Answering Christianity Research Center

Hello brother Farhan, you have asked a good question and that is the same question that I asked.

I am in a strong disagreement with many posters in this forum, but I don't have the tiem to start another debate. I just wanted to post here and remind everyone of ONE Quranic verse (that is all it takes), that removes this entire hadith scene. There are many, but, this one is enough by itself.


(Quran 45:6) These are the verses of Allah which We recite to you in truth. Then in what statement other than Allah and His verses will they believe?

Let's break this verse down. The beginning of the verse talks about the Quran. THESE are the verses of Allah in which we recite to you in truth. It is speaking of the Quran. You MUST agree with this as any honest person would. A sentence later, Allah tells you in what statement other than THESE verses will YOU believe? That clearly means that the message include ONLY these verses. Nothing else.

What does that verse tell you??!!!! Does that sound like Allah wants you to follow something else besides these verses (Quran). How could any honest person possibly say so!!! I don't understand!

Does this verse seriously leave any room for hadith (an alternate revelation)??

There is no Dajjal. BlackMuslim's double facepalm picture is an embarrassment to Islam and this forum. Please do not engage in actions like this.

As'salamu Alaikum dear brother Mclinkin94,

This is a topic that I wanted to debate you on, and I guess we could start it now .  I of course come with complete humbleness and respect to you and to everyone, especially that I am the owner of this blog.  So please, feel free to speak your mind freely.  I only stopped a few threads about this subject in the past, because I didn't want it to be distracting to the young students that we have here in both college and high school.  I don't mind debates at all as long as they don't become compulsive and out of control and devouring to one's time and personal life.

Thank you for allowing me to speak my mind freely. And of course there will be no disrespect in my posts, all my posts will do is present Quranic evidence and possible show evidence that a certain interpretation is correct than the next. If anything seems disrespectful, I would like to apologize beforehand.  I don't take anything you say in this debate personally and please don't take anything I say personally!

For this debate, I would like to completely leave the hadith scene. I will not present hadiths as I do not take them as valid sources (this could be another debate, but for now, we are looking at the Quranic disclosure on evolution. you cannot interpret the Quran using a weak-potentialy corrupted source like hadiths or the bible. The Quran is to be interpreted by the Quran itself).

Having said that, I would like to directly engage you by inviting you to visit: www.answering-christianity.com/cloning.htm.  Here are some of the reasons, from many, why evolution is completely false according to Islam.  First, when I say "evolution", I mean us becoming humans from animals.  This is completely rejected in the Holy Quran for the following reasons:

This is an interesting article and that verse about altering Allah's creation is absolutely relevant in modern times. We are manipulating Allah's creation as we speak. With biotechnology coming over, we are injecting genes into new organisms.

I obviously don't agree that it is rejected in the Holy Quran that humans came from animals and that we were made in diverse successive stages and those stages involved primitive humans whom which we became successors of the Earth with.

The Popular Belief of Multiplying is Wrong:

1-  Did you know that according to the Holy Quran Itself, humans weren't created from just sexual intercourse from Adam and Eve, and certainly not from their immediate children having sex with each others?  In other words, the popular belief that Adam and Eve had offsprings through their marriage and sex, and their offsprings (siblings) had sex with each others and had other humans, and those other humans had sex and multiplied into other humans, and those other humans had sex and multiplied and so on.....  This popular belief is wrong! 

It is possible that this popular belief is wrong. I have nothing against the belief as whether these beings mated or not has no relevance to evolution. If Adam and eve did not mate, then they are just 2 people whom which we all descended from.

many Muslims would go against your view, because of Quran 4:1

 [Quran 4:1] O mankind, fear your Lord, who created you from one nafs and created from it its pair and dispersed from both of them many men and women. And fear Allah , through whom you ask one another, and the wombs. Indeed Allah is ever, over you, an Observer.

Many Muslims assert that this means that Allah created us from Adam and then created eve from adam and then they made many men and women from them. If this is the case, then your view is wrong. But, I don't believe this is the case. Allah did not mention the names of Adam and Hawwa on purpose. This verse is telling us that ALL humans came from a singular "nafs". But what is a "nafs"? A "nafs" is not necessarily a human being.

The question arises: What is a 'nafs'? 'Nafs' is a living being as the following verse informs us:

(Quran 21:35) Every living being (nafsin) shall have a taste of death


Thus we must conclude that we were created from a singular living being in which its pair was created from it. This singular cell and its pair then made many human men and women. 21:35 "Every living being (nafsin) shall have a taste of death." Whatever dies have Nafs. So it means any living being including single cell being. Therefore, in verse 4:1 "Who has developed you from one Nafs (living being), and from it its mate and sent forth from both many male and female.", one Nafs was not Adam, it talks about the "same origin" of all nafses (beings), the rudimentary simple single cell and the relation between the Nafses.

Since the origin of all living being is same, they certainly were not separately created. There is NO verse that tells that the living being were developed separately. In fact Quran 2:30 tells us that we became successors on Earth. The Question arises, successors to who?

If you have noticed that the Quran started by saying that Allah created us a from a living being and from THAT singular living being, MEN and WOMEN (humans) formed.

This is completely in line with how the first cell formed from clay and that cell is the ancestor of all beings on earth.

