The Original Sin

The Saint wrote: This is utter nonsense, and slanderous nonsense at that. Can you imagine if I said such things about you? I find your outrage quite hypocritical after reading so many times your thoughts ridiculing Islam, God and the Prophet PBUH.

I am critical of Islam as in ideology.  I refrain from personal criticisms of Muslims.  For instance, I have no hesitation in pointing out that Islam clearly advocates the murder of apostates; but I would never say that most Muslims are capable of or approve of that.  See the difference?

Define "work". What significant human progress has been made by Islam in the past century or so? Read any newspaper. Are you sure you phrased your question correctly? shouldn't you be asking whether what the Muslims have achieved? I admit that Muslims have not done much. But that is very different from what Islam has achieved? Islam is attracting more believers from lands which have patently anti-Muslim majorities. The fastest growing religion, today is Islam. Although Muslims are hardly good examples of believers.

No, I would prefer to ask about the benefits to humankind of Islam, the ideology.  I refrain from asking about individual Muslims, many of whom do achieve great things -- but I would argue they do so despite their religion, not because of it.  Rapid growth is not the same thing as progress and is not necessarily beneficial.  Cancer is also characterized by rapid growth.

What notable successes can Islam claim, aside from flying planes into buildings, blowing up mosques and kidnapping young girls for sex slavery? Muslims have at last begun fighting back against their puppet rulers who in turn are supported by the former colonialists. Who have milked the Muslims lands of most of their natural resources. They have begun throwing-off the yoke of bondage of foreign, pagan forces.

Which "puppet rulers" are you talking about?  The theocracy in Iran has broad popular support, as I understand it.  The military dictatorship in Egypt was tossed out by a popular uprising, but then the Egyptians voted in the Muslim Brotherhood.  Afghanistan's Taliban were forced out by the West after 9/11, but again the Aghanis elected another bunch who don't seem to be much better.  It really seems that every time Muslims "fight back" against radical Islam, they opt for even more radical Islam.

Btw, what notable progress have the so called modern nations achieved besides rejecting God and besides adopting satanic methods to impose their wills on weaker people all over the world? What? Turning the world into a war theatre and waging a war of civilizations against Muslims, who are perhaps the only eople on earth they fear.

I discussed a few examples in the "Science is AWESOME!" thread, notably the amazing advances in dentistry and medicine in general.  Think about how a dentist can drill a hole in your tooth, extract the nerve, and patch it up in some ways better than new -- and all without any pain!  Isn't that progress?  By comparison, the best religion can do is teach me that I deserve my toothache because I am a bad person.

I may have also mentioned GPS technology, which can determine my location on this planet accurate to within a few meters.  Think about what that means: with a tiny electronic device in my pocket, I can never be lost, ever!  Compare that to Moses, wandering in the desert for forty years!  What a pity he all he had was God to guide him.

Look at the device in front of you right now, capable of communicating almost instantaneously with people all over the world.  The best Allah could do with his Quran was to disseminate it orally and via manual copying, which took hundreds of years.

I mean that Islam is founded on an "us versus them" mentality. I have never seen another religion that treats unbelievers ("infidels") with such disrespect and hostility. Right now the power bloc called the west is doing it. Albeit, discreetly.

It's still much easier to be a Muslim in a Western country than a Christian in a Muslim country.  Or even a Muslim of the wrong sect, for that matter.

Sorry, but I'm not following you at all. Once again, this seems like a series of non sequiturs to me. Yes, individuals and governments can change, and ought to change as circumstances change. Yes, Bin Laden had American support when he was fighting against Russian occupation; but he became their enemy when he plotted against the Americans. This makes perfect sense. Why would it arouse your suspicion about his involvement in 9/11? Because it does not make sense to me. Why is logical to expect Laden to change? Why is it so difficult to accept that America is a self-serving monster and it has no compunction to turn on friends when it suits them? You have a mental block.

America didn't turn on Bin Laden.  Bin Laden turned on us.  Obviously.

As for foreigners being outcasts, surely that is a far more severe problem in Islamic nations than in western ones. Try being a Coptic Christian in Egypt. Persecution of Jews is so rampant that there are hardly any left in the Middle East outside Israel. Even Muslims are often outcasts if they are the wrong Sunni/Shiite/Sufi flavour. For a man who hails from a likely stock that has 3000 sects, churches and bibles that blatant hypocrisy.

Our diversity is kinda the point.  In what way are these 3000 sects, churches and bibles persecuted?

