Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Qualities of Allah

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 9
1
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Noah
« on: June 22, 2021, 07:56:15 AM »
Lol, thanks for the answers. I can disprove them now even more on the third point. Just discovered that for Verse 31:14,
"And We have commanded people to ˹honour˺ their parents. Their mothers bore them through hardship upon hardship, and their weaning takes two years (عامين). So be grateful to Me and your parents. To Me is the final return."

The word used here was عامين (dual form of عام) which is supposed to mean "good years" according to them. Except literally when the Verse says the mother faced "hardship upon hardship" for two عام, I dont think those عام were "good years". Now if they argue that the baby's weaning in the baby's point of view were part of the "good years", I dont think trying to give the baby other food, they would like to be given food other than breast milk when that is all that it wants.  So that is also hardship.

2
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Noah
« on: June 21, 2021, 08:43:28 AM »
Quote
Sixth, Verse 29:14 itself says that Noah REMAINED WITH HIS PEOPLE, and not lived, for 1000 minus 50 years, thus "proving" that the Quran never said Noah lived for 950 years.
Finally, they say that after doing the math, 1000 سنة minus 50 عام, which unit should the answer be in, سنة or عام? Thus, they say that just doing simple math here doesn't make sense, "falsyfing" the claim that Noah lived for 950 years. (I find this reasoning to be poor because سنة and عام mean the same thing and are synonyms, so the answer would be in سنة or عام.



The number of Letters and number of years perfectly matching exists throughout the Glorious Quran, and is one of the Quran's beautiful Numerical Miracles phenomenon that were discovered.  Prophet Noah's Chapter is written in exactly 950 Letters.  Not 951 or 949.  Prophet Noah is also the cornerstone of the Glorious Quran's number 19 Miracle.  He is the only Prophet that was given this Divine Honor from Allah Almighty.  This is thoroughly demonstrated with 1000s of scanned images at:

www.answering-christianity.com/100_percent_guarantee_that_quran_is_divine.htm


The doomed-to-Hell infidels are bankrupt, and they're on their way to Eternal Destruction.  They think it is laughs and jokes.


Take care,
Osama Abdallah

Yes brother we agree that the Surah Nuh is made of 950 letters but these are Muslims making this claim and they also believe in the Quran. They just say the 950 years things is interpreted differently. So can you shut these hypocrites up by refuting it point by point?

3
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Noah
« on: June 18, 2021, 04:01:56 PM »
-Scientifically speaking, it's impossible to determine the age of death of a historical figure whose womb is not examined.
-There is nothing that makes his age of death impossible. Allah is All-powerful.

Jazakumullah for the answer. However they made many points and not just this one.

4
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Noah
« on: June 17, 2021, 09:02:17 PM »
Assalamu Alaykum,
The Quran says Noah lived for 950 years in Verse 29:14,
[29:014]"Indeed, We sent Noah to his people, and he remained among them for a thousand years, less fifty. Then the Flood overtook them, while they persisted in wrongdoing."

Some Muslims argue that living for 950 years makes no sense and that is not what Allah meant. They say that Allah is not concerned with ages of people so Allah did not mention the age of Noah and instead Allah said "1000 less fifty" (not 950 directly). They argue that the word used for "years" in "1000 years" is سَنَةٍ, which is associated with bad years and for "minus 50 years" the word used was عَامًا, which is associated with good years. They prove this claim by saying that the use of the word عام is found in Quran 12:49, which reads: "'Then a year (عَامٌ) will come after that when people will receive showers, and in which they will press [grapes].'"

As you can see, the use of عام here denotes a good year where people will receive rains and make wine. And for the word سَنَة, they say that it is found in Quran 5:26: "He said: 'It will proscribed on them for forty years (سَنَةً). They will wander around the earth, so do not worry about such perverse people.'"

Here, the Holy Land is forbidden upon the Jews for 40 years and the word used was سَنَةً. So, those Muslims say that سنة refers to bad years and عام refers to good years. So, Muslims argue that for Noah's case, 1000 سنة is metaphorical and means that it means Noah experienced a lot of bad, oppressed years except only 50 عام, or only a few years of spiritual progress. They say that 1000 years minus 50 years does not mean Muslims just do easy math (1000-50=950) since Allah could have said 950 years directly.