2-  According to the Holy Quran, Allah Almighty performed what we call today CLONING from Adam and Eve's immediate children, peace be upon all of the righteous ones from among all of that family.  I've written about this long before you joined this blog in the past at:

http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,842.msg2547.html#msg2547

The Noble Verse that I analyzed in great details is:

‏7:172 واذ اخذ ربك من بني ادم من ظهورهم ذريتهم واشهدهم على انفسهم الست بربكم قالوا بلى شهدنا ان تقولوا يوم القيامة انا كنا عن هذا غافلين 

[007:172]  When thy Lord drew took (اخذ) from the Children of Adam - from their loins backs (ظهورهم)- their descendants, and made them testify concerning themselves, (saying): "Am I not your Lord (who cherishes and sustains you)?"- They said: "Yea! We do testify!" (This), lest ye should say on the Day of Judgment: "Of this we were never mindful":

I have been looking into this recently. I would say that it is possible that this is what the Quranic verse is referring to. The other alternate valid translation is that "Drew from their loins", would be the semen that was taken from their loins. But it is possible that Allah intervened for some reason. The fact is that it still says that Adam and Hawwa may have been husband and wife and that they are 2 people whom which we all descended from. It is also possible that Adam and Hawwa may not be a husband and wife and they were just 2 people whom we all descended from. My point is, it doesn't matter exactly how it occured--it just matters where they came from. And this verse informs us that Adam and Eve (the pair of humans in which we have all descended from, came from sexual reproduction).

(Quran 35:11) And Allah did create you from dust; then from a reproductive fluid; then He made you in pairs

^It says "THEN" allah made humans in pairs. So if Adam and eve were a pair (male and female), then they were made AFTER allah created sexual reproduction (reproductive fluid). This fact by it self informs us that the hadith explanation that Adam was not formed from sexual reproduction or in an embryo is wrong. Adam was created from sexual reproduction and he was formed in an embryo and he may have had a parent.

In fact, Jesus was born in an embryo and he had a parent. The Quran informs us that Adam was created in the same way (it is possible, he may not have had a father):

(Quran 3:59) Surely the likeness of Jesus is with Allah as the likeness of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him, Be, and he was.

Both were created from dust: Yes
Both were created from the embryo: Yes
Both had a parent: Yes
Both had Allah intervening in their wombs: Yes

2-  And according to the Holy Quran, Allah Almighty CREATED and FASHIONED Adam, and blew from His SPIRIT into Adam's NEW BODY and made Adam alive, peace be upon him.  And then Allah Almighty ordered all of the Beings of the Universe to bow down to Adam.  Iblis, who later became satan, refused.  You can read about all of this at:

www.answering-christianity.com/holy_spirit.htm
www.answering-christianity.com/adam.htm

I do not deny that Allah created and fashioned Adam and blew from his spirit onto Adam. These events do not undermine the Quranic support for evolution. Adam was chosen to be the one whom which the spirit was blown into. The problem is you are assuming that the spirit gives life. The spirit is something that Allah did not explain what it is. It does not have to be life giving. The spirit could be the soul that Allah has inserted into Adam and his progeny so that Allah could test us. Adam and his descendants marked the creation of humans. This is where Allah inputs your soul.

 Adam was just chosen to be the descendant of the Earth. And at that moment that is where Allah ordered the beings to bow to Adam. That is the moment where Allah asked Adam the names.

Allah did create Adam in stages from Clay.
Allah did proportion his creation until it reached the human level. (Allah made his creation better)
Allah did blow into Adam his spirit.

(Quran 32:7) Allah is He who has perfected everything he created, and He began the creation of the human (being) out of clay--> He made everything he created better. Evolution seems to explain the mechanism of perfecting God's creation. (Clay is a product of wet earth-Exactly what you are made of: Water and Earth.

What's even more fascinating about this verses is that Allah say he made all of his creation better from the original and he began the creation of a human. This verse is hinting at a connection. A connection that human beings were made through a process of evolving better than the original creation.

(Quran 32:8) Then He made his posterity out of the extract of a liquid disdained.

^This verse comes right after the previous one. So AFTER human beings BEGAN forming,, our posterity comes from an extract of semen. This is hinting at sexual reproduction forming.

(Quran 32:9) Then He proportioned him and breathed into him from His [created] soul and made for you hearing and vision and hearts; little are you grateful.

^AFTER Allah made sexual reproduction, he proportioned us and given us vision/hearing/consciousness.

Allah BEGINS the process of creation, lets sexual reproduction happen, and then we get proportioned and achieve higher consciousness. Aren't these verses clear in their support of gradual creation of humans?

The preceding verse seems to be a highlight of the major evolutionary steps and it uses a sequential conjunction to illustrate its purpose. Creation began from a basic earth like substance (clay), then after the initiation of creation, sexual reproduction develops and then after that higher intelligence forms. This verse specifically says that our posterity was made from an extract of a liquid disdained, this implies that after the initiation of creation of man from the Earth, the ability to sexually reproduce formed.  After sexual reproduction formed, higher intelligence develops. Evolutionary, we can say that life formed from the Earth (or what became to be the earth). Their mode of reproduction was asexual. Then sexual reproduction occurred which allowed for more variation and more complexity in organisms. Through sexual reproduction, more variation occurred which allowed extremely complex multicellular organisms capable of thought, like humans to develop. This Quranic verse appears to highlight such a phenomenon by stating that creation started out of the Earth, then sexual reproduction developed, then humans formed.