For a man who if he lives in America he should be ashamed of racial riots, hate crimes and frequent shootings by hatred-driven youngsters. Shooting innocent people. A rape rate which is highest in the world And a divorce rate that must have a world rating. And alcoholism and drug addiction that is almost unparalleled in the world.

More slanderous nonsense.  You can't back up any of these wild accusations; but even if you could, it would be irrelevant.  What does any of this have to do with foreigners or outcasts?

Look, here's the point I am trying to make, specifically with regard to religious persecution:

In sectarian societies religious minorities often are persecuted for what they believe. They face varying challenges where Buddhists, Hindus, and Jews enjoy a majority, but these states are few (although Hindu India is the world�s second most populous nation). A few at least nominally Christian countries persecute; however, this behavior most often reflects authoritarian politics (in former communist states) rather than theology. In a few cases, though, the Orthodox Church relies on the government for support against other Christian faiths.

In contrast, majority Muslim nations almost uniformly persecute. The only question is how virulent the repression. Believers are mistreated everywhere, but Christians most suffer in the birthplace of Christianity. The Iraq invasion and Arab Spring have loosed a campaign of religious cleansing across the Middle East.

I think you just answered your own question. He ought to have spoken about it beforehand precisely because it might have prevented the slander. Why wait for a crime to be committed, and only then reveal a law against it? Who defines what God ought to have done? certainly not you!

Logic defines it.  Logically, if His goal is to prevent a crime, He ought to declare it a crime beforehand.  How are people supposed to abide by a law that He hasn't even revealed?

But more to the point, you seemed to be trying to claim it as some sort of prophetic evidence of the authenticity of the Quran. For that to work, the prophecy has to come before the associated event, not after. That is an assumption on your part. And it is incorrect.

Again, not an assumption.  Just plain logic, or maybe I should say semantics.  A prediction must precede the event; otherwise it would be a "postdiction".  Whatever you call it, it wouldn't be very impressive.

A very specific prophecy of nine years would be much more remarkable than a vague "in a few years". If it turned out to be true, which as I said, it really wasn't. It took fourteen years to recapture the territory about which the prophecy was made. But undeniably it did come true! You are left to nitpicking.

I don't think it's nitpicking to expect God to get His facts straight.  Is He only approximately omniscient or something?

How many times do I need to tell you that these comments make little difference to the truth of the Quran. Even if Gibbon's quoted comments are not true the prophecy is still unbelievable and yet it came true.

No, the prophecy is not unbelievable at all, but I think you're missing the point.  I don't much care whether Gibbon did or did not make the statement.  what I care about, and what you should care about, is that your sources are lying to you.

And let me repeat: I don't mean to insult your sources. I'm sure they are good people, whose only purpose is to spread what they regard as the truth.  If they fail to check their own sources, or if they "embellish" or even fabricate a story to achieve this greater purpose, no doubt they believe that the end justifies the means.

But the point is that over and over again, the sources upon which you rely for evidence show themselves to be unreliable (to put it charitably).  If they are wrong about what Gibbon allegedly said, and what H. G. Wells and the others allegedly said, then how do you know they are not also wrong about what Muhammad allegedly said?  Or what Allah allegedly said?  How do you know it's not all embellishment and fabrication?

Edited by Ron Webb - 01 August 2015 at 8:17am

The Saint wrote: Your ignorance and total lack of understanding would appall people but I have grown used to your absolute disregard for faith. Which you freely insult and ridicule oblivious to how hurtful it could be to those who have faith.

To be honest, I do find most religious beliefs to be a bit ridiculous (and except for Islam I bet you do too).  It may be that this attitude seeps into my writing from time to time, but I try not to let it.  Can you give an example of my insulting or ridiculing Islam?

The first positive impact of Islam in the world can be seen in the encouragement of Muslims to the pursuit of knowledge, [blah blah blah]...

Still copy/pasting from anonymous sources, I see.  Yes, I think we are all aware that Islam made great advances in its early years (a.k.a. its "Golden Age"); but as the centuries passed and the world progressed, Islam remained wilfully stagnant and increasingly out of step with secular knowledge and civil society.  It has achieved virtually nothing in the past five hundred years or more.

As for "declaring women equal to men", surely you're joking.  Can a woman marry four husbands?  Does her testimony have the same force in an Islamic court?  Is her inheritance equal to that of her brothers?  And  or "equality of all humans"?  Is a Muslim equal to a non-Muslim according to the Quran?

