HEAVEN IS NOT PARADISE IT IS UNIVERSE (QURAN CORRECTS THE FALSE BIBLE)

[John]

Then, look how hard it is to make 114 chapters without errors for barbaric person..
You are too old buddy... It's so boring with you.. Bring something new... 

Hate to bring you the bad news but...the Koran is full of ARABIC grammar errors. (jkhan says to himself, "I'm shutting my eyes now. I do not want to know. Eyes, REMAIN SHUT!)

Here are just a sample:

The First Error

In 5:69
"Surely they that believe, and those of Jewry, and the Sabaeans, and the Christians, whosoever believes in God and the Last Day, and works righteousness - no fear shall be on them, neither shall they sorrow." (Arberry)
"Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'uuna wan-Nasaaraa man 'aamana bilaahi wal-Yawmil-'Aakhiri wa 'amila saali-hanfalaa khaw-fun 'alay-him wa laa hum yah-zanuun."
There is a grammatical error in the above verse. The word Saabi'uuna has been declined wrongly.

In two other verses, the same word, in exactly the same grammatical setting was declined correctly.

2:62 "Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu wan-Nasaaraa was-Saabi'iina ..."
22:17 "Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'iina wan-Nasaaraa ..."

You notice that the word was written Saabi'uuna in 5:69 and was written Saabi'iina in 2:62 and 22:17. In the last two verses the word was declined correctly because the word inna in the beginning of the sentence causes a form of declension called "nasb" (as in cases of accusative or subjunctive) and the "yeh" is the "sign of nasb". But the word Saabi'uuna in 5:69 was given the 'uu, waw which is the sign of "raf'a" (as in cases of nominative or indicative). This then is an obvious grammatical error.

The Second Error

In 4:162
"But those of them that are firmly rooted in knowledge, and the believers believing in what has been sent down to thee, and what was sent down before thee, that perform the prayer and pay the alms, and those who believe in God and the Last Day - them We shall surely give a mighty wage." (Arberry)
"Laakinir-Raasi-khuuna fil-'ilmi minhum wal-Mu'-minuuna yu'-minuuna bi-maaa 'unzila 'ilayka wa maaa 'unzila min-qablika wal-muqiimiin as-Salaata wal mu'-tuunaz-Zakaata wal-Mu'-mi-nuuna billaahi wal-Yawmil-'Aakhir: 'ulaaa 'ika sanu'-tii-him 'ajran 'aziimaa."
The word muqiimiin should be muqiimuun. The word should be declined by the "raf'a sign" like the other nouns in the sentence. Indeed the two nouns before it (Raasi-khuun and Mu'-minuun), and the noun after it (mu'-tuun) are declined correctly. Some have argued that this word was declined as such to distinguish and praise the act of praying, but the scholar Ibn al-Khatib says that this is a sick reasoning. (al-Furqan by Mohammad M. 'abd al-Latif Ibn al-Katib, Dar al-Kutub al-'elmiyah, Beirut, p.43). Such reasoning defies logic. Why would one distinguishe prayer which is a branch of religion, and not faith which is the fundamental and root of religion? Besides can this logic apply to the error of declension in the previous verse? Do we conclude that the Saabi'iin are more distinguished than those who believe, and the People of the Book? And why do they get distinguished in one verse and not the other as we have seen? God is much higher than this sick logic. This again is an obvious grammatical error.

The Third Error

In 20:63
"They communed secretly saying, 'These two men are sorcerers'." (Arberry)
"Qaaluuu inna haazaani la-saahiraani ..."
The word haazaani should be haazayn.

The word haazaani was declined incorrectly because the word inna in the beginning of the nominal sentence causes a form of declension called "nasb" to the nominative and the "yeh" is the "sign of nasb". This is the third grammatical error.

AND HERE ARE SOME MORE https://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Newton/grammar.html

[John]

Peace John..
You say ,quote:

"Again you don't provide any evidence. Again, you just spew out a thought bubble. Would you like to be honest and provide your evidence that the Gospels were composed centuries after Jesus. Considering we have manuscript remnants that can arguably be dated back to the late first century, I'll say good luck on digging up any. I won't hold my breath waiting."

The bible is not the original Gospel given to Jesus. It is you who should provide us with the evidence that GOD revealed them to Jesus. to compare and check your claim. If they have different authors ,then GOD has not revealed them through Jesus..

You are quoting  Qoran , it clearly says Injeel=Gospel- was given to Jesus.
My argument is clear, Qoran is referring them to Jesus Gospel  not any other Gospels or the bible.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

Again, if the Koran says "read the Injeel", which is what I've quoted, it must have existed in a written form at the time of Muhammad. If it did then, we have copies of it which go back well before Muhammad was born...and they are the same. They are the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.

