Contradictions and inconsistencies in the quran?

mquran

Salaam to you, Danish,

Some questions if you please vis-a-vis your statement My views towards Quran has recently evolved to the point that it is an excellent read and yes it carries much wisdom, but only to the point of MAN'S WORKS and not GOD'S WORDS. With that said and man being fallible, I do see some problems. That's all.

What problems do you see with al-quraan?
Is it possible that these problems, instead of being 'real', exist to your limited understanding of al-quraan itself?
How do you classify something as 'man's works' ? If X claims to be from God, what is your criteria to reject this assertion and classify it as man's work?
What should a book of God's words be like ?

thank you for your attention.

unknownuser

Salam brother agentxxx

Let me take them in order and try to respond to the ones I haven?t resond to yet inshaallah, I will respond to the Noah's one

NOAH
2176. And Noah, when he cried of old, We heard his prayer and SAVED HIM AND HIS HOUSEHOLD from the great affliction.

And it sailed with them amid waves like mountains, and Noah cried unto his son - and he was standing aloof - O my son! Come ride with us, and be not with the disbelievers.
He said I shall betake me to some mountain that will save me from the water. (Noah) said This day there is none that saveth from the commandment of Allah save him on whom He hath had mercy. And the wave came in between them, SO HE WAS AMONG THE DROWNED.

The enemy of Islam think that when Allah said in 2176 about Noah ?And Noah, when he cried of old, We heard his prayer and SAVED HIM AND HIS HOUSEHOLD from the great affliction?, which suggest that Noah and his family were saved, is contradicting 1143 where Allah said that Noah?s son was NOT saved but drowned ?He hath had mercy. And the wave came in between them, SO HE WAS AMONG THE DROWNED?

Let me bring the Arabic verse again so I can follow the above

(76)

-> In 2176 we read that Noah and his family ? ?, pronounced ?Wa Ahlahu? were saved from ? the great affliction?, but hold on, did the verse said ? ALL HIS FAMILY??, of course it didn?t, also if I say ?Me and my family?, would that mean every bloody member in my family?, it might be but again it may be NOT, UNLESS I SAY ?ME AND EVERY MEMBER OF MY FAMILY?

In 1143 we know that his son drowned, but the blind could not see that Allah excluded his son earlier, here it is in 1140

Until when Our command came and water came forth from the valley, We said Carry in it two of all things, a pair, and your own family?except those against whom the word has already gone forth, and those who believe. And there believed not with him but a few.

(40)

-> See how they delebrtly never mention 1140 in their so called contradiction? Because Allah simple is telling Noah ? ?, ?Wa Ahlaka Ila Mn Sabaqa Alaihi Al Qawl?, i.e. ? and your own family?except those against whom the word has already gone forth?, IS CLEARLY EXCLUDING FROM HIS FAMILY WHOM THE WORD HAS ALREADY GONE FORTH., it didn?t directly say that his son will be excluded but at least it was said generally that some of his family will be excluded because the word has already gone forth against them., I?m sure Allah is excluding the ones who didn?t believe in Noah from his family, because Allah said straight after that. He will also save ? and those who believe. And there believed not with him but a few?

The blind also couldn?t see that Noah himself raised the same question with Allah and Allah clearly told Noah that his son WAS NOT ONE OF HIS FAMILY BUT A DISBELIEVER, let?s pick up the story at the final stages of the flood

44 And it was said O earth, swallow down your water, and O cloud, clear away; and the water was made to abate and the affair was decided, and the ark rested on the Judi, and it was said Away with the unjust people.

45 And Nuh cried out to his Lord and said My Lord! surely my son is of my family, and Thy promise is surely true, and Thou art the most just of the judges.

46 He said O Nuh! surely he is not of your family; surely he is (the doer of) other than good deeds, therefore ask not of Me that of which you have no knowledge; surely I admonish you lest you may be of the ignorant

47 He said My Lord! I seek refuge in Thee from asking Thee that of which I have no knowledge; and if Thou shouldst not forgive me and have mercy on me, I should be of the losers.

