Islam's Incorruptible Qur'an Is Corrupt

a reply to: whitewave

originally posted by: whitewave
Thank you for that clarification. My source was not from an "Islamic hate site" as you presume but from a researcher and scholar who has dedicated years to the study of Islamic teachings (something I'm unwilling to do).

I have to say with all openness and honesty, with absolutely no malice intended (even if your "source" had said loads of nice thinks like how Muhammad liked tulips and enjoyed apple pie, wrong is wrong), that your source literally does not know the first thing about Islamic scripture, and I think I've demonstrated as much. I suppose the easy route to go is to find someone who calls themselves a "researcher" and "scholar" whose views line up with ones own, and just accept everything they say...but easy isn't always right.

originally posted by: whitewave
You say that the sources are not considered canonical and therefore to be ignored, I'm guessing?

It seems unfortunately that I didn't explain myself very well. I tend to get a bit long-winded, and the result is sometimes people not reading what I say, or glazing over and skipping stuff.
That isn't what I said at all. I never said that stuff like Ibn Ishaq's Sirat and al Tabari aren't considered canonical and are therefore to be ignored. I said they're not scripture at all. For a hopefully meaningful counter example from christianity, one might read the works of Thomas Aquinas, one might enjoy them and appreciate them, one might even find loads of good stuff in them. That still doesn't make the works of Thomas Aquinas the Bible. The Bible is the scripture, and Thomas Aquinas is some interesting stuff, some right, some wrong, that came much later, and is based off it.

To clear up this misconception again, Ibn Ishaq's Sirat and al Tabari are not hadith collections. They don't count as Hadith. They no more a part of Islamic scripture than "Heaven is for Real" is a part of the Bible, even though it includes stories about Jesus.
It seems you missed my explanation of hadith in my previous post, so here it is again. In terms of Sunnis, at least, the 6 collections that make up the bulk of the hadith with the majority of the narrations being authentic are Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abu Dawood, Sunan Ibn Maja, Sunan Al-Tirmidhi and Sunan Al-Sughra. There are some smaller collections where some of the hadith included are accepted as being authentic (although the majority of them are already present in the main six), such as Muwatta Malik and Musnad Ibn Hanbal.

I mentioned this in my initial post, but I'll say again, Tarikh al-Tabari is most definitely not a "bunch of Hadith quotes with some Koran verses thrown in". It is a history written by a guy in the 10th century, that covers the time period from the beginning of creation up until the time the book was written. It does mention some hadith and some Quranic quotes, but those make up nowhere near the bulk of the collection. It is not a part of scripture in the same way that a history of the vatican would not form a part of the Catholic scripture, even if it may include a couple of Bible quotes used in the historical context of the middle ages.

I repeat for the 3rd time, Ibn Ishaq's Sirat and the Tarikh al-Tabari are NOT considered hadith collections and are NOT a part of the Islamic scripture. I have no idea what other way I can phrase this.

originally posted by: whitewave
Since the Koran is without context or chronology, one must rely on the only account of Mo's life when Islam was being formed (the Sara), the Sunnah, and Hadith writings to know what's happening and when.

You know, people are constantly SAYING this, but I've never understood what on earth they're on about. The Quran is not a history book. Why should it need to be chronologically ordered? Who says it is without context. There are those who completely abandon the hadith, and I'm not one of them, but I'd certainly never say that the Quran needs the Hadith to be understood. That is just silly. Just read it.
"Say he is God, the one and only. God, the Eternal, the Absolute. Neither does He beget, nor was He begotten, and there is none like unto Him" (one of the smaller Surahs in the Quran so I wouldn't crowd up this thread). Does this somehow confuse you? Does it lack context? Does the unmentioned chronology make it hard to understand? Sure, if you read the hadith, you'd find out that the Surah was a response to the question "Who do you worship?", and that's cool. Not knowing that doesn't lose you any information, though.
Each of the five pillars of Islam (belief, prayer, charity, fasting and pilgrimage- you'll notice nothing about killing Jews and Christians, I wonder where you got that ridiculous tidbit from...the same scholar and researcher?) are explained in great detail all over the Quran. The 5 times of the daily prayer are listed all over the Quran.
There is no such thing in the Islamic scriptures called "the Sara". You either mean the Sirah/Sirat or Sura/Surahs. If you mean the Sirat, then sorry, no, they were definitely not the only source of Muhammad's life. Did I fail to mention how there are all these tonnes of collections of Hadith books that have all this stuff?

originally posted by: whitewave
The difference being that the Christian "prophet" (Yeshua) doesn't order his followers to be destructive as the Islamic prophet does. I feel pity for their delusions, and anger at the false teachers who promote such self-serving chaos.

