[39:45]  When GOD ALONE is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter shrink with aversion. But when others are mentioned beside Him, they become satisfied.

As   usual,  i am submitting  this  little  treaties  on  behalf  of  those  who  sincerely  reverence  GOD, and do  not  set-up  partners  with  HIM  by  reverencing  Humans(prophets , messengers and the so-called  saints). Many  people  have  poluted  their  belief  in GOD  by  idolizing  GODs’  servants, muslims(muhammad)  and  christians(jesus). Little  wonder  why  prophet  muahmmad  will reject  them  on the  judgment  day.

[25:30]  The messenger  will say, "My Lord, my people have deserted this Quran."

Did  u notice  the messenger  wouldn’t  complain  about  his so-called  Hadith or  sunnah  in  the  above  verse?  How  ironic, wake up , use  your  brains. Always   check  yourself  using  the  quranic  criterion above(39:45).


for  better  presentation, pls  copy  to  ms-word.


THE  SUBJECT:
The abrogation of Quranic verses, arguably the greatest lie against the Quran, was originally invented during the fourth century A.H. (late 10th century A.D.) by some Muslim scholars notably Ahmed Bin Ishaq Al-Dinary (died 318 A.H.), Mohamad Bin Bahr Al-Asbahany (died 322 A.H.), Hebat Allah Bin Salamah (died 410 A.H.) and Mohamad Bin Mousa Al-Hazmy (died 548 A.H.), whose book about Al-Nasekh and Al-Mansoukh is regarded as one of the leading references in the subject.
This concept invented originally by these scholars, claims that there are some verses in the Quran that have been abrogated and invalidated by other verses!
The verse that is the abrogator they call (Al-Nasekh) while the abrogated verse they call (Al-Mansoukh).
These scholars have come up with hundreds of cases of abrogated verses to the extent that they have formulated a whole science of the subject filling lengthy books and references.
Although the concept was originally invented by Muslim scholars as a result of their poor understanding of the Quran, yet it has been widely exploited by non-Muslim writers to tarnish the perfection and divinity of the book(Quran).



MY  IMPETUS FOR  PRESENTING THIS:

Firsly ,  to rid  submision(islam  in  Arabic)  of  the lies  and  non-sense  the scholars  have  invented  and  as  such  have  corrupted  the  true  teachings  of  submission(islam  in Arabic)  which  prophet  Muhammad  taught.
Secondly , i realize  that  most  of  those who  profess  submission(islam)  are  not  even  remotely  aware  of the  corruption  they  have adopted  as  a religion.  Any  time  i try engaging  the so-called muslims(muhammadans) in a conversation regarding  the  corruption  in  islam, they are  swift  to  come up  with things  like: do  u understand the  concept of  abrogation, reason(asbab)  for  revelation e.t.c.

LAGOSBOY, a  little  while  ago, summoned  me to a debate. But  his condition for  debating  me  is  only  if  i  understood  this  islamic  concept(nasekh  wa  mansoukh).  Meaning  he does  accept  these  lies  as  part  of   islam. Quranic  verses  been  abrogated?   subhannallah!!!!!

Only  disbelievers  in  GOD  will  accept  such  fabrications.  A  book  in  which  GOD  describes  with  the  following  words,

[6:115]  The word of your Lord is complete, in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words. He is the Hearer, the Omniscient.

[11:1]  A.L.R. This is a scripture whose verses have been perfected, then elucidated. It comes from a Most Wise, Most Cognizant.



UPLAWAL, i know  u  have  always been  keen  on  finding out more  on  this  subject, well!  This  is  also  for  u. Happy  reading.


i  hope  this  becomes  an  eye opener for  those  who  say "we  are  muslims".


Abrogations or Contradictions?
The lie invented by the Muslim scholars suggests that some Quranic verses have been abrogated by other verses. On the other hand, the non-Muslim writers claim that these cases, and other cases they put forward, are in fact contradictions inside the Quran. Consequently, they use these cases as evidence to refute the divinity of the Quran.

It is noted that the examples used by Muslim scholars as ‘abrogated verses’ are not always the verses used by non-Muslim writers and which they simply refer to as ‘contradictions in the Quran’.
Although it can be said that the common aspect shared by the two groups is their poor understanding of the Quran, yet it can also be added that in the case of the non-Muslim writers, and particularly those who do not speak Arabic, we often find many of their claims for contradictions to be a product of their acquisition of corrupted and misleading translations of the Quran.
Both of these types of false claims can be dealt with in the light of the Quran. It can be demonstrated that these claims are no more than cases of poor understanding of the book.


Abrogation claims of Muslim Scholars

"A.L.R. This is a book whose verses have been perfected" [Sura 11, verse 1]

"……the words of God are unchangeable" [10:64]

Although God asserts that the Quran is perfect and harbours no contradictions, yet sadly these scholars have invented the greatest lie about the Quran, claiming that there are verses in the Quran that abrogate and invalidate other verses.

They base their claim on a corrupted interpretation of two verses:

FIRST VERSE 2:106

"Whichever Ayah We relinquish or cause to be forgotten We replace it with its equal or with that which is greater, did you not know that God is capable of all things?" [2:106]

What the interpreters claim is that this verse confirms that some Quranic verses are invalidated by others. They interpret ‘Ayah’ in this verse to mean a verse in the Quran.
However the word Ayah, as used in the Quran, can have one of four different meanings:

a) It could mean a miracle from God as in:
"And We supported Moses with nine profound Ayah’s (miracles)." [17:101]

b) It could also mean an example for people to take heed from as in:
"And the folk of Noah, when they disbelieved the messengers, We have drowned them and set an Ayah (example) of them for all people." [25:37]

c) The word ‘Ayah’ can also mean a sign as in:
"He said, ‘My Lord, give me an ‘Ayah’ (sign).’ He said, ‘Your Ayah is that you will not speak to people for three consecutive nights." [19:10]

d) It could mean a verse in the Quran, as in:
"This is a book that We have sent down to you that is sacred, perhaps they will reflect on its ‘Ayat’ (verses)."[b/][ 38:29]

Now if we consider verse 106 of Sura 2, we can easily spot that the word [b]‘Ayah’ in this particular verse could not mean a verse in the Quran. It can mean any of the other meanings (miracle, example or sign) but not a verse in the Quran. This is because of the following reasons:

1) The words "cause to be forgotten" could not be applicable if the word[b] ‘Ayah’[/b] in this verse meant a verse in the Quran. How can a verse in the Quran become forgotten? For even if the verse was invalidated by another (as the interpreters falsely claim) it will still be part of the Quran and thus could never be forgotten.

2) The words "We replace it with its equal" would be meaningless if the word[b] ‘Ayah’[/b] in this verse meant a Quranic verse, simply because it would make no sense for God to invalidate one verse then replace it with one that is identical to it! 

3) If the word ‘Ayah’ in verse 106 meant a miracle an example or a sign, then all the words of the verse would make perfect sense. The words "cause to be forgotten" can apply to all three meanings and that is what actually happens with the passing of time. The miracles of Moses and Jesus have long been forgotten. We only believe in them because they are mentioned in the Quran.

Similarly the words "We replace with its equal or with that which is greater" is in line with the miracles of God. God indeed replaces one miracle with its equal or with one that is greater than it. Consider the following verse :

"And We have sent Moses with Our Ayah’s (miracles or signs) to Pharaoh and his elders proclaiming : ‘I am a messenger from the Lord of the universe’. When he brought them our Ayah’s they laughed at him. Every Ayah We showed them was greater than the one that preceded it."[ 43:46-48 ]


SECOND VERSE [16:101]

"When We substitute one Ayat (revelation) in place of another, and God is fully aware of what He reveals, they say, 'You made this up'. Indeed most of them do not know"

The substitution spoken of here is concerned with one of two things:

a) The substitution of one Scripture in place of another.
b)The substitution of one verse or law within a Scripture with another in a subsequent Scripture

a- The first meaning is given evidence to in the following verse:

"Then we revealed to you this scripture, truthfully, confirming previous scriptures, and superseding them." 5:48

Here, the words "superseding them." confirm that the previous scripture were substituted with the Quran.

b- The second meaning is also given evidence to in the Quran where various issues that were prohibited to the previous people of the book were made lawful in the Quran.