So basically their argument is that 1000 and 50 are metaphorical numbers and not literal, saying that 1000 merely means a lot (of bad years) and 50 means a little (good years). Then they use Verse 29:43 to justify that the Quran was being metaphorical, "These are parables We make up for mankind, though only the learned will use their [powers of] reason."

"These are parables", they say means that Noah's age and many other stories in the Quran are metaphorical and this Verse is especially referring to Noah's age because both verses (the one about Noah's age and the other that says "these are parables") are in the same Surah (Surah Ankabut). Then, they also use Verse 48:23 to prove that lifespans are always the same and they are not getting shorter or longer. The Verse reads: "[This is] the established way of Allah which has occurred before. And never will you find in the way of Allah any change."

So they say Allah's way can not change, as a result lifespans cannot change either because they are part of Allah's way.

Finally, they go back to Verse 29:14 itself, "Indeed, We sent Noah to his people, and he remained among them for a thousand years, less fifty. Then the Flood overtook them, while they persisted in wrongdoing."

They say that it says he "remained" among his people and that it never says "he lived for". So they say that the Quran isn't talking about how long he lived at all.

Ok so here are the summaries of the points they made to prove that Noah did not live 950 years but a normal lifespan:

  • First, living 950 years makes no sense scientifically as scientists say that the lifespan is increasing, not decreasing.
  • Second, Allah is not concerned with the ages of people since it has nothing to do with guiding people.
  • Third, Allah never directly said 950 years but instead said 1000 سنة minus 50 عام. And they "proved" that عام means good years and سنة means bad years using Quran 12:49 and 5:26. They say that 1000 and 50 are metaphorical numbers and just mean that Noah achieved many years of oppression and only a few years of spiritual progress.
  • Fourth, the same chapter where Noah is said to live 950 years says in Verse 43 that God gives parables to mankind, concluding that God "confirms" Noah's age was a parable and not literal.
  • Fifth, Verse 48:23 is used to say that God does not change his way. Thus, "proving" that lifespans were never different and longer before and were always the same as they are part of God's way.
  • Sixth, Verse 29:14 itself says that Noah REMAINED WITH HIS PEOPLE, and not lived, for 1000 minus 50 years, thus "proving" that the Quran never said Noah lived for 950 years.
  • Finally, they say that after doing the math, 1000 سنة minus 50 عام, which unit should the answer be in, سنة or عام? Thus, they say that just doing simple math here doesn't make sense, "falsyfing" the claim that Noah lived for 950 years. (I find this reasoning to be poor because سنة and عام mean the same thing and are synonyms, so the answer would be in سنة or عام.

So these are their points, and is it possible for you to refute all the points they made? Please refute their claim point by point.

Thank you,
Qualities of Allah



5
Learn Arabic / Verb Conjugation Part I: Simple Sound Verbs (Form I)
« on: June 14, 2021, 02:33:56 PM »
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
Last topic we said verbs are marked with 7 different categories. Now I will tell you which categories we will discuss these days. We will discuss tenses, persons, numbers, and genders for sure now and in the near days inshallah. We may discuss voices in the near days. We may or may not discuss moods in the near future (but we will definitely discuss the imperative mood).  We will most likely not discuss forms EVER (that's because I find them very complicated and hard, lol). (*NOTE: Just because I won't discuss some things doesn't mean that you can't research it yourself, if you really want to know.*)

We will talk about form I verbs, because they are the normal verbs (for me, lol). But forms are out of the picture so I will pretend as if they don't even exist. First of all, in verb conjugation, verbs are divided into 2 categories, sound and weak, which in turn are divided into three categories each. Sound verbs are divided into simple sound verbs, hamzated verbs, and doubled root verbs. Weak verbs are divided into hollow, defective, and assimilated verbs. In this topic, we will discuss simple sound verbs only and conjugate them into all tenses, persons, and numbers.

Simple sound verbs are those verbs that have 3 letters without any "weak" letters, which are ا،و،ي. They are verbs like كَتَبَ (to write) and فَتَحَ (to open).

First we will conjugate a verb in the past tense. We will choose the verb كَتَبَ (to write). كَتَبَ is actually the singular past tense third person masculine form of the verb and literally means "he wrote" instead of "to write." In the Arabic dictionary, verbs are represented by the singular past tense third person masculine form.  So in the past tense, letters are added to the END of the verb (suffix), when conjugating. We do not look at the beginning of the verb AT ALL in past tense.

