How many Qurans are there? Good information for Christians.

[pandaflower]

Concerning the Prophet’s marriage to Aisha:

The Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam)’s first (and only) wife for twenty-five years was Khadija bint Khuwaylid (Radi Allahu ‘anha). She was a successful businesswoman in her own right, and Muhammad’s employer before their marriage.

Khadija proposed to Muhammad when he was 25 years old. She was fifteen years his senior. They had six to eight children (the precise number is disputed).

Khadija died in November 619 CE.

ʿĀʾishah’s father was Abu Bakr Abdullah ibn Uthman Abi Quhafa, one of the first converts to Islam, and one of the prophet’s closest companions. Following the latter’s death in death in 632, Abu Bakr became the first of the ‘Rashidun’ (the ‘Rightly Guided’ Caliphs).

Two years after the death of Khadija, the Prophet was living alone with three of his daughters. He was approach by Khawlah bint Hakim, who asked if he wished to re-marry. This meeting took place in late 621 CE.

Khawlah suggested two options; ʿĀʾishah, and Sawdah bint Zam’a, a widow, whose husband had died after their migration to Abyssinia – to escape persecution at the hands of the Quraysh of Mecca.

At Mohammad’s request, Khawla first approached Sawdah bint Zam’a and her family. Sawdah agreed to the marriage, but her family objected.

Khawlah then approached Abu Bakr.

Abu Bakr agreed to this marriage, and so ʿĀʾishah and Muhammad became engaged. This was in 622 CE.

They were married some two years later.

In Islam, marriage is a legal contract between a man and a woman. The marriage is invalid without the freely-given consent of both parties; regardless of their social status.

Consent cannot be obtained from those who are legally unable to give it, such as those who, for various reasons, are incapable of sound judgement

Shaykh Seyyed Hossein Nasr defines ‘sound judgement’ as:

‘Possession of a correctly functioning rational faculty, a healthy and upstanding character, an understanding of how to manage property, and sound religion to the degree that one no longer requires custodial care.’ (‘The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary).

Under the marriage contract, the husband has sole financial responsibility for the welfare and maintenance of his family. He must meet their every need. His wife – no matter how great her personal wealth – is not obliged to spend so much as a dime (or its equivalent) upon her husband or children. She may own property and assets in her own right, and her husband has no claim to any of this, save by her freely given consent.

By the way, this is why – under Islamic inheritance laws – a husband inherits twice as much as his wife. His financial obligations are so much greater than hers.

A wife is expected to manage the financial affairs of her family; to ensure that the income provided by her husband is not wasted.

ʿĀʾishah had a sister (Asmā') who died around 695 CE, at the age of 100. (cf. Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani’s: ‘Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb’).

Al Asqalani’s narrative is supported by Abdurrahman bin Ebi Zinad el-Medeni’; Ibn Hajar; and Ibn Kathir.

At the time of the Hijri (622 CE), Asmā' was 27 years old. She was 10 years older than ʿĀʾishah. This means that ʿĀʾishah was 17 at the time of the Hijri; and 19 or 20 at the time of her marriage to Muhammad.

I hope you will agree that a young woman of 19 or 20 is more likely to satisfy the requirements of an Islamic contract of marriage than a child of 6 or 9.

Blessings.

Aisha was in fact 6 years old when Muhammad took her to wife.
He allegedly waited until she was nine years old so to consumate the marriage.

This fact is in the Hadith and according to Aisha herself.
So called Muslim Scholars claim of this being perfectly acceptable at the time is that children developed earlier back then. Which is nonsense. It's an excuse for pedophilia.

Muslims are leaving Islam. Often because Jesus reaches out to them in dreams and visions.

Islams roots are Judaism and Christianity.

Muhammad was an illiterate merchant.

He dictated the Quran to scribes from his death bed. A bed he found himself in because the widow woman whose husband he'd murdered years before was slowly poisoning him. (*Edit to add: The woman was his slave,cook)
Muhammad wasn't too smart.

Muhammad did not write the Hadith.

True Islam - History Hadith 1

True Islam is derived from the Quran and not from the traditions or cultures of Muslim people

www.quran-islam.org

 

[Debp]

This young man left Islam because even at 16 he felt his morals were higher than in Islam.