As an example, we are told in 2:187 that sexual intercourse between married couples during the nights of the fasting month was made lawful, while it was prohibited previously.
We are also told in 6:146 that God prohibited for the Jews all animals with undivided hoofs; and of the cattle and sheep the fat was prohibited. These were made lawful in the Quran.
This verse 16:101 does not speak about the substitution of one verse in the Quran with another.
The evidence to that is given within the same verse (16:101):

The key to the meaning of the verse lies in the words: ", they say, 'You made this up"
Here we must stop and ask, who is likely to tell the messenger "You made this up" ? and why? For sure it cannot be his followers, his followers are not likely to tell him  "You have made it up", it has to be those who do not believe in him, which focuses on the followers of previous scripture who feared that their scripture was in danger of being "substituted" with the Quran,  What more evidence to that more than the fact that till this day, the Jews and Christians accuse Muhammad that he fabricated the Quran himself! If this accusation is from the Jews and Christians we must then ask, are they accusing Muhammad of substituting one verse in the Quran with another? The Jews and Christians do not care if one verse in the Quran is substituted for another, after all they do not believe in the whole book,  they will not complain that one verse in the Quran is being substituted with another! However, and if their Scripture is being substituted by the Quran, they will immediately accuse the messenger that the Scripture he brings (Quran) is not from God but that he "made it up" himself
.
These glorious words "You have made it up" indeed stand as true indicator from God Almighty that the substitution spoken of in this verse is not related to one within the Quran, but indeed a substitution between two scripture.

As mentioned before, the substitution of the previous scripture with the Quran is confirmed in 5:48
As a result of the corruption of the meaning of 2:106 and 16:101, and the claim that some Quranic verses invalidate other verses, the interpreters have demonstrated their failure to uphold two main characteristics of the Quran, those being that the Quran is perfect and harbours no contradictions (11:1) and also that the words of God are unchangeable (10:64).

It is well worth inquiring here into the motive behind the interpreters corruption of the meaning of 2:106 and 16:101.
Perhaps the major reason is not connected to the Quran at all but to the ‘hadith’. It is well accepted among the hadith scholars that the concept of abrogation applies to the hadith since it is found that many ‘hadith’
contradict one another. The examples of these are too numerous. The following are only some examples:

P.S. (the first number is the number of the book (chapter), and second number is the number of hadith. For example Muslim 18/58 means the 58th hadith in the 18th book of Muslim. In other quotations the name of the chapter is given instead of its number.

1- "I am the most honourable messenger" (Bukhary 97/36).
This hadith contradicts the following hadith:
"Do not make any distinction among the messengers; I am not even better than Jonah" (Bukhary 65/4,5; Hanbel 1/205,242,440).

2- "The Prophet never urinated in standing position" (Hanbel 6/136,192,213). This contradicts:
"The prophet urinated in standing position" (Bukhary 4/60,62).

3- "The prophet said, ‘The sun was eclipsed the day Ibrahim (the prophet’s son) died’…(Bukhary 7/page 118)
This contradicts:
"The prophet said, ‘the sun and moon are signs from God, they are not eclipsed for the death or life of any one" (Bukhari 2/page 24)

4- "If two Muslims fight each other with their swords, the killer and the killed will go to hell" (Bukhari 1/page 13, Muslim 18/page 10).
This hadith contradicts the hadith of the ten who were foretold that they will go to heaven by the prophet (Ahmad 1/page 187-188, also narrated by Abu Dawood and Al-Tarmazy). That is because among those ten were those who fought and killed one another in battle, specifically Ali, Talha and Al-Zobair. According to the first hadith they will go to hell but accoding to the second hadith they are foretold paradise!

5- In various hadith, specifically in the chapters of the ‘Hereafter’ in the books of Bukhary and Muslim we read numerous predictions by the prophet detailing what will take place there. This contradicts the hadith by Aesha, the prophet’s wife where she says "Anybody who says that Muhammad knows the future is a liar" (Bukhary 8/ page 166, Muslim 3/ page 9-10)

6- "The prophet said, ‘Take your religion from the words of Aesha (the prophet’s wife)"
This contradicts: "The prophet said, ‘Aesha is immature in mind and faith." (Bukhari and others)
The heart of the matter is directly connected to the following verse:

"Why do they not study the Quran carefully? If it were from a source other than God, they would have detected within it numerous contradictions." 4:82

This verse confirms that anything that contains contradictions cannot be from God, and since the hadith contains numerous contradictions, as shown, it cannot be from God. But the hadith advocates claim that the hadith was inspired by God and that the hadith Al-Qudsy is God’s own words spoken to Muhammad! If that is so, how could they explain the contradictions in hadith? How could it be from God when it is full of contradictions? According to 4:82 nothing that contains contradictions can be from God.

To wiggle out of this tricky situation, the hadith advocates devised the concept of the abrogation of Quranic verses.
The plan was as such: If the Quran can be shown to contain contradictory verses, yet no one will dispute that it is from God, then the hadith with its contradictions can also be described to be inspired by God !!!
Quite a sly plot except for one minor detail;

THE QURAN CONTAINS NO CONTRADICTIONS!
It is the intention of this book to review the most common cases of abrogation and, God willing, demonstrate that they are all based upon poor understanding of the Quran. Each case presented will be accompanied by Quranic evidence that confirms the absence of any contradiction between the relevant verses, and as a result will expose the interpreter’s poor understanding of the Quran.


CLAIMS OF ABROGATION
P.S. (The following are a few examples, the complete number of claimed abrogated cases appear in the book by the author).

CASE ONE:

The first example is concerned with the following verses:

Abrogated
"Whether you declare your inner thoughts or you conceal them, God holds you accountable to them." 2:284

Abrogator
"God never burdens any soul beyond its means, to its credit is what it earns, and against it is what it commits." 2:286

The claim is that these two verses contradict one another, the first verse states that God holds people accountable to their intentions while as the second verse indicates that we are only accountable to our deeds. Therefore this stands as a candidate for abrogation where the second verse is the abrogator and the first verse is abrogated.
Thus they claim that the underlined words in 2:284 were invalidated by the underlined words in 2:286
However, one only has to read the verse immediately before verse 284 to realise that there is no contradiction between 284 and 286:

The last words of verse 283 together with verse 284 read as follows:
"Anyone who withholds a testimony is sinful at heart. God is fully aware of everything you do. To God belongs everything in the heavens and the earth, Whether you declare your inner thoughts or conceal them, God holds you accountable for them."

By reading the two verses together it becomes apparent that the subject of verse 284 is testimony and not one’s intentions in general.
Verse 284 confirms that God holds those who conceal a testimony accountable. Furthermore, the words used in verse 284 are ‘declare’ and ‘conceal’ while as the words used in verse 286 are ‘earn’ and ‘commit’. The words ‘declare’ and ‘conceal’ are consistent with the subject of testimony. Testimony can indeed be declared or concealed. On the other hand, the words ‘earn’ and ‘commit’ which are used in verse 286 speak of our deeds.
Indeed verses 283 and 284 are related to the same subject (withholding testimony) since they are consecutive. For all that, it becomes clear that there is not the slightest contradiction between verses 284 and 286.


