The purpose with this blog is to expose the claim of modern Islamic apologists that the Qur'an is miracolous in its prediction of what they claim resembles modern science.

Saturday 27 March 2010

A Response to the Muslim 'Hello' concerning the Qur'anic Plagiarizing of External Sources

This article is lengthy response to a 'Hello', a Muslim who has posted numerous rebuttals against me on this blog.

Unfortunately Hello resorts to insults of Christians and calls my articles poor and unscholarly, he also satisfies himself to heap up claim upon claim while he continually depends upon Islamic websites.

He even has the courage to contradict himself to suggest that I do not dare to respond back and if I do I will simply cite websites. As the reader will see, I dare to respond and my response is not depended upon websites.

Furthermore, Hello encourages me to utilize secular sources in my study of the Bible, which to his information, I have already done for years, however Hello laughs and despises the secular sources I have utilized upon the study of the Qur'an---yeah what type of a twisted mindset are we dealing with here.

(Hello has also challenged me to respond to a number of questions related to Bible integrity. I will respond to those elsewhere, I guess on the Apologetics blog, since this blog primarily focuses on the science in the Qur'an)

I would not say that Hello has written anything of significance, or at least anything that challenges the accuracy of my articles, hence my replies hardly require very detailed information.


Ok lets begin

Hello said...

Ok, can you name the Greek philosopher Muhammad(saw) interacted with? Can you produce a chapter like the Quran?

Hogan replies:

I never stated that a Greek Philosopher guided Muhammad in Qur’anic material, I quoted Bukhari one of your earliest and most reliable sources, in which a Christian who converted to Islam and helped Muhammad write the Qur’an later turned back to Christianity and stated that he and Muhammad fabricated the Qur’an together.

hello said...

“Greek philosophers guessed a lot of scientific details correctly–they anticipated atoms, other solar systems, evolution, the laws of thermodynamics, the rain cycle, you name it. That doesn’t make them supernaturally prescient…” I agree so when Darwin proposed the theory of evolution I suppose he was plagiarizing/borrowing from the Greeks? You need to re-asses your criticism"

Hogan replies:

You are absolutely right, they are not supernaturally revealed, and that is the main point of this blog that scientific discovery or guessing does not necessarily conclude divine influence. Furthermore, no, Darwin did not plagiarize the Greek philosphers, however the evolution theory was widely spread and considered in great details prior to Darwin and the era of Darwin and back to the fourteenth century included the Enlightenment Period and the Renaissance period, which were the revival of Greek thinking versus the Latin; many of the flourishing thoughts in Darwin’s days originated within this re-awakening of Greek philosophy.

Hello wrote:

Again produce a chapter like the Quran.

Hogan replies:

Sorry man, I do not read or write Arabic, exactly what logic are you following? Here we are arguing science and all you can ask me is to write a passage in Arabic language?

hello said...

You write
"Greek scientific ideas would also have been passed on to Muhammad by the Jewish community; in fact some of the scientific ideas of the Qur’an, both terminology and chronology, resemble the writings of the Talmud significantly/"

My response:

Babylonian Talmud & The Qur'an

There are only two places in Talmud where the story of Abraham and idols is mentioned:

1. When the wicked Nimrod cast our father Abraham into the fiery furnace, Gabriel said to the Holy One, blessed be He: "Sovereign of the Universe! Let me go down, cool it, and the deliver that righteous man from the fiery furnace.'" [Pesachim 118a]

2. Let Nimrod come and testify that Abraham did not (consent to) worship idols; [Avaodah Zarah 3a]

This is all that one reads in the Babylonian Talmud. The only similarity that one can see is that Abraham was saved from the fire, but there is no mention of the events leading unto the climax of the fire.

What is interesting is that there is no agreement between these "strikingly similar" sources concerning whether Abraham fled or was he put in to the fire.

Both Catena Severi and Jacob of Edessa's writings say that Terah and his family fled from Ur of Chaldees.

On the other hand, the Babylonian Talmud and Jerome's writings say that Abraham was put into the fire but was saved. Furthermore, what was it that Abraham refuse to worship? Was it the fire according to Jerome's version or was it the idols as mentioned in Catena Severi, the writings of Jacob of Edessa's and the Babylonian Talmud etc.?

In dept refutation to this absurd claim can be found here:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBrabbah.html

Hogan replies:

I do not want to move from the actual scientific purpose of this blog, there are a number of scientific statements found in the Qur’an that closely resemble the Talmud. For example, the seven heavens and the seven earths. The Qur’an refers to seven heavens and an equal number of earths (65: 12); this number follows in line with the Talmud; (see Aboth D ’Rabbi Nathan, chapter XXXVII, A, Cohen (ed.) The minor Tractates of the Talmud, Massektoth Ketannot, vol.2, London: The Soncino Press, 165, 185.)

Also consider the statement that everything in the universe is created in pairs and exists in pairs:

One the verse ‘Hear, O Israel, The Lord our God, the Lord is one,’ the comment is made: The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, ‘My children, everything that I created in the Universe is in pairs—e.g. heaven and earth, the sun and moon, Adam and Eve, this world and the World to Come; but I am one and alone in the Universe (Deut. R. II. 31)’ Dr. A. Cohen, Everyman’s Talmud, London: J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd: 1949: 4

Since Muhammad was surrounded by Jews and some of his followers were Jews, and so much of the Qur’an is Jewish it is not surprising that the authors of the Qur’an simply borrowed their ideas from the Jews...

hello said...

You mention

"The Bukhari indeed refers to a Christian convert to Islam, who helped narrating Muhammad revelations. Initially he left Islam and informed about his contribution to fabricate the Qur’an with Muhammad; Bukhari informs us that Allah caused him to die.["

Lets take a look at the hadith:

Narrated Anas:

There was a Christian who embraced Islam and read Surat-al-Baqara and Al-Imran, and he used to write (the revelations) for the Prophet. Later on he returned to Christianity again and he used to say: "Muhammad knows nothing but what I have written for him." Then Allah caused him to die, and the people buried him, but in the morning they saw that the earth had thrown his body out. They said, "This is the act of Muhammad and his companions. They dug the grave of our companion and took his body out of it because he had run away from them." They again dug the grave deeply for him, but in the morning they again saw that the earth had thrown his body out. They said, "This is an act of Muhammad and his companions. They dug the grave of our companion and threw his body outside it, for he had run away from them." They dug the grave for him as deep as they could, but in the morning they again saw that the earth had thrown his body out. So they believed that what had befallen him was not done by human beings and had to leave him thrown (on the ground).

