Christian/Muslim ThreadsScholar Bart Ehrman confess that the Bible we have is ....Peace be upon who follows the right way,
Sorry Friend. That is not what Catholics. Catholics argue that those books are a word of God, otherwise why do they keep it in their books? It will be so funny to keep in The Holy Book which represents the word of God what others handwriting then tell the people all of that came from God. For more about that, go there http://www.icubed.com/~rpoe/cathfaq.htm#canonscr Muslims did not make the site? So, those books were in the early age of Christianity. And there was not a term “The Bible" until the 4th Century. Earlier Christians and even if the Protestants themselves include the Greek translation of Jewish Scripture, the Septuagint until and they started depend on Jewish canon since the middle of 18th century. http://www.twopaths.com/faq_bibles.htm So, I think you do not know the history of the earlier Christians, even if the earlier history of Protestants themselves. About Jews, whom told you that those books are not in Jews books or they put them in their holy book? It is so funny to talk about what you do know. I am going to give you here and for others a brief about Jewish Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible, consists of 39 Books that are divided into three sections – Torah (the [Written] Law; also known as the Pentateuch), N'vi'im (the Prophets), K'tuvim (the Writings; also known as the Hagiorgrapha). The Hebrew equivalent of the TNK acronym for the three parts has been assigned vowels which give it the pronunciation TANACH, a title that has become a common reference to the Hebrew Bible. According to traditional Judaism, the Torah is God's word as recorded by Moses, and the remainder of the Hebrew Bible consists of inspired works by various persons. In addition to the Written Torah, traditional Judaism holds that an Oral Torah also originated at Sinai. This oral tradition was eventually codified and recorded in the Mishnah during the second century C.E., and later expounded on in the Gemara, both of which comprise the Talmud. The Oral Torah is part of a living corpus of Jewish Law, Halachah, which is continuously updated by the religious authorities in order to keep it consistent with the laws of the land and with changing times. The Written Torah contains 613 precepts which form the framework of Judaism, and which are regarded as eternal and of utmost value. The Oral Torah contains details concerning these 613 precepts, which are essential to the understanding and ability to live by the Written Torah. There are many other writings of the Sages, including the codifications of Judaism by Rabbi Moshe Ben Maimon (RAMBAM; Maimonides), Rabbi Joseph Karo, and others, all of which have had their impact on the practice of Judaism. traditional Judaism also includes a mystical tradition, known as Qabalah (often also transliterated as Kabbalah), the central written work of which is the Zohar. So, do you include the Oral Torah in the Old testament of your Christian Protestant Bible? The Christian Old Testament used by the Christian Protestant Church now contains the same books as the Hebrew Bible, though they are not organized in the same way, nor do they appear in the same order plus then do not attach Talmud (Mishnah and Gemara) or Oral Torah in their book. The Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Armenian and the Ethiopian Oriental Orthodox Church include in their renditions of the Old Testament several additional books, namely, Tobit, Judith, 1&2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch. So, do you still think your Old Testament is still like the Jews? Go there to know what Jews say about you friend, http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/handb ... stian.html So, do not argue again that those books it was not in the earlier Church History anymore. The Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Armenian and the Ethiopian Oriental Orthodox Church are not agree with you? Even if Jews Bible as you saw before differs from the Protestants Old testament? What fact friend? go to this sites again and read the fact which anyone studied Christianity know it. http://www.icubed.com/~rpoe/cathfaq.htm#canonscr Otherwise go me you home address to send you some books, who knows you might know the truth finally. O It was already accepted by the earlier Church friend. I am not saying that from my own desire, you Catholic brothers say that. All the Bible's translations made by Greek Christians not by Jews. Matt Gospel have been written in a very good Greek way. Friend, Look at the site again to know who was responsible for arranged the Bible on the 4th Century. I just replied about this issue although I have already got a point from it to show you that you need to read in real Christian history. But my question are still without any Answer? Which Old Testament do you mean Catholics, Jews or Protestants Old Testament? If you think your old testament is like how it is with Jews, then you need to read more about this issue. They are not reluctant friend, they are sure that Christians misquoted and mistranslated it Like how Catholics argue that you left those books for no reason. Yes as a matter of fact the original version of KJV has all the books which it missed in Protestant Bible. Friend Kai, you always talk a lot without no sense, sorry. The fact is still that Catholics believe that their Holy Book is the word of God and they deny all your speech. Jews accused you both Catholics and Protestants by Misquoting and Mistranslating the Old Testament. So, the question, which Old Testament do you want me to use for arguments? There are three. Or it is another trinity. They are three books with different books but they are one. From did you get those words "The Koran in a translation" We do not have any translation for the Koran. I challenge you to get a version of a Quran while it written on it “Translation of the Quran" But you can find this verse "Translation