Let us start conjugating:

Third person singular

كَتَبَ: He wrote
كَتَبَتْ: She wrote

Third person dual

كَتَبَا: They (m.) wrote
كَتَبَتَا: They (f.) wrote

Third person plural

كَتَبُوا: They (m.) wrote
كَتَبْنَ: They (f.) wrote

Second person singular

كَتَبْتَ: You (m.) wrote
كَتَبْتِ: You (f.) wrote

Second person dual

كَتَبْتُمَا: You (m. or f.) wrote

Second person plural

كَتَبْتُمْ: You (m.) wrote
كَتَبْتُنَّ: You (f.) wrote

First person singular

كَتَبْتُ: I wrote

First person dual and plural

كَتَبْنَا: We wrote

So now we are done with the past tense. We will move on to the present tense. In the present tense, you add a letter to the BEGINNING of the verb (prefix) and sometimes you also add letters to the end of the verb (suffix). Lets conjugate:

Third person singular

يَكْتُبُ: He writes
تَكْتُبُ: She writes

Third person dual

يَكْتُبَانِ: They (m.) write
تَكْتُبَانِ: They (f.) write

Third person plural

يَكْتُبُوْنَ: They (m.) write
يَكْتُبْنَ: They (f.) write

Second person singular

تَكْتُبُ: You (m.) write
تَكْتُبِيْنَ: You (f.) write

Second person dual

تَكْتُبَانِ: You (m. or f.) write

Second person plural

تَكْتُبُوْنَ: You (m.) write
تَكْتُبْنَ: You (f.) write

First person singular

اَكْتُبُ: I write

First person dual and plural

نَكْتُبُ: We write

Now we are done with the present tense. We will move on to future tense. The future tense is easy, just take the appropriate present tense verb and add a سَ or the word سَوْفَ before it. Let us start:

Third person singular

 سَيَكْتُبُ : He will write
 سَتَكْتُبُ :She will write

Third person dual

سَيَكْتُبَانِ: They (m.) will write
سَتَكْتُبَانِ: They (f.) will write

Third person plural

سَيَكْتُبُوْنَ: They (m.) will write
سَيَكْتُبْنَ: They (f.) will write

Second person singular

سَتَكْتُبُ: You (m.) will write
سَتَكْتُبِيْنَ: You (f.) will write

Second person dual

سَتَكْتُبَانِ: You (m. or f.) will write

Second person plural

سَتَكْتُبُوْنَ: You (m.) will write
سَتَكْتُبْنَ: You (f.) will write

First person singular

سَاَكْتُبُ: I will write

First person dual and plural

سَنَكْتُبُ: We will write

Now we are done with all tenses.

Let me give you a trick to remember the second person of the past tense. Just use the word اَنْتَ (you m.) as the model.

  • اَنْتَ كَتَبْتَ (you [m.] write)
  • اَنْتِ كَتَبْتِ (you [f.] write)
  • اَنْتُمَا كَتَبْتُمَا (you [m. or f. dual] write)
  • اَنْتُمْ كَتَبْتُمْ (you [m. plural] write)
  • اَنْتُنَّ كَتَبْتُنَّ (you [f. plural] write)

Now I shall tell you a trick for the present tense. For the present tense you only use the letters ا،ن،ي،ت as prefixes. ا is only for first person singular (I), ن is only for first person plural (We), ت is for all of second person, and ي is for all of third person (except for the feminine singular and dual, which uses ت instead of ي).

So I shall end this topic now.

Bye.



6
Learn Arabic / Verbs: 7 categories
« on: June 12, 2021, 04:11:23 PM »
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

We have covered family relationships, which are nouns. Now we will do some verbs.

