Hello,
I have a question. Does the Quran say that the previous scriptures are corrupted? If yes, then why the Quran instruct to refer to them?
Also, the dead sea scrolls show there is little difference between the bible today and the one that is 2000 years old.
This article confused me a lot.:
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Corruption_of_Previous_Scriptures_(Qur'an_2:79)
I understand your confusion. It's a natural result if one is unaware of the hidden history of the origins of Islam.
The contradicting statements on Jews, Christians and their scripture inside Quran can only be understood when one understands the true history of Islam.
Arabs and Jews were once allied in the early days of Islam (even though there was no faith called Islam back then, nor did they call themselves muslims). In early islamic history, they collaborated to retake Jerusalem among others.
At some point in history the Arabs turned against their judeo-christian allies. This led to the self-contradicting statements inside Quran. The Quranic text was manipulated by later authors to try to textually confirm this schism but did a poor job resulting in the confusing and self-contradicting statements we find today in Quran.
Btw, I disagree the dead sea scrolls confirm the Bible was unaltered. I think you are misunderstanding the DSS. Some of the DSS repeat Old Testament texts. The Bible however is a compilation of multiple books (not only the Old testament) which has changed a lot over time, just like the Quran.
The DSS shed a new light on the history of Islam. The judeo-nazarene elements found inside the DSS can still be found in Islam and Quran today. As I understand it, Islam sprung from judeo-nazarism. Judeo-nazarism itself was a reaction on a judeo-christian faith that was being hijacked by Rome and turned into a gentile/universal faith. Judeo-nazarenes heavily insisted on the Law (Thora) and didn't allow anyone to speak about the faith when they weren't circumcized or respected the dietary laws (among others).
These judeo-nazarens were oppressed by Byzantine Romans. Chased out of Palestine and Syria (see destruction of the Qumran site and the reason why they hid their texts in caves), they fled to the south, indoctrinated their Arab neighbours (see waraqa). Forged an alliance to retake Jerusalem and Temple Mount from the Byzantine Romans. Because of internal conflict the allliance broke, led to a schism with the Jews and Christians - resulting in a Quranic text which both speaks good and bad about Jews and Christians and their scriptures.
Islam is a Jewish (Persian) invention. The Arabs broke loose and formed their own sect (Sunni Islam) of the sect while there was a schism which turns out to be that Shia sect although Shia was conjectured together later. These Jews were as you say allied in ways, rallied by Persian clergymen and why the annexation of Persia was simple due to already present infiltration alternatively indoctrination.
Be well
Qarael Amenuel
@MoF I disagree early Islam was Jewish. I repeat they were a judeo-christian more specifically judeo-nazarene sect in origin. I can easily prove this to you with archaelogical evidence.
See this inscription at the Baths of Hammat Gader/Gadara dated 662-63 CE:
(http://www.bibleandscience.com/store/catalog/images/Baths%20of%20Gadara.jpg)
Notice the christian cross (top left corner)? This is a christian symbol. There is no way a jewish ideology would use a cross symbol.
More evidence?
Check this "islamic" coin:
(https://fayezthezealot.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/muhammad-and-cross.jpg)
Again the cross symbol. Are you saying a Jewish ideology would mint coins with a christian cross on it? :rotfl:
If this isn't sufficient evidence for you... just look at the inscription on the dome of the rock. Ever seen a jewish inscription speaking of the messiah Jesus son of Mary? ::)
Concerning the rapid conquest of Persia this is historically explained by the instability of the Sassanid Empire during that time.
Quote from: runninglikezebras on February 11, 2017, 09:29:49 AM
See this inscription at the Baths of Hammat Gader/Gadara dated 662-63 CE:
(http://www.bibleandscience.com/store/catalog/images/Baths%20of%20Gadara.jpg)
Notice the christian cross (top left corner)? This is a christian symbol. There is no way a jewish ideology would use a cross symbol.
Running... This particular claim falls by itself. The baths of Gader were ROMAN not jews and they were used by BYZANTINE rich people specially during the VII century AC. when they became popular.
There are greek inscriptions with poems and salutations to the emperor's wife. Jews did not rule Israel in VII. And the baths already existed having beig built by romans. It is PERFECTLY normal to find Greek inscriptions (with cross or not). Byzantio had accepted Christianism.
Quote from: virginia on February 11, 2017, 11:54:45 AM
Running... This particular claim falls by itself. The baths of Gader were ROMAN not jews and they were used by BYZANTINE rich people specially during the VII century AC. when they became popular.
There are greek inscriptions with poems and salutations to the emperor's wife. Jews did not rule Israel in VII. And the baths already existed having beig built by romans. It is PERFECTLY normal to find Greek inscriptions (with cross or not). Byzantio had accepted Christianism.
You are mistaking. These buildings were damaged by an earthquake and restored in 633 by the Umayyad caliph who ruled from Damascus. The inscription reads:
In the days of the servant of God Muʿāwiya (abdalla Maavia), the commander
of the faithful (amēra almoumenēn) the hot baths of the
people there were saved and rebuilt
by ʿAbd Allāh son of Abū Hāshim (Abouasemou), the
governor, on the fifth of the month of December,
on the second day (of the week), in the 6th year of the indiction,
in the year 726 of the colony, according to the Arabs (kata Arabas) the 42nd year,
for the healing of the sick, under the care of Ioannes,
the official of Gadara.
This inscription is not Roman but Ummayad.
Quote from: runninglikezebras on February 11, 2017, 09:29:49 AM
@MoF I disagree early Islam was Jewish. I repeat they were a judeo-christian more specifically judeo-nazarene sect in origin. I can easily prove this to you with archaelogical evidence.
See this inscription at the Baths of Hammat Gader/Gadara dated 662-63 CE:
(http://www.bibleandscience.com/store/catalog/images/Baths%20of%20Gadara.jpg)
Notice the christian cross (top left corner)? This is a christian symbol. There is no way a jewish ideology would use a cross symbol.
More evidence?
Check this "islamic" coin:
(https://fayezthezealot.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/muhammad-and-cross.jpg)
Again the cross symbol. Are you saying a Jewish ideology would mint coins with a christian cross on it? :rotfl:
If this isn't sufficient evidence for you... just look at the inscription on the dome of the rock. Ever seen a jewish inscription speaking of the messiah Jesus son of Mary? ::)
Concerning the rapid conquest of Persia this is historically explained by the instability of the Sassanid Empire during that time.
I agree that Persia was a weak empire, but the conquerors were Persians in origin themselves. Their faith perception created Islam. The reason of the assimilators being Persians may have aided the annexation and the phenomenon called Muhammed bringing back "true religion" amidst spiritual chaos.
Islam is anti-christian, adherents of that would hardly have conjured Islam. It is also opposing a certain variation of Judaism, and you could therefore say it is an offshoot of Judaism which was radical minded and obsessed with only God so much it blinded their judgment. They made a separation between Creator and Creation that the other groups had made into one. So Islam is in essence a dualism, a creation existing besides God while ancient Judaism, the group the Islamists assaulted, were thinking Creator and Creation was a symbiosis of sort. This is what "sons of God" comes from which the Islamists did not understand while under the flag of Islam which means being healthy and sound.
The sect called Pharisees might as well be the group resulting in Islam which adherents had opposed the challenge of their traditions which much resemble Islam. It is where I would say: "Pharisees = Persians". Even the tendency to shift between Fe and Pe in saying Fars or Pars is a nice indicator.
