i thought this would be an interseting topic for jews, christians and muslims.



''Those who believed, the jews, the christians, and the sabiaens
- any who believe in God and the last day and work righteous, shall
have their reward with the lord, on them shall be no fear nor shall
they grieve''



somebody please explain this, how can this all be?. i thought islam was ''true religion, why would they have a surah about jews, christians and sabiaens getting salvation when the quran says it was them that played around Gods true message, and the sabieans ? ? ? , why would they get salvation they left ''true religion'' known as islam. how the quran first say they corrupted Gods message and preached falsehood, then have a surah about them getting salvation. ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Hello scared one,
Others on the forum helped me with this question too on this thread. Ansar provided a good link which explains that the verse was abrogated by a verse revealed later. The writer explains it much better than I can:

http://www.islamqa.com/index.php?ref=2912&ln=eng

Peace

Others on the forum helped me with this question too on this thread. Ansar provided a good link which explains that the verse was abrogated by a verse revealed later. The writer explains it much better than I can:

http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=e...e&QR=2912&dgn=4

Firstly, I have a dislike for websites that use a direct IP in the URL. However, I browsed this forum and came to a curiosity. I always, and correct me if I am wrong but "Haraam" is something that a Muslim "avoids" doing. However, this comes to a bit of a grey area for what are we actually saying by stating something as haraam. is it:

1. Something a Muslim should avoid at all costs.
2. Something that should be avoided when practicle.

Also, again this site reffered to me as a Kaafirs, Getting tired of that racist remark.

Muezzin,

I didn't feel the topic worthy of a new thread. Seeing as the question had already been answered I thought I might as well continue here. Know what I'm sayin' like, yeah?

hey guyz
what does that all have to do with surah 2:62, i want to hear your opinions on it. or explain it or intererpet more.

Greetings Muhammad,
Thank you for all your help to this point. Though we have different world-views it's been fascinating to discover the reasoning behind your beliefs.
I'm sorry to go on about it, but I'm still unclear on the abrogation issue with regard to verses 2.62 and 3.85. I've read the articles I've been directed to, and the explanations kindly provided by yourself and Ansar, but I still have some questions.

OK, let's have a look at the first verse (2.62):

Those who believe (in the Qur'an).
And those who follow the Jewish (scriptures),
And the Christians and the Sabians,
Any who believe in Allah
And the Last Day,
And work righteousness,
Shall have their reward
With their Lord on them
Shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

This appears to mean that four different groups of people have nothing to fear. They all share belief in Allah and the Last Day, but they follow different scriptures. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is not mentioned (but he is implied by the translator's mention of the Qur'an). So someone who follows Jewish scriptures (and does not necessarily believe in the Prophet (pbuh)) appears to have nothing to fear. I can't see from this verse that belief in Allah necessitates belief in Muhammad (pbuh). This view is derived from the disjunction between each group that is mentioned, i.e. the implication seems to be that the four groups do not believe all the same things, despite the fact that they share the same fundamental beliefs. So to say that these different groups have nothing to fear seems (to me) to be contrary to the more generally known position of Islam, stated clearly in verse 3.85:

If anyone desires
A religion other than
Islam (submission to Allah)
Never will it be accepted
Of him; and in the Hereafter
He will be in the ranks
Of those who have lost.

It looks as if Allah has adjusted the original position. Since Allah is supposed to have absolute foreknowledge, why would such a change be necessary?

Originally Posted by Muhammad

So the first verse is referring to the Jews, Christians and Sabians of the past nations who believed in their own Prophets and Scriptures without change and died likewise, or those who were contemporaries of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who believed in Allaah and His Prophet and performed good deeds. Allaah only accepts deeds that are in accordance with His Prophet's (pbuh) religion as mentioned in verse [3.85].

I read verse 2.62 as referring to contemporaries of Muhammad (pbuh); there doesn't seem to be anything in the text to indicate it refers to people of past nations. So verse 2.62 seems not to have belief in Muhammad (pbuh) as a necessity to gain paradise and avoid hellfire, while verse 3.85 does seem to do so.

Now, there is probably an explanation for this, but it does appear to be a contradiction. I find many things in the Qur'an that appear to be contradictions, and many of them are explained (and apparently resolved) on the LI main page. The articles there are usually quite long and hard to understand, making references to various possible interpretations. It's difficult to grasp how a book that is reputed to be so clear, by an author with absolute wisdom and foreknowledge, could require long-winded clarification on a point that appears to be a simple contradiction. I'm sure there's still something I'm missing here.

Finally, on another point you mentioned:

And if we were talking about existence of dinosaurs for example, I think there would be little to discuss in light of Islamic evidence, therefore the discussion would cease whether the phrase were used or not. If one decided not to talk about it, it wouldn't be due to the fact that there was something to hide but simply due to lack of knowledge.

Does this mean Muslims claim not to know about the existence of dinosaurs? I'm not sure about the Islamic position.

Thanks again for all your help - maybe I'll get my head round all this one day....

Peace

Originally Posted by czgibson

Greetings Muhammad,
Thank you for all your help to this point. Though we have different world-views it's been fascinating to discover the reasoning behind your beliefs.
I'm sorry to go on about it, but I'm still unclear on the abrogation issue with regard to verses 2.62 and 3.85. I've read the articles I've been directed to, and the explanations kindly provided by yourself and Ansar, but I still have some questions.