(44)
(45)
(46)
(47)

What can I say, this one needs a slam dunk before even I elaborate but let me save it for now

-> The flood water has receded ?And it was said O earth, swallow down your water, and O cloud, clear away; and the water was made to abate and the affair was decided, and the ark rested on the Judi, and it was said Away with the unjust people.?

-> Noah cried and raised the same question about his son with Allah ?And Nuh cried out to his Lord and said My Lord! surely my son is of my family, and Thy promise is surely true, and Thou art the most just of the judges.?

-> Allah is explaining to Noah that Noah is wrong because Allah excluded him earlier because HE WAS NOT ONE OF HIS FAMILY (METAPHORICALLY) ? ?, ?Inahu Laisa Min Ahlika?, ?He said O Nuh! surely he is not of your family; surely he is (the doer of) other than good deeds,?, then Allah warned Noah not to ask Him things that he has no knowledge of ?therefore ask not of Me that of which you have no knowledge; surely I admonish you lest you may be of the ignorant?. see how tough was the response? And the clarification from Allah regarding Noah?s son, this response is also for the ignorant who say this is a contradiction.

I hope those ignorant repent as Noah did after realizing his mistake ?He said My Lord! I seek refuge in Thee from asking Thee that of which I have no knowledge; and if Thou shouldst not forgive me and have mercy on me, I should be of the losers.?

And finally slam dunked, it?s getting boring

Salam

unknownuser

Mate, please don't play the english language game with me, i'm not that native in english, i have to say i could not understand perfectly what you meant by the above statement,

Even natives in the english language will have a hard time reading that statement bro. It's not constructed accurately, maybe to add some level of 'witticism'?!? To clarify, I think they are trying to say-

'If I was to spot your fallacy, then your statement in bold along with the statement that you made previously in the same post, may reverse the proverbial "sticks to snakes". (Insert more 'wit' here)'.

This is not saying much at all unless they try.

Thanks for your go at it sister, but I'm still confused, if he spot a fallacy on my side then why he is not exposing it?, i will not show mercy if I sense fallacy from anyone indeed ) i think Danish is talking about Moses story somehow ???

Peace

unknownuser

Ahmed bro, please understand that people can accuse and vent out all they want (bears no effect on me)

nor it bears any effect on myself

and I am very much aware of their own lamented yet slippery and deceptive minds barging in and supporting others

and myself is also aware

with all sorts of fatwahs to incite belligerency and hostility.

now here I have a problem, what the hell is belligerency?, sounds like pregnancy to me, are they from the same ROOT?, as well what fatwahs has to do with the quran contradiction exactly?, is responding to an alleged quran contradiction is a fatwah?

My views towards Quran has recently evolved to the point that it is an excellent read and yes it carries much wisdom,

of course it is, because it is from Allah not from a bunch of humans, it also took me years to realize its wisdom and superiority it is a time based sort of thing

but only to the point of MAN'S WORKS and not GOD'S WORDS.

that is a puzzle man, it can also be a typo, look it seems to me sort of you are comparing two things

MAN'S WORKS & GOD'S WORDS

well i can't see any sort of comaprison here unless the K is a D or the D is a K

but I see a relationship between the above two as is, this relation is simply MAN'S WORKS will be best if the man follows GOD'S WORDS

With that said and man being fallible, I do see some problems. That's all.

of course a man is fallible that is why for the BEST MAN"S WORKS we need GOD'S WORDS, "the perfect relationship between the fallible man and the perfect God"

Now coming to the "spotlight", I will have you concentrate on the red marked portions of agentxxx's concern rather than your etymological exegesis. We'll get to my previous unanswered post, no problem there. As a matter of fact, I found more stuff to it.

can't you just be bloody straighforward and show everypne how stupid i'm?

cheers

unknownuser

Peace mquran. If you dont mind,i will answer your questions too.