Be well
Qarael Amenuel
Quote from: farati on February 11, 2017, 06:31:31 AM
Hello,
I have a question. Does the Quran say that the previous scriptures are corrupted? If yes, then why the Quran instruct to refer to them?
Also, the dead sea scrolls show there is little difference between the bible today and the one that is 2000 years old.
This article confused me a lot.:
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Corruption_of_Previous_Scriptures_(Qur'an_2:79)
The Quran does refer to the Injeel and the Torah - not necessarily to the Bible. At least not to the Bible that we have in our hands today.
Firstly the Gospel parts of the Bible were written by Mark, Matthew etc - and not by Jesus. That's why there are different versions of the Gospel ...... according to ......X or Y.
Secondly, one could potentially find the original work of Mark and the others in geographical digs, but that still does not prove that what is found is the original version of the Injeel.
Personally I do have the King James Version of the Bible and read it - but for example the part where it says that God (the all powerful) needs to rest in this Bible is a clear contradiction about the omnipotence of God and it proves that there have been changes to the Bible (in the least).
Does any of ayets ordered Muslims to take huden (guidance) from Injeel or Tewrat?
Even it's too obvious, Injeel and Tewrat are huden and kitab (set of laws) only for Beni Israil and nations from them. None of Muslims should follow anything from those two.
Form of the Qur'an is different then Tewrat or Injeel. Tewrat is totally explained (fa-sad-lam) and one can read it from its start to the end and get his huden. Injeel is specific, because Allah's Words in El-Mesih a.s. were spoken in alegories then explained in detail (fa-sad-lam), same as in Tewrat. This is because some of the creatures can get huden only from something obvious, w/o using deduction.
The language of the Qur'an is specific, because it's impossible to understand it w/o using deduction. With deduction ayets of the Qur'an are enriched (kaf-ra-mim). None of Beni Israil was invited to follow the Qur'an alone, because they can't understand it. They should take from the Qur'an only informations about what was changed (edited) in huden they have, these ayets are fully explained (fa-sad-lam) and can be understood by any sane person.
Injeel and Tewrat are not corrupted, because there is musaddaq (informer about their truth), which is the Qur'an. But, Injeel and Tewrat w/o informations about them in the Qur'an will misguide Beni Israil in many situations.
Not even christians consider the Bible the word of God, they say it is an inspired collection of books, not revelation itself or the word of God. Some of its contents, yes, they believe it may be the word of God, but the books as such are not. That is what the followers of the Bible think and believe.
When in a muslim forum some people try to equate those books with the Qur'an, it is really preposterous and redolent of coloniser mindset.
Salaam
Quote from: Aladin on May 29, 2017, 09:43:24 AM
Does any of ayets ordered Muslims to take huden (guidance) from Injeel or Tewrat?
Even it's too obvious, Injeel and Tewrat are huden and kitab (set of laws) only for Beni Israil and nations from them. None of Muslims should follow anything from those two.
Form of the Qur'an is different then Tewrat or Injeel. Tewrat is totally explained (fa-sad-lam) and one can read it from its start to the end and get his huden. Injeel is specific, because Allah's Words in El-Mesih a.s. were spoken in alegories then explained in detail (fa-sad-lam), same as in Tewrat. This is because some of the creatures can get huden only from something obvious, w/o using deduction.
The language of the Qur'an is specific, because it's impossible to understand it w/o using deduction. With deduction ayets of the Qur'an are enriched (kaf-ra-mim). None of Beni Israil was invited to follow the Qur'an alone, because they can't understand it. They should take from the Qur'an only informations about what was changed (edited) in huden they have, these ayets are fully explained (fa-sad-lam) and can be understood by any sane person.
Injeel and Tewrat are not corrupted, because there is musaddaq (informer about their truth), which is the Qur'an. But, Injeel and Tewrat w/o informations about them in the Qur'an will misguide Beni Israil in many situations.
To believe in a script would mean one would have to read it.
But using the logic in the post above, does any ayat tell Muslims to believe in all the volumes of scriptures (Hadith) that came after the Quran?
There's a big difference: Tewrat and Injeel are from Allah swt for sure.
I don't see importance of them for Muslims. Why you're so interested in the Bible (or better: Tewrat and Injeel) if you Muslims?
Quote from: Aladin on May 29, 2017, 03:14:58 PM
There's a big difference: Tewrat and Injeel are from Allah swt for sure.
I don't see importance of them for Muslims. Why you're so interested in the Bible (or better: Tewrat and Injeel) if you Muslims?
Does the Quran not say that the believers are to believe in ALL of the scriptures and make no differentiation between ANY of the prophets? So those prophet who are messengers and gave books to humans need to be followed just like Muhammad.
Tewrat and Injeel are for Beni Israil, and they're "min duni-n-nas".
وَالَّذِينَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَا أُنزِلَ مِن قَبْلِكَ
This doesn't mean that I have to follow anything from Tewrat and/or Injeel, but I'm saying: they're from Allah.
All the creatures are believers, but some are telling so (mu'minoon) and some are rejecting their belief (kafiroon). Some are liars (kaziboon) and some are hiding (munafiqoon), some have no knowledge (jahiloon).
I have knowledge that Tewrat and Injeel are from Allah and I'm saying so, it's my 'iman, but I don't need to follow anything from them, since I'm not of Beni Israil.
Don't forget that there're (at least) two types of creatures in el-'alemoon: el-jinn and en-nas. Not all of persons you see are en-nas.
You don't need to follow all of en-nebiyy. How can you?
Quote from: Aladin on May 29, 2017, 09:02:48 PM
Tewrat and Injeel are for Beni Israil, and they're "min duni-n-nas".
وَالَّذِينَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَا أُنزِلَ مِن قَبْلِكَ
This doesn't mean that I have to follow anything from Tewrat and/or Injeel, but I'm saying: they're from Allah.
All the creatures are believers, but some are telling so (mu'minoon) and some are rejecting their belief (kafiroon). Some are liars (kaziboon) and some are hiding (munafiqoon), some have no knowledge (jahiloon).
I have knowledge that Tewrat and Injeel are from Allah and I'm saying so, it's my 'iman, but I don't need to follow anything from them, since I'm not of Beni Israil.
Don't forget that there're (at least) two types of creatures in el-'alemoon: el-jinn and en-nas. Not all of persons you see are en-nas.
You don't need to follow all of en-nebiyy. How can you?
My question was about the verse in the Quran where believers are asked to believe in ALL the scriptures and and make not distinction between ANY of the prophets. I am not sure if I made my question clear earlier. in regard to those verses in the Quran...
Also, how do you know you are not from the children of Israel? Whether you are white, brown, black or any other shade, you could possibly have genes from the Children of Israel - not that we know what they are - however, those genes would have originated on the Arabian Peninsula (certainly not in Europe) - nevertheless if you look at the genes of Genghis Khan or Prophet Muhammad, you will see that even those genes have spread all over the world.
It's very important to know meaning of the word "beyn", which is mostly rendered as "between", but its meaning is "connection". So, ayet you're telling about is about confirmation that all of them are connected, and we cannot make separation in their connection. Anyways, even with a common understanding of "beyn", nobody can understand that we Muslims have to follow Tewrat/Injeel.