for the Meanings of the Quran” Is there a difference? Yes kids know the difference. There is a difference between the meanings of the word "Hope" and the word itself. There is a difference between saying "Kai entered to the temple" and to say " Kai entered to the temple the place where Jews worship God" This increment is just explanation. But what is for Bible which translated in into 80 languages around the world saying this word of God. For my Arabs Christians they did know a lot of stuff about what kind of evil entered to put verses from 9 to 16 in a Gospel with a hand and introduce it as a word of God. Anyways, give me any Bible labeled with “Translation of the meanings of the Bible". You will not find? You will just find books say it is word of God. And does the word of God require you to change the real words in Greek version. It is really very strange for me that you are Christian and you make a great blind defense against facts every scholar knows it, while you can not speak the language Jesus spoke. It is like someone drives a car while he does not recognize how many miles does it have? It might break down any time soon. Again please give me A Koran Translation? You will never ever find? You will the Translation of The Meanings of the Koran and I already explained it. And what is really strange, how can you attack the Quran if you can speak Arabic. That is very weird? We Muslims use Arabic Koran in our translations. Have you found a Muslims before whatever its nationality say the translation of the meanings of the Quran in his prayers? Second, give me a translation of the meanings of the Koran for any person on this planet with some notes on the version referring to that those verses are not included in the original version. Give me any translation of the meanings of the Koran with any language you want has an addition verses in it? Go and try? Are you serious? Do you believe yourself that the Gospels have been written originally in Greek? Friend sorry, that is against Papias. Papias whom you stated him many times said that the Gospels were in Hebrew and each one did his best for translating it. Papias (according to Eusebius) wrote this: "Mark having become the interpreter of Peter wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord's sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took especial care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put anything fictitious into the statements. Matthew put together the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could." So that is a clear asseveration from Papias that Gospel of Matthew was in Hebrew in its first feature. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papias Friend kai, Most of Gospels are supposed to be in written in Greek. That is how your phrase should be. That is how the fresh man in college for studying religions knows it. That is how new scholars refuse the idea of Papais for some reasons, 1- There is no evidence that the Gospel of Matthew was originally composed in Hebrew, otherwise, where is the Hebrew Script which the people interpreted it in the best way? The oldest thing could be found about the Bible is a piece of paper. Its size like a card and it is in Greek Language. 2- Papias knew the Gospels only in its current form in this time and had not seen a version in a Semitic language. The Source is, Complete Gospels which made by more than twenty Christians Scholar and Eidt by Robert J. Miller (Teaches Religious Studies and Philosophy at Midway College, Midway, Kentucky, USA.) Moreover, how does it come that there are different manuscripts, if the people really translated it in the best way? Christianity have about 80,000 Manuscripts but no one is alike the other. You will never find a translation for the meanings of the Quran with more verses inside it and then tell the people that is the word of God? Compare the translations of the meanings of the Quran see if it will lead you to the same meanings or not? Because as I have said before, If the main context was like that, “ I got a prize” Some one may say it like that “I obtained a prized” for me that is interpreted for the meanings but if you say it like that “I did not obtain the prize” that will change the meanings totally. Like how it is in Acts 3:13 KJV translate the term “His Son Jesus” while NKJV translate the term like that “His Servant Jesus” Do you know the great difference between the term “Son” and the term “Servant”? Because KJV understand that it is impossible for a God to be a Servant. The term “Servant” agreed wit the same thought with us Muslims. But the term “Son” with a Capital letter although it should be written with small letter according to Greek language that really gives a great dishonestly. ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΤΩΝ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ 3 (1881 Westcott-Hort New Testament) {13ο θεος αβρααμ και ισαακ και ιακωβ ο θεος των πατερων ημων εδοξασεν τον παιδα αυτου ιησουν ον υμεις μεν παρεδωκατε και ηρνησασθε κατα προσωπον πιλατου κριναντος εκεινου απολυειν} Do you see the see the term “servant” in this verse has been written in a capital letter? In [Mark 1:1] there are three words entered in Christianity thought. Three words in some manuscripts and it is not in others {Son of God}. In the same Gospel [Mark 1: 9-19], verses from 9 to 19 which means 11 verses were not in the earlier manuscripts while it is in the Holy Book you have now? Who put it? Who is reasonable for that? By looking at the Papias words we can see that “"Mark having become the interpreter of Peter wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ” From his words we can conclude two things, 1- Mark having become the interpreter of Peter wrote down, Which means Peter wrote down his writings with another language. What assures this idea that he add later “Matthew put together the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could”. That is how we can understand the term “Interpreted” here means translated. 