The problems are; literal undestandings being contradictory,harmful and not totally relevant to todays society. Incompleteness of the book. ( eg how do we implement 'simple' salat just from the book?..never mind a complete,peaceful political system.) Different versions of the book. Almost Impossible to verify/apply some simple passages literally because of conflicting historical reports about the context and circumstances of the verses. The book is sometimes unclear/obscure. The book cannot be totally understood clearly just by self-reference.(this last point is impossible to achieve by any book,all books need some reference from outside sources,otherwise you cant verify or compare it to anything to see if it is true,i made this last point to show the 'fallacy' of complete internal self-reference.)
It is possible some of the 'problems' occur because of my misunderstandings,but not probable or possible that all of these problems can be blamed on every readers limited knowledge.(is there a reader with unlimited knowledge?)
I would classify knowledge as being 'a mans work',when an open-minded reader continually cannot understand the relevance of certain passages,and cannot apply the simple verses that ask you to do certain duties(eg salat or zakat,etc...),even when asking/referring to others well-versed in life and the book. In other words totally failing to see what the book is saying or portraying in the so-called simple,clear,decisive(or muhkamat.) verses of the book. A mans work would also contain clearly incomplete or time/context based knowledge,as well as contradictions.

4)A book (not necessarily a physical one,but intrinsic to the soul or person,ie an internal book.) from god should be easily or eventually grasped by the sincere seeker. (and even partly understood by the insincere,non-seeker.) It should contain a solution or plan for every single situation any individual person faces,without exception. It should be available to all manking regardless of language,intellectual level,beliefs,age etc.. It should also be completely in tune with nature and the universe and 100% verifiable by all people.(even if they try to distort it,or dont want to follow it.) You should be able to verify any knowledge that comes to you(eventually.) with this 'book' or 'true criterion'.

The good news is that this 'divine book' already exists,always existed,and always will exist,and be available to all people,if they want it...
This book is your OWN UNIQUE DIVINE HEART... Your CONSCIENCE... View all knowledge/experiences through its genuine 'filter' and see how peaceful and enlightened you can be...This heart can grow if you feed it good deeds,or shrink if you feed it bad deeds...This 'heart' knows 'instinctively' what is 'good' or 'bad' for itself and others...Use it or 'lose' yourself... Happy feeding...
Peace all.

viartualeye

The problems are; literal undestandings being contradictory,harmful and not totally relevant to todays society. Incompleteness of the book. ( eg how do we implement 'simple' salat just from the book?..never mind a complete,peaceful political system.)

So you think,,,Allah put all people in astray for 1000 years and you now are the right people to find a new innovation that salat was actually not prayer. After completing his Deen, Allah put all people to astray for 1000 years?
These stupid people also have to change all the meanings of quran to avoid prayer,,,,such as masjid and qibla.

Do you have any historical evidences that prayer was actually not offered before in the age of prophet and it suddenly started??
And we were certainly dependant on the people of our history to transfer the MESSAGE. Otherwise you did not find the quran revelated to you... It was printed and transfered to you by those people who used to offer prayer 5 times a day.

Also there is a mentioning in quran about 5 times prayer....Does that mean we implement policical system 5 times a day?

Come on!....dont give some stupid reason now.

mquran

Peace mquran. If you dont mind,i will answer your questions too.

I don't mind at all. What is deplorable is your tactic of moving on without acknowledging that you were wrong. Your study of the Quran is at best, superficial (I say this because I have been with people whose deep understandings of the Book has shown that the book when properly understood, is what it says it is) and I will prove it to you below.

The problems are; literal undestandings being contradictory

The contradictions you mentioned have been answered. Your lack of acknowledgement of them shows that you're unwilling to accept EVEN WHEN al-quraan clearly shows otherwise. You're not an 'open-minded, unbiased' person that you think you are. In reality, you have a bigotry towards the book but its good to talk to you to increase faith.

,harmful and not totally relevant to todays society.

Nice rhetoric, but can you give an example of harmfulness and tell me BY WHICH CRITERIA (i've asked Elke and Ichepren this) do you deem it 'not totally relevent'

Incompleteness of the book. ( eg how do we implement 'simple' salat just from the book?..never mind a complete,peaceful political system.)

The fact that you mention 'salaat' and 'peaceful political system' as examples shows how well you've grasped the book.

Different versions of the book.

What VERSIONS? You think Hafs and Warsh are VERSIONS of al-quraan????

