Another underrated reason why being religious is useless

[Gengar]

There are hundreds of religiouns.

So even if a god exists (which is not unlikely, I will say that)

How would you know which religion worshippes the real god? So you have the probability of 1 in thousands to get it right, and if you don't you land in hell (accourding to most religiouns.)

Thats why its retarted to follow one religion all your life, you follow rules just for a 1 in 1000000 chance, not a good idea tbh
@thenewhebbe

Oh wowzers! I’m so convinced now! Leaving Islam right now!!!

 

[Deleted member 14693]

Oh wowzers! I’m so convinced now! Leaving Islam right now!!!

You were literally born into Islam

 

[Gengar]

You were literally born into Islam

Everyone is, including you.

 

[Deleted member 14693]

Everyone is, including you.

You only believe in it cause you were born into it.

 

[Deleted member 20835]

Niggas be in a blackpill forum and talk about muh god

 

[Gengar]

You only believe in it cause you were born into it.

And you don’t believe it because you weren’t taught. See how that argument can go two ways?

 

[Deleted member 14693]

And you don’t believe it because you weren’t taught

Yeah, I don't believe it cause I wasn't brainwashed. Water

 

[Deleted member 32846]

you can use deductive reasoning to realize that with thousands of religions only 2 have enough facts and credibility to have potential to be legit

what kind of thread is this

subhuman doesnt realize every religion has hundreds of other religions with the same premises and the 2 u probs say "have facts" are new recent religions made by jews

 

[Deleted member 32846]

And you don’t believe it because you weren’t taught. See how that argument can go two ways?

why would u have to be taught the truth about god, if god was real everyone would already know what god was real it'd be obvious

 

[Deleted member 32846]

God in Islam subhana wa ta’ala is beyond human comprehension. There’s no low level beings there’s a purpose to all creation. We were created for a purpose/reason known to Allah subhana wa ta’ala and must worship him to the best of our ability

allah doesnt exist moron, allah was made by some dumb retard who "heard voices in a cave" how dumb do u have to be to believe in this shit

 

[Deleted member 32846]

Jesus is pretty obviously powerful, any demon in the world you say Jesus name and they fear him, he can cast them out.

specific miracles aren’t that far fetched because other saints and random have done them throughout history

hopefully ur trolling

 

[Deleted member 32846]

Cope religion gives me motivation. I like to think I have a destiny given by god and that I must fulfill it to make him proud.

retard "cope" but u just admitted ur using religion to cope bc u know deep down ur life is meaningless

 

[Deleted member 32846]

You’re fantasising about a le comfy waifu god who lets you do whatever you want. Cope.

Our creator has given us guidelines and revelations so we can obey him via scriptures and the Quran is the last and most complete of them.

rrrretard alert, ur religion was made up 1400 years ago and ur only proof is "muh corruption" "muh muhammad" "muh quran" when the quran has been scientifically disproven many times and all muhammadians do is cope and adjust to the new times

 

[Deleted member 32846]

historical evidence, scientific accounts, human accounts, religious text

dont try to twist this shit. 1000 religions do not have near enough proof or information backing it like Christianity or Islam

"religious text" all religions have this retard
"historical evidence" moses, abraham, and the exodus story, adam & eve all have not been proven history
"science" show me where the quran or the bible alone has gotten us any scientific discovery thats been used for literally anything, we got put on the moon and made it so we live past 40 on average bc of science alone, not ur dogshit religion
"human accounts" human accounts i.e chinese whispers aka not reliable, its known fact that human accounts arent reliable bc all humans usually have cognitive bias i.e "witness testimony isnt that reliable in court" i.e "most people dont remember where they actually were on 9/11"

 

[Deleted member 32846]

Jfl at the state of Christianity in 2023 changing their rules as they please for lgbt jfl

Gay churches lmao, you never see shit like this in Muslim countries

islam has gay imams "muh islam is last" is cope, this is why to be muslim u have to be sub 120 iq u genuinely believe a guy heard voices in a cave from an angel, brainwashed cope

 

[Deleted member 32846]

Its not really hard to cut down the bullshit

If tou narrow it down you got Christianity and islam and we all know islam is the true religion

bbbbbrainwashed, the earth is billions of years old and islam and christianity are at best if we take "muh abraham" to be true its 5000 years old, humans have been around for 300,000+ years, ur telling me all history we have points to ur religion being new but its somehow always been here..?

also the god of allah i.e yahweh started as a polytheist god in a pantheon, go to history research and once u do u will realize religion is just stories past down with chinese whispers and other ideas of what religious text means, also for non muslims, muslims believe the prophet rode a donkey into fucking space, these guys are delusional polytheist

 

[Deleted member 32846]

There are hundreds of religiouns.

So even if a god exists (which is not unlikely, I will say that)

How would you know which religion worshippes the real god? So you have the probability of 1 in thousands to get it right, and if you don't you land in hell (accourding to most religiouns.)

Thats why its retarted to follow one religion all your life, you follow rules just for a 1 in 1000000 chance, not a good idea tbh
@thenewhebbe

read above my replies, i've debunked evrry single claim made by this muhammadians and christcucks

 

[Gus17]

retard "cope" but u just admitted ur using religion to cope bc u know deep down ur life is meaningless

Shut the fuck up u greycel little bitch go back to ur retarded ass TikToks with that nihilistic bullshit. A true looksmaxer finds motivation wherever he needs instead of crying on a forum about other people’s success.

 

[Deleted member 32846]

Shut the fuck up u greycel little bitch go back to ur retarded ass TikToks with that nihilistic bullshit. A true looksmaxer finds motivation wherever he needs instead of crying on a forum about other people’s success.

"true looksmaxxer" yea ur retarded thankd for admitting u use religion as a crutch and coping mechanism little boy

 

[Gengar]

why would u have to be taught the truth about god, if god was real everyone would already know what god was real it'd be obvious

Alright, if God is not real you should provide me with proof. After all, you’re trying to change my mind. Whoever comes up with the take, has to provide evidence. So I wait!

 

[Deleted member 23359]

islam has gay imams "muh islam is last" is cope, this is why to be muslim u have to be sub 120 iq u genuinely believe a guy heard voices in a cave from an angel, brainwashed cope

bbbbbrainwashed, the earth is billions of years old and islam and christianity are at best if we take "muh abraham" to be true its 5000 years old, humans have been around for 300,000+ years, ur telling me all history we have points to ur religion being new but its somehow always been here..?

also the god of allah i.e yahweh started as a polytheist god in a pantheon, go to history research and once u do u will realize religion is just stories past down with chinese whispers and other ideas of what religious text means, also for non muslims, muslims believe the prophet rode a donkey into fucking space, these guys are delusional polytheist

Bro you just saying some bullshit acting like ur high IQ jfl

God is real and islam is the truth, historical evidence and the quran proves it

 

[Deleted member 14693]

God is real and islam is the truth, historical evidence and the quran proves it

You don't have a single truth. How can a book (human words) proof smth. Thats just brainwashing

 

[SubHumanHere]

There are hundreds of religiouns.

So even if a god exists (which is not unlikely, I will say that)

How would you know which religion worshippes the real god? So you have the probability of 1 in thousands to get it right, and if you don't you land in hell (accourding to most religiouns.)

Thats why its retarted to follow one religion all your life, you follow rules just for a 1 in 1000000 chance, not a good idea tbh
@thenewhebbe

Only thing that matters in every religion is not to steal, kill, lie, swearing, snitch or inflect pain on others.

 

[Deleted member 14693]

Alright, if God is not real you should provide me with proof

You made up god. So you need to proof he exists.