CASE TWO:

Abrogated

"Surely those who believe, and the Jews, and the Christians and the Sabaeans, those among them who believe in God and the hereafter, and who works righteous deeds, will receive their recompense from their Lord, they have nothing to fear nor will they grieve" 2:62

Abrogator

"Whoever seeks other than Islam as his religion, it will not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he will be with the losers" 3:85

Here the claim is that while verse 2:62 says that some Jews and Christians will be rewarded, this was abrogated by 3:85 which states that all who are not Muslim will end up in hell.
The misunderstanding and poor interpretation here stems from their lack of understanding of the word Islam (Submission). In spite of the fact that God tells us in the Quran that Islam (Submission to God Alone) is as old as Abraham who was the first Muslim (see 2:128, 2:131, 2:133) and who was the first to name us Muslims (22:78), still the Muslim scholars today insist that Islam is confined to being the religion of the Quran !!!

By creating such a false statement, the Muslim scholars claim to be the custodians of the message! In 3:67 God specifically tells us that Abraham was neither Jewish nor Christian, but a monotheist Muslim. God also tells us in 5:111 that Jesus and the Disciples were Muslim. In 27:44 tells us that Solomon was Muslim and in 5:44 we are told of all the prophets who were given the Torah and who were all Muslim.

What all these verses are confirming is that there are Muslims who followed the Torah and the Bible and who knew nothing of the Quran. These Muslims were submitters to God Alone , Lord of the universe.
In effect the religion of Islam which was originally founded by Abraham can be found, not only in the Quran, but also in the Torah and the Bible. After all we are told that all the foundations of the religion, and which Muslims call the pillars of Islam were first given to Abraham.

The Quran confirms the true meaning of a Muslim, as being he who submits to God Alone and obeys the law of God Alone, and should not be confined to he who follows the Quran.

Those among the Christians who believe in the Oneness of God and who do not worship Jesus are Muslim in the sight of God. Similarly those among any other religion who submit to God Alone and who set up no idols to partner Almighty God are Muslim in the sight of God.

All these have their recompense from their Lord and have nothing to fear (2:62). These people are also the subject of 3:85 since they chose to be Muslim (submitters) to God. They could be Muslim submitters, Jewish submitters, Christian submitters …, etc. 

Consequently, there is no contradiction between 2:62 and 3:85


CASE THREE:

Some of the most ridiculous cases of abrogation are connected with the difficulty of these scholars in understanding that some laws set by God make allowance for exceptions. Whenever the scholars see a law that makes allowance for an exception, they construe it as a case of abrogation!
There are many cases throughout the Quran of this poor deduction and total irrationality, the following are some of them:

1- In 4:19 God address’s the men by saying:

"You shall not force them (the women) to give up anything you have given them, unless they commit a proven adultery"

Here the abrogation claim is that the first part of the verse "You shall not force them (women) to give up anything you have given them" has been abrogated by the second part of the verse "unless they commit a proven adultery" !!!!

Why does an exception to a rule that is made allowance for by God obliterate the rule Obviously the rule still stands, because God states that for all women who have not committed adultery, their husbands do not have the right to regain anything they had previously given them.

The first part of the verse, which constitutes the general case has not been abrogated. The second part of the verse which constitutes the exception also stands.
2- In 2:159 we read:

"Those who conceal Our revelations and guidance, after proclaiming them in the Scripture, are condemned by God; they are condemned by all the condemners"

They claim that this verse (159) has been abrogated by the verse that immediately followed it (160) which reads:

"Except those who repent, reform and proclaim, I redeem them. I am the Redeemer, the Most Merciful"

Again we see that verse 160 says that those who had concealed the revelation but then repented and reformed are redeemed by God. Verse 159 has not been abrogated. It still stands, since all those who concealed the revelations and have not repented and reformed are not redeemed.
3- In 3:86-88 we read:

"Why should God guide those who disbelieved after believing…………….the retribution is never commuted for them, nor will they be reprieved"

The claim here is that these verses have been abrogated by verse 89:

"Exempted are those who repent thereafter and reform, God is Forgiver, Most Merciful."
Once again the claimed abrogation is non existent. Both verses stand true.
Verses 86-88 are speaking about those who disbelieve after believing and maintain their disbelieving until death. They are never reprieved in the hereafter. Verse 89 speaks about those who repent and reform during their life. Because God is Forgiver and Most Merciful they are reprieved.

The Quran confirms that only those who die as disbelievers are not pardoned:
"Those who disbelieve and die as disbelievers, an earthful of gold will not be accepted from any of them, even if such a ransom were possible. They have incurred painful retribution; they will have no helpers." 3:91
Once again the claim of abrogation is false and is based on poor understanding of the Quran.

4- Another case of poor understanding is found in the following verses:
"Also you shall not be married to two sisters at the same time" 4:23
they claim that this has been abrogated by the words that immediately followed :
"except that which has taken place in the past"

and they interpret the last sentence, which in Arabic is (Ila ma salaf) to have the meaning of (I have forgiven you).
Obviously this is all incorrect. What this last verse means is ‘do not break up existing marriages’. It has nothing to do with forgiveness.

In other words God is saying that this law is to be enforced from that time onwards, but not to previous marriages so as not to break existing families.
Again the abrogation is non existent.
The same is applied to :
"Do not marry the women who were previously married to your fathers, except that which has taken place in the past…………, " 4:22



CASE FOUR:

Here they claim the underlined words in the following verse:
"To God belongs the east and the west, so wherever you go you will always be facing God. God is Omnipresent, Omniscient" 2:115

have been abrogated by the underlined words in the following verse:
"We now assign a Qiblah that is pleasing to you. Henceforth, you shall turn your face towards the Sacred Masjid. Wherever you may, all of you shall turn your faces towards it." 2:144

The claim is that in the beginning God made it lawful for the believers to face anywhere in Salat (Contact Prayers) (as in 2:115) then later God cancelled that by appointing a set Qibla (2:144) for the believers. Therefore, the claim is that 2:144 invalidates 2:115

First of all, it was never made lawful for believers to face anywhere in their Salat. We are told in the Quran that the Qibla was changed, but nowhere are we told that there was no Qibla.
We are told in the Quran that there was a Qibla that did not appeal to the prophet, and that God changed it to one that is more appealing to the prophet (see 2:144)

The obvious misunderstanding here is that while verse 144 is speaking about Qiblah for the Salat, verse 115 is not speaking about Salat at all. Verse 115 is speaking about the fact that God is present everywhere, and thus wherever we may look or wherever we may go, we will always be facing God. The presence of the word "Omnipresent" at the end of the verse confirms that the subject of the verse is God’s Presence and not the Salat.
Verse 144 does not abrogate verse 115. They are talking about two completely different subjects.



CASE FIVE:

Abrogated:

"Had they, when they wronged their souls, come to you and prayed to GOD for forgiveness, and the messenger prayed for their forgiveness, they would have found GOD Redeemer, Most Merciful." 4:64

Abrogator:

The claim is that the underlined words in 9:80 "even if you ask forgiveness for them seventy times - GOD will not forgive them" invalidate the underlined words in 4:64 "the messenger prayed for their forgiveness, they would have found GOD Redeemer, Most Merciful."

Once again very poor understanding of the Quran.
Here we immediately note that these two verses speak about two different groups of people. In 4:64 God is speaking about those who have wronged their souls but have turned back to God and asked for His forgiveness. The fact that they asked forgiveness from God denotes that they believe in God, and for that we are told that "they would have found GOD Redeemer, Most Merciful."
On the other hand, those spoken of in 9:80 are described by the words: "they disbelieve in GOD and His messenger" ………and because they are disbelievers, we are told that "GOD will not forgive them"
From these two verses we learn that forgiveness can be asked for any believer who repents and reforms, but may never be asked for disbelievers.
No contradiction or invalidation exists between the two verses.



