69 million page views

bayezid: Meeting Allah's challenge is as easy as ABC

Reader comment on item: Still Asleep After Mumbai
in response to reader comment: wordplay re-revisited.

Submitted by Plato (India), Jan 2, 2009 at 02:11

bayezid, you write:

>>Neither have I presented the Koranic verses in Arabic. Since all three have been translated into English, you can expect they would suffer about equal damage to their original beauty and sense. If I had presented them in Sanskrit or Aramaic would you have been able to appreciate them?

>> kind of you to take the trouble to translate them for me. what i was simply saying was if you considered the way the quran is recited and read in its original language, you wouldve seen yet another beautiful aspect of it altogether. read the veda or the bible in their languages and then compare to quran, youll see the difference.<<

You are not a native Arabic speaker. Only such a person can appreciate its full beauty. If you were a Sanskrit scholar, you will be able to appreciate the beauty of the verses in the Vedas and so for the Aramaic Bible. How one go about comparing three books written in three different languages except by translating them into a common one?


My simple, cynical mind wants to know what they contain now. Garbage?? What happened to Allah's unchangeable words 006.034 YUSUFALI: Rejected were the messengers before thee: with patience and constancy they bore their rejection and their wrongs, until Our aid did reach them: there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those messengers.

no, books dont hold garbage. trashbins do. im sure you have one in your room. i dont see what you find so objectionable here. the quran came down totally in ALLAH's words. those previous rvelations did not. they came in ideas and words partially unlike the quran. that is why those could be corrupted. and in the above verse, ALLAH is talking to Muhammad pbuh the last prophet. and HE is talking about the words of the quran here. not previous books. so there you go.


Just a few sentences ago you said they contain the revelation from God. What now makes you say they are people speaking about God? Let that be. But tell me weren't what those people spoke revelations from God?

>>again, like your previous inquiry. with a sinister touch of course. but hey its ok. i love it sinister. its challenging.<<

Do you think you have answered the sinister challenge?

>> they may contain revelation, but unlike the quran. i exlpained earlier that the previous books did not come as direct words.<<

What do indirect words look or sound like. Are they different from direct words? And seriously was Allah dumb and could not articulate Himself to the other prophets instead of merely inspiring them and either getting it all wrong or people distorting His words?

>> al quran is the only book that did.<<

You seem to have forgotten that Muhammad got your so-called direct words of Allah from Gabriel and you got it from what was written down by various people. You call that direct?

>>the bible and veda has revelation in it, inspired by GOD to messengers, but in words of the prophets.<<

Compared to fourth hand information they were much more direct, probably second hand. You should also consider how words inspired by Allah can be any different from the words spoken directly. If Allah's inspired words give incorrect meaning then He is not much of an inspirer.

>>Koran contains direct message? You are kidding me. Did not Muhammad himself admit that he received it second hand from Gabriel and what you have is what was written down by his listeners and compiled much later. You also admit they are revelations from Allah and Allah being all-powerful is capable of communicating His message clearly to His prophets of the Vedas and Bible. If you deny this you are denying that Allah is all-powerful. So what happened to Allah's words in the Vedas and Bible?

>>lol no im not kidding you. i kid my 9 year old nephew.<<

From the answers you have been providing me it seems as though you think I am also a nine-year-old.

>> direct maeesage from GOD to prophet.<<

NO! The Koran itself says Gabriel delivered Allah's message to Muhammad. That makes it indirect. And furthermore you go it from what is said in a book written by others who heard him.

>> this is the case of the quran only. ALLAH says that.<<

Allah says this through Gabriel. How could Muhammad be sure they are not Gabriel's words?

>>the quran wasnt ideas set in words of the prophet. it was simply dictated. dictated. word for word. that makes it directly GOD's words.<<

Gabriel dictated what He claimed was Allah's word. That makes it only indirectly Allah's words, that is if Gabriel was speaking the truth.

