www.ExamineTheTruth.com

[ Intro] Page 2 of Omar’s response continued…

 

"Obviously you did not read what I wrote or did not understand it. I did not say those verses are coincidence and good guess. I said most of what Muhammad said is wrong and the rest is commonsense, things that any ignorant man living in his time could have known."

"Because what he said is mostly wrong and what is not wrong is commonsense and general knowledge available to anyone at his time."

I proved in my reply above that those verses conformed to modern science and could not be known by man at the time of the Prophet. It was physically/experimentally impossible for them to know those information.

"Scrape together a few post facto miracles of reinterpretation,"

They are not few. There are many other scientific miracles in the Quran. And it's not reinterpretation, its correct interpretation. Remember that we are controlled by a text(We cannot make any verse look scientific). However, there are clear scientific hints and indications in the Quran which prove its divine authorship.

"Ignore the fact that most of the Quran contains complete idiocy and quite a few errors and inconsistencies (which require tremendous amounts of doublethink, blissful ignorance and mental gymnastics to swallow)"

Petitio principii. Your premises are as false as your conclusion. The Quran (Unlike the Bible) is the epitome of knowledge and instructions. It's your own problem that you have problems with comprehension. There is no one single error or contradiction in the Quran.

"This is basically my argument. The question of chance, guess or genius becomes ludicrous when the entire Quran is full of nonsense, errors and absurdities. I am afraid your understanding is very limited."

Again, petitio principii. Your premises are as false as your conclusion. You have proved nothing. Again, there is no one single error or contradiction in the Quran.

"As I said the word bee in Arabic is feminine. Muhammad had to use this word because this is an Arabic word and there is no other word that can substitute it. So if any credit is due it should go to the Arabs who invented a feminine word for bee. This argument of yours is as ridiculous as saying someone calling a hen, hen must have divine knowledge because hens are female."

Wrong! I already addressed that above, but I will repeat it again. The Quran uses the word “nahl” which is not a feminine word, yet it clearly stated that this bee was feminine because God addressed it with the word “ittakhithee”, which is always addressed to females (The “eest the end of the word).!

Your analogy of hen is false, because Arabic is completely different, and richer than English. In Arabic, a hen is called dagaga, the husband of the hen, is a male called deek, which translates to cock in English I believe.

"As for the city of Iram I said that people will not forget the loss of a city and the destruction of Iram was something that the Arabs knew. Muhammad was not the only person with this knowledge."

The Arabs never knew of such a city. This is evident by the Early Muslim scholars’ ignorance of the true meaning of the word Iram. Ibn Kathir thought it referred to Sam, the son of Noah. Tabari thought it referred to Alexandria, which is obviously wrong since Alexandria never underwent total destruction or was ever known as Iram.

"First of all Adam is a mythological personage."

Please say that to your Christian fellows.

"Thirdly humans started to become city dwellers no more than four thousand years ago and Forth the writing was invented almost at the same time."

Wrong! Humans started to be city dwellers around 12,000 years ago!

"Mr. Ahmed said that the name Iram did not exist in any pre-Islamic books. I said what books? Muhammad and his marauding gangs burned all the pre-Islamic books. They dismissed them as false or redundant because as Muhammad said anything pre-Islamic was Jahili (ignorance) and there was no need for them. The history reports the burning of the libraries in virtually all the countries that Muslims invaded. The most famous one of then was the huge library of Alexandria."

Wrong. Muslims never burnt the pre-Islamic books whether in Arabia or in any other country that they invaded. If you have evidence from a credible historian or history book, please show it.

Also, if the Arabs knew of such a city, they would tell its story to their following generations. Obviously this is untrue, since early Muslim scholars did not know what that word Iram even meant.

"The vast quantity of what is called pre-Islamic poetry has nothing to do with the pre-Islamic literature, but it is fabricated after Islam. ... Thus our research will lead us to a very strange conclusion; that this poetry can not be used in interpreting the Qur'an."

Taha Hussein is talking here about poetry that was invented after Islam. These poetries had clear quotes from the Quran. What Taha Hussein proved is that, these poetries were forged after the revelation of the Quran, and hence the Quran never copied from any pre-Islamic poetry. There is an amazing collection of authentic pre-Islamic poetry, however.

"http://debate.domini.org/newton/inventions.html"

That site is no longer available. May be its founders were embarrassed by its contents.

