• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Mohammad in the bible

Discussion in 'Christianity and World Religion' started by habibii zahra, Mar 10, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. GeorgeTwo

    GeorgeTwo Member

    +115
    Methodist
    Private
    Muhammad is not the Servant in Isaiah 42:

    The Servant in Isaiah 42 is the same Servant in the following Scriptures:

    Isaiah 41:8
    Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

    8 But you, Israel, My servant,
    Jacob
    , whom I have chosen,
    descendant of Abraham, My friend—

    Isaiah 42:1-4
    Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)


    42 “This is My Servant; I strengthen Him,
    this is My Chosen One; I delight in Him.
    I have put My Spirit on Him;
    He will bring justice[a] to the nations.
    2 He will not cry out or shout
    or make His voice heard in the streets.
    3 He will not break a bruised reed,
    and He will not put out a smoldering wick;
    He will faithfully bring justice.
    4 He will not grow weak or be discouraged
    until He has established justice on earth.
    The islands will wait for His instruction.”

    Isaiah 44:1-5
    Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)
    Spiritual Blessing

    44 “And now listen, Jacob My servant,
    Israel whom I have chosen.
    2 This is the word of the Lord
    your Maker who formed you from the womb;
    He[a] will help you:
    Do not fear; Jacob is My servant;
    I have chosen Jeshurun.
    3 For I will pour water on the thirsty land
    and streams on the dry ground;
    I will pour out My Spirit on your descendants
    and My blessing on your offspring.
    4 They will sprout among[c] the grass
    like poplars by flowing streams.
    5 This one will say, ‘I am the Lord’s’;
    another will call himself by the name of Jacob;
    still another will write on his hand, ‘The Lord’s,’
    and name himself by the name of Israel.”

    And further:

    Isaiah 44:2
    Thus saith the Lord that made thee and formed thee from the womb, who will help thee: Fear not, O Jacob, My servant, and thou, Jeshurun, whom I have chosen.

    Isaiah 44:21
    “Remember these, O Jacob and Israel, for thou art My servant. I have formed thee; thou art My servant. O Israel, thou shalt not be forgotten by Me.

    Isaiah 49:3
    and said unto Me, ‘Thou art My servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.’

    Isaiah 49:6
    and He said: ‘It is a light thing that Thou shouldest be My servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved of Israel. I will also give Thee for a light to the Gentiles, that Thou mayest be My salvation unto the end of the earth.’”

    Isaiah 52:13
    “Behold, My Servant shall deal prudently, He shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high.

    The mention of Kedar simply means "Kedar" will rejoice at this Servant.

    Do all the Scriptures which mention Kedar refer to Muhammad?

    Isaiah 21:16
    For the Lord said this to me: “Within one year, as a hired worker counts years, all the glory of Kedar will be gone.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  2. habibii zahra

    habibii zahra Well-Known Member

    812
    +92
    Muslim
    Single
    Jesus will come to rescue weak people and to accomplish mercy and justice in the world

    He will come as the savior of jews Christians and Muslims...he will come along with our imam Al-Mahdi ..(Mashiash) in Hebrew and not for the jews only
     
  3. habibii zahra

    habibii zahra Well-Known Member

    812
    +92
    Muslim
    Single
    Where is the problem in being jacob and Israel the servants of god including prophet Mohammad?

    Prophet MOHAMMAD didn’t call us to believe in the Christ?? Thus he is a servant of god

    Didn’t he called us to believe in god in monotheistic religions and in all divine books?? Thus he is a servant of god
     
  4. stuart lawrence

    stuart lawrence Well-Known Member

    +1,581
    Christian
    Single
    This is your problem you see.
    According to Islamic doctrine all fifteen of your major prophets are equal. No prophets words carry more weight than another's. Zechariahs words are as important as mohammads.
    But you refuse to accept what Zechariah wrote. In Islamic doctrine that is as much an error as refusing to accept what Mohammad wrote
     
  5. GeorgeTwo

    GeorgeTwo Member

    +115
    Methodist
    Private
    The Servant in Isaiah 42 is not Muhammad.

    You are reading your own theology back into the text.
     
