I have no idea why BP closed the thread: BFS I did. I quoted one person and gave him credit. Go get glasses or learn how to read. I can claim that I know such and such a person who's a "native" speaker of a language too, but if I don't provide references, then I might as well claim the moon is made of cheese. Sorry, but the evidence shows that you can't read. Dawood's translation of the Qur'an is full of innaccuracies. Get a clue. No it doesn't. They are "virgins" by nature, because they are "pure", but the Arabic word "houris" is inclusive of more than just virginity. It's an all inclusive term that denotes a morally uprighteous, beautiful, and pure spouses. You don't know what you are talking about. Are you really dumb? I already explained myself. The hadith literature has varying levels of authenticity. In other words, there is a "science of hadith" that attributes ratings to various sayings that are attributed to the prophet. The hadith that states the numbers of virgins in paradise is classified as "weak", meaning that it is highly unbelievable. But, you're too stupid to realize that the hadith compilers were meticulous in everything they recorded, from hadiths that can be described as highly authentic or "mutawattir", to weak, or "daif". You can't even read your own source quote. That was an interpretation by someone that has absolutely no basis in the Qur'an. I said Muslims don't have accept hadiths that are classified as weak. Learn how to read. You spoke to no expert. I referenced a copy of Qur'an with its Tafsir and translation done by Muhammad Asad, a well known Muslim scholar. All you have is someone you claim is a "native" speaker. Well, I have ten Islamic scholars in my family who all tell me you're wrong. See, I can claim something without referencing anyone specifically either. Yes. You do need to stop. You have no idea what you're talking about.