The BBC reports today:
‘What may be the world’s oldest fragments of the Quran have been found by the University of Birmingham.
Radiocarbon dating found the manuscript to be at least 1,370 years old, making it among the earliest in existence. The pages of the Muslim holy text had remained unrecognised in the university library for almost a century. The British Library’s expert on such manuscripts, Dr Muhammad Isa Waley, said this “exciting discovery” would make Muslims “rejoice”. The manuscript had been kept with a collection of other Middle Eastern books and documents, without being identified as one of the oldest fragments of the Quran in the world.’
Full article here
‹ Ikea
Blogging Theology 
Great discovery!
It has high probability of pre-dating the caliphate of Othman. And, interestingly, Professor David Thomas confirmed that the text of this eye-witness old manuscript virtually does not differ with the one in the hands of Muslims today.
LikeLiked by 1 person
More proof the Qur’an is not PERFECTLY preserved
LikeLike
depends what you mean by ‘perfectly’. There are insignificant variants – so what? Your Bible has a large number of significant variants. Care for a list?
LikeLike
Please do. Show me one textual variant that portrays an Islamic ISA. Show me one Textual Variant where Jesus says these exact words “I am not God do not worship me”. Show me one textual variant that says Jesus was not crucified “it was only made to appear that way.”
LikeLike
what’s an Islamic ISA?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Bible has lots of very significant textual variants. Do you know what a variant is? It is not the absence of Islamic doctrine (lol). Textual variants arise when a copyist makes deliberate or inadvertent changes to the New Testament. Some common alterations include the deletion, rearrangement, repetition, addition, or replacement of one or more words or paragraphs.
Here’s a biggy:
The story of Jesus and the woman taken in adultery in John 7-8, it’s in some manuscripts but not in other early manuscripts. So is the story in John or not? (Hint: its not in any early manuscripts – but it’s in all modern Bibles!)
Just look at all this textual corruption, here is a list as requested:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_variants_in_the_New_Testament
LikeLike
Wow thats a biggy? Hmmm so how does the woman caught in adultery mean that Jesus is really Isa, who did not die on the cross and it was only made to look like he died on the cross? Can you find me any textual variant that backs up the Islamic Isa?
LikeLike
now you are just being silly (yawn). I thought we were having a serious discussion. You’re a Christian right? Do not the textual variants in the NT concern you?
LikeLike
Hey I’m just trying to keep up with you. You made the claim that the bible has ” significant variants.” The woman caught in adultry is not a “Significant” variant since it does change any of the doctrines of Christianity. BTW where is that verse on stoning in the Quran? According to one of the rightly guided Caliphs there was a verse on Stoning. Where is the Surah that was more more sever then the longest surah in the Quran. According to Aisha there was such a surah.
LikeLike
Of course it is a significant variant! And many Christians oppose the death penalty based on this story (a point of doctrine). It is a massively popular Bible story amongst Christians – except it is not in the earliest manuscripts!
The stoning verse was abrogated during the prophet’s lifetime. It is not in the final version taught by the Prophet:
‘None of Our revelations do We abrogate [nansakh] or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?’
2:106
LikeLike
So its massively popular bible story, and being in favor of or opposing the death penalty has nothing to do with any the doctrines of Christianity. So how do you know that it doesn’t belong in the Gospel of John? The only way you could know is that if we have the older manuscripts. (more on that later)As far as your claim that stoning has been abrogated at least one Rightly guided caliph (Uthaman I believe) and the majority of Muslims scholars disagree with you.
Speaking of Uthman, how do you feel about him being so hated by his contemporaries, that after he compiled his authorized version of the Quran, he was murdered in his own home, and his corpse left to rot for three days. They hated him so much that he was only allowed to be buried in the Jewish part of the cemetery. And even then only undercover of darkness with a very small party of attendees.
That doesn’t bother you? I mean everyone abandoned him, after he gave them his authorized version of the Quran.
Now back to the woman caught in adultry, see we have the older manuscripts thats how we know. YOU don’t have any evidence as to what the verse on stoning said, and worse you have no idea what the entire surah that was longer then the longest surah actually said. Doesn’t that bother you. I mean what could have been in that lengthy surah that Uthman left it out of his authorized version before he was MURDERED. Doesn’t that bother you?
LikeLike
So Paul can you find me one Textual variant that effects any of the doctrines of Christianity?
LikeLike
Billy you ask,
‘So Paul can you find me one Textual variant that effects [sic] any of the doctrines of Christianity?’
I know many conservative evangelicals and they all subscribe to the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy – a key doctrine for fundamentalist Christians. Yet, in reality, their Bibles are far from perfect – some key stories (like the one in John) were added to the gospel by unknown scribes centuries later, yet they are in their inerrant Bibles!
Now I admit that this doctrine is not held by more liberal Christians. But Christians are divided about what constitutes their key religious doctrines. For some committed liberal Christians (especially Roman Catholics) opposition to the death penalty is a key part of their faith and this forged text in John is key to their justification of it.
LikeLike
Do you even know what any of the doctrines of Christianity are?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Billy, please stop. Please just sop telling tales.
Uthman ra was killed by a group of rebels when he was around 90 years old. People took turns to pray the funeral prayers in his home over his body. He was buried in what was East of Al Baqi at that time. And as for Jewish cemeteries, do you even think what you write or do you grab any spurious story you can? How many Jews were living in that land at the time? So how could there still be a Jewish cemetery there in any case? Think
On your false suggestion that the people abandoned him based on what happened regarding the Quran…erm that was a collective decision that the Companions ra were involved in. See a statement from Ali ra on this.
And Billy rather than talk about something you don’t understand – something that is not meant to be in the recitation of the Quran is not a problem for anybody with any knowledge and common sense. Here’s Br. Bassam Zawadi’s summary on this:
We can clearly see that there was a consensus amongst the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the scholars that the recitation of the verse on stoning was abrogated and that they did not corrupt it. How can all the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) who sacrificed everything they had for this religion just happen to decide to come together and purposely corrupt the Quran by removing this verse? What motive would they have in doing so if its law was to remain being implemented? So there can’t be a motive to remove this verse simply because they wished to not follow its ruling since the ruling still remains in effect up to this day.
So clearly the evidence shows that this recitation was always meant to be abrogated while its ruling remains in effect.
http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/the_quranic_verse_on_stoning
Now stop playing games and tell me, before Von Tischendorf’s 1800’s find of the Codex Sinaiticus, Bible believing Christians believed the last few verses of Mark were inspired. And all of a sudden the Christian community relegated that chunk of Biblical text to the ‘possible forgery list’. Now you tell me, what is stopping a new find where another chunk in your NT is downgraded to a ‘possible forgery’ because it’s not included in the earlier Mss?
Do Christians constantly refresh the news pages just in case there’s a new NT find…do you boys and girls do that before you go to church every Sunday (or every Christmas or Wedding in the case of many of you)? I guess the James White types would be doing that, after all they wouldn’t want the Pastor to be reading known forgeries to them, right?
Think about it, Billy.Boy
LikeLiked by 1 person
Billy
You said;
Speaking of Uthman, how do you feel about him being so hated by his contemporaries, that after he compiled his authorized version of the Quran, he was murdered in his own home, and his corpse left to rot for three days. They hated him so much that he was only allowed to be buried in the Jewish part of the cemetery. And even then only undercover of darkness with a very small party of attendees.
That doesn’t bother you? I mean everyone abandoned him, after he gave them his authorized version of the Quran.
I say;
What is your proof that Caliph Uthman was assassinated because of the compilation of the Quran?
Caliph Uthman was not left to rot three days. That is a lie.
Caliph Umar was the second Caliph after the first Abubakar. Caliph Umar did not do anything with regards to the Quran and was murdered. Your naivety would have triggered you to say he was murdered because he did something about the Quran.
