Why do Muslims attack the Christian trinity? They have there own in many ways. There are the three daughters of Allah also known as "the flying cranes whose intercession is hoped for." This is a verse that Uthman abrogated from the Quran. It was a hard thing for Uthman to leave in the Quran after Muhammad's death. Allah had to cancel out Muhammad's Satanic verse. No prophet ever made a mistake like this before Muhammad's time. How could he get away with it? These videos make an argument that the unholy trinity of Islam is Allah, Gabriel and Muhammad. It states they are one and the same. If this is so, do Muslims attack the Christianity trinity only to turn a blind eye to their own unholy trinity?
Allah, Gabriel & Muhammad are one?
Moderator: Moderators
- Burninglight
- Guru
- Posts: 1202
- Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:40 am
Post #41
@Burninglight: Peace be unto you!
I would rather you address my lengthy response in your own comfort, so I will not bother you with my rebuttal to this response. Maybe we will fall into this subject later, but for now take your time
Take care!
Yup take your time, and if you have time to show me about the 'pillars' I would love to hear it too, thxI'll have to look over all you wrote. I'm surprised You didn't know about the pillars that cannot be seen that hold up the sky in the Quran.
I look forward to your explanation of this.As much as I hate to agree with Troubled man you really do have physco selective memory. You also do that with you belief system.
Incorrect, someone hasn't proven it to me yet. If someone can prove to me the Qur'an is wrong I will leave the fold of Islam willingly.To you the Quran cannot be wrong even if someone can prove it to you.
I look forward to your rebuttal.Deut 18 has nothing to do with Muhammad. Those similarties could be said about many prophets
I'm sorry what?? Did you just say both were 'made God'? You really shouldn't have said that cause now I'm totally lost. By God you mean savior? or Prophet? Don't you believe Moses was a Prophet?but not is not the case with Jesus and Moses: the sea obeyed them both; they were both saved from infanticide; both were called out of Egypt: the sea obeyed them both; both were saviors;both were made God. Moses was made god to pharoah and Jesus is God the son to the the world!
I would rather you address my lengthy response in your own comfort, so I will not bother you with my rebuttal to this response. Maybe we will fall into this subject later, but for now take your time
Take care!
-
- Guru
- Posts: 2301
- Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:24 am
Post #42
You aren't raising any valid points to debate, they are complete nonsense.Peace wrote: @A Troubled Man:
I have a problem figuring out why you do not address my list, we can debate this point all you want, but we will not actually move forward unless you address the many points I keep raising and you wish to ignore.
So basically, you're going to ignore anything anyone says and keep repeating the same nonsense over and over.
I'm sorry, we're going to have to be accurate here, mountains come in all shapes and sizes however when 'folding' occurs a very specific phenomenon occurs where the mountain ends up with 'roots' and appears 'embedded' in the ground much like a peg.
LOL! That is the point entirely, whose interpretations of the Quran are correct? Who is the authority? If there was an authority, Islam wouldn't have so many factions and sects and people fighting and killing each other over who has the correct interpretation.You seem to jump to interpretations of the Qur'an that you have decided are correct without referring to any authority, and that I have never heard of. Your latest evidence of an 'interpreter' was a journalist. I cannot possibly accept your 'interpretations'.
I can and have read the Quran, I don't need you to interpret it for me.Please, if you wish to debate me, acquire some knowledge on the subject by either asking me (I would love to answer your questions) or read about the subject online and come back with a basic understanding.
Instead, why don't you get a basic understanding of geology?
Post #43
@A Troubled Man:
I personally believe, you have no idea what your talking about when it comes to Islam. You seem to have no understanding of basic interpretations, of basic rulings, of basic ideas and have trouble with scientific issues as well. Going from critizing the idea of 'roots' to accepting they exist but critizing their appearance all the way to denying what the Qur'an actually says. See what I mean? Please center your arguments.
The reason being that the Qur'an is not like any other scriptural text, you can't just open it read the translation and expect to understand what it says, you would be fooling yourself. The book was revealed over 20 years during the Prophet's (pbuh) lifetime, so each revelation in the Qur'an corresponds to a particular moment in time, so you must understand the context of the verse. Next, Arabic, Arabic, Arabic! The english version of the Qur'an is not the Qur'an, it is merely the translation. It is the Arabic that we believe is remarkable and unique. You must be a student of Arabic to be able to interpret any of the verses. There are many other factors but they aren't important now - my point is, not anyone can interpret the Qur'an. I was always listing people's interpretations and work - and I agree as I can read Arabic too and understand.