First of all He does not help Narrating, That is just an absurd claim. Second of all you refute yourself saying that he helped Muhammad saw to compose the Quran because the hadith translates he only wrote the revelations. Also the Quran was orally transmitted and Muhammad(saw) obviously memorized the Surat-al-Baqara and Al-Imran. Third he tries to take the credit when he returns to the christians and spreads his lies. Then he suffers a terrible faith. And if Muhammad(saw) fabricated the quran then i challenge you to produce a chapter like it.

Hogan replies:

Again, all Hello can do is to challenge me to write something in Arabic.

I don’t see how you have debunked my argument! Firstly, how do you know he did not help narrating and fabricating? Why is that an absurd claim? Do you think you have refuted this argument simply by calling it absurd, is that your argument?

Bukhari clarifies three things: this fellow was 1) closely associated with Muhammad; 2) wrote down the Qur’an; 3) claimed to have given the information to Muhammad.

So who am I to believe, the faction that fabricated such a bulk of material or a Christian who after adhering so closely to Muhammad actually waived Islam goodbye? In fact the Islamic source fails to clarify the accuracy of his claim, hence I am left with you, and you know nothing.

Furthermore, how do you know he only wrote revelations down, does the passage indicate that? No! This is what the passage says:

There was a Christian who embraced Islam and read Surat-al-Baqara and Al-Imran, and he used to write (the revelations) for the Prophet.’

He read the information and the wrote the information!

I don’t see how your claim that the Qur’an was only oral refutes this argument. The very fact that he read the Suras and as he maintains: ‘Muhammad knows nothing but what I have written for him’ suggests that he and Muhammad together worded the material and that this Christian taught Muhammad the material, whether written or oral.

Also you claim that he simply took credit for the Qur’an---how do you know that? Why did he leave the prophet in the first place?

Also is it possible that he died due to assasination?

hello said...

Even classical polemicists such as J.M Rodwell and Alan Jones admit that the Prophet (P) was indeed illiterate.

Hogan replies:

I don’t get the point of your argument here. Firstly there are Muslims out there who do not believe that Muhammad was illiterate. But even if he was, it would hardly make him disfunctional anyway, many cultures applied memorization as a main method of preserving and passing on information. Particularly in educated circles memorization had been valued higher than literacy. Christians themselves practiced memorization so did the Jews. If you intend to claim that Muhammad was not able to deal with information due to his possible illiteracy, then you are approaching the matter with the highest ignorance.

Hello wrote:

You write:

These sects were connected to Christian factions to which science was greatly valued; who possessed schools which emphasised and propagated the Christian faith, including philosophy and science. Their contribution to translating literature e.g. into Syrian language and their knowledge was not only confined to monasteries but were transmitted to the communities."

First point:

Many scientific mistakes in the Bible are not copied over, such as World's creation, Noah Ark, World is Flat etc. If he copied over, how does he know which one is wrong and not to copy?

Hogan replies

Again I have no clue what you are on about! What do you mean by scientific mistakes in the Bible are not copied over? Exactly how does this claim fit into the context of our topic? And are you assuming that the Biblical creation account is wrong, are you saying that the earth and its heaven was not created in six days? Does not the Qur’an say the very same thing? Oh no it contradicts itself by 6 or 8 days. Are you referring to the light in verse 3? Exactly what is so mistaken about the passage? And what is the problem with the Ark of Noah? Do you doubt that God can send a global flood? And where does the Bible say that the earth is flat? If you are referring to the earth being spread out, then the same description is found in the Qur’an.

Hello wrote:

Muhammad recites the Qur'an for 22 years.

Whenever new verses are revealed, he immediately memorizes them and instructs the companions either to memorize or write down. Since he recites it, there is no 'editorial process', which means whatever being said cannot be taken back. Imagine the level of consistency that he has to maintain.

With over 600+ pages of verses over such long period, any mistake will be pointed out immediately by non-believers who are always denying him.

Hogan replies:

You are absolutely out of touch with your own religion and your own sources:

Narrated 'Abdullah: ... (Muhammad said) I am a human being like you and liable to forget like you. So if I forget remind me ... (Bukhari: volume 1, book 8, number 394, Khan)

Muhammad forgot and depended upon his followers to teach him, this actually happens several times in the Hadiths.

Even the Qur’an confirms that Muhammad forgot the Qur’an, yet the author of the Qur’an blamed this upon Allah himself:

By degrees shall we teach thee (Muhammad) to declare (the message), so thou shalt not forget, except as God wills ... (Sura 87:6-7, Yusuf Ali).

What is worse is, even the followers those assist and teach Muhammad began
forgetting the Qur’an:

Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet said, "Why does anyone of the people say, 'I have forgotten such-and-such Verses (of the Qur'an)?' He, in fact, is caused (by Allah) to forget." (Bukhari: volume 6, book 61, number 559, Khan)

Sahih Muslim confirms that Muhammad’s followers lost large portions of the Qur’an by failing to preserve it by memory:

It is recorded that 300 Qur’anic reciters forgot an entire chapter of the Qur’an, a chapter still missing (Muslim: book 5, number 2286)

Furthermore:

It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: "Let none of you say 'I have acquired the whole of the Qur'an'. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Qur'an has disappeared? Rather let him say 'I have acquired what has survived.'" (as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.524).

The problem is, Gabrial sought to help Muhammad to remember the Qur’an while Allah made him forget it:

Fatima said: "The Prophet (saw) told me secretly, 'Gabriel used to recite the Qur'an to me and I to him once a year, but this year he recited the whole Qur'an with me twice. I don't think but that my death is approaching.'" (Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 6, p.485) (if Gabriel can’t help you remember who can).

In any case Gabrial failed to help Muhammad and Muhammad sought help from his own
followers:

Narrated 'Abdullah: ... (Muhammad said) I am a human being like you and liable to forget like you. So if I forget remind me ... (Bukhari: volume 1, book 8, number 394, Khan)

This only shows how fragile the early Islamic transmission was and that Muhammad and his followers totally failed to preserve it.

