=[ Difference between Al-Kitaab and Al-Quraan ]=
-
PEACE, MMKHAN,
GUIDANCE the instructions on how to live a righteous life in this world (especially, not to do shirk) , so that, one may successfuly pass the test of conduct , so that, one may avoid the destiny of Hell and gain the destiny of Paradise .
Seperately, these verses are really very good. But making it a definition of guidance by mingling verses by ourself is not good. The above definition of guidance is absolutely your own made definition. When I have quoted you from Al-Quraan what actually the guidance is, you just ignored and repeat your own quiz of yes or no.
LOL! I was wondering when you were going to come with that excuse. Anyway, the definiton is not mine, but Allah's and those ayats prove it. Do you, then, reject the above definition for guidance, yes or no?
I cannot answer this question except to say "Falaa tadhriboo li-Allahil amsaal, Allahu ya'lamu wa antum laa ta'lamoon"
I have no idea what you wrote above, although, I'm certain it's just one more excuse for not answering yes or no my question.
My excuses (if you think so) has already been given above. Read it carefully, do not ignore as you do it always...
Yes, I read them, now, when are you going to stop stalling and answer either yes or no to my question?
Looking forward to your reply.
-
Peace,
Al-Kitaab can mean
The book, the prescription, the law, the writing, the decree.It can also mean
Books, Prescription, Law, Writing(s), Decree(s).
If the Koran can be classified under any of the above it can be described as such only in that sense. If it contains any of the above than it can contain al-kitaab only in the cases where that makes sense.
There is not need for such an argument as can be seen above the the Classical Arabic senses of Al-Kitaab are understood.
Godbless,
ProGod -
Peace,
Al-Kitaab can mean
The book, the prescription, the law, the writing, the decree.It can also mean
Books, Prescription, Law, Writing(s), Decree(s).
If the Koran can be classified under any of the above it can be described as such only in that sense. If it contains any of the above than it can contain al-kitaab only in the cases where that makes sense.
There is not need for such an argument as can be seen above the the Classical Arabic senses of Al-Kitaab are understood.
Godbless,
ProGodPeace be upon you brother,
Normally, I translate every word by looking at the usage of same word in other places. And I think this is the best way to get the correct meaning. And also I don't use any word with multiple meanings as I see it not suitable to understand the verses clearly.
Also as per AlQuraan it has been sent in ARABIC LANGUAGE so we cannot interperete our own meanings.
May Allah guide us all towards the correct path.
Regards,
MMKhan
-
You think I'm interpreting my own meanings? . . .Interesting. I am using Classical Arabic to give the meanings of this word so that people can, with more education, approach the Koran.
Looking at how the Koran uses a word in other places can give you a glimpse at how the word CAN be used, but it is only through understanding Cl. Arabic grammar and definitions that you will understand how to interpret Cl. Arabic words in the Koran and in other Cl. Arabic text. Believe me, I'm not making this up.
Godbless,
ProGod. -
Salaamun Alaik brother,
You think I'm interpreting my own meanings? . . .Interesting. I am using Classical Arabic to give the meanings of this word so that people can, with more education, approach the Koran.
No, I does not mean that you are interpreting. I mean that today what we see in the so called Quranic dictionaries. They are actually interpreting. Let me tell, I bought Al-Mawrid (an Arabic to English dictionary) which is very famous in middle east. But unfortunately, I don't find everything that I needed. I got another Quranic dictionary and when I looked for the word "Esha(n)" I got the meaning as "Night Prayer". This is what I meant.
Looking at how the Koran uses a word in other places can give you a glimpse at how the word CAN be used, but it is only through understanding Cl. Arabic grammar and definitions that you will understand how to interpret Cl. Arabic words in the Koran and in other Cl. Arabic text. Believe me, I'm not making this up.
A Glimpse? I don't think so brother. But Cl. Arabic may help you somewhat. But I believe that the usage of words in Al-Quraan do change. I believe that the usage of words at the time of Prophet Mohammed cannot be used today exactly in the same form. I might be wrong. But I think thats how Al-Quraan is useful for centuries or till the last hour.