This is extremely fundamental as it describes the creation of humans on earth EXACTLY AS IT HAPPENED!

(QURAN 7:11)And We have certainly created you, [O Mankind], THEN given you [human] form. Then We said to the angels, "Prostrate to Adam"


We were created in one form (early hominid), THEN given another form (human form), THEN Allah made the angels prostrate to Adam. Look at the sequence of events and the evolutionary implication.  We were created in a form, then given human form, Then Adam was created, then Allah made the angels prostrate to him. That means that the creation of Adam involved many diverse stages.


Another Quranic verse informs us that Allah creates by increasing and adding on to his creation. Making his creation better!

(Quran 35:1) All praise is due to Allah , Creator of the heavens and the earth, who made the angels messengers having wings, two or three or four. He increases in creation what He wills. Indeed, Allah is over all things competent.

In this verse, Allah informs us that he increases the complexity of creation. He adds onto his creation things--He improves upon/perfects his creation. This verse is informing us that Allah increases complexity in creation and that he works through improving creation. Also notice what chapter this verse happens to be coincidentally in. The chapter name is "The originator". Just by mere juxtaposition, the Quran informs us that Allah originates creation and he adds on to creation. Now look at this verse in reference to 32:7. Now do you see why I appeal to translation #2? Allah prefects his creation, he improves it, he adds on to it, he makes it good. Allah perfects his creation.

(Quran 82:7) O mankind, what has deceived you concerning your Lord, the Generous, Who created you, then proportioned you, and then balanced you?


This verse may refer to three main stages of the creation of human beings. The first was creation of a living cell (The Arabic verb khlaqa, created). The second was the change from unicellular prokaryote organism to the multi-cellular eukaryote animal organism (The Arabic verb sawwa, fashioned you). The third was the human departure from the animal stage (The Arabic verb 'adala, made you walk in an upright way, fixed you, made you better). Allah has improved his creation. Allah has added on to his creation, just like Allah mentioned when he said he added wings to angels. Allah originates creation, then Evolves it (increases it, improves it, perfects it).

Quote

The reason why I support translation 2 is because it seems to better fit the context

For the thousandth time : Ahsana means NOTHING except making something in a good way . So all the points you base on "You can interpret the verse in two ways" are meaningless . You CAN'T interpret the sign in two ways . The word for improving and perfecting something is "Hassana" and it's way different from "Ahsana" . This is the essential matter in the case and you ignore it like it's nothing .

And for the Thousandth time, Quran 32:7 could be interpreted that Allah creates or that Allah makes his creation that he already created good. I support the latter. No, you can't interpret a sign in two ways, that is why I show you which way makes the most sense.

And for the Thousandth time, the difference of translation of "perfected" and "good" is not there. Both meanings work and they both mean the same thing.

Secondly, explain why sahih international used the word "perfected". (this is irrelevant as it has nothing to do with my point, whether the translation is good or perfected, my point remains--you never seem to get that). If you make something you already made good, you have improved it. I made a cake. And then I made the cake good. I just made the cake better than its original form. Sahih international understood that and translated the word as "perfected". I have no issue with this either.

Read the rest of Quran 32:7-9. Allah tells us that a common trend in his creation is that he creates and then he creates the creation good. Then he tells us that be began the creation of the human being. And then when it comes to verse 9, the creation of the human being is now good. Allah makes everything that he creates, good/perfect.


I'll continue tomorrow. I need to get some things done.

Invalid argument. Allah has says that he is going to protect his Deen till the day of Judgement. Islam is not Christianity or Judaism. Allah tests us. But Allah does not let his religion be corrupted.

The religion hasn't been corrupted. Many Quranists have existed back then and today. And the fact that I am here defending true Islam shows Allah protecting his deen.

So this argument is invalid.

I provided you with the basic fundamental evidence. You accept or do not. If you want further evidence read the books of the scholars that show more in depth evidence. Am not going to give you a 1000 page essay. If you are seeking the truth, seek it. I gave you a start.

I've been on this topic for years...I gave you evidence, and now it is your turn to search. See both sides of the argument

Islam is based on the sunnah, as i have shown before. So you ARE in the delusion. And about authority. Arguments from authority do have validity in Islam, only if the arguments are in accordance with Islam.

NOPE. Arguments from authority have no validity in Islam. http://www.quran-islam.org/main_topics/misinterpreted_verses/authority_(P1246).html

Like I said and keep saying. GIVE ME their arguments, and I will show you why they are invalid. That is how we debate. Why are you so reluctant to do this? Fear?

I've viewed their arguments, but how could I know which ones you adhere to? So this is up to you. Either you present arguments, or you just say that Islamic authorities support your version of Islam (if you can even call it Islam).

Again, arguments from authoirty have no value. I could site Shia scholars and say "see they are scholars, they know more than you therefore their version of Islam (if you can call it Islam) is right". So no. you are gonna need to do better than that.

Quote

Then you are clearly misinformed. The only scholars you are aware of are the ones that graduate from Saudi Arabian universities. There are many many scholars and knowledgeable people who deny hadiths

No am not actually. The scholars am aware of are from the time of Sahaabah throught all the generations upto now. Before their was the saudi state. And even after it. In many institutions of knowledge from all over the face of the globe.

