what is ٱلْعَـٰلَمِينَ (al-'aalameen)

[Timotheus]

Peace my brother

Off course it is, this is the Arabic version, the scenerio of this Quran is Arabia, the people that this Quran reflex is all about the Arabs except the Prophets from the Family of Abraham. Judaism is an Arab religion, the Israelite was in Arabia, the Nasara originated from Arabia, the Tawrat and Injeel originated from Arabia.

Is the Deen of ALLAH all about the Arabs?

peace be with you,

Well i believe in the Quran, all of it is from my LORD

God suffices as a gaurdian of His message.

Arabia? geography is a subject of much conjecture when it comes to nations of the past. one i do not wish to get into

judaism, christianity, muhammadism??

there is only one deen with God, and that is the deen of al-islam, and its origins are from God before creation.

3:19
إِنَّ ٱلدِّينَ عِندَ ٱللَّهِ ٱلْإِسْلَـٰمُ ۗ وَمَا ٱخْتَلَفَ ٱلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا۟ ٱلْكِتَـٰبَ إِلَّا مِنۢ بَعْدِ مَا جَآءَهُمُ ٱلْعِلْمُ بَغْيًۢا بَيْنَهُمْ ۗ وَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِـَٔايَـٰتِ ٱللَّهِ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ سَرِيعُ ٱلْحِسَابِ


i think this verse is very relevant, if you understand, we are all after all, recipients of the book. and Gods word is as relevant now as it was then, and for all times.

regardless i do not desire to conjecture.

one thing for certain, is God does not speak kindly of many arabs in the quran. in fact he says they are worst in hypocrasy and denial, although there are some among them that are righteous.

God gives us sufficient proof, so if you have some proof, bring it forth, otherwise it is nothing but conjecture.

Peace be with you

[Hizbullah]

God gives us sufficient proof, so if you have some proof, bring it forth, otherwise it is nothing but conjecture.

Peace be with you

Peace be with you..

12:2

إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا

indeed we have sent it down an arabic recital

13:37

وَكَذَٰلِكَ أَنزَلْنَاهُ حُكْمًا عَرَبِيًّا

and thus we have sent it down an arabic judgement

20:113

وَكَذَٰلِكَ أَنزَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا

and thus we have sent it down an arabic quran

26:195

بِلِسَانٍ عَرَبِيٍّ مُّبِينٍ
in a tounge of clear arabic

39:28
قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا
an arabic quran

41:3
كِتَابٌ فُصِّلَتْ آيَاتُهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لِّقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ
a book, signs explained, an arabic quran for a people who know

42:7
وَكَذَٰلِكَ أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لِّتُنذِرَ أُمَّ الْقُرَىٰ وَمَنْ حَوْلَهَا
and thus we have inspired to you an arabic quran, to warn the mother city and whoever is around it

43:3
إِنَّا جَعَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ
indeed we have made it an arabic quran so that you may understand

46:12
وَهَٰذَا كِتَابٌ مُّصَدِّقٌ لِّسَانًا عَرَبِيًّا
and this is a attesting book in an arabic tounge


seems clear to me it was revealed in arabic. i choose to base my opinion on the solid proof of the quran. albeit i am prone to errors in my understanding.

peace be with you.

Peace Brother

The above Quranic evidences you provided, proves that this Quran is the Arabic version for a people, the Arabs, as it is in their language, they could comprehend without ambiguity.

If it is in a foreign language, the Arabs will question - [highlight in black]......


Q:41:44 - "If We had made it a Foreign recitation, they would have said, ?why not explain in detail its verses? Foreign and Arabic, say, ?It is guidance and healing for those who have faith, but the ears of the disbelievers are heavy, they are blind to it, it is as if they are being called from a distant place.?


At present we have the Arabic Quran, dont you think a non-Arab has the right to question, "why is the Quran not written in my language?"


However, the verse highlighted in Green, tells us that there were also Non-Arabic Quran, the verse says Foreign and Arabic, which show that irrespective of  whether it is in Foreign or Arabic recitation, the Quran is a guidance for those who have faith and so on........

Also, check the verse, the word Foreign comes first and Arabic came in second, that means, the Foreign Quranic recitation were already present before the Arabic version.

Most important is that the Quran 16:103 proves that the Last Prophet who explained in detail this Quran was a Foreigner!