I believe it is in the Christian scriptures that God ordered innocent men killed, innocent women killed, babes to be "dashed against the rocks" simply for being from a different tribe and different religion. There was no redemption, only slaughter. Even in the most violent verses of the Quran will you not find instructions to kill the innocent. Christians come up with the usual excuses ("It was a different time", "The bad guys were savage barbarians", "They were nazis" "That is the Old Testament, God changed his mind after that") to try and justify the fact that they believe in a God who ordered his chosen messengers to do things like that. Not to mention that the end times according to Christianity has the "Prince of Peace" returning at the head of an army to cause every people to mourn, slaughter all who don't accept him, and then rule the rest with an iron rod. Of course, I'm sure you love those poor, pitiful, deluded muslims who follow this oh-so-violent faith.

originally posted by: whitewave
Allah is NOT the name of my God.

Allah is "The God". It is the most common way to refer to God for most muslims, as well as the millions of Arab Christians, and the word has a documented etymological history that shares roots with the same word Jesus used when referring to God (Eli/Elah). I'm sorry, but whatever your Pastor told you about evil Islam and Allah, it can't compete against reality and history. For a perhaps more understandable example, no matter how much you may hate the idea (for whatever reason), doesn't change the fact that "mater" and "mother" share etymological roots. This is historically documented stuff.

As for the moon malarky, its been posted and debunked numerous times on these forums, and a couple of truncated misquoted verses aren't going to change that.
74:32 Is literally just 3 words (or 4 if you count a prefix preposition as a separate word). "Kalla (No), wal-qamar (By the moon!)". I don't know how you took that and turned it into an anthropomorphised moon god. As the following verses exemplify, oaths are sworn by many things in the Quran. "By the Sun" "By the moon" "By the Night at its darkest", "By the morning light", "By his life". According to muslims, this is God speaking to humanity, so while there is a lot of "I bear witness.." and "Bear witness..." that doesn't mean inanimate objects are being worshipped.
6:77 is talking about Abraham and how he went from the idolatory of his ancestors and family to true worship of God. Spoiler: While some of the people of that time and place may have done so, he doesn't end up worshipping the moon.
And then you mention 2:189 without explaining exactly what it is, because it goes completely against your argument. It explicitly states that the new moon has no magical powers, and is just to be used as a method of demarcating time. Like a CALENDAR! You know, like the same calendar that Jews used? And the one used by Jesus and the jews of his time to mark important dates like the Passover? Technically, the jewish calendar in Jesus's time was lunisolar rather than just lunar like the muslim's calendar. I guess by the same logic that means Jesus worshiped the moon AND the sun?
The crescent moon was used as a symbol by muslims for the first time over half a millennium after Muhammad's death, by Turks, who took the standard from the Byzantian Christians, according to tradition. That some people choose to associate as a symbol of Islam doesn't make it so, no more than you calling the Kabah a meteor (it is a square building, not a meteor- you know the word "cube" you might use occasionally in english? Guess where it comes from! I suppose you better change your fridge to dispel ice spheres now, otherwise you might end up worshipping the kabah!) doesn't make it so.

I refer you to your signature: Research thoroughly. It makes your lies more believeable.
(and btw, you misspelled believable).

a reply to: whitewave
It is hilarious how OFTEN my signature is relevant to the people I talk to. Though I'm hoping in this case it is simply a lack of knowledge rather than an intentional effort to spread falsities.

Still, amazing how long that typo stayed there...thanks for the heads up!

And at the end of the day it will be Islam that deceives many ..