Qur'an told me that I'm not Beni Israil, and I got explanation who they are also. I've found it very important for all of us to know who we are. Most of the people are following revalations which are not for them... some should follow the Qur'an but they're following the Bible, and vice versa.
Yes, you're right about genes... maybe you read in the Bible about mixing humans with "God's sons"; maybe you read in the Qur'an about "Allah's sons", or maybe you understood same by deduction. So, first of all, we have to know "who am I?".
Peace Aladin.
I do not understand the following,quote:
Most of the people are following revalations which are not for them... some should follow the Qur'an but they're following the Bible, and vice versa.
You mean Qoran is not for "Alaalamin" all of them?
GOD bless you.
Peace.
Quote from: Aladin on May 30, 2017, 03:37:33 PM
It's very important to know meaning of the word "beyn", which is mostly rendered as "between", but its meaning is "connection". So, ayet you're telling about is about confirmation that all of them are connected, and we cannot make separation in their connection. Anyways, even with a common understanding of "beyn", nobody can understand that we Muslims have to follow Tewrat/Injeel.
Qur'an told me that I'm not Beni Israil, and I got explanation who they are also. I've found it very important for all of us to know who we are. Most of the people are following revalations which are not for them... some should follow the Qur'an but they're following the Bible, and vice versa.
Yes, you're right about genes... maybe you read in the Bible about mixing humans with "God's sons"; maybe you read in the Qur'an about "Allah's sons", or maybe you understood same by deduction. So, first of all, we have to know "who am I?".
1. How do you know you are not one of the children of Israel as alluded to in my above posting?
2. You have used lots of maybes in relation to what I maybe did - You could have just asked me as this is a dialogue and I would tell you I have read lots of things but am note sure what you link of them is to genetics as related to you being originated from the Children of Israel?
3. You focus on the word "beyn" - please see below http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/2/285/default.htm
2:285
Amana alrrasoolu bima onzila ilayhi min rabbihi waalmu/minoona kullun amana biAllahi wamala-ikatihi wakutubihi warusulihi la nufarriqu bayna ahadin min rusulihi waqaloo samiAAna waataAAna ghufranaka rabbana wa-ilayka almaseeru
Believed the Messenger in what was revealed to him from his Lord and the believers.
All believed in Allah, and His Angels, and His Books, and His Messengers. "Not we make distinction between any of His And they said, "We heard and we obeyed. (Grant) us Your forgiveness our Lord, and to You (is) the return."
Please note that the statement to believe in all His books comes before your word of focus so how is it not permissible to believe in all His books?
So would this make the first Muslims different from the Muslims now if the Muslims today decide not to believe in ALL His books?
Quote from: Aladin on May 30, 2017, 03:37:33 PM
It's very important to know meaning of the word "beyn", which is mostly rendered as "between", but its meaning is "connection". So, ayet you're telling about is about confirmation that all of them are connected, and we cannot make separation in their connection. Anyways, even with a common understanding of "beyn", nobody can understand that we Muslims have to follow Tewrat/Injeel.
Qur'an told me that I'm not Beni Israil, and I got explanation who they are also. I've found it very important for all of us to know who we are. Most of the people are following revalations which are not for them... some should follow the Qur'an but they're following the Bible, and vice versa.
Yes, you're right about genes... maybe you read in the Bible about mixing humans with "God's sons"; maybe you read in the Qur'an about "Allah's sons", or maybe you understood same by deduction. So, first of all, we have to know "who am I?".
Also what about this verse 39:63
For Him (are the) keys (of) the heavens and the earth. And those who disbelieve in (the) Verses (of) Allah, those - they (are) the losers.
Word which was translated as "believe" is "confirming our belief", even that is not a big diffence for your question.
I believe that El-Furqan was sent by Allah, as said in 4:3. Does this mean I have to follow it, even I have to know what is in it? No, I believe it from Allah, and I am stating so.
Just think if anything from the Qur'an is about following Tewrat/Injeel or anything else except what is said in the Qur'an and what Resulullah sawa personally said to somebody. If you know any other source of guidance for last Ummet of humans, please share that info.
I used "maybes" only when I was talking about you, I don't know you. What I told before that needed no "maybe", even I should check all of what I think I know all the time.
You should differ "belief" of "following/obeying". You have to believe in melaiket (angels), but you don't have to obey them. It was said in 2:102 that some of them used to teach sheyateen tricks (sihr) and something more evil, and sheyateen were teaching humans same after that... so you have to believe in them, but you don't need to follow them, if Allah didn't say so.
good logic, el-'alemoon are at least humans (en-nas) and jinn (el-jinnet), but there're few more types of creatures. Yes, all of us have something in the Qur'an, but all of the Qur'an is only for humans (en-nas).
Quote from: Aladin on May 31, 2017, 03:45:46 PM
Word which was translated as "believe" is "confirming our belief", even that is not a big diffence for your question.
I believe that El-Furqan was sent by Allah, as said in 4:3. Does this mean I have to follow it, even I have to know what is in it? No, I believe it from Allah, and I am stating so.
Just think if anything from the Qur'an is about following Tewrat/Injeel or anything else except what is said in the Qur'an and what Resulullah sawa personally said to somebody. If you know any other source of guidance for last Ummet of humans, please share that info.
I used "maybes" only when I was talking about you, I don't know you. What I told before that needed no "maybe", even I should check all of what I think I know all the time.
You should differ "belief" of "following/obeying". You have to believe in melaiket (angels), but you don't have to obey them. It was said in 2:102 that some of them used to teach sheyateen tricks (sihr) and something more evil, and sheyateen were teaching humans same after that... so you have to believe in them, but you don't need to follow them, if Allah didn't say so.
good logic, el-'alemoon are at least humans (en-nas) and jinn (el-jinnet), but there're few more types of creatures. Yes, all of us have something in the Qur'an, but all of the Qur'an is only for humans (en-nas).
I am happy to agree to disagree on this one as I am not out to convince you but only my curiosity why some Hadithists believe in the Hadith scriptures which they say are mentioned in the Quran, however they usually do not follow the previous scriptures and its the first time I am discussing with someone about the logic of this.
I do not intend to disrespect you in this discussion.
You have made a distinction between a translation of the word which is translated to BELIEVE which you have indicated should be indicated to "Confirming the Belief".
Can I ask how you get this translation - a reference or a dictionary?
In terms of your implication that we should believe in Angels but not obey them, well I am not sure about that based on how I read the Quran. For example, many times the angels came down with the message from God so that message was either to be believed, or it was a warning which also had to be believed.
In any case, do you see that in this ayat it is (arguably) stated that believe also in God and the Prophets and the Book in addition to the Angels.
Here, I see that we do believe in God and follow what He tells us. We do believe the prophets if we are alive at their time, as well as follow his books - if they are not corrupted - or if an un-edited/corrupted book or 3rd-person-book is with us as is the Quran.
Re: Furqan - I don't know enough about this but I thought these were the criteria of right and wrong that are both in our souls as well as all the holy books, Torah, Gospel and Quran. In this area I need to find out more.
Did you see my other Ayat that I posted which says believe in the verses of Allah - yet it does not say believe in the verses of a Prophet.
Also, what do you make of the Talmud which is followed by the Jewish people? Do you see this as a scripture similar to the Hadith?
I already told you all, but I'll again and you could stop calling me by names, such as hadithist, quranist... I'm a Muslim and Aladin is my name.