After all, you’re trying to change my mind. Whoever comes up with the take, has to provide evidence. So I wait

Your mind was already changed as a child. Your default mindset wasn't that there is a god that is allah

 

[Deleted member 32846]

Bro you just saying some bullshit acting like ur high IQ jfl

God is real and islam is the truth, historical evidence and the quran proves it

show me history and quran
quran has been disproven by science
and no history proves islam

 

[Deleted member 32846]

Alright, if God is not real you should provide me with proof. After all, you’re trying to change my mind. Whoever comes up with the take, has to provide evidence. So I wait!

burden of proof isnt on me even though i can disprove your god in several ways

if a teapot that starts a religion thats invisible and no science can prove it, its not on scientist to disprove it its on religious people to prove it, ill make thread that disproves islam, and christianity

 

[Deleted member 23359]

show me history and quran
quran has been disproven by science
and no history proves islam

watch these

 

[Deleted member 23359]

watch these

 

[alriodai]

If I would believe in one it would be Christianity cause christian societies always were the pinnacle of civilization those favoured by god and my grandfather felt my grandmothers sould and both were christian, so.

You just believe in Islam cause your idol said so (you don't follow any of the rules so I know you don't actually believe it, but you are a nigger so deep self thinking isn't expected in your case)

Looksmaxxing in the first place is forbidden in Islam if you take in count Quran + "Sunni hadiths"

But you know there's a technique that Muslims do nowadays:
-Any retarded hadith that make them look like 8th century bedouins retards = "weak hadiths bro!!"
-Any hadiths (with not much context) that make them look like good people = "authetnci hadith bro!! islam bro!!"
-Any bad shit muslim does "hes not tru muslim bro!!!"

I don't believe in any religion but there's a reason why Christian societies/countries mog the shit outta the bedouin retards in muslim countries, the only "muslim" countries that "mog" european/christian ones are the ones with oil like Saudi, Qatar lmao

Muslims are too much restricted because of their religion to do any actual scientific developpement or develop their society, in case you wonder, there is still child marriages in muslim countries

 

[Deleted member 14693]

watch these

How can someone talking be historical evidence. Again, its just someones thoughts

 

[alriodai]

show me history and quran
quran has been disproven by science
and no history proves islam

Not only that: Quran has been changed and corrupted overtime and WE DO HAVE histroical evidence of this, the Quran that was recited in the time of Muhammad is not the same one that is available today. Only Muslims contest and deny this. Muslims wanted to create a physical book after the death of Muhammad in order to preserve the "words of Allah" for future generations. This was due to the fact that a number of huffaz (memorizers) had perished in combat. Additionally, there were many problems with the many regional dialects of Arabic as Islam spread. In order to prevent verses from being understood differently depending on where you are in Arabia, Caliph Uthman sought to add diacritical marks. There were numerous problems with this procedure.

Consider these hadiths and tafsirs.

Surah al-Tawbah used to be similar in length to Surah al-Baqara:

“Malik said among what had been narrated by Ibn Wahb and Ibn Al Qasim and Ibn Abdul Hakam is that when the first part of Surat Bara'at was lost, ‘Bismillah Al Rahman Al Raheem’ was also lost along with it. It has also been narrated from Ibn Ajlan that he heard that Surat Bara'at was equal to the length of Surat Al Baqarah or approximately equal to it, so the part was gone and because of that "Bismillah Al Rahman Al Raheem" wasn't written between them (between the lost and the remaining part) .” (Tafsir al-Qurtubi on Surah al Bara'at)

Surah al-Ahzab used to be in similar length to Surah al-baqara, and a verse about stoning is missing:

"Umar said to me ‘How many verses are contained in the chapter of al-Ahzab?’ I said, ‘72 or 73 verses.’ He said it was almost as long as the chapter of the Cow, which contains 287 verses, and in it there was the verse of stoning." - Al-Muttaqi ‘Ali bin Husam al-Din in his book “Mukhtasar Kanz al-’Ummal” printed on the margin of Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Volume 2, page 2, in his hadith about chapter 33

A sheep ate a paper containing a verse about breastfeeding and stoning:

“It was narrated that ‘Aishah said: “The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.” Sunan ibn Majah Vol. 3, Book 9, Hadith 1944

The above is confirmed by Caliph Umar himself:

“'Abdullah b. 'Abbas reported that 'Umar b. Khattab sat on the pulpit of Messenger of Allah and said: Verily Allah sent Muhammad with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Messenger of Allah awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession.” Sahih Muslim 17:4194

If you're more interressed, read this

Bad apologetic arguments on Quran preservation and variants

By Avnar Sidiche This article is focused on arguments that are commonly made in popular discourse about Quran preservation, often a result of ill informed apologetic mythologies. Firstly, the follo…

quranvariants.wordpress.com

@Beastimmung tagging my boy beast, because the muzzlims retards who probably never read the quran or know shit about their religion will spew "muh its scientific miracles" (they were disproven 20 years ago) and muh it's preserved and histroical evidence (0 histroical evidence of it being preserved, but we do have the opposite tho)

 

[Corleone]

How would you know which religion worshippes the real god? So you have the probability of 1 in thousands to get it right, and if you don't you land in hell (accourding to most religiouns.)

haha, jokes on you, I of course was born into the one true religion.

 

[alriodai]

Y'know one of the funniest shit about muslims retards (christian ones don't debate that much or gaf about their religion that hard, they live life which they should do)

They make fun of the Big Bang Theory that "atheist" and non religious people believe in and be like "ahaha you believe the world and universe came from nothing!"

But when you ask them "who made your god" they literally just tell you that god was made from the big bang theory (in another rephrasing of course) JFL

@Beastimmung

 

[Deleted member 23359]

Not only that: Quran has been changed and corrupted overtime and WE DO HAVE histroical evidence of this, the Quran that was recited in the time of Muhammad is not the same one that is available today. Only Muslims contest and deny this. Muslims wanted to create a physical book after the death of Muhammad in order to preserve the "words of Allah" for future generations. This was due to the fact that a number of huffaz (memorizers) had perished in combat. Additionally, there were many problems with the many regional dialects of Arabic as Islam spread. In order to prevent verses from being understood differently depending on where you are in Arabia, Caliph Uthman sought to add diacritical marks. There were numerous problems with this procedure.

Consider these hadiths and tafsirs.

Surah al-Tawbah used to be similar in length to Surah al-Baqara:

“Malik said among what had been narrated by Ibn Wahb and Ibn Al Qasim and Ibn Abdul Hakam is that when the first part of Surat Bara'at was lost, ‘Bismillah Al Rahman Al Raheem’ was also lost along with it. It has also been narrated from Ibn Ajlan that he heard that Surat Bara'at was equal to the length of Surat Al Baqarah or approximately equal to it, so the part was gone and because of that "Bismillah Al Rahman Al Raheem" wasn't written between them (between the lost and the remaining part) .” (Tafsir al-Qurtubi on Surah al Bara'at)

Surah al-Ahzab used to be in similar length to Surah al-baqara, and a verse about stoning is missing:

"Umar said to me ‘How many verses are contained in the chapter of al-Ahzab?’ I said, ‘72 or 73 verses.’ He said it was almost as long as the chapter of the Cow, which contains 287 verses, and in it there was the verse of stoning." - Al-Muttaqi ‘Ali bin Husam al-Din in his book “Mukhtasar Kanz al-’Ummal” printed on the margin of Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Volume 2, page 2, in his hadith about chapter 33

A sheep ate a paper containing a verse about breastfeeding and stoning:

“It was narrated that ‘Aishah said: “The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.” Sunan ibn Majah Vol. 3, Book 9, Hadith 1944

The above is confirmed by Caliph Umar himself:

“'Abdullah b. 'Abbas reported that 'Umar b. Khattab sat on the pulpit of Messenger of Allah and said: Verily Allah sent Muhammad with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Messenger of Allah awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession.” Sahih Muslim 17:4194

If you're more interressed, read this

Bad apologetic arguments on Quran preservation and variants

By Avnar Sidiche This article is focused on arguments that are commonly made in popular discourse about Quran preservation, often a result of ill informed apologetic mythologies. Firstly, the follo…

quranvariants.wordpress.com

@Beastimmung tagging my boy beast, because the muzzlims retards who probably never read the quran or know shit about their religion will spew "muh its scientific miracles" (they were disproven 20 years ago) and muh it's preserved and histroical evidence (0 histroical evidence of it being preserved, but we do have the opposite tho)

This is the original quote in Tafsir al-Qurtubi:

وَقَالَ مَالِكٌ فِيمَا رَوَاهُ ابْنُ وَهْبٍ وَابْنُ الْقَاسِمِ وَابْنُ عَبْدِ الْحَكَمِ: إِنَّهُ لما سقط أو لها سَقَطَ بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ مَعَهُ. وَرُوِيَ ذَلِكَ عَنِ ابْنِ عَجْلَانَ أَنَّهُ بَلَغَهُ أَنَّ سُورَةَ "بَرَاءَةٌ" كَانَتْ تَعْدِلُ الْبَقَرَةَ أَوْ قُرْبَهَا فَذَهَبَ مِنْهَا فَلِذَلِكَ لَمْ يُكْتَبْ بَيْنَهُمَا بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ.