 

[Debp]

This video is sad. Also in Islam, a woman's testimony is worth half of a man's testimony. A woman, a donkey or a dog crossing in front of a man will invalidate his prayers. Hell will be mostly populated by women as they are stupid. Beating of wives is allowed.

 

[Debp]

The many versions of Arabic Qurans.

 

[Debp]

A six year old isn't able to give consent as she has no understanding of what marriage is.

When Mohammad saw Aisha crawling on the floor as a baby, he said he wanted to marry her.



Your own Islamic sources say she was six years old at the time of marriage and nine at the time of Mohammad basically raping her.

@pandaflower

A 45 year old man marries a 6 year old. Taliban said no....that he must wait until she is 9 years old.
Brief.

 

[pandaflower]

A 45 year old man marries a 6 year old. Taliban said no....that he must wait until she is 9 years old.
Brief.

Religion of peace. Pedophiles.

Islam translates as submission. Not peace.

Though some think they find peace when they are submissives.

 

[Debp]

Religion of peace. Pedophiles.

Islam translates as submission. Not peace.

Though some think they find peace when they are submissives.

I feel sorry for some Muslims that don't really follow the Quran...they don't want to. But that fear of being disowned or even killed by their family is too strong. I know a few like that.

I pray for them to be delivered from that bondage, to know Christ.

 

[pandaflower]

I feel sorry for some Muslims that don't really follow the Quran...they don't want to. But that fear of being disowned or even killed by their family is too strong. I know a few like that.

I pray for them to be delivered from that bondage, to know Christ.

Many are being rescued.

I think we should be cautious though. Because in Islam, a Muslim can lie about being a Muslim if they feel it necessary to keep themselves safe.

Which ,if we consider the number of supposed refugees that have been flown to Western countries,when International Law says refugees should be transported to the nearest refuge to their homeland, we may want to consider something.

Muhammad's dream was to conquer the west in the name of Allah. He failed.

Now,there are countless Muslim refugees in the west. Transported there by governments and taxpayer monies.

Sleeper cells abound already.

Now imagine a "Christian nation," believing we should transport apostate Muslims, "new" Christians, into our country to keep them safe.

Because in Islam Apostasy is unacceptable. The duty is to convince the offender to return to the faith.
Or,barring that,they refuse,kill them.

Considering Muslims can lie and say they're Christian, BHO committed to taqiyya for eight years so to gain and retain the presidency.

Imagine countless "Christian" Muslims being "rescued" from the ME and entering western countries in larger numbers than has already occured.

ME Muslims, and Chinese, have been detained at our southern border.

Chinese? How'd they get to Mexico? They swam? But, that's what's happened under BHO=Biden.

Sure,God can change hearts. However, I don't think we can be naive and think a terrorist political ideology disguised as a religion, is easily overcome in masse by its faithful in exodus.

Wolves in sheep's wool is a real thing.

 

[Niblo]

@pandaflower

You write:

‘Aisha was in fact 6 years old when Muhammad took her to wife. He allegedly waited until she was nine years old so to consummate the marriage. This fact is in the Hadith and according to Aisha herself.’

As you know, the aḥādīth are oral accounts of the sayings and actions of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam).

You should also know that there are two polarised (extreme) views within the Muslim Community concerning the aḥādīth.

At one extreme are the Qur’anists; folk who consider all aḥādīth to be unreliable; worthy only of outright rejection. At the opposite extreme are the Puritans (Wahhabis), who claim that to doubt the authenticity of even a single ḥādīth is to place oneself outside the fold of Islam.

The majority Muslims fall somewhere in between.

Mohammad Hashim Kamali – an Afghan Islamic scholar and former professor of law at the International Islamic University of Malaysia – writes:

‘One of the main objectives of methodology, whether in the sphere of hadith or other disciplines of learning, is to develop objective and scientific standards of enquiry and research. The purpose is to ensure adequate safeguards against subjectivity and error that might compromise reliability of the results of that enquiry.

‘Muslim jurists and ulama have developed elaborate methodologies for the authentication of hadith with the purpose precisely to enhance the scope of scientific objectivity in their conclusions. This they have done in full awareness that in no other branch of Islamic learning has there been as much distortion and forgery as in hadith.’ (‘Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence’; my emphasis).