First of all verbs in Arabic are marked with 7 different categories,  which are tenses, voices, forms, numbers, genders, persons, and moods (non-past only). There are:

  • 3 tenses (past, present, future)
  • 2 voices (active, passive)
  • 19 forms (Form I, Form II,...Form XIX)
  • 3 numbers (singular, dual, plural)
  • 3 persons (1st person, 2nd person, 3rd person)
  • 6 moods for non-past only (indicative, jussive, subjunctive, imperative, short energetic, long energetic)
  • 2 genders (masculine, feminine)








7
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Abrogation
« on: June 10, 2021, 01:42:10 PM »
I read tafsirs on 33:50 and the part where the Verse says "this is only for you (Prophet) and not the other believers" refers only to "any women who offer themselves to you" and not the cousins mentioned in the before part of the verse. So basically what you are saying here, anyone can marry their cousins, not just the Prophet.
Quote
  The Noble Verse was to the Prophet, but the Law was a general one for all Muslim men on whom they can marry from their relatives and others.

You are correct, and these Verses do not bother me anymore because you have answered my questions.

Jazakallah Khayran also.

8
Quran Morality and Moral Code, Laws & QA / Re: Peace or not
« on: June 05, 2021, 01:15:25 PM »
then how come in 8: 61 it says that if they incline to peace you should also incline to it. It says peace, not surrender.

Muslims do not wage or start any war. They fight in self-defense AFTER the kafirs wage war. About why the Muslims can not call for peace in a war, the conflict and fitnah will not be fully gone if Muslims don't keep fighting the kafirs until they surrender. They will come back again. About "if they incline to peace, thou incline to peace" that is IF the kafirs want peace FIRST then Muslims should listen to them and end the war.

In other words, Muslims do not ask for peace FIRST when they are fighting a self-defense war but if the enemies ask for peace FIRST, then Muslims must listen. If the kafirs come back to fight though after requesting peace, the cycle is repeated (Muslims do not ask for peace first but if the kafirs do, then you also.)

9
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Abrogation lies
« on: June 04, 2021, 10:04:32 AM »
You're arguing too much over this point and it is becoming annoying.  I don't know the details of how the Noble Verse was executed during the Prophet's days, and I don't really care.  The Noble Verse above is crystal clear:  Any and all free women are forbidden upon the Prophet in marriage.  He could only interact with any slave woman he may have owned at the time.  And again and again, Allah Almighty Commanded all Muslims to end all forms of slavery in the Muslims' lands.  Let's move on to the next "abrogation" lie.



The gospel of porn, i.e., "bible" can't even decide on whether brothers can do their little sister or not.  It literally praises them for lusting over her and her "little" breasts, as they called her breasts:

www.answering-christianity.com/ac10.htm#links

Yet, this pornography is upheld while being part of the pile of dung, i.e., bible, as the Holy Word of GOD.


You mean these specific Verses you don't want to talk about or you want to stop this "abrogation lies" topic completely?

Quote
Let's move on to the next "abrogation" lie.

Do you mean move on to supposed other verses talking about "abrogation" or what you said afterwards about the "Bible can't even make up its mind"? Because if you meant the former then I dont have any Verses yet under question. They will come later in time.

جزاك الله خيرا

10
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Abrogation
« on: June 03, 2021, 09:17:07 PM »
.

11
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Abrogation
« on: June 03, 2021, 06:23:28 PM »
Yes I realized that it was in the singular but I thought that in modern day this could also apply to the reader of the Quran
who has 4 wives since the Quran talks to everyone. But I guess it only refers to the Prophet.

An abrogation is when a general Law is permanently nullified by another. This does not exist in the Glorious Quran.  Christianity's prohibition of polygamy, for example, would qualify as an abrogation in their lala world of buffoonery, even though Jesus never forbade it:

www.answering-christianity.com/jesus_problematic_hyperboles.htm

Because their religion is a religion of lies, it is filled with lies on GOD Almighty, and it has turned sinful into lawful and lawful into sinful.


If the Prophet was in a position where any further marriage became forbidden for him because he had more than four wives at the time Allah Almighty set that limit, then this is not an abrogation.  The Prophet's situation here is not a general Law for all Muslims and for all times and places.  The Law about a woman offering herself to the Prophet can still be applied for slave women.  Believing slaves owned by Muslims did exist back then.  She could still be his female harem.  But then again, one of Islam's Grand Goals is to end all slavery:

[090:012] And what will make you comprehend what the uphill road is?
[090:013] (It is) the setting free of a slave,


