Autochecked users, Bureaucrats, Editors, oversight, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators
19,746
edits
Textual History of the Qur'an: Difference between revisions
Undo revision 107471 by Nightmare140 (talk) - this would need input from the original author (Disguised) or someone else who can do the same
| [unchecked revision] | [checked revision] |
Nightmare140 (talk | contribs) (→Diacritical Marks and Grammatical Mistakes: I removed a claimed "grammatical error" because it's not an error. In Arabic it's decided if it's sabi'een or sabi'oon based on what part of speech it is (I'm an Arab, I can explain more if needed)) |
(Undo revision 107471 by Nightmare140 (talk) - this would need input from the original author (Disguised) or someone else who can do the same) |
||
| Line 190: | Line 190: | ||
The following are just a few examples from among many grammatical ''mistakes'' which show that the Qur'an is not flawless. | The following are just a few examples from among many grammatical ''mistakes'' which show that the Qur'an is not flawless. | ||
1. '' | 1. ''Sabi'een'' or ''Sabi'oon'', one must be wrong (5:69, 22:17) | ||
2. ''Kon fayakoon'', meaning "be and it is", must be ''kon fakana'', meaning "be and he was" in 3:59, because it refers to the past not present. | 2. ''Butunihi'' is a mistake in 16:66. It must be ''Butuniha'', because it is referring to the plural (cattle). | ||
3. ''Kon fayakoon'', meaning "be and it is", must be ''kon fakana'', meaning "be and he was" in 3:59, because it refers to the past not present. | |||
==Corruption of Previous Scriptures== | ==Corruption of Previous Scriptures== | ||