You however, have no authority, and I highly doubt you speak Arabic, which means you don't have the authority to interpret the Qur'an as you wish. There are interpretations that are popular and reliable that you must refer too (Ibn Kathir's works, for example.) As well as the history of the Qur'anic revelation, to be able to understand the context of the versus - this is our religion and this is how the rules were set for interpretation.
As for the 'many sects' that you speak of, I am a Sunni, and that is around 75-90% of all Muslims in the world. Many other 'sects' don't disagree with any of the interpretations I gave. The only 'group' of people that may disagree are the terrorists and criminals that claim to be part of Islam, throw around interpretations without proper textual understanding, proper Arabic knowledge and proper historical records - much like you - and this group probably constitutes 3-5% of Muslims. You cannot possibly say that 3-5% represents the rest.
As I have constantly presented, you have a distorted image of Islam, you seem to be lacking on almost every aspect of the religion. When I said to go and read about the subjects you so hastily seem to reject it was advice, (you can always ask me as well).
It's just I cannot continue debating with you when you seem to exhibit some very fundamental problems when it comes to your 'evidence' and understanding. Even if you had basic knowledge on the subjects I could steer the debate towards an information session and 'show' you the religion, but when you seem to be in denial of all religious ideas and demonstrate a clear ignorance when it comes to the actual religion, you put me in a very difficult position.
Please, take some time off to read and then come back with proper evidence. I really wish to debate with you and am always trying my hardest to be patient, but you show no consistency, professionalism or even desire to learn and debate.
I will not stop 'debating' with you (if that's what you believe we are doing), but it would steer the discussion in a much more intellectually stimulating environment if both debaters had a basic understanding of the religion and basic debating skills.
Thanks!
Hope this has helped!
I was referring to the list I created that will help me understand what you don't agree with. It will help me understand exactly what your point is.You aren't raising any valid points to debate, they are complete nonsense.
And what have you said exactly? you haven't raised a point you disagree with, you seem to float from point to point without any anchor of a counterargument.So basically, you're going to ignore anything anyone says and keep repeating the same nonsense over and over.
I personally believe, you have no idea what your talking about when it comes to Islam. You seem to have no understanding of basic interpretations, of basic rulings, of basic ideas and have trouble with scientific issues as well. Going from critizing the idea of 'roots' to accepting they exist but critizing their appearance all the way to denying what the Qur'an actually says. See what I mean? Please center your arguments.
There is an authority! the Prophets interpretation is well documented, Ibn Kathir is well documented, infact many of our religious scholars nowadays (Sheikh Hamzah Yusuf, Nouman Ali Khan etc...) reference many popular works on the interpretation of the Qur'an.LOL! That is the point entirely, whose interpretations of the Quran are correct? Who is the authority? If there was an authority, Islam wouldn't have so many factions and sects and people fighting and killing each other over who has the correct interpretation.
The reason being that the Qur'an is not like any other scriptural text, you can't just open it read the translation and expect to understand what it says, you would be fooling yourself. The book was revealed over 20 years during the Prophet's (pbuh) lifetime, so each revelation in the Qur'an corresponds to a particular moment in time, so you must understand the context of the verse. Next, Arabic, Arabic, Arabic! The english version of the Qur'an is not the Qur'an, it is merely the translation. It is the Arabic that we believe is remarkable and unique. You must be a student of Arabic to be able to interpret any of the verses. There are many other factors but they aren't important now - my point is, not anyone can interpret the Qur'an. I was always listing people's interpretations and work - and I agree as I can read Arabic too and understand.
You however, have no authority, and I highly doubt you speak Arabic, which means you don't have the authority to interpret the Qur'an as you wish. There are interpretations that are popular and reliable that you must refer too (Ibn Kathir's works, for example.) As well as the history of the Qur'anic revelation, to be able to understand the context of the versus - this is our religion and this is how the rules were set for interpretation.
As for the 'many sects' that you speak of, I am a Sunni, and that is around 75-90% of all Muslims in the world. Many other 'sects' don't disagree with any of the interpretations I gave. The only 'group' of people that may disagree are the terrorists and criminals that claim to be part of Islam, throw around interpretations without proper textual understanding, proper Arabic knowledge and proper historical records - much like you - and this group probably constitutes 3-5% of Muslims. You cannot possibly say that 3-5% represents the rest.
As I have shown you, yes you do need someone to interpret the things that you don't understand, every verse has a historical and linguistic element that is hidden from the english translations. If you don't want me to do it, go and read Ibn Kathir, infact, go and find your own books about the subject and read for yourself!I can and have read the Quran, I don't need you to interpret it for me.
Instead, why don't you get a basic understanding of geology?
