|
|
This is because you have been mocked for being one angry christian who cannot answer anything with regards your faith and now you are trying to laugh yourself out of the corner you painted yourself into. Ha ha .... the truth isn't it?
Back to the issue on hand :
You claim that the Quran is wrong regarding the death of Jesus and him dying for your sins. Ok then ,
(1) Where in the bible that Jesus confirmed to have died on the cross?
(2) Where in the bible Jesus in his own words admitted to die for your sins?
Why so scared to answer? Your fear of answering confirms the claim of the Quran that your trinitarian faith is just an assumption and / or conjecture.
Yes? What say you ..... LOL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by sam1528 at 30-3-2015 02:58 PM
wkk5159 replied at 30-3-2015 10:18 AM
ow this icon  becomes the angriest Christian....
This poor old demented sissy mufti sam1528 is really suffering from irreversible debilitating dementia.
Little wonder he is pseudodyslexicly unable to comprehend the Bible....even that famous recalcitrant muslim in this forum, Mashimaru is silenced by the undeniable fact of Jesus's crucifixion and resurrection. http://mforum2.cari.com.my/forum ... ;page=4#pid59408375
Sissy demented mufti aka sam1528 anyone ?....ahh, give him a pass !
LOL , now you are trying to bulldoze your way thru? Isn't it true that you became the angriest Christian on earth when your faith being questioned? When mocked at , you now try to laugh yourself out of the corner you painted yourself into. This is pathetic.
Ooh I see , the 'undeniable fact' of Jesus crucifixion per joh19:1-37? I copy post again my post #81 of the same thread :
Your response per joh19:1-37 provides NO confirmation. If you continue reading , verse 35 to 37 states as follows :
35 The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe.
36 These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken,”[c]
37 and, as another scripture says, “They will look on the one they have pierced.”[d]
LOL , it is just the testimony of an unknown person narrated by an unknown author going by the pen name of John.
Where is the confirmation? What is the criteria that makes the unknown person's testimony to be true?
Are you now claiming that the testimony of an unknown person is a fact?
Appears that you don't even know the truth even when it hits you on the head ...... ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Islam is based on fallacies and lies !
I like this phrase.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , I already told you that you cannot answer my counter argument. I am proven right again.
Lets recap my counter argument :
Your response per joh19:1-37 provides NO confirmation. If you continue reading , verse 35 to 37 states as follows :
35 The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe.
36 These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken,”[c]
37 and, as another scripture says, “They will look on the one they have pierced.”[d]
LOL , it is just the testimony of an unknown person narrated by an unknown author going by the pen name of John.
Where is the confirmation? What is the criteria that makes the unknown person's testimony to be true?
Are you now claiming that the testimony of an unknown person is a fact?
Ha ha , all I see is you trying your best to run from your own argument. It is true then , the Trinitarian Christian faith is based on conjectures. Therefore the Quran is right
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 John 5 :7 For there are Three that bear witness in Heaven, The Father, The Son(Jesus) and the Holy Spirit. And these Three are One !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This post contains more resources
You have to Login for download or view attachment(s). No Account? Register
x
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL , why do you constantly shoot yourself in your foot? Now it is your appeal to the 'Johannine Comma'
Do you know that this verse is a later day insertion? Appears that you don't know.
All scholars consider it to be spurious, and it is not included in modern critical editions of the Greek text, or in the English versions based upon them. For example, the English Standard Version reads:
You should look seriously into my advice for you to go back to sunday school ...... get your basics right first.
What say you? Ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For once I agree with you
(1) Where in the bible that Jesus confirmed to have died on the cross?
(2) Where in the bible Jesus in his own words admitted to die for your sins?
(3) No mention of Trinity , you know the 3 in 1 formula for God in the bible
Yet trinitarians like you 'die die' believe in such
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by wkk5159 at 8-4-2015 11:10 AM
Taqiyative muslim like sam1528 who pretends to be biblical scholar just fully fit the definition of stupidity i defined...........
Q : Is it true that 1 John 5:7 is not in any Greek manuscript before the 1600s ? If it is true, why is it in the King James Bible?