The situation was so bad that after the death of Muhammad the Muslims were left in utter chaos:

Narrated Zaid bin Thabit: Abu Bakr as-Siddiq sent for me when the people of Yamama had been killed. 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 (saw). 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. Then I said to Abu Bakr, "How will you do something which Allah's Apostle (saw) did not do?" Abu Bakr replied "By Allah, it is a good project". (Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 6, p.477).

How could it be so difficult to collect the Qur’an if Muhammad and his followers had preserved it so effectively?

Hello wrote:

He didn't get any help.

Since he is the first Muslim, then nobody was there to help him. No-one was around him for the whole 22 years to assist him. Qur'an is in perfect Arabic language, so whoever taught him must be of Arabic mother-tongue with excellent knowledge in everything. So no proof of him getting outside help.

Hogan replies:

Hold it for a while, you are bring up such a loat of rubbish, desparate claims and speculation. Let assess your claims: you state that Muhammad had no one to assist him, we just looked at a passage in the Hadiths which stated that a Christian who had converted to Islam assisted him. Other Hadith passages actually reveal how Muhammad learned the Qur’an from others:

I said,"O Allah's Apostle, I wish we took the station of Abraham as our praying place (for some of our prayers). So came the Divine Inspiration: And take you (people) the station of Abraham as a place of prayer (for some of your prayers e.g. two Rakat of Tawaf of Ka'ba)". (Qur'an 2:125) Volume 6, Book 60, Number 117:

Seems as if Allah learned the Qur’an from human or that the Qur’an in heaven was influenced by human intelligence.

Narrated Al-Bara:
When the Verse:-- "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home)" (4.95) was revealed, Allah Apostle called for Zaid who wrote it. In the meantime Ibn Um Maktum came and complained of his blindness, so Allah revealed: "Except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame..." etc.)
(4.95)

Seems that Allah forgot someone, or what?

Furthermore, Hello claims that the Qur’an is perfect Arabic. But the Qur’an is not perfect Arabic, it contains a number of foreign words. May I suggest that you study Arthur Jeffrey:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Jeffery/Vocabulary/index.htm

Jeffrey is a secular scholar and you keep urging me to study secular scholars, now be consistent, rather than attacking Jeffrey apply your own criteria upon Biblic critic upon yourself.

And also you assume that every Arab was ignorant and stupid, which is far from reality, in fact Waraqa, the cousin of Khahidja, Muhammad’s first wife was an Arab, lived in Meccah and was highly intelligent and obviously spent much time with Muhammad. Bukhari even records that Muhammad contemplated suicide when Waraqa died and that the revelation stopped:

...But after a few days Waraqa died and the Divine Inspiration was also paused for a while and the Prophet became so sad as we have heard that he intended several times to throw himself from the tops of high mountains and every time he went up the top of a mountain in order to throw himself down, Gabriel would appear before him and say, "O Muhammad! You are indeed Allah's Apostle in truth" whereupon his heart would become quiet and he would calm down and would return home. And whenever the period of the coming of the inspiration used to become long, he would do as before, but when he used to reach the top of a mountain…. [Al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 87, Number 111]

Notice here that the suicide attempts are related to the inspiration, could you please elaborate on this?

In fact the majority of Southern Arabs were educated, or at least grew up in an advanced society and many of these settled in the North prior to Muhammad’s era. It would only take on Arabic speaking intellectual to debunk your ignorant claim, and there were many such individuals. Also you seem to assume that Jews having settled in Arabia must have been entirely ignorant about Arabic, tell me then how did the converted Jew Abdullah Salim communicate with Muhammad and the other Arabic Muslims?

Hello wrote:

No, he didn't copy from Bible nor Torah.

Bible in arabic is non-existent at that time. In fact, he cannot read, no library, Internet or Y!A. In fact the content of Qur'an is obvious opposite with Bible, such as Jesus as God.

Hogan replies:

There where many Jews in Arabia, there where Christians in Arabia, there were even Christian Arabs. Waraqa even translated Gospel material into Arabic. No need of libraries or the internet. I know that the content of the Qur’an is different, but the Qur’an claims that the Injeel in Muhammad’s time (which we read today) was intact. Now that really debunks the credibility of the Qur’an.

hello said...

I'm actually surprised you would even use Arthur Jeffery as your reference.

You mention:

Arthur Jeffery suggest that a range of religious vocabulary in the Qur’an, such as Qur’an, Isa and Injil derives from the Syrian Christian faction. If this is true it reveals strong, intellectual interaction and borrowing, which Jeffery seems to suggest.

Here is an article exposing Jeffery & Missionaries. You'd have to be desperate to use him as a reference.

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Gilchrist/GilJeffery.html

Hogan replies:

See my response above. You would be surprised that I have mainly used secular scholarship in my study of the Bible, do you Muslims dare to do the same with the Qur’an? Does not seem so!

When it comes to the Bible you Muslims urge us Christians to use atheist opinions and material but when it comes to the Qur’an we need to laugh at and despise such sources.

What a pick and choose mentality.

hello said...

You should do more research.

This story originated from the book of Al-Tabari. Here is what Al-Tabari said about his own book and writings:

"Let him who examines this book of mine know that I have relied, as regards everything I mention therein which I stipulate to be described by me, solely upon what has been transmitted to me by way of reports which I cite therein and traditions which I ascribe to their narrators, to the exclusion of what may be apprehended by rational argument or deduced by the human mind, except in very few cases. This is because knowledge of the reports of men of the past and of contemporaneous views of men of the present do not reach the one who has not witnessed them nor lived in their times except through the accounts of reporters and the transmission of transmitters, to the exclusion of rational deduction and mental inference. Hence, if I mention in this book a report about some men of the past, which the reader of listener finds objectionable or worthy of censure because he can see no aspect of truth nor any factual substance therein, let him know that this is not to be attributed to us but to those who transmitted it to us and we have merely passed this on as it has been passed on to us."

Hogan replies:

Funny you Muslims include Al-Tabari whenever you need him, also when you defend the Qur’an, but when Al-Tabari damages the credibility of the Qur’an we have to remember that not everything Tabari records is trustworthy? I wonder how much of the Islamic tradition is trustworthy? There appears to have been a high proliferation of written corruption within the Muslim community!

Also you will happily quote all the junk you can get hold on to attack the Bible, even modern atheist theories which equally question the Qur’an, but when we quote a early authoritative and respected source within Islamic scholarship we need to cherry pick through his material and reject what may damage the reliability of the Qur’an in favour of what may support it---yeah I really call that scholarship.