The word translated as "lost" is "سَقَطَ." By "lost", Imam Malik means "gone" i.e. "abrogated." He doesn't mean someone "misplaced" it which is why we no longer have it similar to the narration regarding Ibn Umar (Meanings of Ibn 'Umar's statement, "Much of the Qur'an is Gone").

The evidence that he does not mean "misplaced" is that another narration from Imam Malik exists that elaborates on this particular narration:

وروي عن مالك أنه قال: بلغنا أنها كانت نحو سورة البقرة ثم نسخ ورفع كثير منها وفيه البسملة
It was narrated from Imam Malik that he said: It reached us that it was as long as Surah Baqarah. Then, a lot of it was abrogated and taken up and among that (the abrogated) was the Basmalah.

 

[Deleted member 23359]

Not only that: Quran has been changed and corrupted overtime and WE DO HAVE histroical evidence of this, the Quran that was recited in the time of Muhammad is not the same one that is available today. Only Muslims contest and deny this. Muslims wanted to create a physical book after the death of Muhammad in order to preserve the "words of Allah" for future generations. This was due to the fact that a number of huffaz (memorizers) had perished in combat. Additionally, there were many problems with the many regional dialects of Arabic as Islam spread. In order to prevent verses from being understood differently depending on where you are in Arabia, Caliph Uthman sought to add diacritical marks. There were numerous problems with this procedure.

Consider these hadiths and tafsirs.

Surah al-Tawbah used to be similar in length to Surah al-Baqara:

“Malik said among what had been narrated by Ibn Wahb and Ibn Al Qasim and Ibn Abdul Hakam is that when the first part of Surat Bara'at was lost, ‘Bismillah Al Rahman Al Raheem’ was also lost along with it. It has also been narrated from Ibn Ajlan that he heard that Surat Bara'at was equal to the length of Surat Al Baqarah or approximately equal to it, so the part was gone and because of that "Bismillah Al Rahman Al Raheem" wasn't written between them (between the lost and the remaining part) .” (Tafsir al-Qurtubi on Surah al Bara'at)

Surah al-Ahzab used to be in similar length to Surah al-baqara, and a verse about stoning is missing:

"Umar said to me ‘How many verses are contained in the chapter of al-Ahzab?’ I said, ‘72 or 73 verses.’ He said it was almost as long as the chapter of the Cow, which contains 287 verses, and in it there was the verse of stoning." - Al-Muttaqi ‘Ali bin Husam al-Din in his book “Mukhtasar Kanz al-’Ummal” printed on the margin of Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Volume 2, page 2, in his hadith about chapter 33

A sheep ate a paper containing a verse about breastfeeding and stoning:

“It was narrated that ‘Aishah said: “The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.” Sunan ibn Majah Vol. 3, Book 9, Hadith 1944

The above is confirmed by Caliph Umar himself:

“'Abdullah b. 'Abbas reported that 'Umar b. Khattab sat on the pulpit of Messenger of Allah and said: Verily Allah sent Muhammad with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Messenger of Allah awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession.” Sahih Muslim 17:4194

If you're more interressed, read this

Bad apologetic arguments on Quran preservation and variants

By Avnar Sidiche This article is focused on arguments that are commonly made in popular discourse about Quran preservation, often a result of ill informed apologetic mythologies. Firstly, the follo…

quranvariants.wordpress.com

@Beastimmung tagging my boy beast, because the muzzlims retards who probably never read the quran or know shit about their religion will spew "muh its scientific miracles" (they were disproven 20 years ago) and muh it's preserved and histroical evidence (0 histroical evidence of it being preserved, but we do have the opposite tho)

By "lost" Imam Malik means "gone" i.e. "abrogated." He doesn't mean someone "misplaced" it which is why we no longer have it.

Basically, what Imam Malik said is that there were narrations from the Sahabah that Surah Tawbah used to be as long as Surah Baqarah. And he used this as evidence (because Surah Tawbah isn't currently as long as Baqarah) that there were other verses alongside the Basmalah that were in it, but are now abrogated.

This is the original quote in Tafsir Qurtubi:

وَقَالَ مَالِكٌ فِيمَا رَوَاهُ ابْنُ وَهْبٍ وَابْنُ الْقَاسِمِ وَابْنُ عَبْدِ الْحَكَمِ: إِنَّهُ لما سقط أو لها سَقَطَ بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ مَعَهُ. وَرُوِيَ ذَلِكَ عَنِ ابْنِ عَجْلَانَ أَنَّهُ بَلَغَهُ أَنَّ سُورَةَ "بَرَاءَةٌ" كَانَتْ تَعْدِلُ الْبَقَرَةَ أَوْ قُرْبَهَا فَذَهَبَ مِنْهَا فَلِذَلِكَ لَمْ يُكْتَبْ بَيْنَهُمَا بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ.

The word translated as "lost" in your translation is "سَقَطَ."

The evidence that he does not mean "misplaced" is that another narration from Imam Malik exists that elaborates on this particular narration in Tafsir Al-Qurtubi you quoted. Ibn Atiyah says:

وروي عن مالك أنه قال: بلغنا أنها كانت نحو سورة البقرة ثم نسخ ورفع كثير منها وفيه البسملة
It was narrated from Imam Malik that he said: It reached us that it was as long as Surah Baqarah. Then, a lot of it was abrogated and taken up and among that (the abrogated) was the Basmalah. (Tafsir Ibn Atiyah 3/3)
(Translation is mine)

Here, rather than "سَقَطَ", Imam Malik clearly says "abrogated and taken up."

In addition, saying Imam Malik meant "misplaced" doesn't make sense in context. This is because he says the Basmalah was also "lost" alongside it. In what sense, could someone claim the Basmalah is misplaced?

1. We have the letter by letter Basmalah obviously.
2. Imam Malik says we have knowledge that the Basmalah was part of Surah Tawbah.

So, in what sense could one claim the Basmalah was misplaced from Surah Tawbah?

In my opinion, "lost" was poor choice in translation, but even in English "lost" doesn't need to mean "misplaced." For example, if someone says: "I lost a million dollars," does he mean he misplaced them? No, he means he used to have them but for some reason no longer has them.

It is clear, then, that Imam Malik is saying it was abrogated as elaborated in the other narration.

As for evidence from the Quran that the earlier parts of Surah Tawbah are abrogated, that is easy. Open a mushaf. Do you see those parts of Surah Tawbah? If not, it was abrogated. The Quran is a mutawatir narration. It is its own proof that Surah Tawbah's verses are abrogated. No one narrated those verses to us, hence it is clear the Sahabah agreed on their abrogation (if they existed).

 

[Deleted member 23359]

By "lost" Imam Malik means "gone" i.e. "abrogated." He doesn't mean someone "misplaced" it which is why we no longer have it.