2- Mark remembered what he is just remembered. 3- Mark put his writings in the order like how in exactly of sayings of deeds of Christ. And from all of those conclusions we can get that the Gospels main languages are not in Greek? Mark or (whatever the person’s name that put the Gospel) writes down as much as he remembered? The Gospel’s verses did not put in a right order? There is Papias words friend Kai, what do you think about it? That is the your Holy Book? What is really interesting how did Eusebius look at Papias, “Papias also related a number of traditions that Eusebius had characterized it as "some strange parables and teachings of the savior, and some other more mythical accounts"? For example, Eusebius indicated that Papias heard stories about Justus, surnamed Barsabas, who drank poison but suffered no harm and another story via a daughter of Philip the Evangelist concerning the resurrection of a corpse (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Book 3.34.377-392).” So as you see even if Eusebius had characterized Papias with Mythical accounts. And do you believe Papias in this story as well, Papias also related a tradition on the death of Judas Iscariot, in which Judas became so swollen he could not pass where a chariot could easily and was crushed by a chariot, so that his bowels gushed out (Papias Fragment 3, 1742-1744). Papias confirms that there is a Mark’s Gospel, however, Mark’s Gospel is not to be considered as a Gospel compiled or composed by Mark. Papias notes that Mark served in dictating Peter’s teachings, or more correctly Peter’s testimony, possibly in the city of Rome I am sorry friend that is not what Papias said according to Eusebius. Please read what I have said before. Peter Gospel (First edition probably 50-100 C.E.) " In 1886 French archaeologists discovered a small papyrus codex in a monk's grave at Akhmim in Upper Egypt. On pp.2-10 of this condex is a fragmentary Gospel narrative containing significant portions of a passion story, a miraculouse epiphany , an empty tomb story, and an introduction to what is probably a resurrections story . A small crosses stant obove a knotwork interlacing at the bottom of p.10 The presence of the surrounding ornamentation indicates that the writer was copying an already frangmented text. The cursive handwriting of the gospel narriative dates from the eighth or ninth century. This Gospel fragment became known as the Gospel of Peter due to the fact that Simon Peter is presented as its author." For more about that http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/gospelpeter.html
Say that your Gospels have additions words and verses are not in the manuscripts. Then they wonder, how could we be sure that every other word in this gospels are right? They could discovered the additions verses like how in Gospel Mark but, what is about the other verses in the Gospel. The scholars knew that the verses are not in the same order and in the same time they know there are additional verses. Some manuscripts have it and others do not. That is why Scholars call that "Shorter Ending" and "Longer Ending" of Mark Gospel. But what is about other Gospels, let us just take an example: Look at this verse in 1 John 5:7 The trinity verses have been omitted from other Gospels versions although the KJV still have it. 1 John 5:7 (King James Version) {7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.} Compare it too 1 John 5:7 (New International Version) {7For there are three that testify: 8the[a] Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement} The comment on this verse which mad by more than one hundred Scholars is like this: 1 John 5:8 late manuscripts of the Vulgate testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 8 And there are three that testify on earth: the (not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteenth century). Who put these verses after sixteen century Friend Kai. Who put that in the Book of God friend Kai? Let us go to another version, NKJV 1 John 5:7-8 (New King James Version) {7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness on earth:} The comment on this verse which made by 130 respected Bible scholars according to NKJV's introduction is like that: b. 1 John 5:8 NU-Text and M-Text omit the words from in heaven (verse 7) through on earth (verse 8). Only four or five very late manuscripts contain these words in Greek. Again who was responsible for this mistake friend kai? Have you found some stuff like that in the Quran? Have you find a version of the Quran put additional verses like that? Have you found any translation of the meanings of the Quran put additional verses? Who was responsible for putting those verses in manuscripts after sixteen century then introduce it for the Bible as word of God? Who was responsible for putting a whole verse while it is not in the main context? Is that what the Quran saying? Is the Spirit who is responsible for putting a verse in after 16th Century? Read this Article who wrote by Daniel B. Wallace , Th.M., Ph.D. (Daniel B. Wallace has taught Greek and New Testament courses on a graduate school level since 1979. He has a Ph.D. from Dallas Theological Seminary, and is currently professor of New Testament Studies at his alma mater). http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=1186#P14_2015
Friend Kai, if you do not want to believe the clear facts and scientists then there no reason for truth your Bible, because it came through scientists too. And really there is no reason to complete this conversion anymore. Those people spend all their life studying the Bible. Those people can speak languages you can not speak. Those people can four languages (English, Hebrew, Aramaic plus Greek). Those people see the real manuscripts which you have never seen. So, if you do not truth in them while they are saying the truth. So, sorry, you chatting here is not depend on scientific behavior. If you can not see the sun and others can see it, then problem in your eyes, not in the sun.