  6. GeorgeTwo

    GeorgeTwo Member

    +115
    Methodist
    Private
    The Messiah Jesus is the Messiah and savior for all people. He died for everyone who believes and accepts the sacrifice at the cross.

    He will not come back as Muslims say He will.
     
  7. GeorgeTwo

    GeorgeTwo Member

    +115
    Methodist
    Private
    The Qur'an claims to confirm the past revelations -- what was in the hands of Jews and Christians at the time the Qur'an was written -- and this is the Bible we have today since our manuscripts pre-date the Qur'an by several hundred years.
     
  8. GeorgeTwo

    GeorgeTwo Member

    +115
    Methodist
    Private
    Jesus did not say the Torah was the only way to God; He said that He was.

    Acts 4:
    8 Then Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit and said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders:

    12 There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to people, and we must be saved by it.”
     
  9. GeorgeTwo

    GeorgeTwo Member

    +115
    Methodist
    Private
    There are many variants among the vast number of New Testament manuscripts. Most are spelling errors, some are word order, but no variant affects any Christian doctrine. Nothing has been lost.

    The Qur'an on the other hand...


    The Perversion of Qur’an and the Loss of Many Parts of It

    The Perversion of the Qur'an and the Loss of Many Parts of It

    Clips:

    ’Ibn Umar al–Khattab explicitly admits,

    "Let no one of you say that he has acquired the entire Qur’an for how does he know that it is all? Much of the Qur’an has been lost, thus let him say, ‘I have acquired of it what is available"’ (Suyuti: Itqan, part 3, page 72).

    A’isha (also page 72) adds to the story of ibn Umar and says,

    "During the time of the prophet, the chapter of the Parties used to be two hundred verses when read. When Uthman edited the copies of the Qur’an, only the current (verses) were recorded" (73 verses).

    The same statement is made by Ubay ibn Ka’b, one of the great companions. On page 72, part 3, the Suyuti says,

    "This famous companion asked one of the Muslims, ‘How many verses in the chapter of the Parties?’ He said, ‘Seventy-two or seventy-three verses.’ He (Ubay) told him, ‘It used to be almost equal to the chapter of the Cow (about 286 verses) and included the verse of the stoning.’ The man asked, ‘What is the verse of the stoning?’ He said, ‘If an old man or woman committed adultery, stone them to death."’

    Another confession by A’isha:

    "Among the (verses) which were sent down, (the verse) of the ten breast feedings was abrogated by (a verse which calls for five breast feedings. The apostle of God died and this verse was still read as part of the Qur’an. This was related by Abu Bakr and ’Umar" (refer to Suyuti’s qan, part 3, pages 62 and 63).

    In his book (volume 8, part II, pages 235 and 236), Ibn Hazm says plainly,

    "The verses of stoning and breast feeding were in the possession of A’isha in a (Qur’anic) copy. When Muhammad died and people became busy in the burial preparations, a domesticated animal entered in and ate it."

    In part 3, page 73, the Suyuti said,

    "Hamida, the daughter of Abi Yunis, said, ‘When my father was eighty years old, he read in the copy of A’isha, "God and His angels bless (literally pray for) the prophet Oh ye who believe, bless him and those who pray in the first rows." Then she said, "That was before ’Uthman changed the Qur’anic copies.""’

    On page 74, we read,

    "Umar said to ’Abdul-Rahman Ibn ’Oaf, ‘Didn’t you find among the verses that we received one saying, "Strive as you strove at the first?" We do not locate it (any more).’ ’Abdul-Rahman Ibn ’Oaf told him, ‘This verse has been removed among those others which were removed from the Qur’an."’

    If we ponder the first part of "The Itqan", by the Suyuti, we read (page 184),

    "Malik says that several verses from chapter 9 (Sura of Repentance) have been dropped from the beginning. Among them is, ‘In the name of God the compassionate, the Merciful’ because it was proven that the length of Sura of Repentance was equal to the length of the Sura of the Cow."

    This means that this chapter has lost 157 verses. Also (page 184), the Suyuti tells us that the words, "In the name of God the compassionate, the merciful" were found in the chapter of Repentance in the Qur’anic copy which belonged to Ibn Mas’ud which ’Uthman confiscated and burned when the current Qur’an was edited.