Hello wrote:

Conclusions:

A poor attempt to convince a reader that the Quran borrowed from other cultures. Quran is error free.

Hogan replies:

Firstly you did not refute anything?

Secondly you reacted desperately to my article, insulted me and heaped up lots of claims.
I referred to secular source which according to you are essential and always correct, right? Or are we now to be cautious about secular sources since the credibility of the Qur’an is at stage?

I also referred to Islamic sources, the Qur’an, the Hadiths and the early Islamic commentators.

In fact this was everything but a poor attempt and I have effectively provided evidence that the authors of the Qur’an did fabricate and plagiarize and that the Qur’an is everything but error free.

Contrary to you I have utilized proper sources not websites, all you have given me so far are references from Islamic websites.

20 comments:

  1. For this reason was man created alone, to teach thee that whosever destroys a single soul of Israel [of Israel is absent in some texts], scripture imputes (guilt) to him as though he had Destroyed a Complete World; and whosever preserves a single soul of Israel, scripture ascribes (merit) to him as though he had Preserved a Complete World [since all mankind originated from one man]. - Babylonian Talmud, Mishnah Sanhedrin 37a

    Now let’s take a look at what was spoken centuries later by a copy cat:

    For this reason did we prescribe unto the children of Israel that he who slayeth any one (man), without (that being for) murder, or for mischief in the land, (It shall be) as though he hath slain mankind as a whole; and he who saveth it (a human life), shall be as though he hath saved mankind as a whole; and certainly our Apostles come onto them with clear evidences and yet verily, many of them even after that certainly commit excesses in the land. – The Quran, Sura 5:32 (and then in Sura 5:33 we read "the punishment is only that they be slain or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off")

    Hmmm? I wonder who is actually doing the prescribing here...

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is the lovely commentary from my Quran on Sura 87:6-7 (thanks for pointing this out Hogan!), it says: “The Holy Quran was revealed in stages...leaving a margin for gradual growth. This (word Tansa ie forget or forsake) indicates that the Holy Prophet was divinely endowed with the wonderful memory to remember the very text of the Word of God even though it was revealed to him only once (?). Some would take the exception in the next verse 7 as the proof of the possibility of the Holy Prophet forgetting his duty BUT THIS WOULD AFFECT the Holy Prophet being the absolute example to be followed by mankind (LOL?). Therefore exception here is the same as the exception in 11:108...everything depends on His will whether He exercises it or not, is a different matter or the exception refers to the orders which later on have been abrogated by Him (LOL!?) Otherwise the Holy Prophet is saved from forgetting his duties.”

    Now can anyone explain how the commentator draws the conclusion that Mohammad never forgets because he is the perfect example? Talk about going in circles!

    And of course in verse 7 we read “save what willeth God; Verily He knoweth the declared and what is HIDDEN” (so? Something is HIDDEN, but from Mohammad? Verily I say unto thee that Mohammad did not recite perfectly!)

    It seems Muslims cover up their inconsistency by calling everything “perfect”. Perfect man perfect Quran etc...while the truth stands that there was really nothing all that “perfect” about Mohammad, or the Quran.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I wrote a articel on surat 4:95( i.e. the jihad verse) which documents different sources showing that the Quran was open to human influence.

    http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/princ/ibn_umm_maktum.html

    ReplyDelete
  4. A sura like this challenge begs the question. If you insist on us writing one than you have to accept it in English. So here is the deal here is my response to the challenge: Kill all who do not believe in Allah or his messanger Muhammad. Spread islam with violence. There is my suras a simple reading of the Quran one walks away with those two basic verses I just made.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Your reply:

    "I never stated that a Greek Philosopher guided Muhammad in Qur’anic material"

    My response:

    "O’Leary points out that there are elements of definite Greek scientific origin, which made its way to the Arabs by a transmission of which route and date are uncertain."

    and then you follow it up with an abdsurd claim:

    If therefore, Muhammad was acquainted only with the impoverished life of northern Arabia and its cultural exclusiveness and remoteness, from where did such insight derive? Is it plausible that Muhammad’s environment and social circle was not as scientifically impoverished as we are made to believe? Is it possible that Mecca and dessert cities were indeed impacted by external cultures?"

    Now I dont know if you have noticed, even classical polemicists such as J.M Rodwell and Alan Jones admit that the Prophet (P) was indeed illiterate. Dr. William Campbell demonstrated the best naturalistic anti-Islamic argument for correct statements in the Holy Qur’an regarding modern embryology involves a doctor of the Prophet (P) who was taught in Persia! Your argument so far is nothing but fanciful heresy “it could have been like this..”, “maybe…”, “perhaps..”; you provides nothing solid and merely try to ground the idea that Arabs would have been masters of Greek scientific literature and disappointingly fail miserably.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Your Reply:

    Bukhari clarifies three things: this fellow was 1) closely associated with Muhammad; 2) wrote down the Qur’an; 3) claimed to have given the information to Muhammad.

    My Reply:

    1) First, he embraced Islam. However, he then embraced christianity.
    2)He was not the only one to write down the revelations.
    3)Which was a lie, and he was punished for that. He made these absurd claims when he returned to christianity.

    Your reply:

    Firstly, how do you know he did not help narrating and fabricating? Why is that an absurd claim? Do you think you have refuted this argument simply by calling it absurd, is that your argument?

    My reply:

    How could he have helped in narrating If the verses were revealed to Muhammad(saw)???? The revealed verses were recorded on a variety of available materials (leather, palm leaves, bark, shoulder bones of animals), *MEMORIZED AS SOON* as they were revealed, and were recited in daily prayers by Muslims. He was not the only one to record the revelations either.

    Your reply:
    So who am I to believe, the faction that fabricated such a bulk of material or a Christian who after adhering so closely to Muhammad actually waived Islam goodbye?

    My reply:
    You are full of laughs.

    Once a year, the Prophet used to recite all the verses revealed to him up to that time to Jibreel to authenticate the accuracy of recitation and the order of verses [Qur'an 17:106].

    Again your argument so far is nothing but fanciful heresy “it could have been like this..”, “maybe…”, “perhaps..”;

    The significance of the hadith is that because of his lies, he was punished. I suggest you read the hadith carefully.

