Discrepancies in the Quran
-
The next discrepancy is in verse 569 where Sabeans is spelt Sabioon should be written Sabieen. The same phrase is repeated in 2217 where it is correctly written.
Wrong
0569 Inna allatheena amanoo waallatheena hadoo waalssabi-oona waalnnasara
0559 Lo! those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Sabaeans and the ChristiansRight
2217 Inna allatheena amanoo waallatheena hadoo waalssabi-eena waalnnasara
2217 Lo! those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Sabaeans and the Christians -
Do they not then meditate on the Quran? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy
-
Albion
The new post of yours has forced me to change my opnion regarding you
I wrote in my previous post "you are an average brain", but actually you are below average.Now you come up with the allegations brought forward by Newton and his Muslim licker Mr. rafiq-ul-Haq; which again have been refuted 100 times by different Islamic scholars including
M AS Abdul Haleem
Moiz Amjad and many others.
Before I go in to detail I would like to share some of my practical experience.
On internet and live, often I come across having debates with different persons having different believes and religons, but one thing I found common in them is; When logically they feel loosing the debate, when their arguments become weak, they shift there cannons towards the grammatical and spelling mistakes in my wrtings and speach.
This fact alone is enough to explain how irritate they are when they find no errors in Quran and think by attacking grammar they can achieve some thing.The Qur'an being one of the major source materials of the grammarians' works can obviously not be judged on the basis of the grammarians' work. Trying to do so would actually be like trying to find faults in in the Universe on the basis of the books written by astronomers.
As is clear from the cited argument, newton has tried to establish that the two verses of the Qur'an 2 62 and 22 17, are themselves an evidence that the word in the above verse should have been "Saabi'iina" rather than "Saabi'uuna". The author, by quoting the two verses (2 62 and 22 17) has, at least, recognized the fact that whoever authored the Qur'an was not unaware of the "correct" declension of the word "saabi'uuna". However, even after recognizing this fact, the author finds no option but to term such a deviation, of even someone who is fully aware of the general rule as an "Error".
Thus, before and after 569 the importance of true belief and good deeds are stressed in spite of any straying, even by the sbi'n, those who return to true belief and good work shall not fear or grieve. The context of 262 and 2217 is quite different from this. Judging from the context of the situation, then, sbi'n in 569 could be said to require highlighting in the way suggested by Zamakhshar, Khall and Sbawaih even the Sbi'n will be forgiven if they believe. . . others will the more readily be forgiven, the Sbi'n being of all the categories listed the most clearly astray. According to this opinion, sbi'n has been singled out by a shift in the case marker for special effect. In this case it would not differ from 2177 and 4162, both of which had been understood as iltift.
For a detailed answer please click on to following link
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Grammar/iltifaat.html
Albion you are just exposing yourself.
ALLAH HO AKBAR
-
I see know one has yet put forward any logical explaination for any of the discrepancies posted so far.
The Next Discrepancy is found in verse 6612 where the masculine phrase "breathed in HIM" is attributed to Mary. Many of the translators have seen the problem and tried to cover it up by changing it to "breathed into HER". Only one translator from those listed below (Sher Ali) was honest enough to quote it correctly as "breathed into HIM"....
Khalifa
6612 "Also Mary, the Amramite. She maintained her chastity, then we blew into HER from our spirit"Shakir
6612 "And Marium, the daughter of Imran, who guarded her chastity, so We breathed into HER of Our inspiration"Sher Ali
6612 "And sets forth as an example Mary, the daughter of Imr?n, who guarded her chastity - so WE breathed into HIM of Our Spirit"Yusuf Ali
6612 "And Mary the daughter of 'Imran, who guarded her chastity; and We breathed into (HER body) of Our spirit"Notice Yusuf Ali saw the problem and tried to overcome it with a bit of trickery and changed it to (her body) in brackets..
Because the words used are Masculine there are two possible variants of the phrase
- "breathed into IT"
- "breathed into HIM"
But "breathed into HER" is out of the question because the words are not feminine.
The translators have seen the problem with "breathed inti IT" and the discrepancy it would cause so ALL have avoided translating the phrase that way.
The translator have also seen the problem with translating it as "breathed into HIM" and have tried various tactics and twisting of the verse to overcome the problem. Only a very few honest translators are game enough to traslate the phrase in the Masluline the way it reads in Arabic..
-
Since Albion doesnot understand logic and is here Just to play the old game, therefore it is over for him.
The Next Discrepancy is found in verse 6612 where the masculine phrase "breathed in HIM" is attributed to Mary.
So could the life be breathed in to some one who is alive????
off course the life was breathed into "Jesus" who was to be born and I guess he was a man!