Friend Kai, What are talking about? Which fact should we believe? The fact some original manuscripts do not have it? Or the Fact that other manuscripts have it? Who was responsible for that? Who wrote the manuscripts with those additions? Or who wrote those manuscripts without them? Is word or God? Can you understand what does that mean? Is means it can not be changed like that? If a famous person has a memo and you played in it like that? He will sue you in the front of the Court? What is about if you play in the book of God? Who is responsible? Who should we believe, Manuscripts with additional words or without it? Even if in the prayer words its self, you can find some additional words in some manuscripts rather than others. Matthew 6:13 (New American Standard Bible) {13'And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil. [For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.} The NASB was shy to tell the people that there are some words in the prayer is not in the earlier manuscripts so it put it between brackets without any comment. But NIV was more honest with itself and it writes it with this comment put: Matthew 6:13 (New International Version) {13And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.[a]'} Matthew 6:13 Or from evil; some late manuscripts one, / for yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen. The question again, who add these additional words to the verse? What else have been add and it is discovered yet?
Because simply friend Kai that is what Quran said from more than 1400 years? The Translation of the Meanings of the Quran by Pickthall [2] {Therefore woe be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands and then say, "This is from Allah," that they may purchase a small gain therewith. Woe unto them for that their hands have written, and woe unto them for that they earn thereby.} Is that what indeed happened?
then you should decide What the original text probably was? That is the main questions Friend Kai? That means anyone can add anything to the Bible and say that is the word of God then the Scripture will just words of Human beings not from God? In John 8:1-11 There is an interesting story about the woman who committed adultery and how Jesus let her free. The story shows how Jesus was kind and let and very nice to the woman although she committed a sin, anyways, But, before I go further, this story was always one of the things which took some of my thinking when I was youth. Especially those words by Jesus "“He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.”. According to this theory we should not judge anyone in the world. All of us have sins. So we can not sue others and those teaching against the law of life so, it is impossible this speech could be related to Jesus. Second, in Law of Moses (Deu 22:22-30) Jews should stone both man and the woman whom commit adultery. Where is the man in the story? Did they find her commit adultery with none? Jesus was not required to make a line of the floor with his finger, Jesus always was so smart and he was so good in Law of Moses. He was best teacher for it, so he could just ask? Where is the man? As no man, so there is no problem then. When I tried to investigated this verse between eighteen different Holy Bibles from different countries, that is what I found, John 8 (New Life Version) puts the verses from 1 to 11 between brackets without any comment. And as I said before, it is a general rule among the translators, putting phrase between brackets mean it is not in the main context or it is just for explanations. John 8 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) put this comment: John 8:11 Other mss omit bracketed text John 8 (New King James Version) puts lot of comments,it puts 11 comments in between some words in these verses and some are not. John 8 (Contemporary English Version) was clear about this issue and it put this comment, John 8:11 don't sin anymore: Verses 1-11 are not in some manuscripts. In other manuscripts these verses are placed after 7.36 or after 21.25 or after Luke 21.38, with some differences in the text. Mr. Bart Ehrman (The chairman of the religious studies department at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, U.S.A.) assures the verses in John 8:1-11 are not in the earliest manuscripts of Gospel John. Plus the fathers of the earlier Church until the 12th Century did not comment on it too. So, how did it come inside the Bible? Does the Holy Spirit still came to the People and asked them to put some new verses inside the Bible after one thousand and two hundred years. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... Id=5052156 And as we have decided before the there are 11 verses at the end of Gospel Mark has been added to it after 16th Century?