In this case the Cl. Arabic Grammer or the usage of words at that time may not be helpful.
May Allah guide us all towards the Truth.
MMKhan
-
Like is with the case with all dictionaries, just one will not always be sufficient. Some dictionaries are just more extensive than others. In the case of Arabic some are directed more towards what is modernly understood than what is traditionally or classically understood.
In addition to that you have to take into account that a dictionary that does not claim to explain a more Traditional or Classical Cl. Arabic will include words that came about way after the Koran that can be considered Cl. Arabic, like words that you would find in Medieval Classical Arabic all the way up to the Colonial Era.
A Quranic dictionary will be biased just by its name. Quranic is not a language. Those who believe that the Quran employs its own language really mean Islamic language. Being that Muslims believe that the Koran promotes Islamic theologies they will take those Arabic words and interpret them in their Islamic theological meanings when they read the Koran. So what they should really say is an Islamic dictionary, because the Koran doesn't have a language all on its own.
Understanding the words of the Koran as Muhammad and his people would have been able to understand it is the key to understanding what the Koran really says. Its message is what will be able to apply to all generations. Just because it is written in an ancient language doesn't mean that what it has to say is outdated and ancient.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Greetings anwar,
I would like to comment on this?
Peace,
Al-Kitaab can mean
The book, the prescription, the law, the writing, the decree.It can also mean
Books, Prescription, Law, Writing(s), Decree(s).
If the Koran can be classified under any of the above it can be described as such only in that sense. If it contains any of the above than it can contain al-kitaab only in the cases where that makes sense.
There is not need for such an argument as can be seen above the the Classical Arabic senses of Al-Kitaab are understood.
Godbless,
ProGodLet?s review the true understanding?
= ?alqur-ana?
?alqur-ana? definition
Originally meaning the Collection; ?I collected together the thing? or ?I read, or recited, the book or scripture?; and then conventionally applied to signify the Book of God that was revealed to Mohammad; it also signifies the revelation, meaning that which is termed the mighty, or imitable which is read, or recited, and written in books or volumes. A name for the Book of God, like the book of the Law revealed to Moses and the Gospel.
is so called because it has collected the histories of the prophets, and commands and prohibitions, and promises and threats, and the verses or signs, and the chapters.
It comes from the root ?qara?a?, which has the primary signification he collected together the thing; put it, or drew it, together; part to part, or portion to portion. He read, or recited, the scripture chanting; he read or recited anything in any manner, without, or from, or in a book.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume seven, pp. 2502 - 2504
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar, pp. 448 - 449Thus, as we can clearly see for ourselves, the Koran is not ?original? at all. It is merely a ?Collection? of previous scriptures (Mainly OT and NT Gospels), that have been collected and pulled together in an attempt to imitate the Holy Bible.
The authors who penned the Koranic text went to great lengths in acknowledging as truth, their Biblical origins.
Let?s review the definition for ?the Book??.
= ?alkitabu?
?alkitabu? definition
Lane references sura 22 in his definition
Thalika alkitabu la rayba feehi hudan lilmuttaqeena
That The Book no doubt/suspicion in it, (it is) guidance to the fearing and obeying. (22)
?That is the book, or scripture?; as though combining in itself the excellences of all other books or scriptures; or meaning that is preeminently the book, or scripture. The Pentateuch or Mosaic Law; and the Gospel, or Book of the Gospels; the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians. Divine prescript, appointment, or ordinance; judgment, or sentence; fatal decree or predestination.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume one, p. 74; volume seven, p. 2590Thus?it is quite clear, even at this point, and even without performing any scriptural comparison(s) whatsoever, that ?the collection? that comprises the Koran, is basically the Jewish and Christian scriptures.
This is beyond any reasonable doubt.
Furthermore, let?s review some Koranic passages that will shed even more clarity on what it claims to be?
Alif-lam-ra tilka ayatu alkitabi waqur-anin mubeenin
15.1 A L R , that is The Book's inseparable message, and (a) distinct/clear Koran.
Here we have the astounding statement (from the Koranic authors) that the Jewish and Christian scriptures ?alkitabi? are inseparable ?ayatu? from the Koran.