CASE SIX:

Abrogated:

"O you who believe, witnessing a will when one of you is dying shall be done by two equitable people among you (relatives or close friends). If you are travelling, then two others may do the witnessing. After observing the Contact Prayer (Salat), let the witnesses swear by GOD, to alleviate your doubts: "We will not use this to attain personal gains, even if the testator is related to us. Nor will we conceal GOD's testimony. Otherwise, we would be sinners." 5:106

Abrogator:

"Once the interim is fulfilled, you may reconcile with them equitably, or go through with the separation equitably. You shall have two equitable witnesses from among you (relatives or close friends) witness the divorce before GOD." 65:2

The claim is that in 5:106 any two witnesses, who are not necessarily relatives or close friends, can act as witnesses while in travel if relatives are not available, but this was invalidated by 65:2 which stated that the witnesses must be from among the relatives or close friends.
Once again, the claim is false for the following reasons:

1- The subject of 5:106 is witnessing the will of someone who is dying, or near death. The subject of 65:2 is witnessing a divorce.

2- In the situation of travel, a dying person may not have much time left, and since equitable relatives may not be available in time, thus God wavered the condition of the witnesses being from among the relatives, so that the will is witnessed in time before the death of the person.

3- The case of divorce does not present such immediate urgency, and thus the condition of equitable witnesses from among the relatives stands.

4- Thus it is obvious that 65:2 does not abrogate 5:106 in any way.



CASE SEVEN:

Abrogated:

"Say, ‘I fear, if I disobeyed my Lord, the retribution of an awesome day." 6:15

Abrogator:

[b]"We have bestowed upon you (O Messenger) a great victory, whereby GOD forgives your past sins, as well as future sins……, " [/b]48:2

Here the claim is that the underlined words in 6:15 were abrogated later by the underlined words in 48:2
The indirect outcome of this outrageous abrogation is one of total idolatry.
If the scholars state that the words "I fear, if I disobeyed my Lord, the retribution of an awesome day" are invalidated, are they saying that the prophet no longer has to fear God? !!!
To demonstrate the truth of these verses and their implications it is necessary first to examine in the light of the Quran what is forgiven by God, and which can be implied under 48:2, and what is never forgiven by God and thus must be feared according to 6:15.

We are told in the Quran that God forgives all sins except idolatry:
"God does not forgive idolatry, but He forgives lesser offences for whomever He wills." 4:48 and 116
We are also told that this warning applies to all people, including God’s messengers. To affirm that even Muhammad was not excluded from that warning we see God specifically warning Muhammad against idolatry:
"It has been revealed to you (O Muhammad), and to those before you that if you ever commit idolatry, all your works will be nullified, and you will be with the losers." 39:65
Now when we come to the claimed abrogation of 6:15, we read the following words:
"Say, ‘I fear, if I disobeyed my Lord, the retribution of an awesome day."
However, when we read the words that immediately precede this verse, we read:
"Say, "I am commanded to be the most devoted submitter, and, `Do not be an idol worshiper." 6:14
If we put the two verses next to one another (verses 14 and 15 of Surah 6), it becomes obvious that the messenger is to say (I fear the retribution of an awesome day if I should disobey God and commit idolatry).
It follows from that to conclude that verse 48:2 which promises the messenger’s sins will be forgiven (past and future sins) is obviously connected to all other sins, except idol worship.
There is no contradiction or abrogation between the two verses.



CASE EIGHT:

Abrogated:

"GOD has pardoned you: why did you give them permission (to stay behind), before you could distinguish those who are truthful from the liars?" 9:43

Abrogator:

[b]"The true believers are those who believe in GOD and His messenger, and when they are with him in a community meeting, they do not leave him without permission. Those who ask permission are the ones who do believe in GOD and His messenger. If they ask your permission, in order to tend to some of their affairs, you may grant permission to whomever you wish, and ask GOD to forgive them. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful." [/b]24:62

The claim here is that in 9:43 the prophet was not allowed to give permission to the ones wanting to stay behind, before he could distinguish those who are truthful from the liars, while in 24:62 he was not given the permission to do so.
Again, the error is quite obvious. Verse 9:43 is specifically talking about going out for battle while 24:62 is talking about leaving a community meeting to attend to some personal matters!
We read in the two verses preceding 9:43, namely 9:41 and 42:
"You shall readily mobilize, light or heavy, and strive with your money and your lives in the cause of GOD. This is better for you, if you only knew.
If there were a quick material gain, and a short journey, they would have followed you. But the striving is just too much for them. They will swear by GOD: "If we could, we would have mobilized with you." They thus hurt themselves, and GOD knows that they are liars."
The underlined words "mobilize" and if it were a "short journey" indicate that the subject is mobilizing to go out for the purpose of battle.
However, the words "community meeting" in 24:62, denotes that the situation then is not one of battle but a normal community meeting where a request for permission to be excused for some personal matters would not exactly be classified as an unforgivable sin!
Once again 24:62 does not contradict or abrogate 9:43, the subject of the two verse is different.



Quran: The ONLY Source

[17:46] We place shields around their minds, to prevent them from understanding it, and deafness in their ears. And when you preach your Lord, using the[b] Quran alone[/b], they run away in aversion.



Verify GOD's proofs: visit the following websites:


www.submission.org

www.miracleof19.com

www.masjidtucson.org

www.quranmiracles.com



May GOD help us ALL!!

Insha Allah i would read this soon

Lagosboy and Sweetnecta Oya now

Alhamdullilah,i have read all and understood it by the help of Allah,thanks usisky for this piece,may Allah reward you,amin.

Lagosboy and co,still waiting o.

@Usisky,you dnt write about the intoxicants.

If there is no sunnah and or hadith [saying] that we can attribute to the messenger [as], can anyone tell how do i get into the bathroom, from the Quran? Or does Usisky enter the bathroom, without any procedure, etc?

Allah says in the Quran that the messenger should say, if you love Allah [oh believers] follow the messenger. . . .

Allah further says " take what the messenger gives you, and rejects what he forbids you".

Could you explain anything from the above to us, in light of Quran alone, since you are saying there is no sunnah or hadith? Even Allah has His Own Sunnah.

IN THE NAME OF GOD, MOST GRACIOUS, MOST MERCIFUL


Maintaining the Status Quo: A Human Tragedy

[2:170]  When they are told, "Follow what GOD has revealed herein," they say, "We follow only what we found our parents doing."What if their parents did not understand, and were not guided?"

Sweetnecta:

If there is no sunnah and or hadith [saying] that we can attribute to the messenger [as], can anyone tell how do i get into the bathroom, from the Quran? Or does Usisky enter the bathroom, without any procedure, etc?

Mr sweetnecta, firstly u have not commented on the subject at hand. No one amongst the so called learned people here commented . What i have refuted above sits as a foundation to what your version of "ISLAM"(muhammedanism) is founded upon. so long as u cannot defend what u follow, then i rest my case. However , i will comment a little on the points u believe u have made.

Sweetnecta:

can anyone tell how do i get into the bathroom, from the Quran

[5:101]  O you who believe, do not ask about matters which, if revealed to you prematurely, would hurt you. If you ask about them in light of the Quran, they will become[b] obvious[/b] to you. GOD has deliberately overlooked them. GOD is Forgiver, Clement.
[5:102]  Others before you have asked the same questions, then became disbelievers therein.

[68:35]  Shall we treat the muslims(afanaj alul muslimina) like the criminals?
[68:36]  What is wrong with your logic?
[68:37]  Do you have another book to uphold?
[68:38]  In it, do you find anything you want?

You people talk about the Qur'an as though it means nothing to you. utter blasphemy. how can u say this about the quran. well the quran has given u d answer.
do u really have another book u uphold besides quran?  i know u do. yes "Hadiths and Sunna" right?  and in them do you find anything you want? yes u do. things like bathing, eating, walking, sleeping, laughing and all the non-sense in the world. the Qur'an certainly does not contain such, u knw y? cos the quran does not contain any non-sense.