Basically, what Imam Malik said is that there were narrations from the Sahabah that Surah Tawbah used to be as long as Surah Baqarah. And he used this as evidence (because Surah Tawbah isn't currently as long as Baqarah) that there were other verses alongside the Basmalah that were in it, but are now abrogated.

This is the original quote in Tafsir Qurtubi:


The word translated as "lost" in your translation is "سَقَطَ."

The evidence that he does not mean "misplaced" is that another narration from Imam Malik exists that elaborates on this particular narration in Tafsir Al-Qurtubi you quoted. Ibn Atiyah says:


Here, rather than "سَقَطَ", Imam Malik clearly says "abrogated and taken up."

In addition, saying Imam Malik meant "misplaced" doesn't make sense in context. This is because he says the Basmalah was also "lost" alongside it. In what sense, could someone claim the Basmalah is misplaced?

1. We have the letter by letter Basmalah obviously.
2. Imam Malik says we have knowledge that the Basmalah was part of Surah Tawbah.

So, in what sense could one claim the Basmalah was misplaced from Surah Tawbah?

In my opinion, "lost" was poor choice in translation, but even in English "lost" doesn't need to mean "misplaced." For example, if someone says: "I lost a million dollars," does he mean he misplaced them? No, he means he used to have them but for some reason no longer has them.

It is clear, then, that Imam Malik is saying it was abrogated as elaborated in the other narration.

As for evidence from the Quran that the earlier parts of Surah Tawbah are abrogated, that is easy. Open a mushaf. Do you see those parts of Surah Tawbah? If not, it was abrogated. The Quran is a mutawatir narration. It is its own proof that Surah Tawbah's verses are abrogated. No one narrated those verses to us, hence it is clear the Sahabah agreed on their abrogation (if they existed).

It looks like translation problem after all jfl

 

[Deleted member 14693]

Y'know one of the funniest shit about muslims retards (christian ones don't debate that much or gaf about their religion that hard, they live life which they should do)

They make fun of the Big Bang Theory that "atheist" and non religious people believe in and be like "ahaha you believe the world and universe came from nothing!"

But when you ask them "who made your god" they literally just tell you that god was made from the big bang theory (in another rephrasing of course) JFL

@Beastimmung

Yeah.

They often argue that from nothing can come nothing.

But that god can come from nothing.

 

[Deleted member 23359]

Not only that: Quran has been changed and corrupted overtime and WE DO HAVE histroical evidence of this, the Quran that was recited in the time of Muhammad is not the same one that is available today. Only Muslims contest and deny this. Muslims wanted to create a physical book after the death of Muhammad in order to preserve the "words of Allah" for future generations. This was due to the fact that a number of huffaz (memorizers) had perished in combat. Additionally, there were many problems with the many regional dialects of Arabic as Islam spread. In order to prevent verses from being understood differently depending on where you are in Arabia, Caliph Uthman sought to add diacritical marks. There were numerous problems with this procedure.

Consider these hadiths and tafsirs.

Surah al-Tawbah used to be similar in length to Surah al-Baqara:

“Malik said among what had been narrated by Ibn Wahb and Ibn Al Qasim and Ibn Abdul Hakam is that when the first part of Surat Bara'at was lost, ‘Bismillah Al Rahman Al Raheem’ was also lost along with it. It has also been narrated from Ibn Ajlan that he heard that Surat Bara'at was equal to the length of Surat Al Baqarah or approximately equal to it, so the part was gone and because of that "Bismillah Al Rahman Al Raheem" wasn't written between them (between the lost and the remaining part) .” (Tafsir al-Qurtubi on Surah al Bara'at)

Surah al-Ahzab used to be in similar length to Surah al-baqara, and a verse about stoning is missing:

"Umar said to me ‘How many verses are contained in the chapter of al-Ahzab?’ I said, ‘72 or 73 verses.’ He said it was almost as long as the chapter of the Cow, which contains 287 verses, and in it there was the verse of stoning." - Al-Muttaqi ‘Ali bin Husam al-Din in his book “Mukhtasar Kanz al-’Ummal” printed on the margin of Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Volume 2, page 2, in his hadith about chapter 33

A sheep ate a paper containing a verse about breastfeeding and stoning:

“It was narrated that ‘Aishah said: “The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.” Sunan ibn Majah Vol. 3, Book 9, Hadith 1944

The above is confirmed by Caliph Umar himself:

“'Abdullah b. 'Abbas reported that 'Umar b. Khattab sat on the pulpit of Messenger of Allah and said: Verily Allah sent Muhammad with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Messenger of Allah awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession.” Sahih Muslim 17:4194

If you're more interressed, read this

Bad apologetic arguments on Quran preservation and variants

By Avnar Sidiche This article is focused on arguments that are commonly made in popular discourse about Quran preservation, often a result of ill informed apologetic mythologies. Firstly, the follo…

quranvariants.wordpress.com

@Beastimmung tagging my boy beast, because the muzzlims retards who probably never read the quran or know shit about their religion will spew "muh its scientific miracles" (they were disproven 20 years ago) and muh it's preserved and histroical evidence (0 histroical evidence of it being preserved, but we do have the opposite tho)

It was narrated by ‘Abdullah the son of Imam Ahmad in Zawaa’id al-Musnad (21207), ‘Abd ar-Razzaaq in al-Musannaf (599), Ibn Hibbaan in his Saheeh (4428), al-Haakim in al-Mustadrak (8068), al-Bayhaqi in as-Sunan (16911), Ibn Hazm in al-Muhalla (12/175), via ‘Aasim ibn Bahdalah, from Zirr, who said: Ubayy ibn Ka‘b said to me: How long is Soorat al-Ahzaab when you read it? Or how many verses do you think it is? I said to him: Seventy-three verses. He said: Only? There was a time when it was a long as Soorat al-Baqarah, and we read in it: “The old man and the old woman, if they commit zina, then stone them both, a punishment from Allah, and Allah is Almighty, Most Wise.”

Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

This is a clearly saheeh isnaad, as clear as the sun, in which there is no fault. End quote.

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

This is a hasan isnaad. This implies that there were more verses in it, then the wording and ruling were both abrogated. And Allah knows best.

End quote from Tafseer Ibn Katheer (6/335)

There is a corroborating report that was narrated by ‘Abdullah ibn Ahmad in Zawaa’id al-Musnad (21206): Wahb ibn Baqiyyah told me: Khaalid ibn ‘Abdullah at-Tahhaan informed me, from Yazeed ibn Abi Ziyaad, from Zirr ibn Hubaysh, from Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, who said: How many (verses) do you recite in Soorat al-Ahzaab? He said: Seventy-odd verses. He said: We recited it with the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) like al-Baqarah, or more than that, and verily the verse of stoning was in it.

Yazeed ibn Abi Ziyaad is da‘eef (weak), but there is nothing wrong with the hadeeth,as there is corroborating evidence for it.

This indicates that Soorat al-Ahzaab was a lengthy soorah like Soorat al-Baqarah, but most of it was abrogated.

In the answer to question no. 105746 we stated that abrogation in the case of the Qur’an is of three types: abrogation of both the verses and the ruling, abrogation of the ruling but not the verses, and abrogation of the verses but not the ruling.

With regard to the abrogation that took place in Soorat al-Ahzaab of this large number of verses, some of it comes under the heading of abrogation of the verses but not the ruling, as in the case of the verse on stoning, and some of it comes under the heading of abrogation of both the verses and the ruling – as stated above in the words quoted from Ibn Katheer.

Az-Zarqaani (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

With regard to abrogation of the verses but not the ruling, the fact that this occurred is indicated by the saheeh report from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab and Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, according to which they said: Among the words of Qur’an that were revealed were the words: “The old man and the old woman, if they commit zina, then stone them both”

You know that this verse no longer exists between the covers of the Mushaf or on the lips of the reciters, although the rulings remain in effect and have not been abrogated.