"Paul Newton the Christian scholar on Islam states:"

Who's that? What are his qualifications and degrees on Islam? Obviously, any Tom and Dick can be a scholar on Islam in Ali's book.

"When the Muslims found themselves in the need to protect what they believed to be the miraculous nature of the Qur'an they invented:"

The miraculous nature of the Quran (I believe he is talking of the linguistic miracle of the Quran here) was never in danger. The people of Quraysh could never produce a Sura like the Quran. That's why all Arabia (The masters of Arabic language) was Muslim before the Prophet's death.

"Pre-Islamic poetry."

There is a huge collection of authentic pre-Islamic poetry in our hands today. The 7 Muallaqats of Imroa Alqays, Torfa Ibn Alabd etc... are the most famous and most eloquent poetries ever written in any language.

"They invented non-Hijazi and foreign words"

People do not wake up and invent foreign words. What words are these anyway?

"3.They invented grammatical rules."

Grammar rules were derived from the Quran. Arabs never knew grammar before the Abbasid era. This is alone proves the silliness of those who claim that the Quran contains grammar errors in it. How can it contain grammar errors when it's the source of the grammar rules? Anyway, there are no grammar errors in the Quran whatsoever, even if we apply these post-Quran grammar rules to it.

"4. They invented a huge amount of Hadith."

Which is the biggest curse to ever happen to Islam. These Hadiths are unauthentic and Unislamic.

"He proves each and every one of his claims in an article available here:

http://debate.domini.org/newton/inventions.html"

That website is dead. May be he was too embarrassed by that "article". The fact of the matter is, there is an overwhelming amount of authentic pre-Islamic poetry available to us today.

"According to Taha Hussain Muslims destroyed all pre Islamic books and then fabricated poetries and words to justify the errors of the grammar of the Quran. The proof is convincing."

You are intentionally misquoting Taha Hussein. Taha Hussein never said that Muslims destroyed all pre-Islamic books. He said that some poetries that arrived to us were not pre-Islamic. There is however a great amount of pre-Islamic poetry such as the 7 Muallaqats which Taha Hussein mentions in his book "Fi Ash-Shear Aljahili". As for grammar, it was derived from the Quran. Arabs never knew grammar before the Abbasid era. This alone proves the silliness of those who claim that the Quran contains grammar errors. How can it contain grammar errors when it's the source of the grammar rules? Anyway, there are no grammar errors in the Quran whatsoever, even if we apply these post-Quran grammar rules to it.

"One evidence presented by Taha Hussain is that all those poetries are in Quraysh dialect when in reality the Arabs spoke many different dialects and it is highly unlikely that these Arabs who were so tribalists would compose poetries in the dialect of the Quraysh instead of their own. They went even as far as to compose poetries and attribute them to Adam."

Those are unauthentic, I agree with this. However, the authentic pre-Islamic poetries that we have today are in different dialects. For instance, the dialect of the Muallaqa of Imroa Alqays is different than that of Antara Ben Shaddad.

"Mr. Ahmed asks me to remove my website if I can’t prove what I say is true. I have proven everything I say about Muhammad and the Quran is true."

You have proved nothing. You and your arguments have been debunked and refuted many times, but you are too arrogant and ignorant to admit or know this.

"As I said before Mr. Ahmed has problem with comprehension. He has learned only one argument and that is the bee, Iram, iron, sea, orbit argument and that is all he can talk about. That argument is proven false but he can’t get over it because that is all he knows. Unfortunately that little knowledge proved to be unfounded and now he does not know where to stand."

I have proved all these verses to be scientifically true and unknown to man at the time of the Prophet.

"Mr. Ahmed quoted the verse 3:7 that says some of the verses of the Quran are clear and some are not. Can he tell us why the Quran contradicts itself in other verses and claims to be:

clear book (5:15)

easy to understand (44:58 , 54:22 , 54:32, 54:40)

explained in detail (6:114),

conveyed clearly (5:16, 10:15)

with "no doubt" in it (2:1).

I also quote the questions raised by Orenda one of the members of FFI. Those are also my questions. She wrote:

"I have a big problem with this ayah I am hoping you can help me to understand. To me this ayah is entirely illogical. Why would Allah purposefully send revelations which are unclear? and that he knows that will cause Fitnah and that he knows people will use the unclear verses for evil. ? Why would I purposefully give unclear directions to my friend when I know the chance could mean the loss of her very life?

