The Search for Muhammad has Ended
-
He may be real, but I consider that it was an impostor who took the name Muhammad based on an interpretation of Quran. The stories of an unrighteous and violent man is obviously not of a righteous prophet. The "non-islamic" scholars also mainly portray a cruel conqueror even if they may confirm he existed.
I believe an impostor who went by the name "Muammad ibn `Abd Allh" who died in Madinah was part of the hijacking of The Reading(Quran). The tomb in Madinah is not of the real messenger but an impostor. Bukhari & Co could not have achieved such mega deception without the help of an impostor.
-
Do you have any evidence to back up what you said in your last post brother invalid?
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
Peace,
I now think the very theory presented here is of an erroneous nature for a couple of reasons
- The Quran makes a specific distinction between the Bani Israel and the Arabyu
Meaning we can tell from the Word of our Lord that these are two very different groups of peoples.
What this theory supports is quite the opposite, although. This theory supports the notion that these two distinct people are virtually the same, and that all the stories from Ibrahim to Muhammad were about these specific people. I don't think I am wrong in assuming so about this theory.
- The Quran repeats multiple times that Muhammad was the first messenger to these people who have received the Scripture in Arabic.
This theory holds that Yemen was the centerstage of biblical events, raising the Arabs as Bani Israel.
But the Quran repeatedly tells us that these people( the Arabs) never had a messenger sent to them before Muhammad, the seal of the prophets.
I think these two counts gape a hole in the OP's theory.
Can the OP provide his/her view on these contradictions tot he theory presented by his/her research? - The Quran makes a specific distinction between the Bani Israel and the Arabyu
-
.
The eloquent tongue (lissan 3arabi) of the Quran is the most ancient tongue on the planet. It was the tongue spoken by Adam (the first homo-sapien race). It is made up of three-letter roots whose meanings are derived directly from natural phenomena. For example. If you ask any European or American what the word "Adam" means, he will say "it's the name of the first human being". They see it as a proper noun which doesn't have a meaning. In "Arabic" the word "adam" is derived from the 3-letter root "adm", from which comes the word "adeem". When we say "adeem al- ardh", it means the soil or skin of the earth which is good and convenient for cultivation. So ADAM. is the being that was created from the skin of the earth (the surface clay), and who is ripe and fit to be the vicegerent , and worthy of receiving the divine message.There is not a single language on the face of this planet that will give you this meaning. Only "arabic" can.
.Arabic as the mother tongue, the language of heaven etc is simply arabist propaganda and wishful thinking.
To demonstrate why your last sentence (quoted above) is completely fanciful I will offer you an alternative explanation of the etymology of "Adam" (who was not arabic or semitic).
In languages the most basic words have single phonemes (consisting of 1 or 2 letter written forms). These most basic words signify important early concepts in proto-languages.
It so happens that "AD" means name or designation in Turkic.
http//tureng.com/en/turkish-english/ad
And Ad-*m would be "My name".
Given that the most significant distinguishing feature of humans (who through evolution of primates) was the gift of God to think and name things, this is highly significant.
The first mention of Adam is 231 and the first thing Adam is mentioned with respect to is names.
"And He taught Adam the names of all things; then He placed them before the angels, and said "Tell me the names of these if ye are right." "
The oldest languages on earth have an agglutinative structure (like Sumerian, and Turkic) as opposed to conjugated nominative-accusative (Indo-European) later languages. Semitic is very likely a synthetic contructed language group and not natural (like Esperanto, Klingon) and were invented by a priestly class as a closed language limited to religious elites for a purpose and only later gained currency as common spoken languages.
Ancient languages like Basque (still spoken) and Etruscan (extinct) are also agglutinative and show especially in the Etruscans who predate Rome that agglutinative languages were more widespread in Europe even but were extinguished by increasing Indo-European ingress from Indo-Aryan migrations.
Adam was the first named human, and the one who knew names. That is what distinguished him. All creatures come from clay. I hope you can appreciate the difference.
-
Adam was the first named human, and the one who knew names. That is what distinguished him. All creatures come from clay. I hope you can appreciate the difference.
I doubt it. Adamwas the generic denominationn of thee population to whom God revealed Itself of the present human kind. That is, from te Qur'an. TheQujr'an de nnot say that adam was th first named human ad it speaks of adam in the dual in the plural and in the singular. It is not a proer ame, but the geeric denomiation of tht human kind. According to the Qur'an.
Of curse nybody is free of developping or holding any opinion or belief about it. But this one i prticular is ot substantiated by the Qur'an.
Salaam
-
I doubt it. Adamwas the generic denominationn of thee population to whom God revealed Itself of the present human kind
this is debateable, depends on how somebody understand it,,
human being is perfected through stages...
all humans agree to accept the trust ....
after that the first creation from the womb of earth is somehow revised to form another creation that would supposed to create from womb of women...now
the first perfected human being after taking trust by (whole humanity ) was it adam or a group of people
but i think some language experts need to ponder over grammer where God is reffering to adam is it plural noun or singular noun...
what i find adam is a person one single person.. i havnt see a word qoom/nation anywhere with adam...
but again
God knows best -
?nation? ?qawm?
Just read the very clear expressions in verbs singular or dual or plural, you have them all cocerning the events rgarding adam. Just as there is o Eve or Hawa, because all of them are adam.
Salaam
sister if you can explain it with examples and references from quran it will be helpful,
how you say it not a single perosn , everthing have a starting point so from one single soule(niether male nor female) a human being started and from that soule a pair created of male and female,, it must be a process God knows his secret of creation, but we know its started from a single unit of creation then from that unit a pair is been created and then from that pair there are mutipple pairs now,,
what i understand you are telling us a theory in which there was lot of humanity at the very start...? or i m thinking it wrong
please explain it in detail whatever ur understadning ,,if you provide reference as well it will be helpful
thanx
God bless you -
41 O MANKIND! Be conscious of your Sustainer, who has created you out of one living entity, and out of it created its mate, and out of the two spread abroad a multitude of men and women. And remain conscious of God, in whose name you demand from one another, and of these ties of kinship. Verily, God is ever watchful over you!
peace
-
Whe Godex expels adam fromthe garden He tells them in the plural "iHbitu".... And it is always adam and mate...
Look a little yourself. I am short of time. And look at actual people and animals.
Salaam
so it was more than one person , i.e adam and mate... what so indifferent in it...
peace
-
Notsingular, ot dual, but pluural,more than two. Ithought that muchwas clear.
Salaam
when a thing is not single by default its plural... whether its two or two million...
-
3166 What you suffered on the day the two armies met was by God's leave, and to let those who acknowledge know.
238 We said, "Descend from it all of you, so when the guidance comes from Me, then whoever follows My guidance, they will have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve."
same root word used on otheer occassion clearly tell its two
plural is plural in grammer and its mean more than one..
-
its you who bring a language discussion in between,
wheras i was asking something else... anyway come back to the topic and tell me the possible outcome of anything that start ,, is it not a single enitity at some specific point... that was actual topic... or God create adams of every color .. ethinicity lol
-
You want to invent a new Arabic language,
Salaam
hahaha , no , the language references which i posted is 1400 years old..