Compare to this ayah?
Ta-seen tilka ayatu alqur-ani wakitabin mubeenin
27.1 T S, that is the Koran's inseparable message, and (a) distinct/clear Book.
In order to re-emphasize that the Koran is no more than a collection of Jewish and Christian scriptures, the Koranic authors transposed the order of the same juxtaposed words; this time around claiming that the Koran is inseparable from the ?alkitabi?.
Are we beginning to see the picture now?.?
And?look at these examples?
Wama kana hatha alqur-anu an yuftara min dooni Allahi walakin tasdeeqa allathee bayna yadayhi watafseela alkitabi la rayba feehi min rabbi alAAalameena
10.37 And this the Koran was/is not that it be fabricated from (by) other than Allah, and but confirmation (of) what (is) between his hands, and detailing/explaining The Book, no doubt/suspicion in it, (it is) from the Lord of mankind and the jinn.
The Koran details/explains the Jewish and Christian scriptures?..?
Who would have guessed?
Kitabun fussilat ayatuhu qur-anan AAarabiyyan liqawmin yaAAlamoona
41.3 A Book its verses were detailed/explained/clarified, an Arabic Koran to a nation reasoning/comprehending/knowing.
The Jewish and Christian scriptures are inseparable from an Arabic Koran?.?
There is absolutely no doubt that the authors who penned the Koran (as we know it today) borrowed Biblical material.
In fact, they quite proudly made it a blatant point to say so?.
Take care?
-
Peace,
This is the point where you started to go wrong
The Koran "is merely a ?Collection? of previous scriptures (Mainly OT and NT Gospels), that have been collected and pulled together in an attempt to imitate the Holy Bible. "
That is a big jump from the definitiont that you gave that all that the word Koran means is 'collection, recitation, chanting.' Let me note that it also has the meanings of 'study and reading.' Those meanings can be seen in other dictionaries. I wasn't even arguing about the Koran's link to the Old Testament and New Testament. But pointing to the fact that Qur'an(un) mainly means 'a collection' and Al-Qur'an 'the collection' or generally 'Collection(s)' does not create a link to the Bible even if you want it to.
As for Al-Kitaab
You have
Lane references sura 22 in his definition
Thalika alkitabu la rayba feehi hudan lilmuttaqeena
That The Book no doubt/suspicion in it, (it is) guidance to the fearing and obeying. (22)
?That is the book, or scripture?; as though combining in itself the excellences of all other books or scriptures; or meaning that is preeminently the book, or scripture. The Pentateuch or Mosaic Law; and the Gospel, or Book of the Gospels; the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians. Divine prescript, appointment, or ordinance; judgment, or sentence; fatal decree or predestination."
I don't see why you think that you are making a point here. Christians and Jews still refer to their books as 'The Scripture' or 'Scripture.' Being that Saudi Arabia during Muhammad's time (God bless him) was full of Christians and Jews it would make sense that this meaning would have penetrated the Arabic language of the time. But that does not mean that the word doesn't have other meanings, just as you put them book, scripture (which we would refer to as 'script or text' nowadays when speaking about a non-religious scripture), appointment, divine prescript
(I would say authoritative prescript which I've read in other dictionaries), appointment, ordinance, judgement, sentence, fatal decree or predestination.What you should also consider (which you wouldn't get completely from any dictionary) is that the form fi&aal, which would be the equivalent of fa&l, in the case of kataba that would mean that kitaab is also a synonym of katb. It is also a synonym of kitaabat (a word that started being used because kitaab had taken a more religious sense in Arabic, despite its non-religious meaning of 'book'). Kitaab can mean 'any writing' as well as law, decree and prescription. These meanings derive from the other meanings of kataba which have to do with 'decreeing, prescribing and setting as law.'
So your statement
Thus?it is quite clear, even at this point, and even without performing any scriptural comparison(s) whatsoever, that ?the collection? that comprises the Koran, is basically the Jewish and Christian scriptures.
This is beyond any reasonable doubt.
That is a big, big jump, brother. . . A big jump.
Godbless,
ProGod -
Greetings anwar,
Thanks for your reply?