What notable successes can Islam claim, aside from flying planes into buildings, blowing up mosques and kidnapping young girls for sex slavery?

If that is a reference to 9/11 I shall ask you what proof do you have that Muslims did it? Why not the Jews who seemed to have gained in many ways because of the hate and scorn heaped on Muslims because of the propaganda.

Mosques that are being blown-up are absolutely un-Islamic acts and they is thoroughly deplorable.

Kidnapping young girls is a new one. Where did you pick this one from? LOL........you should hardly be talking about this........particularly issue since the West runs multi billion dollar businesses exploiting children, teenagers and women. Even your churches are not free of this sickness. And rape as I have already told you is pandemic in the US, making it the rape capital of the world.

If we talk about perversions, the west has them all. The latest addition is same sex-relationships, which though not new are now legal in most parts of the west. Absolutely revolting.    

Which "puppet rulers" are you talking about? The theocracy in Iran has broad popular support, as I understand it.

I am talking about Saddam Hussain who was western protege against Iran for a long, long time. But when times changed he became a villian overnight almost. I am talking about Saudi Arabia, Jordan, who are clents. Libya which was given a long rope and then when it became politically expedient that rope was pulled.

OTOH there is Israel. Another protege. Its defence is reprehensible and unforgivable.

The military dictatorship in Egypt was tossed out by a popular uprising, but then the Egyptians voted in the Muslim Brotherhood.   

The Muslim Brotherhood is anathema. So, a military ruler was foisted on Egypt.

Afghanistan's Taliban were forced out by the West after 9/11, but again the Aghanis elected another bunch who don't seem to be much better.

And who do you think is behind the status quo there? The West, yes!

It really seems that every time Muslims "fight back" against radical Islam, they opt for even more radical Islam.


What is radicalism? Political�orientation of those who favour revolutionary change in government and society. Why do these people seek revolutionary change? Because the puppeteers impose or try to impose their policies on them which they have been doing since colonial eras!
If the west will not mend its ways the said radicalisation shall worsen.

I discussed a few examples in the "Science is AWESOME!" thread, notably the amazing advances in dentistry and medicine in general. Think about how a dentist can drill a hole in your tooth, extract the nerve, and patch it up in some ways better than new -- and all without any pain! Isn't that progress? By comparison, the best religion can do is teach me that I deserve my toothache because I am a bad person.


That is pure BS. The Quran says that if you need advice or help you must go to the experts. The expert in this case is a dentist who can help in resolving issues with your teeth.

The Quran and the Hadiths both encourage Muslims to seek knowledge. That is how you get your doctors, engineers, scientists and accountants.

I may have also mentioned GPS technology, which can determine my location on this planet accurate to within a few meters. Think about what that means: with a tiny electronic device in my pocket, I can never be lost, ever! Compare that to Moses, wandering in the desert for forty years! What a pity he all he had was God to guide him.

God is enough! Only you do not know that. And you do not even want to know.

Moses PBUH was well-guided. And he taught jews so well that they became the most knowledgeable, successful, intelligent and enterprising people in the world.

Look at the device in front of you right now, capable of communicating almost instantaneously with people all over the world. The best Allah could do with his Quran was to disseminate it orally and via manual copying, which took hundreds of years.


You do not really know if that was the best he could do? You are simply trying to assert your own importance as a so called modern and sophisticated man.

Allah SWT simply chose a method of revelation. His miracle is that He preserved His message and made it spread all over the planet and he alone knows where else. And despite your presumably, best efforts you could deny its genuineness and truthfulness.

I am reminded of what Jesus PBUH said to his followers and disciples. I have yet many things to tell you but you cannot bear them now. he said he will send them a Comforter who will lead you into all truth. Now this is a divine sign which tells us that for every period there are specific rules and arrangements. Human intelligence can only absorb a certain amount of progress over a period of time. Therefore, was given proofs of divine evidence that suited his times. And Muhammad was given evidences that people of his time could recognise.

Today, he has given us computers and mobile and other gadgets which are markers of scientific advancements but He did not give you anything even remotely resembling the device with which He spoke to Moses PBUH. Or, how He summoned His servant Muhammad PBUH to the Heavens.

Sorry, but I'm not following you at all. Once again, this seems like a series of non sequiturs to me. Yes, individuals and governments can change, and ought to change as circumstances change. Yes, Bin Laden had American support when he was fighting against Russian occupation; but he became their enemy when he plotted against the Americans. This makes perfect sense. Why would it arouse your suspicion about his involvement in 9/11?