The fact that this occurred is also indicated by the saheeh report from Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, according to which he said: Soorat al-Ahzaab was equivalent (in length) to Soorat al-Baqarah, or longer…

End quote.

For more information, please see the answer to question no. 110237

Secondly:

With regard to what was mentioned in the report, that Ibn Mas‘ood (may Allah be pleased with him) used to say that the Mi‘wadhatayn (i.e., the last two soorahs of the Qur’an) were not part of the Qur’an, there are three scholarly views concerning that:

-1-

That the report is not soundly narrated from him. Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

Everything that has been narrated from Ibn Mas‘ood to suggest that the Mi‘wadhatayn and Umm al-Quran (the Essence of the Qur’an, i.e., Soorat al-Faatihah) were not part of the Mushaf, is false and fabricated, and is not saheeh. Rather what is narrated soundly from him is the recitation of ‘Aasim from Zirr ibn Hubaysh from Ibn Mas‘ood, which includes Umm al-Qur’an (al-Faatihah) and al-Mi‘wadhatayn.

End quote from al-Muhalla (1/32)

An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The Muslims are unanimously agreed that the Mi‘wadhatayn, al-Faatihah and all the soorahs that are written in the Mushaf are Qur’an, and that whoever denies any of that has disbelieved. What has been narrated from Ibn Mas‘ood about al-Faatihah and the Mi‘wadhatayn is false and is not soundly narrated from him.

End quote from al-Majmoo‘ (3/396)

-2-

He only said that they were not written in the Mushaf; he did not deny that they are part of the Qur’an.

Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

In Kitaab al-Intisaar, Al-Qaadi Abu Bakr al-Baaqillaani gave his interpretation of what was narrated from Ibn Mas‘ood, and he was followed in that by ‘Iyaad and others. He said: Ibn Mas‘ood did not deny that they (the Mi‘wadhatayn) were part of the Qur’an; rather he denied that they were written in the Mushaf. He thought that nothing should be written in the Mushaf except that which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) gave permission to write in it. It is as if news did not reach him that he had given permission for that. This is another way of understanding the report on his part; it is not a denial that they are Qur’an.

It is a good interpretation of the report; but the saheeh report that I quoted contradicts that view, as it says in it that he said that they are not part of the Book of Allah. Yes, the phrase ‘Book of Allah’ may be understood as referring to the Mushaf, thus it may be in harmony with the interpretation mentioned.

End quote from Fath al-Baari (8/743)

-3-

Initially he used to deny they were part of the Qur’an, but when it became clear to him that they are part of the Qur’an, he wrote them in his Mushaf and recanted his earlier opinion. Az-Zarqaani (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

It may be that the report that Ibn Mas‘ood denied that the Mi‘wadhatayn were part of the Qur’an – assuming that it is saheeh – was before he came to know of that, then when he came to know that they are part of the Qur’an, after that had been established by mutawaatir reports, and consensus had been formed that they were indeed part of the Qur’an, he was in the forefront of those who believed that they are part of the Qur’an.

One of them said: It may be that Ibn Mas‘ood did not hear the Mi‘wadhatayn from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and he did not hear mutawaatir reports to that effect, so he refrained from accepting or rejecting them. He should not be denounced for that, because he was examining the issue and he had to be certain about it. Perhaps this response is the one that will put one’s mind at rest, because in the recitation of ‘Aasim from Ibn Mas‘ood the Mi‘wadhatayn are confirmed (as part of the Qur’an). This recitation is saheeh and was narrated soundly (via saheeh isnaads) from Ibn Mas‘ood. The report that Ibn Ma‘ood denied that the Mi‘wadhatayn were part of the Qur’an was also narrated via isnaads that were classed as saheeh by Ibn Hajar. Therefore this denial is to be understood as having been earlier in the life of Ibn Mas‘ood, so as to reconcile between the two reports.

End quote from Manaahil al-‘Irfaan (1/275-276)

See also the answers to questions no. 178209 and 174796

And Allah knows best.

 

[Deleted member 32846]

By "lost" Imam Malik means "gone" i.e. "abrogated." He doesn't mean someone "misplaced" it which is why we no longer have it.

Basically, what Imam Malik said is that there were narrations from the Sahabah that Surah Tawbah used to be as long as Surah Baqarah. And he used this as evidence (because Surah Tawbah isn't currently as long as Baqarah) that there were other verses alongside the Basmalah that were in it, but are now abrogated.

This is the original quote in Tafsir Qurtubi:


The word translated as "lost" in your translation is "سَقَطَ."

The evidence that he does not mean "misplaced" is that another narration from Imam Malik exists that elaborates on this particular narration in Tafsir Al-Qurtubi you quoted. Ibn Atiyah says:


Here, rather than "سَقَطَ", Imam Malik clearly says "abrogated and taken up."

In addition, saying Imam Malik meant "misplaced" doesn't make sense in context. This is because he says the Basmalah was also "lost" alongside it. In what sense, could someone claim the Basmalah is misplaced?

1. We have the letter by letter Basmalah obviously.
2. Imam Malik says we have knowledge that the Basmalah was part of Surah Tawbah.

So, in what sense could one claim the Basmalah was misplaced from Surah Tawbah?

In my opinion, "lost" was poor choice in translation, but even in English "lost" doesn't need to mean "misplaced." For example, if someone says: "I lost a million dollars," does he mean he misplaced them? No, he means he used to have them but for some reason no longer has them.

It is clear, then, that Imam Malik is saying it was abrogated as elaborated in the other narration.

As for evidence from the Quran that the earlier parts of Surah Tawbah are abrogated, that is easy. Open a mushaf. Do you see those parts of Surah Tawbah? If not, it was abrogated. The Quran is a mutawatir narration. It is its own proof that Surah Tawbah's verses are abrogated. No one narrated those verses to us, hence it is clear the Sahabah agreed on their abrogation (if they existed).

all this just for ur religion to be made up pagan nonsense

 

[Deleted member 23359]

It was narrated by ‘Abdullah the son of Imam Ahmad in Zawaa’id al-Musnad (21207), ‘Abd ar-Razzaaq in al-Musannaf (599), Ibn Hibbaan in his Saheeh (4428), al-Haakim in al-Mustadrak (8068), al-Bayhaqi in as-Sunan (16911), Ibn Hazm in al-Muhalla (12/175), via ‘Aasim ibn Bahdalah, from Zirr, who said: Ubayy ibn Ka‘b said to me: How long is Soorat al-Ahzaab when you read it? Or how many verses do you think it is? I said to him: Seventy-three verses. He said: Only? There was a time when it was a long as Soorat al-Baqarah, and we read in it: “The old man and the old woman, if they commit zina, then stone them both, a punishment from Allah, and Allah is Almighty, Most Wise.”

Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

This is a clearly saheeh isnaad, as clear as the sun, in which there is no fault. End quote.

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

This is a hasan isnaad. This implies that there were more verses in it, then the wording and ruling were both abrogated. And Allah knows best.

End quote from Tafseer Ibn Katheer (6/335)

There is a corroborating report that was narrated by ‘Abdullah ibn Ahmad in Zawaa’id al-Musnad (21206): Wahb ibn Baqiyyah told me: Khaalid ibn ‘Abdullah at-Tahhaan informed me, from Yazeed ibn Abi Ziyaad, from Zirr ibn Hubaysh, from Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, who said: How many (verses) do you recite in Soorat al-Ahzaab? He said: Seventy-odd verses. He said: We recited it with the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) like al-Baqarah, or more than that, and verily the verse of stoning was in it.

Yazeed ibn Abi Ziyaad is da‘eef (weak), but there is nothing wrong with the hadeeth,as there is corroborating evidence for it.

This indicates that Soorat al-Ahzaab was a lengthy soorah like Soorat al-Baqarah, but most of it was abrogated.

In the answer to question no. 105746 we stated that abrogation in the case of the Qur’an is of three types: abrogation of both the verses and the ruling, abrogation of the ruling but not the verses, and abrogation of the verses but not the ruling.