The life was breathed in to "Jesus" who was "him" and was in the body of "Marry" who was "her". -
You obviously don't know Arabic otherwise you wouldn't be making so many basic mistake ....
"fanafakhna" (breathed into HIM/IT) can ONLY refer to a word that came before it. So the "Him" can ONLY refer back to Mary. Unless "fanafakhna" is translated as "breathed into IT", in which case it refers back to "farja" which is Maries private parts.
Wamaryama ibnata AAimrana allatee ahsanat farjaha fanafakhna
Even ALL the translators new that one roll
Nice try, but try again...
.......
-
There seems no need
True there is no need because not even translators who know Arabic well could overcome the discrepancy without changing the Arabic text. The best they could do was to try the magic trick of replacing "breathed into Him/It" with "breathed into Her".
First you tried the tricky of adding the words "their Mothers" to 43 when no such words appear in the Arabic text.
f you deem it best for the orphans, you may marry their mothers "
Then you ignore all Arabic Grammar rules to try and overcome the discrepancy in 6612...
The discrepancy is still there and will remain, along with all the others..
-
The Next discrepancy is in 2177 where the past tense is wrongly used for four words. The verse begins in the present tense (turn) but then changes to the past tense for the four underlined words.
All translators have seen the problem and have changed the words to the present tense, but the error is still there no matter how much they try to cover it up
2177 "It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteous is he who believed (amana ) in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets; and gave (waata) wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and to those who ask, and to set slaves free; and observed (aqama) proper worship and paid (waata) the poor-due"
2177 "Laysa albirra an tuwalloo wujoohakum qibala almashriqi waalmaghribi walakinna albirra man amana biAllahi waalyawmi al-akhiri waalmala-ikati waalkitabi waalnnabiyyeena waata almala AAala hubbihi thawee alqurba waalyatama waalmasakeena waibna alssabeeli waalssa-ileena wafee alrriqabi waaqama alssalata waata alzzakata"
When it is translated the way it reads in the Arabic text, it makes no seen what soever.
"the righteous is he who believed" ?
-
Do they not then meditate on the Quran? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy
-
Some words from an Ex-Muslim at
http//apostatesofislam.com/
a cursory look at the Quran reveals that this book is full of errors. Quran is replete with scientific heresies, historic blunders, mathematical mistakes, logical absurdities, grammatical errors and ethical fallacies. It is badly compiled and it contradicts itself. There is nothing intelligent in this book let alone miraculous
Seems he noticed the many discrepancies too
2177 "It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteous is he who believed (amana ) in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets; and gave (waata) wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and to those who ask, and to set slaves free; and observed (aqama) proper worship and paid (waata) the poor-due"
......
-
The next discrepancy is a scientific error (one of many such errors) where the quran says that male sperm is emitted from "between the backbone and the ribs"
"Now let man but think from what he is created! He is created from a drop emitted-Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs"
This is an obvious error to say that sperm comes form in a man's chest/kidney area.
-
The next discrepancy is a contradiction between 7160 and 6146.
In 6146 it says those with Claws/Talon are unlawful to the Children of Israel as food to Eat.
But in 7160 God sent down quail as Food for the Children of Israel to eat
Why is God giving the Children of Israel an Unlawful food to eat ?
7160 "We sent to them manna and quails Eat of the good things We have given you"
6146 "And to those who were Jews We made unlawful all of those who have claws (Thufur), and of oxen and sheep We made unlawful to them the fat of both, except such as was on their backs or the entrails or what was mixed with bones this was a punishment We gave them on account of their rebellion, and We are surely Truthful"
"Thufur" in respect to humans means Nail. But in respect to Animals and Birds "Thufur" means Claw or Talon
Source Arabic-English dictionnary "Al-kamoos Al-Asri"
-
The Next Huge Discrepancy is in 4157 to 4161 where its says the jews were Prohibited Good things that were once lawful to them due to there transgession. And listed among the transgressions is the way the Jews treated Jesus and Mary.
Its easy to see the Problem here because the Jews received no Extra Revelations or Prohibitions after the time of Jesus. The Jewish food laws for example were given 1000 years early in the time of Moses.
4155 "Because of their breaking of their covenant, and their disbelieving in the revelations of Allah"
4156 "Because of their disbelief and of their speaking against Mary a tremendous calumny"
4157 "And for claiming that they killed the Messiah... "
4160 "Because of the wrongdoing of the Jews We forbade them good things which were (before) made lawful unto them, and because of their much hindering from Allah's way,"
Apparently the jEws also took Usury when forbidden as stated in 4161..
4161 "And of their taking usury when they were forbidden it"
But how could they take usury when they received NO extra commandments or Revelations after the time of Jesus.
.....