    Not only verses have been dropped, but also entire chapters have been abolished from the ’Uthmanic copy which is in the hands of all Muslims today.
     
  10. GeorgeTwo

    GeorgeTwo Member

    +115
    Methodist
    Private
    The Hebrew word for “new song” is shiyr and it always means music or a song. It does not refer to new scriptures, the law or a new book.

    Jesus was sent to all mankind, Jews and Gentiles alike:

    Was Jesus sent ONLY to Israel?


    Muslims seem to think so based on the following two Scriptures


    Matthew 10:5-6 (NIV)
    5These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.

    Matthew 15:24 (NIV)


    "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel."

    but they don’t seen to realize or do not want to admit that Jesus’ mission was to the Jews and the Gentiles alike. In order to understand the scope of Jesus’ mission, we must take all relevant Scriptures into account.

    The Jews needed to hear the Gospel first; they needed to be convinced that Jesus was the fulfillment of God’s promises to them. As one theologian said “If Jesus and his followers had simply begun an indiscriminate mission to the wider world, before God’s purpose had unfolded, they would have made God a liar.” God loves the whole world and intends to save the whole world, including the Gentiles, by fulfilling His promises to Israel and this was accomplished through His Messiah, Jesus.

    It would be wrong to suggest that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels ignored the potential inclusion of the nations in Jesus’ mission. Notice Jesus preformed miracles that involved Gentiles.

    Jesus’ mission was universal:

    Matthew 8:11 (New International Version © 2010)
    11 I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.


    As Jesus said in Luke 24:

    45Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. 46He told them, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

    And as Apostle Peter said:


    Acts 3:25-26 (New International Version)
    25And you are heirs of the prophets and of the covenant God made with your fathers. He said to Abraham, 'Through your offspring all peoples on earth will be blessed.'[a] 26When God raised up his servant, he sent him first to you to bless you by turning each of you from your wicked ways."

    Jesus concentrated primarily on the Jews during His time on earth, but after He rose from the dead, He said:

    Acts 1:8 (New International Version)
    8But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."

    Matthew 28: 19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations,

    Jesus anticipated that the Gentiles were to be included in His mission:


    Matthew 24:14 (New International Version)
    14And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.


    John 10:16 (New International Version)
    16I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.


    If Jesus had meant that His Gospel was only to be preached to the Jews, His disciples would never have gone to the Gentiles, but they did. After Jesus’ resurrection the Gospel was to be preached to all nations – Jew and Gentile alike.


    Luke 2:


    25Now there was a man in Jerusalem called Simeon, who was righteous and devout. He was waiting for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. 26It had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not die before he had seen the Lord's Christ. 27Moved by the Spirit, he went into the temple courts. When the parents brought in the child Jesus to do for him what the custom of the Law required, 28Simeon took him in his arms and praised God, saying:


    29"Sovereign Lord, as you have promised,
    you now dismiss[d] your servant in peace.
    30For my eyes have seen your salvation,
    31which you have prepared in the sight of all people,
    32a light for revelation to the Gentiles
    and for glory to your people Israel."



    (Simeon quotes from Isaiah; Jesus is the servant of Isaiah., the Messiah)



    The Messiah appointed Paul as the Apostle to the Gentiles, but Paul was not the only one who spread the Gospel to the Gentiles. There were others.



    Barnabas accepted what Paul was preaching and brought him to the Apostles. (Acts 9:27-28)
    Acts 13:45-47 (New International Version)

    45When the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy and talked abusively against what Paul was saying.

    46Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: "We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles. 47For this is what the Lord has commanded us:
    " 'I have made you[a] a light for the Gentiles,
    that you[b] may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.'[c]"



    Barnabas and Paul quote Isaiah 9:6.



    Isaiah 49:6 (New International Version)
    6 he says:
    "It is too small a thing for you to be my servant
    to restore the tribes of Jacob
    and bring back those of Israel I have kept.
    I will also make you a light for the Gentiles,
    that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth
    ."

    Jesus’ mission was two-fold – first to the Jews and then to the Gentiles.
     
  11. Muslim-UK

    Muslim-UK Well-Known Member

    406
    +127
    Muslim
    Married
    Where does the OT mention a saviour to die for the sins of all people?
     