This is the point where you started to go wrong
The Koran "is merely a ?Collection? of previous scriptures (Mainly OT and NT Gospels), that have been collected and pulled together in an attempt to imitate the Holy Bible. "
That is a big jump from the definitiont that you gave that all that the word Koran means is 'collection, recitation, chanting.' Let me note that it also has the meanings of 'study and reading.'
Actually, my position follows the original meanings of the words.
Furthermore?.the original definitions are indeed proven-out by a study of the Koran as a whole - which is indeed 99% Biblical material.
Those meanings can be seen in other dictionaries.
Please bring forth your references?
I wasn't even arguing about the Koran's link to the Old Testament and New Testament. But pointing to the fact that Qur'an(un) mainly means 'a collection' and Al-Qur'an 'the collection' or generally 'Collection(s)' does not create a link to the Bible even if you want it to.
The classic definition for ?alkitabu? was also given as pertaining to the Holy Bible.
This word is unimpeachably juxtaposed with ?alqur-ana? as shown in the brief examples demonstrated in 15.1 & 27.1 ?..showing beyond any reasonable doubt that the ?collection? called the Koran is no more than an Arabic Bible?
As for Al-Kitaab
You have
Quote
Lane references sura 22 in his definitionThalika alkitabu la rayba feehi hudan lilmuttaqeena
That The Book no doubt/suspicion in it, (it is) guidance to the fearing and obeying. (22)
?That is the book, or scripture?; as though combining in itself the excellences of all other books or scriptures; or meaning that is preeminently the book, or scripture. The Pentateuch or Mosaic Law; and the Gospel, or Book of the Gospels; the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians. Divine prescript, appointment, or ordinance; judgment, or sentence; fatal decree or predestination."
I don't see why you think that you are making a point here. Christians and Jews still refer to their books as 'The Scripture' or 'Scripture.' Being that Saudi Arabia during Muhammad's time (God bless him) was full of Christians and Jews it would make sense that this meaning would have penetrated the Arabic language of the time. But that does not mean that the word doesn't have other meanings, just as you put them book, scripture (which we would refer to as 'script or text' nowadays when speaking about a non-religious scripture), appointment, divine prescript
(I would say authoritative prescript which I've read in other dictionaries), appointment, ordinance, judgement, sentence, fatal decree or predestination.What you should also consider (which you wouldn't get completely from any dictionary) is that the form fi&aal, which would be the equivalent of fa&l, in the case of kataba that would mean that kitaab is also a synonym of katb. It is also a synonym of kitaabat (a word that started being used because kitaab had taken a more religious sense in Arabic, despite its non-religious meaning of 'book'). Kitaab can mean 'any writing' as well as law, decree and prescription. These meanings derive from the other meanings of kataba which have to do with 'decreeing, prescribing and setting as law.'
So your statement
Quote
Thus?it is quite clear, even at this point, and even without performing any scriptural comparison(s) whatsoever, that ?the collection? that comprises the Koran, is basically the Jewish and Christian scriptures.This is beyond any reasonable doubt.
That is a big, big jump, brother. . . A big jump.
Godbless,
ProGodHere is what we can do to test the strength of my position...
I challenge you to pick any portion of your book of faith in which you feel is completely free of any Jewish and Christian influence whatsoever?.
This should demonstrate if the classic definitions are indeed accurate?
Your call?
-
Who cares. I disagree with you but I really don't think it is worth arguing with you. Believe what you will believe. I already know that there is nothing that I can say to change your mind. May God guide you. The Koran is not Jewish or Chrisitian. It transcends both those religions. Whoever, wants to believe your logic let them. It will only be the fault of their own stupidity. Only a fool couldn't see through what you are saying.
I don't even know why you are arguing about it. Whatever you motives may be, follow your heart and your dreams.Godbless,
Anwar -
Greetings anwar,
Thanks for your reply?
Who cares.
We do?
I disagree with you but I really don't think it is worth arguing with you. Believe what you will believe. I already know that there is nothing that I can say to change your mind.
Thanks for declining our invitation. wink
We have yet to meet a true Muslim who is up for the challenge?