Sweetnecta:

Allah says in the Quran that the messenger should say, if you love Allah [oh believers] follow the messenger. . . .
Allah further says " take what the messenger gives you, and rejects what he forbids you"

Yes, if we love GOD,we must follow the messenger, also take what ever he gives u and reject what he forbade u. well are u following the messenger? the messenger told u to follow and uphold the Qur'an as your only source, did u listen?. the messenger told u that the Qur'an is complete and fully detailed, did u listen?. the messenger told u devote the religion to GOD alone and not to ever bring him anywhere near GOD, did u listen. As u quote these verses, u should observe them yourself.

Quran: The ONLY Source

[17:46]  We place shields around their minds, to prevent them from understanding it, and deafness in their ears. And when you preach your Lord, using the Quran alone(wa iza zakarta rabaka[b] fil Qur'ani wahadahu[/b]), they run away in aversion.

[6:19]  Say, "Whose testimony is the greatest?" Say, "GOD's. He is the witness between me and you that this Quran has been inspired to me, to preach it to you and whomever it reaches. Indeed, you bear witness that there are other gods beside GOD." Say, "I do not testify as you do; there is only one god, and I disown your idolatry."

[45:6]  These are GOD's revelations that we recite to you truthfully. In which Hadith other than GOD and His revelations do they believe(fabi ayyi hadithim ba'dallahi wa ayatihi yu'minun)?

[31:6]  Among the people, there are those who uphold baseless Hadith, and thus divert others from the path of GOD(wa minan nasi man yashtari lahwal hadithi liyudilla an sabilillah) without knowledge, and take it in vain. These have incurred a shameful retribution.


Hadith = narration or news or exposition or sayings.
so GOD asks, in what hadith after Quran(the most authentic hadith) will u believe in?.

review other verses: 6:38, 6:114-115, 50:45, 12:111, 17:77, 33:62  and  many more

Devote your religion to GOD ALONE

[39:3] Absolutely, the religion shall be devoted to GOD alone. Those who set up idols beside Him say, "We idolize them only to bring us[b] closer to GOD[/b]; for they are in a better position!" GOD will judge them regarding their disputes. GOD does not guide such liars, disbelievers.

If prophet muhammad where to come back today, he would not even recognize the islam practiced today. little wonder why he will say this to GOD on the day of judgment.

[25:30]  The messenger will say, "My Lord, my people have deserted this Quran."


specifically the Qur'an. how ironic.

i am not the one telling u there is no sunnah or nothing like hadith. it is prophet muhammad himself, just read all the verses above, are they from me or muhammad said them? 

[7:27]  O children of Adam, do not let the devil dupe you as he did when he caused the eviction of your parents from Paradise, and the removal of their garments to expose their bodies. He and his tribe see you, while you do not see them. We appoint the devils as companions of those who do not believe.

I humbly invite u and all others to the true islam the prophet left behind before it is too late. it has nothing to do with "Sunni or Shi'i" . it is about true monotheism according to the religion abraham brought(16:123).verify the proofs. visit the following:

www.submission.org
www.masjidtucson.org
www.miracleof19.org

Very thoughtful presentation by Usisky. I dont think any Muslim(a) should ever have to be torn between the Quran and the Hadiths. If ever a situation arises, then the Quran should be the only source and standard. However, what I think is that some verses in the Quran can be intellectually challenging to anyone (except Mohammed(SAW)). Hence, the reason we should take it as it is.

Haven said the above, I do not think we can practice Islam without the hadiths. I will like to ask Usisky how he prays. If he prays according to the way Mohammed SAW prays, then where does he get that principle from? Quran or Hadith?

IN THE NAME OF GOD, MOST GRACIOUS, MOST MERCIFUL

[2:148]  Each of you chooses the direction to follow; you shall race towards righteousness. Wherever you may be, GOD will summon you all. GOD is Omnipotent.

@ola_pluto

i have no doubt in my mind that you're one of those who sincerely seek righteousness. i believe that's why you're just about the only person who has commented on the subject, and i do believe you must have atleast read through what i presented. I pray GOD gives you the wisdom and open mind to grasp the Qur'anic proofs i have and will keep presenting.

ola_pluto:

Very thoughtful presentation by Usisky. I dont think any Muslim(a) should ever have to be torn between the Quran and the Hadiths. If ever a situation arises, then the Quran should be the only source and standard. However, what I think is that some verses in the Quran can be intellectually challenging to anyone (except Mohammed(SAW)). Hence, the reason we should take it as it is.

At the bold section above.

Firstly, this is your own personal opinion or what you have been made to believe. well lets look at the ultimate reference again, and see what muhammad himself said about this.

[3:7]  He sent down to you this scripture, containing straightforward verses - which constitute the essence of the scripture - as well as multiple-meaning or allegorical verses. Those who harbor doubts in their hearts will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning. None knows the true meaning thereof except GOD and those well founded in knowledge. They say, "We believe in this - all of it comes from our Lord." Only those who possess intelligence will take heed.


Brother, lets look at the key points in the above stated verse.

1) Qur'an contains "straight forward verses" and "allegorical ones"

2) the straight forward ones are the essence of the message e.g( All your contact prayer(salaat) must be said in a moderated tone-  17:110). Now how come the muslims disregard such an important commandment. Surely, it is very straight forward. maybe they never saw it, or perhaps it was abrogated(GOD forbid).with today's muslims, u never know.

3) non knows the meaning of the allegorical ones but GOD and those well founded in knowledge

it is noteworthy that point3 did not say only GOD and muhammad knows their meaning. but specifically those vast in that particular subject matter. Why?
the truth is virtually the whole verses of the Qur'an are straight forward, those that aren't , are those we get better understanding of as we progressively develop intellectually and become better aware of the world around us. This is quite true in view of the fact that the quran is replete with such astonishing scientific and historical phenomenon that could not have been know to the people of the time of the prophet; and certainly not the prophet as well.

GOD is the one who grants us the understanding of the Qur'an as He deems it apropriate. He is the teacher of Qur'an and no one else. He grants whom ever He wills such a blessing. But in order to understand the quran, u need to firstly believe GOD in HIS assertions that the quran is complete and fully detailed and shall be the only source of guidance. Also, u need to be sincere towards GOD.

[55:1]  The Most Gracious.
[55:2]  Teacher of the Quran.

ola_pluto:

Haven said the above, I do not think we can practice Islam without the hadiths. I will like to ask Usisky how he prays. If he prays according to the way Mohammed SAW prays, then where does he get that principle from? Quran or Hadith?

At the highlighted portions.
Firstly, i am not gonna stomp you with a harsh reply, cos i know u are unaware and that's why you ask these questions. These are the commonest questions i get asked by those who have not reached complete certainty about the Qur'an and what function it is meant to serve in their lives.

To answer your questions, i will use a subtle "trick" on you. it is called reversal of roles. i wil be asking the questions instead.if u are able to answer them; then, i will give u a detailed reply.

Questions:
1)do u believe GOD when HE says the quran is complete(6:115)?
2)do u believe GOD when HE says the quran is fully detailed(mufasallah)-6:114?
3)do u believe GOD when HE says nothing has been left out of the Qur'an(6:38)?
4)what is islam?
5)when did islam start?
6)when did salaat start?
7)show me a detailed description of the salaats from Ahadith?
when did the hadith come into existence?
9)what is Hadith and what does it teach you?

If u believe the first three questions, then the others are really irrelevant, cos the answers are right before u. u just have been averse to it cos your mind has been clouded with several myths. Only GOD can lift off such a veil from ones mind, if u let HIM.

Please brother, keep an open mind. Do u best, i will not ridicule what ever u have to offer. just say something. u may even quote "hadiths"  , "Tafsirs"  etc, i don't mind. I will stand by GOD, and HE will never fail HIS true servants. i will be waiting.

PEACE!!!


Study the Quran:

[47:24]  Why do they not study the Quran carefully? Do they have[b] locks[/b] on their[b] minds[/b]?
[47:25]  Surely, those who slide back, after the[b] guidance has been manifested[/b] to them, the devil has enticed them and led them on.