  12. GeorgeTwo

    GeorgeTwo Member

    +115
    Methodist
    Private
    Qur'an 2:79 does not say the text of the Old Testament has been corrupted.

    This verse is about commentary by the rabbis called the Talmud.

    It's interesting that the Qur'an copied from the Talmud and said it came from God, in Surah 5:32.

    005.032
    YUSUFALI: On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.

    Surah 5:32 was obviously copied from the Talmud, Babylonian Talmud, Mishnah Sanhedrin 37a .


    mishnah. how were the witnesses inspired with awe? witnesses in capital charges30 were brought in and intimidated [thus]: perhaps what ye say is based only on conjecture,31 or hearsay,32 or is evidence from the mouth of another witness,33 or even from the mouth of a trustworthy person:34 perhaps ye are unaware that ultimately we shall scrutinize your evidence by cross examination and inquiry? know then that capital cases are not like monetary cases. in civil suits, one can make monetary restitution35 and thereby effect his atonement; but in capital cases he is held responsible for his blood [sc. the accused's] and the blood of his [potential] descendants until the end of time,36 for thus we find in the case of cain, who killed his brother, that it is written: the bloods of thy brother cry unto me:37 not the blood of thy brother, but the bloods of thy brother, is said — i.e., his blood and the blood of his [potential] descendants. (alternatively, the bloods of thy brother, teaches that his blood was splashed over trees and stones.)38 for this reason was man created alone, to teach thee that whosoever destroys a single soul of israel,39 [ 'OF ISRAEL' is absent in some texts.]
     
  13. Muslim-UK

    Muslim-UK Well-Known Member

    406
    +127
    Muslim
    Married
    The earliest complete NT Bible is found in the Codex Sinaiticus. Is it the same as today bar spelling mistakes and word orders?

    12 year old article from Dr. Mosa-El-Mosawy, some unknown person. No credentials, no evidence, only poor theories.

    If interested I can link you to a recent debate on preservation of the Qur'an between James White and Adnan Rashid. James White speaks about 26,000 New Testament Manuscripts, and Adnan Rashid reminds him over 90% are from the 9th Century onwards :/

    James also admits the Qur'an we have today goes back in written form to Uthman ra.

    1. Introduction


    Lying about Islam and its fundamentals has become a standard for zealous missionaries such as Sam Shamoun and David Wood. Most of their blunders and misrepresentations have been exposed over the past decade, which leaves one to wonder why they are still using the same techniques and approaches. Their academic credentials are without a doubt shady, while their reputation of deception and lies has been following them wherever they go. Taking much of their inspiration from orientalists of the pasts, some sincere (but mistaken) while others with destructive agendas, missionaries have lacked the desire and sincerity to look at Islam from a neutral point of view. In their thirst for hatred (not giving the other cheek) towards Islam they launched many nonintellectual attacks on the holy book of Islam, the Qur'an.

    In doing so they have scavenged for any kind of vague statements or information (keeping in mind that most of the time they have dealt with translations) to cast doubt on the reliability and integrity of the Qur’an. Not being able to cope with the fact that the so called Gospels are human forgeries attributed to God, they have turned to the Qur’an in order to escape the embarrassment. However as we will show beyond the shadow of a doubt Allah has preserved the Qur’an as promised:

    “Verily, We have revealed the Reminder (the Quran) and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption)." (Quran 15:9)


    A narration from 'Abdullah ibn ‘Umar quoted by Hafiz Al-Suyuti (d. 911 A.H.) in his Al-Itqan fi Uloom al-Qur’an has excited many orientalists, missionaries and some other lunatics.

    As Sam Shamoun puts it, the translation goes as;
    `Abdullah b. `Umar reportedly said, 'Let none of you say, "I have got the whole of the Qur'an." How does he know what all of it is? MUCH OF THE QUR'AN HAS GONE. Let him say instead, "I have got what has survived."' (Jalal al Din `Abdul Rahman b. Abi Bakr al Suyuti, al-Itqan fi `ulum al-Qur'an, Halabi, Cairo, 1935/1354, Volume 2, p. 25)

    Not only are the meanings that Sam and other people of his club try to superimpose on this narration are totally wrong, this translation is also misleading. We shall first clarify the real meanings of this narration and then give its rightful translation supported with due reasoning.