---
At the start of the Qur'an, Allah told us that He's Rabb of el-'alemoon. Later, in surah 'Alaq, He told us that Rabb is teaching the human (el-insan) what he doesn't know by El-Qalem. So, if we wanna know we should check if we're insan, then we should understand what is El-Qalem, and we can learn.
Meaning you're asking about... I understood it by El-Qalem. To help you with that, think if you can tell to somebody "believe!" or "don't believe!"... does it make sense? For translators - yes, but for sane persons - no.
For melaiket... Zachary a.s. was calling Allah for a child and melaiket were sent to talk with him for Allah. They told him that he'll get a son, but he's not sure and he's asking for a sign. He believes in melaiket but he has no trust in them, unless they have a sign (ayet).
Furqan is a word, but Injeel is a word and Tewrat is a word and Qur'an is a word. Words have their meaning and those revalations were called by those words for a reason, if we understand words we'll know reasons. For example, Qur'an means "endless recitation" and Injeel means "exile". I'm not so good in English, so forgive me if I choose some wrong English word.
I believe that you exist, but I don't need to follow you, unless Allah tells me to do so.
Quote from: Aladin on May 31, 2017, 08:23:09 PM
I already told you all, but I'll again and you could stop calling me by names, such as hadithist, quranist... I'm a Muslim and Aladin is my name.
I am sorry you take it as an insult to be called a Hadithist.
I have used two words
Quranist to describe the kind of Islam I follow and
Hadithist to describe the kind of Islam you follow but have difficulty admitting to openly.
I can see your name is Aladin, but if you wish for us to address each other by our names then just start your own posts by addressing other posters by their own names to get reciprocation - if this is indeed what you want...
Quote
At the start of the Qur'an, Allah told us that He's Rabb of el-'alemoon. Later, in surah 'Alaq, He told us that Rabb is teaching the human (el-insan) what he doesn't know by El-Qalem. So, if we wanna know we should check if we're insan, then we should understand what is El-Qalem, and we can learn.
Meaning you're asking about... I understood it by El-Qalem. To help you with that, think if you can tell to somebody "believe!" or "don't believe!"... does it make sense? For translators - yes, but for sane persons - no.
For melaiket... Zachary a.s. was calling Allah for a child and melaiket were sent to talk with him for Allah. They told him that he'll get a son, but he's not sure and he's asking for a sign. He believes in melaiket but he has no trust in them, unless they have a sign (ayet).
Furqan is a word, but Injeel is a word and Tewrat is a word and Qur'an is a word. Words have their meaning and those revalations were called by those words for a reason, if we understand words we'll know reasons. For example, Qur'an means "endless recitation" and Injeel means "exile". I'm not so good in English, so forgive me if I choose some wrong English word.
I believe that you exist, but I don't need to follow you, unless Allah tells me to do so.
I find it strange in a debate when a poster only replies to what he is capable of and ignores the other points made.
I stopped being a Hadithist precisely because they used to issue warnings to their flock - like "I warn you of this.... or that" with nothing to back up their claims.
When I challenged their claims they said those who do not do this will go to Hell.
So I will simply ask you again,
You have made a distinction between a translation of the word which is translated to BELIEVE which you have indicated should be indicated to "Confirming the Belief".
Can I ask how you get this translation - a reference or a dictionary?
In terms of your implication that we should believe in Angels but not obey them, well I am not sure about that based on how I read the Quran. For example, many times the angels came down with the message from God so that message was either to be believed, or it was a warning which also had to be believed.
In any case, do you see that in this ayat it is (arguably) stated that believe also in God and the Prophets and the Book in addition to the Angels.
Here, I see that we do believe in God and follow what He tells us. We do believe the prophets if we are alive at their time, as well as follow his books - if they are not corrupted - or if an un-edited/corrupted book or 3rd-person-book is with us as is the Quran.
Also you kind of overlooked these questions:
Q: Did you see my other Ayat that I posted which says believe in the verses of Allah - yet it does not say believe in the verses of a Prophet.
Q: Also, what do you make of the Talmud which is followed by the Jewish people? Do you see this as a scripture similar to the Hadith?
Once you get over the labels of Sunni, Shia, Muslim, Hadithist, Quranist, I look forward to your reply.
I already told you, but it seems my English is too bad and/or you didn't understand. Let me try again.
Allah told us that He as Rabb is teaching el-insan what he doesn't know by El-Qalem. So:
1) one has to be al-insan
2) Allah has to point His Name/Attribute Rabb to him
3) Allah will use El-Qalem, and at the end
4) that person will know.
I haven's found any dictionary/lexicon or opinion of somebody as a source of learning for el-insan. So, I thought the meaning of that word as I explained. I'm not Allah and I'm not your Rabb, so I cannot teach you same (if you are insan), but I told you what you can do, and I told you one of many examples where that word cannot be "belief", because you cannot order to somebody (not) to believe.
I'm not following hadith, I'm following El-Qur'an and all what is 100% explained by it... some of hadith/science/experience etc. are part of that.
Yes, I saw the other ayet you quoted, but it's same for what we were talking about.
What Beni Israil have as Tewrat and Injeel and Zeboor is in Torah, Talmud, Zohar and other scriptures they're using, since Babylon exile. El-Qur'an is musaddaq for them, which means it is explaining truth in them.
If that's the truth, what you told about melaiket, then why Zachary a.s. needed ayet (sign)? All of sent from Allah came with ayets as a proof.
So, if you have any ayet that any human has to follow Tewrat/Injeel (not humans who came with them), them please enlight me. Task is now easier for you, because of "human" ;)
I know that it will be easier for you if you can find suitable label for me... wish you luck...
Quote from: Aladin on June 01, 2017, 11:33:28 AM
I already told you, but it seems my English is too bad and/or you didn't understand. Let me try again.
Although it would seem English is not your first language you write well enough, but it is underlying logic that does not make sense to me. Thanks for trying again.
Quote
Allah told us that He as Rabb is teaching el-insan what he doesn't know by El-Qalem. So:
1) one has to be al-insan
2) Allah has to point His Name/Attribute Rabb to him
3) Allah will use El-Qalem, and at the end
4) that person will know.
I haven's found any dictionary/lexicon or opinion of somebody as a source of learning for el-insan. So, I thought the meaning of that word as I explained. I'm not Allah and I'm not your Rabb, so I cannot teach you same (if you are insan), but I told you what you can do, and I told you one of many examples where that word cannot be "belief", because you cannot order to somebody (not) to believe.
To tell you the truth, I had not really understood the point you were making before.
I have now understood the point that you wish to make.
The problem here is that we are really back at stage one.
The point here is that I have rejected being a Hadithist (one who says that the Hadith are a part of the faith) and I have become a Quranist (who rejects the Hadith because it contains unreliable, untenable and lets just say tall statements that are not attributable to Muhammad, God or anyone else - other than being Chinese Whispers).
I cannot see where God tells us to follow the Hadith.
You could say, that to teach by the pen - or to teach by written words - could include any information that God writes for humans but this would also include all the holy scriptures and not just the Quran (that were revealed by God).
It surely would not include a scripture that men wrote after the Quran and called the Hadith.
Quote
I'm not following hadith, I'm following El-Qur'an and all what is 100% explained by it... some of hadith/science/experience etc. are part of that.