Ali the fourth Caliph was murdered and has nothing to do with the Quran. Christian orientalists claimed Ali did not like the Othman compilation of the Quran and was disagreement with him as you claimed. Well, Ali had the chance to become a Caliph himself and has the power to reverse the Quran to his liken, but guess what? He did not reverse the Quran but instead praised Othman for his good job in compiling the Quran.
Ali was murdered. Does that mean Ali also compiled the Quran?
Umar was also murdered when nothing was done to the fragments of Quran in leaves, bark, shoulders of camel etc. does that mean also that Umar was murdered because he compiled the Quran?
The grand child of the prophet who has nothing to do with the Quran was murdered and the murder continues just like the Ancient Christians like Calvin murdered Michael and came down to protestant Christians persecuting Catholics and Catholics murdering protestants. Arius and his followers were either murdered and or persecuted by Emperor Constantine of Rome.
Before the Prophet of Islam, the Arabs fight with rivals tribes and it was the prophet who united them. After his death the started their old rivalries and that that is why they keep murdering themselves and has nothing to with the Quran.
When I listened to this independent significant, scientific research and result of the oldest Quran on earth by non Muslims and broadcast on BBC, I visited this blog and lo and behold Paul Williams, I know will publish it.
I was going to comment “lets see what the Christians will say”, knowing very well some like you will talk shit.
You have your gospels which have people raising from their graves and visiting their friends and families as recorded by the Gospel of Mathew alone for such a big news at that time was not recorded by anyone except Mathew alone and you want us to believe it but do not want to believe an independent research by non Muslims with regards to the oldest Quran in the time of our prophet.
You believe Paul of Tarsus who is not a disciple of Jesus and has not met Jesus before and had written about Jesus but to discredit and independent research. Where did Paul of Tarsus got his information? According to scholars it is around 40 to 60 years that Paul of Tarsus wrote about Jesus. Who gave Paul of Tarsus that information after these years which contradicts itself and the teachings of Jesus that you want us to believe.
The earlier a document does not mean it is true or will not contain lies, inconsistencies and half truths. The later a document does not mean it is lie or it is not true. To ascertain a true document with regards to the God of Abraham, one must use his intellect to learn the consistent message of the God of Abraham as always repeated as One, Only and Alone but not 3, 3 in 1, God-Man, which are not in the Bible.
Christians like one of Dr. J……….. will falsely argue that oh “We have more manuscript” , “we thousands of manuscripts” and some Christians are using his arguments. Who tells this Christians Doctor that the more manuscript you have the truth you have? It is philosophical bankruptcy to think that.
You can have billions of manuscript, written in the 40 to 60 years of Jesus time, if they are not written in Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke and by Jesus, and does not say God is One, Only and Alone to be full of lies.
Thanks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Billy “So Paul can you find me one Textual variant that effects any of the doctrines of Christianity?”
The Codex Sinaiticus. It contains 2 whole books! more than your contemporary NT. One of them is the “Shepherd of Hermas” with an Angel Christology. That’s probably the reason why it was removed from the canon later on. When the human philosophical concept of the trinity was declared orthodoxy and established by force.
LikeLiked by 1 person
let’s not forget 1 John 5:7
King James Version:
‘For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.’
Billy I am a bit rusty on this – is the Trinity a key doctrine in Christianity?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Paul,
1 john 5:7. Do you know what year the doctrine of the trinity was made dogma? It was in 325 AD at the council of Nicea. Can you give me one Bishop that was at the council of Nicea that quoted or used 1 John 5:7 as an argument for the doctrine of the Trinity? No you can’t because the first Greek text containing 1 John 5:7 comes from the 16th century. Can you give me one Church Bishop who quoted 1 John 5:7 from the Latin translations of the Greek text at Nicea? No you can’t, because “the earliest instance of the passage is in a 4th century Latin treatise entitled Liber Apologeticus (chap. 4), attributed either to Priscillian (d. ca. 385) or his follower Bishop Instantius in Spanish. The passage was apparently written in the margin as an allegorical gloss. In the 6th century scribes began to include it within the text of 1 John 5, where it shows up in later copies of the Old Latin. It is not dfound in Jerome’s original Vulgate translation (ca. AD 400).
So a textual variant that did not exist in the original Greek manuscripts or in the Latin translations of those manuscripts until centuries after the doctrine of the trinity, can not be used to either support, or refute the doctrine of the trinity since it did not exist before or during the council of Nicea.
So I ask again can you show me one TEXTUAL variant that impacts in anyway any Church doctrine?
You say the Quran has textual variants, but it is perfectly preserved. Even though the Islamic standard has been until recently, that the Quran is exactly as it was spoken, WORD for WORD from Mohameds lips to it being written down on the page. No textual variants. As a matter of fact I believe that was the standard that you held in your first debate with Nabeel Qureshi way back when. (I could be wrong it has been a while since I listened to that debate). Either way that is the standard and belief that most FOM’s (fresh out of madrassa) Muslims hold to. A side note on this, there is a debate with Bassam Zawadi where he tries to explain away the textual variants in the Quranic manuscripts by doing the 7 Ahruf bit, which caused one Muslim to say in the debate “I have never heard this…”
But now back to the bible. So the bible just like the Quran has textual variants but Muslims say that the bible is corrupt because of these textual variants? Do you see the double standard. Of course you don’t because you will say that the bible has “significant” textual variants even though you can not point to a single textual variant that impacts, or challenges any Christian held doctrine. Again double standard.
LikeLike
Billy
“1 john 5:7. Do you know what year the doctrine of the trinity was made dogma? It was in 325 AD at the council of Nicea.”
Oh dear, I didn’t even get beyond your first sentence. You don’t know much about church history do you? The trinity was not mentioned once at Nicea. It was not convened to discuss the trinity. Please do some homework before mouthing off on my blog.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yahya Snow wrote…
“Uthman ra was killed by a group of rebels when he was around 90 years old. People took turns to pray the funeral prayers in his home over his body. He was buried in what was East of Al Baqi at that time. And as for Jewish cemeteries, do you even think what you write or do you grab any spurious story you can? How many Jews were living in that land at the time? So how could there still be a Jewish cemetery there in any case? Think”
LOL How many Jews where living in Medina? LOL umm NONE because the Muslims had killed them all or ethnically cleansed the land of Jews. But before the Muslims committed genocide of the Jews living in Medina they did live in and around Medina, and cemeteries are for the DEAD not for the living. THINK.
Question where these “rebels” MUSLIM?
I don’t know where you are getting your information from, I am getting it from Tabari Volume XV The Crisis of the Early Caliphate, and here is a brief overview of a few facts that Tabari lays out.
1. Three Armies composed of Garrison troops from three different regions of the Islamic empire rode out to Medina and laid seige to it.
2. After a while they came to terms with Uthman and left.
3. They returned after they found out that Uthman had reneged and ordered their executions.
4. When they returned the siege was a little more aggressive, taking over the town and surrounding Uthmans house.
5. A large group of the people of Medina including AISHA left Uthman to go on Haj. Now this is strange as Haj is to be done once in life and only if it can be done, so its not obligatory. The people of Medina including Aisha had been on Haj several times before this, so there was no real reason for them leave their Caliph when he was in trouble to go on Haj.
6. Ali stayed with a few of his supporters and according to Tabari tried to be peace broker between Uthaman and those that declared Uthman an apostate. He was able to bring some relief to Uthman and his family with food and water etc…
7. Some time after Aisha and a number of the Medinans left for “haj” the Muslims attacked Uthman killing him and cutting of the fingers of Uthmans wife. In other words Uthman was “green lit” as they say, once Aisha and others left.
8. Because the Muslims who had took over Medina considered Uthman an apostate they did not allow him to be buried. His body was left to rot in his house for THREE DAYS. Finally undercover of dusk, and in secret a small funeral procession which was comprised of Uthmans intimidate family and I believe Ali. Either way they tried to have him buried in the Muslim section of the cemetery. At this time the cemetery was divided into Jewish and Muslim sections by a wall.