With regard to the abrogation that took place in Soorat al-Ahzaab of this large number of verses, some of it comes under the heading of abrogation of the verses but not the ruling, as in the case of the verse on stoning, and some of it comes under the heading of abrogation of both the verses and the ruling – as stated above in the words quoted from Ibn Katheer.

Az-Zarqaani (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

With regard to abrogation of the verses but not the ruling, the fact that this occurred is indicated by the saheeh report from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab and Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, according to which they said: Among the words of Qur’an that were revealed were the words: “The old man and the old woman, if they commit zina, then stone them both”

You know that this verse no longer exists between the covers of the Mushaf or on the lips of the reciters, although the rulings remain in effect and have not been abrogated.

The fact that this occurred is also indicated by the saheeh report from Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, according to which he said: Soorat al-Ahzaab was equivalent (in length) to Soorat al-Baqarah, or longer…

End quote.

For more information, please see the answer to question no. 110237

Secondly:

With regard to what was mentioned in the report, that Ibn Mas‘ood (may Allah be pleased with him) used to say that the Mi‘wadhatayn (i.e., the last two soorahs of the Qur’an) were not part of the Qur’an, there are three scholarly views concerning that:

-1-

That the report is not soundly narrated from him. Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

Everything that has been narrated from Ibn Mas‘ood to suggest that the Mi‘wadhatayn and Umm al-Quran (the Essence of the Qur’an, i.e., Soorat al-Faatihah) were not part of the Mushaf, is false and fabricated, and is not saheeh. Rather what is narrated soundly from him is the recitation of ‘Aasim from Zirr ibn Hubaysh from Ibn Mas‘ood, which includes Umm al-Qur’an (al-Faatihah) and al-Mi‘wadhatayn.

End quote from al-Muhalla (1/32)

An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The Muslims are unanimously agreed that the Mi‘wadhatayn, al-Faatihah and all the soorahs that are written in the Mushaf are Qur’an, and that whoever denies any of that has disbelieved. What has been narrated from Ibn Mas‘ood about al-Faatihah and the Mi‘wadhatayn is false and is not soundly narrated from him.

End quote from al-Majmoo‘ (3/396)

-2-

He only said that they were not written in the Mushaf; he did not deny that they are part of the Qur’an.

Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

In Kitaab al-Intisaar, Al-Qaadi Abu Bakr al-Baaqillaani gave his interpretation of what was narrated from Ibn Mas‘ood, and he was followed in that by ‘Iyaad and others. He said: Ibn Mas‘ood did not deny that they (the Mi‘wadhatayn) were part of the Qur’an; rather he denied that they were written in the Mushaf. He thought that nothing should be written in the Mushaf except that which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) gave permission to write in it. It is as if news did not reach him that he had given permission for that. This is another way of understanding the report on his part; it is not a denial that they are Qur’an.

It is a good interpretation of the report; but the saheeh report that I quoted contradicts that view, as it says in it that he said that they are not part of the Book of Allah. Yes, the phrase ‘Book of Allah’ may be understood as referring to the Mushaf, thus it may be in harmony with the interpretation mentioned.

End quote from Fath al-Baari (8/743)

-3-

Initially he used to deny they were part of the Qur’an, but when it became clear to him that they are part of the Qur’an, he wrote them in his Mushaf and recanted his earlier opinion. Az-Zarqaani (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

It may be that the report that Ibn Mas‘ood denied that the Mi‘wadhatayn were part of the Qur’an – assuming that it is saheeh – was before he came to know of that, then when he came to know that they are part of the Qur’an, after that had been established by mutawaatir reports, and consensus had been formed that they were indeed part of the Qur’an, he was in the forefront of those who believed that they are part of the Qur’an.

One of them said: It may be that Ibn Mas‘ood did not hear the Mi‘wadhatayn from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and he did not hear mutawaatir reports to that effect, so he refrained from accepting or rejecting them. He should not be denounced for that, because he was examining the issue and he had to be certain about it. Perhaps this response is the one that will put one’s mind at rest, because in the recitation of ‘Aasim from Ibn Mas‘ood the Mi‘wadhatayn are confirmed (as part of the Qur’an). This recitation is saheeh and was narrated soundly (via saheeh isnaads) from Ibn Mas‘ood. The report that Ibn Ma‘ood denied that the Mi‘wadhatayn were part of the Qur’an was also narrated via isnaads that were classed as saheeh by Ibn Hajar. Therefore this denial is to be understood as having been earlier in the life of Ibn Mas‘ood, so as to reconcile between the two reports.

End quote from Manaahil al-‘Irfaan (1/275-276)

See also the answers to questions no. 178209 and 174796

And Allah knows best.

It is interesting to know that (Musnad Ahmad) is not a collection of the authentic Ahadeeth only, although this was the intention of Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, which is to scutinize his collection afterward and to keep the authentic Ahadeeth only. But-Subhan Allah- he passed away before doing so.
However, the Ahadeeth in Musnad Ahmad were classified by contemporsy great Imams, like Ahmad Shakir and Abdul-Rahman Al-Sa’aty Al-Banna.
With this in mind, here is the status of the relevant narrations;

1- The narration of Aysha RAA indicated that Suratul-Ahzab was 200 Ayat is a weak narration. It was narrated through (Ibn Luhaya’ah) and his narrations are rejected.

2- The narration of Ubay Ibn Ka’ab that he forgot 70 Ayat of the same Surah in which he couled not find is another weak narration. It was narrated through (Abdullah Inb Shuraik Al-A’amiry) and many scholars of Hadith do not recognize him as a trustworthy narrator. So, when he narrates what contradicts the consensus of whole Ummah regarding the number of the Ayat of Suratul-Ahzab, obviously, his narration is denied, as millions of Muslims nowadays memorize Suratul-Ahzab with their uninterrupted chain of trustworthy narrators that goes back to the Prophet SAAW Himself. They are unanimous that this Surah counts 73 Ayat only.


3- The only recognizable and accepted narration in this regard is what have been narrated by Ubay Ibn Ka’ab (Suratul-Ahzab was as long as Suratul-Bakarah, or even longer. It used to have the Ayah obligates stoning the adulterers till death).

But this Hadith does not mean that part of the Surah was dropped, intentionally or unintentionally. It means that at a certain time this Surah was in the same length of Surat- Al-Bakarah. However, the revelation of Surat-Al-Bakarah took almost 10 years! So, it was not completed whan Ubay RAA said what he said.
As of lacking (Ayatu-Rajm) or the punishment of stoning adulterers till death, that is correct as the recitation of this Ayah was abrogated from the Quran, while its rule is not obregated. The authentic Sunnah of the Prophet SAAW emphasized that He SAAW commanded His eminent companions to stone until death those who confessed committing adultery (married and not single people).

 

[Deleted member 23359]

all this just for ur religion to be made up pagan nonsense

god is real

 

[User49]

i follow veganism

 

[Deleted member 23359]

@alriodai thoughts ?

 

[Deleted member 14693]

@alriodai thoughts ?

No ones gonna read alla that. You prob didn't yourself

 

[Deleted member 23359]

No ones gonna read alla that. You prob didn't yourself

he keeps spreading missinformations so i had to step up ya feel me

if he's serious he will read it all

 

[Deleted member 14693]

he keeps spreading missinformations so i had to step up ya feel me

if he's serious he will read it all

You still didn't provide a single proof to me though (despite claiming there is)

 

[Deleted member 23359]

You still didn't provide a single proof to me though (despite claiming there is)

of what

 

[Deleted member 14693]

of what

That islam is the truth.

 

[Deleted member 23359]

That islam is the truth.

Evidence for the validity of Islam​

The evidence for the validity of Islam and the truthfulness of the Prophethood of the Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) is abundant and can hardly be enumerated. This evidence is sufficient to convince any wise and fair-minded person who is impartially and sincerely seeking the truth. We can sum up some of this proof as follows.