As I have constantly presented, you have a distorted image of Islam, you seem to be lacking on almost every aspect of the religion. When I said to go and read about the subjects you so hastily seem to reject it was advice, (you can always ask me as well).
It's just I cannot continue debating with you when you seem to exhibit some very fundamental problems when it comes to your 'evidence' and understanding. Even if you had basic knowledge on the subjects I could steer the debate towards an information session and 'show' you the religion, but when you seem to be in denial of all religious ideas and demonstrate a clear ignorance when it comes to the actual religion, you put me in a very difficult position.
Please, take some time off to read and then come back with proper evidence. I really wish to debate with you and am always trying my hardest to be patient, but you show no consistency, professionalism or even desire to learn and debate.
I will not stop 'debating' with you (if that's what you believe we are doing), but it would steer the discussion in a much more intellectually stimulating environment if both debaters had a basic understanding of the religion and basic debating skills.
Thanks!
Hope this has helped!
-
- Guru
- Posts: 2301
- Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:24 am
Post #44
LOL! You can make up any excuse you wish, but your claims about the Quran and science are garbage.Peace wrote:
I personally believe, you have no idea what your talking about when it comes to Islam. You seem to have no understanding of basic interpretations, of basic rulings, of basic ideas and have trouble with scientific issues as well. Going from critizing the idea of 'roots' to accepting they exist but critizing their appearance all the way to denying what the Qur'an actually says. See what I mean? Please center your arguments.
So what? There are many interpretations of the Quran, which one is right?There is an authority! the Prophets interpretation is well documented, Ibn Kathir is well documented, infact many of our religious scholars nowadays (Sheikh Hamzah Yusuf, Nouman Ali Khan etc...) reference many popular works on the interpretation of the Qur'an.
Unlike yourself, I can actually open a book, read the words and understand the words.The reason being that the Qur'an is not like any other scriptural text, you can't just open it read the translation and expect to understand what it says, you would be fooling yourself.
No, the words were made up by Muhammad because he was a liar and a fraud.The book was revealed over 20 years during the Prophet's (pbuh) lifetime
Ah yes, the typical "context" excuse. What's next, the "translation" excuse? LOL!so each revelation in the Qur'an corresponds to a particular moment in time, so you must understand the context of the verse
Yup, right on schedule. LOL! No, translation is a very poor excuse because we can translate from one language to another.Next, Arabic, Arabic, Arabic! The english version of the Qur'an is not the Qur'an, it is merely the translation.
It isn't unique, it can be translated.[It is the Arabic that we believe is remarkable and unique
That is entirely false considering the Quran has been translated by those who know Arabic quite well, better than you, probably.You must be a student of Arabic to be able to interpret any of the verses.
Yes, anyone can interpret the Quran to mean anything they want, that is why there are so many Islamic propagandists like yourself littering the internet with their nonsense.There are many other factors but they aren't important now - my point is, not anyone can interpret the Qur'an. I was always listing people's interpretations and work - and I agree as I can read Arabic too and understand.
LOL! That is utterly childish.You however, have no authority, and I highly doubt you speak Arabic, which means you don't have the authority to interpret the Qur'an as you wish.
So, YOUR belief is that Ibn Kathir is the authority because he is popular. LOL!There are interpretations that are popular and reliable that you must refer too (Ibn Kathir's works, for example.)
In other words, you don't agree with the Shia, the Sufi and the Ahmadiyya. In fact, you have been known to kill each other over your interpretations.As for the 'many sects' that you speak of, I am a Sunni, and that is around 75-90% of all Muslims in the world.
LOL! No, I don't. However, you would do yourself a great justice by taking the time to understand geology.As I have shown you, yes you do need someone to interpret the things that you don't understand
You are presenting a distorted image of reality. My image of Islam is in the Quran's words, ONLY.As I have constantly presented, you have a distorted image of Islam
You have only placed yourself in a difficult position attempting to align your holy book with science.It's just I cannot continue debating with you when you seem to exhibit some very fundamental problems when it comes to your 'evidence' and understanding. Even if you had basic knowledge on the subjects I could steer the debate towards an information session and 'show' you the religion, but when you seem to be in denial of all religious ideas and demonstrate a clear ignorance when it comes to the actual religion, you put me in a very difficult position.
LOL! The evidence is in geology.Please, take some time off to read and then come back with proper evidence.
LOL! True, we are not debating, you are presenting ridiculous nonsense that doesn't align with science or even reality. Debating skills, at this point, is not an issue considering that.I will not stop 'debating' with you (if that's what you believe we are doing), but it would steer the discussion in a much more intellectually stimulating environment if both debaters had a basic understanding of the religion and basic debating skills.