OK, let's have a look at the first verse (2.62):

Those who believe (in the Qur'an).
And those who follow the Jewish (scriptures),
And the Christians and the Sabians,
Any who believe in Allah
And the Last Day,
And work righteousness,
Shall have their reward
With their Lord on them
Shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

This appears to mean that four different groups of people have nothing to fear. They all share belief in Allah and the Last Day, but they follow different scriptures. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is not mentioned (but he is implied by the translator's mention of the Qur'an). So someone who follows Jewish scriptures (and does not necessarily believe in the Prophet (pbuh)) appears to have nothing to fear. I can't see from this verse that belief in Allah necessitates belief in Muhammad (pbuh). This view is derived from the disjunction between each group that is mentioned, i.e. the implication seems to be that the four groups do not believe all the same things, despite the fact that they share the same fundamental beliefs. So to say that these different groups have nothing to fear seems (to me) to be contrary to the more generally known position of Islam, stated clearly in verse 3.85:

If anyone desires
A religion other than
Islam (submission to Allah)
Never will it be accepted
Of him; and in the Hereafter
He will be in the ranks
Of those who have lost.

It looks as if Allah has adjusted the original position. Since Allah is supposed to have absolute foreknowledge, why would such a change be necessary?

Greetings,

The islamqa article adequately explained the position of the verse and its stance on those who believed in Allaah.

You have to grasp that this verse does not refer those [mentioned in the verse] after the advent of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) but it refers to the Jews [before the advent of the Prophet] who held fast to the Torah and the Sunnah of Prophet Moses (Peace be upon him) until Isa ibn Maryam (Jesus, son of Mary) was sent. When Prophet Isa Ibn Maryam came, those who still adhered to the Torah and the Sunnah of Prophet Moses and did not follow Isa Ibn Maryam were destroyed. The Christians mentioned are the Christians who held fast to the Injeel (Gospel) and the laws of Isa Ibn Maryam (peace be upon him), they were the ones who believed him and there are deemed as believers. This continued until the arrival Prophet Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Anyone who had been following the previous laws ordained should drop it and follow the last Messenger sent to mankind.

The verse was canceled with the next ayaat [verse] as reported by ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him):

And whoever seeks a religion other than Islaam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.

I read verse 2.62 as referring to contemporaries of Muhammad (pbuh); there doesn't seem to be anything in the text to indicate it refers to people of past nations.

It does, the verb amano means believed, it is used in the past tense. It's a perfect tense.


Peace!

Please bear also in mind that generally speaking, a kaafir is another word for Non-Muslim.

It has no racist connations as root implied but is is simply to distinguish [generally speaking] between Muslim and Non-Muslim. If one claims that it is racially insulting, then by his standard, I should be offended to be called a non-Christian.

Originally Posted by kadafi

Please bear also in mind that generally speaking, a kaafir is another word for Non-Muslim.

It has no racist connations as root implied but is is simply to distinguish [generally speaking] between Muslim and Non-Muslim. If one claims that it is racially insulting, then by his standard, I should be offended to be called a non-Christian.

lets get back to the subject about surah 2:62, i dont wanna hear about this anymore i could get you guyz kicked off the site. what the hell does that have to with meaning of surah 2:62?.

lets get back to the subject about surah 2:62

Please refer to this post by the esteemed member czgibson.

what the hell does that have to with meaning of surah 2:62?.

Jews and Christians are referred to as kaafirs and root thinks the term is offensive.

I have split the thread 'Existence of God' so that we can discuss the verse [2.62] in this thread Insha'Allaah.

Originally Posted by Osman

Please refer to this post by the esteemed member czgibson.

Thanks for your compliment, Osman, but I can't take credit for the article - I only linked to it!

ok i see
but tell what you think of this surah. or explain what it means logically, i don't wanna hear anything about them being kafars, i wanna know what you think about the surah saying that they(jews n christians n sabians(ones that left true religion in other terms meaning islam, for a polytheistic religon dealing with the believe of God, or leaving true religon to be jew or christian(corrupted bros),)

please talk about the surah more. stop the talk about kafars, being kafars, or what it means. its driving me crazy, lets just say everybody that believes in the oneness of God is a believer including the christans(in non-religous terms their monotheists even though they believe in the trinity of him cause they believe in God the difference is look at hinduism a polytheistic religon some or most of you didnt know that hindus believe in God but they have a polytheistic view of him they believe he is in the form of many gods meaning all the gods together make up him, thats why sometimes they say they the hindus have alot of dieties in their religon and didnt you know that their were monotheistic hindus another group of hindus that believe in God and that he is just one all of the hindus would be monotheists if they associate with the skihs, muslims, or jews(just like how the christians and jews), and that they would almost have the same belief as christianity or any other monotheistic religon, in religon terms we only call them monotheists(the christians) cause of their relationship with the jews and that they share some beliefs with islam and judaism,( an example is all these three claim abraham as their patraich, belief in the last day, think that their book of teachings is Gods message to humanity) muslims being ranked no. 1.

muslims being ranked no. 1.

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php...ord2=christian

also, I apologise if I annoy some:

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php...rd2=non+muslim