For me, you seem to be hiding behind a technicality where you are assuming a Hadithist follows only the Hadith.
However, you have stated that you are following the Hadith in your next statement - ie, following Hadith as part of your ideology or version of Islam. This is the definition of Hadithist.
Are you a Shia or a Sunni?
Quote
Yes, I saw the other ayet you quoted, but it's same for what we were talking about.
What Beni Israil have as Tewrat and Injeel and Zeboor is in Torah, Talmud, Zohar and other scriptures they're using, since Babylon exile. El-Qur'an is musaddaq for them, which means it is explaining truth in them.
Ok, so I have understood that you are saying that the Talmud is as authentic for the Jewish folk as is the Hadith for some Muslims?
Quote
So, if you have any ayet that any human has to follow Tewrat/Injeel (not humans who came with them), them please enlight me. Task is now easier for you, because of "human" ;)
I know that it will be easier for you if you can find suitable label for me... wish you luck...
There are verses that say that believers should believe in the Quran, Angels, Books and Prophets, and by believing, they should follow what they are told.
But even if you are going to contend a word called - beyn - that does not seem to have any bearing on the command to believe in these, yet could you please tell me where in the Quran does it tell humans to follow the man-made Hadith as part of faith?
And if you follow the Hadith, do you follow all the Hadith that exist or the ones that you choose to decide are divine?
I seriously do not understand why Hadith could be made divine and part of Islam when they are Chinese Whispers that are attributed to the Prophet's explanation of the faith.
Man, your obsessed with anti-hadith :)
Hadith is as Torah, Talmud, even as your or mine speech or any narration, story, written or spoken text... if it's supported by the Qur'an it's legit and haqq (reality), if it's not then it's batil (illusion).
I'm a Muslim and I plan to die as one.
El-Qalem is not "a pen" nor "the pen"... if we're of el-insan we should know what is it and we'll be able to learn by it from Rabb, what we do not know. Otherwise, we'll stay as jahiloon for sure.
As I said: I belive that Allah created you, but I don't have to follow you, unless Allah swt tells me so.
Nobody needed to follow Muhammed sawa until Allah swt ordered so.
Quote from: Aladin on June 01, 2017, 01:49:32 PM
Man, your obsessed with anti-hadith :)
One could say you are obsessed about the Hadith :)
But seriously, do you not see how this is an important question - especially as you have found yourself on a Quranist website?
Quote
Hadith is as Torah, Talmud, even as your or mine speech or any narration, story, written or spoken text... if it's supported by the Qur'an it's legit and haqq (reality), if it's not then it's batil (illusion).
Indeed for me it turned out to be an illusion and this is why I am interested in openly discussing (for the first time in my life) with someone who believes the Hadith are part of the faith.
Quote
I'm a Muslim and I plan to die as one.
We all do, but the discussion here is about the Hadith being part of the faith or about Islam.
Quote
El-Qalem is not "a pen" nor "the pen"... if we're of el-insan we should know what is it and we'll be able to learn by it from Rabb, what we do not know. Otherwise, we'll stay as jahiloon for sure.
you have not answered my posts above regarding the Hadith - you have admitted that it is important to know between the reality and illusion so it seems a very important question.
Quote
As I said: I belive that Allah created you, but I don't have to follow you, unless Allah swt tells me so.
This is not about winning people over - I have already explained to you that I left the Hadithist ideas and focused on Quranist ideas because I could not find any reasons to follow the Hadith - so I am asking for evidence that you use.
Quote
Nobody needed to follow Muhammed sawa until Allah swt ordered so.
This is not about following - it is a debate about asking for proof and evidence from the Quran that the Hadith are to be followed as part of the faith.
I have tried so hard to find reasons and cannot see any. It naturally interests me to find a Hadithist Muslim on a Quranist website and ask.
Man, you really got a wrong guy, I'm not hadithist, whatever it means and I'm not quranist either. I don't care about your labels.
Quote from: Aladin on June 01, 2017, 03:10:44 PM
Man, you really got a wrong guy, I'm not hadithist, whatever it means and I'm not quranist either. I don't care about your labels.
I explained the definitions and according to
those definitions I thought you already (indirectly) admitted being a Hadithist.
We are both Muslims but one who makes Hadith part of his faith (you) and one who rejects them (me)
Capish? :)
Salam
Ed
The bible itself says it is written by many people, not by God There may be words and paragraphs attirbuted to God himself in the bible, but the bible itself is collection by many authors with no pretension of being the word or God all thorugh, far from that.
So according to the bible itself it is not the unmodified word of God, what He revealed. Ther emay be something of it, but most is human narration So what the qur'an says about previous scriptures refer to the really revealed by Him, not to human narration. Now I suppose some person here, since he or she was there, can certify that everything narrated in the bible is the pure word of God entirely, but the Bible itself does not say that.
It is so evident that it is painful that again and again we are served the Qur'an says the injil and the whole lot is to be upheld.
Salaam
There is idiocy in either of the books in question including Quran. Either the interpretation is wrong, or the text actually says something else, or the text is a mere delusional fabrication.
Be well
Qarael Amenuel
Quote from: SeekingThePrayer on August 12, 2017, 12:09:33 PM
You really should stop saying such dumb, and evil things about the Bible.
The Bible says some dumb and evil things. What it says about women: https://youtu.be/8aa0ze8aDW0
Quote from: huruf on August 12, 2017, 11:49:39 AM
The bible itself says it is written by many people, not by God There may be words and paragraphs attirbuted to God himself in the bible, but the bible itself is collection by many authors with no pretension of being the word or God all thorugh, far from that.
So according to the bible itself it is not the unmodified word of God, what He revealed. Ther emay be something of it, but most is human narration So what the qur'an says about previous scriptures refer to the really revealed by Him, not to human narration. Now I suppose some person here, since he or she was there, can certify that everything narrated in the bible is the pure word of God entirely, but the Bible itself does not say that.
It is so evident that it is painful that again and again we are served the Qur'an says the injil and the whole lot is to be upheld.
Absolutely agree with you.
a) 57:27
(...) And We sent Isa, son of Maryam, and
We gave him the Injeel (...)
Jesus did not write anything neither came up with any scripture, all writings about him are third party's handwriting and post mortem
b) 57:100 God said: "O Isa, son of Maryam, recall My blessings upon you and your mother, that I supported you with the Holy Spirit; you spoke to the people in the cradle and middle age, and I taught you the Book and the wisdom, and the Taurat, and the Injeel
So Jesus was
taught a book written by other people after his death.
c) Since I can recall, you won't find any verse in Quran affirming Injeel is a book (correct me if I am wrong)
According to Quran the known Gospel(s) CAN NOT BE what Quran calls INJEEL, imo
God bless you all :peace:
Peace SeekingThePrayer.
You need to listen slowly to your argument . Then you need to reflect on what you are saying,What GOD is really saying and what others are saying to you.
Here is a summary of what you keep saying:
The bible contains the Torah, Zaboor and Injeel,hence the bible is from GOD.
GOD is saying in Qoran to uphold Torah,Zaboor and Injeel.
You have the "original "Torah,Zaboor and Injeel that GOD sent down?
Here is a summary of what GOD says:
Torah that GOD sent down must be judged by. Injeel that GOD sent down must be judged by . Only follow GOD s words. i.e what GOD has revealed if some of it is in the bible. Use Qoran as criteria.