Post #45
@A Troubled Man:
I'm sorry, yes you can read all you want but you will not understand it as you've so elegantly shown.
A simple example is that in Arabic the Qur'an rhymes, in English it doesn't showing that the translation is limited in its presentation of the Qur'an. Also in Arabic 'if' comes in many different forms corresponding to different conditional situations. In English you only have one word 'if'. I'm sorry, you can never translate a language perfectly into English - it will always be lacking somewhere.
We don't believe the english translation is the Qur'an. So you have never read the Qur'an!
You have brought my standard down to child's play - I do not like to quarrel like toddlers shouting claims with no evidence and no main theme, crying my claim is correct without support from any external sources besides my demented ideologies.
Ramadan Kareem
Very brief, very vague, no evidence, no rebuttal, denial to address a list that will help us both and an uncentralized argument - all problems with this one line, surely if you wish to prove me wrong, simply saying this doesn't help anyone.LOL! You can make up any excuse you wish, but your claims about the Quran and science are garbage.
No there aren't, there's the Prophet's (peace be upon him) and Companions and scholars interpretations and then there's yours.So what? There are many interpretations of the Quran, which one is right?
Yes you seem to understand an Arabic Qur'an yet you do not speak Arabic, you do not refer to its historical context to understand its history, you publicly demonstrated that you really don't understand the Qur'an.Unlike yourself, I can actually open a book, read the words and understand the words.
I'm sorry, yes you can read all you want but you will not understand it as you've so elegantly shown.
This is our religion, this is what we believe, it's not like the Bible or the Taurah, you must look to the context of the revelation to fully understand the meaning. If you wish to invent your own sect of Islam you are free to do so.Ah yes, the typical "context" excuse. What's next, the "translation" excuse? LOL!
Yes with limitations, if you have ever studied another language you would know this - I don't need to debate this.Yup, right on schedule. LOL! No, translation is a very poor excuse because we can translate from one language to another.
A simple example is that in Arabic the Qur'an rhymes, in English it doesn't showing that the translation is limited in its presentation of the Qur'an. Also in Arabic 'if' comes in many different forms corresponding to different conditional situations. In English you only have one word 'if'. I'm sorry, you can never translate a language perfectly into English - it will always be lacking somewhere.
Unique in Arabic in that in demonstrates a linguistic element of style and linguistic form that is unmatched anywhere in any work and/or form in Arabic.It isn't unique, it can be translated.
Incorrect! If you want to interpret the book on your own you must understand Arabic. Otherwise when you read the translation alone you will miss out on a lot of meaning from the Arabic that can't be represented in the English language.That is entirely false considering the Quran has been translated by those who know Arabic quite well, better than you, probably.
We don't believe the english translation is the Qur'an. So you have never read the Qur'an!
Again incorrect, if you understood an iota of knowledge about this religion you would know our interpretations are well documented and available to read. You seem to interpret it with no authority, you do not even meet the prerequisites of an 'interprator'. You asked me about the verses, I referred to Islamic works and people, you disagreed yet provided no authority for your alternate radical interpretation. This is no argument here, just your baseless wild unsupported english interpretation of a complex Arabic Qur'an.Yes, anyone can interpret the Quran to mean anything they want, that is why there are so many Islamic propagandists like yourself littering the internet with their nonsense.
No I described his works as popular and reliable. I refer his works because he is reliable since we know his history and was an extremely knowledgeable scholar. Don't put words into my mouth, it was a desperate attempt on your half.So, YOUR belief is that Ibn Kathir is the authority because he is popular. LOL!
Again, you show you did not read my post. I said:In other words, you don't agree with the Shia, the Sufi and the Ahmadiyya. In fact, you have been known to kill each other over your interpretations.
We all have a centralized interpretation system that is reliable and based on historical accuracies and mastery of the Arabic language. The only group of people that seem not to agree, are people like you and the criminals that get a lot of media attention nowadays because of their un-Islamic ideologies.Many other 'sects' don't disagree with any of the interpretations I gave.
Again vague, brief, no evidence, no quotation of me 'misunderstanding' geology. If you were so confident I was wrong, you would address my list and show me exactly where I lack.LOL! No, I don't. However, you would do yourself a great justice by taking the time to understand geology.
As I have constantly shown, your interpretation of Islam is your own radical mindset and a magazine article. Please professionalize yourself.You are presenting a distorted image of reality. My image of Islam is in the Quran's words, ONLY.
My comment is still clear, if you do not proceed in a professional manner and do this site justice (basic requirements are to base your claims with evidence and to address your opponents points accordingly in a centralized crystal clear manner) then I see no point in continuing.You have only placed yourself in a difficult position attempting to align your holy book with science.
