Are you serious? I have never heard this from a imam or any religious scholar, is this your own explanation?
You most be comatose. And you said you were an Arab ? Geesh, dont worry your not the first Christian Arab I have incountered. As a matter of fact I would rather deal with your kind than the Christian amarakiyyati wa aswadi .
It is a feature of literary style in Arabic that a person may refer to himself by the pronoun ‘nahnu’ (we) for respect or glorification. He may also use the word ‘ana’ (I), indicating one person, or the third person ‘huwa’ (he). All three styles are used in the Qur’an, where Allaah addresses the Arabs in their own tongue
Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, 4/143
Allaah, may He be glorified and exalted, sometimes refers to Himself in the singular, by name or by use of a pronoun, and sometimes by use of the plural, as in the phrase (which translated means): ‘Verily, We have given you a manifest victory” [al-Fath 48:1], and other similar phrases. But Allaah never refers to Himself by use of the dual, because the plural refers to the respect that He deserves, and may refer to His names and attributes, whereas the dual refers to a specific number (and nothing else), and He is far above that.
These words, innaa ("Verily We") and nahnu ("We"), and other forms of the plural, may be used by one person speaking on behalf of a group, or they may be used by one person for purposes of respect or glorification, as is done by some monarchs when they issue statements or decrees in which they say " We have decided…" etc. [This is known in English as "The Royal We" – Translator]. In such cases, only one person is speaking but the plural is used for respect. The One Who is more deserving of respect than any other is Allaah, may He be glorified and exalted, so when He says in the Qur'an innaa ("Verily We") and nahnu ("We"), it is for respect and glorification, not to indicate plurality of numbers. If an aayah of this type is causing confusion, it is essential to refer to the clear, unambiguous aayaat for clarification, and if a Christian, for example, insists on taking ayaat such as
"Verily, We: it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e., the Qur'an)"
[al-Hijr 15:9 – interpretation of the meaning] as proof of divine plurality, we may refute this claim by quoting such clear and unambiguous aayaat as (interpretation of the meanings):
"And your god is One God, there is none who has the right to be worshipped but He, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful" [al-Baqarah 2:163]
and
"Say: He is Allaah, the One" [al-Ikhlaas 112:1]
and other aayaat which can only be interpreted in one way. Thus confusion will be dispelled for the one who is seeking the truth. Every time Allaah uses the plural to refer to Himself, it is based on the respect and honour that He deserves, and on the great number of His names and attributes, and on the great number of His troops and angels.
Al-'Aqeedah al-Tadmuriyyah by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, p. 75, 109.
In regards to the presence of the "us" and "our" in the Old Testament, this is actually a proof against Christian belief since they were never understood in the way Christians understand them until the time of ‘St’ Paul or later. In Semitic usage, it is customary for one in authority to speak of himself in the plural. For examples of this in the Bible, see 2 Samuel 16:20 and Ezra 4:16-19. Almighty God, in the Qur'an, uses the Arabic word for "We" when He makes some statements, but no one who knows the Arabic language ever understood it as an argument for indication of plurality. This is what we call the "Plural of Majesty", and it is mentioned in almost any book on Arabic grammar.
English has much the same thing. When a King or Queen issues a proclamation, they say "We, the King of England..." This is also done by monarchs in Arabic-speaking countries. Who are they talking to when they do this? Their intended audience of course, not themselves. The examples given above (i.e. 2 Samuel 16:20 and Ezra 4:16-19), also demonstrate this.
So it is suffice to say that plural forms, especially in Arabic and Hebrew and even English, don't necessarily imply plurality. The claim that "plurality of the Godhead" is implied in the language of the Old Testament (which is admittedly by the way imprecise) is just an invention by Christians in order to fill a previously determined theological need. The Greek translation of the Old Testament (known as the "Septuagint" translates "'Eloyhim" the plural form of God, as "ho Theos" (i.e. the God). This is a SINGULAR translation which was done at least two centuries prior to the coming of Jesus, peace be upon him, and shows that the implication of plurality in these words is a purely Christian invention. In spite of all this, if Christians still want to believe that the "Godhead", as they often refer to it as, is "plural", then that belief is to their own discredit.
It should also be mentioned that it's not just the incoherence of Christianity that leads one to these conclusions, because on top of all of this we have a new, CLEAR and unambiguous revelation - the Qur'an - that contradicts the Christian claims. Whether one agrees that the Qur'an is Almighty God's final revelation to mankind or not, the guidance in it is CLEAR. That the Qur'an's central message is the Unity of God is indisputable.
The message of the Bible isn't so clear. If God is merciful and really wants all men to be saved by believing in the Christian doctrines and beliefs, why didn't Jesus make the message clear? Why is most of the New Testament written by Paul, who still didn't make things clear?
