betul sangat tu bro, sebab itu isle di Malaya ada versi mereka sendiri, kerana kebanyakan lobai yang memimpin ummah kejalan yang benar pemikiran mereka sama sahaja seperti lobai bangang CI
mulut kamu lebih besar dari otak kamu sebenarnya.. untuk pengetahwan kamu yang terlalu bebal, Islam telah menggunakan lambang bulan sabit dan bintang seawal 1400 tahun dahulu. Itu dah sememangnya lambang keagamaan. Sebab itu juga samdol nak mula berpuasa harus tengok anak bulan dahulu! Christian telah menggunakan lambang bulan sabit sebelum islam wujud lagi. Semua tu berasal dari bulan sabit tohan enki
Bila dah kantoi , ko ubah pendirian kepada 'pernah gunakan'. Baca balik post aku # 1287
Tengok sahaja tong kosong, penipu bersiri yang maksud "bukti" pada dia ialah posting forumner yang semua orang tahu tak ada integriti itu.
Siap perasan kununnya forumners kat board sendu tu kagum dengan cara dia berhujah (agaknya termasuk hujahnya bahawa tak apa orang tua memedo sebab dulu dulu omputih kat England dan Amrika pon memedo jugak... )
Macam itu punya bodoh pon ada hati nak jadi lawyer....kahkahkahkah
Hujatul Isle kununnnnn......Prrrrrrrrrrrpffftght,P Aisyah kata ayat Quran kena makan kambing pon tak tahu......
Ha ha .. rupa2 argumen ko adalah dari answering islam .. then you are in trouble
Dah banyak respon terhadap apa yg ko dok melalak. Very clear ko tak tau ttg 'ahruf' & 'qira'at' ... ini bermakna ko menyondol buta aje. Typical lah geng ateis bangang macam ko .. .kononnya nak cari kesalahan dlm Islam .. last2 kena balik
We would first like to define what is the actual meaning of Qirâ'a which is frequently translated as 'variant reading'. The Hans-Wehr Dictionary Of Modern Written Arabic defines Qirâ'a as:
Qirâ'a pl. -ât recitation, recital (especially of the Koran); reading (also, e.g., of measuring instruments); manner of recitation, punctuation and vocalization of the Koranic text.[1]
It is quite clear that the Qirâ'a is not a 'variant' reading or text. The Muslims in history have never considered different Qirâ'ât as different 'versions' of the Qur'an.
It is to be made clear that the Arabic script before and during the time of cUthmân was written without vowel and diacritical marks. To say that the vowels and diacritical marks were not included in the cUthmânic Qur'an actually shows the ignorance of the Christian missionary Samuel Green concerning the evolution of Arabic script. The need for vowel and diacritical marks arose only after the time of cUthmân to prevent the wrong recitation of the Qur'an by ignorant Arabs and non-Arabs.
The Concise Encyclopaedia Of Islam under the heading "Koran, Chanting" states:
Only the canonical Arabic text, as collected and compiled under the Caliph 'Uthman with the consensus of the companions (Ijma as-Sahaabah) may be recited, in one of the seven acceptable versions of the punctuation and vocalization (al-Qira'at as-Sab). These, though fixed only in the 4th century of the Hijrah, are taken to correspond to the seven Ahruf ("letters", "versions" or possibly "dialects") of the Koran which according to a hadith, the Prophet refered to as all having divine authority. In practice, only two of the seven readings have become customary: in Egypt, for example, the reading of Hafs according to the scholar Abu Bakr cAsim; and in the rest of Africa that of Nafî.[4]
So, we have the authority directly from the Prophet(P) that the Qur'an can be recited in any of the Qirâ'a. Indeed the presence of masâhif of the Qur'an in different Qirâ'ât as well as the professional Muslim reciters (and common folk too!) reciting the Qur'an in various Qirâ'ât indicates their importance. There are people even in this day and age who recite in more than one Qirâ'a and some of them upto ten.