A : 1 John 5:7 belongs in the King James Bible and was preserved by faithful Christians. But the passage was removed from many Greek manuscripts, because of the problems it seemed to cause. It is true that there is a small number of Scriptures that are not the same between the King James Bible and the so-called "Majority" Greek text. There are a number of reasons for this:
- The so-called "Majority" text was not really based on the majority of texts, but rather a relatively small number of manuscripts. The last person to try to find the differences between the majority of Greek manuscripts, Dr. Von Soden, did not collate more than 400 of the more than 5,000 Greek texts. In other words, what is commonly called the "Majority" Greek text is not a collation of the majority of manuscripts at all.
- The "Majority" Greek text is also the main Greek text used by the Eastern Orthodox religion. They had a vested interest in changing (or deleting) some texts. More on this in a moment.
- 1 John itself is not in a large number of extant Greek manuscripts.
So why then is 1 John 5:7 in the King James Bible, but not in many of the existing Greek manuscripts? To understand the answer, we must look at the history of what happened shortly after the Bible was written.
The Greek and Roman Institutions During the early growth of the Christian church, ministers (whether saved or not) wrote down doctrines that they said were Christian and Biblical. Starting after the death of the apostles (about 100 AD) many people taught the lie that Jesus was not God the Son and Son of God, or that Jesus became God at His baptism, or the false doctrine that the Holy Spirit was not God or was not eternal.
The growing religion that became known as Roman Catholic, after many debates eventually agreed on the doctrine of the Trinity. So they had no reason to remove 1 John 5:7 from their Bibles, since it supported what they taught.
But the Greek Eastern Orthodox religion was combating a heresy called "Sabellianism," and would have found it easier to combat the heresy by simply removing the troubling passage from their Bibles.
A Trail of Evidence But during this same time, we find mention of 1 John 5:7, from about 200 AD through the 1500s. Here is a useful timeline of references to this verse:
| 200 AD | Tertullian wrote "which three are one" based on the verse in his Against Praxeas, chapter 25. | | 250 AD | Cyprian of Carthage, wrote, "And again, of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost it is written: "And the three are One" in his On The Lapsed, On the Novatians, (see note for Old Latin) | | 350 AD | Priscillian referred to it [Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, Academia Litterarum Vindobonensis, vol. xviii, p. 6.] | | 350 AD | Idacius Clarus referred to it[Patrilogiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina by Migne, vol. 62, col. 359.] | | 350 AD | Athanasius referred to it in his De Incarnatione | | 398 AD | Aurelius Augustine used it to defend Trinitarianism in De Trinitate against the heresy of Sabellianism | | 415 AD | Council of Carthage appealed to 1 John 5:7 when debating the Arian belief (Arians didn't believe in the deity of Jesus Christ) | | 450-30 AD | Several orthodox African writers quoted the verse when defending the doctrine of the Trinity against the gainsaying of the Vandals. These writers are:
A) Vigilius Tapensis in "Three Witnesses in Heaven" B) Victor Vitensis in his Historia persecutionis [Corpus ScriptorumEcclesiasticorum Latinorum, Academia Litterarum Vindobonensis, vol. vii,p.60.]
C) Fulgentius in "The Three Heavenly Witnesses" [Patrilogiae CursusCompletus, Series Latina by Migne, vol. 65, col. 500.] | | 500 AD | Cassiodorus cited it [Patrilogiae Cursus Completus, Series LatinabyMigne, vol. 70, col. 1373.] | | 550 AD | Old Latin ms r has it | | 550 AD | The "Speculum" has it [The Speculum is a treatise that containssomegood Old Latin scriptures.] | | 750 AD | Wianburgensis referred to it | | 800 AD | Jerome's Vulgate has it [It was not in Jerome's original Vulgate,but was brought in about 800 AD from good Old Latin manuscripts.] | | 1000s AD | miniscule 635 has it | | 1150 AD | minuscule ms 88 in the margin | | 1300s AD | miniscule 629 has it | | 157-1400 AD | Waldensian (that is, Vaudois) Bibles have the verse | | 1500 AD | ms 61 has the verse |
| Even Nestle's 26th edition Greek New Testament, based upon the corrupt Alexandrian text, admits that these and other important manuscripts have the verse: 221 v.l.; 2318 Vulgate Claromontanus]; 629; 61; 88; 429 v.l.; 636 v.l.; 918; l; r. |
The Vaudois Now the "Waldensian," or "Vaudois" Bibles stretch from about 157 to the 1400s AD. The fact is, according to John Calvin's successor Theodore Beza, that the Vaudois received the Scriptures from missionaries of Antioch of Syria in the 120s AD and finished translating it into their Latin language by 157 AD. This Bible was passed down from generation, until the Reformation of the 1500s, when the Protestants translated the Vaudois Bible into French, Italian, etc. This Bible carries heavy weight when finding out what God really said.John Wesley and Jonathan Edwards believed, as most of the Reformers, that the Vaudois were the descendants of the true Christians, and that they preserved the Christian faith for the Bible-believing Christians today.