Speaking of ḥādīth forgery, Professor Kamali goes on:

'Extensive forgery in hadith was commonly known and acknowledged to have occurred in the early decades of the advent of Islam. It is believed to have begun following the turmoil over the murder of the third caliph, Uthman, which dealt a heavy blow to the unity of the umma. This momentous event is held responsible for the emergence of serious political differences and partisan groups such as Shia, Kharijites and Mutazila, as well as the onset of forgery in hadith. Hadith forgery was to a large extent an epiphenomenon of these developments and the conflicts they precipitated eventually led to the collapse of the early caliphate barely forty years after its inception.’ (Ibid.)

According to Professor Kamali, aḥādīth that stand in conflict with the Quran – such that no reasonable compromise or interpretation can reconcile the two – can safety be rejected.

The notion that a child of 6 years old can enter into a valid marriage contract is clearly in conflict with the Qur’an. See my earlier post.

Again, according to Professor Kamali, aḥādīth that conflict with historical fact can also be rejected.

The facts in this case are:

That ʿĀʾishah had a sister (Asmā' bint Abī Bakr) who was born in 595 CE.

That Asmāʾ was 10 years older than her sister; meaning that ʿĀʾishah was born in 605 CE.

That at the time of the Hijri (622 CE), Asmā' was 27 years old.

That ʿĀʾishah was 17 at the time of the Hijri (and of her engagement to Muhammad); and 19 or 20 at the time of their marriage (in 625 CE).

That ʿĀʾishah participated in the Battle of Uhud (in the same year as her marriage); not as a combatant, but as a provider of care for the injured on the battlefield; and the provision of essential suppliers. This was a role common for women in that era. Hardly a role for a child.

Continued.

 

[Niblo]

You write:

‘Muhammad ……….dictated the Quran to scribes from his death bed.’

This is incorrect.

The IDP Research Division reminds us that:

‘There is no doubt that the Qur’an was not only transmitted orally by many Muslims who had learned parts or the whole of it, but that it was also written down during the lifetime of the Prophet. The well-known report about 'Umar’s conversion shows that large passages of the revelation had already been written down even at a very early time, in Makka, long before the hijra, when the Prophet was still in the house of Arqam.’ (‘Understanding the Qur’an – Its History and Compilation’; my emphasis).

There is an expression: ‘jam’ al-qur’an’. It’s general meaning is to ‘bring together the Qur’an’.

Even though the Qur’an was written down – in its entirety – during the life of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), it had not been brought together in a single book. Abū Bakr (the first Caliph) assigned this task to Zaid bin Thabit; a young man in his early twenties, and one of the Prophet’s most notable scribes.

Zaid was a ḥāfiẓ (a ‘guardian’ or ‘memoriser’ of the Qur’an; someone who knew the Qur’an by heart).

The late Muhammad Mustafa Azmi – Professor Emeritus at the King Saud University; Associate Professor at Umm al-Qura University; visiting scholar at the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor); Visiting Fellow at St Cross College, Oxford; King Faisal Visiting Professor for Islamic Studies at Princeton University; and an Honorary Fellow in Islamic Studies at the University of Wales – informs us that:

‘Zaid would accept only those materials which, according to the sworn testimony of two others, had been written in the Prophet’s very presence. Ibn Hajar’s statement affirms this view, that "Zaid was unwilling to accept any written material for consideration unless two Companions bore witness that the man received his dictation from the Prophet himself.” His contribution, we can summarise, was to collect all first-hand Qur’anic fragments, then scattered about Madinah, and arrange for their transcription into a master volume.

‘In serving the Qur’an Abū Bakr acquitted himself most admirably, heeding its mandate of two witnesses for establishing authenticity, and applying this rule to the Qur’an’s own compilation. The result, though written on rudimentary parchments of varying size, constituted as sincere an effort as possible to preserve the Words of Allāh.’ (‘The History of the Qur’anic Text).

Professor Muhammad Abdullah Draz – Professor of Islamic studies at Al-Azhar University – writes

‘But the sacred text is not only a ‘recitation’ (qur’ān), an assemblage of oral recitations destined solely to be conserved in the memory, it is also a kitāb, a ‘scripture’ or ‘book’, with the two aspects corroborating and controlling each other mutually.