    2- The true meanings of the narration
    To every ardent student of the Qur’anic sciences it is known that there were many verses first revealed as part of the Qur’an and later abrogated. We have discussed the essence of the idea of abrogation earlier.
    Al-Suyuti brings this narration in the section of his work is titled as; “Section forty-seven: About the Abrogating and the Abrogated.”[1]

    Likewise it is in the section about abrogation in another work of al-Suyuti.[2]
    In Abu ‘Ubayd’s (d. 228 A.H.) work, from which al-Suyuti quotes this, it is the first narration in the chapter titled; “[About] what all was abrogated from the Qur’an after revelation and is not put in the Masahif.”[3]

    Most important is the narration quoted by Hafiz Ibn Hajr (d. 852 A.H.) which compliments and fixes the meaning of the report we are discussing. Ibn Hajr writes;

    وقد أخرج بن الضريس من حديث بن عمر أنه كان يكره أن يقول الرجل قرأت القرآن كله ويقول إن منه قرآنا قد رفع
    Ibn al-Dhurays has narrated a report of Ibn Umar that he used to dislike the person who said, ‘I have recited the whole of the Qur’an.’ He (Ibn Umar) used to say, ‘But (the reality is) a part of the Qur’an has been abrogated.’[4]

    This report seals the fact that Ibn Umar’s statement simply refers to what was abrogated from the Qur’an.
    .
    Abu Bakr ibn Tayyib Al-Baqilani (d. 403 A.H.) in his amazing work al-Intisar li’l-Qur’an (In Defence of the Qur’an), quotes another narration on the similar lines and then explains the two together. He writes;

    ونحوُ روايةِ عبدُ الله بنُ عباسِ عن أبي أنه سمعه وقد قال له رجل: "يا أبا المنذر إني قد جمعت القرآن، فقال له: ما يدريكَ لعله قد سقطَ قرآن كثير فما وُجد بعد".
    And similar is the report of Abdullah bin ‘Abbas from Ubay, that he heard a man said to him; ‘O Abu al-Munzar verily I have gathered (i.e. memorized) the whole of the Qur’an.’ He (Ubay) said to him, ‘He does not know (what the whole of it was) because so much of the Qur’an was abrogated and it was not found afterwards.’[5]

    And then explaining it he writes;
    “And it is not possible for anyone to claim that he has learnt (all) what was revealed as Qur’an- the abrogating part of it and the abrogated. And their words ‘it was not found afterwards’ (underscore) that we do not find in our day one who has memorized all that was abrogated and whose recitation was given up. And this is something which was bound to happen.” [6]

    3. Nothing has been lost of what the Prophet left of the Qur’an

    Narrated 'Abdul 'Aziz bin Rufai': Shaddad bin Ma'qil and I entered upon Ibn 'Abbas. Shaddad bin Ma'qil asked him, "Did the Prophet leave anything (besides the Qur'an)?" He replied. "He did not leave anything except what is between the two bindings (of the Qur'an)." Then we visited Muhammad bin Al-Hanafiyya and asked him (the same question). He replied, "The Prophet did not leave except what is between the bindings (of the Qur'an)."[7]

    This hadith is categorical evidence that nothing was lost of the Qur’an because all that the Holy Prophet- peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- left for his people is what was put between the two bindings.
    Hafiz Ibn Hajr writes;
    “And this chapter is made to refute those who assume that a lot from the Qur’an was lost with the death of those who knew it.”[8]

    Al-‘Ayni (d. 855 A.H.) also makes exactly the same point.[9]

    Shahabuddin al-Alusi’s (d. 1270 A.H.) comment helps understand the entire issue;

    “Verily they (i.e. people of sunnah) have agreed on there being no loss in the Qur’an as is continuously reported like we today find between the two bindings. Yes during the time of (Abu Bakr) al-Sidiq the part which was not reported continuously and was (rather) abrogated was dropped (out of the official Mushaf) … and to this relates that which is reported by Abu ‘Ubayd from Ibn `Umar, who said: ‘None of you should say that he has taken the whole of the Qur’an; how could he know what all of it was! A lot of the Qur’an has passed him by! Let him say instead: ‘I have taken of the Qur’an that which became apparent.”[10]

