problem. The source: Organized Religion.

what you probably meant here was that you need to go to the Toilet, that's what i think you mean by saying "Their version of your religion does not". can you deny that? we have two interpretations for this what makes you so sure yours is right?

The difference is yours has no basis in reality. You have done this before:

Shakir: "And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample." Qur'an 51:47
Pickthal: "We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof)." Qur'an 51:47
Yusuf Ali: "With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of space." Qur'an 51:47
Cyrene: "And the Heaven, We constructed with power and skill and verily We are expanding it." Qur'an 51:47

These are different translations to English of the same verse and you either just saw what you wanted to see or you deliberately manipulated the translation to fit your purpose.

there were Companions who memorized the Whole Qur'an, would they accept for it to be Altered,

If it suited their interests, it is not inconceivable considering what mankind is capable of. Also see the above sources about memory and the implausibility of accuracy in retelling an event after 30 years.

Not to mention the lack of controversy on the contradictions in the Qur'an and Hadith (likely due to illiteracy as explained further up and down in the post), but many people tend to just do what they are told and not question, to turn their brain-off and be sheep:

Qur'an 39:53
"Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

Qur'an 4:116
"Allah forgiveth not (The sin of) joining other gods with Him; but He forgiveth whom He pleaseth other sins than this: one who joins other gods with Allah, Hath strayed far, far away (from the right)"

Qur'an 18:26
"Say: "Allah knows best how long they stayed: with Him is (the knowledge of) the secrets of the heavens and the earth: how clearly He sees, how finely He hears (everything)! They have no protector other than Him; nor does He share His Command with any person whatsoever."

Qur'an 26:108
"So fear Allah, and obey me."

Your religion is a not a diamond in the ruff, it is just as corrupt as all the others who claim righteous perfection and demand people kneel before them or else. Never mind the man behind the curtain.

The Noble Quran was revealed in one language and that is Arabic. It has only one original Arabic copy. Arabic 1400 years ago had 7 dialects. There exists today one original copy of the Noble in Saudi Arabia today. A copy of this original copy also exists in Turkey today as well.

And how can you even be sure you understand the meanings of the words that long ago? A word with a certain meaning now can have another then as languages morph considerably over time.

Source.

Not to mention of course recent study done on the language in certain parts of the Qur'an that appear to have roots in the Syriac language. The author has to hide his identity under a pen name out of fear for his life, because that is how religion hides its weakness, by killing those who point it out.

Source.

The point being that there is doubt and falsities and misunderstandings as detailed earlier in the post. This is not the way to divinity, only to humanity.

When the Noble Quran was revealed to Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, it was revealed in Arabic, and in the Quraishi dialect. The Quraishi dialect is the most proper Arabic dialect that properly uses the Arabic words without altering their sound.

Back then, altering their sound back then.

So, it is beyond the shadow of the doubt that the numbering and the order of the Noble Chapters and Verses was already determined by our Prophet peace be upon him through the inspiration and guidance of Allah Almighty, and not by anyone else.

Through the veil of time there is always a shadow of doubt.

You speak of the preservation of the holy book and yet for most people to hear it, it has to be translated, and here as has been proven, there is room for error. Not to mention half of Arabic speakers are themselves illiterate and cannot read this Qu'ran.

Source.

Though it would seem the book was never meant to be understood by anyone who could not speak Arabic:

Qur'an 41:3
"A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail;- a Qur'an in Arabic, for people who understand;"

Historically, almost every Muslim scholar had the entire Noble Quran memorized by heart. If you live among Muslims or know well how the Muslims deal with the Noble Quran, then you would know that tampering with the Noble Quran is impossible among the Muslims.

Why, were they more literate back then? Not likely, it is more likely there was an even greater gap than there is now (which is wide). They could conceivably not have even been aware or possessed the abilities to become aware on a large scale. You cannot know for certain.

wasn't talking about Nazis, but about Taliban.

Then why did you quote me talking about Nazis that you brought up? Losing track of the quote pyramid, methinks.

your source refuted you.

From said source:

"But are a few drinks on the weekend, or even the occasional long drinking session, enough to kill brain cells? What about binge drinking or the frequent, sustained drinking of alcoholics? Not so much. Even in alcoholics, alcohol use doesn't actually result in the death of brain cells."

More science denial, surprising.

moreover, killing brain cells isn't Alcohol's only problem, check this

Other problems were also detailed in my source, but we were talking about the death of brain cells, the primary issue that you brought up that I subsequently debunked.

you can't have alcohol and logic at the same time, quit one of them.

You can say the same thing about religion, both distort reality after all, but we would be overly generalizing people.

how is that related to my Question, again, did that religion (not religious figure) tell him to do so?

Sura 9:5
"Kill those who join other gods with Allah wherever you find them; besiege them, seize them, lay in wait for them with every kind of ambush"

Sura 47:4
"When you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads, until ye have made a great slaughter among them"

Sura 9:29
"Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in Allah, or in the Last Day, and who forbid not what Allah and His Apostle have forbidden ... until they pay tribute"

The term 'weak hadith' means nothing to someone who wants this to be the way. So he makes it the way and tells others who have no means of knowing themselves, that it is.

as if there aren't any Crimes now as people figure out murder is bad.

There is always going to be bad people, on a state level you do not need organized religion to know murder should be against the law.

you didn't, and that's what the media calls, if i call apes Agnostic militants does that they really are?

Just because you do not identify with Islamic militants does not make them something else. Here again you deny reality.

can you show me one example?

The word 'dahia' in Arabic is used to describe an ostrich egg by Zakir and yet it is also rooted in the word 'flat' and is synonymous with another word that means "a location that gets flattened".

Not to mention when they are translated they can and are translated into different words in languages like English and can, even you as an example, be given different meaning.

Or we can just use your example of an Arabic word that can refer to two things:

in arabic the word "Samaa" is used for both Space and the Normal sky we see.

Unless of-course your religion tells you these things are one and the same and you actually believe it.

The bigger question is, why to know the truth, as you would have it, does anyone need all this knowledge of biology, cosmology, geology and linguistics to know the truth of the Quran? If it were divine, it would be easy as you said, self-evident with little effort, but it is not, because this is the way of mortals, not gods, whose part in this if ever present is concealed and unknowable. Yet these things lined above do not prove truth in the Qur'an, but many false statements and inaccuracies as I have outlined previously.

With any religion it works best in areas where there is poverty and poor education.

Source on poverty to religion ratios.

Source on intelligence quotient to religious ratios.

are you saying that these western scientists fabricated this sound?

As I said, it was synthesized.

Source on the Vacuum of Space and how it effects sound.

not very clever of you, nowhere in that verse the sun is mentioned, i said the Qur'an, not this verse, God takes an oath, "by the Sun" in other places in the Qur'an, what i was trying to say is that the Topic of that verse where it says " by the knocker" isn't about that Pulsar itself, God was taking an Oath. you do understand, but that is what Non-theists do.

I understand completely, I was asking why you called it a sun, as sun and pulsar are not interchangeable. The word 'sun' is a layman's term for that bright thing we see in the sky before we understood what it was, which we know today is a star that we orbit. And yet the old name is still popular to refer to our solar system's star by most people and typically no other star scientifically. So you can see the confusion when you changed your translation of the verse.

that's not related to what i said at all, and no your wrong again, God doesn't live in the Sky, but in the Heavens. a place Humans didn't reach to.

And yet by your account scientists refer to the sky as heaven:

in the 21st Century, the term "Sky" isn't scientific, modern day scientists use "Heaven".

All of which is moot due to references to 'ore from the sky' that predate the Qur'an in the polytheistic Egyptian culture as ba-en-pet. Which reinforces that the Qur'an is just a set of already existing notions and folk tales that were re-purposed for political reasons and personal gain.

i took this right off from USGS , the most popular Geology Website in the World. it shows the Seven layers of Earth.

your links are broken btw. I don't take them as sources.

The first was broken, it looks like they updated their lecture list for a new week and removed the page describing the material for the prior week. The second link works for me however from work and home computers. It should either open another tab in a pdf viewer or download the pdf to your computer depending on your browser/browser settings.

You are not counting the mantle and lithosphere layers in that image which are listed with words and brackets, which brings the total to 9 on a geological component layering by depth of the Earth (which is what the left side of the image is describing) as I listed in my prior post. You will note that the mantle layer covers two partitions, which are unnamed here, these are the mesospheric lower and upper mantle sub-layers, just as the lithosphere has the subordinate crust and uppermost mantle sub-layers which are listed in parenthesis.

You yourself list the lithosphere layer along with a crust layer in your original listing prior to that image, so to not accept the mantle layer in this particular layer classification is folly. This is in a geological component layering of the Earth, where it is more typically described mechanically (rheologically) and chemically with five distinct layers or the primary three.

Here is a USGS source confirming this. Which is likely where you get that image in the first place, which is likely why you posted the image out of it's context.

Quoting from that source "Together they form a rigid layer of rock called the lithosphere (from lithos, Greek for stone)." The same is to be done for the mantle layer itself. The core is typically exempt because of the striking differences of it's two layers, even if were not, that total is 10, which is not your desperately needed 7.

Your book got it wrong.

You mean the one you supposedly could not read?

Nice ninja edit, you removed this.

Her tomb is there in the island of Cyprus, that's how you know she actually made that claim.

She could have easily self-fulfilled that prophecy. It states in the verse she wishes to be there so she made sure of it when something similar came up.

Source on self-fulfilled prophecy.

What?

You do not recognize the verse of your religion?

well done, very scientific of you. "Someone" may discovered it. really?

too bad for you, that's in the Qur'an, you can't deny that, your claim is not valid until you source it.

Bees were studied and their jobs and duties were likely known:

"Others, again, assert that these insects copulate, and that the drones are male and the bees female."

Aristotle, History of Animals, Book 5, 350 B.C

"For the food that insects go in quest of is of diverse kinds, and they do not all delight in the same flavours: for instance, the bee never settles on a withered or wilted flower, but on fresh and sweet ones"

"In the bee the fact of its being asleep is very obvious; for at night-time bees are at rest and cease to hum."

Aristotle, History of Animals, Book 4, 350 B.C.

What god gave Aristotle this knowledge? Observation and study, to definitely say that the source of your verse is divine is folly.

This is not even considering the Arabic feminine vs masculine headings for things in that verse, as you put it, is the bee actually female, or does it just "feel" feminine and you are just wishfully thinking? I find that to be far more likely as you are someone who has to believe and are twisting an Arabic translation to suit your needs, as you have been proven to do.

Even if that is not the case, can you prove that the masculine form of that word even existed back then for there to be a distinction?

how does the creation of Mountains refute that they are Stabilizers for the Earth?

Because they are created by the instability under the Earth and are a product of it, not a deterrent.

You are confusing cause with effect. Mountains are caused by tectonic plate collision and do not effect plate stabilization. Plate motions are almost completely halted not by collisional-type mountain formation (effect) but by the opposing plates themselves. Your argument is akin to saying that in an aircraft collision, the crushed cockpit stabilizes the plane during the crash. In reality, the crushed cockpit (the mountain) is the effect of the crash (the tectonic plate collision). It does not stabilize the plane during the collision.

Source on cause and effect.

in arabic the word "Samaa" is used for both Space and the Normal sky we see. do i really need to source this? go check it in the link i posted earlier

And yet you said it was "Samawat", not "Samaa", so which is it plural or singular? Again it just seems as though you are twisting the words to mean what you want.

You also ignored the alternate translation of that verse by Yusuf Ali that I provided which contradicts you.

your very confused because you don't know how a man living with Bedouins knows that.

He knew little of what he was talking about:

Surat Al-'Araf 7:54 Shakir
"(He created) the sun, the moon, and the stars" He did not even know they were the same thing.

oops, now your getting very silly here,

As opposed to being made in such a way that it would fit just as easily into a Dr. Seuss book.

last thing you wanna do is call Islam a non-Monotheist Religion.

And I wonder why it is the 'last thing' I would want to do.

Earth did exist but it was smoke.

Qur'an 41:10
"He placed therein firm hills rising above it, and blessed it and measured therein its sustenance in four Days, alike for (all) who ask;"

Qur'an 41:11
"Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it had been as smoke: He said to it and to the earth: "Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly." They said: "We do come, in willing obedience."

Sorry, sir, you are incorrect. You knew, as well, you had to know the verse immediately before described the hills on the Earth, but you chose deception or willing ignorance, as is the nature of religion itself, to fit your purpose, as religion is prone to such corruption.

I will also elaborate that there is no similarity between the early universe and smoke as there was no burning of material, let alone any kind of organic compounds at all in the early universe. Organic molecules would not exist for billions of years. Even carbon did not exist at this point and it would not exist for millions of years until it was first fused in the center of giant stars.

I too will point out that the early universe was extremely dense and smoke is not dense at all, in fact smoke is completely vaporous. Smoke can be hot, but often is not. Hot gas close to a burning material can make smoke hot, but the carbon particles that linger in the air can be fairly cool.

God guides whom he wills.

So just the ones Allah likes get the opportunity for paradise?

Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi 66:1
Hafsah said: 'How could she be forbidden for you when she is your slave girl?'

Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi
'When Hafsah found him with her (in an intimate moment), she said: 'Why did you bring her in my house? You did this to me, to the exception of all your wives, only because I am too insignificant to you' ... 'He said to her: 'Do not mention this to A'ishah; she (i.e., Mariyah) is forbidden for me if I ever touch her'. ... 'He swore to her that he will not touch her and then said: 'Do not mention this incident to anyone'.