Yeah, I can see you are not following what you are being told. You are programmed to believe the media and accept its versions as truth. That is how you have been brought-up. You have been made incapable of living a life without the crutches of so called 'modern' life.

Let me ask you if you ever read or studied proof about Bin Laden's alleged involvement in 9/11? Of course, not!

Btw, Laden fought the US war against the Soviets. It was not the other way round!

And tell me why did he became an enemy of America? Equally plausible is that the american policies changed after the Soviet Union was broken-up. it became unsuitable for them to nurture a Mujahid who they knew would never be a friend forever because of opposing ideologies.

America didn't turn on Bin Laden. Bin Laden turned on us. Obviously.

Prove it to me.

Our diversity is kinda the point. In what way are these 3000 sects, churches and bibles persecuted?

Who is talking about persecution? But if you do wish to talk about it, tell what did the white man do with the natives in the US and Australia? How did the white man treat the Africans?

More slanderous nonsense. You can't back up any of these wild accusations; but even if you could, it would be irrelevant. What does any of this have to do with foreigners or outcasts?

You know very well that I can prove every bit I have said.

It does have a lot to do with what we are talking about. Your 'beauty' is not even skin deep. Beneath the exterior you are a horrible people. You are racists. Suffering from delusions of grandeur. You are twisted and depraved in the way you live. There is zero morality in your societies. You have no principles in your foreign policy. In fact you are the only people on earth to have used a clear device and that too against civilians.

In sectarian societies religious minorities often are persecuted for what they believe. They face varying challenges where Buddhists, Hindus, and Jews enjoy a majority, but these states are few (although Hindu India is the world�s second most populous nation). A few at least nominally Christian countries persecute; however, this behavior most often reflects authoritarian politics (in former communist states) rather than theology. In a few cases, though, the Orthodox Church relies on the government for support against other Christian faiths.

In contrast, majority Muslim nations almost uniformly persecute. The only question is how virulent the repression.

Let us have examples.


Believers are mistreated everywhere, but Christians most suffer in the birthplace of Christianity.

Which is Israel.

The Iraq invasion and Arab Spring have loosed a campaign of religious cleansing across the Middle East.

Who invaded Iraq? And why? Who caused civil wars there?

Again, not an assumption. Just plain logic, or maybe I should say semantics. A prediction must precede the event; otherwise it would be a "postdiction". Whatever you call it, it wouldn't be very impressive.

The prophecy about a Roman victory preceded the instance! Btw, there are other prophecies as well.

Here are a few samples:

1. "Their skins will bear witness against them as to what they have been doing" (41:21)

The finger prints system at borders, criminal investigation cells and immigration centres prove the fulfillment of this Quranic prophecy.

2. And after him We said to the Children of Israel, 'Dwell Ye in the promised land; and when the time of the promise of the Latter Days come, We shall bring you together out of various people." (17:105)

Creation of Israel and gathering of Sephardic, Ashkenazi and the Jews of many other different races in Israel proves the authenticity of this prophecy and hence Quran.

3. "They will alter Allah's creation." (4:120)

The holy Quran has prophesied the plastic surgery, genetic engineering and cloning in this short and concise sentence.

4. "And when the rivers are made to flow into each other." (81:7)

"He has made the two bodies of water flow. They will one day meet. Between them there is a barrier; they cannot encroach one upon the other." (55:20,21)

"And He it is Who shall merge the two seas together. This palatable and sweet, that saltish and bitter. And between them He has (presently) placed a barrier and a massive partition." (25:54)

This phenomenal prophecy is an excellent proof of truthfulness of Quran. It was beyond imagination of any one living 1400 years ago to even think of linking of oceans which we see today in Panama and Suez canals.

I don't think it's nitpicking to expect God to get His facts straight. Is He only approximately omniscient or something?

He, in His infinite wisdom tells us what he deems fit. he knows what you do not. You cannot decide how things should happen.

No, the prophecy is not unbelievable at all, but I think you're missing the point. I don't much care whether Gibbon did or did not make the statement. what I care about, and what you should care about, is that your sources are lying to you.

Which part of the prophecy is a lie?

But the point is that over and over again, the sources upon which you rely for evidence show themselves to be unreliable (to put it charitably). If they are wrong about what Gibbon allegedly said, and what H. G. Wells and the others allegedly said, then how do you know they are not also wrong about what Muhammad allegedly said?