Almost Impossible to verify/apply some simple passages literally because of conflicting historical reports about the context and circumstances of the verses.

Funnily, the 'conflicting historical reports' are deemed to be credible enough to challenge al-quraan. Do you see how biased you are ?

Does al-quraan say it should be judged via history?

The book is sometimes unclear/obscure.
Full of 'far-fetched meanings', yes I remember.

The book cannot be totally understood clearly just by self-reference.(this last point is impossible to achieve by any book,all books need some reference from outside sources,otherwise you cant verify or compare it to anything to see if it is true,i made this last point to show the 'fallacy' of complete internal self-reference.)

Can you point to me where the book enjoins understanding 'just by self-reference' ?

If you think the book enjoins total self-reference, then this only shows the extent of your reading. Seriously, why do you continue to waste the time of others on this forum when you so clearly have not read al-quraan except perhaps a casual read during your morning expulsion? It's really shameful.

It is possible some of the 'problems' occur because of my misunderstandings,but not probable or possible that all of these problems can be blamed on every readers limited knowledge.(is there a reader with unlimited knowledge?)

No there isn't but that is why the book calls for a constant increase of ilm (20/114) as ilm is to give more and more detail to the book (41/3)

I would classify knowledge as being 'a mans work',when an open-minded reader continually cannot understand the relevance of certain passages,and cannot apply the simple verses that ask you to do certain duties(eg salat or zakat,etc...),even when asking/referring to others well-versed in life and the book. In other words totally failing to see what the book is saying or portraying in the so-called simple,clear,decisive(or muhkamat.) verses of the book. A mans work would also contain clearly incomplete or time/context based knowledge,as well as contradictions.

Who is this 'open-minded reader' ? YOU ? Who thinks al-quraan proposes it be understood 'JUST BY SELF-REFERENCE'?

Question do you deem yourself informed enough to make a judgement about al-quraan ?

4)A book (not necessarily a physical one,but intrinsic to the soul or person,ie an internal book.) from god should be easily or eventually grasped by the sincere seeker. (and even partly understood by the insincere,non-seeker.) It should contain a solution or plan for every single situation any individual person faces,without exception. It should be available to all manking regardless of language,intellectual level,beliefs,age etc.. It should also be completely in tune with nature and the universe and 100% verifiable by all people.(even if they try to distort it,or dont want to follow it.) You should be able to verify any knowledge that comes to you(eventually.) with this 'book' or 'true criterion'.

Right, and so every man can bring forward his view and say 'God told me this'. Guess what, some guy already did....

Enquirer, do some more reading, please. So far, the tools with which you choose to engage al-quraan are poor. You have notions about al-quraan which it itself doesnt acknowledge. Is the only way for you to critique al-quraan is by projecting false assumptions about it? Reading a translation (probably by NJ Dawood or someone of that ilk) and coming and saying 'you dont get salaat' is a real ill-equipped way to attack al-quraan. I await your answers to my questions above.

unknownuser

Peace mquran.Just to clarify... I read the quran in arabic,and i have studied it on and off for about 25 years...The last 7-8 years, very intensely at times.I have also been through 'nearly' all the posts in free-minds,some in submission.org,tolu islam,dr shabbirs forum,i have read translations,interpretations and opinions of dozens of authors,as well as talking to 'quran only' and traditional muslims for 25 years also.
I have also studied hinduism,buddhism,taoism,confuicism,new age spirituality,greek philosophy,philosophy,mysticism,paranormal,science,red indian spirituality,indigenous religions,atheism,agnosticism,polytheism,pantheism,panentheism,scientology,wicca.etc,etc...and most importantly life...And im still studying... If the quran helps you or anyone else,thats fine,i took a lot of benefit from it too...But im not going to deny other sources,or claim its superior to everything else,or complete in itself,or the only criterion,or a 'literalistically written,dogmatic,unverified' idol. Im not too worried about defending my' beliefs',or refuting your beliefs...but i am concerned about deflecting,defusing and defending against 'harmful' 'immoral' beliefs/behaviour from any source...Be they from quran,'democratic' governments,science,the bible,atheism,peoples opinions or even myself...
Peace all.

bmbmm

Salam,

I do not find anything bad or contradictory in the Quran. Whats bad is the twisted understanding of human mind ;D.