It is true that the earlier consensus of scholarly opinion on the origins of Islam has, since the publication of John Wansbrough’s Quranic studies 2 and Patricia Crone and Michael Cook’s Hagarism , 3 been shattered, and that various attempts at a new reconstruction of those origins have been put forward. As a whole, however, the theories of the so-called sceptic or revisionist scholars who, arguing historically, make a radical break with the transmitted picture of Islamic origins, shifting them in both time and place from the seventh to the eighth or ninth century and from the Arabian peninsula to the Fertile Crescent, have by now been discarded, though many of their critical observations remain challenging and still call for investigation. New findings of qur anic text fragments, moreover, can
be adduced to affirm rather than call into question the traditional picture of the Qur̄an as an early fixed text composed of the s̄uras we have. Nor have scholars trying to deconstruct that image through linguistic arguments suc ceeded in seriously discrediting the genuineness of the Qur̄an as we know it. These include the work of Christoph Luxenberg, 4 who views the Qur̄an as an originally Syriac–Arabic melange later adapted to the rules of classical Arabic, and Gunter Luling, 5 who reads the Qur̄an as a collection of hymns
composed in a Christian Arabic dialect and later revised to fit the grammatical rules newly established in the eighth and ninth centuries.
Ko dah ketinggalan zaman lah tambi
Orientalist scholarship has moved on .. skg depa affirm ttg preservation of the Quran
Kah kah kah .... kesian ... mat slow v2 dah ketinggalan zaman
Ulang tayang temberang yg konfom pader@ loyar karat Maideen dah kantoi
Pos#21 dari ko
Oklah...dia tak ada tulis pasal omputih di England dan Amrika pon kawen dengan budak pompuan kecik jugak.....
Pos#23 dari bro airfilterkotor
Yang ko baru tulis tu pun takdak.
Lagi mo tokok tambah.
Ko dah kenapa Meideen?
Ni nak tanya.... sirap dah amik
Pos #24 dari ko
Tak dak jugak ka?
Tak pa lah.......
Dah tak boleh lari ..... terpaksa mengaku yg diri sendiri kuat temberang ...... loyar auta
Macam pondan tua ..... dgn sedih & penuh rendah diri ....... "tak pe lah"........ pssst , ko ada menitiskan air mata?
Kesian ....
****************
Kita bongkar lagi temberang l̶o̶y̶a̶r̶ ̶k̶a̶r̶a̶t̶ oops legal assistant maideen
Bila tak boleh jawab 2 soalan senang .. dah mula temberang kononnya tak tau ttg hadith tersebut
Oops .. ko dimalukan lagi .. ada ke mati2 percaya kambing boleh makan ingatan org
Aisayman , ko mengaku diri ko tu :'..forumner haprak tak ada credibility..'
Kah kah kah
This post contains more resources
You have to Login for download or view attachment(s). No Account? Register
Samdol kembali lagi untuk menutup kebodohan dan kemaluan bersiri dia sambil merogol thread.
Tohan itu sememangnya tidak adil kerana memilih samdol dan mashimary yang begitu lembab didalam memahami pembacaan & tahap IQ mereka yang terlalu rendah.. untuk menjadi pemimpin ummah CI
Apa lagi mau cakap kalau lobai tak boleh nak bezakan di antara... WE & HE, YOU & THEY, I & WE, FOUGHT & KILLED & ETC..ETC..ETC
Hahaha... Hanya Bahalol2 ajer yg mempercayai PENIPUAN oleh Pejuang2 Kistian..
Wama muhammadun illa rasoolun qad khalat min qablihi alrrusulu afa-in mata aw qutila inqalabtum AAala aAAqabikum waman yanqalib AAala AAaqibayhi falan yadurra Allaha shay-an wasayajzee Allahu alshshakireena (QS Al-Imran 3:144)
Sahih International: Muhammad is not but a messenger. [Other] messengers have passed on before him. So if he was to die or be killed, would you turn back on your heels [to unbelief]? And he who turns back on his heels will never harm Allah at all; but Allah will reward the grateful.
