Direct link:
https://d.tube/#!/v/vladtepesblog/QmYYLE2Qu1AbAb1DA6m5zC3u6wC7EUWqPTawTvVwhBiSZw
I did find it very interesting that the Koran I have, the one recommended to Robert Spencer by the Finsbury Mosque imam, goes directly from chapter 24:47 to 24:51 skipping those two paragraphs altogether.
CORRECTION: My Koran DOES have these paragraphs, but they are built into paragraph 47 of chapter 24.
A year or so ago, a friend of ours ordered the complete Hadiths in English and it was also missing the most odious ones. Quite interesting how Islam handles its own Scripture.
You might find this web site of interest. It is kind of old and not recently updated as near as I can tell. It is Australian, Australian Islamist Monitor Islam Under Scrutiny. The page referenced in the link is how translations are sugar coated to conform with western ideology
http://islammonitor.org/index.php?option=com_content&id=4408:islams-text-is-sugar-coated-in-translation
Interesting. “Reliance of the traveller” was translated to english by an american convert, he chose not to translate the chapter on slavery because it “no longer applies”. Still, he left the chapter itself in, only in Arabic. i think it’s kitman (lying by omission).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliance_of_the_Traveller
“Certain sections of the book were left untranslated (although the original Arabic text is retained), as Nuh considered them irrelevant to modern societies. These parts include a section on slavery, describing the rights and duties of slaves and their masters, as well as some smaller sections such as, for example, a discussion on fixing utensils using gold.”
PDF here:
http://deanbibleministries.org/dbmfiles/notes/2018-ChaferConf-Hadian-01-Document.pdf
I wish soembody would translate those sections. I found something online, but commenters say it’s bogus.
I had a discussion (online) with a muslim recently about the stone. He kept saying muslims don’t worship it. I told him muslims consider it a relic, and travel halfway around the world to walk circles around it, in the hope of touching or kissing it. In my book, a relic is by definition an object that’s worshipped, and those rituals are worship as well, but he kept denying it. The denial is sort of a performative act I guess, not a conclusion arrived it though logical reasoning. So there can’t be a dialogue, really.
At least he had the decency to not utter death threats.
I also pointed out Ali said it’s sentient, but I didn’t get a reaction. And it has been called the right hand of God, although in a metaphorical way it seems.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Stone#Meaning_and_symbolism
“And this stone has a pair of eyes, ears and a tongue and it opened its mouth upon the order of Allah, who put that confirmation in it and ordered to witness it to all those worshippers who come for Hajj.””
“[T]he Prophet has named the (Black Stone) the “right hand of God” (yamin-Allah), and for purpose. In fact one poses there one’s hand to conclude the pact, and God obtains there our pact of allegiance and submission. In the qur’anic terminology, God is the king, and … in (his) realm there is a metropolis (Umm al-Qurra) and in the metropolis naturally a palace (Bait-Allah, home of God). If a subject wants to testify to his loyalty, he has to go to the royal palace and conclude personally the pact of allegiance. The right hand of the invisible God must be visible symbolically. And that is the al-Hajar al-Aswad, the Black Stone in the Ka’bah.”
I believe that Muslims think that the Virgin Mary is the third person of God, also that she is Miriam the sister of Moses, making Jesus his nephew. Another sura combines the stories of the Tower of Babel, the Exodus and the events of the book of Esther into one story. Events which took place approximately at 1000 year intervals and in 3 different countries.