Who Has the Most to Gain? Who Has the Most to Lose? The evidence of history shows us that the Roman Catholic religion was relentless in its effort to destroy the Vaudois and their Bible. It took them until the 1650s to finish their hateful attacks. But the Vaudois were successful in preserving God's words to the days of the Reformation.
Now we have to ask ourselves a question: Who had the most to gain by adding to or taking away from the Bible? Did the Vaudois, who were being killed for having their Bibles, have anything to gain by adding to or taking from the words of God? Compromise is what the Roman religion wanted! Had the Vaudois just followed the popes, their lives would have been much easier. But they counted the cost. This was not politics; it was their life and soul. They above all people would not want to change a single letter of the words they received from Antioch of Syria. And they paid for this with their lives.
What about the "scholars" at Alexandria, Egypt? We already know about them. They could not even make their few 45 manuscripts agree. How could we believe they preserved God's words?
The Reformation itself owes a lot to these Christians in the French Alps. They not only preserved the Scriptures, but they show to what lengths God would go to keep his promise (Psalm 12:6-7).
And that's only part of the story about the preservation of God's words.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wkk5159 replied at 8-4-2015 10:58 AM
Taqiyative muslim like sam1528 who pretends to be biblical scholar just fully fit the definition of stupidity i defined...........
Q : Is it true that 1 John 5:7 is not in any Greek manuscript before the 1600s ? If it is true, why is it in the King James Bible?
A : 1 John 5:7 belongs in the King James Bible and was preserved by faithful Christians. But the passage was removed from many Greek manuscripts, because of the problems it seemed to cause. It is true that there is a small number of Scriptures that are not the same between the King James Bible and the so-called "Majority" Greek text. There are a number of reasons for this:
- The so-called "Majority" text was not really based on the majority of texts, but rather a relatively small number of manuscripts. The last person to try to find the differences between the majority of Greek manuscripts, Dr. Von Soden, did not collate more than 400 of the more than 5,000 Greek texts. In other words, what is commonly called the "Majority" Greek text is not a collation of the majority of manuscripts at all.
- The "Majority" Greek text is also the main Greek text used by the Eastern Orthodox religion. They had a vested interest in changing (or deleting) some texts. More on this in a moment.
- 1 John itself is not in a large number of extant Greek manuscripts.
So why then is 1 John 5:7 in the King James Bible, but not in many of the existing Greek manuscripts? To understand the answer, we must look at the history of what happened shortly after the Bible was written.
The Greek and Roman Institutions During the early growth of the Christian church, ministers (whether saved or not) wrote down doctrines that they said were Christian and Biblical. Starting after the death of the apostles (about 100 AD) many people taught the lie that Jesus was not God the Son and Son of God, or that Jesus became God at His baptism, or the false doctrine that the Holy Spirit was not God or was not eternal.
The growing religion that became known as Roman Catholic, after many debates eventually agreed on the doctrine of the Trinity. So they had no reason to remove 1 John 5:7 from their Bibles, since it supported what they taught.
But the Greek Eastern Orthodox religion was combating a heresy called "Sabellianism," and would have found it easier to combat the heresy by simply removing the troubling passage from their Bibles.
A Trail of Evidence But during this same time, we find mention of 1 John 5:7, from about 200 AD through the 1500s. Here is a useful timeline of references to this verse:
| 200 AD | Tertullian wrote "which three are one" based on the verse in his Against Praxeas, chapter 25. | | 250 AD | Cyprian of Carthage, wrote, "And again, of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost it is written: "And the three are One" in his On The Lapsed, On the Novatians, (see note for Old Latin) | | 350 AD | Priscillian referred to it [Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, Academia Litterarum Vindobonensis, vol. xviii, p. 6.] | | 350 AD | Idacius Clarus referred to it[Patrilogiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina by Migne, vol. 62, col. 359.] | | 350 AD | Athanasius referred to it in his De Incarnatione | | 398 AD | Aurelius Augustine used it to defend Trinitarianism in De Trinitate against the heresy of Sabellianism | | 415 AD | Council of Carthage appealed to 1 John 5:7 when debating the Arian belief (Arians didn't believe in the deity of Jesus Christ) | | 450-30 AD | Several orthodox African writers quoted the verse when defending the doctrine of the Trinity against the gainsaying of the Vandals. These writers are:
A) Vigilius Tapensis in "Three Witnesses in Heaven" B) Victor Vitensis in his Historia persecutionis [Corpus ScriptorumEcclesiasticorum Latinorum, Academia Litterarum Vindobonensis, vol. vii,p.60.]