You refused to follow what the Quran says and instead follow the 7th Century conjectures in which you and those sectarian are fond off.

[jemby97]

Peace Hizbullah,
Can you explain further what you have said about 16:103....

Thank you very much...

[HP_TECH]

[[PLEASE CONFIRM EACH AYAAT PRESENTED HERE, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING ACCURACY AND INVESTIGATING THOROUGHLY. EACH AYAAT CITED IS EXTREMELY RELEVANT TO THE ARGUMENT POSED SO DO MAKE THE TIME TO READ AND DOUCLE CHECK EACH ONE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
(I always advise to use corpus.quran.com as a tool, in conjunction with PRL-Project Root List)]]

In response to Hizbullah,

Brother, let us not lock our hearts with our arrogance like the disbelievers among the People of the Book.
Indeed we are not fluent in the tongue of Allah's Message, so we must use a cautious approach for interpreting and studying the Book. See my method.

I was going to initially ask you, Hizbullah to see if there are more than one verse that you could cite as support for your claims.
I looked for "matching ayaats". I found in my current opinion what one could, if he willed, mistakingly interpret as every nation had a messenger.
 
I believe the best policy is to bring forth all the ayaats we can think are linked to the specific topic/ concept.
The Quran is The Book which its parts are oft-repeated. So if a foreign perspective is introduced by someone and he can only provide one example from the entire Quran chances are he misinterpreted this concept.

I will if Allah so wills illustrate the misconception of believing every nation that existed had a messenger in it.

وَلَقَدْ بَعَثْنَا فِي كُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَّسُولًا أَنِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ وَاجْتَنِبُوا الطَّاغُوتَ فَمِنْهُم مَّنْ هَدَى اللَّهُ وَمِنْهُم مَّنْ حَقَّتْ عَلَيْهِ الضَّلَالَةُ فَسِيرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ فَانظُرُوا كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الْمُكَذِّبِينَ

Walaqad baAAathna fee kulli ommatin rasoolan ani oAAbudoo Allaha waijtaniboo alttaghoota faminhum man hada Allahu waminhum man haqqat AAalayhi alddalalatu faseeroo fee al-ardi faonthuroo kayfa kana AAaqibatu almukaththibeena

And certainly, We sent into every nation a Messenger, that, "Worship Allah, and avoid the false deities." Then among them (were some) whom Allah guided, and among them (were) some was justified on them the straying. So travel in the earth and see how was the end (of) the deniers.

Quran 16:36


وَلَوْ شِئْنَا لَبَعَثْنَا فِي كُلِّ قَرْيَةٍ نَّذِيرًا

Walaw shi/na labaAAathna fee kulli qaryatin natheeran

And if We willed, surely, We (would) have raised in every town a warner.

Quran 25:52

Why am I highlighting these two ayaats? The reason is because these will help us better understand how easily one can misinterpret The Scripture.
At a first glance one may be inclined to question whether these two ayaats present a contradiction.
Remember there is no contradiction in the Quran.
Meaning then that we must learn how to properly define words by examining context which is why I stress so much on gathering all matching ayaats related to a specific topic or concept.

The inherent difference between these two ayaats are:

[16:36]
a) sent, b) in every nation, c) a Messenger 
a) baathna b) ummatin c) rasula

[25:52]
a) raised, b) in every town, c) a Warner
a) labaathna b) qaryatin c) natheeran


16:36 is stating that a Messenger was sent among each umma
25:52 is clearly stating that a warner was not raised in every town.

Warners among which we are certain of were: Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa, Isa, Muhammad.
Because warners have a strong covenant(33:7), they bear the responsibility of delivering the Revelations/Books. They are sent as witnesses, bearers of glad tidings and warners these are Messenger Prophets.

Evidence for the above can be found here:
2:213
33:45

Verses like 16:36 which some of you are citing to claim every nation had a messenger are not supporting the notion that these messengers had Guidance/Books sent down to them.

Therefore you cannot use these Verses as evidence for claiming that every nation must have had a messenger and therefore we expect one as well.

I do not want to make much speculation but I will convey some of my intuition on the matter. Therefore take it with a tiny grain of salt. These are strong intuitions based on Salat, supplication and constant Reading so take the grain with a glass of water.