Surah 66:1,2
"O Prophet! Why bannest thou that which Allah hath made lawful for thee, seeking to please thy wives? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."

It must be nice to have a deity to excuse whatever action you do. As I said, organized religion is rooted in power and control, deities are often just tools for the sins of mankind right from the start.

lol and here you recognize that it was a miracle and deny the Qur'an at the same time, you suffer from Schizophrenia.

I said it mentions it and by it I mean that yet there are bodies of water which are not connected and have barriers between them. However after I re-read that verse... by barrier and sweet water, that is not talking about salt and fresh water as having a barrier is it? I thought it was colorfully describing land barriers blocking a large body of water. That is comical, I am afraid, which is why it never dawned on me to think of it that way, but I guess it is. Which I suppose should not surprise me.

I could explain the principles of an estuary to you but that would be pointless as once again Aristotle already brought this notion forth before the Qur'an existed:

“The drinkable, sweet water, then, is light and is all of it drawn up: the salt water is heavy and remains behind.” ~ Aristotle (382 BC to 322 BC)

Which again just makes my case that the Qur'an just borrowed from older notions, which the Qur'an itself feared people would recognize:

Qur'an 6:25
"...if they saw every one of the signs, not they will believe in them; in so much that when they come to thee, they (but) dispute with thee; the Unbelievers say: "These are nothing but tales of the ancients."

They were worried people would bring this issue up and tried to get ahead of it, as any good liar does. See through the veil that is placed over you.

as i said, God guides whom he wills, and leaves the others to believe in incomplete theories. how miserable..

So you agree, it is very fickle for what it wants in return. How apostate of you.

What is Islam to speak of incomplete theories, it does not even say how long humanity has been around save for vagaries yet boasts of being very detailed.

Qur'an 41:3
"A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail;- a Qur'an in Arabic, for people who understand;"

Qur'an 6:38
"Nothing have we omitted from the Book"

Qur'an 16:89
"We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything"

Why do you need the Hadith again? Inconsistencies, the first sign someone is lying to you. Wake up.

that's because you don't know, not knowing things isn't something you should be afraid of.

you've wasted all your time defending Incomplete theories anyway..

Compared to yours that are just fabrications. I will take a little truth over a lot of lies.

Source

sorry for the Embarrassment.

The embarrassment? Hah, good one, this is why I love you, man. None of this contradicts my source or what I said. I found this page, too, and considered adding it as a second source but I figured one was enough and it was by someone who had not gotten their PhD yet so I docked it (thinking you would cite that they had not gotten their PhD yet and so would criticize their validity).

Did you read the part about it needing to be chemically synthesized to be of any use? Which I stated originally (go look at my post) and where your verse says it is readily available just by dunking. And nowhere does it speak of using their wings, rather the skin of the fly (as I also stated originally). And drowning the flies in ethanol was not described in your verse, which boasts as being very descriptive and that it omits nothing... yet it did.

You also highlighted larvae having antimicrobial defense, except larvae do not have wings. Not sure what you were trying to accomplish there.

So thanks for posting my second source and saying it was valid enough for you. You got my back, brother.

yep, and proud of it, told by my religion and confirmed by science, couldn't be more good than this.

So science confirms they carry poison and not bacteria? That it is only in one wing and the other has the antidote? And that all you have to do is dunk them to make the antidote work?

See above quote.

one question, who prophecised all of this? and now we see them come true. answer this simple question.

Supposedly your prophet Muhammad, who also testified that:

Qur'an 42:51
"It is not fitting for a man that Allah should speak to him except by inspiration, or from behind a veil,"

Qur'an 4:164
"Of some messengers We have already told thee the story; of others We have not;- and to Moses Allah spoke direct"

Also:

Qur'an 4:48
"Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin Most heinous indeed."

Qur'an 4:153
"The people of the Book ask thee to cause a book to descend to them from heaven: Indeed they asked Moses for an even greater (miracle), for they said: "Show us Allah in public," but they were dazed for their presumption, with thunder and lightning. Yet they worshipped the calf even after clear signs had come to them; even so we forgave them; and gave Moses manifest proofs of authority"

Contradictions and falsities, this is your prophecy.

i challenge you to post all these, do that and i promise i would make you regret the day you posted them

Why would I regret it? And posting all of them I would old and grey by the end, but I have posted a few examples throughout this post for you to mull over.

nope, what you assumed is completely Wrong, here's a lesson for you and the Anti-Islamic websites you take these from:

"And We have certainly beautified the nearest heaven with stars and have made from them what is thrown at the devils and have prepared for them the punishment of the Blaze" [Sahih International]

them here is referring to the Nearest heaven, not the stars.

here's the transliteration of the Verse in Arabic:

in Arabic if the referring word ha "Ha" at the end of it, it means "Ha" is referring to the First thing to be mentioned, which is at this case, the Heaven, if it does not, then it refers to the latter one, "Wajaaalnaha" has "Ha' so it refers to the Heaven, if the verse was refferring to the Stars it would be "Walaqad zayyanna assamaa addunya bimasabeehin wajaAAalna rujooman lishshayateeni waaAAtadna lahumAAathaba assaAAeer

so no, what you copy-pasted from anti-islamic websites is now proven to be a lie.

This really changes nothing other than it says the destruction of these things comes from the stars rather than that it is the stars themselves. It does not explain how these stars are in the 'lowest/nearest heaven', which would conceivably make them all very close to the Earth, far closer than they are in reality.

As for anti-Islamic websites, you need to rid yourself of this defeatist 'us versus them' mentality when someone just brings out a little rational thinking and applies it to one of your verses.

I do conduct research but it is mostly in ex-Muslim forums, I read their stories and the reasons why they left, and also websites that defend the Qur'an on these same issues for a balanced perspective.

The common theme was usually "I just thought about it too much and the more I thought the harder it was to believe." Which supports my assertion that intelligent quotient is a large player in who has faith and who does not (the thinkers tend to leave).

from the Heaven Meteors shoot the Evil ones (Devils) as perfectly said in the Qur'an.

and i find it very funny that you miraculously accepted that the word "Heaven" is also used for "sky", why did you accept it now? because you want your argument to succeed, in other words, you Lied for the sake of your argument, is that how you debate?

That is a tactic more favored by you, it seems. As I said on page four, typically the literal translation for heaven is 'sky'. I said most scientists do not use the term because it has religious connotations and can be misleading. All too often deities were said to live there, and in the last few centuries many religions have scrambled to describe it not as the sky, which it was what it originally meant, but as a different plane of existence to cover the fabrications of their religion. This is due to us now having explored the atmosphere and some of the space outside it.

i don't care how the bible thinks about women.

I will state that I am not necessarily making a claim against Islam specifically but more toward organized religion itself, Islam will naturally come up as that is your particular set of beliefs but I will generally attempt to be unilateral.

The Qur'an on women:

that's for inheritance, not how you treat women.

That is your defense? That who cares they are not equal when splitting up assets that determines what their quality of life will be compared to their male siblings after their parents die?

That is cold, brother, and only proves my point. You are right in that it is probably the least of the evils toward women in your religion.

may i ask you when and why this vere was revealed?

I imagine when the prophet wanted to have sex with his wife anytime and anyway that he wanted so he made it a law by saying god said so.

The usual cult-leader stuff.

Husbands are the Heads of their Family, don't tell me that's not the case in the USA.

Many women are the primary household bread-winners in the United States and other free places. It is often no longer a simple matter of gender, it is a matter of personality, partnership and career. Witch each passing decade we break down the old ways steeped in religious non-sense.

In-fact Hillary Clinton is a strong contender in our next presidential election if she chooses to run (which she most likely will).

go back and read my first post.

Turn on a television set, that is at least, if you have free press.

"He made the earth egg-shaped" [Qur'an]

Again you twist a translation to fit your portent from a 1974 change by Mustafa Mahmud in his book "The Qur'an: An attempt for a modern understanding". Adjusting the fabrication to keep the story alive, this is the nature of organized religion.

Even with the new translation the Earth's shape is far closer to that of a ball than an egg, it is not a perfect circle but it is circular, not oval, as is plain to see:


Look folks, an egg, courtesy of NASA.

As detailed here, the Earth is an oblate spheroid (which has no resemblance to an egg).

Why did you stop here may i ask? to support your argument maybe? oh no, you lied again!

the verse continues: “That ye may go about therein, in spacious roads.”

The surface of the earth i.e. earth’s crust is less than 30 miles in thickness and is very thin as compared to the radius of the earth which is about 3750 miles. The deeper layers of the earth are very hot, fluid and hostile to any form of life. The earth’s crust is a solidified shell on which we can live. The Qur’an rightly refers to it like a carpet spread out, so that we can travel along its roads and paths.

And that contradicts it how? It does not, it simply goes on about speaking of the length of the Earth with using roads as a descriptor, which in no way is indicative of a sphere shaped anything.

Some people seem to think that carpet can only be put on an absolute flat surface.

It is about speaking plainly, as the Qur'an claims to speak clearly, you would not think to spread a carpet out over a ball.

Qur'an 16:89
"We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything"

It is possible to spread a carpet on a large sphere such as the earth. It can easily be demonstrated by taking a huge model of the earth’s globe covering it with a carpet. Carpet is generally put on a surface, which is not very comfortable to walk on. The Quran describes the earth crust as a carpet, without which human beings would not be able to survive because of the hot, fluid and hostile environment beneath it. The Qur’an is thus not only logical, it is mentioning a scientific fact that was discovered by geologists centuries later.

Nice interpretation of an old story.

"And He it is Who created the night and the day, the sun and the moon. They float, each in a falak (The Noble Quran, 21:33).

Hah. This is the same verse you used to claim describes the orbits of these things, not there shapes. Again, you twist the word of the Qur'an to mean whatever you want. This is religion.

That the Muslim scholars are in agreement

Who are these scholars but men? Who are they to say what the Qur'an means? Is the Qur'an not plain to see? Why must it be explained, a consensus to be agreed on?

Because it is just a story to be interpreted whichever way man wishes.

Qur'an 16:89
"We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything"

and here you expose yourself as an Ignorant, Sikhism was Founded over a Thousand years after Islam.

And you claim Islam as the source of all monotheism. Monotheistic birth so to speak is not dead after Islam no matter how much you want to believe. Religions formed today have as much validity as Islam, Christianity or any other religion. I fear Allah as much as I fear Xenu of Scientology.

nah, you didn't, taking Sikhism as an example for "Old Monotheist Religions" doesn't show that.

Right, because fun is directly related to old monotheistic religions. Silly goose.

see how "arabs" are "difficult" erik?

That seems a bit like prejudice. This is how all religious debates look with stubborn people involved, the issue is religion not ethnicity.

[Monoloco]

yet, Western Europeans are the ones who went on the Crusades and attacked the Holy land, not Byzantines, Israelis Lived in Israel long before the Roman Republic was formed, Why did the Romans take it then?



and that's what i want you to say, this claim is as valid as the Crusades, so why not? we can go and live there for 100 years to be driven out of it later, just like the crusaders did

and to make things clear, the Muslims Lived for 800 years in Iberia. they have a strong claim on it, but war isn't the answer, Muslims shouldn't do that. Spain is a tolerant nation now, anyone can live there.

Word of warning. The Jesuits are markedly gaining in popularity again in Latin America and have even directly influenced many of the newer parties after the fall of the fascist juntas and the reestablishment of democracy across the continent. Although there is little love for the fatherland (Spain) there is literally hundreds of millions of fanatic Catholics with no direction looking for something to follow. If Islam ever attempts to break off parts of Spain it would take little effort to plaster it an attack on the Holy Church and you would have the Christian version of ISIS forming in Iberia.

Spain is currently more preoccupied with its financial situation to take notice of repeated calls of crazy Imams and sheikhs for the Invasion and re establishment of Al Andalus that is declared every few weeks. However every time a Muslim bombs a train or kills a journalist they are only aiding the fanatics on our side to convert more to their cause. Just as in 1919, no one could envision the Nazi regime, it is only a hop skip and a suicide bomb away from fanatical Catholic Europe rising again.

[Shaxx]

just a clarification here, i wasn't talking about the Eastern Roman conquest of Western Roman Territories, but about the Muslim Invasions, in just 8 years, Syria, Jordan, Israel/Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt and North Africa was out of their control, except for a few towns in Tunisia and Northern Algeria, which eventually would fall along with the Mediterranean Islands. to whom? not to the Sassinid Empire or any other strong nation, but to Barefoot Arabs Rushing out of the Desert.

an Eastern Roman Empire wouldn't let that happen.

If you put your god up as the reason for these victories, where is it now?

Muslim countries are hardly the wealthiest or most peaceful countries in the world on average where the general populace is considered. Nations with large Christian denominations or those that are non-religious on average have a far better quality of life with typically higher GDP per capita, vastly lower illiteracy percentages and are often more democratic with the people having a greater say in their own governance. Not to mention greater security with fewer uncontrollable tribal feuds and fewer religious sects clashing in the streets.