Why send unclear meanings at all, because Allah says none know the hidden meaning except Allah. Therefore, it would be useless to study the Qur'an front and back, in fact the ayah implies that searching for hidden meanings cause fitnah. Allah has declared that only he knows the hidden meaning.

Yet, at the same time, Allah expects those people who are knowledgeable to say we believe in it, all of it. The clear AND unclear.

How can they believe in the unclear parts when they can not know the meaning?!" "

That verse does not say that there are clear and unclear verses. It says that there are verses which are the pillars (The mother in the language of the Quran) of the Quran, and there are other verses which elaborate on these verses. Wicked people ignore the Pillars of the Quran and busy themselves with trivial matters to cause trouble (Fitna). This is similar to the Israelites when God asked them to slay a cow. They ignored God's order and started to ask about its colour, its size etc...to escape from the order of God.

The Quran is a very clear book for open-minded people with no pre-conceived notions.

"As for a "barrier between fresh and salt water" there is no such barrier at all and the Quran is wrong."

The Quran is 100% correct on this. There is a barrier that separates between fresh and salt water. This barrier consists of both fresh and salt water and prevents the fresh water from mixing into the salt water.

"Anyone standing on a hill can see that when the water enters the sea (especially when it is muddy) it pushes the sea water aside and because of its momentum goes forward. In the mouth of the delta the waters seem to be separate but soon they merge. The Quran mentions that there is a barrier and the Quran is wrong. So the question of probability and chance is irrelevant because the Quran is wrong"

That's wrong, and the Quran is 100% correct on this. Fresh and salt water never merge, and this barrier is not visible to the naked-eye. This barrier consists of both fresh and salt water and prevents the merging. The Quran said scientific information hundreds of years before man discovery.

"Mr. Ahmed provided a link to the Islamic site that tries to explain the miracles of the Quran. In that link there is a picture of the Mediterranean Sea meeting the Atlantic Ocean and the Gibraltar Sill acting as the barrier between the two seas. Then he claims that this is what Muhammad is talking about? Mr. Ahmed, do you have any proof that Muhammad is talking about this Gibraltar Sill? It is up to you to present your evidence. Where is your proof? If Muhammad had specified the Seas then I could accept your claim. Otherwise it is just a vague statement that Muslims could even use if we discover a planet in another solar system with a barrier between two seas."

The Quranic verse is talking about any river meeting any sea. Nadir provided a picture illustrating another verse. You obviously have problems with comprehension.

"As the verse 25:53 makes it clear, Muhammad is talking about two seas one with sweet and palatable and the other with salty and bitter water. The water in both Atlantic and Mediterranean are salty. Therefore this verse does not refer to any two seas but to the waters at estuary where an arm of the sea extends inland to meet the river."

Verse 55:19 talks about the phenomenon of a barrier between 2 seas/oceans.

"In this case as I said there is no "forbidding partitions" between the waters and they eventually mix. On one side we have the fresh waters of the river running into the sea and on the other side we have the salty water of the sea being pushed away."

You provide no source for your outrageous and silly claims. There is a barrier between any 2 seas or sea/rivers.

"This statement is simply asinine to say the least. The waters eventually keep mixing until all the salt water and sweet water become one. The mixed water between the two waters is not the barrier but the reverse. It is the mixture of the two."

This is exactly what the Quran is talking about. The mixed water between the two waters serves as the barrier between the salt water and the fresh water. This is true and the Quran is spot on.

25:53 AND HE it is who has given freedom of movement to the two great bodies of water – [41] the one sweet and thirst-allaying, and the other salty and bitter - and yet has wrought between them a barrier and a forbidding ban. [42]

Wahuwa allathee maraja albahrayni hatha AAathbun furatun wahatha milhun ojajun wajaAAala baynahuma barzakhan wahijran mahjooran.

The word “maraja” here means the mixture of both waters, which serves as the barrier between the sweet water and the salt water.

"When I say that Muhammad must have heard that at estuaries waters do not mix Mr. Ahmed says " total baseless assumption, show us proof of what you are saying if you are truthful

Dear Mr. Ahmed. I am not making any absurd claims about Muhammad. It is you who are claiming Muhammad had never heard about this phenomenon that could have been observed by anyone and was known universally by all seamen and those who lives near the deltas. It is up to you to prove to us that he never had heard what everyone else already knew. "

This phenomenon was never known to anyone and I am challenging Ali to give us any pre-Islamic book (From Europe to Asia) that described this phenomenon.

