Let's say much of Islam and Quran is "bad" even then...

[Islam_mulia]

Actually I could at least consider it as a working hypothesis. There is nothing historically strange about it. After all:

1. Islam is younger than Christianity
2. Large part of Qur'an is based on the Bible and other Christian literature
3. Christians lived in that time in that place

You are saying it is possible that Christians wrote the Quran when the Quran says
(i) Jesus was NOT crucified
(ii) Jesus was a slave of God and Not the son of god
(iii) not to associate anything or anyone with God

You will then have Applepie changing the verses and words of the Quran to say otherwise. We went through this before and I do not wish to continue with this argument.

However, if you wish to make the same stand as Applepie, I am willing to discuss with you alone.

So, what is strange about that? The New Testament was written, at least in great part, by Jews.

Jews who followed the teachings of Christ will more likely wrote things that glorify Christ and his techings. If follows that if Christians wrote the Quran, they would not wrote about Jesus denying being divine or that Jesus was not crucified.

What do you mean? Did he change the Arabic text? I sincerely doubt that unless he had any manuscript evidence to back that up.

Applepie does not read or speak Arabic. He only used some lexicons to change the words to suit his purpose. I leave it to you to read and judge by yourself.

I expressed a doubt. The fact that I do not know the answer to a question does not make your answer automatically correct. It could be, but you would need some supporting evidence.

I do not expect you to automatically agreed with the date. If you think the date is not correct, give me another date.

Concerning (i) you have provided no evidence for that. Concerning Sana'a, thanks for the information. I will have to read about it. Of course if (ii) is correct, then you are correct about (i)

The inscriptions on the Dome of the Rock can be found in the Quran. You can also check with other ancient manuscripts of the Quran.

 

[alhamdullilah]

So, some parts of the Bible you believe and some parts you do not. Why do you not grant me the same privilege? Some parts of the Qur'an I believe and some I do not.

I would be especially suspicious of a statement in Arabic that affirms that the book it is part of was in Arabic. Why would some one make such a statement? Obviously because some accusations were made.

The same with the verse from the 2nd Letter of Peter that I quoted on purpose. Why is the author stating that the New Testament stories are not myth? Obviously because the accusation was made. Was it a valid accusation? Maybe yes, maybe not. In any case you would not take the statement from the Bible at face value, i suppose. I hope you see the parallelism.

Nope I don't.
Allah stated that it is revealed in arabic. There is no connection with the aramaic or whatever nonsense.

 

[alhamdullilah]

I spent some time reading the older posts by ApplePie7 and their responses. I did not see that he was refuted. What I saw was the posting of translations that were different from his translation. That does not make him wrong, though.

He could be wrong, he could be wright. Just posting different translations does not settle the matter. I am aware of a verse of the Letter to the Hebrews that I am convinced is wrongly translated by all Bible translations.

The only fact that you have shown is that his translations are different from the ones you are used to. They are, to say the least, non-traditional. That does not make them wrong or right.

Then the postings descended into rhetoric with close to no content.

THere is no way that you could have read everything, then you would have seen how many people refute his stupid ideas.

Christians and muslims refute him, I never said that I was the only one that refuted him.

He stated faulty translations, I and some others have given him the right translations from well known scholars, he, up to this day, has never had any backup from any scholar, and has never stated even 1.
He has some translations with wrong arabic, I showed him this, he just ignored them and went on his repeating streak.

There are so many threads by him that have been closed, so many people answered him and shown him where he's wrong. I dont think you have been reading up on his threads. To many pages to quote

 

[alhamdullilah]

You are assuming that you refuted him

When someone tells me that the quran is accually making a reference that nowhere the name Muhammad is mentioned. What I do is show him where it is mentioned, even in the arabic. He just ignores it and says no that is about Jesus.

My refutation has a backup and I shown him where. He answered with something no christian or arab or scholar or whomever, wants to backup.

Im sorry but that is refuting someone. I don't know if you do know the deffinition?

Up to this day he never took up my challenges I have posted.

* I challenged him to debate me in arabic - he ignored it
* I challenged him with some basic arabic grammar - he ignored it

Up to this day he still has not answered. SO yes this is refuting.