The evidence of sound human nature​

The call of Islam is in accordance with sound human nature, as is indicated by the words of Allah, may He be glorified and exalted (interpretation of the meaning):

“So set you (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)) turn your face towards the religion of pure Islamic Monotheism Hanifa (worship none but Allah Alone) Allah’s Fitrah (i.e. Allah’s Islamic Monotheism), with which He has created mankind. No change let there be in Khalqillah (i.e. the Religion of Allah Islamic Monotheism), that is the straight religion, but most of men know not” [ar-Rum 30:30].

And the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “There is no child who is not born in a state of fitrah, then his parents make him a Jew or a Christian or a Magian, just as animals bring forth animals with their limbs intact, do you see any deformed one among them?” Narrated by al-Bukhari (1358) and Muslim (2658).

The words “animals bring forth animals with their limbs intact” mean: just as an animal is born with its limbs intact and free of defects; anything that happens to it of cuts to its ears and so on happens after it is born.

Similarly, every human is born with an inherent inclination towards Islam, and any deviation from Islam is undoubtedly a departure from sound human nature. Therefore, we never find anything in the teachings of Islam that is contrary to sound human nature. Rather all of its teachings on beliefs and practical matters are in accordance with sound human nature. As for religions and ideologies other than Islam, they include things that are contrary to sound human nature. This is something that is quite clear and apparent to anyone who reflects and ponders.

Rational evidence​

There are many Islamic texts that address reason and direct people to examine the rational proof and evidence, and call upon people of sound reasoning and mature thinking to examine the definitive evidence for the soundness of Islam.

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“(This is) a Book (the Quran) which We have sent down to you, full of blessings that they may ponder over its Verses, and that men of understanding may remember” [Saad 38:29].

Al-Qadi ‘Iyad said concerning the miraculous aspects of the Quran:

“In it you will see that there is an explanation of a set of divine laws; it mentions the way of proof based on reason, presents arguments against the misguided followers of different religions and sects, and argues against them on the basis of strong and clear proof, using very easy and concise language. Those who pretend to be clever tried to come up with proof and evidence like that, but they were not able to do so.” (Ash-Shifa (1/390)

The texts of the revelation do not contain anything that is impossible according to rational thinking or that would be rejected by reason, and the texts never presented an argument that contradicts reason or contradicts any analogy based on rational thinking. Rather the proponents of falsehood never presented any analogy to support their falsehood but the Quran refuted it on the basis of truth and an argument that is based on clear reason.

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And no example or similitude do they bring (to oppose or to find fault in you or in this Quran), but We reveal to you the truth (against that similitude or example), and the better explanation thereof” [al-Furqan 25:33].

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

“Here Allah, may He be glorified, tells us that the disbelievers do not produce any rational argument to support their falsehood but He refutes it on the basis of truth, and presents arguments and evidence and examples that offer a better explanation thereof, are more convincing and give a clearer explanation of the truth than their argument and analogy.” (Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (4/106)

One of the examples of rational evidence in the Quran is the verse in which Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Do they not then consider the Quran carefully? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much contradiction” [an-Nisa 4:82].

In Tafsir al-Qurtubi it says:

“There is no one who speaks a great deal but you will find a lot of contradictions in his words, either in the presentation and wording, or in the meaning, or you will find discrepancies, or there will be untruths. Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, sent down the Quran and instructed them to reflect on it, because they will not find in it any discrepancies in the presentation of ideas, or any flaws in what it promotes, or any contradiction, or any lies in what they are told of matters of the unseen and what they conceal.” (Al-Jami‘ li Ahkam al-Quran (5/290)

Ibn Kathir said:

“That is, if it were fabricated and made up, as the ignorant polytheists and hypocrites said to themselves, “they would surely have found therein much contradiction” that is, many flaws and discrepancies. In other words, this Book is free of discrepancies and contradictions, therefore it is from Allah.” (Tafsir al-Quran al-‘Azim (1/802)

Miracles and signs of Prophethood​

Allah, may He be exalted, supported His noble Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) with numerous miracles and tangible signs that pointed to the truthfulness of his Prophethood and the soundness of his message, such as the splitting of the moon for him, the glorification of Allah by food and pebbles in front of him, the springing forth of water from between his fingers, the increasing of food, and other miracles and signs that were seen and witnessed by huge numbers of people, and have been transmitted to us via sahih isnads (sound chains of narration) that reach the level of tawatur. This gives rise to certainty.

An example of that is that which is narrated in a sahih report from ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud, that he said: We were with the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) on a journey and our supply of water ran low. He said: “Bring me a little leftover water.” So they brought a vessel in which there was a little water. He put his hand in the vessel, then said: “Come to a blessed, purifying water; and the blessing is from Allah.” And I saw the water springing from between the fingers of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). And we used to hear the food glorifying Allah as it was being eaten. (Narrated by al-Bukhari (3579)

Prophecies​

What is meant by prophecies here is what the revelation foretold of matters and events that would happen in the future, whether that was during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) or after his death.

The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) never foretold anything that would happen in the future, but it would happen exactly as he foretold. This indicates that Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, had revealed and disclosed to him some matters of unseen knowledge that could not be attained except by means of revelation.

One example of that is the report narrated by Abu Hurayrah, that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “The Hour will not begin until a fire emerges in the land of the Hijaz which will illuminate the necks of the camels in Busra.” (Narrated by al-Bukhari (7118) and Muslim (2902)

And it happened exactly as the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) had foretold, in 654 AH – approximately 644 years after his death. This was mentioned by historians, including al-‘Allamah Abu Shamah al-Maqdisi, in his book Dhayl ar-Rawdatayn. He was one of the scholars who lived at the time of this historical incident.

It was also mentioned by al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir in al-Bidayah wa'an-Nihayah (13/219), where he said: Then the year 654 AH began, in which there appeared fire in the land of the Hijaz by which the necks of the camels in Busra were illuminated, as it says in the agreed-upon hadith. Shaykh al-‘Allamah al-Hafiz Shihab ad-Din Abu Shamah al-Maqdisi spoke at length about that in his adh-Dhayl wa Sharhuhu, based on many letters that came to Damascus from the Hijaz, describing that fire that had been witnessed and seen, and how it emerged, and the story thereof.

To sum up what Abu Shamah said:

Letters came to Damascus from the Prophet’s City – may the best of blessings and peace be upon its inhabitant – speaking of the emergence of a fire in their land on 5
th Jumada al-Akhirah this year. The letters were written on 5th Rajab, when the fire was still burning, and they reached us on 10th Sha‘ban. Then he said: In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. At the beginning of Sha‘ban 654 AH, letters came to the city of Damascus from the city of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) describing a significant event that occurred there, in which there was confirmation of the hadith of Abu Hurayrah in as-Sahihayn, who said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “The Hour will not begin until a fire emerges in the land of the Hijaz which will illuminate the necks of the camels in Busra.” Someone whom I trust from among those who saw it told me that he heard that in Tayma letters had been written by its light.

He said: We were in our houses during those nights, and in the house of each one of us it was as if there was a lamp, but it had no heat and did not burn, despite its greatness; rather it was one of the signs of Allah, may He be glorified and exalted.”

Qualities and attributes of Prophet Muhammad​

One of the greatest proofs of the truthfulness of the Prophethood of the Messenger Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) is his own character and the noble attributes and great manners with which he was blessed, for the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) reached a level of human perfection in terms of good characteristics and attitudes that could only be attained by a Prophet who was sent from Allah.

There is no praiseworthy characteristic but he promoted it, enjoined it, encouraged it and acted in accordance with it; and there is no blameworthy characteristic but he forbade it, warned against it and was the furthest removed of all people from it.

His concern for good manners and attitudes reached such an extent that he gave as the reason for his mission the promotion of good attitudes and manners and striving against bad manners and attitudes. In the hadith from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), it tells us that he said: “I have only been sent to perfect good manners and attitudes.” (Narrated by Ahmad (8739). Al-Haythami said in al-Majma‘: It was narrated by Ahmad and its men are the men of as-Sahih.