9. The Muslims discovered this plan and intercepted the small funeral procession, and only allowed Uthman to be burried in the Jewish section of the cemetery.
10. It wasn’t until 13 years later that the wall dividing the two parts of the cemetery was knocked down after Medina was conquered by another Muslim.
Those are the essential facts according to Tabari. So where do you get your information from? Do you just grab it from any website like thefactsaboutIslam…
LikeLike
Wow Paul really so the Council of Nicea had nothing to do with the trinity lol. Ok then I think we are done. LOL thanks for playing. Next contestant lol
LikeLike
You said the trinity was made “dogma” at Nicea and you were wrong. Your amateur attempts at polemics are embarrassing.
LikeLike
Intellect wrote…
What is your proof that Caliph Uthman was assassinated because of the compilation of the Quran?
My Response: I never he said he was killed because of his authorized version of the Quran. I said he was killed AFTER he had his authorized version of the Quran. He may have been killed because of that, or it maybe because of nepotism or it could be for a combination of factors. Either way the Muslims who killed him declared and believed he was an apostate.
You wrote…
“Caliph Uthman was not left to rot three days. That is a lie.” According to Al Tabari he was. So what is your source that says he wasn’t?
LikeLike
Billy
You said;
Intellect wrote…
What is your proof that Caliph Uthman was assassinated because of the compilation of the Quran?
My Response: I never he said he was killed because of his authorized version of the Quran. I said he was killed AFTER he had his authorized version of the Quran. He may have been killed because of that, or it maybe because of nepotism or it could be for a combination of factors. Either way the Muslims who killed him declared and believed he was an apostate.
You wrote…
“Caliph Uthman was not left to rot three days. That is a lie.” According to Al Tabari he was. So what is your source that says he wasn’t?
I say;
Correction to you. Caliph Othman did not authorized another version of the Quran. We do not have versions of the Quran like the Christians have versions of the Bible such as King James version to trigger King James only Christians who will not believe any other versions of the Bible such as the Revised Standard versions etc. but King James Bible alone. The more books of the Catholics and the East Ethiopian versions and many more.
Muslims, we have only one Quran as revealed by One, Only and Alone God of Abraham to our prophet Mohammed through Angel Gabriel in the form of recitation and the Quran as its name suggests means recitation. Allah knows by committing His final word into memory and also written will definitely preserve it so He(Allah) instructs Angel Gabriel to be training the prophet and his followers to be committing the whole Quran i.e. recitation into memory, so for some time intervals, the Angel will visit our prophet especially in the month of Ramadan to train him to recite the whole Quran that was revealed, and the prophet will also train his disciples to train them to recite the whole revealed Quran into memory.
At that time poetry is one of the Arabs entertainment by writing good poems and committing them to memory and challenges in good poetic recital and the Quranic poetic devices surpasses all the Arabic poetry at that time. In fact most people at that time converted to Islam because of the beauty of the Quranic poetic devices and one is Abubakar who was on his way to kill the prophet when he heard the Quran being recited and converted knowing this words must come from a divine being.
That tradition of memorization is what you see from the Angel Gabriel to our prophet till today where Muslims will keep reading the whole Quran from cover to cover and those who can will commit what they can into memory. Allah know by that He will keep his final message intact. It is a command in the Quran for Muslims to be reading the Quran and there is a big reward for that. Why because Allah wants to keep his message.
So, after the death of our prophet, people have the Quran in memory and in written form as well. So, the Quran is known by Muslims and no one can change any thing whether in writing and recitation and that is why the wrong recitation by new Muslims was easily detected to trigger Uthman to authorise the compilation of the correct Quraishi dialect to be sent to the new states under Islam to use, in order not to make mistakes. That decision by the disciples help Muslims and Islam but has nothing to add by Othman.
Zaid Bin Thabit is a companion and a chief scribe of our prophet who is the head of the committee to compile the Quraishi dialect Quran and people already recites the Quran in prayers and occasional recitation of the whole Quran as commanded by Allah and trained by Angel Gabriel and is done till today. I swear, every two weeks in my Mosque, we recite the whole Quran as is done by many Mosques in the world, so we do not have versions of Quran. The Qiraat or different mode of recitations is known by those who learned them is recited.
No body will question you when you say; Malik instead of Maaalik. it has the same meaning and imams use the one they like.
No body will question you when you say; Wa ma adraaka ma Lail… instead of Wa ma adreyka ma lail…
No body will question you when you say; Ghairul Maghdub Alaihum instead of Ghairul Maghdub Alaihim
You see you can say Alaihum instead of Alaihim.
It is known as different recitations as revealed by Angel Gabriel and it is known, so you can say or recite either and it carries the same meaning.
Once again, Othman did not authorize another version of the Quran, because we do not have any other version of the Quran available before that project. The only compiled Quran in one book was with the wife of the prophet and it was used with witnesses of other written forms from others combined with the memorizers to produce the same Quran and no version please because it was in peoples memory including the compilers and the one who authorized its compilation.
You said;
You wrote…
“Caliph Uthman was not left to rot three days. That is a lie.” According to Al Tabari he was. So what is your source that says he wasn’t?
I say;
You Christians were the ones who claimed that Al Tabari came centuries after Mohammed, so it is not reliable and now you are using it as true. We have true and lies about our prophet and his companions just like you have true and lies about Jesus and his companions in your Gospels and Apocryphas and it is just like me quoting the Gospel of Thomas about Jesus to you and you will say it is not true. Both Al Tabari and the Gospel of Thomas contains some truths and lies in them and the story about Othman is a big lie.
Thanks
LikeLike
Billy
You said;
Yahya Snow wrote…
“Uthman ra was killed by a group of rebels when he was around 90 years old. People took turns to pray the funeral prayers in his home over his body. He was buried in what was East of Al Baqi at that time. And as for Jewish cemeteries, do you even think what you write or do you grab any spurious story you can? How many Jews were living in that land at the time? So how could there still be a Jewish cemetery there in any case? Think”
LOL How many Jews where living in Medina? LOL umm NONE because the Muslims had killed them all or ethnically cleansed the land of Jews. But before the Muslims committed genocide of the Jews living in Medina they did live in and around Medina, and cemeteries are for the DEAD not for the living. THINK.
Question where these “rebels” MUSLIM?
I don’t know where you are getting your information from, I am getting it from Tabari Volume XV The Crisis of the Early Caliphate, and here is a brief overview of a few facts that Tabari lays out.
1. Three Armies composed of Garrison troops from three different regions of the Islamic empire rode out to Medina and laid seige to it.
I say;
The Bible says; Thou shall not lie. Billy, you lied a big lie. Tell us where did Tabari said, Caliph Uthman was left to rot for 3 days in Arabic or a literature by al Tabari himself not from a book by Stephen Humphrey-The History of al-Tabari Vol. 15
The Crisis of the Early Caliphate: The Reign of ‘Uthman.
The book said he was killed by rebels. If they were Muslims and so what? Do not link it with the Quran. Christians have their rebels too. Like Emperor Constantine killing rebellious Arians.
A quick glance of the book indicates, the murder of Othman has nothing to do with the Quran but by political tension and He(Othman) was old at that time.
Jews were still living in Medina at that time and beyond. Some of them converted not by force but some of them still remains Jews. Jews can be found in Muslim dominated countries till today.
Thanks
LikeLike
It’s not looking good for Islam. U don’t have the original Qur’an. Ur only copy of copies was authorized by what many Muslim contemporaries called an apostate. And even those copies of copies of the apostate Qur’an do not agree wit each other. U have missing verses and even an entire chapter longer then the longest chapter is missing. All of ur copies are copied by some anon scribe. What a mess. Lol
LikeLiked by 1 person
Actually we do have the originals – memorized by millions of Muslims since the time of the Prophet.