May God guide you.
Which God might that be?.?
The Koran is not Jewish or Chrisitian. It transcends both those religions.
Dead wrong.
The Koran copies both religions?
Just as the authors? told us?
The Koran can only copy.
Period.
Whoever, wants to believe your logic let them. It will only be the fault of their own stupidity. Only a fool couldn't see through what you are saying.
Only an unconfident fool would reject our offer?
I don't even know why you are arguing about it. Whatever you motives may be, follow your heart and your dreams.
You have just proved our position?and your lack of one?
Thanks for your time?
-
Peace,
By the way, I'm not a Muslim.
And who said "The Koran can only copy"? What authors?
I don't really want to discuss it, because as I said I can tell you have your mind made up. But would you mind, just briefly, without any challenges for me to "prove" your point wrong, explain what you mean by the above.
Godbless,
ProGod -
Peace be upon you,
challenge you to pick any portion of your book of faith in which you feel is completely free of any Jewish and Christian influence whatsoever?.
This reading(quran) is a confirmation of what came before it.
Likewise, the so called bible contains stories from long before Jesus. Virgin Births and ressurections are not new D
Why waste time cherishing what your sect has, why not focus on changing behavior, unifying. It is clear what the followers of the bible here choose to do, create division and war one against the other.
-
Greetings anwar,
Thanks for your reply?
Peace,
By the way, I'm not a Muslim.
What would you refer to your status as then?.?
And who said "The Koran can only copy"?
The authors of the Koran?
What authors?
The ones who penned the text?
I don't really want to discuss it, because as I said I can tell you have your mind made up.
My position is the result of years of research?
But would you mind, just briefly, without any challenges for me to "prove" your point wrong, explain what you mean by the above.
Which point?.?
The Koran copying Biblical scriptures?.or the authors who penned the text??
Thanks?
-
Greetings idolfree1,
Thanks for your reply?
Quote
challenge you to pick any portion of your book of faith in which you feel is completely free of any Jewish and Christian influence whatsoever?.This reading(quran) is a confirmation of what came before it.
Then you acknowledge that the Koran is simply an Arabic collection of previous Biblical Hebrew and Greek scriptures.
As such?.we already know that the Koran?s information is a second-hand translation that has attempted to cross the Hebrew and Greek language barriers?
Knowing this?.why would you want to put your faith in a second-hand source instead of the original?.?
This is illogical.
Likewise, the so called bible contains stories from long before Jesus. Virgin Births and ressurections are not new
Then?.this would make the Koran out to be a copy of a copy of a copy??exactly how far back to you really want to go?..?
Why waste time cherishing what your sect has, why not focus on changing behavior, unifying.
There is plenty of low-hanging fruit in educating Muslims to the origins of their book of faith?
It is clear what the followers of the bible here choose to do, create division and war one against the other.
I think that the suicide bombers that cling tenaciously to their Koran while blowing themselves (and others) up in the name of their ?god??.have this ground pretty well covered already?
Thanks?
-
Peace,
Now you don't understand what I'm saying. . . figures. Read and read well
Which point?.?
The Koran copying Biblical scriptures?.or the authors who penned the text??
Both.
You said
Just as the authors? told us?
The Koran can only copy.
Who are the authors of the Quran?
And where did they say that the Quran can only copy?
Who are these authors that "penned the text"?
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace be upon you,
Then you acknowledge that the Koran is simply an Arabic collection of previous Biblical Hebrew and Greek scriptures.
No, I acknowledge that there are men and woman who have the ability to recieve inspiration from the God, since the beginning of time, and they are given the same message, which is then written by the pen to distribute to mankind, however, mankind always tries to tamper with the message, sometimes knowingly so they can imprison the minds of those who are unaware and cause them to fight amongst each other. So each time a person brings TRUTH, it is a confirmation of the TRUTH that came before it.
As such?.we already know that the Koran?s information is a second-hand translation that has attempted to cross the Hebrew and Greek language barriers?
I have no clue where you got that. Think of it this way, a pure white light shining through different colored window panes, you are reading from a DIRTY BLUE window pane, we are reading from a LESS DIRTY Green pane, I am trying to get to that Pure White Light that manifests through ALL of the window panes.