So one of the monumental tasks upon the Muslims is to end all forms of slavery.  Yet, the Glorious Quran also allows enslaving, buying slaves, selling slaves, having harems (female slaves).  So is this a contradiction?  No.  Is this an abrogation (90:12-13 abrogating all other verses or vise versa)?  No.  All Noble Verses concerning slaves and slavery still stand TILL THIS DAY!  All 6236 Noble Verses that make up the entire Glorious Quran still stand today and will always stand till the Day of Judgment.  We have no abrogation here.  The Muslim State and Court and people must be mindful that Allah Almighty has set high and monumental goals in the Glorious Quran.  In the interim of things, however, the slavery Noble Verses could be activated and applied due to battles that may occur or deals and/or transactions.  But the ultimate goal must be to end all forms of slavery in all Muslim lands.

As to why the Noble Verses that are limited to the Prophet exist in the Glorious Quran, this belongs to Allah Almighty.  No one can really answer this one.  I can however remind you that the Glorious Quran's Text and number of verses is STUNNINGLY miraculous:

www.answering-christianity.com/ac20.htm#links


Take care,
Osama Abdallah
So you're saying that the Verse that prohibits marrying women "after this" can apply to people who have 4 wives in modern day am I right? And why Allah talked to only the prophet in the quran is unknown?

Please confirm or fix what I'm saying.

No, it was only limited to the Prophet.  The Noble Verse is speaking in singular and directly to him:  LAKA (to you) is singular and is directly speaking to a single person and ignores everyone else around; to thee, and it is masculine.  If you direct LAKA to someone in a group, it would single him out.  The feminine form of LAKA is LAKI.  LAKUMA is a dual plural (dual plural even for two women).  LAKUM is a plural of three or more of either mixed gender or all men.  LAKUN is for three or more women.


I believe the prohibition for the Prophet from marrying more women and from divorcing and marrying women as a replacement is to prevent the Prophet from abusing marriage and divorce.  If the Prophet himself was practicing Muta, then this would've ended it dead in its track right there for him.  The sacredness of marriage is big in Islam, and the Covenant of Marriage in Islam is a SOLEMN ONE.  Mithaqan Ghaleetha ميثاقا غليظا (solemn covenant) was given three times in the Glorious Quran:

1-  To the solemn covenant between Allah Almighty and the Jews on the sacredness of the Sabbath.

2-  To the solemn covenant between Allah Almighty and the Prophets.

3-  To the solemn covenant between the husband and wife.

Please visit: www.answering-christianity.com/was_muta_immoral.htm


Take care,
Osama Abdallah

So this law (33:50) that was replaced by another (33:52) was ONLY for the Prophet. And based on what you said, the law for the Prophet ONLY if replaced by another law is not abrogation since it is not a general law to Muslims for all times and places. Am I correct?

I think maybe 33:50 was revealed to the Prophet to provide for needy and poor women who lost their husbands by marrying them. And later, maybe 33:52 was revealed to, like you said, not make the Prophet abuse marriage. So first Allah revealed 33:50 to provide for needy women and then later after a while, Allah (always) knew that marriage to too many women would likely make the Prophet neglect the Covenant of Marriage. Am I wrong?


12
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Abrogation
« on: June 03, 2021, 03:05:48 PM »
I would like to make my small contribution to this discussion:

According to this concept, Repeals in the Qu’ran (Al-Nasekh and Al-Mansoukh), it is said that some verses of the Qu’ran are repealed and invalidated by other verses! The verse that is abrogating is called Al-Nasekh, while the repealed verse is called Al-Mansoukh.

Although the concept was originally invented by a few scholars as a consequence of their poor understanding of the Qu’ran, it has been widely exploited by enemy Quran writers to tarnish the perfection and divinity of the book.
As stated, the concept of abrogation implies that some Quranic verses have been abrogated by other verses.
On the other hand, writers who are enemies of Islam claim that these verses, and others that they put forward, are in fact contradictions within the Qu’ran.
So, they use these examples to refute the divinity of the Qu’ran.
It should be noted that the examples used by Muslim scholars as "abrogated verses" are not always the verses used by non-Muslim writers; they then speak of "contradictions in the Qur’an ".
Although it can be said that the common point between these two groups is their poor understanding of the Qur'an, it should also be added that in the case of non-Muslim writers, and particularly those who do not speak Arabic, a large number of their assertions in favor of contradictions is only the product of their use of imprecise and misleading translations of the Qur'an.
Both of these claims can be refuted in the light of the Qu’ran. They can be shown to be nothing more than a weak understanding of the Book.