Al-'Ajlouni classed its isnad as sahih in Kashf al-Khafa. It was also classed as sahih by al-Albani in Sahih al-Jami‘ (2349)

Miracles are indicative of the truthfulness of the Messenger. He told the people that he had been sent by Allah, may He be exalted, and some of them challenged him to prove that. So Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, supported him with miracles, which are extraordinary events. And he was also granted miracles without anybody challenging him or claiming that he was lying, which served to increase his followers in steadfastness.

The essence of the call of Prophet Muhammad​

The basis of the call of the noble Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) may be summed up as the aim to build sound beliefs on a sound textual and rational foundation. It is a call to believe in Allah and affirm His oneness in terms of His divinity and lordship. None is deserving of worship except one God, namely Allah, may He be glorified, for He is the Lord, Creator and Sovereign of this universe, Who controls it and disposes of its affairs; He governs it by His command, and is the One Who possesses the power to cause harm or bring benefit, and Who controls the provision of all creatures – and no one has any share of that with Him. Nothing is equal or like unto Him, so He, may He be glorified, is far above having any partners, rivals, peers or equals.

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)): ‘He is Allah, (the) One. ‘Allah-us-Samad (The Self-Sufficient Master, Whom all creatures need, He neither eats nor drinks). ‘He begets not, nor was He begotten; ‘And there is none co-equal or comparable unto Him’” [al-Ikhlas 112:1-4]

“Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)): ‘I am only a man like you. It has been inspired to me that your Ilah (God) is One Ilah (God i.e. Allah). So whoever hopes for the Meeting with his Lord, let him work righteousness and associate none as a partner in the worship of his Lord '' [al-Kahf 18:110].

The call of the noble Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was a call to destroy shirk of all kinds and to rid the two races (of mankind and the jinn) of everything that was worshipped on a basis of falsehood. So there is to be no worship of rocks, stars and graves, or of wealth, whims and desires, or the tyrannical rulers of the earth.

Rather it is a call that came to liberate humanity from the worship of other people and to bring them forth from the humiliation of idolatry and the oppression of tyrants, and to free them from the captivity of whims and desires.

This blessed call is regarded as a continuation and affirmation of the previous divinely revealed messages that called to belief in the oneness of Allah. Therefore Islam called people to believe in all the messengers and prophets, and to respect them and venerate them, and to believe in the Books that were revealed to them. A call such as this is undoubtedly true.

Foretelling of Islam​

The Books of the prophets foretold the coming of Islam and the Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). The Noble Quran tells us of the clear foretelling of the Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the Torah and Gospel, including cases where his name and description are clearly mentioned.

Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write (i.e. Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)) whom they find written with them in the Taurat (Torah) (Deut, xviii, 15) and the Injeel (Gospel) (John xiv, 16), - he commands them for Al-Ma’ruf (i.e. Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam has ordained); and forbids them from Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism of all kinds, and all that Islam has forbidden); he allows them as lawful At-Tayyibat ((i.e. all good and lawful) as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons, foods, etc.), and prohibits them as unlawful Al-Khabaith (i.e. all evil and unlawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons, foods, etc.), he releases them from their heavy burdens (of Allah’s Covenant), and from the fetters (bindings) that were upon them” [al-A‘raf 7:157]

“And (remember) when ‘Isa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), said: O Children of Israel! I am the Messenger of Allah unto you confirming the Taurat ((Torah) which came) before me, and giving glad tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad” [as-Saff 61:6].

In the books of the Jews and the Christians – the Torah and the Gospel – there are still glad tidings that foretell his coming and his message, and describe some of his characteristics, despite the continual attempts to erase and distort these glad tidings. An example of that is what is mentioned in the Book of Deuteronomy, 33:2:

“The Lord came from Sinai and dawned over them from Seir; he shone forth from Mount Paran… ” [New International Version]

It says in Mu‘jam al-Buldan (3/301):

“Paran is a Hebrew word that is Arabized as Faran. It is one of the names of Makkah that is mentioned in the Torah, and it was said that it is a name for the mountains of Makkah.

Ibn Makula Abu Bakr Nasr ibn al-Qasim ibn Quda‘ah al-Quda‘i al-Farani al-Iskandarani said: I heard that this refers to the mountains of Paran, which are the mountains of the Hijaz.

And in the Torah it says: Allah came from Sinai and dawned from Seir and shone forth from Paran.

His coming from Sinai refers to His speaking to Musa (peace be upon him). His dawning from Seir – which refers to the mountains of Palestine – refers to His sending down the Gospel to ‘Isa (peace be upon him). And His shining forth from the mountains of Paran refers to His sending down the Quran to Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him).”

The Noble Quran as a proof of the validity of Islam​

This is the greatest of miracles and signs, and the clearest of proof. It is the ultimate proof of Allah against His creation on the Day of Resurrection. It is miraculous from several angles, such as rhetorical, scientific, and legislative, and in the way in which it spoke of future events and unseen matters.

Commentary on at-Tur 52:34​

With regard to what is meant by the verse (interpretation of the meaning), “Let them then produce a recital like unto it (the Quran) if they are truthful” [at-Tur 52:34], it is a response to those who claimed that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was making up the Quran by himself.

Therefore the Quran challenged them to produce something like it, if they were telling the truth in their claim, because the implication of these claims was that this was something within the capability of human beings. If that was true, then what was preventing them from producing something like it, when they were masters of eloquence and rhetoric?

Allah challenged the disbelievers to produce something like it, but they were unable to do that, as the Quran tells us (interpretation of the meaning):

“Say: ‘If mankind and the jinns were together to produce the like of this Quran, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another’” [al-Isra 17:88].

And He challenged them to produce ten surahs like it, but they were unable to do that:

“Or, they say, ‘He has forged it.’ Say, ‘Then bring ten chapters similarly forged and call for aid from whom you can besides Allah, if what you say is the truth’” [Hud 11:13].

And He challenged them to produce a single surah like it, but they were unable to do that:

“And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Quran) to Our slave (Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)), then produce a Surah (chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful” [al-Baqarah 2:23].

With regard to the nature of the miracle with which the Quran challenged them , the scholars differed concerning that. There are several views, the most likely of which to be correct is what al-Alusi said:

“The Quran as a whole, and parts of it, even the shortest surah of it, is a miracle in terms of its composition and eloquence, and its speaking of the unseen, and its harmony with reason and its precise meanings. All these aspects may appear in one verse, or some of them may not be present, such as telling of the unseen. There is no harm in that and no flaw, because what is there is sufficient.” (Ruh al-Ma‘ani (1/29)

All the proofs mentioned above in general terms may be discussed in much more detail, but we do not have room to do so here. It is more appropriate to read about that in specialised books. Every Muslim is advised to seek knowledge of the Quran and Sunnah, and to study the books of correct ‘aqidah, and to learn about his religion so that he can be a good Muslim and worship his Lord with understanding.

And Allah knows best.

 

[Deleted member 14693]

Similarly, every human is born with an inherent inclination towards Islam, and any deviation from Islam is undoubtedly a departure from sound human nature. Therefore, we never find anything in the teachings of Islam that is contrary to sound human nature. Rather all of its teachings on beliefs and practical matters are in accordance with sound human nature. As for religions and ideologies other than Islam, they include things that are contrary to sound human nature. This is something that is quite clear and apparent to anyone who reflects and ponders.

Thats already the biggest bullshit I heard. I don't see any proof.

Every human is naturally born with an inclination towards Islam? What? Why did in most cultures develop a polytheistic religion. If humans supposedly have a inclination towards Islam.

Also Islam has many teachings that seperate from human nature. For example not eating certain types of food, how is that natural human behaviour? It clearly isn't.

Not gonna read further if the first paragraph already has a million logical errors and doesn't provide any proof.