‘Each fragment inspired in the Prophet and recited by him was immediately put down in writing on anything the scribes could lay their hands on: leaves, planks, pieces of parchment, leather, flat stones, shoulder-blades and so on.

‘The most trustworthy scholars describe up to 29 people who were called upon by the Prophet to fulfil the role of secretary. The most well-known are the first five caliphs (Abū Bakr ʿUmar, ʿUthmān, ʿAlī, Muʿāwiya) plus al-Zubayr bin al-ʿAwwām, Saʿīd bin al-ʿĀṣ, ʿAmr bin al-ʿĀṣ, Ubayy bin Kaʿb and Zayd bin Thābit, with Muʿāwiya and Zayd bin Thābit being the most prolific. But, over and above these few who were unofficially given this office in Mecca, from the very outset and even in the midst of persecutions, the individual faithful were constantly recording fragments of the revealed text in personal manuscripts for private use.’ (‘Introduction to the Qur'an; London Qur'an Studies’).

‘A working methodology was established and rigorously applied: no writing was to be accepted unless certified by two witnesses as having been put down, not from memory, but at the very dictation of the Prophet, and as being part of the text as given in its final state.

‘Having completed this task with all of these precautions followed, Zayd placed his recension in the hands of Abū Bakr, who kept it with him during his caliphate. Before his death, the first caliph entrusted it to ʿUmar, whom he had designated as his successor. ʿUmar, in turn, rendered it in his last moments into the protection of his daughter, Ḥafṣa, a widow of the Prophet, since the third caliph had not been elected at that time.

‘This first official recension (which one can imagine as taking the form of a dossier of ordered sheets in an unbound pile) differed from other existing entire or partial copies because of the absolute rigour exercised at its collation, and because of its exclusion of all that was not part of the text in its final recited form.’ (‘Introduction to the Qur'an; London Qur'an Studies’).

We need to be aware of the centrality of Qur’anic recitation, and memorisation, throughout its existence.

Practically every Muslim community in the world has numerous ḥuffāẓ (singular ḥāfiẓ); meaning those who have memorised the entire Qur’an by heart in Arabic, and are its ‘guardians’ (my son is one).

The unbroken practice of reciting the Qur’an publicly in daily prayers has continued since the time of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), and is one of the reasons why revisionist Western narratives appear fanciful to Muslim scholars familiar with the lived practices of Islam.

Continued

 

[Niblo]

The scholarly consensus is that the first revelation of the Qur’an came to the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) in the Hira Cave, near Mecca, in 610 CE; and that these revelations continued – at intervals – for the following 23 years.

The Meccan surahs seek to establish the fundamentals of Islam; to declare the truth that Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) is One (Al-'Aḥad) and Single (Al-Wāḥid); to confirm that human existence does not end at death, but that all will experience resurrection, judgement, reward and retribution; to declare that Heaven and Hell are realities (the Meccan idolaters did not believe such things); and to declare that polytheism and idolatry are unacceptable, for there is only one Lord.

The Hijrah (migration to Medina) in 622 CE created the first Islamic state; a state responsible for its own development and protection.

In an essay entitled ‘The Qur’an as a Source of Islamic Law’, Aḥmad Muḥammad al-Ṭayyib writes:

‘The Madinan parts of the Quran are distinguished by the promulgation of laws for personal affairs, society, and the state, including rules of marriage, child nursing (raḍāʿah), family maintenance (nafaqah), inheritance (mīrāth), usury (ribā), commercial transactions (buyūʿ) retribution (qiṣāṣ) and struggle in society and in the path of God (jihād) – all of the different laws that came to be a matter of concern for Muslims as soon as they were constituted as a community, with a state of their own, social institutions, an army, and a leader.’ (‘The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary’; by Seyyed Hossein Nasr, et al).

You continue (my emphasis):

‘……………………………………..A bed he found himself in because the widow woman whose husband he'd murdered years before was slowly poisoning him. (*Edit to add: The woman was his slave, cook)’

This is incorrect!

It is said that Zaynab bint Al-Harith attempted to poison the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), in revenge for the death of her husband at the battle of Khaybar (628 CE); and that this attempt was carried out immediately after the battle.