There is absolutely no reliance on any external source to learn the truth. Because the truth came in the Quran and every bit of comment, post or opinion is evaluated against what the Quran said. And we need no substantiation for the veracity of the Quran.

To know what the Prophet PBUH said we have the Hadiths. And to confirm what is right in the Hadiths we have the Quran.

People like HG and Gibbon are quote only so that people like you may believe.

Or what Allah allegedly said? How do you know it's not all embellishment and fabrication?

Fabrication is inconsistent. Allah and His word are not. Besides Islam makes a huge amount of sense to me. Alhamdollliah.

Allah SWT says in the Quran: Surah 4 Verse 82

Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other than Allah they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.

That is a challenge for you. Go and find an inconsistency in the Quran.

The Saint wrote: If that is a reference to 9/11 I shall ask you what proof do you have that Muslims did it? Why not the Jews who seemed to have gained in many ways because of the hate and scorn heaped on Muslims because of the propaganda.

Well, we have Bin Laden's video confession, just for one thing.  What evidence do you have that the Jews (which Jews) were involved?

Kidnapping young girls is a new one. Where did you pick this one from? LOL........

Have you heard of Boko Haram?

you should hardly be talking about this........particularly issue since the West runs multi billion dollar businesses exploiting children, teenagers and women. Even your churches are not free of this sickness. And rape as I have already told you is pandemic in the US, making it the rape capital of the world. If we talk about perversions, the west has them all.

First, I am Canadian, not American; but yes, the number of reported rapes is probably much higher in the west than in Muslim countries.  Sharia makes it almost impossible to get a conviction for rape, so most do not get reported.  That doesn't mean it's not happening.  It just means we'll never know the true extent of it.

Also, the west has much more strict definitions of exploitation and rape.  Many of Muhammad's sexual liaisons (with a nine year old girl, with his slaves, with multiple wives) would have been considered statutory rape in our culture.  Plus, sharia doesn't even recognize marital rape as a crime.  So it's hard to compare.

However, the point I was making was that Islam provides a religious justification for various kinds of exploitation.  At least we know it's wrong.

The latest addition is same sex-relationships, which though not new are now legal in most parts of the west. Absolutely revolting.

If you don't approve of same-sex relationships, you don't have to be involved in one.  What's revolting is the idea that you or I have any right to tell others who they can or cannot love.  It's no different than telling them who they can or cannot worship.  There is no compulsion in religion, nor in love.

What notable successes can Islam claim, aside from flying planes into buildings, blowing up mosques and kidnapping young girls for sex slavery? Muslims have at last begun fighting back against their puppet rulers who in turn are supported by the former colonialists. Who have milked the Muslims lands of most of their natural resources. They have begun throwing-off the yoke of bondage of foreign, pagan forces. Which "puppet rulers" are you talking about? I am talking about Saddam Hussain who was western protege against Iran for a long, long time. But when times changed he became a villian overnight almost. I am talking about Saudi Arabia, Jordan, who are clents. Libya which was given a long rope and then when it became politically expedient that rope was pulled.

And which of these countries do you regard as "notable successes"?

The Muslim Brotherhood is anathema. So, a military ruler was foisted on Egypt.

Do you think a government dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood would have been a "notable success"?

Afghanistan's Taliban were forced out by the West after 9/11, but again the Aghanis elected another bunch who don't seem to be much better. And who do you think is behind the status quo there? The West, yes!

I'm not sure there is a "status quo" at the moment.  The 2014 election was flawed by sectarian violence and widespread fraud.  The UN and US continue to intervene, without which the country would quickly descend into chaos.  Whatever your view on the situation, I hardly think you'll find any "notable successes" there.

What is radicalism? Political orientation of those who favour revolutionary change in government and society.

No, you're thinking of "revolutionary".  By "radical" I mean extreme, fundamentalist.  I mean governments that chop off hands and stone adulterers and murder apostates and mandate niqabs and deny freedom of religion.

That is pure BS. The Quran says that if you need advice or help you must go to the experts. The expert in this case is a dentist who can help in resolving issues with your teeth. The Quran and the Hadiths both encourage Muslims to seek knowledge. That is how you get your doctors, engineers, scientists and accountants.

My point is that the Quran did not teach us how to extract the nerve of a tooth without pain.  Secular, liberal, democratic western society did that.  For at least the past five centuries, virtually all such advances in science and medicine, and all the other things that have materially and spectacularly improved the condition of humankind, have come from western and non-Muslim cultures.  If success is defined has providing benefits to human life, then Islam has been a failure.