Peace

unknownuser

Peace bmbmm.As a scientist can you 100% prove or verify every verse in the quran?
If not,then its your 'faith' in some 'correct' verses that makes you think the whole book is correct,yes? Thats fine...But do you agree that a lot of 'backward',immoral thinking has come from its interpretations?...And do i have to follow it 'literally' to be successful? If so please tell me how to establish 'salat' or go to hajj etc...
If i cant follow half of the book because we cant agree or understand the verses how can the whole book be totally useful or verified? As a scientist can you say all science has to be verified by the quran? If so,is every scientific discovery already in the supposedly 'complete' quran?
Peace all. Ps;i do agree some great morals and knowledge can be found in some of the quran,especially if taken metaphorically.

Navid

Peace

Enquirer, do you not see my posts? It seems you are the one that avoids posts that refute your claims, and then you go on to insult.

Peace all. Whoever wants to say im avoiding this or that or whatever... well thats fine,thats your opinions... I have posted the contradictions,and if i see anybody refute them properly then i will discuss or accept their findings. I reserve the right to discuss with people i want to...No compulsion in the deen hey. Wink

So you claim something, then when someone wants to discuss it with you, and you don't like what they said, you can just decide not to discuss it with them, correct?

You say you're open-minded - now tell me, is the above quote really open-mindedness?

Are you really here to discuss things? Please, be honest with yourself.

Once again, I kindly posted about the topic you brought forth - 262 and 569 being in opposition with 319 and 385. I will quote again.

Peace all

I'd like to talk about 262 and 569 being 'in opposition' with 319 and 385, as enquirer mentioned.

Absolutely, these are not in opposition with each other. In fact, arranging them together is a very good idea.

Since enquirer failed to even bring forth the actual verses, I'll post the literal translation. Let's look at 262 and 385

That those who believed and those who repented/guided/Jews , and the Christians and the Sabians/converts , who believed with God and the Day the Last/Resurrection Day, and made/did correct/righteous deeds, so for them their reward (is) at their lord, and no fear/fright on them, and nor they be sad/grieving.

And who desires/wishes other than the Islam/submission/surrender (as) a religion, so (it) will never/not be accepted from him, and he (is) in the end from the losers.

Looking at 385, we can ask "What is considered Submission? What do I need to do to be a Submitter?"

And 262 clarifies that; to be a Submitter, one must

Believe in God
Believe in Resurrection Day
Do righteous deeds

So the Christians, Jews, etc. who believe in God, Resurrection Day, and do righteous deeds, are indeed Submitters. The same goes for 319 and 569. It is that simple.

It's amazing how to one person, these two verses are 'in opposition with each other'; while to another person who is sincere to the Qur'an, one verse helps clarify the other.

Enquirer, I'd greatly appreciate you engaging in an actual discussion with me about this. I'd be very happy to do so. From what I've seen so far, you have claimed something, then when someone wanted to discuss your claim, you avoided it and insulted them. It seems you aren't here for discussion; but perhaps for other reasons. Huh

God willing, you'll actually start discussing. After all, this is a forum.

Peace

I don't see what's holding you back from responding.
You claimed something.
I responded.
You - for some reason - avoided, insulted, and said "if i see anybody refute them properly then i will discuss or accept their findings. I reserve the right to discuss with people i want to"

An open mind, indeed. -\

If you were actually open-minded and actually wanted to have a discussion, you would have done so by now. Oh well.

I'll be waiting for your next insult.

Peace for now.

bmbmm

Salam eq,

The Quran is not a scientific book, there are some scientific facts in it, however. I think salat is the contact, commitment and hajj in debate/consultation, according to my understanding. We just need to apply logic to the Quran and things gets clear ;D

arnoldyasin

Peace,

It is science.........science on the truth........So that includes phenomena in nature, societies and individuals......Quran is the most pure science i have ever come across..

agentxxx

Peace brother Ahmed,

The other person wrote

Peace AB,

Quote from AhmedBahgat
I found it very strange that you just keep posting masses of alleged contradictions without responding to the others who tried to help you out, at least say anything that indicate that you read it, anyway it is up to you to read it or not

This is what happens when the other person...
(a) had no intention of learning or finding out the truth
(b) had a previous agenda (note one of my first posts to him was asking this very question)
(c) is here to preach his own religion or lack of
(d) all of the above.