Almighty God, as He describes Himself in the Qur'an, is Merciful and Compassionate towards His Creation, and one way which He manifests this is by making His revelations clear and comprehensible - even to the limited human mind.
Abu Iman 'Abd ar-Rahman Robert Squires
Maybe you need to do a refresh on our language, it seems you fell short. You are the first Nasaraa I have heard comment in negation on such a thing. But again even you Nasaraa are in dispute about the plural use.
Older then Hebrew? what dialect of arabic are you talking about? the "brother" said culture so I replied concerning culture.
What dialect do you think I am talking about and what difference does it make, isnt it all Arabic regardless of what dialect it is ?
Did you READ the quote above from britannica ? The OLDEST SCRIPT of the Arabic language dates back to 8BCE in the Southern Arabic dialect of
Minaean in which the alphabet system they used dates back to the begining of the first millinium BCE before they adopted the northern semitic alphabet system.
Not to mention southern Arabic has remained more stable than all the Semitic languages with less influence from other language cause of its isolation. In this same region is where our Nabi came from. Hebrew is NOT a stable semitic language. It is mixed with other semitic languages such as Egyptian, Arabic, Chaldea, Aramaic, and Cannan due to the enfluences the Iraelites incountered as they were subdued by various nations.
H2O wrote:
In what Arabic dialect was the Quran written in ? Quraish dialect the dialect of the tribe Muhammad came from.
Is that so? What about Uthman and the burning of the Qurans? I thought that he burned all the Qurans that where in a different dialect and kept the Quraish dialect?
Duh ! You basically said the same thing I said. What did I say ? I said the Quran was revealed in the dialect of the Quraish which was the dialect of Muhammad. When Uthman ordered the burning of the other copies of the Quran that differed in
RECITAL ORDER by the people of Iraq and Sham. What did Uthman say to Zaid when he made additional copies in there correct order to send them out to the people of Iraq ? Lets refresh your comatose memory.
Volumn 006, Book 061, Hadith Number 510. (Al-Bukhari..and same reported by Muslim, Thirmidhi, Abu Dawud ahadeeth)
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Anas bin Malik : Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were Waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. Said bin Thabit added, "A Verse from Surat Ahzab was missed by me when we copied the Qur'an and I used to hear Allah's Apostle reciting it. So we searched for it and found it with Khuzaima bin Thabit Al-Ansari. (That Verse was): 'Among the Believers are men who have been true in their covenant with Allah.' (33.23)
Now what was this difference of Recital or Reading ?
Volumn 006, Book 061, Hadith Number 515. (Bukhari and same reported Muslim)
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Yusuf bin Mahk : While I was with 'Aisha, the mother of the Believers, a person from Iraq came and asked, "What type of shroud is the best?" 'Aisha said, "May Allah be merciful to you! What does it matter?" He said, "O mother of the Believers! Show me (the copy of) your Qur'an," She said, "Why?" He said, "In order to compile and arrange the Qur'an according to it, for people recite it with its Suras not in proper order." 'Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read first? (Be informed) that the first thing that was revealed thereof was a Sura from Al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire. When the people embraced Islam, the Verses regarding legal and illegal things were revealed. If the first thing to be revealed was: 'Do not drink alcoholic drinks.' people would have said, 'We will never leave alcoholic drinks,' and if there had been revealed, 'Do not commit illegal sexual intercourse, 'they would have said, 'We will never give up illegal sexual intercourse.' While I was a young girl of playing age, the following Verse was revealed in Mecca to Muhammad: 'Nay! But the Hour is their appointed time (for their full recompense), and the Hour will be more grievous and more bitter.' (54.46) Sura Al-Baqara (The Cow) and Surat An-Nisa (The Women) were revealed while I was with him." Then 'Aisha took out the copy of the Qur'an for the man and dictated to him the Verses of the Suras (in their proper order).
Also, the oral Quran always had preference over the written copy of the Quran. The diacrical marks were intruduced to assure the proper reading of the Quran by those whos mother tongue was not Arabic. Adding diacrital marks did and does not alter the Quran. Remember the Quran was NEVER in book form. The Quran was established orally and preserved orally. The need to write it down in book form was done to preserve its recital order in which many of the ahafeez had died in wars.
Yeah you could say that, except the spainish have 3 extra letters
You forgot to address the issue of Iranians and Lebanese etc that use the Arabic alphabet system but their language is not Arabic. The point I brought up is that Webby introduced such reasoning to infer the origin and era of the Arabic language cause of its Alphabet system adoption is strickly nonsense.
Could Allah be a truine God?
Why Triune ? The ideology is so stuck in your sculls that all you can think is "three" ? When you Nasaraa see plural you think "THREE" . That called mere programmed indoctrination.
For Christians who dont believe in the Quran you sure want to dictate the Aqeedah of the Quran like if you do. Wnat to show me where Allah infers himself to being TRI in the Quran ?