C) Fulgentius in "The Three Heavenly Witnesses" [Patrilogiae CursusCompletus, Series Latina by Migne, vol. 65, col. 500.] | | 500 AD | Cassiodorus cited it [Patrilogiae Cursus Completus, Series LatinabyMigne, vol. 70, col. 1373.] | | 550 AD | Old Latin ms r has it | | 550 AD | The "Speculum" has it [The Speculum is a treatise that containssomegood Old Latin scriptures.] | | 750 AD | Wianburgensis referred to it | | 800 AD | Jerome's Vulgate has it [It was not in Jerome's original Vulgate,but was brought in about 800 AD from good Old Latin manuscripts.] | | 1000s AD | miniscule 635 has it | | 1150 AD | minuscule ms 88 in the margin | | 1300s AD | miniscule 629 has it | | 157-1400 AD | Waldensian (that is, Vaudois) Bibles have the verse | | 1500 AD | ms 61 has the verse |
| Even Nestle's 26th edition Greek New Testament, based upon the corrupt Alexandrian text, admits that these and other important manuscripts have the verse: 221 v.l.; 2318 Vulgate Claromontanus]; 629; 61; 88; 429 v.l.; 636 v.l.; 918; l; r. |
The Vaudois Now the "Waldensian," or "Vaudois" Bibles stretch from about 157 to the 1400s AD. The fact is, according to John Calvin's successor Theodore Beza, that the Vaudois received the Scriptures from missionaries of Antioch of Syria in the 120s AD and finished translating it into their Latin language by 157 AD. This Bible was passed down from generation, until the Reformation of the 1500s, when the Protestants translated the Vaudois Bible into French, Italian, etc. This Bible carries heavy weight when finding out what God really said.John Wesley and Jonathan Edwards believed, as most of the Reformers, that the Vaudois were the descendants of the true Christians, and that they preserved the Christian faith for the Bible-believing Christians today.
Who Has the Most to Gain? Who Has the Most to Lose? The evidence of history shows us that the Roman Catholic religion was relentless in its effort to destroy the Vaudois and their Bible. It took them until the 1650s to finish their hateful attacks. But the Vaudois were successful in preserving God's words to the days of the Reformation.
Now we have to ask ourselves a question: Who had the most to gain by adding to or taking away from the Bible? Did the Vaudois, who were being killed for having their Bibles, have anything to gain by adding to or taking from the words of God? Compromise is what the Roman religion wanted! Had the Vaudois just followed the popes, their lives would have been much easier. But they counted the cost. This was not politics; it was their life and soul. They above all people would not want to change a single letter of the words they received from Antioch of Syria. And they paid for this with their lives.
What about the "scholars" at Alexandria, Egypt? We already know about them. They could not even make their few 45 manuscripts agree. How could we believe they preserved God's words?
The Reformation itself owes a lot to these Christians in the French Alps. They not only preserved the Scriptures, but they show to what lengths God would go to keep his promise (Psalm 12:6-7).
And that's only part of the story about the preservation of God's words.
LOL , do you understand what you copied pasted? I will take excerpts from your copy paste :
1 John 5:7 belongs in the King James Bible and was preserved by faithful Christians. But the passage was removed from many Greek manuscripts, because of the problems it seemed to cause.
Do you know how the King James Bible came to being? My previous link provides the answer :
These extra words are generally absent from the Greek manuscripts. In fact, they only appear in the text of four late medieval manuscripts. They seem to have originated as a marginal note added to certain Latin manuscripts during the middle ages, which was eventually incorporated into the text of most of the later Vulgate manuscripts.
In addition , from your copy paste :
200 AD Tertullian wrote "which three are one" based on the verse in his Against Praxeas, chapter 25.
Now you are admitting that the corruption might have came from Tertullian who is thought to be a lawyer from Carthage.
