1500 years old Bible in which 'Jesus predicts coming of Prophet Muhammad' unearthed in Turkey

[Chronos]

I know this is going to sound offensive. Never was a fan of the Abrahamaic religions. Never was, and never will.

On the other Hand, Buddhism, Jainism and other philosophy-religions fascinate me, because it implores the adherents to question morality in a deep way.

They do not say, follow x to the letter and ensure your entry into heaven.

 

[Thirdfront]

'Compilation of Bukhari' is considered most authentic source of Hadith. Imam Bukhari spent 16 years collecting Hadiths, during that time he collected 600,000 Hadiths. Of which he only included 7000 in his compilation; but labelled only 2602 as authentic; still, he was not satisfied and revised it 3 more times. So, even if a Hadith is quoted from 'Compilation of Bukhari' (Sahih Bukhari) there is only 2602/7000 x 100 = 37% chance that it is an authentic Hadith considered by Imam Bukhari.

We also need to remember that Imam Bukhari was, by no means, contemporary of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and was not even from any close by region. Even his first language was not Arabic. He had a totally different culture and age. During the time from passing away of Prophet (PBUH) and time of Imam Bukhari hundreds of thousands of Hadiths had been fabricated by people with vested interests.

I will leave it here. Whatever next I say is useless as you can say that is not authentic. When you can say hadith themselves are not authentic, any thing else can be dis-regarded also. Which other "authentic" sources are there??

 

[Dubious]

I will leave it here. Whatever next I say is useless as you can say that is not authentic. When you can say hadith themselves are not authentic, any thing else can be dis-regarded also. Which other "authentic" sources are there??

Only the Quran!

 

[Thirdfront]

Also when we say a Hadith is Sahih we say the chain of narration has no untrustworthy source on it, that does not mean the Hadith itself is some sort of unlettered word of God. Case in point many hadiths contradict each other yet both are labelled Sahih. Meanwhile the bible itself has so many contradictions and mistakes that we do need to even use outside sources to try and disprove its divinity.

None of the religious texts in world are without self contradicting that they need any external source to disprove divinity for divinity is not based on evidence and reason. Having said that, I don't want to get banned, I will leave it here.

Only the Quran!

Yes off course. Now we come to the great logical fallacy of them all, circular reasoning.

 

[Dubious]

None of the religious texts in world are without self contradicting that they need any external source to disprove divinity for divinity is not based on evidence and reason. Having said that, I don't want to get banned, I will leave it here.

Then bring forward your proofs!

Yes off course. Now we come to the great logical fallacy of them all, circular reasoning.

You asked I told...dont ask if you cant face facts!

 

[BATMAN]

I will leave it here. Whatever next I say is useless as you can say that is not authentic. When you can say hadith themselves are not authentic, any thing else can be dis-regarded also. Which other "authentic" sources are there??

Why you insist on history books and ignore Quran completely.

 

[Thirdfront]

@Thirdfront @KingMamba @Azlan Haider

Alif wa and ya can be used as vowels...

Like in SMS when you type you easily drop off vowels ...like:

hw ru?

Do u undrstnd dis?

So for a native English speaker that is a piece of cake but to a non native he may struggle in the begging but might get it later...Hence, for a non native we go How are you? Do you understand this?

Was that a good example @al-Hasani @Hazzy997

The difference being that it is not an official communication. It is informal. Are you suggesting that quran is just another un-official and casual book? Or do you use "sms lingdo" when publishing a scientific paper?

Why you insist on history books and ignore Quran completely.

Because quaran is not, and was not intended for, learning history.

 

[M. Sarmad]

@Thirdfront
You can disagree with what Quran says and choose not to be a Muslim as it is your personal choice
but you can never prove academically what you are trying to claim here
peace

 

[BATMAN]

Because quaran is not, and was not intended for, learning history.

Do i have choice to trust the version of history of my choice? or do i have to believe what Hindus tell about Islamic history?

 

[Thirdfront]

And where does it say / prove that The copies that Usman Burnt down differed in content ??????
All it says is The Quran in Tashkent and Istanbul are not from the time of Usman (but from some later times)

Here is a concise list of Quranic manuscripts that can be safely dated back to first century of Hijra :

These are not complete copies. Most undated. What are you trying to say?

 

[KingMamba]

The difference being that it is not an official communication. It is informal. Are you suggesting that quran is just another un-official and casual book? Or do you use "sms lingdo" when publishing a scientific paper?

So now you have a problem with how we teach our holy book to those who wish to learn? So you will tell us how we should teach people then? Just admit you have no evidence for your claims besides the things others try and spoon feed you and go on your way, people like you are mentioned in the Quran itself that no matter how much you show them the truth they will refuse to accept it. The truth is the Quran has never been altered and it never will.

I will leave it here. Whatever next I say is useless as you can say that is not authentic. When you can say hadith themselves are not authentic, any thing else can be dis-regarded also. Which other "authentic" sources are there??

You even show a lack of Muslim beliefs yet you want to come here and try to tell us about our holy book? No Muslim believes hadith are the word of God.

 

[Dubious]

The difference being that it is not an official communication. It is informal. Are you suggesting that quran is just another un-official and casual book? Or do you use "sms lingdo" when publishing a scientific paper?

I am saying that natives can understand how the Quran was written while non natives could not read it without the "vowels" and hence the alif ya wa were added which did not change the meaning as you being an English language speaker could understand the short form hw ru but type that to say someone in Africa or say Someone from a village in India studying in an English medium school...will they understand? that is just a simple 1 question give them a whole book with some 100 chapters using the same shorthand....and ask them to read...will they understand?

What scribes did was use shorthand (lay man word) to scribe and by adding alif wa ya we can read it better...first learn the basics of Arabic language say how you even pronounce somethings then check by adding or removing the alif wa ya and check if words changed?

 

[Thirdfront]

Do i have choice to trust the version of history of my choice? or do i have to believe what Hindus tell about Islamic history?

No.You do not. History is not religion based, it is evidence based. Also, it doesn't prove things conclusively, but tells you what most probably happened (probability generally declines as one goes back in time)

 

[KingMamba]

None of the religious texts in world are without self contradicting that they need any external source to disprove divinity for divinity is not based on evidence and reason. Having said that, I don't want to get banned, I will leave it here.

The Quran has not contradicted itself in any part, now before you go running off to annotated bible know that I have already read those "contradictions".

 

[Thirdfront]

I am saying that natives can understand how the Quran was written while non natives could not read it without the "vowels" and hence the alif ya wa were added which did not change the meaning as you being an English language speaker could understand the short form hw ru but type that to say someone in Africa or say Someone from a village in India studying in an English medium school...will they understand? that is just a simple 1 question give them a whole book with some 100 chapters using the same shorthand....and ask them to read...will they understand?

What scribes did was use shorthand (lay man word) to scribe and by adding alif wa ya we can read it better...first learn the basics of Arabic language say how you even pronounce somethings then check by adding or removing the alif wa ya and check if words changed?

My question is "why" quaran was written so that only natives can understand. "why" shorthand was used. It was not like somebody was taking a running notes/dictation... In any case, it is irrelevant.