Granted Christianity has had rough patches, but why does Islam suffer the same patch? Since is it not the truest religion? Why do these Kafir span more of the world and have more believers in their corrupt monotheism when they have half the commitment of Islam? Why do countries who have no gods also outpace Islam in these social and economic areas too? Is your god-creature too weak to affect this like it once did against the Eastern Roman Empire? It sought by your admission to change the fate of Islam, and yet now look at the comparison for mastery of the world to whose faith is truest. It seems unfair, why would it let this be done?

The answer is simple, things are what they are by the hands of mortals, not divinity.

Source on GDP per capita for Muslim countries compared to Catholic, Christian and Non-Religious country groups.
Source on the Human Development Index for Muslim countries compared to the rest of the world.
Source on terrorism by country.
Source on tourism of Muslim countries compared to Catholic, Christian and Non-Religious country groups.
Source on illiteracy rate of Muslims.

Qur'an 2:114
"Allah will make disbelievers' lives miserable in this world and torture them forever after they die."

Under this verse with my citations, who are the true disbelievers?

[Mangalore]

...


i took this right off from USGS , the most popular Geology Website in the World. it shows the Seven layers of Earth.
...

Here a small reality check on such issues: The reason there are seven layers is because scientists made them up. Why? Because humans like to categorize stuff. It prevents our brains from hurting. Why seven? We like seven.

Case in point the muddled four layers close to the surface with no actual differing properties other than whatever scientists decided are the threshold values to call this or that layer another layer. It's all mostly rock in different energy states. In the same graphoc you also see the two layers of the Earth and the the three levels of the Earth, you could also argue for four layers of the Earth and if you are sneaky you easily define five or six layers of the Earth. So you are arguing a human concept with no actual value other than to make it easy for humans to talk about it to be invented by God. Congrats. You demoted your own deity.

Muslims abuse the Quoran a lot to prove its "worthiness" ignoring that by doing that they demote their own God to flawed human ideas because that's what you tag them to.

[Shaxx]

I just would like to add, beside memorizing just for the sake of memorizing the verses were recited during every prayers daily. It's not something that's done once a week or once a year since the very beginning, not just after the days of Muhammad so it's not strange and not just a matter of belief to believe that Qur'an as we have now is the same as it was 1400 years ago.

there were Companions who memorized the Whole Qur'an, would they accept for it to be Altered,

Sahih Bukhari 6:61:509
"...Then Abu Bakr said (to me). 'You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it in one book)." By Allah If they had ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an..."

Sahih Bukhari 6:61:509
"...I started looking for the Qur'an and collecting it from (what was written on) palm-leaf stalks, thin white stones..."

Why would he need to search for it if he already had it memorized?

Sahih Bukhari 6:61:558
"Allah's Apostle heard a man reciting the Qur'an at night, and said, "May Allah bestow His Mercy on him, as he has reminded me of such-and-such Verses of such-and-such Suras, which I was caused to forget."

Qur'an 2:106
"Whatever communications We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it..."

This illustrates how the Prophet had forgotten a number of verses and had to be reminded of them and the second is subsequently a revelation from god that explained why he forgot (how convenient for him). Yet he praised someone for reminding him of the same stories despite the revelation saying better ones were to replace it.

Sahih Bukhari 6:61:510
...Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before..."

Sahih Bukhari 6:61:510
"...'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt..."

Verses were chosen by mortals from what they had gathered (Sahih Bukhari 6:61:509) against ones others had gathered in similar attempts ultimately from the same source and destroyed them to prevent people seeing the corruption in their stories.

[sumskilz]

And yet you said it was the word "Samawat", not "Samaa"

That's plural then singular, but I'm interested in which is used as well. The cognates I know šāmayim (Hebrew/Aramaic), šamā (Assyrian/Babylonian) are always used in plural to mean both sky and heaven, heaven being thought to be just on the other side of the firmament (and where the stars are).

[Shaxx]

That's plural then singular, but I'm interested in which is used as well. The cognates I know šāmayim (Hebrew/Aramaic), šamā (Assyrian/Babylonian) are always used in plural to mean both sky and heaven, heaven being thought to be just on the other side of the firmament (and where the stars are).

Ahh, I was curious, I edited the post to fit, thanks for the clarification.

I would say not being able to read Arabic hinders me in this debate but most Muslims cannot speak Arabic and only half those that can speak it can also read it, so they would also not have been able to know the difference between the two.

This is a useful tool, really, religions frequently found it easier to control the populace by limiting access to holy texts in one way or another. Even in Catholicism, it suppressed the circulation of the Orthodox version of the Bible in western Europe for a long time. Christendom as a whole limited the Bible at certain times in certain places so that only clergy could read or possess it to quell dissent.

This is also found in cults such as Scientology where you have to be trusted before gaining access to the higher supposed truths of the religion. The idea is usually to hide corruption, contradictions or just outright silliness from the main flock so they stay loyal to the powers that be.

[Cyrene]

Right, because if anything makes text more accurate, it is recalling the event it describes three decades after it happened before writing it down. This is a giant gap for human error. There is a reason people write things down, it is so they do not forget things.

Source on the frailty of human memory.

Second source.

what proves that they didn't change is that they came true, as the hadiths tell us.

if they were altered they wouldn't have came true.

They do not seem unnecessary, at least when translated. The translations are often wrong or could be interpreted in different ways on the interpreter's side and the reader's.

that is in English, only in English, in Arabic that sentence is very clear, hence in the English translation you find the Brackets.

Now considering that only 290 million Muslims can even speak Arabic out of 1.6+ billion, this seems to be a major issue. If there is a god-creature and it is the one in Islam, it seems to have seriously mismanaged it's holy text. Which is an unlikely mistake for such a thing, do you know who would do this? Humans would.

again, that's why you find the brackets in English, Farsi, Sanskrit etc translation of the Qur'an, there are Turkish Imams, Persian Imams, Malaysian etc as much as Arab Imams, so there is no problem, your the one who came up that problem.

Furthermore, how many Muslims are even literate? On average 6 out of 10 Muslims cannot read a language of any kind.

it is not necessary to read the Qur'an to memorize it, most of Arabia at the period of the revelation was illiterate, including the prophet himself, nevertheless, many Arabs wrote Poems glorifying their tribes, they memorized them orally, not by reading them from scrolls.

haven't you heard of Ahmad Muslim, the man's suffers from mental issues, and he memorized the Qur'an with Arabic, English and French.

in this video, the Imam gives him a small verse from the Qur'an and asks him to read the Whole sura (Chapter) containing that verse.

and here is 8-year old boy from Tajikistan, a non-arab country, he memorized the whole qur'an.

and btw Homer was blind and came up with the Iliad and Odyssey.

Qur'an 6:38
"Nothing have we omitted from the Book"

jumping on verses that suit your purpose, seems legit.

no Muslim would say that "book" here is referring to the Qur'an, actually it is talking about a book in heaven, called Al-Lawh Al Mahfouth., in this book every creature's destiny is written there, every single bit of information in the universe is there.

the Qur'an mentions that book many times:

"No calamity befalls on the earth or in yourselves but is inscribed in the Book of Decrees, before We bring it into existence. Verily, that is easy for Allah" [Iron: 22]

"Know you not that Allah knows all that is in heaven and on earth? Verily, it is in the Book. Verily! That is easy for Allah" [Pilgrimage:70]

Qur'an 41:3
"A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail;- a Qur'an in Arabic, for people who understand;"

yeah, this verse is often used by Qur'an only muslims, The word mufassal is understood by the Qur'an-only muslims to mean "fully detailed" and with this understanding they deduce from the passage that the Qur'an is complete and perfect and therefore does not need Hadith in any way. But neither the statement that the Qur'an explains its verses nor the statement that the word of God is perfect in truth and justice can mean that the external context provided by the Hadith is not relevant in understanding, interpreting and applying the book of God.

Thus even the verses most favorable to the Qur'an-only people of both Muslims and Agnostics do not support their contention, or at least do not oblige us to accept their position.

"Verily, Allah did a favor to the believers when He has rosen up a messenger from among themselves; he is reciting to them His verses, purifying them, and teaching them the Book and the Wisdom, though, before this, they were in an evident straying from the right path" (Qur’an 3:164)

this proves that the verse you quoted actually refers to the prophet explaining the verses.

no, the Qur'an disagrees with you.

That is my point. Everything in the Qur'an and the Hadith is considered true, yes?

no, Weak hadiths are not considered true.

Things are either true or they are not. This is not your interpretation but it is theirs.

who is "theirs"? All of the Ulama disagree with Al-qaeda, thus Al-Qaeda has no Top (Focus) Religious figures backing their claims.

It is everyone's problem. The source: Organized Religion.

read above.

The difference is yours has no basis in reality. You have done this before:

Shakir: "And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample." Qur'an 51:47
Pickthal: "We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof)." Qur'an 51:47
Yusuf Ali: "With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of space." Qur'an 51:47
Cyrene: "And the Heaven, We constructed with power and skill and verily We are expanding it." Qur'an 51:47

you kidding? :


And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are (its) expander [Sahih interntional]

And the heaven. We have built it with (Our) Hands and surely We are indeed extending (it) [Ghalli]

Qur'an 39:53
"Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

Qur'an 4:116
"Allah forgiveth not (The sin of) joining other gods with Him; but He forgiveth whom He pleaseth other sins than this: one who joins other gods with Allah, Hath strayed far, far away (from the right)"

first, let me post the verses in question:


"Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin Most heinous indeed" (4:48)



"Allah forgiveth not (The sin of) joining other gods with Him; but He forgiveth whom He pleaseth other sins than this: one who joins other gods with Allah, Hath strayed far, far away (from the right)" (4:116)


And:


"Yet they worshipped the calf even after clear signs had come to them; even so we forgave them; and gave Moses manifest proofs of authority." (4:153)


25:68,70-71, "And those who invoke not any other god along with Allah, and whoever does this shall receive the punishment, Except those who repent and believe , and do righteous deeds, for those, Allâh will change their sins into good deeds, and Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful"

"And whosoever repents and does righteous good deeds, then verily, he repents towards Allâh with true repentance."


Shirk is the sin of associating partners with Allah, i.e. attributing divinity or worshipping other than the One Creator.


The explanation of these verses becomes clear if we review the Islamic beliefs one at a time.


1. The first principle is that Allah will forgive ALL sins of anyone who repents sincerely during this life, before their death. This is made clear in the following verse of the Qur'an:


39:53-55 Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah. for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. Turn ye to our Lord (in repentance) and bow to His (Will), before the Penalty comes on you: after that ye shall not be helped. And follow the best of (the courses) revealed to you from your Lord, before the Penalty comes on you - of a sudden while ye perceive not!


From the above verse we understand that Allah will forgive all of our sins if we repent before the coming of a "sudden penalty", which refers to death.


2. The second principle here is that after one dies, they are at the mercy of Allah, who may choose to forgive them of their sins or punish them for it, according to what is just. Allah may forgive all of one's sins after they die, except shirk. After a person dies, they will not be forgiven for shirk. The only chance of forgiveness for shirk is if one repents before they die.


3. The above understanding is derived from the Qur'an and the Sunnah, and can be found in many common Tafsir of the Qur'an. For example, Ibn Kathir Ad-Damishqi (d. 1372CE) writes for this verse in his renowned Tafsir Al-Qur'an Al-Azim:


Allah does not forgive shirk, except after repenting from it. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged, Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, 2000, vol. 2, p. 481)

And Muhammad Asad comments on the verse:

The continuous stress, in the Qur'an, on God's transcendental oneness and uniqueness aims at freeing man from all sense of dependence on other influences and powers, and thus at elevating him spiritually and bringing about the "purification" alluded to in the next verse. Since this objective is vitiated by the sin of shirk ("the ascribing of divine qualities to aught beside God"), the Qur'an describes it as "unforgivable" so long as it is persisted in, i.e., unless and until the sinner repents (cf. verses 17 and 18 of this surah). (Asad, Message of the Qur'an, The Book Foundation 2003)

And verses 4:17-18 read:


4:17-18 Allah accepts the repentance of those who do evil in ignorance and foolishness and repent soon afterwards; it is they to whom Allah will forgive and Allah is Ever All Knower, All Wise. And of no effect is the repentance of those who continue to do evil deeds until death faces one of them and he says: "Now I repent;" nor of those who die while they are disbelievers. For them We have prepared a painful torment.


Shaykh Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi explains the reasoning behind this law:


If a person dies practicing shirk, or not having repented from it, he can never be forgiven for this sin. However, if a person commits shirk before accepting Islam, and dies as a Muslim, then the sin of shirk will be forgiven. This is because a person will be judged by Allah based on his conditions and iman (faith) at the time of death, so if he committed shirk in the past, but eventually accepted Islam, then such a sin would be forgiven. (Qadhi, A Critical Study of Shirk : An Explanation of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab's Kash al-Shubuhat, Al-Hidaayah Publishing and Distribution 2003, p.22)


Thus, when the verses are interpreted in light of other Qur'anic laws, there is no contradiction.

Qur'an 18:26

"Say: "Allah knows best how long they stayed: with Him is (the knowledge of) the secrets of the heavens and the earth: how clearly He sees, how finely He hears (everything)! They have no protector other than Him; nor does He share His Command with any person whatsoever."

Qur'an 26:108

"So fear Allah, and obey me."

how weak your arguments are, the first verse is talking about God's rule there is no God except him, he does not share his Rule of the seven heavens or the seven Earths, how can you assume that God shared all of this with Noah? (btw 26:108 was talking about Noah, i'm sure you didn't even know that, desperately trying to snatch something out of these Anti-islamic websites so you can Copy-paste them here.)