Honest, that is why there are about 80, 0000 manuscripts no one like each other. That is why there are long endings and short endings for Gospel of Mark. That is why you can find in some manuscripts words like "Son of God" Mark 1:1 while it is not in other manuscripts. Honest to put 11 verses at the end of Gospel Mark although it is not included in the earliest Patristic evidence (Clement of Rome, Origin, Eusebius and Jerome). Honest to put 11 verses in Gospel John 8:1-11. Is the honestly in your eye friend kai?
Mistakes in what friend Kai, is the word of God? How could you know that you have discovered all the mistakes?
Friend kai, every time you assure for me that you and your friends here are matures. Because, professionals do not depend on others but seek the evidence themselves. Professional never suggests query and this reply is included inside it. First of all the subject you are talking about is called "Shafait El-Gharaneek". And it has been discussed from more than hundred years ago anyways. The story although it is not right and I will state here later why is not right? Let us suppose this story is right, so this story will support speech of the correction of the Quran. Because it assures that the Quran we have now is right and can not be corrupted. Because when the Satan tried to say some words to be in the Quran, the God stop him. And there is not other story tells us that the Satan did that again anymore. So this story increases the faith not the opposite. The Satan tried but it failed, because God put the right words in the Quran after that. Then verse assures this idea too [22]. The translation of the meanings of the Quran by Pickthall [22] {Never sent We a messenger or a prophet before thee but when He recited (the message) Satan proposed (opposition) in respect of that which he recited thereof. But Allah abolisheth that which Satan proposeth. Then Allah establisheth His revelations. Allah is Knower, Wise;} That is why Al- Tabari -who you cited his explanation- stated in his last words for explanation of this verse: وقوله: { ثُمَّ يُحْكِمُ اللَّهُ آياتِهِ } يقول: ثم يخـلص الله آيات كتابه من البـاطل الذي ألقـى الشيطان علـى لسان نبـيه. { وَاللَّهُ عَلِـيـمٌ } بـما يحدث فـي خـلقه من حدث، لا يخفـى علـيه منه شيء. { حَكِيـمٌ } فـي تدبـيره إياهم وصرفه لهم فـيـما شاء وأحَبّ. Which Means Allah will save His words from the false of Satan’s words? Now let us state two approaches for unimpossibility of this story to be right: Logical approach: 1-This story against the truth of the right verses of the Quran [53:3-4] { وَمَا يَنطِقُ عَنِ ٱلْهَوَىٰ } * { إِنْ هُوَ إِلاَّ وَحْيٌ يُوحَىٰ } The Translation of the Meanings of the Quran by Pickthall {[53]Nor doth he speak of (his own) desire. [53]It is naught save an inspiration that is inspired,}. 2- Quran [69: 44-46] { تَنزِيلٌ مِّن رَّبِّ ٱلْعَالَمِينَ } * { وَلَوْ تَقَوَّلَ عَلَيْنَا بَعْضَ ٱلأَقَاوِيلِ } * { لأَخَذْنَا مِنْهُ بِٱلْيَمِينِ } * { ثُمَّ لَقَطَعْنَا مِنْهُ ٱلْوَتِينَ } The Translation of the Meanings of the Quran by Pickthall {[69]And if he had invented false sayings concerning Us, [69]We assuredly had taken him by the right hand [69]And then severed his life-artery,}. 3- Quran [10] { وَإِذَا تُتْلَىٰ عَلَيْهِمْ آيَاتُنَا بَيِّنَاتٍ قَالَ ٱلَّذِينَ لاَ يَرْجُونَ لِقَآءَنَا ٱئْتِ بِقُرْآنٍ غَيْرِ هَـٰذَآ أَوْ بَدِّلْهُ قُلْ مَا يَكُونُ لِيۤ أَنْ أُبَدِّلَهُ مِن تِلْقَآءِ نَفْسِيۤ إِنْ أَتَّبِعُ إِلاَّ مَا يُوحَىۤ إِلَيَّ إِنِّيۤ أَخَافُ إِنْ عَصَيْتُ رَبِّي عَذَابَ يَوْمٍ عَظِيمٍ } The Translation of the Meanings of the Quran by Pickthall {[10]And when Our clear revelations are recited unto them, they who look not for the meeting with Us say: Bring a Lecture other than this, or change it. Say (O Muhammad): It is not for me to change it of my accord. I only follow that which is inspired in me. Lo! if I disobey my Lord I fear the retribution of an awful Day.