Muslim scholars and writers who lived in Basra such as Mohamed Ben Sirin, Alhassan Albasry, Amr Ibn Ubayd, Alfarazdaq, Jarir, Qatary Ben Fajaa, Roaya Ibn Ajaj, Bashar, Abu Nawwas, Ibn Almoqafaa, Alasmaei, Almofaddal Addobey, Alkhalil Ibn Ahmed, Sebawee, Aljahez, Ibn Salam etc... These people never noticed this astounding phenomenon and it's never found in their writings. Huge volumes written about Basra such as Maajem Alboldan (The Books of the Countries), Masalek and Mamalek (Ways and Kingdoms), Moajam Alboldan (Dictionary of the Countries) etc... None of these books mentioned anything regarding such a "universal" phenomenon.

"If I write the relativity formula and claim this is revealed to me and I never heard of Einstein, it is not up to you to prove I have heard of him. It is up to me to prove I have not."

I have just proved that above.

"Once again you affirm that science has confirmed that there is a barrier between the seas. The only link you provide is the Islamic site from where you learned the only argument you have mastered. Please provide one reliable non-Islamic site that says there is "a barrier and a forbidden partition" between salty water and sweet water."

http://www.mbari.org

http://www.oceanusmag.whoi.edu.

www.hpl.umces.edu/~lzhong/estuary_coastal/estuary

Are these Islamic too? Or are they part of the Islamic "conspiracy"?

"I am sorry. I don’t think you are really paying any attention. To say these are all coincidences I must first agree that the Quran is right. I never said such thing. Quran is wrong in most of these cases and where it is right the knowledge was available to sun and dry and hence it was no coincidence that Muhammad got it right. Muhammad said nothing that an unlettered man of his time could not have known."

I have proved above that all of these verses speak of scientific facts that were not known to man at the time of the Prophet.

"Mr. Ahmed also demands that I should prove that Muhammad destroyed the books of the Jahilia, the pre-Islamic era called by him the age of ignorance. I believe that is ludicrous. It is up to him to show us at least one book of history, philosophy, medicine, astrology, or chemistry dating back to the Jahilia. It is unreasonable to assume that a nation known for their eloquence and literature did not write a single book on any science."

The Arabs were warriors, traders, or poets. They had no knowledge of science or medicine.

"As I said there are some poetry attributed to the Jahilia, but as Taha Hussain has shown they are all forgeries."

No, there is a huge collection of authentic pre-Islamic poetry. Taha Hussein never said that all poetry attributed to Jahilia were forgeries, some were forgeries, but not all of them. Here is a website of the infamous 7 Muallaqats of pre-Islamic poetry

http://zinedine07.free.fr/

For books of history, read the books about the infamous books about the life of Antara Ibn Shaddad, Imroa Alqays etc...

"Muslims simply destroyed all the books in Hijaz as they did in Egypt, Iran and virtually everywhere they invaded. Take the example of Iran. There are very little or virtually no books left from the time of before the Arab invasion. Is it logical to believe that a country such as Iran that rose to become the superpower of the world and in one time excelled Greece and Rome did not have any scholars prior to Islam?"

Wrong. Visit any Coptic library in Cairo and you will find lots of Coptic books that date to the first few centuries AD. I am sure the same could be said of Iran.

"Islam is the enemy of culture, diversity and freedom of thought. Even today possessing a Bible in most Islamic countries is a crime."

Is that why millions of Christians and Jews lived in Muslim countries for centuries in relative harmony?! Is that why post-Islam Iran produced some of the greatest scientists of all time?

"Finally you have not yet answered the question that I repeatedly asked you in each and every communication to you. Do you think if you prove that the Quran is miraculous but fail to disprove the charges of murder, assassination, lecher, pedophilia, genocide, theft, etc that I bring against Muhammad he is still a prophet of God? Let us suppose you prove the Quran is miraculous but Muhammad is proven to be a villain and a monster. Who do you think the author of the Quran would be? Don’t you think may be then the Quran is the work of Satan? I need an answer to that. You seem to not to want to discuss the character of Muhammad while I believe this is crucial. Would you follow a murderer if he can impress you with a few tricks?"

Again, if the Quran is proven to be a miracle (Which as we see it is), then all those "charges" against the Prophet will drop automatically, because they would be fabrications and lies. The facts about the Prophet are in the Quran.

Oh, and Satan does not inspire books. Satan is a very weak creature [4:76].


Ali Sina of Faithfreedom caught RED HANDED

Lies against Islam

Home