You have brought my standard down to child's play - I do not like to quarrel like toddlers shouting claims with no evidence and no main theme, crying my claim is correct without support from any external sources besides my demented ideologies.
I don't even need to say anything.LOL! The evidence is in geology.
I look forward to a post full of evidence, centralized theme of argument, quotations of my 'claims' that are against geology (I attempted this with the list you seem to ignore proving your desperation and lack of confidence in your views), an uplifting spirit that wishes to discuss issues in an intellectually stimulating environment and not throw around one-liners demonstrating ignorance, denial and persistence to avoid progress.LOL! True, we are not debating, you are presenting ridiculous nonsense that doesn't align with science or even reality. Debating skills, at this point, is not an issue considering that.
Ramadan Kareem
-
- Guru
- Posts: 2301
- Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:24 am
Post #46
And, which one of the scholars or companions interpretations are right? My interpretation is based entirely on the words written there, standing entirely on their own without someone telling me their spin on it.Peace wrote: No there aren't, there's the Prophet's (peace be upon him) and Companions and scholars interpretations and then there's yours.
Sorry, but translation and context are irrelevant arguments.Yes you seem to understand an Arabic Qur'an yet you do not speak Arabic, you do not refer to its historical context to understand its history, you publicly demonstrated that you really don't understand the Qur'an.
No, your religion is no different than the others, it is full of myths and superstitions handed down by liars and frauds.This is our religion, this is what we believe, it's not like the Bible or the Taurah, you must look to the context of the revelation to fully understand the meaning. If you wish to invent your own sect of Islam you are free to do so.
Yes, I do know other languages, which is why I know languages can be translated.Yes with limitations, if you have ever studied another language you would know this - I don't need to debate this.
LOL! Rhyming?A simple example is that in Arabic the Qur'an rhymes, in English it doesn't showing that the translation is limited in its presentation of the Qur'an.
That isn't true at all. That is just a dishonest excuse on your part.Also in Arabic 'if' comes in many different forms corresponding to different conditional situations. In English you only have one word 'if'. I'm sorry, you can never translate a language perfectly into English - it will always be lacking somewhere.
Unmatched? So what? Shakespeare is unmatched compared to Marvel comic books. Does that mean Shakespeare is a prophet? LOLUnique in Arabic in that in demonstrates a linguistic element of style and linguistic form that is unmatched anywhere in any work and/or form in Arabic.
Incorrect! If you want to interpret the book on your own you must understand Arabic. Otherwise when you read the translation alone you will miss out on a lot of meaning from the Arabic that can't be represented in the English language.
Pure bs.
LOL! How very dishonest to say such a thing.We don't believe the english translation is the Qur'an. So you have never read the Qur'an!
Yes, there are MANY interpretations of Islam, that is the problem.Again incorrect, if you understood an iota of knowledge about this religion you would know our interpretations are well documented and available to read.
LOL! Appeal to authority fallacy.You seem to interpret it with no authority, you do not even meet the prerequisites of an 'interprator'.
Baseless wild unsupported english translation, not interpretation. LOL!You asked me about the verses, I referred to Islamic works and people, you disagreed yet provided no authority for your alternate radical interpretation. This is no argument here, just your baseless wild unsupported english interpretation of a complex Arabic Qur'an.
So what? He is reliable. How does that prove your religion is valid or Muhammad spoke with an angel? It doesn't.No I described his works as popular and reliable. I refer his works because he is reliable since we know his history and was an extremely knowledgeable scholar.
LOL! Yes, lump us non-believers in with criminals if it makes you feel better.We all have a centralized interpretation system that is reliable and based on historical accuracies and mastery of the Arabic language. The only group of people that seem not to agree, are people like you and the criminals that get a lot of media attention nowadays because of their un-Islamic ideologies.
So, what is an "un-Islamic ideology"? Is that anything that disagrees with Islam?
Yeah, we did that already. You lack in knowledge and understanding of mountains.Again vague, brief, no evidence, no quotation of me 'misunderstanding' geology. If you were so confident I was wrong, you would address my list and show me exactly where I lack.
My own radical mindset? LOL! Your excuses are just getting lamer.As I have constantly shown, your interpretation of Islam is your own radical mindset and a magazine article. Please professionalize yourself.
LOL! More lame excuses.
My comment is still clear, if you do not proceed in a professional manner and do this site justice (basic requirements are to base your claims with evidence and to address your opponents points accordingly in a centralized crystal clear manner) then I see no point in continuing.
You have brought down the level of intelligence in this forum to that of a small child. Your demented ideologies are another story altogether.You have brought my standard down to child's play - I do not like to quarrel like toddlers shouting claims with no evidence and no main theme, crying my claim is correct without support from any external sources besides my demented ideologies.