 

[ApplePie7]

For being criticized as being ‘so wrong’, just look at the reaction that is elicited from our Muslim brothers by my supposedly incorrect position…

 

[Supreme]

MOD HAT ON

Good grief, another one of these threads. Conversation could flourish here, and it has the potential to. Stay on topic, mind. |Final warning- staff will not hesitate to close thread, clean it up and issue staff actions.

MOD HAT OFF

And speaking as a member, not a mod, I cannot stand much more of these Arabic debates over whether or not the Quran mentions Jesus and stuff. It just gets sooo boring, and is not an ideal conversion method.

 

[alhamdullilah]

For being criticized as being ‘so wrong’, just look at the reaction that is elicited from our Muslim brothers by my supposedly incorrect position…

No, not just for (also) being 'so woring', but also for not answering our questions.

* Remember montalban how many questions he has raised, you have never answered him. and don't try the same reply you always do "what question?" or "show me the questions" or something like that.
* Remember the questions I asked you? How many times I have asked you the question i'm sure you haven't forgot?
* What about all of those challenges raised? Also the simple one from the OP in that other thread?

Just stop insulting my religion and just live your life. Respect others like we do.

 

[ApplePie7]

No, not just for (also) being 'so woring', but also for not answering our questions.

* Remember montalban how many questions he has raised, you have never answered him. and don't try the same reply you always do "what question?" or "show me the questions" or something like that.
* Remember the questions I asked you? How many times I have asked you the question i'm sure you haven't forgot?
* What about all of those challenges raised? Also the simple one from the OP in that other thread?

Just stop insulting my religion and just live your life. Respect others like we do.

Instead of promoting more meritless assertions, why not discuss scripture brother?

 

[alhamdullilah]

Instead of promoting more meritless assertions, why not discuss scripture brother?

I did, I showed you the correct views and translations from each word. You have done none of that.

How come you don't answer my questions or from others? How come you always have to reply with a question?

Are you afraid i will catch you again on some more grammar errors?

 

[ApplePie7]

I did, I showed you the correct views and translations from each word. You have done none of that.

How come you don't answer my questions or from others? How come you always have to reply with a question?

Are you afraid i will catch you again on some more grammar errors?

Your Arabic is simply non-existent, brother...

If you knew Arabic, then you would know that "Muhammad" was never a proper name as used in the Koran...and that it merely applied to Jesus Christ.

 

[alhamdullilah]

Your Arabic is simply non-existent, brother...

If you knew Arabic, then you would know that "Muhammad" was never a proper name as used in the Koran...and that it merely applied to Jesus Christ.

Yeah just go ahead and repeat yourself, just go ahead and ignore my intire post like you always do.

 

[ApplePie7]

Yeah just go ahead and repeat yourself, just go ahead and ignore my intire post like you always do.

Come back when you learn Arabic...

 

[alhamdullilah]

Come back when you learn Arabic...

Ok so we agree, you will come back when you learn arabic.
Thanks

 

[AveRegina]

You are saying it is possible that Christians wrote the Quran when the Quran says
(i) Jesus was NOT crucified
(ii) Jesus was a slave of God and Not the son of god
(iii) not to associate anything or anyone with God

Of course it is possible. These 3 points have precedents in various Christian churches of that time and that place. You should know that by now.

(i) is an old belief among the Gnostics. It can already be seen in texts of the 2nd century.
(ii) has been shown to you already. According to the Ebionites/Nazarenes Jesus was not the son of God.
(iii) See Ebionites/Nazarenes. Both churches have attestations from the 2nd century.

You have read this before several times. This should not be a surprise to you. Summarizing, those 3 beliefs are Christian (albeit heretical according to their opponents) beliefs present in the ANE from the 2nd century onwards.

You will then have Applepie changing the verses and words of the Quran to say otherwise. We went through this before and I do not wish to continue with this argument.

As I have previously written, I did not see any evidence that ApplePie7 changed the text. I thought the disagreement was on the exegesis not about the text.

Jews who followed the teachings of Christ will more likely wrote things that glorify Christ and his techings. If follows that if Christians wrote the Quran, they would not wrote about Jesus denying being divine or that Jesus was not crucified.