Knowing this?.why would you want to put your faith in a second-hand source instead of the original?.?
This is illogical.
You are prevented from understanding me because of your emotionality. If you would calm yourself and transcend theses colored panes, you would join me in bringing peace and not fighting this against that, but only search for verifyable truth. There is no God but THE GOD, it is the pure light that flows through all of us "windowpanes", including the Jesus Windowpane.
Quote
Likewise, the so called bible contains stories from long before Jesus. Virgin Births and ressurections are not newThen?.this would make the Koran out to be a copy of a copy of a copy??exactly how far back to you really want to go?..?
We MUST go to the beginning, as I have done. So what is the point of trying to make the "Koran" a copy if the "Bible" has the same so called "faults"? What is the point of that? Suppoose they were BOTH copied from something else, except the BIBLE was a weaker copy that "Koran"? How can you prove otherwise with having already admitted "copy after copy after copy?"
Quote
Why waste time cherishing what your sect has, why not focus on changing behavior, unifying.There is plenty of low-hanging fruit in educating Muslims to the origins of their book of faith?
Why not direct that back to the beginning? To the white Light? Why are you directing them to another window pane?
Quote
It is clear what the followers of the bible here choose to do, create division and war one against the other.I think that the suicide bombers that cling tenaciously to their Koran while blowing themselves (and others) up in the name of their ?god??.have this ground pretty well covered already?
Theres no real difference between you and them, neither one is promoting peace and unity because you both follow window panes and not the pure light.
-
Greetings anwar,
Thanks for your reply?
Peace,
Now you don't understand what I'm saying. . . figures. Read and read well
Quote
Which point?.?The Koran copying Biblical scriptures?.or the authors who penned the text??
Both.
You said
Quote
Just as the authors? told us?The Koran can only copy.
Who are the authors of the Quran?
And where did they say that the Quran can only copy?
Godbless,
AnwarLet?s first review a couple of examples that demonstrate that the Koran is merely a copied collection of previous Jewish and Christian scriptures?
Walaqad darabna lilnnasi fee hatha alqur-ani min kulli mathalin wala-in ji/tahum bi-ayatin layaqoolanna allatheena kafaroo in antum illa mubtiloona (30.58 )
Reviewing the key terms in this ayah?
= ?darabna?
?darabna? definition
Plural. We have set forth. It comes from the root ?dzaraba?, which means to heal, strike, propound, put forth a parable, go, make a journey, travel, mix, avoid, take away, put a cover, shun, mention, state, propound, set forth, compare, liken, a like in stature and make, seek away, march own, set, impose, prevent, fight, traffic with anyone?s property for a share in the profit, leave for sake, take away a thing.
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume five, pp. 1777 - 1783
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar, pp. 328 - 329?darabna? is used three times in the Koran, and in each and every case, the term is integrated within Biblical content.
= ?mathalin?
?mathalin? definition
Noun. Parable, likeness, similitude, like, reason, proverb, discourse, equivalent, comparison, sign, lesson, an example, case, state, condition, argument, match, an analogue. It comes from the root ?mathala?, which means to resemble, imitate, compare any one with, be or look like some one, bear a likeness.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume eight, pp. 3017 - 3018
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar pp. 525 ? 526Here, as in numerous other Koranic locations, we have the term ?mathalin? which means to imitate or make an analogue to something.
We already completely understand that the ?alqur-ani? in this ayah refers to the collection of Jewish and Christian scriptures?
So?let?s plug this ayah into context?
30.55 And a day/time the Hour/Resurrection starts the criminals/sinners swear/make oath (that) they did stay/remain except an hour, as/like that, they were being lied to/turned away.
30.56 And those who were given/brought the knowledge and the faith/belief said "You had stayed/remained in Allah's term/fate/destiny Book to the Revival Day/Resurrection Day, so this (is) the Revival Day/Resurrection Day, and but you were not knowing.
30.57 So (on) that day those who caused injustice/oppression, their apologies/excuses do not benefit (them), and nor they, they be allowed to offer reconciliation/appeasement .