    *Then Allah caused him to die, and the people buried him, but in the morning they saw that the earth had thrown his body out. They said, "This is the act of Muhammad and his companions. They dug the grave of our companion and took his body out of it because he had run away from them." They again dug the grave deeply for him, but in the morning they again saw that the earth had thrown his body out. They said, "This is an act of Muhammad and his companions. They dug the grave of our companion and threw his body outside it, for he had run away from them." They dug the grave for him as deep as they could, but in the morning they again saw that the earth had thrown his body out. So they believed that what had befallen him was not done by human beings and had to leave him thrown (on the ground).*

    ReplyDelete
  7. You reply:

    "Firstly there are Muslims out there who do not believe that Muhammad was illiterate."

    My reply: There are muslims out there who try to justify innovations within the religion as well. Once again you need to reassert your criticism.

    Your reply:But even if he was, it would hardly make him disfunctional anyway, many cultures applied memorization as a main method of preserving and passing on information. Particularly in educated circles memorization had been valued higher than literacy. Christians themselves practiced memorization so did the Jews. If you intend to claim that Muhammad was not able to deal with information due to his possible illiteracy, then you are approaching the matter with the highest ignorance.

    My reply:

    First of all I am not aware of a single historical source that supports your claim and you yourself do not provide one; I think you are confusing Arab history with romantic Greek history. A Noble Arab of the Prophet’s (Saw) time meant that he would be fashioned into a good wrestler, hunter and eventually a warrior. The very year the Prophet (saw) was born tribal warfare nearly destroyed the Ka’abah; furthermore the Holy Prophet (saw) was an orphan who were not viewed highly in ancient Arab society. The Prophet (saw) would later become a humble tradesman (hardly the high life that you envision for nobles) and in all reality almost all Arabs were illiterate and being a noble actually increased their chances of remaining illiterate as nobles were to be skilled warriors and violent protectors of their tribes honor; not to be educated young men in large houses with maidservants and massive libraries. You seems to have a habit of going against the grain without putting in the hard yards. You simply state something that is contrary to the fact and hope we will buy it; for example the claim that Christians and Jews populated Makkah we of course know that there was no real Christian influence in Makkah and that the Jews populated al Medina. To quote Dr. Nabîh Aqel:

    “The big difference between Christianity and Judaism is that Christianity unlike Judaism didn’t have any bases in Hijaz, Christianity was an external source of enlightenment echoed in Hijaz either by missionary activities from Ethiopia, Syria and Iraq or from Alheerah’s Christian centers…

    ReplyDelete
  8. Your reply to my bible scientific errors:

    Exactly how does this claim fit into the context of our topic?

    My reply:

    I shouldve provided references neverthless. The point I was trying to make here is that while you try to disprove the scientific miracles of the Quran, You forget that the bible is filled with many scientific errors.

    Just a few: Earth is Flat?????

    "He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 104:5)"

    "The LORD reigns, he is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed in majesty and is armed with strength. The world [The deceiving translators should've said "earth", not "world"] is firmly established; it cannot be moved. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 93:1)"

    "Say among the nations, "The LORD reigns." The world [Again, the deceiving translators should've said "earth", not "world"] is firmly established, it cannot be moved; he will judge the peoples with equity. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 96:10)"

    "The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises. (From the NIV Bible, Ecclesiastes 1:5)"

    Well, I don't think there is any need for much explanation to the nonsense above! It is crystal clear that the Bible is full of man-made corruptions and alterations. Since when the Earth is flat and can never move?! We all know that the Earth and the other planets rotate and move in space around the Sun. Since when the Sun hurries back to where it rises, like if there is some hole it rises from and another hole it sets through on Earth?!

    For those Jews and Christians who would like to see where in the Noble Quran does Allah Almighty say that the planets in space rotate and move, read the following Noble Verse:

    "It is He who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon, all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its orbit with its own motion. (The Noble Quran, 21:33)"

    Proverbs 6:6-8, ants have no commander, no ruler and no overseer! This is absurdly false, because ants live in colonies and ranks of rulership and authority. And they have a queen.

    # Compare this falsehood to the Holy Quran's Scientific Miracle about the ants ranks and 4 layers of communications which scientists today have recently confirmed: Ants do indeed talk to each others as the Holy Quran Stated!

    #
    # Mark 16:18 "they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well." Christians so bothered by the falsehood of this verse due to the many fatalities they suffered because of it, that the Bible theologians insist on denying these verses by saying: "The most reliable early manuscript and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20."

    John 12:24 "I tell you the truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds." That is scientifically false. The dead seed does not produce new seeds.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Your reply:

    Narrated 'Abdullah: ... (Muhammad said) I am a human being like you and liable to forget like you. So if I forget remind me ... (Bukhari: volume 1, book 8, number 394, Khan)

    Muhammad forgot and depended upon his followers to teach him, this actually happens several times in the Hadiths.

    Even the Qur’an confirms that Muhammad forgot the Qur’an, yet the author of the Qur’an blamed this upon Allah himself:

    My reply: Muhammad(saw) was a human being and forgetting doesnt constitute falsehood nor does it affect any revelation. This only applied from a human-being perspective however it does not prove the revelation or the teachings to be wrong. Besides the hadith is teaching the muslims what to do if anyone is dountful about their prayer.

    Narrated 'Abdullah: "The Prophet prayed (and the subnarrator Ibrahim said, "I do not know whether he prayed more or less than usual"), and when he had finished the prayers he was asked, "O Allah's Apostle! Has there been any change in the prayers?" He said, "What is it?' The people said, "You have prayed so much and so much." So the Prophet bent his legs, faced the Qibla and performed two prostrations (of Sahu, or correction in case a mistake was done) and finished his prayers with Tasiim (by turning his face to right and left saying: 'As-Salamu'Alaikum-Warahmat-ullah'). When he turned his face to us he said, "If there had been anything changed in the prayer, surely I would have informed you but I am a human being like you and liable to forget like you. So if I forget remind me and *if anyone of you is doubtful about his prayer, he should follow what he thinks to be correct and complete his prayer accordingly and finish it and do two prostrations (of Sahu)."**********************

    ReplyDelete
  10. Your Reply:
    Even the Qur’an confirms that Muhammad forgot the Qur’an, yet the author of the Qur’an blamed this upon Allah himself:

    By degrees shall we teach thee (Muhammad) to declare (the message), so thou shalt not forget, except as God wills ... (Sura 87:6-7, Yusuf Ali).