Anyway what about "saudi arabian universities".?

Time of the Sahaabah? How do you know that is what they said? How do you know? Through utilizing a potentially corrupt source. Wow, looks like you are using reason as the Quran wants you to use...

Anyway, enough with the authority nonsense. I could point you to many hadith rejecters who are scholars, but, I don't do that. Instead I present arguments...

Quote

Now let me reverse this question to you to show you how your argument holds absolutely no water. How about all the shia scholars? Eh? You saying that ALL of them were in error and Allah failed in his deen to the muslims. There are many shia scholars who are more knowledgeable than you.

Yes all of the ones that ascribed commited shirk and kufr, and went opposed Islam are in error. And Allah did not fail them but they failed themselves for straying from the Quran and Sunnah that Prophet brought. As you see they departed from the muslims at the time of Husseins death about 61 AH. Majority shias dont even follow our Quran by the way. And claim tahreef (its been distorted). Astaghfurullah.

No shia kaffir is knowledgeable.  So you see it does hold water. See how my argument is strong.

The same arguments apply to your version of Islam. They are not arguments, you just slandered shia Islam and any shia can slander your version and call you shirk and kufr.

My whole point was that arguments from authority hold no value as I could point you to Shia scholars with authority. And I could say "they know more than you, therefore they are right". That is what you are doing with me. You are pointing me to scholars and saying that they know best and therefore are right.

To follow the Prophet, is to follow the Quran and Sunnah. So what your saying is that the sahaabah obeyed the Messenger in through orders from the Quran but didnt or didnt have to obey the Prophet when he spoke as a human. Or are you saying that he didnt speak for 23 years except the Quran? See your arguments are invalid.

Yes, the Sahabbah obeyed the messenger through orders in the Quran only!!!! The prophet's orders come from the Quran only. He makes up nothing new.

Where did the Quran say the follow the prophet is to follow the Quran and Sunna!!!!! Where!!!! Stop with this heresy, this is the talk of a disbeliever!

Despite the CLEAR words that the Quran is complete and fulyl detailed, you still say it doesn't have all the details and the Quran isn't the full message...This is direct kufr!

”Shall I seek other than God as a source of law, when He has revealed to you this book fully detailed?” The Word of your Lord is complete in truth and in justice” 6:115

Does that sound like Allah wanted you to use an external source given that the Quran is fully detailed and complete. HOw about these verses:

”This is not fabricated ‘hadith’; this (Quran) confirms all previous scriptures, provides the details of everything, and is a guidance and mercy for those who believe” 12:111
”We have revealed to you this book to provide explanations for everything, and guidance and mercy and good news for the submitters” 16:89

In spite of the very clear words: “fully detailed”, “details of everything” and “explanations for everything” the corrupt interpreters somehow still claim that the Quran does not include all the details! Sadly, they claim that the Quran has only mentioned the major outlines of the religion while as the details of everyday rituals are only to be found in the Hadith and Sunna!

These false claims only go to expose these people’s ignorance of the Quran, and also their disbelief in God's words.

What does Allah mean by EVERYTHING?
If a professor tells you, your textbook is complete contains everything and made no exceptions--What are you going to believe? You are going to say that the textbook has everything that is relevant to the course. That does not mean that you can go to another textbook and say that "this textbook has things relevant to the course that is not in the textbook the professor authorized" The only things that are relevant in the course is everything in that textbook. If any other textbook contains anything else that is not mentioned in the professor's textbook, it is NOT relevant to the course.

I don't know where Muslims make this false claims. They are disbelievers of the Quran and Allah's word.

Prophet is to be followed as said in the Quran. Allah said who ever obeys the Quran is a believer. but also says the Prophet, meaning his sunnah.

3:31. Say (O Muhammad SAW): "If you (really) love Allah then follow me, Allah will love you and forgive you of your sins. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

3:32. Say (O Muhammad SAW): "Obey Allah and the Messenger (Muhammad SAW)."...

3:132. And obey Allah and the Messenger (Muhammad SAW) that you may obtain mercy.

4:13. ...and whosoever obeys Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) will be admitted to Gardens under which rivers flow (in Paradise), to abide therein, and that will be the great success.

4:59. O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger...

4:64. We sent no Messenger, but to be obeyed...

4:69. And whosoever obeys Allah and the Messenger (Muhammad SAW), then they will be in the company of those on whom Allah has bestowed His Grace...

4:80. He who obeys the Messenger (Muhammad SAW), has indeed obeyed Allah...

5:92. And obey Allah and the Messenger...

8:1. ...and obey Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad SAW), if you are believers.

8:20. O you who believe! Obey Allah and His Messenger, and turn not away from him (Messenger Muhammad SAW)...

8:46. And obey Allah and His Messenger...

9:71. ...and obey Allah and His Messenger...

24:52. And whosoever obeys Allah and His Messenger (SAW), fears Allah, and keeps his duty (to Him), such are the successful ones.

24:54. Say: "Obey Allah and obey the Messenger...

24:56. ...and obey the Messenger (Muhammad SAW) that you may receive mercy (from Allah).

33:21. Indeed in the Messenger of Allah (Muhammad SAW) you have a good example to follow...

33:33. ...and obey Allah and His Messenger...

33:71. ...And whosoever obeys Allah and His Messenger (SAW) he has indeed achieved a great achievement.