Here is what some of us are saying to you.
There are a mixture of GOD s words and men s words in the bible.
GOD has never revealed a book called the bible. It claims it has the Torah, Zaboor and Injeel. Use Qoran to check what the bible says. Anything that contradicts the message of Qoran is the men s words in the bible.
We believe that GOD sent Torah,Zaboor and Injeel,but GOD sent a last scripture as a criterion and preserved it for us to use as criteria. It superseeds and tells Beni Israeel (Those who uphold the bible) all that they differe in.
Now ,either bring them the originals and show them your evidence,or keep claiming /repeating what you are saying all over these threads.
As far as we are concerned you are free to believe what you wish to believe. I myself study the bible . There is nothing wrong in studying the bible. What is wrong is saying all the bible is the word of GOD.
All we are asking is "evidence your claims".
GOD bless you.
Peace
I have seen your link. There is zero evidence it is the original.
For example GOD s original book to Moses was in tablets,where are they? ( Wa katabna lahu fi Al=Alwah")
Sending a link and giving evidence it was revealed by GOD are two different things.
Hope you understand now.
GOD bless you.
Peace
Us saying is of no help to you or to the readers.
What is wrong with a book written on tablets at the time of Moses?
Me believing Qoran is the word of GOD for me and you insisting the bible is the word of GOD for others are two different things.
Please evidence your claim for others . For you ,you are free to believe what you want with or without evidence.
I am not criticising the bible or those who want to follow the bible,I am saying you have not evidenced your claim.
GOD bless you.
Peace.
I think the different terms should be clarified.
The earlier books are Torah, Psalms, and Gospel.
The Bible=New Testament+Old Testament
New Testament=The Gospel (+ I think the Psalms) and some man-made books, such as the numerous messages, and other books. So if we were to compare sectarianism, new testament would be similar to Quran+hadith collections.
Old Testament=Torah and some man-made books. To compare, old testament would look like Quran+hadith collections.
The only way, I think, that we can find which are the Torah and Gospel and Psalms is to look to Quran because it gives many hints. For example, the hint for the Psalms is quite clear. I haven't looked much into this.
Salam
And what is your source?
The Bible contains many works of the devil.
Here, check the image to understand which are the books from God and which are man-made devil work.
From God; Torah (named Pentateuch for unknown reason), Psalms, and Gospel. Everything else on that list=devil's work.
http://www.bible-explained.org/02-old-testament/introduction.htm
Quote from: SeekingThePrayer on August 12, 2017, 12:33:05 PM
Arme,
How's that even close to my name
Quote from: SeekingThePrayer on August 12, 2017, 12:33:05 PMdo you know Aramaic and Hebrew? How sure are you that it is really there what you are reading in the comments of people that comment on mistranslated verses?
Why don't you learn the language, and read the Book for yourself?
And why don't you stop saying such evil things about the Previous Scriptures?
Yeah im sure all the bad stuff is just mistranslated ::)
Quote from: SeekingThePrayer on August 12, 2017, 06:54:21 PM
We will see on the Day of Judgement who was working for the Devil.
I believe thay the other Books in the Bible are Divine Inspirations of God given to the Prophets.
Thats why God told me in 2:285 of the Quran to believe in the Books and Prophets.
Anyways, i do not further want to talk with someone who doesnt know ehat the Bible is but yet he is willing to say that it is the work of the devil.
May God cure you and guide you.
May God guide you and divert you from the many falsehoods that you believe.
Quote from: SeekingThePrayer on August 12, 2017, 12:09:33 PM
Anyways, i have a question for you Huruf. How can we follow the Quran when it said:
An English translation of the Quran 5:68 Say: "O people of the Book, you are not upon anything until you uphold the Torah and the Gospel and what was sent down to you from your Lord." And for many of them, what was sent down to you from your Lord will only increase them in transgression and rejection. So do not feel sorry for the rejecting people.
How can God tell us to uphold the Tora and the Gospel? How can you say it is changed? Do you really want to be cursed? How can God tell us to uphold them? There must be a Tora and Gospel if you want to uphold it. Why don't you stop following those people who say that they are changed. You have to read the Quran. The Quran itself is enough as an evidence that there is a Tora and that there is an Injeel and that there is a Zabur. De Quran told us to believe in them, 2:285, the Quran told us that they are from God, 3:3, really, wake up, and stop following those people and start doing your research.
Peace,Verse 5:68 - People of the Book = Jews and Christians
5:77 - Say: "O people of the Book, do not overstep in your system other than the truth, and do not follow the desires of a people who have been misguided before, and they misguide many; and they strayed from the right path."
What system did the People of the Book overstep?5:72 - Rejecters indeed are those who have said: "God is the Messiah, son of Mary." And the Messiah said: "O Children of Israel, serve God, my Lord and your Lord. Whoever sets up partners with God, then God will restrict Paradise from him, and his destiny will be the Fire; and the wicked will have no supporters."
5:73 - Rejecters indeed are those who have said:
"God is third of three!" There is no god except One God. If they do not cease from what they are saying, then those who reject from among them will be afflicted with a painful retribution.
Not all People of the Book are rejecters.3:113 - They are not all the same, from the people of the Book are a nation that is upright; they recite the revelations of God during the night hours and they prostrate.
3:114 - They believe in God and the Last Day and order kindness and prohibit vice, and they hasten in goodness; these are of the good doers.
If we can come to mutual understanding with the People of the Book, then that is best.3:64 - Say: "O people of the Book, let us come to a mutual understanding between us and between you; that we serve none except God, and that we do not set up anything with Him, and that none of us takes each other as patrons besides God." If they turn away, then say: "Bear witness that we have submitted."
29:46 - And do not argue with the people of the Book except in that which is better; except for those who are wicked among them; and say: "
We believe in what was revealed to us and in what was revealed to you, and our god and your god is the same; to Him we submit."
God knows best.
Quote from: SeekingThePrayer on August 12, 2017, 03:15:55 PM
An English translation of the Quran 5:68 Say: "O people of the Book, you are not upon anything until you uphold the Torah and the Gospel and what was sent down to you from your Lord." And for many of them, what was sent down to you from your Lord will only increase them in transgression and rejection. So do not feel sorry for the rejecting people.
How can they uphold the Injeel if you claim there is none?
Peace,
I never said there is no Injeel, I said that imo, according to Quran Gospel can not be Injeel.
Quote
People are upholding the chapters Matthew up until Revelation for more then 2000 years.
2:170 When they are told, "Follow what GOD has revealed herein," they say, "We follow only what we found our parents doing." What if their parents did not understand, and were not guided?
Quote
When the Quran was Revealed, it was that same Injeel that was being uphold, like the one we have now.
Can you prove Injeel is Gospel and Isa is Jesus? And in any case Quran says to you what you need to know about Isa and the Injeel, whatever else you are adding to the information given in it, you are risking to be misled.
Quote
Jesus died for three days, God woke the Messiah from hes death after three days, read the Injeel, he was alive, and sent the Apostels with the Injeel to humanity.
1. No, the apostles wrote the Gospels, and not only the apostles wrote about Jesus, there are like hundreds of myths about him and not precisely from Israel. Jesus did not write anything either came up with anything, he did not send any Injeel to human kind.
I would appreciate if you respect Quran quoting, because in it you will understand that GOD taught Isa the Injeel in order to guide by His grace, so alhamdulillah! There is no savior Jesus sending mercies to human kind, the One God is who sent His Mercy upon Isa.
Are you a hidden Christian on the forum? Not because of the christian belief, but because of the "hidden" of it >:(
2. There is not non-Christian historical evidence about any Jesus until the 2nd century.
3, I can not read the Injeel, how can you? :wow
Quote
Do not say that he is death. He is alive, in heaven, with God. He is the Messiah, and we have just 1 Messiah. God haves different plans for us.
Please quote full verse
4:157 And their saying: "We have killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, messenger of God!" And they had not killed him, nor crucified him, but it appeared to them as if they had. And those who dispute are in doubt regarding him, they have no knowledge except to follow conjecture; they did not kill him for a certainty.
God knows best
But there are historical records of a Muhammed, and they say he was a ruthless warmonger. It fits the portrayal of Muhammed according to so-called hadith. And Muhammed according to (the mainstream interpretation of) Quran is not a saint either.
And historical records do seldom mention a person who was considered a fool and not acknowledged by the authorities. There is a reason why only certain sources mention Jesus besides Quran and that is because he was not popular among religious leaders. Jesus had a small group of followers and they were heavily persecuted. While Jesus is not mentioned in any "historical records", those who followed him and were heavily persecuted has a thorough documentation associated with them. Look at it this way, many people tried to silence the real Jesus or they abused his words for their own agenda, e.g making a God out of him to be worshiped.
Plus you can also consider what is a historical record.
However, the writings you find in the Bible called Evangelium/Gospel are true records of the real Jesus. Albeit not written by Jesus, it displays quotes of what he said, but the translation is often miserable. The Injeel is not relating to a book but the teachings themselves. Example: The saying "I am in the father and the father is in me" is supposed to say in Aramaic "The I (or self) is in the Originator and the Originator is in the I (the self)". It follows the expressed dynamics of God in the Torah: "I am who I am". Everyone should be like him and he did not say he was anyone exclusive and even the poorly translated texts mention that Jesus said: "You will all be children of the father". This is like saying you have the spirit of God with/in you.
It was those who Jesus opposed who invented the religion Islam. By supporting the mainstream interpretation of Quran and Islam, you indirectly support them and their sect with strange practices.
Quran is not false and a fake, but it is very poorly interpreted and translated by the likes of those who opposed Jesus and they could barely understand the script and that is what you people are following.
Be well
Qarael Amenuel
Peace Man Of Faith.
I would like to make a small comment on what you say here,quote:
But there are historical records of a Muhammed, and they say he was a ruthless warmonger. It fits the portrayal of Muhammed according to so-called hadith. And Muhammed according to (the mainstream interpretation of) Quran is not a saint either.
Do you believe the above? Why?
If you do,is it because it suit you and your agenda ?
I thought you use your instinct and logic and analyse what it has been recorded/said ?
Also you need to give him your take /translation if you wish to highlight a correction.
GOD bless you.
Peace.
Quote from: SeekingThePrayer on August 13, 2017, 05:21:12 AM
I disagree with a lot of your current understanding of the Injeel and Quran.
Do you want to learn the Injeel and interpretate the Quran in a better way?
Have you found any evidence for this claim of yours? And what is wrong with follow the Messih Isa ibnu Maryam and the Injeel? Have you not read the Quran in 5:68 and in 5:47?
Quote from: Aries on August 12, 2017, 12:28:26 PM
a) 57:27
(...) And We sent Isa, son of Maryam, and We gave him the Injeel (...)
Jesus did not write anything neither came up with any scripture, all writings about him are third party's handwriting and post mortem
b) 57:100 God said: "O Isa, son of Maryam, recall My blessings upon you and your mother, that I supported you with the Holy Spirit; you spoke to the people in the cradle and middle age, and I taught you the Book and the wisdom, and the Taurat, and the Injeel
So Jesus was taught a book written by other people after his death.
c) Since I can recall, you won't find any verse in Quran affirming Injeel is a book (correct me if I am wrong)
According to Quran the known Gospel(s) CAN NOT BE what Quran calls INJEEL, imo
God bless you all :peace:
Peace,
:brickwall: we complain and rightfully so that the Quran has some
mistranslations even though we have the Arabic to support it!
Based on the above why and how would one come to the conclusion
that the bible has not been corrupted. :nope:
:peace:
Quote from: SeekingThePrayer on August 13, 2017, 05:26:17 AM
The Quran is a Book and we are people.
We also are now called the people of the Book.
That is what also happened with the Christians when they received the Injeel.
That is what also happened with the followers of the Tora and Zabur when they received the Books and Prophets.
5:48 - And We have sent down to you the Book with the truth,
affirming what is between your hands of the Book and superseding it. So judge between them by what God has sent down, and do not follow their desires from what has come to you of the truth. For each of you We have made laws, and a structure; and if God had willed, He would have made you all one nation, but He tests you with what He has given you; so race to do good. To God you will return all of you, and He will inform you regarding that in which you dispute.
3:99 -
Say: "O people of the Book, why do you repel from the path of God those who believe? You wish to twist it while you are witnesses. And God is not unaware of what you do."3:100 -
O you who believe, if you obey a group of those who received the Book they will turn you after your belief into rejecters!Peace.
Quote from: good logic on August 13, 2017, 06:19:37 AM
Peace Man Of Faith.
I would like to make a small comment on what you say here,quote:
But there are historical records of a Muhammed, and they say he was a ruthless warmonger. It fits the portrayal of Muhammed according to so-called hadith. And Muhammed according to (the mainstream interpretation of) Quran is not a saint either.
Do you believe the above? Why?
If you do,is it because it suit you and your agenda ?
I thought you use your instinct and logic and analyse what it has been recorded/said ?
Also you need to give him your take /translation if you wish to highlight a correction.
GOD bless you.
Peace.
Of course I take all input into consideration, this is highly logical for an intelligent person. There are indications Muhammed decreed that an invasion force should attack villages, apparently defenseless, and then wreak havoc there. This is without even counting any hadith record. The record of the opponents of Muhammed says that the conquerors were there on behalf of Muhammed "the prophet".
In many ways the sect Islam was forced upon the defeated region.
You cannot take Quran for a word without considering all the details surrounding it. Objective reflection on Quran and you see the alleged God is very primitive and desires what a common man desire in general, like an image of man.
Concerning the Arabic I will not comment because the administration of this forum is trigger-happy to their interpretation of "baseless claims" and I only lay forth what Quran says according to people in general.
But I am not required to offer a correction to the translation you have and I will not debate that aspect of Quran on this forum.
Plus, I would not use my bestial instinct in assessing all the information surrounding Quran and God. That would be a mistake. That would just leave me to the instinctive awe of a god of delusion, a mindless projection of God. That leads towards Paganism.
Be well
Qarael Amenuel
Peace Man Of Faith.
I disagree with what you say here about Mohammed,quote:
There are indications Muhammed decreed that an invasion force should attack villages, apparently defenseless, and then wreak havoc there. This is without even counting any hadith record. The record of the opponents of Muhammed says that the conquerors were there on behalf of Muhammed "the prophet"
For at least 20 odd years after Mohammed ,there was no compulsion in deen.
History investigation,in my opinion, will confirm for us that the political establishment after the civil war and the massacre of most of Mohammed s family, i.e When Traditional Islam was born,is the culprit of all the made up history about what people know as Islam today and the birth of all the fabrications that you call sectarians.
According to my study of Qoran ,Mohammed was of "Khulukan Adhim" -Good peaceful/moral human.
What you describe in your comments are lies about Mohammed and in his name.
My view brother.
GOD bless you.
Peace.
Quote from: Man of Faith on August 13, 2017, 05:34:22 AM
But there are historical records of a Muhammed, and they say he was a ruthless warmonger. It fits the portrayal of Muhammed according to so-called hadith. And Muhammed according to (the mainstream interpretation of) Quran is not a saint either.
E.g., this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fragment_on_the_Arab_Conquests
QuoteIn January {the people of}[2] Ḥomṣ took the word for their lives[3] and many villages were ravaged by the killing of {the Arabs of} Muhammad[4] and many people were slain and {taken} prisoner from Galilee as far as Beth?[5]
On the tw{enty-six}th of May the Saq{īlā}ra went {?} from the vicinity of Ḥomṣ and the Romans chased them {?}
On the tenth {of August} the Romans fled from the vicinity of Damascus {and there were killed} many {people}, some ten thousand. And at the turn {of the ye}ar the Romans came. On the twentieth of August in the year n{ine hundred and forty-}seven there gathered in Gabitha {a multitude of} the Romans, and many people {of the R}omans were kil{led}, {s}ome fifty thousand.[6]
Dated around 636 AD.
The issue is that is not known whether the Muhammad in question (more exactly MHMT in Syriac, the language of the Fragment of Arab Conquest) was actually the messenger of Qur'an or not.
I believe it is not the same person, but I have no proof either.
Quote from: farati on February 11, 2017, 06:31:31 AM
Hello,
I have a question. Does the Quran say that the previous scriptures are corrupted? If yes, then why the Quran instruct to refer to them?
Also, the dead sea scrolls show there is little difference between the bible today and the one that is 2000 years old.
This article confused me a lot.:
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Corruption_of_Previous_Scriptures_(Qur'an_2:79)
You have to investigate the Originals. Dont even try to prove your point with translations.
The Injeel is written in Greek. And the Zabur and Tawrat are written in Hebrew.
The Injeel and the Tawrat were there in the lifetime of Mohammad, and he even told he people to uphold them. See the Quran 5:68, 5:43, 5:47.
So why would God keep the Tawrat for more then thousands of years? And why would He keep the Injeel for like 600 years? If they were there until the lifetime of Mohammad, then why would they suddenly change in the last 1400 years since the Quran?
The problem is that if you tell something enough of times, people will start believing it. The Sunni people gain a lot if they keep people from the previous Scriptures. And so do the Catholic gain a lot to keep the people from the Quran. And so do the Pharisees gain a lot if they keep the Jewish people from the Injeel.
The Quran confirmed them. Read 3:3, 5:43, 5:46, 5:68.
So who are you with your desires?
The part of the Bible that is lknown as the old testament might hve been written originally in wht is called hebrew, but the fact is that we do not have those writings. What has reached us in hebrew and aramaic are the masoretic texts which are themselves translations from the greek septuagint old testament version done Alexandria under Ptolomeo II Philadelfo in 284-246 b. C. So there is no originalhebrew text tht can be ressorted to. The oldest thing at hand is that Septuagint greek version. To resort to the hebrew implies to resort to a trnslation of a rnasltion, or rather of a version, since th setuagint itself is not merely a translation but a version with soemthings dded or modified. The text fromwhich the greek septuagint was made seems were destroyed in some fire.
So no originl hebrew is there to check, which indeed would be interesting, alsoif they were the original which we do notknow even to what extent the texts extant at the time of Ptolomeo II were the very originals without modification.
Salaam
Quote from: huruf on December 31, 2017, 12:52:36 PM
The part of the Bible that is lknown as the old testament might hve been written originally in wht is called hebrew, but the fact is that we do not have those writings. What has reached us in hebrew and aramaic are the masoretic texts which are themselves translations from the greek septuagint old testament version done Alexandria under Ptolomeo II Philadelfo in 284-246 b. C. So there is no originalhebrew text tht can be ressorted to. The oldest thing at hand is that Septuagint greek version. To resort to the hebrew implies to resort to a trnslation of a rnasltion, or rather of a version, since th setuagint itself is not merely a translation but a version with soemthings dded or modified. The text fromwhich the greek septuagint was made seems were destroyed in some fire.
So no originl hebrew is there to check, which indeed would be interesting, alsoif they were the original which we do notknow even to what extent the texts extant at the time of Ptolomeo II were the very originals without modification.
Salaam
The Old Testament is written in Hebrew and little parts of it are in Aramaic, and yes we have those writings and they are all around the globe in Hebrew Synagoges and i myself also have a copy.
What is your evidence that the Hebrew/Aramaic Old Testament we have now are changed and are actually translations from the Greek Septuagint? Do you know that the Septuagint is a Greek translation made from the Hebrew/Aramaic Old Testament? Do you think that the Hebrew/Aramaic Old Testament was lost after the Greek septuagint translation was made from the Hebrew/Aramaic Original Old Testament?
So if you say that there was no Hebrew/Aramaic Old Testament anymore in 284 b.c., then why does the Injeel in many places confirm the Tora, Zabur, any many other Scriptures from the Old Testament in like 100 a.d., and then why does the Quran confirm that there was one in like 600 +/- a.d.? Read 5:43 and 5:46, 47, 68 of the Quran for evidence.
So my question to you is, do you believe that the Quran confirmed the Tora and the Zabur and the Injeel? In places like 5:43 and 5:47. Or do you believe a narration that tells you that there is no Tora and Zabur anymore?
Do you understand that the prophet himself when we read 5:68 told the people to uphold the Tora and the Injeel? Or do you think that God asked Mohammad to do something that couldn't be accomplished? Christians and Jews will have a good laugh when reading that the Quran actually confirms the Scriptures that they try to follow.
What is my proof that there was a President of the United Sttes Jefferson?.
For God's ake it is about the most basic thinginBible kknowledge. Find out it is not difficult. You do not need "my" proof.
The Qur'an does not seakabout any OLd Testament.
Salaam
Quote from: huruf on December 31, 2017, 01:39:23 PM
What is my proof that there was a President of the United Sttes Jefferson?.
For God's ake it is about the most basic thinginBible kknowledge. Find out it is not difficult. You do not need "my" proof.
The Qur'an does not seakabout any OLd Testament.
Salaam
I edited my post. Can you read it again please?
And you said, the Quran does not seek any Old Testament? Can you explain to me what is written in 5:43 and 5:47 and 5:68?
Thishas been aqasked and answered hundreds of times in this forum and may be millions in other fora. You can triy to look those up. I really cannot undertake to answer that once more.
I am not trying to convince you of anything. I am sure you aare old enough and intelligent enough to look aafter yourself.
Salaam
Quote from: huruf on December 31, 2017, 02:22:39 PM
Thishas been aqasked and answered hundreds of times in this forum and may be millions in other fora. You can triy to look those up. I really cannot undertake to answer that once more.
I am not trying to convince you of anything. I am sure you aare old enough and intelligent enough to look aafter yourself.
Salaam
So you don't want to explain what's written in the Quran in verse 5:43, 5:47 and 5:68? So you claim something, but tell me to search for answers somewhere else?