This is the common psyche of the person who..
Thinks only he has found the truth
Has a fix agenda of a narrow-minded approach
Thinks he is all-knowing
Is among those in the below

Have you not considered THOSE WHO ATTRIBUTE PURITY TO THEMSELVES? Nay, ALLAH PURIFIES WHOM HE PLEASES; 449.

The other person wrote

I commend your patience and perseverance to still answer the "contradictions" in detail, knowing they will not be addressed and that the other party will still claim you posted "nothing".

I too commend your patience and perseverance in answering the ?contradictions in detail.

Peace .

agentxxx

peace brother Ahmed,

you wrote

found it very strange that you just keep posting masses of alleged contradictions without responding to the others who tried to help you out, at least say anything that indicate that you read it,

My reason for not responding

Sister s-c- Did u read my previous post?
YES I HAVE READ IT NOW, thank you very much for taking time to explain sis
ITS ALMOST 330 IN THE MORNING, brother Ahmed just got up, good morning bro and have a nice day. as for me I THINK ITS BETTER TO GO TO SLEEP BEFORE I AGAIN MIX UP REPLIES
bye.
God bless you sis,
peace.

I hope now you understand why I didn?t responded and if you look at the time these replies were posted there is a difference of 10 minutes only and the reply of sis s-c has couple of links which I couldn?t read at that time.

Also when the discussion becomes emotions and brothers and sisters start calling each other ?the enemy of God? ?The enemy of the Quran? ?the enemy of islam? or doubt your beliefs/intentions what is there to discuss?

brother Ahmed wrote

anyway it is up to you to read it or not, but please be aware that you are contributing indirectly to a SICK PROPAGANDA AGAINST YOUR RELIGION that you should be proud of, I?m not saying that you should not raise any concerns, in fact I encourage you to do, BUT THE WAY YOU ARE DOING IT IS NO DIFFERENT TO THE ENEMY OF YOUR RELIGION, I just thought I mention that to you as a brother, now I hate responding to masses of alleged Quran contradictions in one comment, this is silly indeed and only causes confusion and requires a lot of work, so I chose one of the alleged contradictions in your last comment to sister Nadia and will respond to it, of course I chose the easiest one that raised my eye brow which I responded to over a year ago somewhere but could not find my comment

Bro if you had read my post to sis s-c, you would have known the reason why I posted these alleged contras, and they are all over the net bro, ALL OVER THE NET? But even then because I have ABSOLUTELY NO INTENTION TO HURT THE FEELING OF OTHERS or to be associated with the enemies of my religion etc, so I have deleted both my posts.

this will give you a clear picture why i posted those alleged contras

Quote from agent
Absolutely right but on the opposite side when the desires/emotions creep in, along with the blind belief! This is a perfect book, that?s when things start messing up too.

SISTER Savage-Carrot -ALL I ASK IS TO BRING THE 'WHY IT ISN'T' OUT INTO THE OPEN SO THAT WE CALL CAN LEARN. IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO CALL SOMETHING IMPERFECT AND NOT BRING THE EVIDENCE TO BE DISCUSSED?

agentxxx-I have already posted some of these before but wasn?t satisfied with the explanations, so may be you can help me? also I don?t want to debate these issues, one of the reason of this post is to let you know what makes me skeptical?

Last, all I want to say on this thread is, we all have our own reasons to believe or disbelieve. People who think the book is perfect have theirs own understanding and reasons. People who are skeptical or People who are traditional/orthodox believers have their own understanding and reasons. Every sect, every individual believes in WHAT HE/SHE UNDERSTANDS IS RIGHT, and all have a right to do so, as ONLY THEY HAVE TO ANSWER FOR THEIR DEEDS to the almighty and not any other person.

I respect my religion but not the absurdities in it.