LikeLike
Billy
You said;
It’s not looking good for Islam. U don’t have the original Qur’an. Ur only copy of copies was authorized by what many Muslim contemporaries called an apostate. And even those copies of copies of the apostate Qur’an do not agree wit each other. U have missing verses and even an entire chapter longer then the longest chapter is missing. All of ur copies are copied by some anon scribe. What a mess. Lol
I say;
Original Quran is in the memory of every Muslim from Angel Gabriel to our Prophet passed down to us(Muslims) from past to today and to the future reciting the unadulterated Quran(recitation) as it is called and commanded us to recited and commanded our prophet to recite. The written ones are also there to those who do not commit it to memory. The written was compiled by the first Caliph into one place and was used to compile the Othman and to be sent to the newly Muslim states,
Compare it to Paul of Tarsus who never met Jesus at all and start to write lies around 40 to 60 years as the scholars say. Where did Paul of Tarsus got this information from in all these years? No wonder there lies and his messages contradicts Jesus’s own messages and can be seen clearly. Paul said God is immortal and God died for peoples sin. What a childish contradiction.
The Gospels are not reliable either, i.e. Gospel of Mathew reporting of people resurrecting from their graves and visiting their families and friends and only recorded by Mathew gospel alone. You believe a book with all this nonsense just to question an independent research by experts about our earliest Quran.
Thanks
LikeLike
Billy it’s just funny how the critique of this “not-original-fake-apostate Qur’an” regarding the Christian scriptures is confirmed by serious Christian scholarship.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Burhanuddin1 indeed it is.
LikeLike
So u have the original brain that contained the original Qur’an? And if so how do u access it to compare with the memories of the alleged millions
LikeLike
it was memorized by thousands of people originally and passed down through the centuries. Today millions know it by heart. The Quran is indestructible.
LikeLike
Paul so the Qur’an is all hearsay just one big game of telephone or Chinese whispers
LikeLike
hardly. The first Muslims revered the Quran as the literal Words of God Himself and took great pains to memorise it accurately and preserve it. God also promises in the Quran to ensure its preservation.
LikeLike
Billy
You said;
So u have the original brain that contained the original Qur’an? And if so how do u access it to compare with the memories of the alleged millions
I say;
If you want to test to have a proof, just visit a Mosque and pray that, the Imam makes a slight mistakes in his recitation and you will be amazed to see and hear the congregation from all corners of the Mosque firing their correction to him. This is how it was from the time of our prophet till today and will be for the future till the end of the world.
Othman dare not add anything because it is in peoples memory and is recited over and over and in my language it called “reminder”. All languages have the way they call the complete Quran recitation either weekly, daily, bi-weekly, monthly, by monthly etc. Allah commands us to do that. Also it is recited daily in prayers. Imams will like to recite long chapters to prove their knowledge.
Example is this young white British convert who has a reputation of reciting very long verses in memory during salat (prayers).
Listen to An Islamic Scholar(Cleric) from university of Medina name Timothy Humble
Billy, you do not have all this devotions to the Almighty God, who is Only, One and Alone according to the Bible who created you but instead you worship man who is God creation and following Paul of Tarsus instead of Jesus.
So, all nonsense of original Quran and version of Quran are unfounded. We do not have any version of the Quran but one and the original is in peoples mind and heart. The written ones are there for those who could not memorize all but all Muslims have memorized some parts of the Quran for prayers.
You do not have all this in Christianity but you just follow an anonymous writer like Mathew who said ghosts bursts out of their graves and visited their friends and families and it was not history written by any one except him and him alone.
You believe a writer of this fairy tale and disprove an independent research for our new oldest Quran on earth.
Thank you.
LikeLike
Dude I’m not listening to that ugg like nails on a chalk bored to a rational mind.
There is a couple flaws with your claim. First you assume that some people in the Masjid know the quran better then the Imam, second what if those people are the ones who are wrong and the Imam is right. Who is to say. The only way to say is who gets beat up or killed is the one who is wrong.
And thats exactly why the Apostate Uthman had his Authorized version of the Quran produced.
LikeLike
Billy,
You’re a peculiar fella. I would encourage you to checl websites like thefactsaboutislam:) u may be particularly interested in a few new updates on the man who ‘narrates hadith like imams’ James White, see here:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/James%20White
And here’s a little taster
As for my sources regarding information on Uthman, a book called Men and Women Around the Messenger and Sheikh Mumtaz Ul Haq’s lecture. Now you made it out as though everybody had left Uthman…yet Ali appointed his sons to look after him. You also lied saying he was an apostate, Ali ra buried him. No Shia as far as I know even calls him an apostate, have Christian bigots on the net been feeding their sheep nonsense again?
And as for your repeated claim of him being buried in a Jewish cemetery, he was buried in an area of land which he had bought himself:
http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?p=17996
As for his burning of the Quran, this was an agreed upon action by the Companions – it was not simply him acting on his own.
Anyways, I have said my bit, I’m not going to repeat myself. If a Christian bigot on the net has been barking while feeding sheep it does not mean we should take them or the sheep seriously.
Now you would not like it if somebody presented claims to the effect that Paul was imprisoned and beheaded because he abolished circumcision while all the other ‘Christian’ followers of Paul abandoned him and did not try to break him out of prison because they thought he had become an apostate.
Peace.
LikeLike
Intellect wrote…
“You believe a writer of this fairy tale and disprove an independent research for our new oldest Quran on earth.”
My response: Not at all, I believe the research on these Quranic PAGES. That the parchment is radio carbon dated between 568 and 645 AD. Thats the parchement not the writing. So yes the Parchment is old but the writing could be 100’s of years later. I also believe what they say about the writing itself, that being it is very “SIMILAR” and “CLOSE” to what we have today. Similar and close is not word for word perfectly preserved.
So its you who believes in a fair tale not me.
LikeLike
One more point, the dating of the parchment is 568 to 645 AD, you all are assuming the writing came after Mohamed first started to get his revelation in 610 AD. But the writing could just as easily be from before Mohamed, and that would be an even bigger problem.
LikeLike
Billy
You said;
Intellect wrote…
“You believe a writer of this fairy tale and disprove an independent research for our new oldest Quran on earth.”
My response: Not at all, I believe the research on these Quranic PAGES. That the parchment is radio carbon dated between 568 and 645 AD. Thats the parchement not the writing. So yes the Parchment is old but the writing could be 100’s of years later. I also believe what they say about the writing itself, that being it is very “SIMILAR” and “CLOSE” to what we have today. Similar and close is not word for word perfectly preserved.
So its you who believes in a fair tale not me.
I say;
Typical of a missionary Christian. He will discredit anything Islam. Why on earth will a parchment be produced on 645 AD or earlier, just to use in 700 AD or 745 AD? In the eyes of a missionary a writing material like a parchment will be created and not used but for the next 100 years before it is used. It does not sound intelligent and it sound silly like billy.
By the next 100 years, there must be a better material to write on but not on a goat skin. Was the Christian manuscripts not radio carbon dated? for you to believe that just to reject Islamic radio carbon dated. Show a proof that said, the Christian manuscript was not radio carbon dated just like the latest Quran?
Well, when it was published on the net, please be a Christian and show us the word that is not on this manuscript. When you visited the BBC website, did you not see the magnified copy of the old writings to the modern Quran word for word? It is there and an Imam read it on BBC for anyone to hear.
You said;
Dude I’m not listening to that ugg like nails on a chalk bored to a rational mind.
There is a couple flaws with your claim. First you assume that some peopQle in the Masjid know the quran better then the Imam, second what if those people are the ones who are wrong and the Imam is right. Who is to say. The only way to say is who gets beat up or killed is the one who is wrong.
And thats exactly why the Apostate Uthman had his Authorized version of the Quran produced.
I say;
Most Christians knew the Lords prayer by heart and that is all. So When someone says “Our Father who art in heaven hallowed be thy mane” most Christians will correct him and say “Hallowed be thy name” because they new it by heart. The one who was corrected will remember the right word because he also knew it but he just forgot.