    My Reply:
    The Author of the Quran is Allah(swt). And the verses do not confirm Muhammad(saw) forgot the verses.

    Here are the tafsir to the verses:

    "We shall enable you to recite, then you shall never forget" of verse 6 also indicate that it was sent down in the period when the Holy Messenger (upon whom he Allah's peace) was not yet fully accustomed to receive Revelation and at the time Revelation came down he feared lest he should forget its words.

    Allah says,

    ﴿سَنُقْرِئُكَ﴾(We shall make you to recite,) meaning, `O Muhammad.'

    ﴿فَلاَ تَنسَى﴾(so you shall not forget (it),) This is Allah informing and promising him (the Prophet ) that He will teach him a recitation that he will not forget.

    ﴿إِلاَّ مَا شَآءَ اللَّهُ﴾(Except what Allah may will.) Qatadah said, "The Prophet did not forget anything except what Allah willed.'' It has been said that the meaning of Allah's statement,

    ﴿فَلاَ تَنسَى﴾(so you shall not forget,) is, "do not forget'' and that which would be abrogated, is merely an exception to this. Meaning, `do not forget what We teach you to recite, except what Allah wills, which He removes and there is no sin on your leaving it off (not retaining it).' Concerning Allah's statement,

    ﴿إِنَّهُ يَعْلَمُ الْجَهْرَ وَمَا يَخْفَى﴾(He knows what is apparent and what is hidden.) meaning, He knows what the creatures do openly and what they hide, whether it be statements or deeds. None of that is hidden from Him. Then Allah says,

    ﴿وَنُيَسِّرُكَ لِلْيُسْرَى ﴾(And We shall make easy for you the easy.) meaning, `We will make good deeds and statements easy for you, and We will legislate such Law for you that is easy, tolerant, straight and just, with no crookedness, difficulty or hardship in it.'


    Now your shifting towards using methods of deceit such as the answeringislam team.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Your Reply:
    What is worse is, even the followers those assist and teach Muhammad began
    forgetting the Qur’an:

    Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet said, "Why does anyone of the people say, 'I have forgotten such-and-such Verses (of the Qur'an)?' He, in fact, is caused (by Allah) to forget." (Bukhari: volume 6, book 61, number 559, Khan)

    Sahih Muslim confirms that Muhammad’s followers lost large portions of the Qur’an by failing to preserve it by memory:

    It is recorded that 300 Qur’anic reciters forgot an entire chapter of the Qur’an, a chapter still missing (Muslim: book 5, number 2286)

    First, Id like to mention that these false accusations are nothing new. In fact, It seems as though you have copied the cliams of Samuel Green.

    My reply: Taken from answeringchristianity rebbuttal to samuel greens article.

    First, 559. Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet said, "Why does anyone of the people say, 'I have forgotten such-and-such Verses (of the Qur'an)?' He, in fact, is caused (by Allah) to forget."

    Again The companions were human however, this did not mean that the Revelations were lost as soon as a person would forget. Do you mean to say that only one companion memorized the Quran? Again you fail to ressert your criticism and make absurd claims.

    "Even if Islamic critics want to be stubborn and persist that the Prophet forgot needed verses from the Quran, this could be refuted by the fact that the Prophet always used to rehearse the Quran to angel Gabriel and angel Gabriel would have corrected the Prophet where he went wrong. Furthermore, angel Gabriel recited the Quran TWICE to the Prophet in the year he died.

    Sahih Bukhari

    Volume 006, Book 061, Hadith Number 519.


    Narated By Ibn 'Abbas : The Prophet was the most generous person, and he used to become more so (generous) particularly in the month of Ramadan because Gabriel used to meet him every night of the month of Ramadan till it elapsed. Allah's Apostle used to recite the Qur'an for him. When Gabriel met him, he used to become more generous than the fast wind in doing good.

    Volume 6, Book 61, Number 520:

    Narrated Abu-Huraira: Gabriel used to repeat the recitation of the Qur'an with the Prophet once a year, but he repeated it twice with him in the year he died. The Prophet used to stay in I'tikaf for ten days every year (in the month of Ramadan), but in the year of his death, he stayed in I'tikaf for twenty days.



    Furthermore, the Prophet would order his scribes to write down the Quran as soon as the revelations came to him."

    ReplyDelete
  12. My Reply continued:



    Taken from samuel greens rebuttal:

    Regarding Sahih Muslim: book 5, volume 2 :

    Some of the companions of the Prophet believed that the statement "If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." was part of the Qur'an.

    However, it is turns out that the statement was most likely a hadith. Here are some hadith to show this.

    Saheeh Bukhari

    Volume 8, Book 76, Number 444:

    Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:

    I heard the Prophet saying, "If the son of Adam (the human being) had two valley of money, he would wish for a third, for nothing can fill the belly of Adam's son except dust, and Allah forgives him who repents to Him."



    Volume 8, Book 76, Number 445:

    Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:

    I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "If the son of Adam had money equal to a valley, then he will wish for another similar to it, for nothing can satisfy the eye of Adam's son except dust. And Allah forgives him who repents to Him." Ibn 'Abbas said: I do not know whether this saying was quoted from the Qur'an or not. 'Ata' said, "I heard Ibn AzZubair saying this narration while he was on the pulpit."



    Volume 8, Book 76, Number 446:

    Narrated Sahl bin Sa'd:

    I heard Ibn Az-Zubair who was on the pulpit at Mecca, delivering a sermon, saying, "O men! The Prophet used to say, "If the son of Adam were given a valley full of gold, he would love to have a second one; and if he were given the second one, he would love to have a third, for nothing fills the belly of Adam's son except dust. And Allah forgives he who repents to Him." Ubai said, "We considered this as a saying from the Qur'an till the Sura (beginning with) 'The mutual rivalry for piling up of worldly things diverts you..' (102.1) was revealed."



    Volume 8, Book 76, Number 447:

    Narrated Anas bin Malik:

    Allah's Apostle said, "If Adam's son had a valley full of gold, he would like to have two valleys, for nothing fills his mouth except dust. And Allah forgives him who repents to Him."



    You can see the commentary of hadith 'Volume 8, Book 76, Number 446' here http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=0&Rec=9633.

    The commentary basically says....