And follow the best that has been revealed to you from your Lord before there comes to you the punishment all of a sudden while you do not even perceive;

I try to follow what i believe is the best and that according to my understanding is the excellent code of ethics in the book and nothing else.

enquirer wrote

'Who said anything against quran? The problem with some people here is that whenever a question is asked regarding the quran THAT THEY DONT HAVE AN ANSWER TO,or that the obvious answer(not necessarily right.) might make the quran look bad, THEY BECOME DEFENSIVE AND EMOTIONAL. If we want to truly learn from the quran,we need to learn to criticize it,and uphold its teachings on rational thought. Questioning the content of the quran or its authenticity is not wrong. Questioning leads to answers.'

Absolutely Right brother and still wants to be called free minds progressive muslims ??

God bless you all,
peace.

TheNabi

Peace Enquirer

i am concerned about deflecting,defusing and defending against 'harmful' 'immoral' beliefs/behaviour from any source

I have mentioned before that you are a dabbler in many things and therefore have no concrete knowledge of the basis of these many things. You say you study Buddhism, but recently you had no knowledge of it's basic tenents and I think I can say that of many another systems you claim that you are a student of.

What I really wanted to address however was your mention of harmful behavior. I'd suggest you start with yourself because your dabblings and misunderstandings have led you to uninformed conclusions.

Joe

Fahad1

Peace

Enquirer, do you not see my posts? It seems you are the one that avoids posts that refute your claims, and then you go on to insult.

Peace all. Whoever wants to say im avoiding this or that or whatever... well thats fine,thats your opinions... I have posted the contradictions,and if i see anybody refute them properly then i will discuss or accept their findings. I reserve the right to discuss with people i want to...No compulsion in the deen hey. Wink

So you claim something, then when someone wants to discuss it with you, and you don't like what they said, you can just decide not to discuss it with them, correct?

he wants to 'discuss' only with those who , he thinks , cant refute his claims .

Fahad1

Peace darbari. ok,you say these sunnat of allah are specific to just those verses,so i wont discuss that with you...

me say ?! i showed u the verses . thats what the verses are saying . do u agree with my explanation or not ? finish this one first , so we can move on .

(im sure many 'quran only' would disagree,and it would be nice of them to explain the verses if they think/agree that allah does not ever change his sunnat or laws.)

huh?! still insisting ? can u quote or give reference to any other such verses ?

Ok,then explain those list of strange literal occurences like a stick turning into a snake,virgin birth etc,etc...
Most especially what does sujood to adam mean when you should only do sujood to allah alone? Any takers?...

first, list your favourite "contradictions" together please . it would be better to post them in the original post of this thread .

unknownuser

peace brother Ahmed,

Good morning mate

you wrote

found it very strange that you just keep posting masses of alleged contradictions without responding to the others who tried to help you out, at least say anything that indicate that you read it,

My reason for not responding

Sister s-c- Did u read my previous post?
YES I HAVE READ IT NOW, thank you very much for taking time to explain sis
ITS ALMOST 330 IN THE MORNING, brother Ahmed just got up, good morning bro and have a nice day. as for me I THINK ITS BETTER TO GO TO SLEEP BEFORE I AGAIN MIX UP REPLIES
bye.
God bless you sis,
peace.

I hope now you understand why I didn?t responded and if you look at the time these replies were posted there is a difference of 10 minutes only and the reply of sis s-c has couple of links which I couldn?t read at that time.

Ok bro, sorry about that

Also when the discussion becomes emotions and brothers and sisters start calling each other ?the enemy of God? ?The enemy of the Quran? ?the enemy of islam? or doubt your beliefs/intentions what is there to discuss?