>> yet again, prophets before this never had this privilege. their revelations wer not coming down in dictation.<<

Prophets before Muhammad had the privilege of being directly inspired by God instead of hearing it second hand from Gabriel.


I have read some parts of the Vedas, quite a bit of the Bible and every bit of the Koran. The Koran cannot hold a candle to either the Vedas or the NT. And I am an atheist. I have no axe to grind.

but you have been grinding your axe since forever. conflict of words dear friend. so you tell me, for a man who cant even have his priorities right, how should i simply take your word for it? if the words of ALLAH hold no meaning to you then its simply a matter of your perception.but here is what ALLAH has to say about this.

>>Those who reject our signs are deaf and dumb,- in the midst of darkness profound: whom Allah willeth, He leaveth to wander: whom He willeth, He placeth on the way that is straight.

from surah al an'am<<

You are quoting from the Koran which contains words which Muhammad claimed he had heard from Gabriel who claimed he had heard it from Allah. What credence should I give to this quotation? A being who claims to be the most merciful and full of knowledge cannot write such tripe. As in so many verses Allah claims He wills some to wander in disbelief and others He guides to belief. The apparent confusion this verse shows is probably due to the fact that the Sura you have quoted is third hand information and not direct from Allah.


I have noticed. I have also noticed that you have forgotten this is all about a challenge in the Koran that it cannot be imitated. You reject it on the ground that the other verses are not direct words of Allah, then what remains of the challenge?

This is what you had written: "quran is word of GOD. i dont have to prove it to you myself, ALLAH challenges anyone who disbeieves. ALLAH challenges you to write a book like this. 1400 years and we are still waiting."

And this is the challenge in the Koran:

010.038 YUSUFALI: Or do they say, "He forged it"? say: "Bring then a Sura like unto it, and call (to your aid) anyone you can besides Allah, if it be ye speak the truth!"

011.013 YUSUFALI: Or they may say, "He forged it," Say, "Bring ye then ten suras forged, like unto it, and call (to your aid) whomsoever ye can, other than Allah!- If ye speak the truth

>>whoa !!! oh man !! you just answered your own question here. lol. or has ALLAH done it ??<<

Why do you ask such a silly question when you have told me innumerable times that Allah is the one who does everything? If you are to be believed I am not the one who has "done it", it has to be Allah.

>> the challenge for you to imitate the quran is barefaced and glaring in your face. you are more than welcome to take it up.<<

This challenge is a bare-faced attempt by Muhammad to hide the fact that he is the real author of the Koran when his listeners said they thought he was forger. There is no objective criteria for judging one poet's verses against another. Or even consider flower arrangement.

If I arrange ten vases of flowers in a particular way and ask you to arrange ten vases like mine you can meet the challenge only by making the exact same arrangement all over again with probably one change, say of using a yellow rose for a red one. I can meet Allah's challenge by writing down ten verses exactly as contained in the Koran but change the word Allah to Shaitan wherever it occurs.

>> ALLAH challenges you. not me.<<

Why are you in such a tearing hurry to answer my posts? Go back and read them again. I never said you had thrown me the challenge. It is Allah's challenge I had taken up. And I have met the challenge in my previous post by quoting the Lord's Prayer and the Creation Hymn of the Rig Veda and in this one by substituting Shaitan for Allah in Koranic verses.


Out of this tafsir of yours I have underlined two sentences. You triumphantly proclaim that since Allah says unbelievers (who He created as unbelievers) will be in a state where they are neither dead nor alive He is comparing them to comatose patients. Comatose patients don't feel a thing. But in several other verses Allah informs us those in hell will feel excruciating pain and will endlessly swallow pus and other unmentionable stuff. This verse is contradicting those other verses. So the info contained in this verse is wrong or all the verses are wrong. What happens to all the other info contained in it?

Why have you avoided comparing the Lord's Prayer with the Fatiha which you consider the greatest verse since time began. It does sound puerile compared to the Lord's prayer does it not? The Al Fatiha is a vacuous verse of narcissistic self-praise. Here it is again.