Alif, Lâm, Ra. A Scripture whose signs have been confirmed, and then detailed, from a knowledgeable Sage. Qu’ran, 11: 1

There is for them a good announcement in the life here below as well as in the ultimate life. - There will be no change in the words of Allah -. This is the huge success! Qu’ran, 10:64

These Quranic verses clearly state that God's words are perfect and cannot be abrogated, yet some have fabricated the biggest lie about the Qu’ran, claiming that some verses abrogate others. They base their words on a misinterpretation of this verse:
First verse, 2: 106
If We abrogate (“nansakh”) any Ayah or cause it to be forgotten, We bring a better one, or a similar one. Don't you know that Allah is Omnipotent? Quran, 2: 106

Interpreters claim that this verse confirms that some verses invalidate others.
They interpret the word "ayah" to mean a verse in the Qur'an; and they interpret the word "nansakh" to mean "to abrogate".
But does this word, as used in the Quran, really mean to abrogate?
The word "Ayah", as used in many verses of the Quran, can have four different meanings:

It can mean a miracle from God:
And indeed, We gave Moses nine obvious Ayahs (miracles). (…) Quran, 17: 101
It can also mean an example for people:
And the people of Noah, when they denied the messengers, We drowned them and made an example (Ayah) to the people. (…) Quran, 25:37
The word "Ayah" can also mean sign:
"O my Lord, said (Zechariah), grant me a sign (Ayah)". “Your sign (Ayah), says (Allah,) will be that you will not be able to talk to people for three nights while being well. Quran, 19:10
And finally, it can denote a verse from the Quran:
(Here is) a blessed Book which We have sent down to you, that they may meditate on its verses (Ayat) and those who are gifted with intelligence may reflect! Quran, 38:29
If we now consider verse 106 of sura 2, one can easily verify that the word "Ayah" cannot refer here to a verse from the Quran. It can correspond to other meanings (miracle, example or sign), but not to a Quranic verse.

Here's why :
1) The words "may We make him forget" cannot be applied to a verse from the Quran.
How could a verse from the Quran be forgotten?
Because even if the verse is invalidated by others (as falsely claimed by the interpreters), it will still be part of the Quran and therefore cannot be forgotten.

2) The words "We bring a similar one" would be meaningless if the word "Ayah" meant a Koranic verse, simply because it would be absurd for God to invalidate a verse and replace it with an identical one!
3) If the word “Ayah” in verse 106 means a miracle, example or sign, then all the words in the verse have a perfect meaning. The words "may We make him forget" can be applied to all three meanings, and this is what happens with the passage of time. The miracles of Moses and Jesus have been forgotten. We only believe in them because they are mentioned in the Quran.

Likewise, the words "We bring a better, or the like" accord with the miracles of God.
God replaces a miracle with its like or one that is greater. Consider the following verse:
We actually sent Moses with Our miracles (Ayah), to Pharaoh and his notables. He said, "I am the Messenger of the Lord of the universe." Then when he came to them with Our miracles (Ayah), they laughed. Each miracle (Ayah) We showed them was more convincing than its previous one. And We seized them with the chastisement, perhaps they will return (to Us). Quran, 43: 46-48

The word "nansakh" used in 2: 106 comes from the verb "Nasakha". It is said that this word means to repeal.
But a careful study of all the Quranic verses using this word shows that it actually has the opposite meaning. It means to record or put in writing.
When God means "substitute", the word used is “Baddala”, as in 16: 101.
When We replace ("baddalna") one "Ayat" with another - and God knows better what He sends down - they say, "You made it up." But most of them do not know. Quran, 16:10
The replacement in question here can relate to two things:
a) replacing one scripture with another. This first meaning can be validated by the following verse:
And upon you We sent down the Book with the truth, to confirm the Books which were there before it and to prevail over them. (…) Quran, 5:48