Babyloi and others,


[ quote] I believe it is in the Christian scriptures that God ordered innocent men killed, innocent women killed, babes to be "dashed against the rocks" simply for being from a different tribe and different religion. There was no redemption, only slaughter. Even in the most violent verses of the Quran will you not find instructions to kill the innocent. Christians come up with the usual excuses ("It was a different time", "The bad guys were savage barbarians", "They were nazis" "That is the Old Testament, God changed his mind after that") to try and justify the fact that they believe in a God who ordered his chosen messengers to do things like that. Not to mention that the end times according to Christianity has the "Prince of Peace" returning at the head of an army to cause every people to mourn, slaughter all who don't accept him, and then rule the rest with an iron rod. Of course, I'm sure you love those poor, pitiful, deluded muslims who follow this oh-so-violent faith.

This is pretty much textbook of todays enlightenment thinking no matter the source.

There are things in the Bible which are hardly mentioned today..even by ministers who ought to know better concering statements such as you are making above Babyloi.

What is known by certain people is that pre flood...the demons and their religion had almsot completely overtaken the earth..and only Noah and his family escaped to restock the earth.


What is not taught to most today is that there has been an attempt and is still on going to repopulate the earth with this olde pre flood religion...with demonic results which today people think is becoming normal..even enlightened, illuminated, the preferred way to go.

It was only shortly after the flood when the earth began to repopulate that the olde religions began to return with their attendant results..drugs..human sacrafice...rampant runaway sexuality et al..etc etc etc.

This knowledge and history are mostly avoided in public schools today and also by most Bible schools. It should not so be.

What happened to the children of Israel in the land which their God gave to them was that because of the Whoredom and corruption in these lands..the demonic religions being practiced ..the inner breeding of demons and humans..that the land was defiled.

These inbred people became known as Emins, Rephaims, Zanzumins and Nephalim. This can be found in the Bible and mostly in the Olde Testament. This is the source of the corruption which God wanted to be wiped out. For the entire nations had corrupted and defiled themselves with these olde relgiions ..including human sacrifice.

The Children of Israel waged about a 500 year war against this religion and to wipe out the line of Emins, Rephaims, Zanzumins, and Nephalim.

Og..the King was among these as were others.

This is the information missing from much of what passes for Christianity and even Olde Testament today. It ought not to be so.

If you do not know this informations you will easily fall into the Traditions of Men the very thing God warned us against.

And today the "Traditions of Men " is attempting to make a come back and re assert itself as the dominant relilgion on this earth. In particular ..the goal is to get rid of the line of Adam...and insert the line of "The Fallen."

This informations can be found in a long lecture series on "The Ever War" on line

midnight-emissary.com...

This is a very interesting and telling series..very educational..not only on religion and philosophy but also on science, politics, history,
and economics ..to show that they are not separate items but all interconnected..part of a whole.

There was and stil is a blood war going on and a war for which the intelligences today do not want anyone to know is going on in order to bring back the olde religions. This is the source of much of the chaos we see going on around us today.


Hope this helps.
Orangetom

Just for reference material...the phrase from the New Testament goes like this in the King James..


Galatians 4:30

Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

IN this case the bondwoman is Hagar and her son ..Ishmael. The freewoman is Sarah and her son Issac.

This refers to an event back in Genesis where there was a dispute between these two women over inheritance in the line of Abraham...or the House of Abraham.

God told Abraham to harken unto his wife Sarah and cast out Hagar and her son...Ishmael

For if you read carefully in Galatians chapter 4 you will find out that Hagar and her son Ishmael are symbolic of the Olde Testament and are in bondage with her children. From, Mt Saini...where the Commandments were given to Moses or the Law as it came to be called. Hagar is Mt Saini..and gendereth to bondage...with her children.

And Sarah ..and her son Issac are free and the mother of us all...and are the New Testament. For we look to the Jerusalem which is above and the mother of us all..not the Jerusalem which is here today.

What this passage is stating is that those under Olde Testament law..are in bondage with their children..and shall not inherit the promises of God

The method of this world for those versed and taught in it whether secular or religious ..is to get us as beleivers away from Issac and his seed..singular..and onto Ishmael ..and whatever version of Ishmael is being promoted this year. To make Ishmaelites out of us all.