"The people of Noah denied the messengers, When their brother Noah said to them, "Will you not fear Allah ? Indeed, I am to you a trustworthy messenger, So fear Allah and obey me. And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds, So fear Allah and obey me, They said, "Should we believe you while you are followed by the lowest [class of people]?"

He wasn't asking them to be their King or something, he just asked them to listen to what he said that they may go to Heaven. so now it is clear that what you accused the Qur'an of was mere BS.

And how can you even be sure you understand the meanings of the words that long ago? A word with a certain meaning now can have another then as languages morph considerably over time.

Lisan al-Arab, Al-Muheet, Al-Muajam Al-Waseet, Al-Mawrid, Al-Sahhah etc these are all dictionaries written a millennium ago, each one of them is 10 books or over. The Arabic used in these books is the same as the one we use today, sorry.

Not to mention of course recent study done on the language in certain parts of the Qur'an that appear to have roots in the Syriac language. The author has to hide his identity under a pen name out of fear for his life, because that is how religion hides its weakness, by killing those who point it out.

so?! English and German have roots in Saxon language, French and Italian have roots in Latin. what's your point here?

Back then, altering their sound back then.

any proofs?

Through the veil of time there is always a shadow of doubt.

You speak of the preservation of the holy book and yet for most people to hear it, it has to be translated, and here as has been proven, there is room for error. Not to mention half of Arabic speakers are themselves illiterate and cannot read this Qu'ran.

Today there exists a copy of the Qur'an written by the Prophet's close companion, Uthman, it was compared with the Qur'an we have today, all was the same, sorry again.

Though it would seem the book was never meant to be understood by anyone who could not speak Arabic:

Qur'an 41:3
"A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail;- a Qur'an in Arabic, for people who understand;"

before you get smoked by the Verses in the Qur'an that Say it is for all Mankind, i'd like to first post a Hadith from the Prophet:

"Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind." [Bukhari]

Quran:

"thou art truly a warner, and to every people a guide" ( Quran, 13:7)

"We sent thee not, but as a Mercy for all creatures. (Quran, 21:107)"

"This is no less than a Message to all the Worlds. (Quran, 38:87)"

"And no reward dost thou ask of them for this: it is no less than a message for all creatures" (Quran, 12:104)"

"Verily this is no less than a Message to all the Worlds (Quran, 81:27)"

If the Noble Quran is indeed only for Arabs and not for Mankind, then why did the Almighty talk in the many verses of the Qur'an saying "O Mankind" ?

Why, were they more literate back then? Not likely, it is more likely there was an even greater gap than there is now (which is wide). They could conceivably not have even been aware or possessed the abilities to become aware on a large scale. You cannot know for certain.

i already replied to this, you don't have to be literate to memorize the Qur'an.

Then why did you quote me talking about Nazis that you brought up? Losing track of the quote pyramid, methinks.

i quoted you talking about Nazis?!

some consider these men to be devout, do they not?

Some consider Nazis to be Heroes, do they not?

They did, and do, without reason, based in belief of things that are not real (such as pure blood and superior German genetics). Religion uses this same system.

well guess what, i'm religious, i don't think they are devote.


what you accused religion of has nothing to do with it.

^ This? i have been telling you that i was talking about the Taliban, i don't consider them to be devout, what i was trying to say is that as some consider the Taliban Devote, some consider Nazis to be heroes. too. it's all about what people think, not religion. your the one who seems to be left out in the argument.

but we were talking about the death of brain cells,

no, my honey bun , the main topic is Apostates in Islam.

Sura 9:5
"Kill those who join other gods with Allah wherever you find them; besiege them, seize them, lay in wait for them with every kind of ambush"

Haha, the Famous 9:5, It is amazing to see how many non-Muslims would blindly post that verses from The Qur'an as a "proof".

Let’s read the verse in context:

"Freedom from obligation is proclaimed from Allah and His messenger toward those of the idolaters with whom ye made a treaty. Travel freely in the land four months, and know that ye cannot escape Allah and that Allah will confound the disbelievers (in His Guidance). And a proclamation from Allah and His messenger to all men on the day of the Greater Pilgrimage that Allah is free from obligation to the idolaters, and so is His messenger. So, if ye repent, it will be better for you; but if ye are averse, then know that ye cannot escape Allah. Give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful doom to those who disbelieve, Excepting those of the idolaters with whom ye (Muslims) have a treaty, and who have since abated nothing of your right nor have supported anyone against you. (As for these), fulfil their treaty to them till their term. Lo! Allah loveth those who keep their duty (unto Him). Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (Quran 9:1-5)

This verses is always quoted out of context, they never post 9:6 or from 9:1 to 9:6. If we read from the beginning it states that there was a treaty, which the Pagan arabs broke. Thus Allah gave them 4 months as 9:2 states in order to amend the treaty. Verse 9:4 states that the punishment prescribed in 9:5 is ONLY to those who broke the treaty and NOT to those who abided by the treaty. Therefore the context of 9:5 is of war with the pagan Arabs who broke the treaty yet refused to amend it in 4 months.

Sura 47:4
"When you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads, until ye have made a great slaughter among them"

what Translation are you using? i couldn't find any Translation like that, or shall we call this "Shaxx Translation" ?

Sahih international, Yusuf Ali, Pickthall, Ghali, Shakir and muhsin Khan use "So when you meet those who disbelieve in battle"

In Battle! why did you remove these two Words? cuz they don't prove your point right? how weak of you..

Naturally, in battle violence is expected.

Sura 9:29
"Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in Allah, or in the Last Day, and who forbid not what Allah and His Apostle have forbidden ... until they pay tribute"

This verse is referring to the Islamic Concept called “Jizya”, root of the word jizya is jaza, and defines it as “A sum of money to be put on anyone who enters the "themmah" (protection and the treaty of the Muslims) from the people of the book“.


It is usually portrayed by certain critics that jizya is a mechanism for discriminating non-muslims in an Islamic-society. This is a common misconception; jizya is a political method dealing with finance.


One of the main pillars of Islam is called Zakat (Muslims whose wealth is above a certain limit must pay a percentage of it (in most cases 2.5%) to the poor and needy). Islam does not “force” upon non-muslims to follow one of it’s main pillars. This certainly quietens some critics who would otherwise be accusing Islam of imposing itself on them. Just like in a non-muslim society muslims pay tax, likewise non-muslims are obliged to pay certain percentage of their money to the Islamic State. It is quite hypocritical of non-muslims to criticize Jizya, whilst, in non-muslims countries muslims have to pay tax. If tax is justified then so should jizya be.

The term 'weak hadith' means nothing to someone who wants this to be the way. So he makes it the way and tells others who have no means of knowing themselves, that it is.

"Logic" means nothing to someone who does not read books in Context.

There is always going to be bad people, on a state level you do not need organized religion to know murder should be against the law.

we all know Murder is bad, People still kill other people, Islam Puts a strict law in front of those, which is, The murderer is to be killed, unless the family of the victim accepts the Amount of money the murderer offers. sadly this Law isn't practiced today in the Islamic world, even in Al-Qaeda. that's why you see all these crimes.

Just because you do not identify with Islamic militants does not make them something else. Here again you deny reality.

just because the Media calls them "Islamic militants" does not make them linked with Islam.

The word 'dahia' in Arabic is used to describe an ostrich egg by Zakir and yet it is also rooted in the word 'flat' and is synonymous with another word that means "a location that gets flattened".

Not to mention when they are translated they can and are translated into different words in languages like English and can, even you as an example, be given different meaning.

the Word "Dahia" does not mean Flat Earth, it only means Egg, the Word "Dahaha" in the Qur'an is used to describe the Earth, which means he made it Egg-shaped, here's what Lisan Al-arab says about Daha:

Daha دحا means: دفعه و رمى به (dafa'aahu wa ramaa bih) "Caused it to move"

Daha دحا means: إندحَّ بطنه إندحاحاّ اي إتّسع His tummy became round and bigger.
In Prophet Muhammad's Hadith: كان لأسامة بطننٌ مُندحٌ اي متسع Osama had a round and big tummy.

و بطنٌ مُنداحُ أي خارخٌ مُدوّر His tummy is mun-daahun means it is OUT THERE AND ROUND مُدوّر.

و رجلٌّ دحدحُ اي قصير غليظ البطن A man is dahda-hun which means he is short, stocky and has a big and fat tummy.

الدحداح هو المستدير الململم The dahdaah is the person who is ROUND and STOCKY.

الدِردِحة من النساء التي طولها و عرضها سواء Al-dir-dihati from the women is the one whose height and width look the same! SHE LOOKS ROUND,

دحا daha means: الدوحة أي المظلة العظيمة Al-Doha, as in Qatar's capital, means a big umbrella.

Here is what Dr. Zaghlool Al-Naggar, one of the top seven Geologists in the World, said about the Arabic word in question:

Linguistic evidence to the "dahu" (egg-shapping) of the Earth:


The "dahu" in the Arabic Language means to extend and even out. It is said: "daha" the thing; It is also said: "the rain daha the stones from the face of the earth," which means washed it away. It is also said: "The horse passed by yad'hu dahwan," which means he is beating his foot on the ground and yad'hu its sand. Also, the ostrich's mad'hi means its laying of its eggs, and "ad'hiha" is the nest where its chicks are born.

So as we clearly see, all of the above Arabic words that are derived from "daha" mean:


1- To extend.


2- To even out.


3- Causing to become egg-shaped or creating, making or producing eggs.

All of these meanings perfectly apply to our planet Earth and the stages that it went through.

in the following video, we'll see that due to the tidal gravitational pulls, the earth bulged and became EGG-SHAPED before its impact with the iron-rich asteroid that was sent down to it, and collided with it and formed our earth's iron core. This video demonstrates that even the tidal gravitational pulls do also contribute to the shaping of our earth today, since it is egg-shaped:

the prophet said: " I have been sent with the shortest expression carrying the widest meanings" [Bukhari]

Dahaha also means expanded, which is also scientifically true.



Look at how the continents of the earth are shaped like. They look like they've been one round and all-connected piece of land in the past and then slowly spread out and split into the continents that we have today due to an expansion of the earth from its sides.

Source

I understand completely, I was asking why you called it a sun, as sun and pulsar are not interchangeable. The word 'sun' is a layman's term for that bright thing we see in the sky before we understood what it was, which we know today is a star that we orbit. And yet the old name is still popular to refer to our solar system's star by most people and typically no other star scientifically. So you can see the confusion when you changed your translation of the verse.

where did i call the Sun a pulsar?

All of which is moot due to references to 'ore from the sky' that predate the Qur'an in the polytheistic Egyptian culture as ba-en-pet. Which reinforces that the Qur'an is just a set of already existing notions and folk tales that were re-purposed for political reasons and personal gain.

do you mean that pre-islamic Arabs knew that Iron was sent down from Heaven?

such strange days, when we say Arabs were civilized the answer is "no they weren't, they lived in the desert" but if we say the Arabs were not Educated at the Time of Muhammad you say no they must have learnt that science from Ancient Egyptians. and the biggest fail is that it was you who claimed to have sources that prove most Arabs were Illiterate

You are not counting the mantle and lithosphere layers in that image which are listed with words and brackets, which brings the total to 9 on a geological component layering by depth of the Earth (which is what the left side of the image is describing) as I listed in my prior post. You will note that the mantle layer covers two partitions, which are unnamed here, these are the mesospheric lower and upper mantle sub-layers, just as the lithosphere has the subordinate crust and uppermost mantle sub-layers which are listed in parenthesis.

which brings the total to 9

that total is 10

i can't see how these two statements come from one person, who of course doesn't suffer from Schizophrenia.

Your Book got it wrong

What is this? when did i say that and why? do Agnostics have a book?

She could have easily self-fulfilled that prophecy. It states in the verse she wishes to be there so she made sure of it when something similar came up.

Source on self-fulfilled prophecy.

please insert your brain into your head before Replying.

You do not recognize the verse of your religion?

i took off my brain so i could know what you meant, but i failed, i still can't understand how that verse says humans originate from stars..

Bees were studied and their jobs and duties were likely known:

"Others, again, assert that these insects copulate, and that the drones are male and the bees female."

Aristotle, History of Animals, Book 5, 350 B.C

"For the food that insects go in quest of is of diverse kinds, and they do not all delight in the same flavours: for instance, the bee never settles on a withered or wilted flower, but on fresh and sweet ones"

"In the bee the fact of its being asleep is very obvious; for at night-time bees are at rest and cease to hum."

Aristotle, History of Animals, Book 4, 350 B.C.

What god gave Aristotle this knowledge? Observation and study, to definitely say that the source of your verse is divine is folly.

This is not even considering the Arabic feminine vs masculine headings for things in that verse, as you put it, is the bee actually female, or does it just "feel" feminine and you are just wishfully thinking? I find that to be far more likely as you are someone who has to believe and are twisting an Arabic translation to suit your needs, as you have been proven to do.

Even if that is not the case, can you prove that the masculine form of that word even existed back then for there to be a distinction?

i double checked your sources and i couldn't find that Humans knew Honey came from female bees, but let' assume i found it, are you saying Arabs knew that from Aristotle? if yes, go up two Quotes and you'll see my answer.