DLM AL QURAN YG SAMA....
Wakaayyin min nabiyyin qatala maAAahu ribbiyyoona katheerun fama wahanoo lima asabahum fee sabeeli Allahi wama daAAufoo wama istakanoo waAllahu yuhibbu alssabireena (QS Al-Imran 3:146)
Sahih International: And how many a prophet [fought and] with him fought many religious scholars. But they never lost assurance due to what afflicted them in the cause of Allah , nor did they weaken or submit. And Allah loves the steadfast.
Seperti yg Red cakap website Answering Islam adalah website Kistian.
Pejuang2 Kistian dlm website Ini so desperado dan cara mereka
utk mengaburi dan memburukkan Islam adalah dgn cara MENIPU.
Org2 Kaper dan yg tidak tahu Al Quran akan percaya dgn tipu helah mereka.
Perkataan QUTILA terdapat dlm ayat Surah 3:144.
Perkataan QATALA terdapat dlm Surah yg SAMA iaitu 3:146.
Pejuang2 Kistian cuma switch perkataan Qutila pada ayat 3:144 dan diletakkan sebelah ayat
Qatala dan mengatakan ia adalah perbezaan perkataan dlm Al Quran.
Awak pergi check perkataan tersebut terdapat dlm
SURAH YG SAMA, Surah Al-Imran 3:144 dan 3:146.
Ini adalah satu PEMBOHONGAN oleh Puak2 Kistian yg desperado..
Thesemissionaries are well aware of the difference between a transmission and a text (to be discussed indetail below). Yet, they intentionally replace one with the other in order to give the false impression to lay readers thatthe Qur'an exists in different texts. Thus, in order to address the questions of Hafs andWarsh, we will first offer a short introduction to the key concepts involvedherein and then proceed to the heart of the matter,
Tentang Hafs dan Warsh…satu lagi PENIPUAN oleh
pejuang2 Kistian dlm website Answering Islam…
Kalau tak menipu tentang Agama bukan Kistian namanya..
Ya Quran itu sendiri memang tak ada beza. Tak berubah sejak beribu tahun yang lalu. Yang berbeza cara orang membacanya.
Bila kau mempertikaikan penggunaan 'He' atau 'I' dalam Quran, maknanya kau tak ariff mengenai konteks penggunaan bahasa Arab dan Hebrew. Sebelum ni kau punya gebang macam kaulah pakar bahasa arab dan hebrew. Siap kutuk orang yang guna google. Akhirnya kau sendiri terpaksa semak google. Kan dah kena batang hidung kau sendiri.
Dan ini merupakan bukti jelas bahawa kau telah membuat andaian membuta tuli dengan mengatakan bahawa 'amin' disebut orang Islam itu merujuk kepada tuhan dongeng mesir purba. Terbukti kau bukan pakar bahasa pun, tapi cuba berlagak sebagai sebagai seorang pakar.
Saya rasa kamu yang tidak faham. Defcon kata ayat quraan semuanya adalah sama dan tidak pernah berubah semenjak 1400 tahun dahulu. Tetapi ternyata Hafs dan Warsh quraan ada perbezaan.
Maafkan saya sebab saya 0% nak percaya dengan lobai Melayu. Saya lebih percaya dengan lobai Islam Pakistan, lobai Islam Somalia. Lobai Melayu ni penuh dengan tipu muslihat kerana mereka terlalu takut untuk mengaku kebenaran.
Eh aku bukan pakar bahasa. Dan aku tak pernah pun claim sebagai pakar bahasa. Lain la macam kau. Gebang sana sini kononnya pakar bahasa Arab, hebrew dan mesir kuno. Siap buat teori mengarut amin disebut orang Islam dan bulan bintang tu merujuk kepada tuhan mesir kuno.
So buat apa tanya aku? Ke kau dah malu nak google? Takut kena kutuk ke?
Author
Post time 1-8-2017 12:33 PM
Hanya Bahalol2 ajer yg mempercayai PENIPUAN oleh Pejuang2 Kistian..