Most assuredly, Zaynab was neither the Prophet’s slave, nor his cook.

The late Martin Lings – an English writer, Islamic scholar, and philosopher – writes:

‘When all the terms had been agreed upon, and when the victorious army had rested, the widowed wife of Sallam ibn Mishkam roasted a lamb and poisoned every part of it with a deadly poison which she concentrated especially in the shoulders, having learnt on inquiry that the Prophet preferred the shoulder of lamb to the other joints. Then she brought it to the camp and set it before him, whereupon he thanked her and invited those of his Companions who were present to sup with him.

‘It happened on this occasion that seated next to the Prophet was a Khazrajite named Bishr, the son of that Bara' who had led the Muslims of Yathrib to the Second' Aqabah and who had been the first ever to pray the ritual prayer in the direction of Mecca.

‘When the Prophet took a mouthful of lamb, Bishr did the same and swallowed it, but the Prophet spat out what was in his mouth, saying to the others: "Hold off your hands! This shoulder proclaimeth unto me that it is poisoned."

‘He sent for the woman and asked her if she had poisoned the joint. “Who told thee?”, she asked. "The shoulder itself," said the Prophet. "What made thee do it?" "Well thou knowest," she said, "what thou hast done unto my people; and thou hast slain my father and mine uncle and my husband. So I told myself: 'If he be a king, I shall be well quit of him; and if he be a Prophet he will be informed of the poison.'" The face of Bishr was already ashen pale, and he died shortly afterwards. But the Prophet, none the less. pardoned the woman.’ (‘Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources’).

William Mongomery Watt – a Scottish historian who specialised in Islamic studies – writes:

‘There is no evidence to suggest that the poisoning had a significant impact on Prophet Muhammad’s health. He continued to live for many years after the poisoning, and he remained active and productive.’ (‘Muhammad: Prophet and Statesman’).

Folk who assume that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) died as a result of poison administered some four years earlier need to explain what type of poison was potent enough to kill one of his Companions, shortly after it was administered; but not the Prophet himself. I know of no such poison (that was readily available in his day).

Their assumption is a classic example of the logical fallacy known as ‘post hoc ergo propter hoc’ (‘after this, therefore because of this.’). Since the Prophet’s death followed an incident of attempted poisoning, it must have been caused by that incident.

Post hoc is said to be particularly seductive, in that temporal sequences can suggest causality. Clearly, such folk have no desire to take into account other factors potentially responsible for the Prophet’s death; such as viral or bacterial disease; exacerbated by age.

On the other hand, it has to be said that the Shi'a (especially the ‘Twelvers’) are convinced that the Prophet was indeed poisoned; not by Zaynab bint Al-Harith, but by ʿĀʾishah herself, in collusion with Ḥafṣa bint ʿUmar, and their respective fathers; Abu Bakr and ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb.

According to the Office of Sheikh Yasser al-Habib – a Kuwaiti Shi'a scholar, and the head of the London-based Mahdi Servants Union – A’isha was an ‘infamous liar’, who fabricated the story of Zaynab bint Al-Harith in order to conceal her crimes.

According to Sheikh al-Habib, the principal motive behind the poisoning was to deny ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib, the Prophet’s son-in-law and designated heir, his rightful succession to Caliphate.

Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) knows best.

Blessings.

 

[Debp]

Muslims are agreeing with child marriages.

One young girl in this top video is sold as a bride to a 70 year old man.

 

[Debp]

Afghani girl...in her own words. Sounds like the devil's work...she was slapped and kicked by her husband and her in-laws. In-laws encouraged husband to hit her. He got a new wife and divorced the girl he abused.

 

[amigo de christo]

I feel sorry for some Muslims that don't really follow the Quran...they don't want to. But that fear of being disowned or even killed by their family is too strong. I know a few like that.

I pray for them to be delivered from that bondage, to know Christ.

The quran is bad news no matter if there are some truths cloaked within it .

 

[pandaflower]

You write:

‘Muhammad ……….dictated the Quran to scribes from his death bed.’

This is incorrect.