47:33. O you who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger (Muhammad SAW)...

48:17. ...And whosoever obeys Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad SAW), He will admit him to Gardens beneath which rivers flow (Paradise)...

59:7. ...And whatsoever the Messenger (Muhammad SAW) gives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it)...

64:12.  Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger (Muhammad SAW)...

There must be something you are just not getting here. Firstly, repeating a verse that says the same thing doesn't add to your argument. I don't know what it is that is going to date for you to grasp this concept.

There is no indication that you are to follow the Sunnah, because the prophet's sole duty is to give the message and the Quran has informed us that the message is in THIS BOOK (Quran) and that this message is complete. DONE! NO room for sunnah.

Obey God and Obey the messenger
------------------------------

The word Messenger is derived from the word Message. A Messenger delivers a Message. If there was no message there would be no messenger. To Obey the Messenger would thus mean to obey the message he is delivering.

Prophet Muhammad is a chosen man who was of fine character and he was given the duty of delivering the Quran, he did that successfully.

So lets study some verses about the sole duty of prophet Muhammad according to the quran.

Sura 5:99
The SOLE DUTY of the messenger is to deliver the message and God knows everything you declare and everything you conceal

Sura 72:23
I only deliver God's words and messages.

Sura 5:67
O you messenger, deliver what is revealed to you from your Lord - until you do, you have not delivered His message.

Sura 5:92
And obey God and obey the messenger and be cautious; but if you turn back, then know that the SOLE DUTY of the messenger is the deliverance (of the message).

Sura 64:12
And obey God and obey the messenger, but if you turn back, then upon Our messenger is the SOLE DUTY of the clear delivery (of the message).



Let's Summarize this one more time and I will bold it and increase the size so that it is emphasized

YOU CANNOT FOLLOW THE MESSAGE, UNLESS YOU FOLLOW THE MESSENGER. IF YOU FOLLOW THE MESSAGE, YOU FOLLOW THE MESSENGER

The whole point of these verses, is Allah reminding you that if you don't follow the messager, you are not following the message. The messenger gives the message and you follow the messenger.

  "Believe in Allah and His Messenger and the light which He sent down." [Al-Qur'an 64:8]

This verse states that Allah is not the messenger and the messenger is not the message. So you have to believe in all three of them. Believe in Allah, believe in his messenger and believe in the message.

It does NOT say "obey" Allah and his messenger and the message. It says "believe". But, you do have a point, if the verse has used "obey" instead of "believe", then we have a bigger issue. But Allah is careful with his word usage and it is clear Allah does not want us to follow anything besides the Quran. First, Allah neglected to mention the sunnah or any other source outside of the Quran (this is my strongest argument BTW). Second, Allah says the Quran is complete, clear, fully detailed and has an explanation of everything (VERY strong point and it leaves no room for hadiths). Thirdly, Allah has made it clear that the prophet ONLY gives the message and the message is the Quran. Does that sound like Allah wants you to follow any other source besides the Quran?

Why do you believe in Allah and his messenger and the message? Because they are all one in the same. If you believe the message, you therefore believe in the messenger which means you therefore believe in Allah.

Pay special attention to this last verse:

verses 69:43-47
"[It is] (Quran) a revelation from the Lord of the worlds.
Had he uttered any other teachings (besides this revelation-Quran),
We would have seized him by the right hand;
Then We would have cut from him the aorta.
And there is no one of you who could prevent [Us] from him."

^it shows that Muhammad could not have taught anything else than the Quran, otherwise God would have killed him! It (Quran) is a revelation from the lord of the worlds. If Muhammad has uttered any other word, he would have been killed and the Quran makes it clear that if the prophet has taught any other teaching besides the Quran, the teaching is invalid and the prophet would be killed. 

The  Quran is complete message to human beings delivered by messenger

Of course similar birds are attracted to each other . The problem with all of you is that you act like you caught the wolf by its tail - a common saying - while you don't bother ask or try to know what the explanation to your misunderstanding is . If those Arabic lessons you claim you're taking actually helped , you'd take 10 second of your time and actually read !
http://islamqa.info/ar/185849
The explanations to that are two :
1 - Saying 10 was choosing the nearest multiple of 10 and since it was 13 , 10 was chosen .
2 - The ten mentioned years would be the total number of time when Quran was revealed to the prophet peace upon him as Quran wasn't revealed at once .
So really , if you stopped jumping the gun and bothered read a little you would have found out the the only contradiction only exists in your head . And I DO know that you'll repeat the broken disc of "What an excuse making !" .

That doesn’t seem likely that you just say they just rounded the result to 10….Why would they do that? Or perhaps this hadith is just like the plethora of hadiths that have internal contradictions?

Absolute nonsense !! You claim Allah talks to us in Abracadabra ?! You claim that all those people who didn't know the nonsense of this "code" used to be blind believers ?! And then you dare with utmost absurdity compare Sunnah to a game of "Your phone is broken" ?! You don't believe Allah can create humans directly but you believe in a fairy tale such as evolution ?! You don't believe in Hadith but believe in a Da Vinci code ?! And you take the words of Osama over the words of the lord ?! YOU'RE the only one contradicting himself here !