To further strengthen my case , we can refer to the Codex Sinaiticus , probably the earliest complete bible thus far , ~ 400 CE. There is no such thing , the nonsense of the so called 'Johannine Comma'.
Ha ha , the biblical scholars and the earliest text of the bible is in support of my argument.
Too bad .... you lose .... again and again ..... BTW , what kind of Christian are you who don't even know the history of your own bible? Don't you think it is embarrassing for you to have your biblical errors pointed out by a lay muslim? Malu oooi .... ha ha
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Malu oooi.....haha..
Typical syok sendiri muslim who thinks that he knows Bible more than Christians, let alone true Bible scholar and authentic source of references.
Obviously he is having tough time digesting the below facts;
"Now the "Waldensian," or "Vaudois" Bibles stretch from about 157 to the 1400s AD. The fact is, according to John Calvin's successor Theodore Beza, that the Vaudois received the Scriptures from missionaries of Antioch of Syria in the 120s AD and finished translating it into their Latin language by 157 AD. This Bible was passed down from generation, until the Reformation of the 1500s, when the Protestants translated the Vaudois Bible into French, Italian, etc. This Bible carries heavy weight when finding out what God really said.John Wesley and Jonathan Edwards believed, as most of the Reformers, that the Vaudois were the descendants of the true Christians, and that they preserved the Christian faith for the Bible-believing Christians today."
"This was not politics; it was their life and soul. They above all people would not want to change a single letter of the words they received from Antioch of Syria. And they paid for this with their lives !"
"What about the "scholars" at Alexandria, Egypt? We already know about them. They could not even make their few 45 manuscripts agree. How could we believe they preserved God's words? "
If i were this sissy mufti, i would be more concern about the purity of that shitty asswipe scroll called Quran, why early muslim leaders wanted to destroy Hafsah codex ??? Why caliph Uthman ordered the burning of other fragmentary Quran manuscript ???
Does he even know how to discern and read, nah.....stupidity and pseudodyslexic as always !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by sam1528 at 9-4-2015 11:48 AM
wkk5159 replied at 9-4-2015 10:26 AM
Typical syok sendiri muslim who thinks that he knows Bible more than Christians, let alone true Bible scholar and authentic source of references.
Obviously he is having tough time digesting the below facts;
"Now the "Waldensian," or "Vaudois" Bibles stretch from about 157 to the 1400s AD. The fact is, according to John Calvin's successor Theodore Beza, that the Vaudois received the Scriptures from missionaries of Antioch of Syria in the 120s AD and finished translating it into their Latin language by 157 AD. This Bible was passed down from generation, until the Reformation of the 1500s, when the Protestants translated the Vaudois Bible into French, Italian, etc. This Bible carries heavy weight when finding out what God really said.John Wesley and Jonathan Edwards believed, as most of the Reformers, that the Vaudois were the descendants of the true Christians, and that they preserved the Christian faith for the Bible-believing Christians today."
"This was not politics; it was their life and soul. They above all people would not want to change a single letter of the words they received from Antioch of Syria. And they paid for this with their lives !"
"What about the "scholars" at Alexandria, Egypt? We already know about them. They could not even make their few 45 manuscripts agree. How could we believe they preserved God's words? "
If i were this sissy mufti, i would be more concern about the purity of that shitty asswipe scroll called Quran, why early muslim leaders wanted to destroy Hafsah codex ??? Why caliph Uthman ordered the burning of other fragmentary Quran manuscript ???
Does he even know how to discern and read, nah.....stupidity and pseudodyslexic as always !
LOL , all you have is just rethoric. I want evidence in your argument.
Arguing that people would not change a single letter is just BS because the bible itself stated or admitted that there have been changes to it like the last few verses in mark16.
I provided that evidence that the Codex Sinaiticus does not have that 'Johannine Comma'. You have nothing but .... LOL .... the claim that people won't change anything in the bible. Do you know the difference between just a claim and evidence?
Destroy the Codex of Hafsah? The Uthman MSS is a copy and check of Hafsah Codex. You don't seem to know what you are talking about. You are blur.
LOL , Caliph Uthman(ra) burnt the other Codex? What other codex are there in his time? Care to explain?