Because they are created by the instability under the Earth and are a product of it, not a deterrent.

You are confusing cause with effect. Mountains are caused by tectonic plate collision and do not effect plate stabilization. Plate motions are almost completely halted not by collisional-type mountain formation (effect) but by the opposing plates themselves. Your argument is akin to saying that in an aircraft collision, the crushed cockpit stabilizes the plane during the crash. In reality, the crushed cockpit (the mountain) is the effect of the crash (the tectonic plate collision). It does not stabilize the plane during the collision.

hang on, i wasn't talking about how Mountains were created, but how they prevent the shaking of the Earth.

And yet you said it was the word "Samawat", not "Samaa", so which is it? Again is just seems as though you are twisting the words to mean what you want.

you could've actually spared yourself from embarrassment by checking it out on Google translator, Samawat is the Plural of Samaa.

again, ask anyone here on the forums about that, you are arguing about something you don't know about.

You also ignored the alternate translation of that verse by Yusuf Ali that I provided which contradicts you.

no it does not contradict me, it doesn't say "we are not it's expanders"

and i already answered that in my post, but i'll do it again:

"And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander." [Sahih International]

"With power did We construct the heaven. Verily, We are Able to extend the vastness of space thereof" [Muhsin Khan]

"We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof)."[Pickthall]

"And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample."[Shakir]

"And the heaven (is also a sign). We have built it with (Our) Hands (i.e., Capability) and surely We are indeed extending (it) wide" [Ghali]

all give the same meaning, all say that God is the one who is making the Heaven expand.

except for Yusuf Ali, he says that God is the Creator of the Wide space.

when things like this happen, we get back to the original Source, The Arabic Qur'an.


Wa Al-samaa banaynaha be-aydin wa enna la-muwassi'un

And The Heaven We Built with Hands and We Are Surely Expanders"

That's the literal Translation, no Brackets, No nothing. although i take most of my translations from Yusuf Ali, he was wrong here.

this proves that Sahih International and the other translations Got it right.

And I wonder why it is the 'last thing' I would want to do.

because if you do you would expose yourself as the Biggest ass on the Internet. "We" is Used as a Plural of Majesty, ask anyone here on the forums about that.

Qur'an 41:10
"He placed therein firm hills rising above it, and blessed it and measured therein its sustenance in four Days, alike for (all) who ask;"

Qur'an 41:11
"Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it had been as smoke: He said to it and to the earth: "Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly." They said: "We do come, in willing obedience."

Sorry, sir, you are incorrect.

"Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together, before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (21:30)

I will elaborate that there is no similarity between the early universe and smoke as there was no burning of material, let alone any kind of organic compounds at all in the early universe. Organic molecules would not exist for billions of years. Even carbon did not exist at this point and it would not exist for millions of years until it was first fused in the center of giant stars.

I will also point out that the early universe was extremely dense and smoke is not dense at all, in fact smoke is completely vaporous. Smoke can be hot, but often is not. Hot gas close to a burning material can make smoke hot, but the carbon particles that linger in the air can be fairly cool.

The Arabic word for "sky" in Noble Verse 41:11 above is "samaa", which is the same word used for "heaven" and "Universe". Since the 7 heavens didn't exist yet (because the seven firmaments or heavens were mentioned in the next Noble Verse 41:12), then this Clearly makes the "samaa" be referring to the Universe, since the heaven was the entire Universe when GOD Almighty "comprehended in His design the sky". He then later divided it into seven firmaments or heavens.

God Almighty initially created the Universe, or the "samaa" with smoke (Dukhan). Dukhan in Arabic refers to the smoke coming from fire, which is always HOT GAS.

the Universe experienced an unbelievable explosion from the hot gases that were forming it, which caused the Universe (which consisted of the ball of gases) to split and expand. The Earth was separated then from the gaseous mass that was forming the Universe.

as science tells us, Ten to twenty billion years ago, the universe consisted of a compact ball of hydrogen -- protons, neutrons, electrons, and their anti-particles -- plus radiation. There were no differentiated planets, stars, suns, galaxies.

So just the ones Allah likes get the opportunity for paradise?

God Guides whom he wills, don't expect to Enter Paradise while denying God.

Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi 66:1
Hafsah said: 'How could she be forbidden for you when she is your slave girl?'

Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi
'When Hafsah found him with her (in an intimate moment), she said: 'Why did you bring her in my house? You did this to me, to the exception of all your wives, only because I am too insignificant to you' ... 'He said to her: 'Do not mention this to A'ishah; she (i.e., Mariyah) is forbidden for me if I ever touch her'. ... 'He swore to her that he will not touch her and then said: 'Do not mention this incident to anyone'.

Surah 66:1,2
"O Prophet! Why bannest thou that which Allah hath made lawful for thee, seeking to please thy wives? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."

It must be nice to have a deity to excuse whatever action you do. As I said, organized religion is rooted in power and control, deities are often just tools for the sins of mankind right from the start.

first, didn't you say Hadiths were Unreliable and we should not take information from them? Shaxx, you will never get sick of Lying. that's your nature. by this you Acknowledge that the Miracles in the hadiths i have been posting were True and relieable.

secondly, the issue is and was controversial amongst muslims, weather she was his Wife or Concubine, how are you so sure? some Authenitic Hadiths say that he freed her.


thirdly, How is God excusing the Prophet here, on the contrary, God said that the Prophet should not make what was lawful to him Unlawful.

I could explain the principles of an estuary to you but that would be pointless as once again Aristotle already brought this notion forth before the Qur'an existed

yet again you did not use your brain, Arabs were not Educated people, and illiterate as you say, you use this Aristotle thing when you do not know what to say. so indeed, the Quran does contain miracles, and you couldn't refute that, so you jump to Aristotle hoping that he may rescue you from this hard situation you are currently in.

Which again just makes my case that the Qur'an just borrowed from older notions, which the Qur'an itself feared people would recognize:

Qur'an 6:25
"...if they saw every one of the signs, not they will believe in them; in so much that when they come to thee, they (but) dispute with thee; the Unbelievers say: "These are nothing but tales of the ancients."

so when Someone is afraid of something he mentions it in his book? nice logic.

So you agree, it is very fickle for what it wants in return. How apostate of you.

you said:

Just because it mentions it does not make everything in your holy text true, no matter how much you want it to.

i again say: God guides who he wills, you clearly admit that the Quran mentions scientific facts, after that you say that doesn't prove it is the word of God.

you know what, i'll give you a chance to insert you brain, so that it might get easier for you to see how you are being exposed as an epic fail..

What is Islam to speak of incomplete theories, it does not even say how long humanity has been around save for vagaries yet boasts of being very detailed.

oh and you are so Sure! no one knows all the information in the Qur'an, Early muslims didn't think that Iron was sent down from outside the earth, nevertheless the Qur'an did say that it was sent down from Heaven. i remember reading an article were someone found the Speed of Light in the Qur'an. so no, no one knows all the information in the Qur'an, and God said in the Qur'an:

"We will show them Our Signs in the universe, and in their ownselves, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the truth. Is it not sufficient in regard to your Lord that He is a Witness over all things?"

after a few decades you will find more Scientific facts in the Quran being discovered.

Qur'an 41:3
"A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail;- a Qur'an in Arabic, for people who understand;"

i already showed you what this verse really means.

Qur'an 6:38
"Nothing have we omitted from the Book"

and how this doesn't talk about the Qur'an

Why do you need the Hadith again? Inconsistencies, the first sign someone is lying to you. Wake up.

i already replied to that.

Compared to yours that are just fabrications. I will take a little truth over a lot of lies.

you say they are fabrications when you can't reply. got it.

Qur'an 42:51
"It is not fitting for a man that Allah should speak to him except by inspiration, or from behind a veil,"

Qur'an 4:164
"Of some messengers We have already told thee the story; of others We have not;- and to Moses Allah spoke direct"

oh come on, where is the Contradiction? Moses heard the Voice of God, but did he see him? no, and nowhere in the Qur'an it says Moses Saw God, hence "from behind a a veil"

from behind a veil means Moses didn't see him, just in case you suck at English. which is likely the case.

Qur'an 4:48
"Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin Most heinous indeed."

Qur'an 4:153
"The people of the Book ask thee to cause a book to descend to them from heaven: Indeed they asked Moses for an even greater (miracle), for they said: "Show us Allah in public," but they were dazed for their presumption, with thunder and lightning. Yet they worshipped the calf even after clear signs had come to them; even so we forgave them; and gave Moses manifest proofs of authority"

Contradictions and falsities, this is your prophecy.

haven't thought you mentioned that here, so i replied to it in another part of my post.

Why would I regret it? And posting all of them I would old and grey by the end, but I have posted a few examples throughout this post for you to mull over.

lol that's all you got? these are nothing. bring some more, so i could wipe the forum with them.

I will state that I am not necessarily making a claim against Islam specifically but more toward organized religion itself, Islam will naturally come up as that is your particular set of beliefs but I will generally attempt to be unilateral.

and i will state that i'm a Muslim, not a Jew or Christian.

I imagine when the prophet wanted to have sex with his wife anytime and anyway that he wanted so he made it a law by saying god said so. The usual cult-leader stuff.

of course, you don't know, why didn't you check that in Asbab al-Nuzool if you truly claim you have sources?

Al Wahidi's Asbab al-Nuzul:


Ibn 'Abbas said: “This was revealed about the Emigrants after they settled in Medina. They mentioned having sex with their wives from the front and back positions and did not see any harm in doing so as long as the penetration was done in the women's sexual organ. the Ansar and Jews who were present condemned this and mentioned that the only lawful way of sleeping with one's wife is to do it from the front position. The Jews also mentioned that they find in the Torah that it is filth in the sight of Allah to sleep with one's wife in any other position than when the wife is lying on her back, and failing to do so is the cause why children are born cross-eyed or mentally disturbed. The Muslims mentioned this to the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, saying: 'In the pre-Islamic period and after we embraced Islam we always had sex with our wives in any position we liked. The Jews have condemned us for doing so and, further, claimed this and that'. And so Allah, exalted is He, gave the lie to the Jews and revealed this verse to give dispensation, He says: the sexual organ of the wife is the plantation where the child grows. meaning: from in front of her and from behind her as long as the penetration is done in her sexual organ.

so this verse was revealed only to answer back the Myths of the Jews back then, Children being born Cross-eyed or having mental diseases.

You need to understand the background of many Islamophobes when it comes to the issue of women. They come across as defending women’s rights, when in fact they are defending their rights to women. The way Western society has evolved affords men to have sex with women they are not committed to by way of legal marriage. This is a dream come true for many men. They have been pursuing this dream for centuries. They finally succeeded when they convinced women that sex without marriage is not a sin if it is by mutual consent between grownups. A majority of Western women, unfortunately, fell for it. The result is what you see everyday of children born out of wedlock, single mothers, abortions, abandoned children, cheating husbands, one-night stands, promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases, women treated as sex or display objects, etc. It is a truly sad state of affairs for women who may actually be duped into thinking that they are “liberated.” It is also a sad state of affairs for men who may be feeling in full control, yet their souls are in pain for violating God’s commandments.

Did you know that more than half of new converts to Islam are women? That is what Western men are afraid of! Muslim women will not date them.


Why do so many women accept Islam? Didn’t they read the Quran and see that Verse? Why did the Quran not repulse these women, and on the contrary, attracted them? It’s because the Quran spoke the truth to them. God wants to honor women but most men’s natural impulses eventually will lead to disgracing them.

Source for Women converting to Islam

another one

Many women are the primary household bread-winners in the United States and other free places. It is often no longer a simple matter of gender, it is a matter of personality, partnership and career. Witch each passing decade we break down the old ways steeped in religious non-sense.

how does Husbands being the heads of their family not make women bread-winners?

i know why, because again you took that Verse from Shaxx Translation.

"But the men have a degree over them in responsibility and authority. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise." [Sahih Translation]

"but men have a degree of responsibility over them. And Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise" [Muhsin Khan]

"but men have a degree of advantage over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise." [Yusuf Ali]

"and men are a degree above them. Allah is Mighty, Wise." [Pickthall]

"and the men are a degree above them, and Allah is Mighty, Wise." [shakir]

"and men have a degree above them; and Allah is Ever-Mighty, Ever-Wise" [Ghali]

all of the translations do not contain "status". the verse wasn't talking about Status, but about Responsibility, funny thing is that the Verse before it completly contradicts your translation, "And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them"

so please, no more monkey ass translations, deal?

In-fact Hillary Clinton is a strong contender in our next presidential election if she chooses to run (which she most likely will).

so? in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt Women participated in the Elections and won. what's the big deal?

Turn on a television set, that is at least, if you have free press.

and watch fox News?

yeah right.

Look folks, an egg, courtesy of NASA.

Eggs don't necessarily look like what you have in your fridge, These are eggs, too.

1 2 3 4 5 6

And that contradicts it how? It does not, it simply goes on about speaking of the length of the Earth with using roads as a descriptor, which in no way is indicative of a sphere shaped anything.

the inner surface is not fit to be lived on, the outer crust is spread out like a carpet on it, so that we can walk, run, go about on it. this isn't talking about the Earth's shape at all.

Qur'an 16:89
"We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything"

Qur'an 16:89
"We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything"

Qur'an 16:89
"We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything"

and this verse you have been Chattering about, does not contain the Word "clearly", it says ""We have revealed the Book to you explaining everything" which is what the Qur'an does.