Your silly claims are just silly. Mountains form in a variety of ways that don't agree with your ridiculous claims of being pegs.I look forward to a post full of evidence, centralized theme of argument, quotations of my 'claims' that are against geology (I attempted this with the list you seem to ignore proving your desperation and lack of confidence in your views), an uplifting spirit that wishes to discuss issues in an intellectually stimulating environment and not throw around one-liners demonstrating ignorance, denial and persistence to avoid progress.
For example, volcanoes don't follow your claims whatsoever. All of their mass is above ground level and are not shaped like pegs or stopping earthquakes from happening at all. There are far more examples than just this.
- McCulloch
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24063
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
- Location: Toronto, ON, CA
- Been thanked: 3 times
Post #47
Of course mainly Islamic Arabic scholars have been told this for centuries. To claim that any other Arabic word could match the Qu'ran would be heresy, so no one makes so bold a claim. That does not however, mean that it is true. Or that if it is true that the Qu'ran had to have been inspired by the god.Peace wrote: Unique in Arabic in that in demonstrates a linguistic element of style and linguistic form that is unmatched anywhere in any work and/or form in Arabic.
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John
Post #48
@A Troubled Man: Hey again!
Again, yes you may read it, but to pull meaning from it you must look to its context. Each verse was revealed for a specific location and time, it wasn't revealed as one book all at once.
You can get:
1) إذا
2) Ù�ÙŠ Øالة
3) لو
4) إذا كان
Not dishonesty, truth. As you can see, one word in English can be translated into 4 - and they are not all the same. Each one corresponds to a specific conditional situation.
In Arabic you have two forms of style: poetry and prose. The Qur'an does not fall under either, i.e. it has not been matched in style and use of linguistic of its elements. A very unique text nonetheless. Check out :http://www.theinimitablequran.com/ - Talks all about it in detail.
Because he is a reliable source of interpretation then we can accept his interpretation of unknown verses happily. Thus proving that the book doesn't contain any scientific errors - as i've demonstrated before on another thread - showing its miraculous nature. Something you have constantly failed to refute.
Their interpretations are all identical when it comes to the verses in question about the 'beating' and about the mountains.And, which one of the scholars or companions interpretations are right? My interpretation is based entirely on the words written there, standing entirely on their own without someone telling me their spin on it.
Again, yes you may read it, but to pull meaning from it you must look to its context. Each verse was revealed for a specific location and time, it wasn't revealed as one book all at once.
Again, this is our religion, when we interpret our Qur'an you must understand the language and look to the historical context. This is our religion, if you wish to invent your own way to understand the Qur'an go ahead, however, I highly doubt anyone would listen to you since our method of interpretation has been preserved and saved dating all the way back to the time of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).Sorry, but translation and context are irrelevant arguments.
I meant here that the text is not similar to the Bible and the Taurah in its textual accuracies and preservation techniques and interpretation technique thus to interpret it you must refer to its history and translation.No, your religion is no different than the others, it is full of myths and superstitions handed down by liars and frauds.
Yes they can be, but I'm sure there are instances where the translation does not do the original language justice, this is the case many times in Arabic, the style of the Arabic, depth, and linguistic elements are not matched in the translation.Yes, I do know other languages, which is why I know languages can be translated.
YUPLOL! Rhyming?
Go to Google translate and type in 'if':That isn't true at all. That is just a dishonest excuse on your part.Also in Arabic 'if' comes in many different forms corresponding to different conditional situations. In English you only have one word 'if'. I'm sorry, you can never translate a language perfectly into English - it will always be lacking somewhere.
You can get:
1) إذا
2) Ù�ÙŠ Øالة
3) لو
4) إذا كان
Not dishonesty, truth. As you can see, one word in English can be translated into 4 - and they are not all the same. Each one corresponds to a specific conditional situation.
No Shakespeare wrote works that were in 'play-writing' format. Maybe the actual text is unmatched, but there are many other plays written by other people - i.e. in the same format.Unmatched? So what? Shakespeare is unmatched compared to Marvel comic books. Does that mean Shakespeare is a prophet? LOL
In Arabic you have two forms of style: poetry and prose. The Qur'an does not fall under either, i.e. it has not been matched in style and use of linguistic of its elements. A very unique text nonetheless. Check out :http://www.theinimitablequran.com/ - Talks all about it in detail.
Ask any Muslim you wish, the English translation is not the Qur'an. We believe the word of God is the Arabic text not the english or any other language.LOL! How very dishonest to say such a thing.