    ReplyDelete
  13. When this Surah was revealed and expressed the same meaning as it (the Adam statement) they knew that the first statement (the Adam statement) was from the statements of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Some of them explained it to be part of the Quran and then its recitation was abrogated when 'The mutual rivalry for piling up of worldly things diverts you..' (102.1) was revealed." so its recitation persisted so it abrogated the recitation of that (the Adam statement). But it's wisdom and ruling was not abrogated if its recitation was abrogated.

    And it also occurred at Ahmad and Abi Ubayd in "Virtues of the Quran" from hadith Abi Waqid Al Labani who said "We used to go to the Prophet (PBUH) if something was revealed to him so he would tell us, so he told us that day: Allah says "We have sent down money for the establishment of prayer and payment of Zakat, Adam's son had a valley full of gold, he would like to have two valleys." the hadith in its exact form, and it is possible that the Prophet (PBUH) informed that this is a verse from the Quran, and it is also possible that it is from the Qudsi Hadith, and God knows and if it is the first (meaning first explanation that it was part of the Quran) then it is what was abrogated from recitation even though its wisdom and rulings are still implemented.



    Again this just takes us to the whole issue of abrogation. Or as the commentary says, it could be a Qudsi Hadith. What is a Qudsi Hadith? See this definition......



    Taken from http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/hadithqudsi.html

    Hadith Qudsi are the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace and Blessings of Allah be upon him) as revealed to him by the Almighty Allah. Hadith Qudsi (or Sacred Hadith) are so named because, unlike the majority of Hadith which are Prophetic Hadith, their authority (Sanad) is traced back not to the Prophet but to the Almighty.

    Among the many definitions given by the early scholars to Sacred Hadith is that of as-Sayyid ash-Sharif al-Jurjani (died in 816 A.H.) in his lexicon At-Tarifat where he says: "A Sacred Hadith is, as to the meaning, from Allah the Almighty; as to the wording, it is from the messenger of Allah (PBUH). It is that which Allah the Almighty has communicated to His Prophet through revelation or in dream, and he, peace be upon him, has communicated it in his own words. Thus Qur'an is superior to it because, besides being revealed, it is His wording."

    ReplyDelete
  14. Your reply:

    It is reported from Ismail ibn Ibrahim from Ayyub from Naafi from Ibn Umar who said: "Let none of you say 'I have acquired the whole of the Qur'an'. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Qur'an has disappeared? Rather let him say 'I have acquired what has survived.'" (as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.524).

    My reply:

    Amazing, how knowledgeable you are of a Companion's mind when you don't even understand his language!!

    This reference to the Itqan is untraceable as no edition of it is in less than two volumes to my knowledge.

    The above refers to a famous saying of Ibn `Umar, once again deceptively/ignorantly mistranslated so as to mislead readers to think it means other than its actual meaning.

    The words used by Ibn `Umar for the terms given as "acquired," "disappeared," and "what has survived" above were -- I am quoting from memory -- respectively "ahattu" (I have encompassed), "faatahu" (escapes him), and "ma tayassara minhu" (whatever amount of it has been facilitated). The actual meaning of Ibn `Umar's words is:

    "Let no one say: I have encompassed the whole of the Qur'an [= its meanings]. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Qur'an escapes him? Rather, let him say: I have encompassed whatever amount of it has been facilitated [for me to know]."

    Ibn `Umar was famous for his strictness in refraining from interpreting the Qur'an, even criticizing Ibn `Abbas's interpretive zeal in the beginning, then accepting its authority. He was not referring to the collection of the Qur'an! But only to the ethics of the exegete, in the same line as Ibn `Abbas's saying narrated by al-Tabari and cited by al-Suyuti and al-Zarkashi: "There are ambiguous verses in the Qur'an which no one knows besides Allah. Whoever claims that he knows them, is a liar."

    Also Ibn `Abbas's and `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf's saying: "The Qur'an has an outward meaning, [literally 'a back'] (zahr) and an inward meaning [literally 'an inside'] (batn)."

    Some parts might have been written down but not memorized by people who survived. It got lost because the manuscripts disappeared. Ubayy said, 'It used to equal the length surat al Baqara and we used to recite in Ahzab the stoning verse.' Zirr asked, 'What is the stoning verse?' Ubayy recited, 'If the saikh and the saikha fornicate, stone them outright as an exemplary punishment from God. God is might, wise.' (Jalal al Din `Abdul Rahman b. abi Bakr al Suyuti, "al Itqan fi `ulum al Qur'an", Halabi, Cairo, 1935/1354, pt 2, p. 25)

    I was able to trace the above according to the page and number given. Al-Suyuti cited the above report among many other reports in the chapter entitled "The Abrogating and the Abrogated," section entitled "Verses Whose Recitation Was Abrogated But Not Their Legal Ruling." Enough said.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Your reply:

    How could it be so difficult to collect the Qur’an if Muhammad and his followers had preserved it so effectively?

    My reply:

    Enough of your false interpretation of hadith and verses of the Quran.

    One of the leading orientalists, Kenneth Cragg, said the following regarding the memorization and preservation of the Qur’anic text, “This phenomenon of Qur’anic recital means that the text has traversed the centuries in an unbroken living sequence of devotion. It cannot, therefore, be handled as an antiquarian thing, nor as a historical document out of a distant past.”Another orientalist scholar, William Graham, wrote: “For countless millions of Muslims over more than fourteen centuries of Islamic history, ‘scripture’, al-kitab, has been a book learned, read and passed on by vocal repetition and memorisation. The written Qur’an may ‘fix’ visibly the authoritative text of the Divine Word in a way unknown in history, but the authoritativeness of the Qur’anic book is only realized in its fullness and perfection when it is correctly recited.”Yet another, John Burton, stated: “The method of transmitting the Qur’an from one generation to the next by having the young memorize the oral tradition of their elders had mitigated somewhat from the beginning the worst perils of relying solely on written records...”At the end of a voluminous work on the Qur’an’s collection, Burton stated that the text of the Qur’an available today is “the text which has come down to us in the form in which it was organised and approved by the Prophet....What we have today in our hands is the mus-haf of Muhammad.”