Logically, your argument makes NO SENSE. You claim that there was something different at the time of Jesus. I say produce it. You say you can't but in YOUR OPINION claim your fake book supposedly says there was another gospel and so because YOU RECKON your fake book says it, then it is true.

To a trained philosopher, like I am, can you even begin to appreciate how irrational you are? Just look at your argument and see how circular it is.

[jkhan]

Hate to bring you the bad news but...the Koran is full of ARABIC grammar errors. (jkhan says to himself, "I'm shutting my eyes now. I do not want to know. Eyes, REMAIN SHUT!)

Here are just a sample:

The First Error

In 5:69
"Surely they that believe, and those of Jewry, and the Sabaeans, and the Christians, whosoever believes in God and the Last Day, and works righteousness - no fear shall be on them, neither shall they sorrow." (Arberry)
"Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'uuna wan-Nasaaraa man 'aamana bilaahi wal-Yawmil-'Aakhiri wa 'amila saali-hanfalaa khaw-fun 'alay-him wa laa hum yah-zanuun."
There is a grammatical error in the above verse. The word Saabi'uuna has been declined wrongly.

In two other verses, the same word, in exactly the same grammatical setting was declined correctly.

2:62 "Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu wan-Nasaaraa was-Saabi'iina ..."
22:17 "Innal-laziina 'aamanuu wal-laziina haaduu was-Saabi'iina wan-Nasaaraa ..."

You notice that the word was written Saabi'uuna in 5:69 and was written Saabi'iina in 2:62 and 22:17. In the last two verses the word was declined correctly because the word inna in the beginning of the sentence causes a form of declension called "nasb" (as in cases of accusative or subjunctive) and the "yeh" is the "sign of nasb". But the word Saabi'uuna in 5:69 was given the 'uu, waw which is the sign of "raf'a" (as in cases of nominative or indicative). This then is an obvious grammatical error.

The Second Error

In 4:162
"But those of them that are firmly rooted in knowledge, and the believers believing in what has been sent down to thee, and what was sent down before thee, that perform the prayer and pay the alms, and those who believe in God and the Last Day - them We shall surely give a mighty wage." (Arberry)
"Laakinir-Raasi-khuuna fil-'ilmi minhum wal-Mu'-minuuna yu'-minuuna bi-maaa 'unzila 'ilayka wa maaa 'unzila min-qablika wal-muqiimiin as-Salaata wal mu'-tuunaz-Zakaata wal-Mu'-mi-nuuna billaahi wal-Yawmil-'Aakhir: 'ulaaa 'ika sanu'-tii-him 'ajran 'aziimaa."
The word muqiimiin should be muqiimuun. The word should be declined by the "raf'a sign" like the other nouns in the sentence. Indeed the two nouns before it (Raasi-khuun and Mu'-minuun), and the noun after it (mu'-tuun) are declined correctly. Some have argued that this word was declined as such to distinguish and praise the act of praying, but the scholar Ibn al-Khatib says that this is a sick reasoning. (al-Furqan by Mohammad M. 'abd al-Latif Ibn al-Katib, Dar al-Kutub al-'elmiyah, Beirut, p.43). Such reasoning defies logic. Why would one distinguishe prayer which is a branch of religion, and not faith which is the fundamental and root of religion? Besides can this logic apply to the error of declension in the previous verse? Do we conclude that the Saabi'iin are more distinguished than those who believe, and the People of the Book? And why do they get distinguished in one verse and not the other as we have seen? God is much higher than this sick logic. This again is an obvious grammatical error.

The Third Error

In 20:63
"They communed secretly saying, 'These two men are sorcerers'." (Arberry)
"Qaaluuu inna haazaani la-saahiraani ..."
The word haazaani should be haazayn.

The word haazaani was declined incorrectly because the word inna in the beginning of the nominal sentence causes a form of declension called "nasb" to the nominative and the "yeh" is the "sign of nasb". This is the third grammatical error.

AND HERE ARE SOME MORE https://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Newton/grammar.html

still boring old man...bring something new... these type of things long i have read... you just copy paste here out of curiosity...

i know from where you pick these..


just read the link as well..

https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/grammatical_errors_in_the_quran__by_moiz_amjad

nothing will make you happy.. coz your intention is finding fault from an immaculate book... you will never ever find...
just waste of your life time..

[good logic]

Peace John.

According to your argument, because Qoran is asking them to refer to "What  GOD has revealed"  then It must be what they have  with them and are already following it?
Then why the need for Qoran to correct them and admonish them for abandoning GOD s guidance?
Qoran is also inviting them to follow this new revelation from GOD that confirms what was sent to them.
So according to your argument, you should not be objecting to this new revelation.

Here is an example quoting verse 136 of Chapter 2 of the Qoran, which says, 'Say, "We believe in GOD, and in what was sent down to us, and in what was sent down to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Patriarchs; and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and all the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction among any of them. To Him alone we are submitters."'