    The above mentioned narration of Sahih Bukhari is very significant. One of the two who said “The Prophet left nothing except what is between the two bindings” was Ibn Abbas and in the narration quoted by Al-Baqilani we find him reporting and listening to the comment of his teacher Ubayy bin Ka’b which is same as that of Ibn Umar. Connecting the dots we make out that he understood Ubay did not mean to say that some part of the Qur’an that the Prophet had left for the Ummah might have been missed and could not be found anymore by the person claiming to have memorized the whole of it. It rather shows that Ibn Abbas fully knew that what Ubay referred to was something exclusive to what the Prophet had left for the Ummah as eternal guidance (i.e. it was the abrogated part). And we have already seen that the narration of Ibn ‘Umar quoted by Ibn Hajr on the authority of Ibn al-Dhurays makes the same point very plainly.
    Another significant observation about Bukhari’s narration is that the two who testified for the Qur’anic preservation are Ibn ‘Abbas, the cousin of ‘Ali bin Talib, and Muhammad bin Al-Hanafiyya, the son of ‘Ali bin Abi Talib- may Allah be pleased with them all. Their testimony is quite sufficient to lay to rest any amount of rant by some extreme Shiites who make speculative allegations of Qur’an being tampered to remove verses in favor of ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him. Had this been the case these two close relatives of ‘Ali would have not failed to make a mention of it.

    4- Two objections/queries answered
    Having explained the narration let us now turn to two possible questions/queries.

    4.1 Why Ibn Umar referred the abrogated verses as Qur’an?
    Before finding the answer to this question let us have another look at the narration of Ibn al-Dhurays;

    “Ibn Umar used to dislike the person who said, ‘I have recited the whole of the Qur’an.’ He (Ibn Umar) used to say, ‘But (the reality is) a part of the Qur’an has been abrogated.”

    Very much like our explanation to the narration we are discussing, this report shows that Ibn ‘Umar referred to the abrogated verses as Qur’an. With the clarity in its last words this narration takes away all the rhetoric power of the question and reduces it to a mere query having no ability whatsoever to cast doubts on the validity of the explanation offered.

    Coming back; Dr. Sa’d bin ‘Abdullah al-Humayyid commenting to this narration in his research on Sunan Sa’id bin Mansur says;

    “And it appears from the words of Ibn ‘Umar that in his opinion even the abrogated verses could also be called Qur’an after their being abrogated or (they could be so called) by the way what they once were.”[11]

    This is understandable given the fact that Qur’an is nothing but the word of Allah and abrogated verses though no more required to be learnt or followed were nevertheless revered due to their divine origin. In this regard there is, however, one important difference between Ibn ‘Umar and the people of later generation like us. As there is no authority of continuous (mutawatir) reports, we cannot be as certain as him about some abrogated-in-recitation words’ once being a part of the Qur’an. We may however refer to them as such for academic purposes on the basis of lesser proofs. But for Ibn ‘Umar this was not the condition as he must have listened to some verses from the Prophet in person for which he later learnt that they were abrogated. Therefore, he for himself was too particular about the words that emanated from the Almighty as part of the Qur’an though abrogated afterwards.

    Further, it also has an indication of an attitude of extreme care on such matters that involves goodness on one part because this can in a way lead to self-glorification. One might see it akin to the following hadith;

    Narrated Abu Bakrah: The Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: “One of you should not say: I fasted the whole of Ramadan, and I prayed during the night in the whole of Ramadan. I do not know whether he disliked the self-praise; or he (the narrator) said: ‘He must have slept a little and taken rest’.”[12]

    We can see that even though it is natural that one who would fast as such for the whole month ofRamadan, will break the fasts at night and will also sleep besides standing in late-night prayers, yet an out of the way step is taken in instructing not to make such a claim. The fact that narration of Ibn ‘Umar is in essence similar to this and involves the idea of claim as well; it can help us appreciate the real message in the words of Ibn ‘Umar- may Allah be pleased with him.