And you claim Islam as the source of all monotheism. Monotheistic birth so to speak is not dead after Islam no matter how much you want to believe. Religions formed today have as much validity as Islam, Christianity or any other religion. I fear Allah as much as I fear Xenu of Scientology.

in Islam Muhammad- peace be upon him- is the Last messenger, what we proved is that the teachings of other prophets to various nations around the world have not dissapeared completely.

Right, because fun is directly related to old monotheistic religions. Silly goose.

yes, and hell is more fun.

That seems a bit like prejudice. This is how all religious debates look with stubborn people involved, the issue is religion not ethnicity.

yep, asses get handed to people when they claim they know enough about religion, when they are not.



your welcome,

[Cyrene]

are you comparing the Muslims of that Age with the Muslims now? where are the True Muslims today? as if the rulers of the Islamic World today were the same as Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Umar ibn Abd Al-Aziz, Alp Arslan, Salahuddin, Mehmet II and many others.

and God's Covenant was clear, if you follow what the Prophet had teached, you will never lose, and if you don't know nothing about the late rulers of Muslims, then Read about the last Abbasid Caliph, and other Weak Caliphs of the Ummayads, Abbasids, and Ottomans. they have nothing to do with Islam, they were just a bunch of Tyrants, drinking wine and stuff.

the Prophet talked about them:

"Prophethood will remain with you for as long as Allah wills it to remain, then Allah will raise it up wherever he wills to raise it up. Afterwards, there will be a Caliphate that follows the guidance of Prophethood remaining with you for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then, He will raise it up whenever He wills to raise it up. Afterwards, there will be a reign of violently oppressive rule and it will remain with you for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then, there will be a reign of tyrannical rule and it will remain for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then, Allah will raise it up whenever He wills to raise it up. Then, there will be a Caliphate that follows the guidance of Prophethood." [Bukhari]

Why would he need to search for it if he already had it memorized?

you seem to be missing something, not all the Muslims at that time did memorize the whole Qur'an, a group of people did, they were called Huffath. that's why i said "there were companions who memorized the Qur'an" not "All companions memorized the Qur'an"

Sahih Bukhari 6:61:558
"Allah's Apostle heard a man reciting the Qur'an at night, and said, "May Allah bestow His Mercy on him, as he has reminded me of such-and-such Verses of such-and-such Suras, which I was caused to forget."

so? what are you trying to prove here? are you implying that the Qur'an was not written at the Time of the Prophet?

The Qur'an itself contains many passages which refer to its written form. There appear to be four chapters (Sura's or Sifirs) of the Qur'an which refer to the Qur'an's written form explicitly. I'll quote them:

"By no means! Indeed it is a message of Instruction, Therefore, whoever wills, should remember, On leaves held in honour, Exalted, purified, In the hands of scribes, Noble and pious" (80:11-16)

"Nay, this is the glorious Qur'an, on a Tablet preserved" (85:21-22)

"This is a glorious Reading, In a book well-kept, Which none but the purified teach, This is a Revelation from the Lord of the Worlds" (56: 77-80)

"They said: Tales of the ancients which he had caused to be written and they are dictated to him morning and evening" (25: 5) even the Polytheists acknowledge that the Qur'an was written.

Sahih Bukhari 6:61:510
...Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before..."

Sahih Bukhari 6:61:510
"...'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt..."

Verses were chosen by mortals from what they had gathered (Sahih Bukhari 6:61:509) against ones others had gathered in similar attempts ultimately from the same source and destroyed them to prevent people seeing the corruption in their stories.

here's the Full story in Bukhari that you quoted only a part of, it answers everything you claimed:

"Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were Waging war to conquer Armenia and Azerbaijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt"

differences in the recitation of the Qur'an

why did you make this bold?, it actually proves my point, Arabic had 7 dialects, and that people started writing the Qur'an according to their own tongue, which is the main reason why Abu Bakr, the first Caliph, and Uthman, the Third Caliph, ordered for the Qur'an to be Standardized. Thank you.

And Dr. Yasir Qadhi also refutes this claim:

[AngryTitusPullo]

are you comparing the Muslims of that Age with the Muslims now? where are the True Muslims today? as if the rulers of the Islamic World today were the same as Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Umar ibn Abd Al-Aziz, Alp Arslan, Salahuddin, Mehmet II and many others.

I have read somewhere, don't remember who quoted it but it goes like this:

If you want to see muslims, go to the middle east. If you want to see Islam, go to Japan.

[Maiar93]

Seriously, Shaxx and Cyrene, you should move this discussion to private messages. It has almost nothing to do with the topic anymore and it's RIDICULOUSLY long-winded, boring and most of all has not a semblance of a point to it. This is no debate, this is a contest of who gets tired first.

From what I read, it seems like most muslims who answered here have conceded that they believe they at least have the right to kill apostates, even though they wouldn't do it themselves. Isn't this how it goes? A lot of people may have believed among the nazis that Jews caused all of our problems, but only the most extreme of that large bunch actively sought to exterminate them.

[AngryTitusPullo]

From what I read, it seems like most muslims who answered here have conceded that they believe they at least have the right to kill apostates, even though they wouldn't do it themselves. Isn't this how it goes?

No. We believe that we have every rights to defend ourselves from harm cause by others, whether infidels, apostates or even those who calls themselves muslims.

Permission is given (to fight) to those who have been fought against, because they are wronged and oppressed; and indeed, God is most able to give them victory; (they are) those who have been unjustly expelled from their homes without right, for no reason except that they say, "Our Lord is God." - 22:39-40

[Shaxx]

what proves that they didn't change is that they came true, as the hadiths tell us.

if they were altered they wouldn't have came true.

Your version of the truth, which is usually vague verse and self-fulfilled prophecy.

that is in English, only in English, in Arabic that sentence is very clear, hence in the English translation you find the Brackets.

again, that's why you find the brackets in English, Farsi, Sanskrit etc translation of the Qur'an, there are Turkish Imams, Persian Imams, Malaysian etc as much as Arab Imams, so there is no problem, your the one who came up that problem.

And again, why do what is in those brackets keep changing through time as in my examples in other posts?

Men decided to do so to fit a political agenda.

it is not necessary to read the Qur'an to memorize it, most of Arabia at the period of the revelation was illiterate, including the prophet himself, nevertheless, many Arabs wrote Poems glorifying their tribes, they memorized them orally, not by reading them from scrolls.

Memorize someone else's version of it for all they would know. After all there are certainly not parts of Islam that kill, bomb, rape and abduct people under the belief it is righteous, right?

So why write it down at all? If it is so sure-fire.

Also the Prophet was illiterate as well? How did he even know what his companions wrote down was what he even said?

jumping on verses that suit your purpose, seems legit.

Just pointing out the flaws in that book.

no Muslim would say that "book" here is referring to the Qur'an, actually it is talking about a book in heaven, called Al-Lawh Al Mahfouth., in this book every creature's destiny is written there, every single bit of information in the universe is there.

No Muslim?

What about these two:
Ahmed Raza Khan/Mohammed Aqib Qadri:
"And there is not an animal moving in the earth nor a bird flying on its wings, but they are a nation like you; We have left out nothing in this Book - then towards their Lord they will be raised"

The verses prior and after really do not refer to the book of decrees in their version just 'this book', which seems very much to indicate the Qur'an itself.

Again more of the easily misunderstood nature of the Qur'an itself. It would seem just as another holy text to obviously not be worthy or capable of pulling off universal belief and passing language barriers as you would expect a truly holy book would.

But neither the statement that the Qur'an explains its verses nor the statement that the word of God is perfect in truth and justice can mean that the external context provided by the Hadith is not relevant in understanding, interpreting and applying the book of God.

I think it does mean that. One supposedly came from god through a prophet and the others from the thoughts of men.

"Verily, Allah did a favor to the believers when He has rosen up a messenger from among themselves; he is reciting to them His verses, purifying them, and teaching them the Book and the Wisdom, though, before this, they were in an evident straying from the right path" (Qur’an 3:164)

this proves that the verse you quoted actually refers to the prophet explaining the verses.

You can also teach people the book by just using the book, not writing a new one and just about deifying yourself in the process.

no, Weak hadiths are not considered true.

But Allah gave them free reign to elaborate on the Qur'an, why do you deny Allah?

Again you are just picking and choosing, not what Allah said or wants and not what the Prophet said or wants.

Hypocrisy.

who is "theirs"? All of the Ulama disagree with Al-qaeda, thus Al-Qaeda has no Top (Focus) Religious figures backing their claims.

Who else would it refer to other than the organization you quoted that I responded to and people like them?

Also, about the second part, I really do not think they care. They seem to be going on just fine without them in the name of god because all they need is god to excuse their actions and have people fill their ranks.

And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are (its) expander [Sahih interntional]

And the heaven. We have built it with (Our) Hands and surely We are indeed extending (it) [Ghalli]

Again, these two contradict each other. 'Expander' is a noun and not a verb.

The explanation of these verses becomes clear if we review the Islamic beliefs one at a time.

In other words, when reviewed out of context with things that do not directly contradict it.

1. The first principle is that Allah will forgive ALL sins of anyone who repents sincerely during this life, before their death. This is made clear in the following verse of the Qur'an:

From the above verse we understand that Allah will forgive all of our sins if we repent before the coming of a "sudden penalty", which refers to death.

2. The second principle here is that after one dies, they are at the mercy of Allah, who may choose to forgive them of their sins or punish them for it, according to what is just. Allah may forgive all of one's sins after they die, except shirk. After a person dies, they will not be forgiven for shirk. The only chance of forgiveness for shirk is if one repents before they die.

This agrees with everything except the part where it says it makes no exceptions for people that join other gods with it.

3. The above understanding is derived from the Qur'an and the Sunnah, and can be found in many common Tafsir of the Qur'an. For example, Ibn Kathir Ad-Damishqi (d. 1372CE) writes for this verse in his renowned Tafsir Al-Qur'an Al-Azim:

Allah does not forgive shirk, except after repenting from it. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged, Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, 2000, vol. 2, p. 481)

And Muhammad Asad comments on the verse:

Shaykh Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi explains the reasoning behind this law:

(Qadhi, A Critical Study of Shirk : An Explanation of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab's Kash al-Shubuhat, Al-Hidaayah Publishing and Distribution 2003, p.22)

Thus, when the verses are interpreted in light of other Qur'anic laws, there is no contradiction.

No contradiction after a diatribe of mental gymnastics to make it so? Yea, no.

The Qur'an was jumbled together and not everything lined in right and people scrambled to explain it. For every verse there is a mountain of Hadith to justify what it really meant.

This is only weakness.

how weak your arguments are, the first verse is talking about God's rule there is no God except him, he does not share his Rule of the seven heavens or the seven Earths,

That is your interpretation.

He wasn't asking them to be their King or something, he just asked them to listen to what he said that they may go to Heaven. so now it is clear that what you accused the Qur'an of was mere BS.

Qur'an 3:79-80
"It is not (possible) that a man, to whom is given the Book, and Wisdom, and the prophetic office, should say to people: "Be ye my worshippers rather than Allah's": on the contrary (He would say) "Be ye worshippers of Him Who is truly the Cherisher of all: For ye have taught the Book and ye have studied it earnestly." Nor would he instruct you to take angels and prophets for Lords and patrons. What! would he bid you to unbelief after ye have bowed your will (To Allah in Islam?)"

Qur'an 4:59
"O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination."

You claim superiority to the Bible, but there are just as many loop-holes in your book as they have in theirs.

Lisan al-Arab, Al-Muheet, Al-Muajam Al-Waseet, Al-Mawrid, Al-Sahhah etc these are all dictionaries written a millennium ago, each one of them is 10 books or over. The Arabic used in these books is the same as the one we use today, sorry.

Just a millennia? So several centuries after the Qur'an was written.

Got it.

so?! English and German have roots in Saxon language, French and Italian have roots in Latin. what's your point here?

Luxenberg's claim is that the Qur'an was originally written in Syriac in certain places. He claims that certain verses which do not make much sense become quite clear and suddenly pertain to the surrounding story quite directly when interpreted with Syriac in mind and that certain understood verses are given greatly different meanings, for example, how women should dress.

Today there exists a copy of the Qur'an written by the Prophet's close companion, Uthman, it was compared with the Qur'an we have today, all was the same, sorry again.

Except for Abdullah Ibn Mas'ud's version and Ubay bin Ka'b's.

Other than that Uthman was quite good at burning alternate copies.

Sahih Bukhari 6:61:510
"...'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt..."

before you get smoked by the Verses in the Qur'an that Say it is for all Mankind, i'd like to first post a Hadith from the Prophet:

"Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind." [Bukhari]

Well he has failed so far. So few speak Arabic and the translations change with the tide of the translator and Islam is nearly tied with atheism for soul points.

Quran:

"thou art truly a warner, and to every people a guide" ( Quran, 13:7)

"We sent thee not, but as a Mercy for all creatures. (Quran, 21:107)"

"This is no less than a Message to all the Worlds. (Quran, 38:87)"

"And no reward dost thou ask of them for this: it is no less than a message for all creatures" (Quran, 12:104)"

"Verily this is no less than a Message to all the Worlds (Quran, 81:27)"

These verses do not make that other contradicting one just disappear.