I thought we were talking about the Qur'an? Interpretation of Islam? huh? what do you mean?Yes, there are MANY interpretations of Islam, that is the problem.
No fallacy, if you don't meet the pre-requisites of what an interprator is supposed have, then you are not qualified to call yourself an interprator. A very simple pre-requisite is knowledge of Arabic otherwise you wouldn't be able to even understand it.LOL! Appeal to authority fallacy.
No the literal translation can be debated but its the interpretation that you gave that shows what you believe the verse says and demonstrated that such an interpretation is baseless and unsupported.Baseless wild unsupported english translation, not interpretation. LOL!
Please centralize your arguments, don't jump around.So what? He is reliable. How does that prove your religion is valid or Muhammad spoke with an angel? It doesn't.
Because he is a reliable source of interpretation then we can accept his interpretation of unknown verses happily. Thus proving that the book doesn't contain any scientific errors - as i've demonstrated before on another thread - showing its miraculous nature. Something you have constantly failed to refute.
It doesn't make me feel better, I am drawing the similarity between you two when it comes to your radical baseless Qur'anic interpretations. Not your morals or views on human life, I believe you are much better then they are.LOL! Yes, lump us non-believers in with criminals if it makes you feel better.
Yes, something that goes against Islamic teaching.So, what is an "un-Islamic ideology"? Is that anything that disagrees with Islam?
Sorry no you didn't my list is still untouched.Yeah, we did that already. You lack in knowledge and understanding of mountains.
I've shown how you seem to jump to radical interpretations of the Qur'an, such as the 'women-beating' you so confidently believe in. You also seem to trust a journalist when it comes to Islamic knowledge.My own radical mindset? LOL! Your excuses are just getting lamer
These aren't excuses, they are criticisms.LOL! More lame excuses.My comment is still clear, if you do not proceed in a professional manner and do this site justice (basic requirements are to base your claims with evidence and to address your opponents points accordingly in a centralized crystal clear manner) then I see no point in continuing.
Correction: Your demented ideologies, please read my sentence properly.You have brought down the level of intelligence in this forum to that of a small child. Your demented ideologies are another story altogether.
Baseless, no evidence, unsupported, please reference your claims with evidence and proof - I believe it is against the rules to give one-liners with no evidence.our silly claims are just silly. Mountains form in a variety of ways that don't agree with your ridiculous claims of being pegs.
In Arabic, a volcano is called something different than a mountain. Yes some volcanoes are mountains however the verse is talking solely about mountains that aren't volcanoes.For example, volcanoes don't follow your claims whatsoever. All of their mass is above ground level and are not shaped like pegs or stopping earthquakes from happening at all. There are far more examples than just this.
Post #49
@McCulloch: Hey there fellow Canadian!
When we look at the different styles of Arabic, it is unmatched in literary history - several attempts have been made before - but they are quickly identified as they do not match the rest of the text in it's uniqueness.
In fact, in the Qur'an, God challenges mankind to come up with something identical - a challenge that has never been defeated in 1400 years!
This is only one of the remarkable factors about the Qur'an. Under the simplicity we find the fact that it does not contradict modern scientific understanding, infact it goes out of its way to reference scientific views that are not common with the belief at the time and at times contradicts those beliefs. We find no possible explanation for such knowledge written 1400 years ago.
It also speaks of past civilizations and kingdoms, that are historically proven to have existed yet the Arab bedouins had no archaeological knowledge. It speaks of past Prophets and preaches a message that makes sense in accordance to our purpose of existence and other religions. It speaks of morality and instructs us to reflect and ponder over creation.
It predicts future events in a very clear and understandable manner. Please put aside everything you've heard about scriptures and their predictions - I understand how radical they get. This is very different.
It demonstrates a very complex structure yet extremely simple language is used and is highly unique in that style. It begs your reflection and clear mind.
These are only some of the reasons why we believe it was sent by God.
Hope this has helped, eh!
It is the Arabic format that is unmatched not the words. 'Words' in Arabic are everywhere, identical in the Arabic Bible in the Qur'an and in school books.Of course mainly Islamic Arabic scholars have been told this for centuries. To claim that any other Arabic word could match the Qu'ran would be heresy, so no one makes so bold a claim.
When we look at the different styles of Arabic, it is unmatched in literary history - several attempts have been made before - but they are quickly identified as they do not match the rest of the text in it's uniqueness.
In fact, in the Qur'an, God challenges mankind to come up with something identical - a challenge that has never been defeated in 1400 years!
When we study Arabic history and its various forms, we find out that the Qur'an does not fall under any familiar style. - check out http://www.theinimitablequran.com/ - where this is thoroughly discussed.That does not however, mean that it is true.