    4.2 Was “much” of the Qur’an abrogated?
    We know the actual text involves the words “qur’an kathir” therefore one may tend to translate it as “much of the Qur’an” with stress on “much.” In fact Sam Shamoun does that and asks “what kind of revelation is this that MUCH (not some) of it consists of verses that have been abrogated?” This may appear to be a very strong point but actually speaks of the lack of proper understanding of the language, something that Sam has been guilty of in all his papers.

    The Arabic word “kathir” does not mean “much” in the comparative sense. In the comparative sense it can even be used to mean less than what it is compared to as shown below. Same is the case with abrogation that we are discussing. The abrogated part of the Qur'an was definitely less than what remains.
    A simple proof for this assertion is the narration in which Sa’d bin Waqqas asked the Prophet- may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- about the share of his wealth that he might give away in charity while he feared to die. Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas himself narrated his dialogue with the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- on the subject;

    قُلْتُ: يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، أُوصِي بِمَالِي كُلِّهِ؟ قَالَ: «لاَ» ، قُلْتُ: فَالشَّطْرُ، قَالَ: «لاَ» ، قُلْتُ: الثُّلُثُ، قَالَ: فَالثُّلُثُ، وَالثُّلُثُ كَثِيرٌ
    “I said; ‘Should I give two-thirds of my property in charity?' He said, 'No.' I asked, 'Half?' He said, 'No.' then he added, 'One-third, and even one-third is much (wal-thuluthu kathir).”[13]

    The translator of Sahih Muslim puts the same as;
    “He (the Holy Prophet) said: (Yes), one-third, and one-third is quite substantial (wal-thuluthu kathir).”[14]

    Certainly one-third is not “much” in the comparative sense of being more than the rest and no person of reason can ever claim that. Just like two thousand years of theological hammering has failed to find logic for “one in three and three in one,” likewise no amount of effort can ever show that “one-third” is “much” in the comparative sense.

    Ibn ‘Umar- may Allah be pleased with him- only aimed to highlight the fact that verses of the Qur'an were abrogated and no one should say that they have memorized the whole of the Qur'an (including those verses) as it rests in the guarded tables with Allah. The Qur'an that we have between the two covers today, the Qur'an given to us by the messenger of God, collected by Abu Bakr and Uthman, is the Qur'an that Allah revealed and decreed to remain as the guiding message for humanity till the Day of Judgment, without any addition, subtraction or alteration.

    5- Summary and Conclusion
    Ibn Umar- may Allah be pleased with him- only referred to the abrogated part of the Qur’an and his comment in no way suggests of even a single letter of the Qur’an being lost.

    Ibn ‘Umar’s other narration quoted by Ibn Hajr on the authority of Ibn al-Dhurays plainly establishes this meaning.
    Abu ‘Ubayd and Al-Suyuti have both placed the narration in the sections about abrogated verses which shows they also understood it likewise. Comments of Al-Baqilani and Al-Alusi also support the same.

    The word “kathir” does not mean “much” in the comparative sense.
    The rightful translation of the meanings of this narration is;
    عن ابن عمر، قال: لا يقولن أحدكم قد أخذت القرآن كله وما يدريه ما كله؟ قد ذهب منه قرآن كثير، ولكن ليقل: قد أخذت منه ما ظهر منه
    Ibn `Umar, who said: ‘None of you should say that he has taken the whole of the Qur’an; how could he know what all of it was (before some of it being abrogated)! Substantial part of the Qur’an has passed him by (due to abrogation)! Let him say instead: ‘I have taken of the Qur’an that which (remained and) became apparent (after abrogation).”
    Indeed Allah knows the best!