} Is this story is true, so did Satan give our prophet (Peace and Mercy of Allah be upon him) this verse in this same Surah as well: 4 -Quran [22-62] { ذٰلِكَ بِأَنَّ ٱللَّهَ هُوَ ٱلْحَقُّ وَأَنَّ مَا يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِهِ هُوَ ٱلْبَاطِلُ وَأَنَّ ٱللَّهَ هُوَ ٱلْعَلِيُّ ٱلْكَبِيرُ } The Translation of the Meanings of the Quran by Pickthall {[22]That is because Allah, He is the True, and that whereon they call instead of Him, it is the false, and because Allah, He is the High, the Great.} This verse includes an invitation from the worship Allah because He is only the truth and worshiping anything else instead of Him is false. Does Satan say that? That means he is faith Satan. It will be the first Satan in the history asked people to worship God and no one else. 5- Quran[22] { أَلَمْ تَرَ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ سَخَّرَ لَكُم مَّا فِي ٱلأَرْضِ وَٱلْفُلْكَ تَجْرِي فِي ٱلْبَحْرِ بِأَمْرِهِ وَيُمْسِكُ ٱلسَّمَآءَ أَن تَقَعَ عَلَى ٱلأَرْضِ إِلاَّ بِإِذْنِهِ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ بِٱلنَّاسِ لَرَءُوفٌ رَّحِيمٌ } The Translation of the Meanings of the Quran by Pickthall {[22]Hast thou not seen how Allah hath made all that is in the earth subservient unto you ? And the ship runneth upon the sea by His command, and He holdeth back the heaven from falling on the earth unless by His leave. Lo! Allah is, for mankind, Full of Pity, Merciful.} It Satan was saying words of the Quran, so it will be for the first time in the history that Satan recite the Blessing of God for us. 6- Looking at verse [22] which is next to the verse [22] will give a guide for our point, { لِّيَجْعَلَ مَا يُلْقِي ٱلشَّيْطَانُ فِتْنَةً لِّلَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِم مَّرَضٌ وَٱلْقَاسِيَةِ قُلُوبُهُمْ وَإِنَّ ٱلظَّالِمِينَ لَفِي شِقَاقٍ بَعِيدٍ } {[22]That He may make that which the devil proposeth a temptation for those in whose hearts is a disease, and those whose hearts are hardened - Lo! the evil-doers are in open schism} If you read this verse, you would not give me a site and make a problem from nothing. Did Satan give our prophet verse 22, and then in the next verse he warned us that his propose is just a temptation? Will Satan call his propose as a temptation for those in whose hearts is a disease and have heard hearts? Really, that will be a righteous Satan. First he warned us from his propose then he gives us the Blessings of God on us then finally asked us to pray and follow God at the end of the Surah [22-78] { وَجَاهِدُوا فِي ٱللَّهِ حَقَّ جِهَادِهِ هُوَ ٱجْتَبَاكُمْ وَمَا جَعَلَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِي ٱلدِّينِ مِنْ حَرَجٍ مِّلَّةَ أَبِيكُمْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ هُوَ سَمَّاكُمُ ٱلْمُسْلِمِينَ مِن قَبْلُ وَفِي هَـٰذَا لِيَكُونَ ٱلرَّسُولُ شَهِيداً عَلَيْكُمْ وَتَكُونُواْ شُهَدَآءَ عَلَى ٱلنَّاسِ فَأَقِيمُواْ ٱلصَّلاَةَ وَآتُواْ ٱلزَّكَـاةَ وَٱعْتَصِمُواْ بِٱللَّهِ هُوَ مَوْلاَكُمْ فَنِعْمَ ٱلْمَوْلَىٰ وَنِعْمَ ٱلنَّصِيرُ } The Translation of the Meanings of the Quran by Pickthall {[22]And strive for Allah with the endeavour which is His right. He hath chosen you and hath not laid upon you in religion any hardship; the faith of your father Abraham (is yours). He hath named you Muslims of old time and in this (Scripture), that the messenger may be a witness against you, and that ye may be witnesses against mankind. So establish worship, pay the poor-due, and hold fast to Allah. He is your Protecting friend. A blessed Patron and a blessed Helper!