I do not know why my response "disappeared" but I will try restating it:

usisky:


This verse confirms that anything that contains contradictions cannot be from God, and since the hadith contains numerous contradictions, as shown, it cannot be from God. But the hadith advocates claim that the hadith was inspired by God and that the hadith Al-Qudsy is God’s own words spoken to Muhammad! If that is so, how could they explain the contradictions in hadith? How could it be from God when it is full of contradictions? According to 4:82 nothing that contains contradictions can be from God.

It seems you are either confused on what Hadiths are or choose to play fast and loose with it. As anybody reading hadiths will easily know that they are statements that are not a continuum, hence the 2 "contradictory" Hadiths can easily be seen as hadiths at differrent time, FYI the Likes of Bukhari, Muslims took it upon themselves to sift out the unsound hadiths.

usisky:

To wiggle out of this tricky situation, the hadith advocates devised the concept of the abrogation of Quranic verses.
The plan was as such: If the Quran can be shown to contain contradictory verses, yet no one will dispute that it is from God, then the hadith with its contradictions can also be described to be inspired by God !!!
Quite a sly plot except for one minor detail;

I do not know who are these Anonymous individuals, whom you claim are hell bent on following hadiths to the extent that it made them believe that the Qu'ran had contradictions, I am really astonished at the level of your claims. So you mean Muslims made allegations that the Qur'an is contradictory just in order to make hadiths acceptable? No I can't believe you believe this trash, it makes close to no sense why "scolars" will by all means invent hadiths for apparently no reason

usisky:

THE QURAN CONTAINS NO CONTRADICTIONS!
It is the intention of this book to review the most common cases of abrogation and, God willing, demonstrate that they are all based upon poor understanding of the Quran. Each case presented will be accompanied by Quranic evidence that confirms the absence of any contradiction between the relevant verses, and as a result will expose the interpreter’s poor understanding of the Quran.

it becomes clear that this is beyond your invention apparrently quoting verbatim from a book whose author is out for mischief, no muslim will claim the Qur'an has contradiction, talk less of producing hadith and then claiming the Qur'an is contradictory, that seems to be a mischievous lie invented by the author of the book.

usisky:

CLAIMS OF ABROGATION
P.S. (The following are a few examples, the complete number of claimed abrogated cases appear in the book by the author).

CASE ONE:

The first example is concerned with the following verses:

Abrogated
"Whether you declare your inner thoughts or you conceal them, God holds you accountable to them." 2:284

Abrogator
"God never burdens any soul beyond its means, to its credit is what it earns, and against it is what it commits." 2:286

The claim is that these two verses contradict one another, the first verse states that God holds people accountable to their intentions while as the second verse indicates that we are only accountable to our deeds. Therefore this stands as a candidate for abrogation where the second verse is the abrogator and the first verse is abrogated.
Thus they claim that the underlined words in 2:284 were invalidated by the underlined words in 2:286
However, one only has to read the verse immediately before verse 284 to realise that there is no contradiction between 284 and 286:

The last words of verse 283 together with verse 284 read as follows:
"Anyone who withholds a testimony is sinful at heart. God is fully aware of everything you do. To God belongs everything in the heavens and the earth, Whether you declare your inner thoughts or conceal them, God holds you accountable for them."

By reading the two verses together it becomes apparent that the subject of verse 284 is testimony and not one’s intentions in general.
Verse 284 confirms that God holds those who conceal a testimony accountable. Furthermore, the words used in verse 284 are ‘declare’ and ‘conceal’ while as the words used in verse 286 are ‘earn’ and ‘commit’. The words ‘declare’ and ‘conceal’ are consistent with the subject of testimony. Testimony can indeed be declared or concealed. On the other hand, the words ‘earn’ and ‘commit’ which are used in verse 286 speak of our deeds.
Indeed verses 283 and 284 are related to the same subject (withholding testimony) since they are consecutive. For all that, it becomes clear that there is not the slightest contradiction between verses 284 and 286.

it seems strange, this is clearly an invention of the author of the book you are quoting verbatim from, as I do not know how any muslim scolar would not have understood the context in which the two verses are speaking, well at least you said they say . . . whoever they actually are . . oly uzizsky can tell

usisky:

CASE TWO:

Abrogated

"Surely those who believe, and the Jews, and the Christians and the Sabaeans, those among them who believe in God and the hereafter, and who works righteous deeds, will receive their recompense from their Lord, they have nothing to fear nor will they grieve" 2:62

Abrogator

"Whoever seeks other than Islam as his religion, it will not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he will be with the losers" 3:85

Here the claim is that while verse 2:62 says that some Jews and Christians will be rewarded, this was abrogated by 3:85 which states that all who are not Muslim will end up in hell.
The misunderstanding and poor interpretation here stems from their lack of understanding of the word Islam (Submission). In spite of the fact that God tells us in the Quran that Islam (Submission to God Alone) is as old as Abraham who was the first Muslim (see 2:128, 2:131, 2:133) and who was the first to name us Muslims (22:78), still the Muslim scholars today insist that Islam is confined to being the religion of the Quran !!!

By creating such a false statement, the Muslim scholars claim to be the custodians of the message! In 3:67 God specifically tells us that Abraham was neither Jewish nor Christian, but a monotheist Muslim. God also tells us in 5:111 that Jesus and the Disciples were Muslim. In 27:44 tells us that Solomon was Muslim and in 5:44 we are told of all the prophets who were given the Torah and who were all Muslim.

What all these verses are confirming is that there are Muslims who followed the Torah and the Bible and who knew nothing of the Quran. These Muslims were submitters to God Alone , Lord of the universe.
In effect the religion of Islam which was originally founded by Abraham can be found, not only in the Quran, but also in the Torah and the Bible. After all we are told that all the foundations of the religion, and which Muslims call the pillars of Islam were first given to Abraham.

The Quran confirms the true meaning of a Muslim, as being he who submits to God Alone and obeys the law of God Alone, and should not be confined to he who follows the Quran.

Those among the Christians who believe in the Oneness of God and who do not worship Jesus are Muslim in the sight of God. Similarly those among any other religion who submit to God Alone and who set up no idols to partner Almighty God are Muslim in the sight of God.

All these have their recompense from their Lord and have nothing to fear (2:62). These people are also the subject of 3:85 since they chose to be Muslim (submitters) to God. They could be Muslim submitters, Jewish submitters, Christian submitters …, etc. 

Consequently, there is no contradiction between 2:62 and 3:85

Again this lies are based on the assertion that somehow somewhere some muslims hold that the Qur'an is contradictory where in fact I know of no such thing.

Now again I refer you to Suratul baynah where it talks of the polytheist, people of the book, going to hell for not believing in the truth which al Islam, in fact your entire reply was based on twisting words, as it becomes clear who is being deceitful, I ask do you know the bible is corrupt according to the Qur'an, certain practices in Christianity borders on shriek? or do you think someone believing in the death and resurrection of Jesus a.s as a requirement o making it to heaven will have it accepted? i am baffled at the author of the book you are quoting.

usisky:

CASE THREE:

Some of the most ridiculous cases of abrogation are connected with the difficulty of these scholars in understanding that some laws set by God make allowance for exceptions. Whenever the scholars see a law that makes allowance for an exception, they construe it as a case of abrogation!
There are many cases throughout the Quran of this poor deduction and total irrationality, the following are some of them:

1- In 4:19 God address’s the men by saying:

"You shall not force them (the women) to give up anything you have given them, unless they commit a proven adultery"

Here the abrogation claim is that the first part of the verse "You shall not force them (women) to give up anything you have given them" has been abrogated by the second part of the verse "unless they commit a proven adultery" !!!!

Why does an exception to a rule that is made allowance for by God obliterate the rule Obviously the rule still stands, because God states that for all women who have not committed adultery, their husbands do not have the right to regain anything they had previously given them.