That is another story, as its literary style is unmatched - we are faced with something remarkable, even though it's supposed 'author' was an illiterate man (Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)). It is not too complex and is easily memorized by children as young as three years old!Or that if it is true that the Qu'ran had to have been inspired by the god.
This is only one of the remarkable factors about the Qur'an. Under the simplicity we find the fact that it does not contradict modern scientific understanding, infact it goes out of its way to reference scientific views that are not common with the belief at the time and at times contradicts those beliefs. We find no possible explanation for such knowledge written 1400 years ago.
It also speaks of past civilizations and kingdoms, that are historically proven to have existed yet the Arab bedouins had no archaeological knowledge. It speaks of past Prophets and preaches a message that makes sense in accordance to our purpose of existence and other religions. It speaks of morality and instructs us to reflect and ponder over creation.
It predicts future events in a very clear and understandable manner. Please put aside everything you've heard about scriptures and their predictions - I understand how radical they get. This is very different.
It demonstrates a very complex structure yet extremely simple language is used and is highly unique in that style. It begs your reflection and clear mind.
These are only some of the reasons why we believe it was sent by God.
Hope this has helped, eh!
-
- Guru
- Posts: 2301
- Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:24 am
Post #50
Then, we can discard their interpretations as being biased and ignorant.Peace wrote: Their interpretations are all identical when it comes to the verses in question about the 'beating' and about the mountains.
I see no relevancy in that at all.Again, yes you may read it, but to pull meaning from it you must look to its context. Each verse was revealed for a specific location and time, it wasn't revealed as one book all at once.
Again, irrelevant.Again, this is our religion, when we interpret our Qur'an you must understand the language and look to the historical context.
Then, if I understand the Quran based on the words written there, my understanding is wrong?This is our religion, if you wish to invent your own way to understand the Qur'an go ahead, however, I highly doubt anyone would listen to you since our method of interpretation has been preserved and saved dating all the way back to the time of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
Baloney. Preservation techniques? Like making jams and jellies?I meant here that the text is not similar to the Bible and the Taurah in its textual accuracies and preservation techniques and interpretation technique thus to interpret it you must refer to its history and translation.
Baloney, Arabic is just another language. There is nothing in one language you can't accurately describe with another.Yes they can be, but I'm sure there are instances where the translation does not do the original language justice, this is the case many times in Arabic, the style of the Arabic, depth, and linguistic elements are not matched in the translation.
Ah, I see now, you're confusion lies in the fact that you believe translation means word for word. That's not how it works. It doesn't matter how many words in one language it takes to describe a word in another language. The only important aspect of translating is to make sure the meaning and intent get across accurately.As you can see, one word in English can be translated into 4 - and they are not all the same. Each one corresponds to a specific conditional situation.
Yeah thanks, more Islamic propaganda about the miraculous Quran.A very unique text nonetheless. Check out :http://www.theinimitablequran.com/ - Talks all about it in detail.
This quote here had me stitches, it's as if the author had never read a book in his entire life other than the Quran...
"The development of an entirely unique expression is beyond the scope of the productive nature of any author, hence a supernatural entity, God, is the only sufficient comprehensive explanation."
I never called myself an interpreter. Where do you get these ridiculous notions?No fallacy, if you don't meet the pre-requisites of what an interprator is supposed have, then you are not qualified to call yourself an interprator.
No, we can't because that is an appeal to popularity fallacy. You don't accept something because someone says so, you accept it on it's own merit and validity.Because he is a reliable source of interpretation then we can accept his interpretation of unknown verses happily.
LOL!Thus proving that the book doesn't contain any scientific errors - as i've demonstrated before on another thread - showing its miraculous nature. Something you have constantly failed to refute.
So, we see that you're dishonestly aligning scientific fact with your holy book and that makes us radical and baseless?It doesn't make me feel better, I am drawing the similarity between you two when it comes to your radical baseless Qur'anic interpretations.
Ah yes, reality.Yes, something that goes against Islamic teaching.So, what is an "un-Islamic ideology"? Is that anything that disagrees with Islam?
Don't you mean the radical interpretation where it actually states in the Quran a husband should beat his wife?I've shown how you seem to jump to radical interpretations of the Qur'an, such as the 'women-beating' you so confidently believe in.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_formationBaseless, no evidence, unsupported, please reference your claims with evidence and proof - I believe it is against the rules to give one-liners with no evidence.
http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk ... ntains.htm
No problem, we can look at Erosional, Folded and Fault Block mountains and find they don't resemble pegs or stop earthquakes.In Arabic, a volcano is called something different than a mountain. Yes some volcanoes are mountains however the verse is talking solely about mountains that aren't volcanoes.