We might be misunderstanding the context in which ummatin and qaryatin are used in addition to misunderstanding the difference between the duties of a Messenger, and a Messenger Prophet/Warner

In my current understanding warners are raised in key qaryatin(affluent cities) to warn the corrupters who indulge in affluence among their brethren with The Scripture.
This is again connected to the prayer Ibrahim made for his offspring to carry the Prophethood and The Scripture.
(Don't hate brother truth is most of our other ancestors were probably too busy idol worshipping, transgressing and etcetera and again Allah chooses whosever He wills by Knowledge and because of their knowledge)

It seems to me then that usually Warners are raised among their own brethren and bring forth to their people revelation containing glad tidings for the believers and warning for the disbelievers.

In comparison messengers are sent in every community reciting Verses (most likely from Books sent from before them) and warning of the punishment but it does not mean they received Scripture.

 

Off course it is, this is the Arabic version, the scenerio of this Quran is Arabia, the people that this Quran reflex is all about the Arabs except the Prophets from the Family of Abraham. Judaism is an Arab religion, the Israelite was in Arabia, the Nasara originated from Arabia, the Tawrat and Injeel originated from Arabia.

Is the Deen of ALLAH all about the Arabs?

Then allow me to answer with the best response:
"Do you distribute the Mercy of our Lord?"
43:32
2:105


Allah explicates why the family of Adam, Nuh, Ibrahim, and Amran were chosen among alameen (yes I managed to include the OP term in question haha comic relief?)[3:33 6:83-88; 19:49-58; 38:24-48] Because they did not associate anything with Allah and they turned to Him in repentance oft-repeatedly!

Therefore I do not understand the hostility towards particular peoples who Allah chose to carry the Message. That is what caused the demise of Iblis.
Will you question Allah too about His decision to raise in degrees some above you, or your kind, or your race or your community, or your gender?
Do you see, do you hear now?


I think your interpretation of 41:44 is a stretch. Arabyuu in this ayaat is not implying Arab language but Arab ethnicity. This is why I perceive it as so:
1)The phrase foreign and arab comes also in the interrogatory form, please double check. Meaning a question is being posed. It is not a statement. As in a foreign Book and an Arab warner?

(41:44:9)
āʿ'jamiyyun
(Is it) a foreign (language)      INTG ? prefixed interrogative alif
N ? nominative masculine singular indefinite noun → Language
الهمزة همزة استفهام
اسم مرفوع
(41:44:10)
waʿarabiyyun
and an Arab?"      CONJ ? prefixed conjunction wa (and)
N ? nominative masculine singular indefinite noun
الواو عاطفة
اسم مرفوع


2)What?s foreign in the "hypothetical" scenario presented by Allah is the Message, The Book.

3)It is hypothetical because Allah says "if" plain and simple.

4)Meaning it was not foreign. Allah is trying to show the opposite of what you insinuate. That if it had been foreign it would have been much cause of doubt for the arabs and also for the believers among the People of the Scripture who were expecting a Message sent down in the tongue of their Arabyuu brethren as prophesied in Torah and Injeel NOT they would have believed in the Message even if he was Israelite reciting perfectly to them in their own language because they were true scholars of the Scripture and recognized the Message and Messenger as they recognize their children

Hard proof for this in:

5)26:197-99

6){2:146, 6:20}<??(sister ayaats! This is how you da-ra-ba bring forth evidence/support for a concept/interpretation in Quran! Adopt this method so you may succeed!)

7)23:69<?? highlighting how Messengers are to be recognized by the people of the Scripture

8 )A good question to ask would be why would Allah pose a hypothetical like this? If you pay heed to the details in the Quran you may find that
the disbelievers were not content with the Quran, they were disbelievers in the Torah as well but they had the nerve to question why the Book was not sent down in the same vernacular as Moses's.
Evidence for this in:

28:47-48

In response to your comment on 16:103

Actually 16:103 proves the opposite of what you say.
It is clarifying that although the disbelievers claim the prophet was being dictated by a man. Possibly an Israelite who had believed in the Scripture. The man that they were referring to spoke a foreign language, while the Arabic being revealed was perfect pure. And the prophet had never recited or written with his right a hand a Scripture before it.

How you conjecture that the prophet was foreign from this one only ayaat rubs me the wrong way, but I will remain polite.

How do you read the Quran brother?

Don't cite only one ayaat brother, I repeat Allah's Book's parts are oft-repeated.

You will never reach true understanding by relying on a misinterpretation of one standalone ayyat. Find its sister and bring a witness from the Verses to testify to the truthfulness of your interpretation.

46:10 supports the notion I propose that a foreigner an Israelites was present at the time of the Revelation and testified to its similarity and believed.

46:12 Makes the distinction between Moses Book and this Revelation in which language is ARABIC


I am not going to try to convince you of what I am conveying, although the evidence gathered is self-evident, I do this so that whoever is reading may know that which my Lord Has guided me to of the Understanding in the Scripture. (Praise be to the Almighty, Most Gracious, Grantor of Infinite Bounty!) 

[Hizbullah]

Peace Hizbullah,
Can you explain further what you have said about 16:103....

Thank you very much...

Peace,

Quran 16:103 - And We certainly know that they say, "Only teaches him a Mortal. Tongue of the one they incline to him is foreign, and this a clear Arabic language.

Pickthall: And We know well that they say: Only a man teacheth him. The speech of him at whom they falsely hint is outlandish, and this is clear Arabic speech.

Yusuf Ali: We know indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him." The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.

Shakir: And certainly We know that they say: Only a mortal teaches him. The tongue of him whom they reproach is barbarous, and this is clear Arabic tongue.

Muhammad Sarwar: We know that they say a mere mortal has taught it (the Quran) to him (Muhammad). The language of the person whom they think has taught it to him is not Arabic. This (the Quran) is in illustrious Arabic.

Mohsin Khan: And indeed We know that they (polytheists and pagans) say: "It is only a human being who teaches him (Muhammad SAW)." The tongue of the man they refer to is foreign, while this (the Quran) is a clear Arabic tongue.

Arberry: And We know very well that they say, 'Only a mortal is teaching him.' The speech of him at whom they hint is barbarous; and this is speech Arabic, manifest.



Study the verse carefully, There are two entities, one a teacher and another one the student. The verse is telling us about the teacher who taught his student the Arabic Quran. The only person who is qualified enough to teach the Quran was the Prophet. As such, the teacher was THE PROPHET, WHO WAS ALSO A FOREIGNER - [Q:12:06; 29:27]. The Student could only be an Arab, who was selected to lead his people, the Arabs, considering the fact that the Arabic version Quran was the tool!

[Hizbullah]

In response to your comment on 16:103

Actually 16:103 proves the opposite of what you say.
It is clarifying that although the disbelievers claim the prophet was being dictated by a man. Possibly an Israelite who had believed in the Scripture. The man that they were referring to spoke a foreign language, while the Arabic being revealed was perfect pure. And the prophet had never recited or written with his right a hand a Scripture before it.

How you conjecture that the prophet was foreign from this one only ayaat rubs me the wrong way, but I will remain polite.

How do you read the Quran brother?

Don't cite only one ayaat brother, I repeat Allah's Book's parts are oft-repeated.

You will never reach true understanding by relying on a misinterpretation of one standalone ayyat. Find its sister and bring a witness from the Verses to testify to the truthfulness of your interpretation.

46:10 supports the notion I propose that a foreigner an Israelites was present at the time of the Revelation and testified to its similarity and believed.

46:12 Makes the distinction between Moses Book and this Revelation in which language is ARABIC


I am not going to try to convince you of what I am conveying, although the evidence gathered is self-evident, I do this so that whoever is reading may know that which my Lord Has guided me to of the Understanding in the Scripture. (Praise be to the Almighty, Most Gracious, Grantor of Infinite Bounty!)

In response to your comment on 16:103...The rest i will respond later.....insha ALLAH


How you conjecture the Quranic verse, How do you read the Quran brother?  Sorry brother, I don?t buy your sectarian innovation.


The Quran is the GREATEST EVIDENCE 12:06


And likewise, will your Lord choose you and teach you the interpretation of narratives and complete His favor upon you and upon the family of Jacob, as He completed it upon your fathers before, Abraham and Isaac. Indeed, your Lord is Knowing and Wise."


وَكَذلِكَ  It is a DEMONSTRATIVE PRONOUN, a pronoun that is used to point to something specific within a sentence. it has nothing to do with the previous or the sentence after it. There are many examples in the Quran pertaining to this pronoun. In fact in Chapter 12 itself there are many examples...verses 21, 22, 32, 56, 75


AND QURAN 29:27


And We gave to him [Abraham], Isaac and Jacob and placed in his descendants Prophethood and a Book. And We gave him his reward in this world, and indeed, he is in the Hereafter among the righteous


AND QURAN 21:72 - 73


And We gave him Isaac and Jacob in addition, and all [of them] We made righteous.

And We made them leaders guiding by Our command. And We inspired to them the doing of good deeds, establishment of prayer, and giving of zakah; and they were worshippers of Us.


From the above verses, it shows explicitly that the Prophetic lineage from the Family of Abraham [03:33] was thru Prophet Ishaq [Isaac]. It explicitly tells us the Prophet was NOT AN ARAB AND AS SUCH A FOREIGNER. As for Ishmael, his descendants was the Great Nation as promised by the ALMIGHTY to Ishmael father, Prophet Abraham - Q:04:54

46:10 supports the notion I propose that a foreigner an Israelites was present at the time of the Revelation and testified to its similarity and believed.

46:12 Makes the distinction between Moses Book and this Revelation in which language is ARABIC

Nowhere in the Quran says the Prophet was taught by the israelites. In fact, the Quran - Chapters 02; 26; 53, confirms that it was Jibreel, who taught him. Please read and try to comprehend the Quran.

You need to know the intricacies of the Quranic system and bring a witness from the Verses to testify to the truthfulness of your interpretation. Even if you cite more than one ayaat, make sure it is relevent. You will never reach true understanding by relying on misinterpretation of ayyats.

I repeat your words

I am not going to try to convince you of what I am conveying, although the evidence gathered is self-evident, I do this so that whoever is reading may know that which my Lord Has guided me to of the Understanding in the Book. (Praise be to the Almighty, Most Gracious, Grantor of Infinite Bounty!)

[imrankhawaja]

its all about how one can understand the innterpretation and meanings and reasonings.. for me

16/103 is reffering that this source of instruction is not copied or plagarised from something else, like bible , torah, geeta, or anythhing ...and it was a reason to start the secure revelation with the language that will last forever what we see no a days,, and from that first source.. of language this arabic message is interpretated on more than 100 popular langauges of world. message is infact everywhere...

i dnt know why people dnt use reasonings when they claim something... a line always start from a staring point... and then line spread whereever the path leads to...

a human line of race started from one soule and then with a couple... then go on..

a human language must start from one language then go on...

a universal message to humanity must revealed in one language accoriding to the laws and language of human understanding then is spread to multiple languages, but still translation is translation cannot be as perfect as original text...

the logics and reasoning tells us the universal message started from quran and the language was arabic...

before that the messages of previous prophets  lost their original langauage and shape and violation of people so the God knows what time the revelation should took place...  and what i feel i am amazed arabic was one region now there are more than 40 countires in globe speaking arabc language.. and more than 60 countires that read arabic langauge and write arabic language as optional langauge... in schoolings

well if still somebody claim the original message was reveled in all lanaguage and all nations,, they need to provide atleast a proof...

1 who was original messenger or language?,, must b more popular than arabic and original messenger must more popular than muhammad and must have more followers thn muhammad,,

2 why did not God preserve original message if it was not arabic, is God was unaware aboout it,,, ?

3 if there was a originlal message then why did not the challange of 1400 years old language achieve yet ,, produce a book or chapter like this...??

questions will go on and on... but the claimers have a burden of proof on their head...

peace
God bless you

[Hizbullah]

Salam Brother

[[PLEASE CONFIRM EACH AYAAT PRESENTED HERE, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING ACCURACY AND INVESTIGATING THOROUGHLY. EACH AYAAT CITED IS EXTREMELY RELEVANT TO THE ARGUMENT POSED SO DO MAKE THE TIME TO READ AND DOUCLE CHECK EACH ONE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
(I always advise to use corpus.quran.com as a tool, in conjunction with PRL-Project Root List)]]

In response to Hizbullah,

Brother, let us not lock our hearts with our arrogance like the disbelievers among the People of the Book.
Indeed we are not fluent in the tongue of Allah's Message, so we must use a cautious approach for interpreting and studying the Book. See my method.

I was going to initially ask you, Hizbullah to see if there are more than one verse that you could cite as support for your claims.
I looked for "matching ayaats". I found in my current opinion what one could, if he willed, mistakingly interpret as every nation had a messenger.
 
I believe the best policy is to bring forth all the ayaats we can think are linked to the specific topic/ concept.
The Quran is The Book which its parts are oft-repeated. So if a foreign perspective is introduced by someone and he can only provide one example from the entire Quran chances are he misinterpreted this concept.

I will if Allah so wills illustrate the misconception of believing every nation that existed had a messenger in it.

وَلَقَدْ بَعَثْنَا فِي كُلِّ أُمَّةٍ رَّسُولًا أَنِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ وَاجْتَنِبُوا الطَّاغُوتَ فَمِنْهُم مَّنْ هَدَى اللَّهُ وَمِنْهُم مَّنْ حَقَّتْ عَلَيْهِ الضَّلَالَةُ فَسِيرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ فَانظُرُوا كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الْمُكَذِّبِينَ

Walaqad baAAathna fee kulli ommatin rasoolan ani oAAbudoo Allaha waijtaniboo alttaghoota faminhum man hada Allahu waminhum man haqqat AAalayhi alddalalatu faseeroo fee al-ardi faonthuroo kayfa kana AAaqibatu almukaththibeena

And certainly, We sent into every nation a Messenger, that, "Worship Allah, and avoid the false deities." Then among them (were some) whom Allah guided, and among them (were) some was justified on them the straying. So travel in the earth and see how was the end (of) the deniers.

Quran 16:36


وَلَوْ شِئْنَا لَبَعَثْنَا فِي كُلِّ قَرْيَةٍ نَّذِيرًا

Walaw shi/na labaAAathna fee kulli qaryatin natheeran

And if We willed, surely, We (would) have raised in every town a warner.

Quran 25:52

Why am I highlighting these two ayaats? The reason is because these will help us better understand how easily one can misinterpret The Scripture.
At a first glance one may be inclined to question whether these two ayaats present a contradiction.
Remember there is no contradiction in the Quran.
Meaning then that we must learn how to properly define words by examining context which is why I stress so much on gathering all matching ayaats related to a specific topic or concept.

The inherent difference between these two ayaats are:

[16:36]
a) sent, b) in every nation, c) a Messenger 
a) baathna b) ummatin c) rasula

[25:52]
a) raised, b) in every town, c) a Warner
a) labaathna b) qaryatin c) natheeran


16:36 is stating that a Messenger was sent among each umma
25:52 is clearly stating that a warner was not raised in every town.

Warners among which we are certain of were: Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa, Isa, Muhammad.
Because warners have a strong covenant(33:7), they bear the responsibility of delivering the Revelations/Books. They are sent as witnesses, bearers of glad tidings and warners these are Messenger Prophets.

Evidence for the above can be found here:
2:213
33:45

Verses like 16:36 which some of you are citing to claim every nation had a messenger are not supporting the notion that these messengers had Guidance/Books sent down to them.

Therefore you cannot use these Verses as evidence for claiming that every nation must have had a messenger and therefore we expect one as well.

I do not want to make much speculation but I will convey some of my intuition on the matter. Therefore take it with a tiny grain of salt. These are strong intuitions based on Salat, supplication and constant Reading so take the grain with a glass of water.

We might be misunderstanding the context in which ummatin and qaryatin are used in addition to misunderstanding the difference between the duties of a Messenger, and a Messenger Prophet/Warner

In my current understanding warners are raised in key qaryatin(affluent cities) to warn the corrupters who indulge in affluence among their brethren with The Scripture.
This is again connected to the prayer Ibrahim made for his offspring to carry the Prophethood and The Scripture.
(Don't hate brother truth is most of our other ancestors were probably too busy idol worshipping, transgressing and etcetera and again Allah chooses whosever He wills by Knowledge and because of their knowledge)

It seems to me then that usually Warners are raised among their own brethren and bring forth to their people revelation containing glad tidings for the believers and warning for the disbelievers.

In comparison messengers are sent in every community reciting Verses (most likely from Books sent from before them) and warning of the punishment but it does not mean they received Scripture.

 

Then allow me to answer with the best response:
"Do you distribute the Mercy of our Lord?"
43:32
2:105


Allah explicates why the family of Adam, Nuh, Ibrahim, and Amran were chosen among alameen (yes I managed to include the OP term in question haha comic relief?)[3:33 6:83-88; 19:49-58; 38:24-48] Because they did not associate anything with Allah and they turned to Him in repentance oft-repeatedly!

Therefore I do not understand the hostility towards particular peoples who Allah chose to carry the Message. That is what caused the demise of Iblis.
Will you question Allah too about His decision to raise in degrees some above you, or your kind, or your race or your community, or your gender?
Do you see, do you hear now?

Your interpretation of the Quranic verses are a far fetch. You confuse yourself with all the verses. From the Quranic concept, all Prophets were Messengers, thus they were warners. But not all Messengers were Prophet, nevertheless, they were warners.


Q:39:71 - And those ATHEIST will be driven to Hell in groups, till, when they reach it, the gates thereof will be opened. And its keepers will say, "DID NOT THE MESSENGERS COME TO YOU FROM AMONG YOURSELVES - reciting to you the verses of your Lord, AND WARNING YOU OF THE MEETING OF THIS DAY OF YOURS'' They will say: "Yes,'' but the Word of torment has been justified against the ATHEIST!


It is explicit that the verse mentioned ?MESSENGERS COME TO YOU FROM AMONG YOURSEVLES?, meaning from among their own people and ?WARNING YOU OF THE MEETING OF THIS DAY OF YOURS''. So does it not show you that the Messengers are of his own people reciting to them and warning them of the future?

If you study the Quran carefully, you will find that, Prophet Nuh, during his ministry, there were only one nation, speaking in only one language. He was sent to his own people, his brothers?..


Q:26:106 - When their brother Noah said to them, "Will you not fear Allah?


After the deluge, various ethnicity of people with their vernacular, from the descendent of Nuh began to emerged - the people of Israel, Hud, than Soleh and the descendants of Abraham ? the people Shu?ayb, all were Messengers, sent to their own respective people, their brothers, considering the fact the Quran stated explicitly in 14:04.


Q:11:50 - And to 'Aad, their brother Hud. He said, "O my people, worship ALLAH; you have no deity other than Him. You are not but inventors.

Q:11:61 - And to Thamud, their brother Soleh?.

Q:11:84 - And to Madyan, their brother Shu'ayb?.

Nowhere in the Quran mentioned such verse pertaining to the Prophet, being the Arabs as his brothers or his people.

However, punishment will be exempted, when messengers were not sent to their people?.


17:15 - Whoever is guided is only guided for his soul. And whoever errs only errs against it. And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another. AND NEVER WOULD WE PUNISH UNTIL WE RAISE A MESSENGER.


Prophets were sent with the Umm al Kitab and Judgement [06:89]. Messengers follow up with what was sent to the Prophets mentioned in 03:81 and 33:07.

I think your interpretation of 41:44 is a stretch. Arabyuu in this ayaat is not implying Arab language but Arab ethnicity. This is why I perceive it as so:
1)The phrase foreign and arab comes also in the interrogatory form, please double check. Meaning a question is being posed. It is not a statement. As in a foreign Book and an Arab warner?

(41:44:9)
āʿ'jamiyyun
(Is it) a foreign (language)      INTG ? prefixed interrogative alif
N ? nominative masculine singular indefinite noun → Language
الهمزة همزة استفهام
اسم مرفوع
(41:44:10)
waʿarabiyyun
and an Arab?"      CONJ ? prefixed conjunction wa (and)
N ? nominative masculine singular indefinite noun
الواو عاطفة
اسم مرفوع


2)What?s foreign in the "hypothetical" scenario presented by Allah is the Message, The Book.

3)It is hypothetical because Allah says "if" plain and simple.

4)Meaning it was not foreign. Allah is trying to show the opposite of what you insinuate. That if it had been foreign it would have been much cause of doubt for the arabs and also for the believers among the People of the Scripture who were expecting a Message sent down in the tongue of their Arabyuu brethren as prophesied in Torah and Injeel NOT they would have believed in the Message even if he was Israelite reciting perfectly to them in their own language because they were true scholars of the Scripture and recognized the Message and Messenger as they recognize their children

Hard proof for this in:

5)26:197-99

6){2:146, 6:20}<??(sister ayaats! This is how you da-ra-ba bring forth evidence/support for a concept/interpretation in Quran! Adopt this method so you may succeed!)

7)23:69<?? highlighting how Messengers are to be recognized by the people of the Scripture

8 )A good question to ask would be why would Allah pose a hypothetical like this? If you pay heed to the details in the Quran you may find that the disbelievers were not content with the Quran, they were disbelievers in the Torah as well but they had the nerve to question why the Book was not sent down in the same vernacular as Moses's.
Evidence for this in:

28:47-48

Yes, it is a question, posted by the Arabs, if the scenario, was when a Foreign recitation was given to them. Obviously, they will question, why an Arabic recitation was not given to them? Why should ALLAH post a hypothetical question, when he knows, the non-Arab will question the same. ALLAH Nevers practise double standard. The most important thing we should know is that ALLAH Nevers contradict himself. If HE contradicts HIMSELF, then, 14:04, is redundant. This whole Quran falls under 03:78.


Quran 16:36?..SO TRAVEL IN THE EARTH AND SEE HOW WAS THE END OF THE DENIERS.


So travel the earth and carry out research, investigation and find out what is the truth and what is false.


Now, base on Q:41:44, according to Arrazi, 3jam means Persian. He was right to a certain extent.  Actually 3jam means the presence of writing elements known as the ?huzvāresh?. The ?huzvāresh? were words that were so called "Nabatean Aramaic" in origin and were written in the Middle Persian, Soghdian, Khawarizmian. In another words, these languages were the so called "Nabatean Aramaic" written in different scripts and all with 22 alphabets ? Aleph, Beth, Gamal, Dalath - Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta?so on and so forth ? Abgd and written from right to left].

The Persian Empire was forced to employ the contemporaneous languages of the ancient Near East for the record of the empire. For effective diplomatic communication among the provinces of the empire, the so called Nabatean ?Aramaic?, as a Lingua Franca, was chosen. It was a natural choice and a practical one: Nabatean ?Aramaic? was already widely spoken in the Levant, Turkey [Rum], Egypt, and Western Iran. Anyone, irrespective of whether they were in the Levant, Turkey [Rum], Egypt or Persia would be able to comprehend Nabatean ?Aramaic?. So when the Quran talk about 3jam, it means those aforesaid languages, that was widely spoken in the Sasanian Empire in the 3rd Century CE.

As for Arabic, the Quran is actually referring to the Ancient South Arabian [Musnad script with 28 alphabets] that was widely spoken in South Arabia. The difference between the Quranic Arabic and ASA, is that the Quranic Arabic sounds more ?Nabatean Aramaic?. In fact, Quran Arabic is a combination of both so called Nabatean Aramaic and South Arabian Musnad, plausible created in the late 4th / early 5th Century CE. It adopted the same number of alphabet like ASA, 28 alphabets.

If the Quran was sent down in the 7th Century CE, then it is of no use that the Quran mentioned the word 3jam. This is because, the whole of Arabia ? right up to southern Turkey, Persia [to a certain extent], Northern Africa, Spain, already adopted Arabic as the spoken and written language since the  late 4th / early 5th Century CE. All those other languages with Huzwaresh and the so called Aramaic had already died out and no more in existence. So what is the point of mentioning them in the Quran? The reason is, because, those languages were still a spoken and written language during the Ministry of the Last Prophet in the 3rd Century CE!

8 )A good question to ask would be why would Allah pose a hypothetical like this? If you pay heed to the details in the Quran you may find that the disbelievers were not content with the Quran, they were disbelievers in the Torah as well but they had the nerve to question why the Book was not sent down in the same vernacular as Moses's.
Evidence for this in:

28:47-48

They were not content with the Quran but there is no evidence that they questioned why the Book was not sent down in the same vernacular as Moses's. No where it is written in the Quran! They were surprised by the difference in the Quran and the Furqan, the Book of Musa. The Quran in 15:87


And We have certainly given you, seven /several of the SECOND ONE and the Great Qur'an.


The above verses proves that the Quran is the second Book that was sent to mankind cross reference with 03:04. Although, it is not like the Book of Musa but it still contains the directives of Abraham and Musa - [87:18-19]

[Timotheus]

peace be with you all,

prehaps an arabic forum board was a bad idea,

please people, this topic is about al-aalameen, and many of theese posts are not realy related, and this has gone way off topic, there is more suitable places to discuss this kind of thing..

peace be with you all

[Hizbullah]

peace be with you all,
prehaps an arabic forum board was a bad idea,

it is good to have this Arabic board in this forum.

please people, this topic is about al-aalameen, and many of theese posts are not realy related, and this has gone way off topic, there is more suitable places to discuss this kind of thing..

Could the moderators kindly transfer all that is not related to a new thread [Quran 14:04] in this Arabic board?

Thank you so much and best regards