So, that is what sometimes happened when an Imam goes wrong in a Masjid. Those who corrected him might not be necessarily knowledgeable than him at all but just he forgot a word which is a typical of human but because there is massive memorizers and memorization going from the time of our prophet till today and to the future he is easily reminded for the forgetfulness.
So, In Islam the congregational prayers carries more reward than individual prayers, because as a human sometimes you do forget and in congregational prayers when you forget the word of God or part of the prayer whether an Imam or not so many people in the congregation will also not forget like you and so will remind you of the forgetfulness.
If you had listened this white British guy reciting passages of the Quran by heart, you would have love Islam with its beauty.
No body was beaten when the Quran was compiled. You are a Christian and God forbids lying. You lied to the companions of the prophet in that they beat people to compile the Quran. It might sound funny to you now, but in the day of judgement it will be a serious matter.
Thanks
LikeLike
Billy
You said;
Dude I’m not listening to that ugg like nails on a chalk bored to a rational mind.
I say;
But you go to your Chapel and Churches to speak in tongue which no one understands.
Fortunately for Muslims, people knew and understands what this young white Imam was reciting. It is the praise of One, Only and Alone God of Abraham.
You said;
One more point, the dating of the parchment is 568 to 645 AD, you all are assuming the writing came after Mohamed first started to get his revelation in 610 AD. But the writing could just as easily be from before Mohamed, and that would be an even bigger problem.
I say;
It is an estimation and falls within a range. Any reasonable person will choose the range that fall within the compilation of the Quran. I say Christians taking a range that fits them when it comes to gospel date estimates but just to choose odd estimates for Muslims. That is not good.
Thanks.
LikeLike
Lets look at it this way. Preservation by way of memory is reliable to the extent that the idea being preserved is easy to understand or memorize. Since even a child who knows no Arabic can easily memorize the Quran, then the Quran is easy to memorize which implies that the case for the oral preservation of the Quran is a really good one.
LikeLike
Billy
You said;
My response: Not at all, I believe the research on these Quranic PAGES. That the parchment is radio carbon dated between 568 and 645 AD. Thats the parchement not the writing. So yes the Parchment is old but the writing could be 100’s of years later. I also believe what they say about the writing itself, that being it is very “SIMILAR” and “CLOSE” to what we have today. Similar and close is not word for word perfectly preserved.
So its you who believes in a fair tale not me.
I say;
BBC-British Broadcasting Corporation, and not me or Ali, Othman, or Paul Williams, has magnified the old writings and compared it with the Quran of today and it is the same. No one beat the staff of BBC. Go and ask them-BBC. No one threatened them, no one killed them, but the Quran is the same. You believe Mathew who wrote about ghosts bursting from their graves and visited their friends and families but just to discredit this independent investigation.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-33436021
Thanks
LikeLiked by 1 person
Billy pls just stop being annoying. Thx
LikeLiked by 1 person
‘Billy’ has been hanging around this blog for a long time – he goes by many names and has been banned many times. But I indulge him from time to time – keeping him on a tight leash of course. Trolls can be an irritant but they are harmless and can be amusing…
LikeLike
Does this shady character have anything to do with our beloved Paulus?
LikeLiked by 1 person
no, that is another timewaster.
LikeLike
Yahya Snow wrote…
“Now you made it out as though everybody had left Uthman…yet Ali appointed his sons to look after him. You also lied saying he was an apostate, Ali ra buried him. No Shia as far as I know even calls him an apostate, have Christian bigots on the net been feeding their sheep nonsense again?
And as for your repeated claim of him being buried in a Jewish cemetery, he was buried in an area of land which he had bought himself:”
My Response: NO I didn’t lie. I did not make it out that EVERYBODY had left. I said a lot of Medinanians left including Aisha to go on Haj. There was no reason to go on Haj at this crucial time when 3 MUSLIM armies had surrounded Uthmans house. The only reason they left was to be some place else far away when whatever was going to go down went down. Uthman was “green lit” and they all knew it. CORRECTION it wasn’t HAJ it was UMRA the lesser pilgrimage. Again no reason to go at this crucial time.
And I did not lie, the Muslims that killed him considered him an Apostate thats why they killed him, and I did say that it was Ali who was the peace broker giving relief to the besieged “Apostate”/Caliph Uthman, and I also said that it was Ali who intervened at the funeral to allow Uthman to be finally buried.
According to Tabari (PRIMARY SOURCE) after three days, he was buried in what was at the time the JEWISH section of the cemetery. A decade or so later under the Umayyads Caliphate the dividing wall was demolished making all of the cemetery a Muslim cemetery. I guess after a decade they didn’t want to dig up and move Uthmans rotting corpse.
So I don’t know where your SECONDARY source got his information from but you really should try reading primary sources to get the real story.
So the only one who lied so far is YOU and or your secondary source.
A few other things I forgot to mention. According to Tabari (PRIMARY SOURCE) Uthman was STONED and knocked unconscious while giving a sermon at the Masjid. Yah they did not like him.
Since I don’t feel like getting out my copy of Tabari I consulted scholar google and the following is taken from Wiki which uses several sources.
Funeral[edit]
Uthman’s tomb
After the body of Uthman had been in the house for three days, Naila, Uthman’s wife, approached some of his supporters to help in his burial, but only about a dozen people responded. These included Marwan, Zayd ibn Thabit, ‘Huwatib bin Alfarah, Jubayr ibn Mut’im, Abu Jahm bin Hudaifa, Hakim bin Hazam and Niyar bin Mukarram.[47] The body was lifted at dusk, and because of the blockade, no coffin could be procured. The body was not washed, as Islamic teaching states that martyrs’ bodies are not supposed to be washed before burial. Thus Uthman was carried to the graveyard in the clothes that he was wearing at the time of his assassination.[48]
His body was buried by Hassan, Hussein, Ali and others however some people reject that Ali attended the funeral[49] Naila followed the funeral with a lamp, but in order to maintain secrecy the lamp had to be extinguished. Naila was accompanied by some women including Ayesha, Uthman’s daughter.[citation needed]
Burial[edit]
The body was carried to Jannat al-Baqi, the Muslim graveyard.[citation needed] It appears that some people gathered there, and they resisted the burial of Uthman in the graveyard of the Muslims. The supporters of Uthman insisted that the body should be buried in Jannat al-Baqi. They later buried him in the Jewish graveyard behind Jannat al-Baqi. Some decades later, the Umayyad rulers demolished the wall separating the two cemeteries and merged the Jewish cemetery into the Muslim one to ensure that his tomb was now inside a Muslim cemetery.[50]
LikeLike
Sources: The History of al-Tabari Volume XV The Crises of the Early Caliphate
At least four different narrations that Uthman body was allowed to rot for three days and finally buried in a Jewish Cemetery Page 246-250
Uthman Stoned to unconsciousness while leading prayers in the Masjid p. 181
LikeLike
Paul Williams I have been accused of lying by two different Muslims on your blog regarding the events of Uthman. I have provided my sources. 1. An Islamic Primary source Al Tabari and just something simply googled from Wiki that also backs ups Tabari’s account. Since I was not lying I’m hoping you can show some justice and ask your co coreligionists to apologize for calling me a liar?
LikeLike
lol no Billy. Not until you apologise for being a troll
LikeLike
LOL wow thanks for demonstrating that Islamic justice we can expect living under the Pauline Williams calipha lol
LikeLike
yep, fair play can be a real problem for trolls lol
LikeLike
Ok lets see if Pauline Islam justice is the same as Isis Calipha Justice. Sure I apologies for being a troll 🙂
LikeLike
Well since you said you would have your minions apolgiese for falsely accusing me of lying if I apologized for being a troll. Even though one has nothing to do with the other. I decided to take the high road and apolgise for being a troll. Now lets see if you are a man of your word or if fair play is a real problem for you a non troll.
LikeLike
no Billy it does not work like that. After confessing your sin show some humility.