I again have the evidence of the preservation of the Quran. If we compare the current Uthman(ra) MSS against the Sanaa Codex , which is a much earlier documented manuscript , there is no difference. Dr Gerd Puin admitted to such :
Dr. Puin himself has in fact denied all of the findings Lester ascribes to him, with the exception of occasionall differences in the spelling of some words. Here is a part of Puin’s original letter – which he wrote to al-Qādī Ismā’īl al-Akwa’ shortly after Lester’s article – with its translation.[35]
[Rasheed: Here al-A’zamî included a photocopy of the hand-written letter from Puin to al-Akwa’. I will just be presenting the Arabic text of that letter, rather than the image of the photocopy.]
المهم والحمد لله لا تختلف المصاحف الصنعانية عن غيرها في متاحف العالم ودور كتبه إلا في تفاصيل لا تمسّ القرآن كنصّ مقروء وإنما الاختلاف في الكتابة فقط. هذه الظاهرة معروفة حتى من القرآن المطبوع في القاهرة حيث ورد كتابة
ابرهيم على جانب ابرهم
قران [على جانب] قرن
سيماهم [على جانب] بسيمهم على جانب بسيمهما
لخ
اما في اقدم المصاحف الصنعانية فتكثر ظاهرة حذف الالفات مثلا.
The important thing, thank God, is that these Yemeni Qur’ānic fragments do not differ from those found in the museums and libraries elsewhere, with the exception of details that do not touch the Qur’ān itself, but are rather differences in the way words are spelled. This phenomenon is well-known, even in the Qur’ān published in Cairo in which is written:
Ibrhīm (ابرهيم) next to Ibrhm (ابرهم)
Qurān (قران) next to Qrn (قرن)
Sīmāhum (سيماهم) next to Sīmhum (سيمهم) etc.
In the oldest Yemeni Qur’ānic fragments, for example, the phenomenon of not writing the vowel alif is rather common.
This deflates the entire controversy, dusting away the webs of intrigue that were spun around Puin’s discoveries and making them a topic unworthy of further speculation.
Again and again , there is evidence for the preservation of the Quran.
You have nothing ..... ha ha
Malu ooi ......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The one in deep shit embarrassment is no one but who believe in Islam like sam1528 do...
Let see the reliable source got to say about purity of Quran; http://www.harvardhouse.com/quran_purity.htm
" Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.
This means that drastic changes occurred. After all, "Why were the other copies and fragments ordered to be burnt?"
The answer is found in the original statement: "Hudhaifa was afraid of the different recitations of the Qur'an"
Siapa oooi...malu sekarang ???
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wkk5159 replied at 9-4-2015 12:14 PM
The one in deep shit embarrassment is no one but who believe in Islam like sam1528 do...
Let see the reliable source got to say about purity of Quran; http://www.harvardhouse.com/quran_purity.htm
" Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.
This means that drastic changes occurred. After all, "Why were the other copies and fragments ordered to be burnt?"
The answer is found in the original statement: "Hudhaifa was afraid of the different recitations of the Qur'an"
Siapa oooi...malu sekarang ???
So what is the issue? Hudaifa had forseen the problem early. That is why there is a need for standardisation. Your reference to Bukhari 6:61:510
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were Waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. Said bin Thabit added, "A Verse from Surat Ahzab was missed by me when we copied the Qur'an and I used to hear Allah's Apostle reciting it. So we searched for it and found it with Khuzaima bin Thabit Al-Ansari. (That Verse was): 'Among the Believers are men who have been true in their covenant with Allah.' (33.23)
This problem was addressed very early so that there would not be any problems like the many versions of the bible. The solution is of course standardization which had escaped the bible , thus the many versions.
How was it done? Simple , just make an exact copy of the Codex of Hafsah. This Codex of Hafsah is a documented Quran during the lifetime of prophet Muhammad(saw).
If you ask me , Caliph Uthman(ra) should be given a medal for his efforts.
LOL , in your post #54 in bitpart
If i were this sissy mufti, i would be more concern about the purity of that shitty asswipe scroll called Quran, why early muslim leaders wanted to destroy Hafsah codex ???
Refer to the underlined in Bukhari 6:61:510 (as above). Ha ha , I caught you lying again.
Ha ha , you are soooo blur.
Malu ooi ....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And worse still he uses Bukhari 6:61:510 to back up his lies....
No independent source......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Post time 28-3-2015 02:21 PM
Author