    [1] Al-Itiqan fil Uloom al-Quran, Haeya al-Masriya al-‘Aamah lil-Kitab, Egypt 1974 vol.3 p.66, 82-83
    [2] Mu'tarik al-Aqran fi Aijaz al-Qur’an, Dar al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, 1988 vol.1 p.95
    [3] Fada’il al-Qur’an, Dar Ibn Kathir, Damascus, 1995 vol.1 p.320
    [4] Fath al-Bari, Dar al-Ma’rifah, Beirut 1379 A.H. vol.9 p.65
    [5] Al-Intisar lil-Qur’an, Dar al-Fath/Dar Ibn Hazm, Amman/Beirut, 2001 p.406
    [6] Al-Intisar, p.408
    [7] Sahih Bukhari, Book 61, Hadith 537
    [8] Fath al-Bari, vol.9 p.65
    [9] ‘Umdah al-Qari, Dar al-Ahya al-Turath al-‘Arabi, Beirut n.d. vol.20 p.36
    [10] Tafsir Ruh al-M’ani , Dar al-Kotob al-Ilmiyya, Beirut, 1415 A.H. vol.1 p.26
    [11] Sunan Sa’id bin Mansur, Dar al-Sami'i, Beirut, 1993 vol.2 p.433 n.2
    [12] Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 2409
    [13] Sahih Bukhari, Book 23, Hadith 383
    [14] Sahih Muslim, Book 13, Hadith 3997

    source Ibn Umar and 'Loss of Much of the Qur'an' Lie
     
  14. Muslim-UK

    Muslim-UK Well-Known Member

    406
    +127
    Muslim
    Married
    So are you saying that, GOD didn't explain to the Jews, killing a person is akin to killing all mankind?
    How can GOD, who gave commandments to previous generations be accused of plagiarism when he recalls what was said? :/
     
  15. Aryeh Jay

    Aryeh Jay Veteran Supporter CF Senior Ambassador

    +7,690
    United States
    Married
    So it is OK for Christians to do that but not Muslims?
     
  16. GeorgeTwo

    GeorgeTwo Member

    +115
    Methodist
    Private
    It comes from the New Testament:

    John 3:16, For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

    Matthew 20:28 - '...THE SON OF MAN DID NOT COME TO BE SERVED, BUT TO SERVE, AND TO GIVE HIS LIFE AS A RANSOM FOR MANY.'
     
  17. GeorgeTwo

    GeorgeTwo Member

    +115
    Methodist
    Private
    The explanation came from the Rabbis.
     
  18. GeorgeTwo

    GeorgeTwo Member

    +115
    Methodist
    Private
    We use what Jesus said and what the prophecies of the Messiah indicate, which is not the same thing as what you are doing.
     
  19. Aryeh Jay

    Aryeh Jay Veteran Supporter CF Senior Ambassador

    +7,690
    United States
    Married
    What I am doing? I am not doing anything. I am Jewish; I won’t become a Muslim until later today.
     
  20. Muslim-UK

    Muslim-UK Well-Known Member

    406
    +127
    Muslim
    Married
    That's incorrect, as New Song can mean New Covenant:

    Christian understanding >>> New Song >>>

    The newness theme is reflected throughout Scripture. Isaiah prophesied of a new order that would bring new blessings to the people of God. This new order with its attendant blessings is expressed by the climax of the newness theme in the New Testament Book of Revelation. New Song Definition and Meaning - Bible Dictionary

    New Song, New Covenant according to Christian Commentators: Isaiah 42:10 Commentaries: Sing to the LORD a new song, Sing His praise from the end of the earth! You who go down to the sea, and all that is in it. You islands, and those who dwell on them.

    Exactly, any thing Christians come up with to justify preaching to Gentiles was likely added into the Scriptures later.

    Paul never met Jesus pbuh. What we do know is he was tasked with persecuting Christians and as there were so many of them, likely came up with a better plan that would benefit his Pagan paymasters.

    He was rejected by the followers of Jesus pbuh in Jerusalem, rejected by Jews in the main, but welcomed by Sun of God worshippers.

    the full verse is, 19 'Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:'

    Only none of the Disciples ever used that formula, so the verse was likely added later to justify preaching to non Jews.

    They went looking for the lost Tribes of Israel as they were commanded.

    Luke was a Disciple of Paul and never met Jesus pbuh.

    I would be surprised if Paul's Disciple said anything showing Barnabas not to be in agreement with Paul.

    This can't be speaking about Jesus pbuh, because we know he was rejected by those who received him. This is why the Jews are still waiting for their Messiah to come and make them a light to all Nations again. Waiting for him to come back and reinstate the Sacrificial system for sin atonement. He will offer animal sacrifices for his own sins too.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...