So instead of attacking the argument, you make fun or it and relate it to abracadabra. What did expect of you? That’s all you do. Why do I even bother. Let me know when you can do constructive criticism

Well drop that so called "response" again . The entire body of speakers of Arabic say that "Ahsana" means to make something in a good way , not that a dinosaur turns into a chicken . I already know the method you're going to address this . You'll ignore all of that as if everyone is wrong and you alone are right and say "The verse is clear ! You're unwilling ! Evolution is true and you're derailing people from the path of God !" . So in short you're saying "Let the Arabic language and logic go to hell" .

I have presented the argument with structured reasons as to why the best translation is “perfects” and even forwarded it to you and still no response. You again appeal to authority.  I can appeal to authority too! "Sahih International interpreted ahsana as “perfects” therefore I am right" That’s not how I argue. I argue with reasons not appealing to authority.

Debunk my argument first.  A rhetoric and authority argument gets us nowhere.

I will respond to the rest soon. Very sorry for not getting back on time.

Dont bother Black Muslim. Am sure Mclinkin94, this great scholar, this great Muhaddith who has memorized Quran and got an Ijazah, who has a BA, MA and Phd in Islamic Studies, who has studied Islam for more than 20 years knows better than all the Imams and Scholars. He knows more than Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Imam Bukhari, Imam Muslim, Imam Abu Dawood, Imam At-Tirmidhi, Imam Ibn Majah, Imam Ibn Rahwaih, Al Ismaili, Baihaqi, Ar Razi, Al Hakim, Ibn Hibban, Ibn Khuzaima, Ad Daraqtuni, Ad Darimi, Ibn As Sakan, Imam Ashafi'i, At Tabaranee, At Tahawi, Ibn Al Qattan, Imam Malik, Ibn Manda, Abu Ya'la, Ibn Al-Jawzi, Al Baghawi, Ad Dhahabi, Al Haythami, Al Maqsidi, Ibn Hajar, Ibn Hazam, Ibn Kathir, Al Nawawi, Ibn Rajab, Al Baghdadi, Sufyan Ath Thawri, As Suyuti, Az Zahiri, Ibn Taymiyyah and the thousands of other scholars and their students who devoted their whole lives so to protect religion of Islam form falling into corruption and help the muslims of later generations. Who traveled thousands of miles just to authenticate one hadith. They faced hardship that you, me or thousand of us would face in a lifetime. They faced hunger, death, poverty, sold all their wealth for knowledge. Only to be shrugged off by someone sitting eating cocoa krispies behind a computer screen.
 
 
If he was so knowledgeable and searching for the truth, he would look into the Quran and listen to the evidences for the sunnah.

 
 
So hold on, people who get Ph.D's are always right? Knowledgeable people are always right, they are infallible. Most of them can't be wrong?
 
 
Well clearly you haven't heard of the scientific history in the united states. When the big bang evidence came out, nearly ALL scientists rejected it and appealed to the steady state model. So people you would just give an argument from authority and say "most scientists believe in the steady state model, so the big bang is bogus"
 
 
By, the way, do you think there are no Quranist scholars? I could name several. 
 
 
Secondly, how do you know that information that they traveled so long distances to authenticate a hadith? By using hadiths...
 
 
Let's again quote the Quran: 
 
 
"But none will grasp the message except the men of intellect."
The Holy Quran, Chapter 2, Verse 269
 
 

If we assume that you didn't bring any evidence for the authenticity of the Quran, then you can't say that 'the Quran did not authorize any other source' because we don't know if the Quran is true. I hope you understand what I'm saying.

Using hadiths as evidence is unjustified as they are unreliable. 
 
Second, you determine the Quran is the word of God through usage of your intellect and a reflection of Allah's verses. The Quran tells us this! How could you ask this question? 
 
This is one example, there are several examples:  Quran (47:24) Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an, or are there locks upon [their] hearts?
 
So you reflect on the Quran and make the judgment whether it is authentic. 
 
As Muslims, both of us can say the Quran did not state to use hadiths to judge whether it is authentic. It said to use your intellect. 
 

Everything you had to show me was evidence for the authenticity of the Quran.

The evidence for the authenticity of the Quran is the content of the Quran and its numerical characteristics
 

 
It's not that I can't answer yor point about the Quran being the only source or the Quran being explained in details, but its irrelevant to what we are discussing. We will discuss it later. What I can say for now, and I will leave you and all other Muslims to think about this, is that, I don't believe you are right and 99.99% of Muslim scholars are wrong. All of them have read these verses. How could not a single scholar except Rashad Khalifa (who is not a scholar), some Muslims who follow their desires, and you, undestand it in the right way?

NO. it is not irrelevant to what we are discussing. The Quran did not authorize any hadith. And as a Muslim, that should really speak to you! 
 
Secondly, the argument from authority does not mean the are necessarily correct. Just because you are unaware of the various Quranist scholars doesn't mean they don't exist. Secondly, the majority opinion of scholars is not valid. The majority view again in science when Darwin's book came out was the evolution is bogus, but they were wrong. The majority view in nazi Germany was that blond haired blue eyed people are the supreme late. Remember what I said earlier about the majority view back then supporing the steady state model rather than the big bang? 
 
How about this, if you like authority arguments, I could just say I don't believe you are right and 99.99% of the shia scholars are wrong. They too have read the verses of the Quran and your hadiths. Do you see why this argument holds no water?
 