Jews and Christians particularly, will find the information in the Qoran quite familiar to what they already know from their scripture. Often referred to as 'people of the scripture' in the Qoran,
they will recognize it as a closely connected continuation of the Old and New Testaments. Many names, instructions, lessons, practices and history from these Testaments have been reiterated in the Qoran. Mary is the only woman mentioned by name in the Qoran with an entire chapter (19) named after her. In fact, the Quran specifies that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians), will actually get twice the reward for recognizing and continuing with what is essentially the last segment of their own scripture.

Quoting from the Qoran, Chapter 28, verses 52 to 54: 'Those whom we blessed with the previous scriptures will believe in this. When it is recited to them, they will say, "We believe in it. This is the truth from our Lord. Even before we heard of it, we were submitters." To these we grant twice the reward, because they steadfastly persevere. They counter evil works with good works, and from our provisions to them, they give.'

Please rest assured that you can certainly retain your religious and cultural heritage. Following Submission to God from the Qoran does not mean you have to abandon your connection with the religion you have identified with all your life. Remember that the Qoran is only the culmination of a series of messages from God which would not have come about if your scripture did not exist before it and people corrupted it and failed to uphold it and preserve t like they promised to do.
. Therefore, if you follow Submission, for all practical purposes, you will be a  Christian Submitter as per your religious lineage.

However, if you prefer to follow a previous scripture from God, you have complete freedom to do so but please keep in mind the following:

1) There is no existing scripture from God other than Qoran that is intact. Though the truth very much exists in the other scriptures, you may not be able to identify the falsehood that has crept into them. This will bring you back to the existing global problem where everyone believes that the information they are presently following is the correct information. The advantage of having a unified, intact scripture from God is that humans no longer need to think about where they can access God's accurate word from. His intact scripture.

2) Because of missing portions and alterations, the complete system of Submission decreed by God to be followed, does not exist in the previous scriptures any longer. For any system to work perfectly, all its parts must work together. Applying only parts of a system is like trying to build your soul all your life on snacks instead of nutritious, wholesome meals. God's comprehensive system to help you build your soul in huge proportions to face His awesome presence in the Hereafter is fully detailed in the Qoran.

3) Even if theoretically you did have a complete previous scripture from God in your possession, God has updated and consolidated all His previous messages into one unified scripture for all people. Since the Qoran represents all of God's previous scriptures, religions and messengers, it is your scripture as much as anyone else's. So when you follow the Qoran, in essence, you will be continuing to follow your own scripture anyway.

GOD bless you.
Peace.

[jkhan]

Here is an example quoting verse 136 of Chapter 2 of the Qoran, which says, 'Say, "We believe in GOD, and in what was sent down to us, and in what was sent down to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Patriarchs; and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and all the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction among any of them. To Him alone we are submitters."'

Thank you for reminding with this particular verse... how can it be a reminder to the one whose intention is mocking only..?

Look brother GL how excellent the verse is when we look at it in depth.. it clearly gives us a common stance that God never created religion for each.. You can't be without making DISTINCTION if God created religion for each..
For a real believer all prophets and messengers and what was revealed to them is nothing but one message.. core is same.. that is to say God is One.. All those who are mentioned in the above verse believed in ONE GOD.. That's so obvious with clear Torah verses... How come God became Trinity while Torah, the book of Jews for ages preached in ONE God. Is God Trinity for Jews of modern day? No way... So why Christians only change from nowhere while Muslims also accept that God is One on top of that accepts that same God of all Prophets.. Is our God different to the one of Musa or Ibrahim or Nuh?

Nonsensical, in fact the Christianity is.. sheer lunatic and eccentric...

[John]

Peace John.

According to your argument, because Qoran is asking them to refer to "What  GOD has revealed"  then It must be what they have  with them and are already following it?
Then why the need for Qoran to correct them and admonish them for abandoning GOD s guidance?

Hopefully I'll get to the rest of your comment later. For now, however, I want you to respond to my criticism of what I've edited above.

Your logical fallacy here is that you've already assumed that the Koran is from God without proving it.

Furthermore, you assume without argument that there is something in the Bible that requires correction.

This is only supported by the circular argument that the Koran is from Allah and because the Koran is from Allah it must be correct and so if the Koran is from Allah then whatever it says about the Bible must be accurate because what's from Allah is never wrong because Allah's words are in the Koran....

It's called petitio principii or begging the question. In an exam you would be marked down quite heavily for that egregious fallacy. Fortunately for you, you are not alone on this site as everyone I've engaged commits it from the get-go.

[good logic]

Peace John..
You say ,quote:
"It's called petitio principii or begging the question. In an exam you would be marked down quite heavily for that egregious fallacy. Fortunately for you, you are not alone on this site as everyone I've engaged commits it from the get-go."