God is enough! Only you do not know that.

Fine,  Next time you are lost, try praying to God and see if that helps.  I'll use a GPS, thanks.

You do not really know if that was the best he could do? You are simply trying to assert your own importance as a so called modern and sophisticated man.

Actually, you're right.  If Allah actually existed, He could do much better in communicating.  IMHO the fact that He does not is ample evidence that He does not exist.

Let me ask you if you ever read or studied proof about Bin Laden's alleged involvement in 9/11? Of course, not!

There is more proof of Bin Laden's involvement in 9/11 than there is of Allah's involvement in the Quran.

And tell me why did he became an enemy of America? Equally plausible is that the american policies changed after the Soviet Union was broken-up. it became unsuitable for them to nurture a Mujahid who they knew would never be a friend forever because of opposing ideologies.

The two propositions are not mutually exclusive.

Who is talking about persecution? But if you do wish to talk about it, tell what did the white man do with the natives in the US and Australia? How did the white man treat the Africans?

You asked earlier, "why is the individual an outcast if he speaks a different language?"  I'm not sure I understood you but I assumed you meant some sort of persecution.

And let's try to keep this discussion in the current century, please.  Without a doubt, terrible things were done to minorities in the past, by all cultures.  My point is that we have learned from those failures and progressed in our ethical standards.  Except for traditional Muslims, who do not believe that progress is necessary or possible.

More slanderous nonsense. You can't back up any of these wild accusations; but even if you could, it would be irrelevant. What does any of this have to do with foreigners or outcasts? You know very well that I can prove every bit I have said.

No doubt you can quote "sources" who make such claims.  That's not the same as proving them.

It does have a lot to do with what we are talking about. Your 'beauty' is not even skin deep. Beneath the exterior you are a horrible people. You are racists. Suffering from delusions of grandeur. You are twisted and depraved in the way you live. There is zero morality in your societies. You have no principles in your foreign policy. In fact you are the only people on earth to have used a clear device and that too against civilians.

If I said such things about Muslims I would be banned from the discussion board.

In contrast, majority Muslim nations almost uniformly persecute. The only question is how virulent the repression. Let us have examples.

The article I was quoting lists many examples: "The Commission highlighted 27 countries for particularly vicious treatment of religious minorities. Eleven are strong Muslim-majority states. Eleven are communist or formerly communist. Two are other kinds of dictatorships, one is a Hindu-majority state, one has a Christian majority, and one has a more equal sectarian division."

Believers are mistreated everywhere, but Christians most suffer in the birthplace of Christianity. Which is Israel.

No, the article does not mention Israel.  By "the birthplace of Christianity" they mean the Middle East as a whole.

Again, not an assumption. Just plain logic, or maybe I should say semantics. A prediction must precede the event; otherwise it would be a "postdiction". Whatever you call it, it wouldn't be very impressive. The prophecy about a Roman victory preceded the instance!

But we were discussing "the incident of Hazrat Aisha RA", not the Roman victory over the Persians.  Specifically, I was suggesting that the timing of the revelation seems rather self-serving of Muhammad.  There is no good reason for Allah not to have revealed the law before the incident occurred, so that those who were unjustly accusing Aisha would know that they were wrong to do so.

Btw, there are other prophecies as well.

None of these prophecies are very impressive either, but I won't be stampeded.  Pick your best example and we'll discuss it.  (Maybe in a different thread.  This one is getting pretty long in the tooth.)

Which part of the prophecy is a lie?

Well, the part that says the Romans will be victorious "within nine years" (as your translator renders it, though "within a few years" might be a better translation).  But I wasn't talking about the prophecy as a lie.  I'm talking about the numerous times you have quoted Muslim apologetic sources and i have shown that they were lying, or at least in reckless disregard for the truth.  When are you going to realize that things you find on the Internet -- especially anonymous sources -- are not necessarily true?

There is absolutely no reliance on any external source to learn the truth. Because the truth came in the Quran and every bit of comment, post or opinion is evaluated against what the Quran said. And we need no substantiation for the veracity of the Quran.

Why not?

That is a challenge for you. Go and find an inconsistency in the Quran.

They are legion (just Google "Quran contradictions"), but I won't stampede you either.  My favourite is verse 18:86, where the sun sets "in a spring of murky water".