30.58 And We have set forth to the people in this the Koran from an equivalent/likeness, and if you came to them with a verse/evidence/sign those who disbelieved will say "That truly you are except wasters.?
30.59 As/like that Allah stamps/seals on those who do not knows' hearts/minds.
The Hour of Resurrection??
Allah?s book?..?
Hardly new information.
Where have we heard this before?.?
Thus?it is quite clear that the collection called the Koran is merely an imitator of the previous scriptures?
Amazingly, this same exact phrase is also used here?
Walaqad darabna lilnnasi fee hatha alqur-ani min kulli mathalin laAAallahum yatathakkaroona (39.27)
So?let?s also plug this ayah into context?
39.23 Allah descended the information's/speech's best, a Book looking alike/resembling/ similar doubles of twos Koranic verses, (the) skins (of) those who fear their Lord tremble/shiver from it, then their skins and their hearts/minds soften to Allah's remembrance/reminder, that (is) Allah's guidance, He guides with it whom He wills/wants, and who Allah misguides so (there is) none from a guide for him.
39.24 Is who fears with his face/front the torture's bad/evil/harm (on) the Resurrection Day, and was said to the unjust/oppressive taste/experience what you were gaining/acquiring.
39.25 Those from before them lied/denied/falsified, so the torture came to them from where/when they do not feel/know/sense.
39.26 So Allah made them taste/experience the shame/disgrace/scandal in the life the present/worldly life, and the end's torture(is) greater if they were knowing.
39.27 And We have set forth to the people in this the Koran from an equivalent/likeness, maybe/perhaps they mention/remember.
39.28 An Arabic a Koran, without/other than of bent/crookedness/indirectness, maybe/perhaps they fear and obey.
Now?.this is actually quite revealing now isn?t it??
Look at what we have just been told?
? A book resembling two Koranic verses
? The Resurrection Day
? The Koran is a likeness
? Not just any ?collection? Koran?but an Arabic KoranNow?the last part is truly amazing as it identifies this copied ?Collection? of scriptures by the qualifier ?Arabic?.
If the ?Collection? that is being discussed was already in Arabic, then there would have been absolutely no need whatsoever to tell us of the language that the material is in; as it would be self-evident?
As it is?.the authors specifically make this point to inform us of the translation of the ?Collection? that has transpired?.
Obviously, from the Greek in this case.
Who are these authors that "penned the text"?
Observe these interesting comments by Lane?
Every language without a written literature tends to decay more than to development by reason of foreign influences; and the history of the Arabic exhibits an instance of decay remarkably rapid, and extraordinary in degree. An immediate consequence of the foreign conquests achieved by the Arabs under Mohammad?s first four successors was an extensive corruption of their language; for the nations that they subdued were naturally obliged to adopt in a great measure the speech of the conquerors, a speech which few persons have ever acquired in such a degree as to be secure from the commission of frequent errors in grammar without learning it from infancy?.
Such being the case, it became a matter of the highest importance to the Arabs to preserve the knowledge of that speech which had thus become obsolescent, and to draw a distinct line between the classical and the post-classical languages. For the former language was that of the Kur-an and of the Traditions of Mohammad, the sources of their religious, moral, civil, criminal, and political code? and they possessed, in that language, preserved by oral tradition, - for the art of writing, in Arabia, had been almost exclusively confined to Christians and Jews?.
The classical language they called, by reason of its incomparable excellence, ?el-loghah,? or ?the language? and the line between this and the post-classical was easily drawn, on account of the almost sudden commencement, and rapid progress, of the corruption.
?.I often have found in my knowledge of modern Arabic a solution of a difficulty; but without great caution, such knowledge would frequently have misled me, in consequence of the changes which have taken place in the applications of many words since the classical age.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume one, pp. vii ? viii; xxii - xxiiiIt is quite inescapable that Islam?s ?prophet??.which is not even mentioned in the Koran? did NOT write the Koran?
Moreover?the authors, who did finally put pen to paper, and translated the Hebrew and Greek into Arabic, were more than likely Christians?..!!!
Thanks?