If the Noble Quran is indeed only for Arabs and not for Mankind, then why did the Almighty talk in the many verses of the Qur'an saying "O Mankind" ?

It referenced those who could understand Arabic text and not the ethnic group, anyone can learn Arabic.

i quoted you talking about Nazis?!
^ This? i have been telling you that i was talking about the Taliban,

Then say that, when you type, put the thing your talking about in the text.

i don't consider them to be devout, what i was trying to say is that as some consider the Taliban Devote, some consider Nazis to be heroes. too. it's all about what people think, not religion.

It is not about what you consider them to be it is about what they consider themselves to be.Religion is just what people think.

Haha, the Famous 9:5, It is amazing to see how many non-Muslims would blindly post that verses from The Qur'an as a "proof".

It was posted as clarity to what he could twist to his purpose or someone else twist to his purpose and the individual would never be able to recognize it by being able to actually read the book he was killing for.

what Translation are you using? i couldn't find any Translation like that, or shall we call this "Shaxx Translation" ?

Sahih international, Yusuf Ali, Pickthall, Ghali, Shakir and muhsin Khan use "So when you meet those who disbelieve in battle"

In Battle! why did you remove these two Words? cuz they don't prove your point right? how weak of you..

Naturally, in battle violence is expected.

You do not think that self-proclaimed holy warrior considers it a war as he goes house to house killing unarmed people who answer his questions wrong?It was just how I found that particular quote (I usually double check the translation but it looks like this one slipped past me). Either way it does not change anything in the circumstance that I applied it.

This verse is referring to the Islamic Concept called “Jizya”, root of the word jizya is jaza, and defines it as “A sum of money to be put on anyone who enters the "themmah" (protection and the treaty of the Muslims) from the people of the book“.

It is usually portrayed by certain critics that jizya is a mechanism for discriminating non-muslims in an Islamic-society. This is a common misconception; jizya is a political method dealing with finance.

One of the main pillars of Islam is called Zakat (Muslims whose wealth is above a certain limit must pay a percentage of it (in most cases 2.5%) to the poor and needy). Islam does not “force” upon non-muslims to follow one of it’s main pillars. This certainly quietens some critics who would otherwise be accusing Islam of imposing itself on them. Just like in a non-muslim society muslims pay tax, likewise non-muslims are obliged to pay certain percentage of their money to the Islamic State. It is quite hypocritical of non-muslims to criticize Jizya, whilst, in non-muslims countries muslims have to pay tax. If tax is justified then so should jizya be.

So your defense is, 'it is extortion with the threat of death for money on those who were targeted for their beliefs'.

Got it.

we all know Murder is bad, People still kill other people, Islam Puts a strict law in front of those, which is, The murderer is to be killed, unless the family of the victim accepts the Amount of money the murderer offers. sadly this Law isn't practiced today in the Islamic world, even in Al-Qaeda. that's why you see all these crimes.

Money washing away sin, yea nothing crude or corrupt about that.

just because the Media calls them "Islamic militants" does not make them linked with Islam.

the Word "Dahia" does not mean Flat Earth, it only means Egg, the Word "Dahaha" in the Qur'an is used to describe the Earth, which means he made it Egg-shaped, here's what Lisan Al-arab says about Daha:

I said it was synonymous with a word (duhiya) that (basically) means to flatten the Earth (like how an Ostrich does to bury it's eggs). All of which is moot as you are just corrupting the translation with your personal bias:

an-Naba' 78:6
Sahih International
"Have We not made the earth a resting place?"

Nuh 71:19
Sahih International
"And Allah has made for you the earth an expanse"

the prophet said: " I have been sent with the shortest expression carrying the widest meanings" [Bukhari]

Dahaha also means expanded, which is also scientifically true.

Look at how the continents of the earth are shaped like. They look like they've been one round and all-connected piece of land in the past and then slowly spread out and split into the continents that we have today due to an expansion of the earth from its sides.

Source

So what you are basically saying is that your Prophet gave plenty of leeway to make things up to fit whatever hole might be in front of you.

Got it.

Before modern times it is funny how it never got translated as 'egg-shaped' and remained as expanse/extent and so on.

do you mean that pre-islamic Arabs knew that Iron was sent down from Heaven?

such strange days, when we say Arabs were civilized the answer is "no they weren't, they lived in the desert" but if we say the Arabs were not Educated at the Time of Muhammad you say no they must have learnt that science from Ancient Egyptians. and the biggest fail is that it was you who claimed to have sources that prove most Arabs were Illiterate

You guys did not call it first, it was an established notion, it is what it is.

Furthermore the translations of that verse differ:

Al Hadid 57:25
Pickthall
"...And He revealed iron, wherein is mighty power and (many) uses for mankind, and that Allah may know him who helpeth Him and His messengers, though unseen. Lo! Allah is Strong, Almighty."

Hardly the same imagery as it being sent down.

Also, other things were 'sent down' for mankind in the Qur'an, such as cattle:

Az-Zumar 39:6
Khan
"...And He has sent down for you of cattle eight pairs (of the sheep, two, male and female; of the goats, two, male and female; of the oxen, two, male and female; and of the camels, two, male and female).""

Cattle from space is best cattle. Other translations exist with this saying 'revealed' as well, which just goes to prove that it does not have the portent you desperately want it to have.

Again with clothing:

Sūrat l-aʿrāf 7:26
Shakir
"O children of Adam! We have indeed sent down to you clothing to cover your shame..."

Other translations exist yet again with instead of 'sent down' they are 'bestowed'.

Again, there are seven partitions but those represent the all of the subordinate layers. You are looking at the pictures and the pretty colors while ignoring the text to the right of the original image and the markings referring to primary layers such as the mantle and lithosphere layers which make it 9. Typically as was mentioned by another poster here they are not referred to in this way very often and are instead classified by far more important factors than the depth, such as their mechanical and chemical properties to which there are only 5 layers in each of those classifications outside the primary three layers which is confirmed by the USGS website where you got the original unmodified image.

Your original list of layers (with some notations of mine added for perspective):

"crust (a subordinate layer)
lithosphere (contains the crust layer and uppermost mantle layer as seen in this image)
upper mantle (listed in this image as the proper name the uppermost mantle layer)
astenoshpere (part of the mantle layer)
lower mantle (has two parts in the above image known as the upper and lower mesosphere which are part of the overall mantle layer)
outer core
inner core"

You count the lithosphere layer but fail to realize it is not one of the colored partitions in that image but is in fact listed to the right of the image by lines showing all of it's subordinate layers and under it the mantle layer is listed in the same way and shows it's subordinate layers. Which as I said takes it past seven in this particular accounting of layers by depth (which again is one of the least descriptive ways to actually classify the layers as the most important factors are their chemical and rheological makeup).

please insert your brain into your head before Replying.

She wanted to be there so she was when inevitably a naval campaign came up which was also likely spurred on by the idea set forth in a holy book that they should do something like that. This is easily a self-fulfilled prophecy.

i double checked your sources and i couldn't find that Humans knew Honey came from female bees, but let' assume i found it, are you saying Arabs knew that from Aristotle? if yes, go up two Quotes and you'll see my answer.

As I said, they likely knew, it is very plausible that it was an established notion. More plausible than talking babies and ants, for example:

An-Naml 27:18
Sahih International
"Until, when they came upon the valley of the ants, an ant said, "O ants, enter your dwellings that you not be crushed by Solomon and his soldiers while they perceive not."

Maryam 19:29-30
"But she pointed to the babe. They said: "How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?" He (Baby Jesus) said: "I am indeed a servant of Allah: He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet;"

Which is more likely, talking babies and ants or the mere plausibility that humans who had for quite some time studied bees knew which of their gender made honey?

Occam's razor.

hang on, i wasn't talking about how Mountains were created, but how they prevent the shaking of the Earth.

As I said, they are created by this 'shaking' of the Earth, they are the effect, the movement is the cause, they do not prevent movement, opposing tectonic plates colliding are what prevent persistent shaking.

you could've spared yourself from embarrassment by checking it out on Google translator, Samawat is the Plural of Samaa.

Embarrassment? I ask questions to learn, you should try it sometime. By your logic it must be embarrassing for you as well, after all roughly 82% of Muslims cannot speak fluent Arabic.

no it does not contradict me, it doesn't say "we are not it's expanders"

Do you think that is what it takes to contradict the meaning you put on the verse? Silly man. See response to below quote.

and i already answered that in my post, but i'll do it again:

"And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander." [Sahih International]

"With power did We construct the heaven. Verily, We are Able to extend the vastness of space thereof" [Muhsin Khan]

"We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof)."[Pickthall]

"And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample."[Shakir]

"And the heaven (is also a sign). We have built it with (Our) Hands (i.e., Capability) and surely We are indeed extending (it) wide" [Ghali]

all give the same meaning, all say that God is the one who is making the Heaven expand.

except for Yusuf Ali, he says that God is the Creator of the Wide space.

No they do not all have the same meaning. Makers (noun) of things ample (noun) is not the same as we are indeed extending (verb) it. Nouns versus verbs. Most of them use nouns. Only one uses a verb with the correct present progressive tense to mean what you want it to. The rest do not have this meaning.

I have suspected for awhile now that your lack of a full understanding of the English language may be cause for much of the misunderstanding in this debate and I think this goes to prove that.

Also none of these match your original translation of the verse you tried to use to prove this supposed divine revelation:

"And the Heaven, We constructed with power and skill and verily We are expanding it" (51:47)

What hat did you pull this rabbit out of?

Furthermore:

Shakir
21:32
"And WE have made the heaven a roof, well-protected"

Luqman 31:10
"He created the heavens without pillars that you see"

The first is self-explanatory and the latter which appears to describe invisible pillars for a standing structure.

because if you do you would expose yourself as the Biggest ass on the Internet. "We" is Used as a Plural of Majesty, ask anyone here on the forums about that.

So you are saying it has weakness like human monarchs who have to puff themselves up like peacocks at every turn to stay in power.

Got it.

"Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together, before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (21:30)

Your point being that you found yet another contradiction in the Qur'an?

Even if this was an earlier point in time shortly after the universe remains as smoke (supposedly) and the Earth is created from it and thus 'cloved Asunder'. Which takes us back to 41:11, which is not an accurate account of the creation of the universe or the Earth. This could not have happened because the universe is almost 14 billion years old by our recent studies and the Earth is only 4.54 billion years old which is far outside the Universe's existence in a gaseous state.

All of which is moot, because again, smoke was non-existent at this gaseous stage. Smoke is a gas, but it is a type of gas, a type of gas that was not in existence yet because the materials required had not been created. See my response to your next quote for further details on this matter.

21:30
Shakir
"Do not those who disbelieve see that the heavens and the earth were closed up, but We have opened them; and We have made of water everything living, will they not then believe?"

This tells a slightly different version where they could have been closed up separately and opened separately, which again fits more in line with verse 41:11. So here we have more uncertainty in the text, more corruption of the message as it can mean different things.

God Almighty initially created the Universe, or the "samaa" with smoke (Dukhan). Dukhan in Arabic refers to the smoke coming from fire, which is always HOT GAS.

He created the universe with smoke from fire? Then really did he not just create the universe from fire? No mention of that, odd.

It seems like you are just making stuff up now, which is line with religion itself, are you going to start your own chapter of the Qur'an?

Even if I were to accept your newest creation story fire can burn and not produce smoke. Smoke needs carbon or organic material to exist, which none did at this stage.

first, didn't you say Hadiths were Unreliable and we should not take information from them?

My point is that the source is not divine. In this story is depicted the likeness of a cult leader who made up rules based on his personal situation as it developed. I am saying that there is obvious hypocrisy when you correlate the two which gleans that both are to be considered non-divinely sourced and are instead rooted in the needs and wants of mankind only.

secondly, the issue is and was controversial amongst muslims, weather she was his Wife or Concubine, how are you so sure? some Authenitic Hadiths say that he freed her.

And yet you claim to have no controversy, to have have no contradictions, to have the truest and least corrupt book. Then why the uncertainty and conflicting accounts?

thirdly, How is God excusing the Prophet here, on the contrary, God said that the Prophet should not make what was lawful to him Unlawful.

So what you are saying is you are buying this hook, line and sinker? He just made it up to have sex with whoever he wanted.

yet again you did not use your brain, Arabs were not Educated people, and illiterate as you say, you use this Aristotle thing when you do not know what to say. so indeed, the Quran does contain miracles, and you couldn't refute that, so you jump to Aristotle hoping that he may rescue you from this hard situation you are currently in.

You do realize Aristotle described it more accurately in how the density of the water came into play, yes? However both he and the Qur'an got it wrong as they do mix to form a brackish flowing water in an estuary, which is why I said 'I will not bother explaining estuaries to you' and just pointed out an older more accurate notion that the one in the Qur'an.

Source on estuaries.

so when Someone is afraid of something he mentions it in his book? nice logic.

Is that not what your whole religion is based on, the fear of Allah and avoiding his punishments? Taqwa, or 'piety', which in this case is to literally be afraid of god, to constantly mind him with fear.

i again say: God guides who he wills, you clearly admit that the Quran mentions scientific facts, after that you say that doesn't prove it is the word of God.