The first part of the verse, which constitutes the general case has not been abrogated. The second part of the verse which constitutes the exception also stands.
2- In 2:159 we read:

"Those who conceal Our revelations and guidance, after proclaiming them in the Scripture, are condemned by God; they are condemned by all the condemners"

They claim that this verse (159) has been abrogated by the verse that immediately followed it (160) which reads:

"Except those who repent, reform and proclaim, I redeem them. I am the Redeemer, the Most Merciful"

Again we see that verse 160 says that those who had concealed the revelation but then repented and reformed are redeemed by God. Verse 159 has not been abrogated. It still stands, since all those who concealed the revelations and have not repented and reformed are not redeemed.
3- In 3:86-88 we read:

"Why should God guide those who disbelieved after believing…………….the retribution is never commuted for them, nor will they be reprieved"

The claim here is that these verses have been abrogated by verse 89:

"Exempted are those who repent thereafter and reform, God is Forgiver, Most Merciful."
Once again the claimed abrogation is non existent. Both verses stand true.
Verses 86-88 are speaking about those who disbelieve after believing and maintain their disbelieving until death. They are never reprieved in the hereafter. Verse 89 speaks about those who repent and reform during their life. Because God is Forgiver and Most Merciful they are reprieved.

The Quran confirms that only those who die as disbelievers are not pardoned:
"Those who disbelieve and die as disbelievers, an earthful of gold will not be accepted from any of them, even if such a ransom were possible. They have incurred painful retribution; they will have no helpers." 3:91
Once again the claim of abrogation is false and is based on poor understanding of the Quran.

4- Another case of poor understanding is found in the following verses:
"Also you shall not be married to two sisters at the same time" 4:23
they claim that this has been abrogated by the words that immediately followed :
"except that which has taken place in the past"

and they interpret the last sentence, which in Arabic is (Ila ma salaf) to have the meaning of (I have forgiven you).
Obviously this is all incorrect. What this last verse means is ‘do not break up existing marriages’. It has nothing to do with forgiveness.

In other words God is saying that this law is to be enforced from that time onwards, but not to previous marriages so as not to break existing families.
Again the abrogation is non existent.
The same is applied to :
"Do not marry the women who were previously married to your fathers, except that which has taken place in the past…………, " 4:22

These are lies invented by you and the author, which scholars make such claims? only u can tell as I know most books I have read clearly forbid the marrying of two sisters at the same time, some even went further by saying generally relatives. so I am baffled at why your man keeps manufacturing lies on non existent claims.

usisky:

CASE FOUR:

Here they claim the underlined words in the following verse:
"To God belongs the east and the west, so wherever you go you will always be facing God. God is Omnipresent, Omniscient" 2:115

have been abrogated by the underlined words in the following verse:
"We now assign a Qiblah that is pleasing to you. Henceforth, you shall turn your face towards the Sacred Masjid. Wherever you may, all of you shall turn your faces towards it." 2:144

The claim is that in the beginning God made it lawful for the believers to face anywhere in Salat (Contact Prayers) (as in 2:115) then later God cancelled that by appointing a set Qibla (2:144) for the believers. Therefore, the claim is that 2:144 invalidates 2:115

First of all, it was never made lawful for believers to face anywhere in their Salat. We are told in the Quran that the Qibla was changed, but nowhere are we told that there was no Qibla.
We are told in the Quran that there was a Qibla that did not appeal to the prophet, and that God changed it to one that is more appealing to the prophet (see 2:144)

The obvious misunderstanding here is that while verse 144 is speaking about Qiblah for the Salat, verse 115 is not speaking about Salat at all. Verse 115 is speaking about the fact that God is present everywhere, and thus wherever we may look or wherever we may go, we will always be facing God. The presence of the word "Omnipresent" at the end of the verse confirms that the subject of the verse is God’s Presence and not the Salat.
Verse 144 does not abrogate verse 115. They are talking about two completely different subjects.

same comments

usisky:

CASE FIVE:

Abrogated:

"Had they, when they wronged their souls, come to you and prayed to GOD for forgiveness, and the messenger prayed for their forgiveness, they would have found GOD Redeemer, Most Merciful." 4:64

Abrogator:

The claim is that the underlined words in 9:80 "even if you ask forgiveness for them seventy times - GOD will not forgive them" invalidate the underlined words in 4:64 "the messenger prayed for their forgiveness, they would have found GOD Redeemer, Most Merciful."

Once again very poor understanding of the Quran.
Here we immediately note that these two verses speak about two different groups of people. In 4:64 God is speaking about those who have wronged their souls but have turned back to God and asked for His forgiveness. The fact that they asked forgiveness from God denotes that they believe in God, and for that we are told that "they would have found GOD Redeemer, Most Merciful."
On the other hand, those spoken of in 9:80 are described by the words: "they disbelieve in GOD and His messenger" ………and because they are disbelievers, we are told that "GOD will not forgive them"
From these two verses we learn that forgiveness can be asked for any believer who repents and reforms, but may never be asked for disbelievers.
No contradiction or invalidation exists between the two verses.

same comment, all making false claims that against non existent people et

usisky:

CASE SIX:

Abrogated:

"O you who believe, witnessing a will when one of you is dying shall be done by two equitable people among you (relatives or close friends). If you are travelling, then two others may do the witnessing. After observing the Contact Prayer (Salat), let the witnesses swear by GOD, to alleviate your doubts: "We will not use this to attain personal gains, even if the testator is related to us. Nor will we conceal GOD's testimony. Otherwise, we would be sinners." 5:106

Abrogator:

"Once the interim is fulfilled, you may reconcile with them equitably, or go through with the separation equitably. You shall have two equitable witnesses from among you (relatives or close friends) witness the divorce before GOD." 65:2

The claim is that in 5:106 any two witnesses, who are not necessarily relatives or close friends, can act as witnesses while in travel if relatives are not available, but this was invalidated by 65:2 which stated that the witnesses must be from among the relatives or close friends.
Once again, the claim is false for the following reasons:

1- The subject of 5:106 is witnessing the will of someone who is dying, or near death. The subject of 65:2 is witnessing a divorce.

2- In the situation of travel, a dying person may not have much time left, and since equitable relatives may not be available in time, thus God wavered the condition of the witnesses being from among the relatives, so that the will is witnessed in time before the death of the person.

3- The case of divorce does not present such immediate urgency, and thus the condition of equitable witnesses from among the relatives stands.

4- Thus it is obvious that 65:2 does not abrogate 5:106 in any way.

usisky:


CASE SEVEN:

Abrogated:

"Say, ‘I fear, if I disobeyed my Lord, the retribution of an awesome day." 6:15

Abrogator:

[b]"We have bestowed upon you (O Messenger) a great victory, whereby GOD forgives your past sins, as well as future sins……, " [/b]48:2

Here the claim is that the underlined words in 6:15 were abrogated later by the underlined words in 48:2
The indirect outcome of this outrageous abrogation is one of total idolatry.
If the scholars state that the words "I fear, if I disobeyed my Lord, the retribution of an awesome day" are invalidated, are they saying that the prophet no longer has to fear God? !!!
To demonstrate the truth of these verses and their implications it is necessary first to examine in the light of the Quran what is forgiven by God, and which can be implied under 48:2, and what is never forgiven by God and thus must be feared according to 6:15.