    Once again:

    The Angel Jibreal Reviewed the quran Twice with the prophet Muhammad the last year before the death of the prophet (pbuh) like the hadith of AbuHuraira as stated in Bokhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number .And Zaid bin Thabit was one of the companians present at the final review , As in the Hadith of Abu Abd Allah Al-Salmy he said:
    ''Zaid Bin Thabit recited (the quran) to the prophet (pbuh) in the year that the prophet died in twice, and it was called the recitation of Zaid Bin Thabit because he Wrote it for the prophet (pbuh) And he recited it to him (the prophet) And he (Zaid) witnessed the Final review. And the people kept on reciting with it (zaids recitation) til his death (the prophet)and thats why AbuBakkir & Umar apointed him to write it (the quran) , and also Uthman apointed him to make copys of it (the quran)''

    ReplyDelete
  16. Instead of wasting my time rebutting your article point by point, Lets work with what we have.

    Your reply:

    Firstly you did not refute anything?

    My reply:

    Lets let the readers decide.

    Your reply:

    I also referred to Islamic sources, the Qur’an, the Hadiths and the early Islamic commentators.

    My reply:

    Because of your constant hankering after half-truths and misconstructions, one cannot follow-up on your posts except with a broom and pail. I feel sorry for the victims of your deluded websites but suspect that, your numbers in real terms are negligible.

    Your reply:
    In fact this was everything but a poor attempt and I have effectively provided evidence that the authors of the Qur’an did fabricate and plagiarize and that the Qur’an is everything but error free.

    My reply: I must have missed this part.

    Your reply:
    Contrary to you I have utilized proper sources not websites, all you have given me so far are references from Islamic websites.

    My reply: I have come across the same absurd claims multiple times. Once again, You're just exposing your gross ignorance with your claim that Muslims cannot do a critical analysis of the Qur'an. We have been doing it for centuries way before Biblical criticism became a norm in the Western academia.

    If anyone has any questions you can contact me at muftislam@gmail.com

    I invite you to Islam and leave your current false ideology.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Well, some parts might have been written down but not memorized by people who survived. It got lost because the manuscripts disappeared.

    Direct response services

    ReplyDelete
  18. @hello pointed out what he thought were scientific errors in the Bible:
    He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 104:5)"

    ["The LORD reigns, he is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed in majesty and is armed with strength. The world [The deceiving translators should've said "earth", not "world"] is firmly established; it cannot be moved. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 93:1)"

    "Say among the nations, "The LORD reigns." The world [Again, the deceiving translators should've said "earth", not "world"] is firmly established, it cannot be moved; he will judge the peoples with equity. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 96:10)"

    "The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises. (From the NIV Bible, Ecclesiastes 1:5)"]

    Now I am not a Christian, but I like to study about religions, so I taught myself to read and write Hebrew, and I have come across these verses in my reading of the Bible. I do not think these are scientific errors. Here's why:
    1) 'The earth cannot be moved' is a common refrain in the Psalms.
    The word for earth is "erets", אֶ֭רֶץ, which can also mean 'land'.
    However, Pslam 93:1 and 96:10 use 'tebel', תֵּ֭בֵל, which comes from yabal;
    the earth (as moist and therefore inhabited); by extension, the globe; by implication, its inhabitants; specifically, a partic. Land, as Babylonia, Palestine -- habitable part, world.
    see HEBREW yabal (From Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, http://concordances.org/hebrew/8398.htm)
    The root word yabal has the meaning:
    bring forth, carry, lead forth

    A primitive root; properly, to flow; causatively, to bring (especially with pomp) -- bring (forth), carry, lead (forth)
    (ibid)
    So yabal has the meaning, 'carry' and also to 'bring', implying motion.
    The translators hav not "deceived" as @hello foolishly thinks.
    Now for the word 'moved' used in the OT:
    It is 'timmowt', תִּמּ֑וֹט, which means:
    be carried, cast, be out of course, be fallen in decay, exceedingly, falling down

    A primitive root; to waver; by implication, to slip, shake, fall -- be carried, cast, be out of course, be fallen in decay, X exceedingly, fall(-ing down), be (re-)moved, be ready, shake, slide, slip.
    (Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, http://concordances.org/hebrew/4131.htm)
    Let's see how the same word is used in other Psalms:
    Psalm 62:6-- He only is my rock and my salvation: he is my defence; I shall not be moved.
    Psalm 16:8-- I have set the LORD always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved.
    Is the Psalmist (traditionally King David)saying he will stand like an idol forever?
    Here the word is clearly translated as TOTTER, FALTER, SHAKE:
    Psalm 46:6-- The nations made an uproar, the kingdoms tottered; He raised His voice, the earth melted.
    Leviticus 25:35-- Now in case a countryman of yours becomes poor and his means with regard to you FALTER, then you are to sustain him, like a stranger or a sojourner, that he may live with you.
    Isaiah 24:19-- The earth is broken asunder, The earth is split through, The earth is SHAKEN violently.
    So 'moved' seen in the light of Isaiah 24:19, refers to the shaking of the earth during an earthquake, and not its motion.

    ReplyDelete
  19. 2) Ecclesiastes 1:5, Young's Literal Translation:
    Also, the sun hath risen, and the sun hath gone in, and unto its place PANTING it is rising there.
    Barnes in his notes also renders it thus:
    Ecclesiastes 1:5

    5The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.

    Hasteth ... - literally, at his place panting (in his eagerness) riseth he there.
    (http://barnes.biblecommenter.com/ecclesiastes/1.htm)
    The word translated as 'hastening', which is "sho'eph" שׁוֹאֵ֛ף actually means 'panting':
    sha'aph: pant
    Original Word: שָׁאַף
    Part of Speech: Verb
    Transliteration: sha'aph
    Phonetic Spelling: (shaw-af')
    Short Definition: pant
    (http://concordances.org/hebrew/7602.htm)
    In all other places in the Bible, it is used in that sense.
    Now the sun does 'pant'; it releases a large amount of charged particles, called 'solar wind':
    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_wind)
    Now for the word translated as 'to' or 'unto' it is "el",
    rhyming with 'ale', and while it usually means 'to', it can also be translated as 'at' or 'in':
    Exodus 29:12-- and hast taken of the blood of the bullock, and hast put it on the horns of the altar with thy finger, and all the blood thou dost pour out at (el) the foundation of the altar
    Deuteronomy 33:28-- And Israel shall dwell in safety alone, The fountain of Jacob, in (el) a land of corn and new wine; Also his heavens shall drop down dew.
    So Ecclesiastes 1:5 can also be translated as:
    And rises the sun, and sets the sun, and at (el) his place panting (sho'eph)rises he.

    ReplyDelete