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
Praise be to Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds;
Most Gracious, Most Merciful;
Master of the Day of Judgment.
Thee do we worship, and Thine aid we seek.
Show us the straight way,

compare this with the prayer from the bible. here ALLAH says how we should call upon HIM. GOD literally tells us how to do it. that biblical prayer does not. here the GOD is glorified in beautiful insightful ways. where is the lord being glorified in the biblical prayer? show me. here ALLAH tells us HE is the most merciful and compassionate. for our benefit. where is that in the biblical prayer ??

we are praying o god. who better than him to show us how to do it? common sense.


The heavens and the earth were never joined together. The heavens appeared at least 10 billion years before the earth. This is Zakir Naik's nonsense science. In other places the Koran says living things are made of clay or dust.

wow you are not just an atheist. yo are scientifically oblique. dont you know of the super dense and super heated mass tht existed before the big bang? then it expoded. thats why they call it the big bang. >>

That the universe appeared nearly 15 billion years ago is oblique? The Koran is talking about separating the heavens from the earth which is meaningless as the heavens already existed much before the earth formed.

>>zakir naik hardly makes up stories as you do. he simply used scientific facts. now you are challenging scientists hahahahaha.<<

Tell me what stories I have made up And for once prove that what you consider stories are not true. Just saying they are false do not make them so.


Mountains were themselves formed by earthquakes and expulsions of lava. In fact many of them are at the fault lines of the earth where the maximum earthquakes occur. You are in Bangladesh, a flat land, how many earthquakes have you experienced? Skip to Pakistan a very mountainous area and add up the earthquakes and the deaths caused. The mountains were useless as earth stabilizers.

>>oh wow. even after countless geo physiscists and geologists claim that mountains act as stakes, you are still ubelieving. you really are hopeless. lol. this is scientific fact.


What is the scientific fact? That I am hopeless? The scientific fact is that you you have no proofs at all for your claims, just so much hot air about ‘countless geophysicists' claiming what you say is true without letting us in on the secret of who they are. Let us accept the unverified fact that mountains act as stakes. But I pointed out to you that they are not doing the job the Koran claims they are supposed to i.e. prevent damage during earthquakes. The quakes in mountainous regions are as devastating if not more than in flat lands. Which goes to show that Allah is a very poor designer of stakes.

The earth being a roof is what pre-civilisation man thought.

>>the earth is a roof?? dont you mean the heavens??? thats what ALLAH says right? <<

Yes, I mean the heavens.

>>the heaven is a roof. the atmosphere protects life on this planet from harmful uv rays. meteroites burn and scatter as they fall in earth. so withoutthe atmoshere, you wouldnt be anjoying a nice day at the beach. loks like the pre civilized people knew better than you.<<

Allah is a poor protector of life on earth. Instead of an atmosphere he could as well as not created meteorites, UV rays and such other dangerous stuff. The atmosphere is no protection against large meteorites has been proved time and again in the history of the earth. Man has succeeded in damaging the protective shield made of an ozone layer that Allah has put around the earth. This is causing UV rays to get through.

>>35. Everyone is going to taste death, and We shall make a trial of you with evil and with good, and to Us you will be returned.<<

Allah is just stating the obvious.

yes HE is. but do you see why HE does that?<<

Simply because Allah is simple minded. You can see how simple minded Allah is when He divides up property among a deceased's inheritors.

>> even when you know your gonna die, we still act arrogantly.you are doing that. so HE does it for a reason. it is a reminder.<<

I act arrogantly not because I am not afraid of death. But I know that Allah is a paper tiger confined to ranting and raving and to be found only between the covers of an outdated 1400-year-old book. I do not bother about what He says about what He will do to me when I am dead.

>>im looking forward to bashing more of your criticisms in the future. tata.<<

Bash away.




Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to bayezid: Meeting Allah's challenge is as easy as ABC by Plato

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2021 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)