We are told in the Quran that God forgives all sins except idolatry:
"God does not forgive idolatry, but He forgives lesser offences for whomever He wills." 4:48 and 116
We are also told that this warning applies to all people, including God’s messengers. To affirm that even Muhammad was not excluded from that warning we see God specifically warning Muhammad against idolatry:
"It has been revealed to you (O Muhammad), and to those before you that if you ever commit idolatry, all your works will be nullified, and you will be with the losers." 39:65
Now when we come to the claimed abrogation of 6:15, we read the following words:
"Say, ‘I fear, if I disobeyed my Lord, the retribution of an awesome day."
However, when we read the words that immediately precede this verse, we read:
"Say, "I am commanded to be the most devoted submitter, and, `Do not be an idol worshiper." 6:14
If we put the two verses next to one another (verses 14 and 15 of Surah 6), it becomes obvious that the messenger is to say (I fear the retribution of an awesome day if I should disobey God and commit idolatry).
It follows from that to conclude that verse 48:2 which promises the messenger’s sins will be forgiven (past and future sins) is obviously connected to all other sins, except idol worship.
There is no contradiction or abrogation between the two verses.



CASE EIGHT:

Abrogated:

"GOD has pardoned you: why did you give them permission (to stay behind), before you could distinguish those who are truthful from the liars?" 9:43

Abrogator:

[b]"The true believers are those who believe in GOD and His messenger, and when they are with him in a community meeting, they do not leave him without permission. Those who ask permission are the ones who do believe in GOD and His messenger. If they ask your permission, in order to tend to some of their affairs, you may grant permission to whomever you wish, and ask GOD to forgive them. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful." [/b]24:62

The claim here is that in 9:43 the prophet was not allowed to give permission to the ones wanting to stay behind, before he could distinguish those who are truthful from the liars, while in 24:62 he was not given the permission to do so.
Again, the error is quite obvious. Verse 9:43 is specifically talking about going out for battle while 24:62 is talking about leaving a community meeting to attend to some personal matters!
We read in the two verses preceding 9:43, namely 9:41 and 42:
"You shall readily mobilize, light or heavy, and strive with your money and your lives in the cause of GOD. This is better for you, if you only knew.
If there were a quick material gain, and a short journey, they would have followed you. But the striving is just too much for them. They will swear by GOD: "If we could, we would have mobilized with you." They thus hurt themselves, and GOD knows that they are liars."
The underlined words "mobilize" and if it were a "short journey" indicate that the subject is mobilizing to go out for the purpose of battle.
However, the words "community meeting" in 24:62, denotes that the situation then is not one of battle but a normal community meeting where a request for permission to be excused for some personal matters would not exactly be classified as an unforgivable sin!
Once again 24:62 does not contradict or abrogate 9:43, the subject of the two verse is different.



Quran: The ONLY Source

[17:46] We place shields around their minds, to prevent them from understanding it, and deafness in their ears. And when you preach your Lord, using the[b] Quran alone[/b], they run away in aversion.



Verify GOD's proofs: visit the following websites:


www.submission.org

www.miracleof19.com

www.masjidtucson.org

www.quranmiracles.com



May GOD help us ALL!!

May God help us from fraudulent authors who invent lies to decisive people, uzizsky you need to have a closer examination of the "facts" you have brought here and see how they actually triviliase those fictional "scholars" that were abrogating verese here and there. The Qur'anic principle behind abrogating verses is very clear and more important aborgatin o verses is not about contradiction, as it is simply stated 'for something better.

Allah knows best but definately this entire article was written with corrupting lies.

so the Qu'ran has been adultrated by man?

One would wonder hw u came about that conclusion.

"The Collection and Preservation of the Qur'an":
by Ayatullah Sayyid Abul Qasim al Khui

http://www.al-islam.org/tahrif_quran/

mkmyers45: so the Qu'ran has been adultrated by man?

vedaxcool: One would wonder hw u came about that conclusion.

^^^That is what you have implied by trying prove me wrong. In other words u agree with abrogation of quranic verses. Yet we all say we believe the God we worship is omniscient!!!

usisky:




^^^That is what you have implied by trying prove me wrong. In other words u agree with abrogation of quranic verses. Yet we all say we believe the God we worship is omniscient!!!

You are right bro..the word of a god should never change but i fear that your fellow muslims will call you false when you clearly speak the truth.

usisky:




^^^That is what you have implied by trying prove me wrong. In other words u agree with abrogation of quranic verses. Yet we all say we believe the God we worship is omniscient!!!

Let me up the stakes a little bit, first prove I indicated the Qur'an is adulterated, failing to do so means u are a liar and a kafir supporter! Secondly u are the coward that flee this thread after I discredited the silly points u made, now that u seem to think your cowardly buddy's insult on the Qur'an validates your points goes to show what is really important to you, if u are not interpreting mazaje semi-illiterate ignorant rants as glorious as to mean erudition then is your buddy mkmyers insults on the Qur'an that serves as proof thayt u are rightly guided, u will notice I have ignored your other heretic threads, it is not as if I have no reply it is that I know when defeated u would cowardly flee the thread just as u did here. Remember my points remains clear for u to refute no amount of mkmyers foolish questions can ever validate any of the lies u wrote!

^^^Oga, no too vex o and make u dey cool ur temper i beg. Na y i no dey rply u b dat. U too dey vex and na wen u like na im u dey cool.....vedaxcool(vex+cool ).
Anyways, go grab a literature on the subject.when u are done, Come back and tell me where u have discredited the allegations. And i think the learned audience should be the judge to dat. If u can't lay hands on a literature, make i refer u to one: INTRODUCTION TO THE QURA'N- by Ahmad Von Denffer.

read the chapter under abrogation of quranic verses(nasekh wa mansoukh). Peace

^
As I expected u lived up to your billing! Unable to substantiate your allegations against me leaving you with the uncharitable tag of a liar and kafir supporter again u still r unable to refute any points I had written earlier, making us wonder whether u even understand the path u follow. Anyway too mkmyers is not here to insult the Qur'an thereby bolstering ur confidence to make new allegations against me. A parting gift go to www.call-to-monotheism.com surf the website so that Allah may guide u. Salam

@ OP

In the first place, I have some questions for you under the thread "Explanations Wanted" awaiting your attention since.

On this thread of yours, I want to comment as follows:

1. To say there are no contraditions in the Quran is a colossal fallacy. So many contradictions have been discovered and some of them discussed on NL, one was sealed up and the other canceled outright. You ask me why: it was because the truth was indisputable.

2. You claim Abraham and other prophets including Jesus and his disciples were muslims. This is a lie of the devil. Muhammad was the only prophet of allah even going by islamic creed. "There is no god save allah and Muhammad is his prophet". This shows the only prophet allah had was Muhammad alone, other prophets were for Jehovah God.

There is no islam without Muhammad. The way of worshiping allah was the introduction of Gabriel and Muhammad. Nobody worshiped the true God the ways muslims worship allah. In fact there are islamic sources that make us to know that what was done to worship the Jinn-devil, the religion in Muhammd's family before islam is what is done to worship allah till today. This shows the type of angel Gabriel was and the type of religion he forced on Muhammad and the muslims.

Zamzam well in Kaaba was dug by Mutaleb, Muhammad's granfather and dedicated to two idols. Mutaleb was an adherent of Jinn-devil religion. The same centre and the same well are used by muslims today in the worship of allah. How can the well and centre dedicated to Jinn-devil be used for the true God?

Before islam brought by Muhammad, nobody was doing ablution and facing Kaaba when praying. If Kaaba was a place specifically built for God, why did Muhammad instruct the muslims to face Jerusalem before changing to Kaaba? Islamic apologists say there are places in the Bible where some people prayed like muslims. This is very untrue. Nobody completed the process of islamic ablution of washing the face, head, hands, legs, nose. ear, mouth at the same time. Besides those who washed a part of their body did so for a different reason, not for prayer. I challenge any muslim to show where anybody or prophet in the Bible completed the process of islamic ablution and faced Kaaba before praying. If they didn't , how were they muslims in the real sense of islam?

For the purpose of emphasis, I repeat that there was no islam before Muhammad because "lai lah ila lah Muhammad rosulilah". Muhammad is the only prophet of allah, no other prophets.

I can now see that Mr. truthman dnt wanna learn