And it does not matter if it is a secular source...it is still of Ishmael ..and trying to get us away from Issac and his Seed.

There are those of us out here who do not want to follow Ishmael..no matter how it is promoted and it is promoted in many ways to the uninformed and those not trained in counterfeits.

In Issac shall thy seed be called.


I am not an Ishmaelite.

Thanks,
Orangetom

anyone with a brain knows its corrupt
as is most of religion

originally posted by: uninfluenced
anyone with a brain knows its corrupt

as is most of religion

I agree...


The Ishmaelite religion of Politics is most corrupt. Well said!! Well said!!


Orangetom

originally posted by: orangetom1999

originally posted by: uninfluenced
anyone with a brain knows its corrupt

as is most of religion

I agree...


The Ishmaelite religion of Politics is most corrupt. Well said!! Well said!!


Orangetom

Hey OT, why is the telling of the politics not corrupt....a vice versa scenario.

Not quite sure how you are intending the use of the words.."The telling of the politics" InTheLight.

The problem I have with much of politics is that it is obviously become a devout and zealous religion..for the faithful. And it is so often a product which is not what is advertised. Yet the "Faithful" keep coming back and back to vote for it and also give it monies while they sell peoples souls down the drain. It is obviously a devout and zealous system among many. This to me makes it a religion.

In otherwords Politics is a counterfeit system..an Occult concealed system of a product not being that which is advertised. It is Ishmael.

Hope this helps.

Orangetom

A reply to: orangetom1999
Orangetom, just to be clear, you are saying that those men, women and babies needed to be utterly slaughtered because they were half-demon/nephilim? And their lands and cattle needed to be raised because they were tainted by them?

PS: I don't know about the politics of religion, but unlike the Christian church the (traditionally) 2.5% mandatory charity for muslims doesn't go to Islam or some nebulous "Islamic Leadership", or upkeep of the priesthood or church. It is for each person to handle as they wish- buying clothes for the poor guy down the block, the soup kitchen, giving a child who cannot afford it an education, etc. They can give it to a religious (or other) organisation that will (supposedly) distribute it more effectively for them.

A reply to: the2ofusr1
The2ofusr1, I can't believe I just spent 50 minutes listening to a robot woman mispronounce things. Literally every statement made in that video is incorrect (and not just the ones pertaining to Islam), and I'm not even joking. I encourage you to post it in its own thread so that it can be discussed at length, since it doesn't really fit in with the topic of this thread.

Although to be fair, this thread really hasn't had any substance since I responded to Sahabi's assertions way back in December last year, which was his last post here (he never responded). I'm sorry I keep harping on about this, but it is interesting, considering how there was page after page of praise for his research and analysis (from people who didn't fully understand the subject matter, but still), and yet he was conclusively stymied by my response (or more accurately, a reiteration of my response to him over all these pages).

I was worried something might have happened to him, but I see he visited these forums earlier this month. Either he has no response, or he's been building it up over the last 5 months. I'm curious to see which. If my constant bringing up of this ends with me having egg on my face, so be it .

originally posted by: babloyi
A reply to: orangetom1999

 

Or I can't believe I just spent 50 minutes listening to a robot woman mispronounce things. Literally every statement made in that video is incorrect .

wait, you actually watch videos thrown at you by Christians? As a principle, I IGNORE youtube vids and copy pastes from anti-Islamic websites that christians present as ''proof'' in debates. The reason? Christians ignore Islamic links and videos. They even ignore the premise of the Koran and rely on statements made by people opposed to Islam, especially those with fake degrees and fraudsters, such as Robert Morey.

originally posted by: sk0rpi0n
As a principle, I IGNORE youtube vids ...

And you ignore facts that prove you wrong as well.