} 7-What is really interesting that the Satan put a verse includes one of miracles of the Quran in the same Surah [22] { يٰأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّاسُ ضُرِبَ مَثَلٌ فَٱسْتَمِعُواْ لَهُ إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ تَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ لَن يَخْلُقُواْ ذُبَاباً وَلَوِ ٱجْتَمَعُواْ لَهُ وَإِن يَسْلُبْهُمُ ٱلذُّبَابُ شَيْئاً لاَّ يَسْتَنقِذُوهُ مِنْهُ ضَعُفَ ٱلطَّالِبُ وَٱلْمَطْلُوبُ } {[22]O mankind! A similitude is coined, so pay ye heed to it: Lo! those on whom ye call beside Allah will never create a fly though they combine together for the purpose. And if the fly took something from them, they could not rescue it from it. So weak are (both) the seeker and the sought!} Until now we have found anyone can create a fly, the best things the scientists can do right now is just play in DNT of an animal or Insect. They could make Space Ships but they could not make a fly like how Quran said from 1400 years ago? Where is your mind Friend Kai, For more about That go and read all the verses [22:53-78] . Practical Approach: All the stories about this story are “Morsala” And if your studied Hadith you will know that The Scientists of Hadith put into their consideration that the “Hadith Morsal” is just a weak one and we do not depend of it. Hadith Morsal means, Stating hadith without a name of friends of our prophet (peace and Mercy of Allah be upon him), So it will be a gab between the person who stated it and our prophet (peace and Mercy of Allah be upon him). Al- Tabari depend on his story on someone called “Mohamed ibn Kab Al Kourizy” and for the people who studied hadith (Which I wish to be one of them Kai even if you will not be a Muslim) know that he does not live in the age of our prophet (Peace of Allah be upon him), but his father did. Read, El-Tahzeeb for Ibn Hajar El- Askalani. Al- Tabari depends on some other stories and all of them are “Morsala” Ibn Kathir Stated that in his introduction of his explanation of this verse, And as a matter of fact Ibn Kather is professional Islamic Scientis of Haith: قد ذكر كثير من المفسرين ههنا قصة الغرانيق، وما كان من رجوع كثير من المهاجرة إلى أرض الحبشة؛ ظناً منهم أن مشركي قريش قد أسلموا، ولكنها من طرق كلها مرسلة، ولم أرها مسندة من وجه صحيح، والله أعلم. (The introduction of Ibn-Kathir Explanation for [22] Al-Shokani , a professional in Haith قال البزار: هذا حديث لا نعلمه يروى عن النبيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم بإسناد متصل. وقال البيهقي: هذه القصة غير ثابتة من جهة النقل، ثم أخذ يتكلم أن رواة هذه القصة مطعون فيهم. وقال إمام الأئمة ابن خزيمة: إن هذه القصة من وضع الزنادقة. قال القاضي عياض في الشفاء: إن الأمة أجمعت فيما طريقه البلاغ أنه معصوم فيه من الإخبار عن شيء بخلاف ما هو عليه، لا قصداً ولا عمداً ولا سهواً ولا غلطاً. قال ابن كثير: قد ذكر كثير من المفسرين ها هنا قصة الغرانيق، وما كان من رجوع كثير من المهاجرين إلى أرض الحبشة ظناً منهم أن مشركي قريش قد أسلموا، ولكنها من طرق كلها مرسلة، ولم أرها مسندة من وجه صحيح. (Al Shokani – Fath El- Kader- the Explanations of [22]) Al-Razi, another Professional in Haith وأما السنة فهي ما روي عن محمد بن إسحق بن خزيمة أنه سئل عن هذه القصة فقال هذا وضع من الزنادقة وصنف فيه كتاباً. وقال الإمام أبو بكر أحمد بن الحسين البيهقي هذه القصة غير ثابتة من جهة النقل ثم أخذ يتكلم في أن رواة هذه القصة مطعون فيهم، وأيضاً فقد روى البخاري في صحيحه أن النبي عليه السلام قرأ سورة النجم وسجد فيها المسلمون والمشركون والإنس والجن وليس فيه حديث الغرانيق. وروي هذا الحديث من طرق كثيرة وليس فيها ألبتة حديث الغرانيق (Al-Razi –Mafateeh El-Ghub, El- tafsir El- Kabir), the explanation of [22]. Then he stated many evidences for in a long search to show how this story is wrong. You can go there for more about this issue. So what is the explanation of this verse then, the best explanation of the Quran is the Quran: The translation of the meanings of the Quran by Pickthall [22] {Never sent We a messenger or a prophet before thee but when He recited (the message) Satan proposed (opposition) in respect of that which he recited thereof. But Allah abolisheth that which Satan proposeth. Then Allah establisheth His revelations. Allah