You think it was impossible to notice that the oceans did not overtake entire rivers with salt water without a book saying that a man said an angel said god said so? It just mentions it, poorly, with obvious lack of understanding as to how it even happens.

oh and you are so Sure! no one knows all the information in the Qur'an, Early muslims didn't think that Iron was sent down from outside the earth, nevertheless the Qur'an did say that it was sent down from Heaven. i remember reading an article were someone found the Speed of Light in the Qur'an. so no, no one knows all the information in the Qur'an, and God said in the Qur'an:

They said a lot of things were sent down from heaven. And no one knows all the information in the Qur'an? Yet you claim many memorize it entirely and it claims to be very clear about everything.

"We will show them Our Signs in the universe, and in their ownselves, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the truth. Is it not sufficient in regard to your Lord that He is a Witness over all things?"

This details the speed of light? Again, mental gymnastics applied to vague statements.

after a few decades you will find more Scientific facts in the Quran being discovered.

Unlikely. For example the translation of verse 51:47 only started having words like 'expanding' and 'extending' in modern times to fit new science to protect itself and the same for verses that depict the shape of the Earth. What you really mean is, every few decades the Qur'an will do back-flips and re-translations to try and keep up with new scientific discoveries or apply vague nonsense like the quote above this one to these discoveries to stay alive.

and how this doesn't talk about the Qur'an

I assume you mean 'and this doesn't talk about Qur'an' as how inverts that meaning to say that it does talk about the Qur'an.

Most translations of this verse do not specify that it is the book of decrees, many could make this mistake, which again goes to show the nature of the issue itself of the Qur'an having so few people who can actually read it in Arabic. A serious mismanagement as far as deities go.

Thanks for pointing that out.

you say they are fabrications when you can't reply. got it.

It is hardly worth a reply. It is called false pattern recognition or 'apophenia'.

oh come on, where is the Contradiction? Moses heard the Voice of God, but did he see him? no, and nowhere in the Qur'an it says Moses Saw God, hence "from behind a a veil"

It was not about sight, it was whether god spoke to mortals directly or just with intermediaries. The first verse I quoted mentions god only speaks to mortals by inspiration or from behind a veil, as so the person does not know he is being spoken to by god and yet the second verse depicts neither of these as god speaks to Noah directly.

It contradicts itself.

of course, you don't know, why didn't you check that in Asbab al-Nuzool if you truly claim you have sources?

so this verse was revealed only to answer back the Myths of the Jews back then, Children being born Cross-eyed or having mental diseases.

The issue is that it equates them to property, their 'fields'.

You need to understand the background of many Islamophobes

Again, I aim arguing my point, generally, against all organized religion. Though yours like many others is not a peach to look at, it is just one of the few which has any kind of executive authority in the modern era in the places where it is most prevalent and thus has an opportunity to enforce it's arbitrary and oppressive rules on people.

This is a dream come true for many men. They have been pursuing this dream for centuries. They finally succeeded when they convinced women that sex without marriage is not a sin if it is by mutual consent between grownups. A majority of Western women, unfortunately, fell for it.

Convinced women? Women fell for it? As if in many places women in your religion have any say. They all too often have to do what the men tell them or else. It is hard to find statistics on the abuse of women in such circumstances as few make it out to tell their story, and are indoctrinated at a young age and are encouraged through familial and societal bonds if not governmental ones too not to speak out against the infringement of their rights or that they even deserve any rights.

North Korea is a good comparison, the rest of the world has a strong glean on the horrors that take place inside the country but very few reports and statistics exist because the trickle of information, survivors and escapees are too few.

The result is what you see everyday of children born out of wedlock, single mothers, abortions, abandoned children, cheating husbands, one-night stands, promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases,

These single mothers and abandoned children in many places still have a higher human development index levels than many Muslim communities. And in case you have not noticed, sexually transmitted diseases are not limited to the West.

I have heard things like this before:

"They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things?" ~ Cliven Bundy

Pretty close to your ideal for women.

women treated as sex or display objects, etc.

As opposed to being forced or shamed to cover themselves?

It is a truly sad state of affairs for women who may actually be duped into thinking that they are “liberated.”

Right, because freedom is a bad thing.

It is also a sad state of affairs for men who may be feeling in full control, yet their souls are in pain for violating God’s commandments.

You are still afraid of monsters.

Did you know that more than half of new converts to Islam are women? That is what Western men are afraid of! Muslim women will not date them.

Source for Women converting to Islam

From that source:

"...many of the British women who adopt Islam say they have a daily struggle to assimilate their new beliefs within a wider culture that both implicitly and explicitly positions them as outsiders, regardless of their Western upbringing."

"More than three-quarters told researchers they had experienced high levels of confusion after conversion, due to the conflicting ways Islam was presented to them."

"Many mosques still bar women from worship or provide scant resources for their needs, forcing them to rely on competing cultural and ideological interpretations within books or the internet for religious support."

"My research also found converts came in two types: some are converts of convenience, who adopt the religion because of a life situation such as meeting a Muslim man, although the religion has little discernible impact on their day-to-day lives. For others it is a conversion of conviction where they feel a calling and embrace the religion robustly."

another one

From that source:

"In 2001, there were an estimated 60,000 Muslim converts in Britain. Since then, the country has seen the spread of violent Islamist extremism and terror plots, including the July 7 bombings."

"Converts who have turned to terror include Nicky Reilly, who tried to blow up a restaurant in Bristol with a nail bomb, shoe bomber Richard Reid and July 7 bomber Germaine Lindsay."

Maybe read your sources before using them. You have a bad habit of not doing this.

Why do so many women accept Islam?

Most of them do not have a choice in the stricter Islamic states. They are too terrified to leave, they have nowhere to go, they fear being alone, their children being taken from them, fear of the physical reprisal if they are caught after fleeing. More commonly they are brain-washed to believe they deserve their situation, as believing is survival, so they accept the indignation to make it another day until they forget they ever wanted something more if they even dared risk thinking that in the first place.

Didn’t they read the Quran and see that Verse?

"More than three-quarters told researchers they had experienced high levels of confusion after conversion, due to the conflicting ways Islam was presented to them."

how does Husbands being the heads of their family not make women bread-winners?

I never said it did. I said many households have female bread-winners, which is an American colloquialism for the person in a relationship who makes the most money and thus usually a majority of the major decisions are up to them such as where to live (where their job takes them) and what can be purchased, that is at least if the other partner does not have their own personal income.

Why does their need to be a male and only a male as the head of the family?

"But the men have a degree over them in responsibility and authority. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise." [Sahih Translation]

"but men have a degree of responsibility over them. And Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise" [Muhsin Khan]

"but men have a degree of advantage over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise." [Yusuf Ali]

"and men are a degree above them. Allah is Mighty, Wise." [Pickthall]

"and the men are a degree above them, and Allah is Mighty, Wise." [shakir]

"and men have a degree above them; and Allah is Ever-Mighty, Ever-Wise" [Ghali]

all of the translations do not contain "status". the verse wasn't talking about Status, but about Responsibility, funny thing is that the Verse before it completly contradicts your translation, "And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them"

The key word there is 'similar', not the same, similar, my friend. Also the removal of status does not really change anything, it still says they are a degree above them and 'responsibility' and 'advantage' replace the word 'status' and have just as large connotations to superiority.

Another prime example just as the one above, woman's testimony is only worth half that of a man:
Qur'an 2:282
"And call to witness, from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not (at hand) then a man and two women"

so? in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt Women participated in the Elections and won. what's the big deal?

Many of which was after the influx of western ideals.

Eggs don't necessarily look like what you have in your fridge, These are eggs, too.

1 2 3 4 5 6

You and I both know it was referring to an ostrich egg, 'dahaha' is derived from 'duhiya' (an ostrich egg), which the Earth looks nothing like, and who bury their eggs and flatten the ground over them. Furthermore only a small percentage of avian eggs are round.

In your own words on this subject:

So as we clearly see, all of the above Arabic words that are derived from "daha" mean:

1- To extend.

2- To even out.

3- Causing to become egg-shaped or creating, making or producing eggs

A wise man once said, "two out of three ain't bad".

the inner surface is not fit to be lived on, the outer crust is spread out like a carpet on it, so that we can walk, run, go about on it. this isn't talking about the Earth's shape at all.

Keep telling yourself that.

and this verse you have been Chattering about, does not contain the Word "clearly", it says ""We have revealed the Book to you explaining everything" which is what the Qur'an does.

Qur'an 16:89
Shakir
"And We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything"

Qur'an 16:89
Sahih International
"And We have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things"

Qur'an 16:89
Muhammad Sarwar
"We have sent you the Book which clarifies all matters."

Qur'an 16:89
Arberry
"And We have sent down on thee the Book making clear everything"

Yet more examples of the frailty of translating the Qur'an from Arabic to another language and the mismanagement of a holy text by it's deity where only the fewest can even read it's true text. Allah does not impress me.

in Islam Muhammad- peace be upon him- is the Last messenger, what we proved is that the teachings of other prophets to various nations around the world have not dissapeared completely.

So let me get this trait, anyone before Muhammad who claimed worship and prophet-hood of a single deity was Allah and one his messengers, everyone after was a two face liar? Makes perfect sense, because all those people before were totally telling the truth, Muhammad too, taken on face value alone, no second thought needed.

yep, asses get handed to people when they claim they know enough about religion, when they are not.

You do realize that I was not even talking to you in that quote, right?

are you comparing the Muslims of that Age with the Muslims now? where are the True Muslims today? as if the rulers of the Islamic World today were the same as Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Umar ibn Abd Al-Aziz, Alp Arslan, Salahuddin, Mehmet II and many others.

I was referring to the state of the Muslim community across the world.

and God's Covenant was clear, if you follow what the Prophet had teached, you will never lose,

Several sources which I made evident a few posts up from yours say otherwise.

the Prophet talked about them:

"Prophethood will remain with you for as long as Allah wills it to remain, then Allah will raise it up wherever he wills to raise it up. Afterwards, there will be a Caliphate that follows the guidance of Prophethood remaining with you for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then, He will raise it up whenever He wills to raise it up. Afterwards, there will be a reign of violently oppressive rule and it will remain with you for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then, there will be a reign of tyrannical rule and it will remain for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then, Allah will raise it up whenever He wills to raise it up. Then, there will be a Caliphate that follows the guidance of Prophethood." [Bukhari]

He spoke with vagaries to sound like he knew what he was talking about. Ancient 'oracles' did this all the time, they could not actually fortell the future, they just ventured guesses and enclosed them in vagaries so they could never really be wrong. Psychics, con-artists that is, do this still today.

not all the Muslims at that time did memorize the whole Qur'an, a group of people did, they were called Huffath. that's why i said "there were companions who memorized the Qur'an" not "All companions memorized the Qur'an"

So what your saying is there is room for error in that parts of it could have been lost, as they had to be gathered by people who could not tell if all the pieces were there.

so? what are you trying to prove here? are you implying that the Qur'an was not written at the Time of the Prophet

It might not have been, not in entirety. You cannot prove otherwise.

I will also say some of it was likely written down before he was born and he just adopted older stories. I mean he borrowed a lot from Judaism and Christendom, total plagiarist that guy (why reinvent the wheel, I guess), who is to say he stopped there? And a lot of does seem like folk-tale. The fly's super easy poison cure and the Jinn are good examples.

The Qur'an itself contains many passages which refer to its written form. There appear to be four chapters (Sura's or Sifirs) of the Qur'an which refer to the Qur'an's written form explicitly. I'll quote them:

"By no means! Indeed it is a message of Instruction, Therefore, whoever wills, should remember, On leaves held in honour, Exalted, purified, In the hands of scribes, Noble and pious" (80:11-16)

"Nay, this is the glorious Qur'an, on a Tablet preserved" (85:21-22)

"This is a glorious Reading, In a book well-kept, Which none but the purified teach, This is a Revelation from the Lord of the Worlds" (56: 77-80)

"They said: Tales of the ancients which he had caused to be written and they are dictated to him morning and evening" (25: 5) even the Polytheists acknowledge that the Qur'an was written.

My story-book says so, boy does that never get old with religious people.

why did you make this bold?, it actually proves my point, Arabic had 7 dialects, and that people started writing the Qur'an according to their own tongue, which is the main reason why Abu Bakr, the first Caliph, and Uthman, the Third Caliph, ordered for the Qur'an to be Standardized. Thank you.

They had their versions, he had his, he won, so his lived on. This is what religion tends to do in history, it wipes out anything off message out of fear and insecurity. If they were simply reciting it wrong, why would he burn it? Why fear translation, if you as you admit, claim this book was meant for the whole world?

I see you have been suspended upon request, where is the fun in that? No fair.

Seriously, Shaxx and Cyrene, you should move this discussion to private messages. It has almost nothing to do with the topic anymore and it's RIDICULOUSLY long-winded, boring and most of all has not a semblance of a point to it. This is no debate, this is a contest of who gets tired first.

I agree, though lack of real debate is common when religion is involved, they will never drop their notions no matter how much evidence is provided despite the god they worship largely being an arbitrary choice made by where they were born and who they were raised by and nothing else. I just like pissing in people's cheerios who have a bit of a haughty attitude like Cyrene when they talk about their imaginary friends, and I got some rep for it, too. Heh.

From what I read, it seems like most muslims who answered here have conceded that they believe they at least have the right to kill apostates, even though they wouldn't do it themselves. Isn't this how it goes? A lot of people may have believed among the nazis that Jews caused all of our problems, but only the most extreme of that large bunch actively sought to exterminate them.

A sensible argument with grave portent.