LikeLike
Billy
You said;
Sources: The History of al-Tabari Volume XV The Crises of the Early Caliphate
At least four different narrations that Uthman body was allowed to rot for three days and finally buried in a Jewish Cemetery Page 246-250
Uthman Stoned to unconsciousness while leading prayers in the Masjid p. 181
You also said;
Paul Williams I have been accused of lying by two different Muslims on your blog regarding the events of Uthman. I have provided my sources. 1. An Islamic Primary source Al Tabari and just something simply googled from Wiki that also backs ups Tabari’s account. Since I was not lying I’m hoping you can show some justice and ask your co coreligionists to apologize for calling me a liar?
I say;
I am a Muslim and I know what I am saying and that you lied. No any Islamic pages said “Othman body was allowed to rot for 3 days”. That is your making and of course other Islamophobes and orientalists.
Our Prophet Mohammed was not buried the same day. Just like Caliph Othman our prophet was buried with the cloths(same cloths) on him before he died. As your sources might suggest a martyr might have a special burial. You as an Islamophobe, initially started by letting it look like he was murdered because of the Quran and I exposed your lies by indicating to you that apart from one of the Caliphs i.e. Abubakar, all the rest were murdered by Muslims that has to do with, rivalry, politics, power struggle and old Arab feud among tribes.
Both our prophet and Othman had people pay their last respect for their body.
You people reject Al Tabari as a later history, but want to use it to discredit the Holy Quran. Well, Quran is the same from the time of our prophet till to day said BBC-British Broadcasting Corporation with proofs and research by independent people and Bart Ehrman has positive comment on that. You believe Gospel of Mathew that record ghosts coming out of their graves just like Michael Jackson’s thriller and unlike Machael Jackson’s thriller, Mathew’s ghosts visited their friends and families and people saw them without anyone recording this big event except Mathew, but you discredit this important research and trying to inject lies by claiming that Othman was murdered because of the Quran.
Paul of Tarsus was tortured in Jail and beheaded. Emperor Constantine persecuted and murdered his fellow Christians because they believed in what Arius believed. Catholics and Protestants murdered and persecute each other until the liberals and the secularist enacted laws and constitution to force them to stop that religious killings. Deal with that and stop telling lies about Muslim feud. Muslims have the feud and differences and so what? It has nothing to do with the Quran please.
Thanks
LikeLike
LOL I see how it works for Muslims. You say you will do something and then don’t do it. Yup makes sense to me.
Intellect if you do not put a body in the ground for three days it ROTS. So yes Tabari says they did not let his body be buried for THREE days and yes it was left to ROT. So no not lying at all.
LikeLike
Actually if you put a body in the ground it rots lol. The point of burring a body is to well make sure you don’t smell the smell. In that hot Arabian sun the rotting flesh would begin to really stink after a day or so.
LikeLike
Billy
You said;
Intellect if you do not put a body in the ground for three days it ROTS. So yes Tabari says they did not let his body be buried for THREE days and yes it was left to ROT. So no not lying at all.
I say;
Our Prophet was not buried for a few days intentionally and the same cloths he wore was left on him to bury him. Othman has the same burial because so many people pay their respect to both bodies. They are saints, and their bodies did not rot.
Ali was the caliph following Othman, so he buries him the time he wants and not by any order. Paul of Tarsus was arrested and beheaded. May be the true Christians gave him up and did not help him because he destroyed the true Christianity of Jesus Christ of worshiping One, Only and Alone God to worshiping Man, God-Man and 3 people.
You should
LikeLike
LOL no one was paying there respects to Uthman lol, Tabari says they through stones at the hand full of mourners, I believe there was only 12. And no Ali did not “buries” Uthman the time he wants not according to Tabari. Here is just one of the narrations in Tabari.
“It was related to me by Ja’far b. Abdallah al-Muhammadi — Amr b Hammad and Ali b. Husayn-Husayn b. Isa — his father — Abu Maymunah — Abu Bashir al–abidi: Uthmans corpse was THROWN ASIDE and left unburried for THREE DAYS… Ali granted them his permission but when news of this spread, people lay in wait for Uthmans body by the road, armed with stones…Now when Uthmans body was brought out before the people, they stoned his bier and were bent on throwing him to the ground. WHen Ali heard that he sent and demanded that they leave him alone. They did so, and Uthmans body was burried along and interred in Hashas Kawkab( Thats the Jewish cemetery according to Tabari)
Another Narration…
It was related to me by Ja’fat—Amr and Ali—Husayn his father — al-Mujalid b. Said Al Hamadani — Yasir b Abi Karib — His father Abu Karib,…Uthman was burried at twilight. ONLY Marwan b. al Hakam, three of his freedmen and his fifith daughter were present. His daughter wailed in Morning…The People TOOK STONES and hooted “LONG BEARDED IDIOT!” she was nearly STONED.
I could go on bu this is getting boring so I will be brief with the next narration which says in part. “Uthman was killed on Friday morning his kin and supporters COULD NOT BURY HIM… They (his kin and supporters) said “We can not bury him in the DAYLIGHT… thus these men entered Uthmans house but they where BARED from HIM”.
Again there is more but like I said this is getting boring and this should be enough to prove to you that they were not paying there respects to Uthman lol.
LikeLike
Intellect as far as your claim that Mohamed was not burried for three days, that is one story but as Al-Islam.org tells it…
“Both Abul-Fida’ and Ibn al-Wardi indicate that the Prophet died on Monday and was buried the next day, i.e. Tuesday. And in one tradition, it is said that he was buried in the night between Tuesday and Wednesday. This appears to be more factual.”
Either way Jesus rose from the dead on the third day, your prophet was put in the ground either the next day or on the third day where his flesh rotted away and his bones are now turned to dust.
LikeLike
Billy
You said;
“It was related to me by Ja’far b. Abdallah al-Muhammadi — Amr b Hammad and Ali b. Husayn-Husayn b. Isa — his father — Abu Maymunah — Abu Bashir al–abidi: Uthmans corpse was THROWN ASIDE and left unburried for THREE DAYS… Ali granted them his permission but when news of this spread, people lay in wait for Uthmans body by the road, armed with stones…Now when Uthmans body was brought out before the people, they stoned his bier and were bent on throwing him to the ground. WHen Ali heard that he sent and demanded that they leave him alone. They did so, and Uthmans body was burried along and interred in Hashas Kawkab( Thats the Jewish cemetery according to Tabari)
I say;
-His body was buried by Hassan, Hussein, Ali and others.
-His body was not thrown aside
-Othman has his supporters
-He prevented his supporters from fighting other Muslims(Rebels)
-He was assassinated when the rebels sneaked to his house but the house was guarded at the gate by Ali’s Children.
-The above narration by you is false.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE QURAN. So you lied. That was your starting point.
Even if Othman is killed by Muslims and so what? I mentioned to you that, apart from Abubakar, all the Caliphs including Ali suffered the same fate and you keep hammering on Othman’s death alone. We knew about that and it has nothing to do with the Quran as you initially started to lie.
You are now arguing with me with regards to Prophet Mohammads burial day because there are different narrations. Othman’s burial also have different narrations, so yours is obviously wrong because you are not an Islamic scholar and you do not know Arabic.
There are so many stories out there with regards to both Christianity and Islam that are not true and some that are true. During Jesus’s time and beyond, there are so many gospels like epistle of banabas, Shephered Hermes, Gospel of Thomas, etc. and many more but the Christians selected Mark, Mathew, John, and Luke as the canon and reject the others. Who ordered them to do that? are they God? The ones they reject have truths in them.
So, there are many stories out there, but we Muslims have classified the weak hadith and strong one and the Quran is the ultimate. So, Umar, Ali and Othman’s deaths because of the politics at that time does not have anything to do with the Quran as you were trying to portray.
Paul of Tarsus was arrested, tortured and beheaded. Deal with that and leave Othman alone. Yes, Othman, Umar, Ali and Ali Child were killed by Muslim rivals. And so what? Christian rivals do kill each other until atheist put laws and constitution to stop them.