YOU need to show reasons to support hadiths
 

Is this how the Science of Hadith classifies hadiths?! Are you showing me how does a hadith look like or how does the Science of Hadith classify hadiths? Wow! I can't believe you wrote this. Simply, you don't have an idea about the Science of Hadith my brother. Sincerely, I'm quite dissapointed.
 
Now to the main point:
From what I have seen until now, its crystal clear the you reject history.
I have to recall some earlier posts from our previous discussion:
When we were discussing Quran 31:6 (And of the people is he who buys the amusement of speech to mislead [others] from the way of Allah without knowledge and who takes it in ridicule. Those will have a humiliating punishment.) You said that 'amusement of speech' refers to hadiths. We see that those people who followed 'amusement of speech' or like you say 'hadiths' will be punished. I said that 'how could so many Muslims, almost all of the Muslims be punished' and I used as an evidence the unambiguous, clear historical fact that Muslims, since the early generations, for 1400 years, are following hadiths. You said that this was circular argument because I was using a hadith to prove hadiths. I also said that, ok, if Muslims in the past followed only the Quran, how did they dissapear? We see many small sects surviving for centuries. How could theose Muslims just dissapear? There was no answer from you. From what you said, it was clear that you rejected history, you rejected something which is known, a clear historical fact. This is important to what we are discussing now.

 
Being disappointed is not an argument as I am disappointed of all these so called Muslims who reject Allah's words in saying the Quran is complete and fully detailed.   
 
Next, I reject fabricated history or unreliable history like hadiths. 
 
The amusement to speech does refer to hadith. Hadith is nothing more than a bunch of lies. How could so many muslims be punished? Let me ask you this, if the majority of students failed a test that was fair because they didn't study and didn't obey the professor, how could so many students fail?..this is not an argument. 
 
We don't know that Muslims have been following hadiths for 1400 years because the only way you know that is by referring to hadiths. So yes it is circular reasoning. 
 
How did they disappear? How do you know they disappeared? By making the assumption that everyone followed hadiths? 
 
It is not a historical fact, they are fabrications--they may contain some truth though--but we can't know which are truthful

 
'How do you know if the manuscript has the same verses revealed to prophet Muhammad? If it was not written during the time of the Prophet, it may have been corrupted by Muslims, the same way like hadiths, the Quran might have been corrupted.' By rejecting history, we can go even further and say: 'How do you know prophet Muhammad existed? Perhaps the Quran was written by Arab poets who combined verses in such ways that it looks like numerical miralce etc, etc, etc....' I can give hudreds of hypothesis if I reject history. Of course, what I said is stupid, but you are saying the same when it comes to the hadiths. I wonder, if a nonmuslim historian or academic asks us Muslims for strong evidence that the Quran is authentic, who is that stupid Muslim who will use the numerical miracle to prove that the Quran is authentic? You have to use historical evidence. Are manuscripts historical evidence? Yes, but then you should accept the whole history that is known to be true. The manuscripts by itself are not evidence, because you don't know what happened before the manuscripts were written. You have to accept the islamic history, and you can say for example that 'Muslims in the time of the Prophet learned the Quran by heart, and they recited it every prayer, and the arabs were known as people who could memorize long poems, and then they wrote it etc.' The historical evidence is indeed overwhelming. Then you can also use the numerical miracle as a supporting argument that the Quran was preserved.
So, if you reject history, then you follow your desires and you pick what is true and what is false. You can't say Quran was preserved while saying that hadiths are not the sayings of the Prophet. As you said in one of your posts, 'get informed'. Learn about hadiths, beacuse what you are doing is only following your desires, even if you said sometime ago that you were 'intellectually honest'; so, please be intellectually honest. I can say: If those Arabs were able to make thousands of false sayings, it was also easy for them to corrupt the Quran, or even to make it look like a numerical miracle. How could they produce so many sayings that were not said by someone? Please think about this.
You also said that you don't reject al hadiths. If this is the case, if you think that something might have been said by the Prophet, then this means that your interpretation of those verses in the Quran where it says that the Quran is detailed and that the Quran did not authorize any other source, is wrong by definition.

 
Okay so there is a lot here and I'm going to summarize. How do we know the Quran is the same one given to Muhammad based on the manuscripts? Again, the numerical miracle. There is no way for anyone to write a Quran with this numerical consistency unless they had a computer. IN fact, we found this consistency by using a computer and we couldn't have found it before. That is how we know the Quranic manuscripts were the ones given to Muhammad. So this pretty much covers the first half of your statement. 
 
There is no various interpretations of the Quran. No amount of word trickery can change the fact that Islam is what God says it is in the Quran. Furthermore, there is a right way of interpreting the verses of the Quran and then there is a wrong way of interpreting the Quran and there is nothing in between these two opposites.Instead of saying that my interpretation  of the Quran is wrong by definition by appealing to authority, show me why it is wrong and we discuss. 
 
Your whole argument is that "scholars believe you should follow hadiths, so Islam says you should follow hadiths". This is not how we debate. Give me the arguments of the scholars themselves and I will rebut them here. 
 

