Bismika Alllahuma

Bismillah…

基督徒传教士在Qur经常提出了涉嫌的语法错误的问题’。 这样指控为基督徒是完全适当的由于他们不连贯的misguidance和缺乏酣然的信仰; 因为他们的信念在反对建立逻辑推理和常识，它根本一定不是奇怪的听见这样指控从他们。 什么使我们难过是有些穆斯林试图通过尝试回答这些要求对神色入阿拉伯语法关于辩解的方面或规则 基督徒“认为”的对格词是一个更好的主格或者 基督徒“相信”的一个复数词是更好的非凡!

所有这是胡话，为了我们是肯定的基督徒传教士不知道关于语法结构甚至阿拉伯语言，但是他们赢取论据，因为他们驾驶穆斯林保卫Qur’，而不是使用它作为一个致命武器反对错误宗教和信仰。 而不是这个被动战略，穆斯林应该暴露事实他们提出的基督徒polemicists没有对问题的理解，并且他们对Qur的困窘的指控’证明他们深刻的无知。 穆斯林应该证明此关闭他们的嘴而不是转向语法和阿拉伯语言课本。

怎么如此是那？

圣洁Qur’告诉我们：

“书的Ye人为什么争执ye关于Ibrahim，当Torah和福音书未显露直到在他以后？ 有您没有理解？”¹

Ibn Kathir在他的说 tafsir:

Ibn `Abbas - radiya阿拉`anhu-认为： Najran的基督徒和犹太犹太教教士聚集了在阿拉的信使(和平是在他)和争执; 犹太人说： Ibrahim是无，但犹太人! 基督徒说： Ibrahim是无，但基督徒! 然后阿拉显露了： {书的Ye人为什么争执ye关于Ibrahim} 意味为什么您-犹太人-要求他是犹太人，当他的时间是在Torah的揭示之前对Moses时和为什么您-基督徒-他是基督徒的要求，当基督教在他以后时开发了时刻？ 所以阿拉说： {有您没有理解？ }

Please put into consideration the ending of the holy verse with the words: { have you no understanding? } for the Jews and Christians by their claims on Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) have made an embarrassing historical error which even a child can notice; that it is a very apparent historical fallacy as finding a Pepsi bottle in the palace of the Pharaoh! These are people with no understanding, is it logical to attribute someone with a religion that would appear centuries later?

However, it seems that Christian idiocy is periodic for it appears again with their alleged grammatical errors of the Qur’an.

Ye People of the Book why dispute ye about the Qur’an, when the laws of grammar were not put till after It? have you no understanding?

They certainly have no inkling about the development of a language, whether it is Arabic or otherwise; grammar was not the machine that produced the Arabic language, rather it is simply a logical explanation to ways of Arabic speech. Due to their inherent stupidity, the Christians do not recognize the correct historicity of its chronological order: Arabs speak the language first, then explanatory rules are formulated later (after the advent of Islam). Consequently, grammar should agree with Arabic speech, not vice versa. However, those who have no understanding believe that grammar came first to existence, then Arabs spoke according to it. Remember the verse: { have you no understanding? }

If you ask any of them about the origin of rules formulated by Arab grammarians during era of documentation, they will answer that they originated from Arabic speech. So, is it sane to derive a certain rule from some speech and then criticize the same speech by this rule? This would be plain insanity, remember these words again: { have you no understanding? }

The language of the Holy Qur’an represents the purest Arabic speech for it was uttered by an Arab in a pure Arabic society and challenged by the most eloquent Arabs who mentioned none of its alleged errors. It is well known that the Arabs during lifetime of the Prophet (P) reached the summit of eloquence and artistry of speech; and it is known as well that those Arabs were the most aggressive and motivated opponents to the message of Islam.

So here, they had two important criteria: (a) they were capable of refuting the language of the Qur’an and exposing its errors, and (b) were much motivated to do so. In other words, they combined the ability and the motive to discover any linguistic errors in the Qur’an. However, they did not which means that there were no errors to discover or to expose.

On the other hand, the Prophet (P) kept challenging them with the Qur’an time after time again, abusing their gods and beliefs, attacking their polytheistic traditions, conquering their lands and killing their fathers, brothers and sons in battlefields, and they were able to combat all this by pointing one linguistic error such as “plural instead of singular” or “accusative instead of nominative”, but they did not!

Do you know why?

Because they were eloquent Arabs living in pure Arabic society, they knew that polemical arguments like these would bring them nothing but mockery.

So, what about the list of these alleged errors?

We answer with the fact that Arabs altogether had accepted the Holy Qur’an as most eloquent speech that no human being can match or even object to. Then we ask the Christian polemicists: Are you more knowledgeable about Arabic language and its usage than the ancient Arabs of the Prophet’s lifetime?

of course, not!

Those Arabs knew their language by nature, so they conceived it all. This is in contrast to the modern-day Arabs — let alone non-Arabs — who acquire it by studying and learning. In spite of this, they fail to conceive the entire Arabic language, especially rules and uses which eventually died in time and is no longer used in everyday speech or writing.

So when Arab Christians start to compare the grammar of the Holy Qur’an with the high-school curricular of Arabic grammar, they surely fall into serious fallacies; one of them being their ignorance of the normal historical sequence in the development of any language. Remember: { have you no understanding? }

The second fallacy is their miserable selection of some rules of Arabic grammar, considering them as absolute and rejecting the fact that the Arabic language is very vast and that it involves so many rules that are not included in the high school curriculum of Arabic grammar.

They indeed have no understanding!

Based on an Arabic post referred to from here.

1. Surah Al-’Imran: 65 [back]