is Knower, Wise;} The verse stated that the Satan proposed in respect to that which the messenger or prophet recited, which means Satan wanted him to stop reciting the words of God, or tells him to delay reciting this verse at this time because it is not the appropriate time to say it. Every Messenger or prophet wished to be away of this mission, because it is so hard to be taken. Because of who take this mission, he should be an enemy for his people plus the pain he got from them. Mosses and Jesus (Peace of Allah be upon them) suffered a lot with their people. Old Testament and New testament tells us that. For example in the Gospel of John, Jesus (Peace of Allah be upon him and his pure mother) declared that the world hates him because of his mission [John 7:7]. And in Gospel of Luke he declared that he came to the world not for peace but for division (father against son and son against father…….[Luke 12: 49-53]. Quran [28] { وَمَا كُنتَ تَرْجُوۤ أَن يُلْقَىٰ إِلَيْكَ ٱلْكِتَابُ إِلاَّ رَحْمَةً مِّن رَّبِّكَ فَلاَ تَكُونَنَّ ظَهيراً لِّلْكَافِرِينَ } {[28]Thou hadst no hope that the Scripture would be inspired in thee; but it is a mercy from thy Lord, so never be a helper to the disbelievers.} That is why our prophet (Peace of Allah be upon him) did not wished to have this mission because it is so hard. So God tells him this Quran is a Mercy from God. And tells him to for not be a helper for the Unbelievers if they asked him to do something God does not order him to do. Once upon a time unbelievers came to our prophet (Peace and Mercy of Allah be upon him) and they asked him if it is possible to worship Allah for one year and then he worship their gods for another year. Read this verse in the Quran [7] { كِتَابٌ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ فَلاَ يَكُنْ فِي صَدْرِكَ حَرَجٌ مِّنْهُ لِتُنذِرَ بِهِ وَذِكْرَىٰ لِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ } The Translation of the Meanings of the Quran by Arthur J. Arberry: {[7]A Book sent down to thee -- so let there be no impediment in thy breast because of it -- to warn thereby, and as a reminder to believers:} That is how we can understand the verse and Allah knows more. What is really interesting is not this situation but Jesus’ situation (Peace of Allah be upon him and his pure mother) when the Satan asked him to worship him and in the return the Satan will give him the entire world. It is the first time in the history that Satan asked (God) according to Christian’s point of view to worship him in a situation never happened before even if for Pagans. Satan suggested giving God the kingdom of the entire world with its authority and glory. Satan (one of God’s Creatures) wanted to give God the kingdom of the world plus what, its authority and glory. Can you imagine that? Satan has what is not God’s have according to Christian’s point of view! And what more interesting were the answers of Jesus himself, which assures how he is just a human being. He did not tell the Satan all of these kingdoms are mine and showed him more. Or even if showed the Satan his power (Jesus who could return the life for the dead people and walked on the water- of Course by the Power of God) or even if ordered him to sharp up but, he just told him “it is written, ‘You shall worship the LORD your God”. He even did not tell the Satan to worship him like how the Satan asked him. In all the entire Bible Jesus (Peace of Allah be upon him and his pure) mother) never told anyone to worship him. It is the second magic of Christianity, God never tells His people to worship Him. Luke 4:5-8 (New International Version) {5The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6And he said to him, "I will give you all their authority and splendor, for it has been given to me, and I can giv |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame