Answering Muslims: The Original Burn the Qur'an Day

Home

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

The Original Burn the Qur'an Day

Quite possibly the greatest video ever made.

For more posts on the preservation of the Qur'an, click here.

Description: This September 11th, a church in Florida is protesting the growing influence of Islam by offending 1.5 billion people. Specifically, they're staging a "Burn the Quran" Day. But is this the first day of its kind? In fact, is today's Qur'an the Qur'an that Muhammad intended his followers to have? Let's take a look at the evidence!

Posted by David Wood at 10:39 PM

Share to Twitter Share to Facebook

Labels: Qur'an (Preservation)

62 comments:

Traeh said...: You guys just keep surprising. Both of you are natural comedians and actors -- or have you had classes?

Keep it up! A brilliant way to teach! You had me laughing with those facial expressions.; September 1, 2010 at 11:06 PM
Tizita said...: OK, OK, David and Nabeel.....

It's not fair that Jesus has not only gifted u guys w/ the ability to debate but also ACTING! That is not fair *pouts*

U guys were really, really funny though! O, and David im w/ u on the No, No, on the burn the quran day. Jesus said never pay evil w/ evil.....So i'll be calling on the show and be on ur side.

Although, i would like for the Quran to be burned and whipped out from the planet.....Remember Paul said we a re not fighting a physical battle, but a battle with prince and principalities that are not of this world.

Good for u guys Nabeel and David......I really loved it!!!!; September 1, 2010 at 11:14 PM
Bartimaeus said...: Yes guys this has to be the best you have ever done. Too bad the original Quran was burned.

I posted a video about Burning the Quran and we are in agreemen burning any book including the Quran is conter productive in any outreach to our Muslim friends and neighbours.; September 1, 2010 at 11:21 PM
Fisher said...: You guys are my heroes. I mean seriously, you guys got serious chutzpah making this video. Great way to demonstrate the flaws of Muslim claims regarding Qur'anic preservation.

God bless y'all.

Fisher.; September 2, 2010 at 12:14 AM
Fernando said...: As far as we know the lost serses of the qur'an saide Jesus was God and thate God was a Triune being...

by the way: great acting skills... I loved it...; September 2, 2010 at 3:24 AM
Andrew said...: Do you have this in manuscript form? I would love to have those references for the next time I encounter a muslim. Though I appreciate the satire of your video I dont think showing it to a muslim would be very effective, but again, I would love your references to attempt a bit more serious approach to sharing the love of Jesus Christ with muslims.; September 2, 2010 at 3:41 AM
thegrandverbalizer19 said...: with the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.

Even I can appreciate this.

You would think that Nabeel would try and save face after the crushing defeat at the hands of Bassam Zawadi, and his 'Shaw shank redemption act' with Osama Abdullah last Friday.

But the quality, and the acting can be appreciated by everyone with one small caveat "Lets grab this random book" or Lets go to this "random part of the Qur'an"

didn't seem to random, that part is not believable so you came just shy of a Grammy.; September 2, 2010 at 4:16 AM
yohannes said...: Love this video.

I expected Chuck Norris to jump out at any minute :D; September 2, 2010 at 6:53 AM
Representative Tom McMillin said...: Classic!; September 2, 2010 at 6:56 AM
Locrian said...: OK, I love you guys to death, but I would quit my day job brothers....

That performance was a little less Dustin Hoffman, and a bit more Kim Peek...

But keep up the great work, and all the best from a Michigander behind you all the way.

GBY; September 2, 2010 at 8:02 AM
Christie said...: NICE! I like it. Very humorous and you still get the point across. I agree never burn books, but instead let them be exposed in the public arena...there is no better disinfectant for lies than sunlight.; September 2, 2010 at 8:17 AM
Sam said...: Granddiarheaofthemouth19 says that Nabeel got crushed. You must be high off the fumes from all those Qurans that Uthman burnt since Bassam did anything but crush Nabeel. He virtually admitted to everything that Nabeel said but justified it on the grounds that it was revealed and that this was Allah's will!

So let's see, it was Allah's will for their to be seven ahruf without anyone having a clue till this day what the ahruf are or supposed to be. And then it must have been Allah's will for Uthman to destroy six out of the seven ahruf which his god revealed and chose to standardize the one he thought was most accurate.

It was Allah's will to have abrogated verses expunged from the Quran even though he arbitrarily left in other abrogated texts.

It was Allah's will to have Uthman destroy the Qurans compiled by Ubay b. Kabb and Abdullah b. Masud, leaving out much of what they had, even though Muhammad said these were two of the four top Quranic reciters whom others were to learn the Quran from.

It was also Allah's will to have a goat eat the sheet containing the verses on adult breastfeeding and stoning.

On top of all these problems people like Bassam still want people to believe the Quran has been perfectly preserved.

Yep, I can see how Bassam crushed Nabeel!; September 2, 2010 at 9:11 AM
Roger said...: Bwhahahahahaha!!

LOVE IT!

Roger (not Williams) Sharp; September 2, 2010 at 10:58 AM
Geoff said...: Absolutley fantastic. Posted to my facebook! Also, a list of the sources for those who wish to reasearch in-depth, would be awesome.; September 2, 2010 at 11:45 AM
Tom said...: Boy, HOWDY! I'm STILL laughing but you guys have helped me to understand something about the compilation & history of the unholy grrr'an that was only vague to me before.

Yes, I'll be watching again and again but the main thing I want to say is THANK YOU for your credibility in this matter. I know you have both done SERIOUS homework on this so that we could understand. But you make learning fun. For THAT, I'm especially grateful.

As the young people from years ago might have said: "ACTS17 ROCKS!"

KAFIR AND PROUD AND LAUGHIN' OUT LOUD! MAY JESUS CHRIST BE PRAISED!!; September 2, 2010 at 12:01 PM
GreekAsianPanda said...: Hahaha.

My cousin came into the room while Nabeel was talking, and she was all like, "Wow, he's a really bad actor." And then David started talking and then she's like, "Oh my gosh, they're BOTH bad actors!"

I love your handshake thing! lol; September 2, 2010 at 12:25 PM
GreekAsianPanda said...: This is soooo going on my favourites list on Youtube.; September 2, 2010 at 1:33 PM
Traeh said...: This baby should go way viral.; September 2, 2010 at 4:29 PM
The Apologetic Front said...: Complete and total...genius.; September 2, 2010 at 7:48 PM
Douglas Kofi Adu-Boahen said...: Way to go killing a dude with laughter LOL; September 2, 2010 at 8:19 PM
Wildcat said...: Yeah, not the biggest fan of modern comedy, but you guys did have me laughing out loud a couple of times from within the house.

I am a big fan of satire, and you captured that well here.; September 2, 2010 at 8:25 PM
Confident Christianity said...: Oh my.; September 2, 2010 at 9:16 PM
minoria said...: Hey I love it to!Great acting.I think the info was fine,about the Koran or Cran(as some write it,coming from Qran).Laughter is the best medicine.; September 2, 2010 at 11:35 PM
minoria said...: The Muslims are proposing a "Read the Koran Day" to counter the "Burn the Koran Day".Technically speaking it is a logical idea,but it is easier said than done.The book is of a very low literary quality,not well-organized,changes themes too fast.In the ORIGINAL Arabic(not seen in the translations)alot of times,time after time it is like this:
"Said:"....",and then said:"...'.Said:"...."to which said:"..."
Really,the translator has to figure,by the context who said what:"Moses said:"..."The Pharaoh said"..."So Aaron said:"..."
So a non-Muslim will read 10 pages and then stop,since it is really non-interesting.; September 3, 2010 at 12:04 AM
Habra2022 said...: The same errors lol! Clearly, David and Nabeel are not bothered with a improving a case. No shame, no shame, the same exact points.

Nabeel Qureyshi vs Bassam Zawadi; Has the Quran Be Preserved?

http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2009/07/bassam-zawadi-vs-nabeel-qureshi-has.html; September 3, 2010 at 4:28 AM
Fernando said...: "Ridendo castigat mores"...; September 3, 2010 at 5:54 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: What,

does the Greatverbalizer (whatever), believe that Nabeel lost the debate with Bassam Zawadi?

I was personally present at the debate, in fact the overall conclusion confirmed what Nabeel had proposed from the beginning, namely that there are variants within the earliest Qur'anic manuscripts.

While Muslim apologists are quick to turn unto third century or sixth century indication of any trace of local variants or disagreements within the Christian community and enforce upon us to embrace these as difficulties, these same Muslims are quick to change their minds when we point out from the most accurate and reliable Muslim sources that the Qur'an suffered corruption.

Obviously if Seraphions knowledge of a fictious Gospel of Peter in the late second century serves to question disprove the historical Gospels, then certainly based upon Bukhari, the Qur'an was fabricated, lost, compiled, corrupted, burned and once more corrupted.; September 3, 2010 at 5:57 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: you guys have to make a few more videos, you have hid a nerve and Muslims are now reacting

good job; September 3, 2010 at 6:21 AM
Hemel Hossain said...: From Bangladesh...Really the educative comedy best video.U 2 really rocked.U 2 friends are really blessed and i pray that by ur friendship stay intact forever.And u keep glorifying the Lord; September 3, 2010 at 6:59 AM
Bartimaeus said...: David & Nabeel

Your video has created quite a stirr Yaya Snow is commenting on my blog. As most Muslims he lives in a constant state of denial and Islam is a religion of denial.

And Once again guys this is the best video ever Thank you so much for it. It is an amazing polemic tool and I plan to use it in my outreach.; September 3, 2010 at 7:53 AM
Ken said...: Thank you for this, David and Nabeel! - excellent material and excellent skit. I agree with some of the other comments that this is your best video yet; and deals with one of the most important issues in apologetics and evangelism with Muslims.

For those that want more documentation, click on the "Preservation Issues" at "posts like this" at the bottom and you will get a whole list of earlier blog articles that give you the documentation you need.

I wish that this kind of information was available when I started reaching out to Muslims in 1983 - back then, it was all locked away and inaccessible in expensive books and hard to find and rarely translated Arabic books, etc.

The internet, and yours and others good work has allowed regular people (like me) to get at this information.

Thanks for your work in this area!

Do some more videos just like this - covering different subjects - even the Grandverbalizer19 can respect it!; September 3, 2010 at 9:58 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: As ussual Yahya Snow failed to refute anything!!!

Better luck next time.; September 3, 2010 at 10:13 AM
GreekAsianPanda said...: There are already video responses on Youtube from RefutingActs17 (there's a whole channel dedicated to refuting you!) and BrotherofJesus1, in case you didn't know, David.; September 3, 2010 at 10:24 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: I recently checked out Yahya Snow's blog. Well, the man, his approach, his writing has changed drastically. Reading one of his posts leaves me to think that the man has had a pretty bad day.

I am pretty sure that Yahya Snow realises deep inside that Islam has a historical, textual, moral and logical problem.

His blog and his responses and posts, often (almost) line by line are literally filled with anger, insult, mockery and name-calling pretty much what he condemns his opponents for doing.

For example I his post against Samuel Green, in which he resorts to insulting and mocking Samuel Green to the core (Samuel Green is both a humble and kind person), pretty unnecessary of Yahya Snow and pretty devestating for his integrity, what's the whole point.

I have to say this is a turning point in Yahya's effort on the internet, I would say a sad ending for someone who began defending his religion in a respectful manner. If he reads this I hope he takes this rebuke seriously, otherwise he will simpy end up as another typical internet freak, with not respect.

I can only conclude that Yahya is possibly acting in desperation, I guess doubt is sinking in as he observes his religion being ripped apart piece by piece, well, I don't blame him, must be a bad feeling.; September 3, 2010 at 10:27 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: I am pretty amazed by Yahya's conclusion in the video (these are his wordings sort off): 'the only thing that happened...so the khalifa simply burned the Qur'ans...and everyone agreed'.

1. It was not a 'the only thing that happened was' matter.

2. or a: 'they simply burned the Qur'ans'

3. and neither did: 'everyone agree'

This is Yahya Snow typically deceiving his listerners and readers (even without proving any background information).

These were great reciters who disagreed with Uthman, not just some distant local copy of the Qur'an with some textual errors.

Furthermore, burning the word of God, wow, if early Muslims did not respect their own text, why should I do so.

And finally did these great reciters agree with the burning of their Qur'ans? Not according to the Islamic sources.

It makes me wonder which Qur'an we would follow today if the earliest and closest followers of Muhammad himself did not launch 'the Great burn the Qur'an day'.; September 3, 2010 at 10:47 AM
1moremuslim said...: You are definitely good actors!! A good missionary should be as good as you.
Seriously you should stop shewing the cud and be little more Kosher like Jesus.; September 3, 2010 at 4:18 PM
Bartimaeus said...: Yahya Snow is beside himself with your video. He is so upset he doesnt know should attted the his nest physcological session or go to the David and Nabeel ribfest and toss back a couple of brewskis; September 3, 2010 at 8:31 PM
Anthony Rogers said...: Bartimaeus,

You should add 1moremuslim to the list; this video obviously got to him as much as it did to Yahya.

David and Nabeel,

Great video. I loved every minute of it (twice).; September 4, 2010 at 1:15 PM
1moremuslim said...: To Anthony Rogers,

My comments are constantly censored here , that tells volume about what got to who. Why David wood is afraid of comments? These are not Sharia compliant comments!!

By the way, if you are a knowledgeable Christian, please answer my question under " Acts chapter 17" blog. I am waiting for an answer since few weeks now.; September 5, 2010 at 7:47 AM
David Wood said...: 1moremuslim,

I don't recall censoring your comments. But since you say I'm afraid of comments, I'll certainly be censoring your comments from now on.; September 5, 2010 at 9:34 AM
FreeInChrist777 said...: I loved the video, very good acting, and also good quotations from the Hadiths. Do Muslims ever start to think to themselves how can an illiterate man memorize the whole Quran?; September 6, 2010 at 2:37 AM
Apollos26 said...: Brother David and Nabeel and all the christian brethren that heleped to make this video: BRAVO!!!! Marvelous job!!!

I watched the video with two other friends - nonchristians - and they laughed the most about the goat eating the chapter of the Quran:D

We asked ourselves what the chapter looked like, after the goat digestes it and if THIS really can be the will of Allah, thaa a goat eats the noble and holy vereses, as the muslims always say about the Quran.

About the acting - as a professsional I can say: it is obvious that it was a copy of the typical 60's/70's acting or generally it was intended to let it be bad acting and that's the point where humor starts. The video is veeery sympathic and I guess you should make a rubric, making more videos of that kind.

Whatever happens, keep in mind: GOD is always with you.

Blessings,

Apollos; September 6, 2010 at 3:55 AM
Samuel Green said...: Thanks guys. It seems so obvious now that Uthman was the first to have a "burn the Qur'an" did but I did not think of it at the time.

You probably have seen this hadith but just in case you haven't. It is similar to the ones your quoted.

Narrated Ibrahim: The companions of 'Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) came to Abu Darda', (and before they arrived at his home), he looked for them and found them. Then he asked them,: "Who among you can recite (Qur'an) as 'Abdullah recites it?" They replied, "All of us." He asked, "Who among you knows it by heart?" They pointed at 'Alqama. Then he asked Alqama. "How did you hear 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud reciting Surat Al-Lail (The Night)?" Alqama recited:
'By the male and the female.'
Abu Ad-Darda said, "I testify that I heard the Prophet reciting it likewise, but these people want me to recite it:--
'And by Him Who created male and female.'
But by Allah, I will not follow them." (Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 60, no. 468; also narrated Alqama vol. 6, bk. 60, no. 467, Khan. Agreed Muslim: bk. 4, no. 1799-1802, Siddique); September 6, 2010 at 8:10 PM
Samuel Green said...: The previous hadith also shows that while Muslim did memorize the Qur'an they did not memorize it the same.; September 6, 2010 at 8:37 PM
umar said...: you have given various references to ahadith in your video. now let me give you an overview of the history of compilation of a hadith. hadith were first compiled into a book form by Muhammad al Bukhari. who lived from 194 AH to 256AH. that means that the hadith were first time compiled around 200 years after the death of the holy prophet(PBUH)..

NOW even though Bukhari tried his best to take only those hadith which came from reliable sources HE IS BOUND TO MAKE MISTAKES.. the criteria set for marking a hadith as true was as such:

1 person delivering the hadith should be a good muslim
2 he should have a good reputation
3 the person should be truthful
4 the links(transferors)should be good muslims etc.

so according to such a criteria, even the false hadith can be included in his collections..; September 7, 2010 at 6:16 AM
umar said...: (contd.)especially when a group called 'kharijites' was boasting that they have disseminated loads of false hadith in order to shake the very foundations of islam..

What i mean to say is that all hadith can not be reliable no matter whether they are from Bukhari or Muslim or Ibn e Majah..

On the other hand, Quran is 100% reliable as evident from the verse 2:2
'This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, WITHOUT DOUBT, to those who fear Allah.'; September 7, 2010 at 6:37 AM
umar said...: quran was compiled into the book form around 3 yrs after the death of the holy prophet(PBUH) by the caliph Abu Bakr 'Siddiq' (RA) on the insistence of Umar 'Farooq'(RA). subsequently the task of compiling was given to zaid bin sabit(RA). he compiled it from various sources such as palm leaves, bones, wood, memories etc.

There was no problem of arrangement of verses as this task was already done by prophet(PBUH) under the guidance of angel Gabriel. And since there were many companions who had learnt the quran by heart, the verses compiled were given a confirmatory check by them before it was finally approved.

and as indicated in your video that ALL the companions forgot such and such verse, is totally unrealistic..; September 7, 2010 at 6:51 AM
umar said...: And in the caliphate of Usman 'Ghani' (RA) when islam had spread to various parts of the world including those where arabic was not spoken, people were found reading the quran in different dialects that completely changed the meaning of the verses!

As a consequence uthman RA took the original copy passed to him by Abu Bakr RA and made further copies of it which were distributed throughout the empire. and all the scripts other than the authentic ones were burnt. as a result the authenticity of the quran was preserved thanks to this timely action of Uthman RA and other companions..

And if we still assume that quran sent by God has been tampered with by people then we are going against the following verse of the holy quran:

'We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).' 15:9

Note that this honor was not given to any other book before..; September 7, 2010 at 7:12 AM
umar said...: And in the caliphate of Usman 'Ghani' (RA) when islam had spread to various parts of the world including those where arabic was not spoken, people were found reading the quran in different dialects that completely changed the meaning of the verses!

As a consequence uthman RA took the original copy passed to him by Abu Bakr RA and made further copies of it which were distributed throughout the empire. and all the scripts other than the authentic ones were burnt. as a result the authenticity of the quran was preserved thanks to this timely action of Uthman RA and other companions..

And if we still assume that quran sent by God has been tampered with by people then we are going against the following verse of the holy quran:

'We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).' 15:9

Note that this honor was not given to any other book before..; September 7, 2010 at 7:13 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: Interesting,

'by the male and female' and 'by him who created the male and the female'

cannot be variants caused by seven dialect readings.; September 7, 2010 at 11:03 AM
hugh watt said...: 1-2

Read this by Abdur Rafay Ahmad & Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi:

"Two Additional Surahs in Ubbay's and Abu Musa's Codex?

Often, it is said that Abu Musa's and Ubbay bin Kaab's (two companions of the Prophet) had 116 Surahs, instead of 114 Surahs. But is this true?

The first so-called additional sura` was named "al-khal" and the other was named "al-hadf." Their translation is as follows:

O Allah, we seek your help and ask your forgiveness, and we praise you and we don't disbelieve in you. We separate from and leave who sins against you.
O Allah we worship you and to you we pray and prostrate and to you we run and hasten to serve you. We hope for your mercy and fear your punishment. Your punishment will surely reach the disbelievers.
On further study, we get to know that this was not a part of the Qur'an, rather these were two pieces of "qunut", supplications that the Prophet (pbuh) sometimes says in the morning prayer or "witr" prayer after recitation of Surahs from the Qur'an. (Ahmad von Denffer, "Ulum al Qur'an")

Acceptance of Variant Readings

Variant Readings can be accepted if they meet the following criteria for acceptance:

A reading with correct Arabic grammar
Traced back to the Prophet (pbuh)
Agreement with the Uthmanic text
Further more, the variant readings should also meet the following criteria for preference:

A reading with correct Arabic grammar
Agreement with the Uthmanic text
Reported/preferred by the majority
Further more, the variant readings can be divided as follows (taken from von Denffer's "Ulum al Qur'an"):

The mutawatir (transmitted by many; they include the seven well-known readings)
The ahad (transmitted by one, they number three, going back to the sahaba and together with the seven make up ten).
The shadh (exceptional; they go back to the tabi'un only)
From the above, the current text of the Qur'an (Uthmanic), is mutawatir."; September 7, 2010 at 1:50 PM
hugh watt said...: 2

Was this authoritative sanction of variant readings, according to the prevailing tribal dialects of his time, to be extended to similar liberties with the text? In particular, was it a licence to deviate from the letter, if the spirit of the text was preserved? At-Tabari makes it clear that the differences were in 'tilawah, not in the ma'ani, in the letter, but not in the spirit of the text. That is also the opinion of ash-Shafi'i and others. A later commentator interprets the Prophet's pronouncement to suggest "the conveyance of the meaning through the use of synonyms," and adds that it was established that a number of the Companions used to recite the Qur'an substituting synonyms for words which they could not recall, without authority. Among other Companions, Ibn Mas'ud is reputed to have gone even farther and to have read according to the meaning.

A.L. Tibawi

It seems the only person who 'understood' the Koran was Muhammad. And what's with this majority rules business!; September 7, 2010 at 1:52 PM
hugh watt said...: 1-2

Brother Mark, in his very informative book, A 'Perfect' Qur'an, -a must read for any who want to study Islamic claims of perfect Quranic preservation, says this:

"The following are the assertions of one follower of Islam who examined the text of ‘A Perfect Qur’an’. He possesses his own copy of the Samarqand MSS and intends to publish it:

"I want to emphasise this point. Mark has found true manuscript variations in the Tashkent muSHaf. That is, they are "true" when it comes to actually representing changes of the *letters*." (Internet article
http://x29.deja.com/threadmsg_if.xp?AN=500614573.1&mhitnum=29&CONTEXT=934318018.305856617)

And,

"For my own purposes, I am grateful for what Mark, the author of the "Perfect Qur’an" polemic, has discovered about the Tashkent. It is extremely tedious to search out these variations. (Internet article
http://x32.deja.com/threadmsg_if.xp?AN=500614573&CONTEXT=932082708.1807024165&thitnum=2)

Also,

"Mark has done an interesting piece of work by carefully searching for variations in the Tashkent. I hope to find the time to go over all the alleged variations he reports; I think he has saved me quite a bit of work, for it is not easy to read that script. What I’d like to do is determine if there are any characteristics in the Tashkent which relate to the variations in the transmitted readings. So far, I have found none, which is, by the way, another sign that the variations in the Tashkent are simply scribal errors, errors which were not, as Br. Ghoniem notes, passed on by the reciters. The oral transmission was primary, the written one secondary, though both were important and it was the combination of the two which made the preservation of the Qur’aan a remarkable as it is.
It is just that, in English, the word "perfect" does not allow any exceptions." (Internet article http://x21.deja.com/threadmsg_if.xp?AN=506730987&CONTEXT=934565652.791609425)"

This begs the Q; what does 'perfect' mean in Arabic?; September 8, 2010 at 8:42 AM
hugh watt said...: 2

Al-Makki is at odds with the commonly held view about the "7 Ahruf's."

"Al-Makki says in his book,

"Anyone who imagines that the recitation of such men as Nafi and 'Asim are the same seven 'harf mentioned in the saying of the Prophet is committing a grave mistake."
(The Qur’an in Islam Its Impact and Influence on the Life of Muslims, Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabataba’i, Published by: Zahra Publications P.O. Box 730, Blanco, Tx. 78606, U.S.A: Internet article http://www.al-islam.org/quraninislam/index.htm)"

In fact, the more I read the more problematic it becomes.

"Al-Qurab says in his al-Shefi, "We should look for the seven recitations amongst the qurra' not from among others." This view is neither tradition nor sunnah but rather it originated from some of the later Scholars who collected the seven recitations."
(The Qur’an in Islam Its Impact and Influence on the Life of Muslims, Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabataba’i, Published by: Zahra Publications P.O. Box 730, Blanco, Tx. 78606, U.S.A: emphasis added; Internet article http://www.al-islam.org/quraninislam/index.htm )"; September 8, 2010 at 8:45 AM
Samuel Green said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; September 8, 2010 at 5:44 PM
Samuel Green said...: Umar, it seems that the only way you can preserve your belief that the Qur'an is perfect is by denying all your history. But with no history you have no evidence for saying the Qur'an is perfect.; September 8, 2010 at 5:46 PM
umar said...: no one is destroying history...

however i am saying that sensitive elements such as ahadith can not frame history as ALL of them can not be reliable..; September 9, 2010 at 8:27 AM
winoceros said...: Umar, which of the ahadith they quote have been termed "unreliable."

Thank you.; September 10, 2010 at 11:20 AM
winoceros said...: Aren't Sahih Muslim and Burkhari two of the more reliable compilers?; September 10, 2010 at 11:41 AM
morningstarsong said...: I had to laugh at the bit about the sheep eating the pages! Don't you just hate when that happens?

This was hilarious and yet very informative. The issue of the missing verses/chapters is one that I am not very knowledgeable about.

Thanks, guys! Keep up the good work. Your vids and writings are informative, often funny, and always clear and easy to understand.; April 13, 2011 at 2:58 PM
morningstarsong said...: I had to laugh at the bit about the sheep eating the pages! Don't you just hate when that happens?

This was hilarious and yet very informative. The issue of the missing verses/chapters is one that I am not very knowledgeable about.

Thanks, guys! Keep up the good work. Your vids and writings are informative, often funny, and always clear and easy to understand.; April 13, 2011 at 2:58 PM
Frans Groenendijk said...: My favorite video on the internet. Today I discovered an interesting aspect of the statistics. After the UK and the USA the third country from which visitors came is UAE, United Arab Emirates.
I think that is great.

Islamophobia: defy the battle cry; February 2, 2013 at 10:01 AM