The IDP Research Division reminds us that:

‘There is no doubt that the Qur’an was not only transmitted orally by many Muslims who had learned parts or the whole of it, but that it was also written down during the lifetime of the Prophet. The well-known report about 'Umar’s conversion shows that large passages of the revelation had already been written down even at a very early time, in Makka, long before the hijra, when the Prophet was still in the house of Arqam.’ (‘Understanding the Qur’an – Its History and Compilation’; my emphasis).

There is an expression: ‘jam’ al-qur’an’. It’s general meaning is to ‘bring together the Qur’an’.

Even though the Qur’an was written down – in its entirety – during the life of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), it had not been brought together in a single book. Abū Bakr (the first Caliph) assigned this task to Zaid bin Thabit; a young man in his early twenties, and one of the Prophet’s most notable scribes.

Zaid was a ḥāfiẓ (a ‘guardian’ or ‘memoriser’ of the Qur’an; someone who knew the Qur’an by heart).

The late Muhammad Mustafa Azmi – Professor Emeritus at the King Saud University; Associate Professor at Umm al-Qura University; visiting scholar at the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor); Visiting Fellow at St Cross College, Oxford; King Faisal Visiting Professor for Islamic Studies at Princeton University; and an Honorary Fellow in Islamic Studies at the University of Wales – informs us that:

‘Zaid would accept only those materials which, according to the sworn testimony of two others, had been written in the Prophet’s very presence. Ibn Hajar’s statement affirms this view, that "Zaid was unwilling to accept any written material for consideration unless two Companions bore witness that the man received his dictation from the Prophet himself.” His contribution, we can summarise, was to collect all first-hand Qur’anic fragments, then scattered about Madinah, and arrange for their transcription into a master volume.

‘In serving the Qur’an Abū Bakr acquitted himself most admirably, heeding its mandate of two witnesses for establishing authenticity, and applying this rule to the Qur’an’s own compilation. The result, though written on rudimentary parchments of varying size, constituted as sincere an effort as possible to preserve the Words of Allāh.’ (‘The History of the Qur’anic Text).

Professor Muhammad Abdullah Draz – Professor of Islamic studies at Al-Azhar University – writes

‘But the sacred text is not only a ‘recitation’ (qur’ān), an assemblage of oral recitations destined solely to be conserved in the memory, it is also a kitāb, a ‘scripture’ or ‘book’, with the two aspects corroborating and controlling each other mutually.

‘Each fragment inspired in the Prophet and recited by him was immediately put down in writing on anything the scribes could lay their hands on: leaves, planks, pieces of parchment, leather, flat stones, shoulder-blades and so on.

‘The most trustworthy scholars describe up to 29 people who were called upon by the Prophet to fulfil the role of secretary. The most well-known are the first five caliphs (Abū Bakr ʿUmar, ʿUthmān, ʿAlī, Muʿāwiya) plus al-Zubayr bin al-ʿAwwām, Saʿīd bin al-ʿĀṣ, ʿAmr bin al-ʿĀṣ, Ubayy bin Kaʿb and Zayd bin Thābit, with Muʿāwiya and Zayd bin Thābit being the most prolific. But, over and above these few who were unofficially given this office in Mecca, from the very outset and even in the midst of persecutions, the individual faithful were constantly recording fragments of the revealed text in personal manuscripts for private use.’ (‘Introduction to the Qur'an; London Qur'an Studies’).

‘A working methodology was established and rigorously applied: no writing was to be accepted unless certified by two witnesses as having been put down, not from memory, but at the very dictation of the Prophet, and as being part of the text as given in its final state.

‘Having completed this task with all of these precautions followed, Zayd placed his recension in the hands of Abū Bakr, who kept it with him during his caliphate. Before his death, the first caliph entrusted it to ʿUmar, whom he had designated as his successor. ʿUmar, in turn, rendered it in his last moments into the protection of his daughter, Ḥafṣa, a widow of the Prophet, since the third caliph had not been elected at that time.

‘This first official recension (which one can imagine as taking the form of a dossier of ordered sheets in an unbound pile) differed from other existing entire or partial copies because of the absolute rigour exercised at its collation, and because of its exclusion of all that was not part of the text in its final recited form.’ (‘Introduction to the Qur'an; London Qur'an Studies’).