You are the one making your argument using verses of Qoran. Now you are changing the subject .

Whether the bible or Qoran or or any other scripture is from GOD  depends on what one makes of it after  they study its contents.This is an individual task for each human to check for themselves,. It does not depend on others - qualified or not, intellectuals or not  and not even messengers who only deliver it-

One checks and believes or otherwise for themselves only. There is no need for your argument or mine when it comes to GOD s scripture even though we are entitled to it, Others will still need to check any human argument.
GOD puts His  own argument in the contents . GOD s argument is what matters and of course GOD always has the best argument.
GOD bless you.
Peace./

[John]

Peace John..
You say ,quote:
"It's called petitio principii or begging the question. In an exam you would be marked down quite heavily for that egregious fallacy. Fortunately for you, you are not alone on this site as everyone I've engaged commits it from the get-go."

You are the one making your argument using verses of Qoran. Now you are changing the subject .

Whether the bible or Qoran or or any other scripture is from GOD  depends on what one makes of it after  they study its contents.This is an individual task for each human to check for themselves,. It does not depend on others - qualified or not, intellectuals or not  and not even messengers who only deliver it-

One checks and believes or otherwise for themselves only. There is no need for your argument or mine when it comes to GOD s scripture even though we are entitled to it, Others will still need to check any human argument.
GOD puts His  own argument in the contents . GOD s argument is what matters and of course GOD always has the best argument.
GOD bless you.
Peace./

I'm pleading with you. No, I'm begging you: You have got to change your name because it is clearly a misnomer as you can't even follow your own argument. There has been no change of argument. I am still on point! This is how the argument has run:

1. On Oct 25 you claimed "The bible is not the original Gospel".

2. The reason you said this is because the Bible and the Koran say different things about God, Jesus etc. In other words, your claim is that the Scriptures have been corrupted.

3. I pointed out that the Koran, contrary to your original denials, has your false prophet being told to confer with Christians and their Scriptures. (A point you dishonestly ignored.)

4. Then I posed a series of logical problems that dovetail rather badly for your argument (and Islam!), one of which is...

5. If the Koran tells your false prophet to go the Christian Scriptures then they can't have been corrupted.

6. You have only 2 options here: the Bible has not been corrupted (no where does the Koran say it has been!) or it has been and so why would the Koran tell your false prophet to seek its support?

As for your quibble about me going to the Koran, I'm not at all doing that, a point you can't seem to understand: I'm merely pointing out the huge contradiction between what your own text says and what your apologetics against Christianity and the Bible say. You don't require a degree in Logic, like I have, to understand my argument.

And as for the other piece of logic you have a difficult time grasping, I know all 30+ Korans are not from God and it's a pile of junk (I'm being polite in my choice of word here). So, I don't believe a word it says. No one here has proved it is from God and so when you quote from it, you quote it as though it has already been proven a revelation from God. That's why you have question begged.

I'm sorry you don't grasp the logic of my argument. I was trained to tear arguments apart, looking for weakness in their structure and the like. You have not undertaken the skills to do that and that is why you have had trouble following my argument.

With all this off my chest, only one thing remains: change your name! May I suggest, Poor Logic or Good Illogic, or maybe, my favourite Mr Paralogism?

[good logic]

Peace John.
You quoted verses of Qoran to follow an argument that used  these out of context verses to claim your point. I have shown you that what you claimed was false according to the subject and context of the verses that were quoted isolated.

Now you say,quote :
"As for your quibble about me going to the Koran, I'm not at all doing that, a point you can't seem to understand: I'm merely pointing out the huge contradiction between what your own text says and what your apologetics against Christianity and the Bible say. You don't require a degree in Logic, like I have, to understand my argument."

Again you claim a lot of understanding but I found out and shown you that your understanding of Qoran is very poor.
You do not have to believe in it . So what is your agenda and purpose with it since you are not studying it ,just copying what hate sites assume by misinterpreting isolated verses about it?
Don t you think that good intentions, good manner and respect also come from good knowledge?
Good logic surely is reflecting these good traits if one studies and understands GOD s scripture.

Then you say,quote:
"I'm sorry you don't grasp the logic of my argument. I was trained to tear arguments apart, looking for weakness in their structure and the like. You have not undertaken the skills to do that and that is why you have had trouble following my argument."

What I grasp is that you are choosing to ignore most of what I say to you and chose to carry on your argument regardless, here is an example,quote:
"6. You have only 2 options here: the Bible has not been corrupted (no where does the Koran say it has been!) or it has been and so why would the Koran tell your false prophet to seek its support?"

What verse/s of Qoran are referring to the bible? quote them!
You are assuming this,
.Clearly your training is not working for you John.
Your choice.
GOD bless you.
Peace.