Some suggested reading for those interested in truth when it comes to the Qu'ran

The Origins of the Koran by Ibn Warraq - Information Here

This volume rejects the notion that Islam's sacred text is error free and cannot be critically evaluated. The study of the Koran must develop and mature. Scholars of Islam are of course familiar with the book's many errors and contradictions, but these inherent flaws have rarely been revealed to a wider public. This book is an attempt to remedy this deficiency by bringing together classic critical essays which raise key issues surrounding Islam's holy book. Divided into four parts, this important anthology begins with Theodor Nöldeke's first truly scientific study of the Koran. Part Two focuses on the difficulty of establishing a reliable Koranic text, while Part Three examines the Jewish, Christian, and Zoroastrian sources of Muhammad's "revelation." Part Four is a consideration of the controversial interpretations of contemporary scholar John Wansbrough, who questions the historical reliability of the earliest Islamic sources.

Ibn Warraq ... he nails it ... and hardcore Muslims hate him for it.
Let the flames begin.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: sk0rpi0n
As a principle, I IGNORE youtube vids ...

And you ignore facts that prove you wrong as well..

again, ''Facts''.

originally posted by: sk0rpi0n
again, ''Facts''.

Again .... FACTS. Straight scripture quotes. FACTS.

Every body Just go find and read Torah in Hebrew, Gospels in Aramaic and Koran in Arabic ! then you can find lies that they have told you in the name of Judaism, Christianity or Islam. lies made by mistranslations.

Babloyi,

A reply to: orangetom1999

Orangetom, just to be clear, you are saying that those men, women and babies needed to be utterly slaughtered because they were half-demon/nephilim? And their lands and cattle needed to be raised because they were tainted by them?

Yes...Babloyi..that is basically it. This is how the nations surrounding the land of Ancient Israel ...and who at the time the Hebrews were told to take it...had defiled themselves with their animals and even children in order to to practice their religion.

This view and knowledge is mostly ignored or never mentioned today even by ministers in order to let "Humanity" default through on ignorance and ever changing winds under the "Traditions of Men." The very thing we are warned about in the New Testament and also the Hebrews were warned against in the Olde Testament.

It is for this reason that eventually the Hebrews Lost the land by 70 AD. For they too had defiled themselves with the "Traditions of Men " in substitution/counterfeit for the Word of God.

This also happens to be what the Hebrew people themselves got caught up into and defiled themselves in so doing. Just as the Christians of today are so doing in defiling themselves with the "Traditions Of Men " in substitution/counterfeit for what the Word of God tells them.

For this corruption/defilement got caught up into the leadership..both in government and in their religions..by leadership..by wickedness in high places. It became universal...even among the Learned Hebrew Leadership.
And so too with many of todays Christians and their leadership...as well as in government leadership. Defiled.

One of the marks/signs of this other religion talking places...is that they "Fill the land with violence " among others.

You will find only a handful of ministers in this nation who will teach this history for what it is and means. For most of them are on the treadmill of " The Traditions of Men."


I don't need to read the Word in Hebrew, or Aramaic, nor Greek..nor any other language. It is right there in English in the AV 1611.




Thanks for your post,
Orangetom

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
And at the end of the day it will be Islam that deceives many ..

And you reference a book through a stupid video that has been fabricated time and time again through the centuries? You do understand that the Antichrist must rule the world from Jerusalem? So tell me, how is Islam going to rule the world from Jerusalem? How is Islam going to establish itself as the Global ruler in this day and age?

You make some pretty silly remarks because Islam will never be in a position to rule the world with the current systems in place. If anything the greatest deceiver is in fact Western Democracy and the Christian faith.

originally posted by: DarknStormy

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
And at the end of the day it will be Islam that deceives many ..

And you reference a book through a stupid video that has been fabricated time and time again through the centuries? You do understand that the Antichrist must rule the world from Jerusalem? So tell me, how is Islam going to rule the world from Jerusalem? How is Islam going to establish itself as the Global ruler in this day and age?
.

Many christians fantasize about a muslim anti-christ who would persecute christians living in the powerful western nations. Besides the anti-christ is supposed to lay claim to being God. Muslims will dont believe God can be a man and so will never accept a man as God. Any Muslim claiming to be God would be lynched by muslims. Christians however already have the idea that God can become man, and so are more likely to end up being deceived by the anti-Christ. One possible scenario is that anti-Christ would kill a lot of Muslims....and christians would think he is Jesus (who they believe will unleash a bloodbath).....so christians will not have a problem worshiping a man they only think is Jesus.