We need to be aware of the centrality of Qur’anic recitation, and memorisation, throughout its existence.

Practically every Muslim community in the world has numerous ḥuffāẓ (singular ḥāfiẓ); meaning those who have memorised the entire Qur’an by heart in Arabic, and are its ‘guardians’ (my son is one).

The unbroken practice of reciting the Qur’an publicly in daily prayers has continued since the time of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), and is one of the reasons why revisionist Western narratives appear fanciful to Muslim scholars familiar with the lived practices of Islam.

Continued

Well,when Muhammad was on his death bed he was certainly able to dictate the Quran.

Aisha was six when Muhammad married her. Nine,eleven, any age prior to adult is a child.

Islam is not a religion. It's a political ideology that clads itself in the guise of religion.

You're in a Christian community.

There are no potential converts here.

 

[amigo de christo]

I feel sorry for some Muslims that don't really follow the Quran...they don't want to. But that fear of being disowned or even killed by their family is too strong. I know a few like that.

I pray for them to be delivered from that bondage, to know Christ.

Debp , you know i love you my friend .
but you gonna have to respond one way or another to my response .
I said , and do so without apology , that the quran is bad news .
It is a false book .
Now tell me i am wrong or right . Do you beleive that book was TOTALLY GOD ORDAINED and A GOOD BOOK
A simple yes or no to that answer is all i require .
But allow me to go ahead and make a real simple BUT VERY TRUE statement .
THE QURAN was NOT OF GOD . IT was not INSPIRED OF HIM .
IT was of the darkness . But the bible . THAT I KNOW was inspired of GOD and not of men in darkness .
Remember its not hate or non loving to expose what is false .
Its hate and non loving , NOT TOO .
And i do not hate muslims , buddists , atheists or any one . BUT I darn sure aint gonna approve of their books
writings or words .
Now if we love people , by all means we correct people .
ITs not a sin or non loving to expose anything , or any book that is false and not OF GOD .
I have spoken to muslims and i can tell you
that if you had been present when i did , I NEVER ONCE hated on them or treated them bad .
But that book is bad news . As is the version of jesus they seem to support .

 

[Debp]

Debp , you know i love you my friend .
but you gonna have to respond one way or another to my response .
I said , and do so without apology , that the quran is bad news .
It is a false book .
Now tell me i am wrong or right . Do you beleive that book was TOTALLY GOD ORDAINED and A GOOD BOOK
A simple yes or no to that answer is all i require .
But allow me to go ahead and make a real simple BUT VERY TRUE statement .
THE QURAN was NOT OF GOD . IT was not INSPIRED OF HIM .
IT was of the darkness . But the bible . THAT I KNOW was inspired of GOD and not of men in darkness .
Remember its not hate or non loving to expose what is false .
Its hate and non loving , NOT TOO .
And i do not hate muslims , buddists , atheists or any one . BUT I darn sure aint gonna approve of their books
writings or words .
Now if we love people , by all means we correct people .
ITs not a sin or non loving to expose anything , or any book that is false and not OF GOD .
I have spoken to muslims and i can tell you
that if you had been present when i did , I NEVER ONCE hated on them or treated them bad .
But that book is bad news . As is the version of jesus they seem to support .

How can you think I believe the Quran is God inspired??? Everything I post is to help Muslims and others realize that Satan deceived Mohammad....and this deception is still at work in Muslims throughout history. May they be delivered from that.

 

[pandaflower]

In Islam believers are taught the first human(s) were created from a blood clot.

This is a good read I think.

The Story of the Quran (part 2 of 4): From the Preserved Tablet to Humankind

How Quran was revealed, memorized and written down.

www.islamreligion.com

 

[Debp]

In Islam believers are taught the first human(s) were created from a blood clot.

They also think the devil resides in your nose overnight. And you need to flush your nose out with water three times upon awaking to flush the devil out!!!

They say sun sets in a muddy pond. Other things I can't recall now.

 

[amigo de christo]

How can you think I believe the Quran is God inspired??? Everything I post is to help Muslims and others realize that Satan deceived Mohammad....and this deception is still at work in Muslims throughout history. May they be delivered from that.

I was just making sure my friend . Praise be to the glorious LORD my friend . To the trenches .