It is not possible that all of those sayings are not from our Prophet. Why would Allah do this to us? If we accept that hadiths, at least some of them are sayings of the Prophet, then your interpretation of the Quran is wrong, which means that Muslim scholars, for 14 centuries, have interpreted them right, and praise be to Allah for this.
It is known that for centuries, Muslims have been following hadiths. There are so many books written, all of them containing hadiths (don't say me now that all of those books are also corrupted and that they weren't written by scholars). The Quran (31:6), according to you, and all other verses which contain the word 'hadith' are refering to hadiths. The same argument again: all scholars, who were also linguists, have read those verses. They didn't interpret it as refering to hadiths of the Prophet. Verse 31 of chapter 6 threatens those who follow "the hadiths" with a humiliating punishment. If you believe that 100% of Muslims (excluding some of them + you) will be punished for this, than the discussion is over, and I can't say anything more. This means that the religion of Allah has failed totally, and this means that Allah is also a failure, everything has failed; OK, except some Muslims + you.

 
Why would Allah do this? Why would Allah test us? Because life is a test. You should know that very well! Hadiths are a test for humanity--and we are failing the test. 
 
Why would Allah create islamic sects and different religions? Life is a test. The Quran explicitly state this.   
 
It doesn't matter whether or not Muslims have been following hadiths. They are wrong. 
 
I do believe Muslims will be punished for supporting hadiths despite Allah's clear words. Just like I believe that several billion people will be punished for not embracing Islam. 
 
Allah doesn't fail, humans fail. Get that straight through your mind. Allah tests us and we fail to accept the message. Humans have been failing the whole time as the Quran consistently shows us. It is no surprise we are failing again. 
 
For some reason Muslims love the prophet more than Allah and I have noticed this. People use the word Muhammad more than they use the word Allah. Ask yourself one more time who do you love more. You will say "of course I love Allah more", but do you? Do you? Don't you think this is an issue in our current Islamic world...Don't you think Humans are failing Allah's test right now? 
 

And whoever obeys Allah and the Messenger - those will be with the ones upon whom Allah has bestowed favor of the prophets, the steadfast affirmers of truth, the martyrs and the righteous. And excellent are those as companions. [Quran 4:69]

 
Thanks Ali for bringing this up. I have answered this in many other posts in this blog and I feel like I am being repetitive. If you want please take a look at: www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,1445.0.html :This is where I discussed nearly all of these points that Muslims tend to raise.  I will explain once more:

 Many people still quote this verse and say that it authorizes hadiths.  Well, I have 2 verses that explain this very well:
 
"And obey God and obey the messenger and be cautious; but if you turn back, then know that the sole duty of the messenger is the deliverance (of the message)" 5:92
"And obey God and obey the messenger, but if you turn back, then upon Our messenger is the sole duty of the clear delivery (of the message)" 64:12
When we look at the above Quranic words, we note that God has defined very clearly the only duty of the Messenger, that being to deliver the message (Quran).
We also have in the above Quranic verses a very strong link between:
 
1- Obeying the messenger
2- The sole duty of the messenger was to deliver the message
 
1 + 2 = we must obey the message he delivered.
The word Messenger is derived from the word Message. A Messenger delivers a Message. If there was no message there would be no messenger. To Obey the Messenger would thus mean to obey the message he is delivering. the message that the prophet is delivering has been told to us in the Quran that it IS ONLY the Quran.

If we weren't to follow the messenger, then we aren't to follow the message which means we aren't follow Allah.   
 

Say, [O Muhammad], "O mankind, indeed I am the Messenger of Allah to you all, [from Him] to whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth. There is no deity except Him; He gives life and causes death." So believe in Allah and His Messenger, the unlettered prophet, who believes in Allah and His words, and follow him that you may be guided. [Quran 7:158]

 
Same as above. We follow the prophet and therefore Allah through following his message because that is his sole duty. So we follow the Quran. 
 
 
 
 
 

Quote

I'm curious to know how do you consider the Quran more reliable than hadiths?

Hands down , Quran is the first source of revelation . Sunnah is the second one which emphasizes on what it says , explains it , or mention some things it didn't .

The Quran is the only source of revelation.

Your words unjustified by the Quran.

”Shall I seek other than God as a source of law, when He has revealed to you this book fully detailed?” The Word of your Lord is complete in truth and in justice” 6:115

Does that sound like Allah wanted you to use an external source given that the Quran is fully detailed and complete. HOw about these verses:

”This is not fabricated ‘hadith’; this (Quran) confirms all previous scriptures, provides the details of everything, and is a guidance and mercy for those who believe” 12:111
”We have revealed to you this book to provide explanations for everything, and guidance and mercy and good news for the submitters” 16:89

In spite of the very clear words: “fully detailed”, “details of everything” and “explanations for everything” the corrupt interpreters somehow still claim that the Quran does not include all the details! Sadly, they claim that the Quran has only mentioned the major outlines of the religion while as the details of everyday rituals are only to be found in the Hadith and Sunna!

These false claims only go to expose these people’s ignorance of the Quran, and also their disbelief in God's words.

What does Allah mean by EVERYTHING?
If a professor tells you, your textbook is complete contains everything and made no exceptions--What are you going to believe? You are going to say that the textbook has everything that is relevant to the course. That does not mean that you can go to another textbook and say that "this textbook has things relevant to the course that is not in the textbook the professor authorized" The only things that are relevant in the course is everything in that textbook. If any other textbook contains anything else that is not mentioned in the professor's textbook, it is NOT relevant to the course.

I don't know where Muslims make this false claims. They are disbelievers of the Quran and Allah's word.