You said;
“Both Abul-Fida’ and Ibn al-Wardi indicate that the Prophet died on Monday and was buried the next day, i.e. Tuesday. And in one tradition, it is said that he was buried in the night between Tuesday and Wednesday. This appears to be more factual.”
Either way Jesus rose from the dead on the third day, your prophet was put in the ground either the next day or on the third day where his flesh rotted away and his bones are now turned to dust.
I say;
Yes, Prophet Mohammed did not say he was God and so is Jesus. So Prophet Mohammed, Moses, Abraham etc. all have their flesh decayed. Jesus did not die and resurrect. You do not have proof for that. Because that day according to Mathew gospel, not only Jesus, but ghosts resurrected from their graves and visited their friends and families and people saw them.
So, I want a proof of that. Mathew is lying about this resurrection story and so it is not reliable. I want a proof that some people at that time had a chat with their pals otherwise the whole resurrection story of Jesus is lies and false and cannot be taking seriously.
I have time for you and will respond to any lie you write.
Thanks
LikeLike
Intellect says…
His body was buried by Hassan, Hussein, Ali and others.
My Response: The Narrations in Tabari say otherwise. But I’m the liar?
Intellect says….
His body was not thrown aside
My Response: The narrations in Tabari says otherwise. But I’m the liar?
Intellect says…
Othman has his supporters
My response: I never said he didn’t but alot of them FLED to go on Haj and left him in dire straights. Even Aisha said their was no one there to defend her.
Intellect says…
He prevented his supporters from fighting other Muslims(Rebels)
My Response: Yah ok that is the story and I never said he didn’t. But if that is true, it did not work out to well for him now did it. So he really wasn’t to bright as Caliph, the leader of the Faithful.
Intellect says…
He was assassinated when the rebels sneaked to his house but the house was guarded at the gate by Ali’s Children.
My Response: Never even commented on how he was killed by other Muslims, but now that you mention it, those guarding and protecting Uthman didn’t do a very good job of it now did they.
Intellect says…
The above narration by you is false.
My Response: Ahh the old false narration routine. No Muslim argument is complete with out it. So how do you know the above narration is false? Even if it is how does that make me a liar? Wouldn’t that make the Muslims who narrated it and the Muslim who repeated it the liars?
Intellect says…
Even if Othman is killed by Muslims and so what? I mentioned to you that, apart from Abubakar, all the Caliphs including Ali suffered the same fate and you keep hammering on Othman’s death alone. We knew about that and it has nothing to do with the Quran as you initially started to lie.
My response: Yes Muslims have been killing Muslims then just like Muslims are killing Muslims now. The more things change the more they stay the same. I never said Uthmans death did have anything to do with his Authorized version. What I said was he was killed AFTER his authorized version, and I asked if that bothered you that AFTER he gave the Ummah his authorized version of the Quran he was killed by Muslims and buried in the Jewish cemetery as an Apostate. Thats it. You made the jump that his death had something to do with the Quran not me.
Intellect wrote…
You are now arguing with me with regards to Prophet Mohammads burial day because there are different narrations. Othman’s burial also have different narrations, so yours is obviously wrong because you are not an Islamic scholar and you do not know Arabic.
My Response:
No I wasn’t arguing with you. It was you who brought up Mohamed burial, I only pointed out that at least one online Muslim source disagrees with you. And its not my narrations its Tabari’s narration and the Muslim online websites narration. And your not a scholar either so your narration is wrong then too.
And thats pretty much it. Anyway so how did I lie again? Since all I did was repeat narrations from Tabari and an online Islamic website, wouldn’t it be the Muslims who are the ones who are LIARS?
LikeLike
Billy
You said;
My response: Yes Muslims have been killing Muslims then just like Muslims are killing Muslims now. The more things change the more they stay the same. I never said Uthmans death did have anything to do with his Authorized version. What I said was he was killed AFTER his authorized version, and I asked if that bothered you that AFTER he gave the Ummah his authorized version of the Quran he was killed by Muslims and buried in the Jewish cemetery as an Apostate. Thats it. You made the jump that his death had something to do with the Quran not me.
I say;
Again, and I repeat and I will continue to repeat, we do not have any version of the Quran like how Christians have so many versions from their ancient manuscripts that do not agree with each other to versions like King James versions, RSV etc. and different books between protestants, Catholics, Ethiopians etc.
Othman just set a committee of all Muslims and not he alone to compiled the Quran from memorizers, the only standard written Quran from the wife of the prophet and two written witnesses to all verses plus a number of memorizer witness including Ziad Bin Thabit, the head of the committee and the chief scribe of our prophet who was writing for our prophet and knows everything in memory.
Before that project we do not have any version of any Quran except personal copies and personal copies are not official. The only official copy was used as a witness together with two from any written material to compile the Quran and was sent to the states under Muslim control to be used in order not to make mistakes. That project helped Muslims a lot and Allah promised in the Quran to preserve His final messages, hence the wisdom of Othman to those who advised him to undertake the project.
Othman himself was persuaded to do that project. Initially he was reluctant to do, but later he got the wisdom from God to do that. The Quran we read today Mr. Billy is not a version because there never was any version like King James version by King James that differs significantly from the other Bibles to trigger King James only Christians who will not accept any other versions of the Bible.
Today, there was a magnified photo of the earliest Quran in the world during the time of its compilation and it is the same as the one we read today and by BBC and Birmingham University and Bart Erhman says it is more appealing than all NT findings.
You said;
And thats pretty much it. Anyway so how did I lie again? Since all I did was repeat narrations from Tabari and an online Islamic website, wouldn’t it be the Muslims who are the ones who are LIARS?
I say;
Both Christians and Muslims have truths and lies in their literature. I am not denying that. So, that is what we keep saying here. Manuscripts alone cannot be used to determine the truth but common sense and intellect to reflect the beginning of Yahwehs consistent message from the Bible or the Torah which is the beginning of all manuscripts and it clearly says God is Only, One, and Alone but it did not say God is Jesus, God-Man, 3 people(Persons/persons), Hypostasis, Trinity etc.
Proof.
1.”For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one [echad] flesh. ” Genesis 2:24
2.”there is no one like Yahweh our God.” Exodus 8:10
3.”Yahweh, He is God; there is no other besides Him.” Deuteronomy 4:35
4.”Yahweh, He is God in heaven above and on the earth below; there is no other.” Deuteronomy 4:39
5.”See now that I, I am He, And there is no god besides Me” Deuteronomy 32:39
1.”Hear, O Israel! Yahweh is our God, Yahweh is one [echad]!” Deuteronomy 6:4
6.”You are great, O Lord God; for there is none like You, and there is no God besides You” 2 Samuel 7:22
7.”For who is God, besides Yahweh? And who is a rock, besides our God?” 2 Samuel 22:32
8.”Yahweh is God; there is no one else.” 1 Kings 8:60
1.”You are the God, You alone [bad], of all the kingdoms of the earth.” 2 Kings 19:15
9.”O Lord, there is none like You, nor is there any God besides You” 1 Chronicles 17:20
1.”You alone [bad] are Yahweh.” Nehemiah 9:6
10.”For who is God, but Yahweh? And who is a rock, except our God” Psalm 18:31
1.”You alone [bad], Lord, are God.” Isaiah 37:20
11.”Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me.” Isaiah 43:10
13.”Is there any God besides Me, Or is there any other Rock? I know of none.” Isaiah 44:8
14.”I am Yahweh, and there is no other; Besides Me there is no God.” Isaiah 45:5
15.”Surely, God is with you, and there is none else, No other God.” Isaiah 45:14
16.”I am Yahweh, and there is none else.” Isaiah 45:18
I have more.
Show me a single message from the Bible that says
God is 3 in 1.
The closest one is a forgery. Bible forgery
Show me where Jesus said I am God worship me.