Sorry, but the above sentence does not make any sense. I have shown you that the ideas expressed in the Qur'an had correspondences with existing Christian churches.

I do not expect you to automatically agreed with the date. If you think the date is not correct, give me another date.

I actually did not write that the date is not correct. I wrote that 72 could be a symbolic number. It is in the Bible. Maybe it is symbolic, maybe not.

 

[AveRegina]

Nope I don't.
Allah stated that it is revealed in arabic. There is no connection with the aramaic or whatever nonsense.

That reminds me of "the Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it"

That does not appear to be very convincing historically. You can not just accept a text at face value. I showed you that you do not so with the Bible. Neither do I. Why should I do so with any other book?

 

[AveRegina]

THere is no way that you could have read everything, then you would have seen how many people refute his stupid ideas.

Christians and muslims refute him, I never said that I was the only one that refuted him.

He stated faulty translations, I and some others have given him the right translations from well known scholars, he, up to this day, has never had any backup from any scholar, and has never stated even 1.
He has some translations with wrong arabic, I showed him this, he just ignored them and went on his repeating streak.

There are so many threads by him that have been closed, so many people answered him and shown him where he's wrong. I dont think you have been reading up on his threads. To many pages to quote

Oh, I have spend several hours reading the threads. After a while it became tiresome because it descended into rhetoric and name calling. Both sides are guilty. So, I am not singling out anyone.

Your wrote "some translations with wrong Arabic". That does not make any sense. You mean "wrong English"? I know that you disagree on the translation, but I never read that his was shown to be in error. Of course, my Arabic is minimal, so I could have missed a lot. If I have the chance I will show it to a professor of Arabic and get back here.

 

[AveRegina]

When someone tells me that the quran is accually making a reference that nowhere the name Muhammad is mentioned. What I do is show him where it is mentioned, even in the arabic. He just ignores it and says no that is about Jesus.

Sorry, but that is self-contradictory. If ApplePie7 wrote that it "is about Jesus" he did _not_ ignore it. He disagrees, that is different from ignoring.

My refutation has a backup and I shown him where. He answered with something no christian or arab or scholar or whomever, wants to backup.

I think that he gave you a list of scholars that supported his translation. I could be wrong, but that is what I remember. I wish I had time to learn classical Arabic to be able to form my own opinion.

 

[AveRegina]

Applepie does not read or speak Arabic. He only used some lexicons to change the words to suit his purpose. I leave it to you to read and judge by yourself.

This is what worries we about this conversation. You can not get a straight answer! I asked you whether ApplePie7 changed the words in the text of the Qur'an. You do repeat the accusation, but do not answer my simple question.

The use of lexicons or not has NOTHING to do with the text. How can you pretend that someone agrees with you if you refuse to be frank with him?

Anyway, I do not agree with ApplePie7 in at least one part. I do not think that the authors of the Qur'an were all Trinitarian as he states. Maybe some were, but I think that at least some, if not most, were unitarian. Just as in modern Islam.

 

[Catherineanne]

Even if much of Quran and Islam is bad, you can't reject Mohammad on that basis.

I am sorry to say, most Christians do not even get as far as rejecting either Islam, Mohammed or the Koran. We really, honestly, don't give a tinker's cuss about any of it. I imagine the Jews have the same attitude to Christianity. They don't want it, don't need it, and have not rejected it; it is just irrelevant.

I like Moslems (and Jews, for that matter); the people I meet every day. But I have no interest in learning from them why I am necessarily wrong and they are necessarily right. Complete waste of time, on both sides.

 

[Islam_mulia]

You are saying it is possible that Christians wrote the Quran when the Quran says
(i) Jesus was NOT crucified
(ii) Jesus was a slave of God and Not the son of god
(iii) not to associate anything or anyone with God

Of course it is possible. These 3 points have precedents in various Christian churches of that time and that place. You should know that by now.

(i) is an old belief among the Gnostics. It can already be seen in texts of the 2nd century.
(ii) has been shown to you already. According to the Ebionites/Nazarenes Jesus was not the son of God.
(iii) See Ebionites/Nazarenes. Both churches have attestations from the 2nd century.

Which Christian sect would that be, knowing that no one Christian sect would agree to all three points (i) to (iii)?