Here, the words "prevail over them" confirm that the previous scriptures are replaced by the Qur'an.
b) Replacing one law in one scripture with another in a subsequent scripture. This second meaning is also proven by the Quran, where various things previously prohibited for the People of the Book were made lawful in the Quran.
As an example, we are told in 2: 187 that sexual relations between married couples during the nights of the month of fasting were permitted, whereas they were previously prohibited.
We are also told in 6: 146 that God forbade the Jews to have all animals with one nail; and that the fat of cattle and sheep was prohibited. This has been made lawful in the Quran.
Verse 16:10 is not about substituting one verse for another
The proof of this lies in the same verse, in the words "they say: You made up this"
Because of their ignorance of the Quran, these forgers clearly violated a fundamental truth in the Quran which states that the words of God cannot be abrogated:

And the word of your Lord is fulfilled in all truth and righteousness. No one can change His words. He is the Audient, the Omniscient. Qur'an, 6:11 a.m.

No change in God's words. This is the immense triumph. Quran, 10:64

[url] https://kadertahri.canalblog.com

Thanks brother Wahrani. I know that nothing in the Quran can be abrogated. You kindly took your time to reply and showed many verses which say there is no abrogation. The problem is that I literally go to a Quranic website and they say in their footnotes that abrogation within the Quran exists. Many Muslim "scholars" are ignorant and mention the nasekh and mansookh verses. That is the problem. So when I read the Quran and verses seem to abrogate each other (obviously not) I will just post the verses here and get an answer and all Muslims that come here will learn that there is no abrogation in the Quran. 

So yes I also believe that the "Ayat" mentioned in 2:106 are referring to miracles and not verses as there is strong evidence for that.

Thank you and جَزَاكَ الله

13
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Abrogation
« on: June 03, 2021, 02:46:06 PM »
So you're saying that the Verse that prohibits marrying women "after this" can apply to people who have 4 wives in modern day am I right? And why Allah talked to only the prophet in the quran is unknown?

Please confirm or fix what I'm saying.

14
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Abrogation
« on: June 02, 2021, 12:40:48 PM »
I'm sorry because I probably missed your point. You said that marriage had an expiration date for the Prophet. But first he could marry single believing women (not any woman, I got that part) and later marriage expired for him where he cannot marry new women. Doesn't this still mean that the marriage expiration verse ABROGATED the Verse where the Prophet could marry single believing women who offered themselves to him?

Also, why are these verses that are ONLY talking to the Prophet even here? Now the Prophet is gone so why are these verses still important? I get that prophets have privileges over common men but if Allah wanted to tell the Prophet rules that only apply to him, why did He not reveal that in another way like through a dream of the Prophet or something? Why did He reveal it in a universal Quran when he knew that after the Prophet is gone, these rules won't apply to anyone anymore?

Please answer the two questions and thank you so much.

15
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Abrogation
« on: June 01, 2021, 08:43:03 PM »
I got more questions related to this topic. I was looking at Surah Ahzab and 2 verses seemed outdated. Also one of the 2 verses abrogated the other one it seems. The verses are 33:50 and 33:52. 33:50 reads as follows:

"Prophet, We have made lawful for you the wives whose bride gift you have paid, and any slaves God has assigned to you through war, and the daughters of your uncles and aunts on your father’s and mother’s sides, who migrated with you. Also any believing woman who has offered herself to the Prophet and whom the Prophet wishes to wed- this is only for you [Prophet] and not the rest of the believers: We know exactly what We have made obligatory for them concerning their wives and slave-girls- so you should not be blamed: God is most forgiving, most merciful."

As you can see, this verse first of all IS ONLY ADDRESSED TO THE PROPHET. Only he can marry women who offer themselves to him (more than 4). So one question can already be made without reading the other Verse, "Why is this Verse in the Quran? This Verse doesn't apply to us?"

Ok moving on to 33:52:

"You [Prophet] are not permitted to take any further wives, nor to exchange the wives you have for others, even if these attract you with their beauty. But this does not apply to your slave-girls: God is watchful over all."

Here is the main question: "Why did Allah 2 verses before tell the Prophet that he can marry anyone who proposes to him and now He is saying that the Prophet cannot marry anyone else (except slaves)? This clearly sounds like abrogation.

Please address these 2 questions. (Note that as I see more things that seem to be abrogation I will ask them in this topic over time. In other words, questions will be added here over periods of time.)

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 9

What's new | A-Z | Discuss & Blog | Youtube