It is important, because that is what he will use to put people in hell otherwise burn people, so it will be unfair on his part if he is not clear like how YAHWEH was clear over and over so that He will be justified to burn anyone who says He is man and died or He is more people other than the one He said He is.
I am is not clear like I am God as Yahweh says over and over I Yahweh I am God.
Thanks.
LikeLike
Billy bob 🙂
As per our email discussion, I showed you where you lied, scroll up and see where YOU called Uthamn an ‘apostate’. You called him that – you did not even try to remove yourself from the frame by saying some rebels accused him of that etc.
Caliph Ali (ra) considered him a great Muslim and he honoured him by burying him yet you, a liar, called him an apostate.
Like I say, if a guy starts saying Paul apostated and was imprisoned then beheaded…would you consider that person to be a liar? You would.
We need consistency as a standard, inconsistency is the sign of a failed argument, inconsistency is part of the course for Christian apolgetics, to this day I’m looking for that consistent Trinitarian [quotes from Yahya White:)]
BTW Billy (Robert), you seem like a resourceful fella (you’ve put money in the kitty for strange Trinitarian causes in the past) and have acted as a courier for a radicalised Trinitarian, would you want to be part of the motley crew led by a Christian skolar hunting down something called ‘New Testament’ manuscripts? You’d be on an adventure working alongside arsonists, trained terrorists, lethal Trinitarian action men, medical experts, and hot air perveyors. See my comment here:
https://bloggingtheology.net/2015/07/25/comparing-the-quranic-and-new-testament-manuscripts/#comments
Don’t forget to take your fishing rod!
LikeLike
Yahya Snow you wrote…
“We need consistency as a standard, inconsistency is the sign of a failed argument,”
My response: I fully agree with you on this we must be consistent which is a trait that is collectively lacking in Muslims. So lets take a look at what I wrote repeatedly.
Ok here is what I said in the context of what I said as you will see you continue to make these false allegations against me.
I first use the word Apostate July 24, 2015 • 10:34 am
“Ali stayed with a few of his supporters and according to Tabari tried to be peace broker between Uthaman and those that declared Uthman an apostate.”
Notice i say “THOSE THAT DECLARED HIM AN APOSTATE”.
I again use the word Apostate on July 24, 2015 • 11:00 am
“Either way the Muslims who killed him declared and believed he was an apostate.”
Notice here I say it was MUSLIMS who KILLED him that declared him an Apostate.
I use the word again on July 24, 2015 • 4:05 pm
“Ur only copy of copies was authorized by what many Muslim contemporaries called an apostate. And even those copies of copies of the apostate Qur’an do not agree wit each other.”
Notice again I say MUSLIM contemporaries called an APOSTATE.
Finally on July 24, 2015 • 9:24 pm I write…
“There is a couple flaws with your claim. First you assume that some people in the Masjid know the quran better then the Imam, second what if those people are the ones who are wrong and the Imam is right. Who is to say. The only way to say is who gets beat up or killed is the one who is wrong.
And thats exactly why the Apostate Uthman had his Authorized version of the Quran produced.”
Notice the context of the sentence not only in the context of the comment but also in the context of all my comments. I am clearly and repeatedly saying that it was the MUSLIMS who killed Uthman that considered him an apostate. The only way you or anyone could come to any other conclusion is if well I don’t want to call you a liar just a Muslim.
I know it is to much to ask for one of the best of creatures to actually apologize and repent to one of the lowest of creatures. But for some reason I do think there is some bit of humanity in you underneath all the Islam.
LikeLike
Billy
You said;
Finally on July 24, 2015 • 9:24 pm I write…
“There is a couple flaws with your claim. First you assume that some people in the Masjid know the quran better then the Imam, second what if those people are the ones who are wrong and the Imam is right. Who is to say. The only way to say is who gets beat up or killed is the one who is wrong.
And thats exactly why the Apostate Uthman had his Authorized version of the Quran produced.”
I say;
At least you did call Othman apostate yourself as per the last line of the sentence above. That is a lie. If he was called apostate by his rival Muslims, it does not mean he is apostate. The narrations are also not reliable.
You also lied that, he had Authorized version of the Quran produced and that is a lie because the Quran never had any version but only personal copies and One officially compiled copy kept by the prophets wife before he set a committee of Muslims who undertook the project of compiling Quran to be sent to the Islamic states upon advise from other Muslims and not his decision anyway.
Paul of Tarsus had disagreement with James the brother of Jesus and Paul did change Christian doctrine and lied so many times according to your scriptures, and was summoned to renounce his false teachings according to your Christian literature and you do not want to deal with that, but to bother us with Othman’s death. In every religion, especially Islam and Christianity, there are bloody disagreement among the adherents and each calling the rival names.
I can also say Paul of Tarsus is an apostate because of the disagreement between him and other disciples as per your literature, but that was not the discussion here. The discussion here is about the new discovery of an oldest Quran.
The reason why Othman and other Caliph were murdered was that, the Muslims were in control and all the rival factions were armed to the teeth, and any small misunderstanding always results in fatalities. That was the culture of the Arab tribes and rivals before Islam. The prophet was able to suppress that, because of his respect, they put their tribal difference aside and always respect what he says. After his death, the rivalry, politics, power struggle, etc. surfaced and it is normal for all human beings.
Had Paul of Tarsus, James the brother of Jesus and other disciples who had problem with Paul and others not under Roman control and the Romans had Authorities and control the arm, and security and order, but the Christians had control of arms, you would have read about fatalities among the early Christians. They do not have power and Jesus himself was under Roman control with no power to fight anyone and to protect population.
Now, What happened when Christians gain control of power? They kill, persecute and suppress any rival faction or any dissenting views i.e. Emperor Constantine persecution of the Arians and the Catholic and Protestants counter persecutions, Mormon persecutions etc.
Do not jump into ridiculing Islam and its figures, you can find it as well in Christianity.
Thanks
LikeLike
Intellect\Yahya Snow this is just sad really just sad. As I have said repeatedly the Muslims who killed Uthman considered him an Apostate, so yes Uthman was an Apostate to the Muslims who killed him. So yes Uthman was an Apostate. So you can call me a liar all you want, you can make all kinds of false allegations against Paul, you can reject all the Islamic sources you want. But none of your false allegations, or personal attacks against me or denials of Islamic sources will change the fact that Uthman was killed by MUSLIMS because they believed he was an apostate. So yes Uthman was an Apostate. Now you and other Muslims may not believe he was an Apostate but to those Muslims who killed he was an Apostate. So it is not a lie for me to say that Uthman was an Apostate since the Muslims who killed him, did so because they believed he was an Apostate. Its that simple.
LikeLike
Billy
Othman apostate to what religion? Christianity? Atheist? What is your proof? Rival faction can call anyone names. Paul of Tarsus had disagreement with James the brother of Jesus with regards to introducing Roman and Greek Pagan religions into early Christianity.
Thanks.
LikeLike
Intellect wow talk about LYING “Paul of Tarsus had disagreement with James the brother of Jesus with regards to introducing Roman and Greek Pagan religions into early Christianity.”
LikeLike
Intellect you asked…
“Othman apostate to what religion? Christianity? Atheist? What is your proof?”
My Response: Since Tabari in multiple narrations reports that he was burred in a Jewish cemetery I’m guessing he Apostated to Judaism.
LikeLike
Billy (Robert)
You wrote: And thats exactly why the Apostate Uthman had his Authorized version of the Quran produced.
So YOU called him an apostate. So please stop and just admit your mistake.
Please don’t respond. I’m done with this.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lol well that was short lived. So much for the oldest Qur’an. Saudi scholars are challenging the claim
LikeLike
Yahya snow repeating what I said a deliberately ignoring the context of what I said makes u ignorant.
Yes I wrote once that utman was an apostate because as I had written several times before the Muslims who killed him did so because the believed he was an apostate.
U also said I believe that Ali was at his funeral I find no mention of Ali being there in tabari so u are lying
LikeLike