Well, I call the ones who clearly show the symptoms like enquirer for example, he is challenging Allah by insisting that the Quran is not His work, He also trying hard to lead Muslims astray by telling them to follow they conscience and not follow the Quran, and that is enough for me to call him the enemy of God, the enemy of the Quran and the enemy of Islam, it is not an insult though because simply I?m an enemy to him too, but I guess I should be called the enemy of atheism

Bro if you had read my post to sis s-c, you would have known the reason why I posted these alleged contras, and they are all over the net bro, ALL OVER THE NET? But even then because I have ABSOLUTELY NO INTENTION TO HURT THE FEELING OF OTHERS

I know they are all over the net so you want the alleged contradoictions to be documented in here too?

or to be associated with the enemies of my religion etc, so I have deleted both my posts.

well, I didn?t associate you with any enemy, I only told you that the way you are posting masses of alleged contradictions is no different to their confusing way that only constitute a propaganda

this will give you a clear picture why i posted those alleged contras

Quote from agent
Absolutely right but on the opposite side when the desires/emotions creep in, along with the blind belief! This is a perfect book, that?s when things start messing up too.

SISTER Savage-Carrot -ALL I ASK IS TO BRING THE 'WHY IT ISN'T' OUT INTO THE OPEN SO THAT WE CALL CAN LEARN. IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO CALL SOMETHING IMPERFECT AND NOT BRING THE EVIDENCE TO BE DISCUSSED?

agentxxx-I have already posted some of these before but wasn?t satisfied with the explanations, so may be you can help me? also I don?t want to debate these issues, one of the reason of this post is to let you know what makes me skeptical?

Ok bro but I just wanted any sort of proper feed back because doing it with you is not a debate unlike doing it with others that I consider enemies to my religion

Last, all I want to say on this thread is, we all have our own reasons to believe or disbelieve. People who think the book is perfect have theirs own understanding and reasons. People who are skeptical or People who are traditional/orthodox believers have their own understanding and reasons.

I agree, but when questions are raised between these parties, I?m sure problems will arise

Every sect, every individual believes in WHAT HE/SHE UNDERSTANDS IS RIGHT, and all have a right to do so, as ONLY THEY HAVE TO ANSWER FOR THEIR DEEDS to the almighty and not any other person.

No question about that, it is called freewill and Judgment

I respect my religion but not the absurdities in it.

sure, me too, but I could not see any absurdities in the Quran I only saw this within the Muslims and in in the Hadith, the Quran is perfect and has no absurdities

And follow the best that has been revealed to you from your Lord before there comes to you the punishment all of a sudden while you do not even perceive;

but 3955 does not mean that the Quran has any absurdities

I try to follow what i believe is the best and that according to my understanding is the excellent code of ethics in the book and nothing else.

sure but you are criticising the book at the same time and you are thinking that there are some content that is absurd

enquirer wrote

'Who said anything against quran? The problem with some people here is that whenever a question is asked regarding the quran THAT THEY DONT HAVE AN ANSWER TO,or that the obvious answer(not necessarily right.) might make the quran look bad, THEY BECOME DEFENSIVE AND EMOTIONAL. If we want to truly learn from the quran,we need to learn to criticize it,and uphold its teachings on rational thought. Questioning the content of the quran or its authenticity is not wrong. Questioning leads to answers.'
Absolutely Right brother and still wants to be called free minds progressive muslims ??

God bless you all,
peace.

Bro the comment by enq is utter BS, if someone come and tell me the quran has mistakes, I have the following options

regardless of who that person is, I have to defend the allegation by dialogue, (defensive)
bash the s*** out of him and act like a terrorist (offensive)
ignore and walk away (defenceless)

So why being defensive (defending the Quran) is a shame?

Unless you guys want us defenceless?

Salam

unknownuser

Peace nabi,ab,darbari and all. Nabi;to be frank you have no idea about me,so you are just making vague assumptions,and as for harmful behaviour...,where?...your posts are sometimes vague and exude a superiority complex... And whats harmful about pointing out inconsistencies in the 'literal' interpretations...or do you believe sticks turn into snakes,or hands should be chopped of nowadays.?..(careful with 17;36 .)

Darbari;You have only explained your opinions of the verses,you havent refuted anything of the literal translations..You havent even answered many of my stated contradictions..but thats fine,you probably cant.

Ab;your interpretations are some of the most harmful on the forum,but i know you only answer to god (or your opinions) ,so i hope your 'god' wakes you up,but you will have to actually use your own mind more...
Peace all. Ps;nice try guys,but no cigar...try be more 'objectice' and less defensive and emotional.