Authenticity of the Qur'an

[Hugo]

I should forewarn you that the fellow Hugo makes up contents to the book as he desires.. in fact this is excerpted directly from the book:

Not a single book from the NT has survived in the original author's handwriting, the closest thing being a fragment dated c. 100-115 and containing six verses of John 18 (footnote) Here I must interject that this date is pure guesswork, a subjective enterprise that can occasionally run with a marginal difference of decades to centuries. Among the earliest Greek manuscript of the N.T to actually bear a date is one written in the year of the world 6457 (i.e 949. C.E) Vatican library No. 345. Notice that the the manuscript does not contain any christian date, because the Anno Domini 'year of the Lord' calendar system had yet to be invented. See also this work pp 238-39, where Leningrad Codex mentions a slew of dates, none of them Christian. This reveals that until the 11th C C.E (if not beyond) no christian calendar system existed or at least was not in use]

he is just selectively, adding and parsing ad lib using adjectives, adverbs and pronouns to create the desired effect, which is obviously to discredit the author, for when you discredit the author, why should you bother reading the book.

He pursues vacuous attempts to paint the Quran and the bible in the same light in terms of transmission, or will come up with something like the author is pursuing this because the Quran's integrity rests on the falsity of the bible, and if that doesn't stand a chance then he'll figure something like volume or mass of empty contents, and when that doesn't work he'll figure out some other inane route to go on and turn the thread into 57 pages where he will discuss everything from roman numberals to the effects of orange juice on penmanship.. but nothing of substance!

It is all about a descent to word play and how he can use them to create a desired end, not an actual interest in textual integrity and content and side by side comparison.. really makes it belaboring to even attempt a response!

1. Let us be clear here, Skye quotes from Azami's book but its up to you to find the page as she make no attempt to make it clear. (its page 282)

2. However, what is interesting here is that the first para under sections 4 quoted above can be found at islam-is-the-only-solution.com/jesus-jihad-and-jizyah.htm in an article written by Shahid Bin Waheed and posted in 2005 indeed almost the whole section from section 3 page 281 onwards is substantially the same. Whist it is understood the quotations would be the same it would be unusual to say the least that Waheed and Azami's own words agreed (unless they are the same person?).

Now I don't know what is going in here but someone is copying from someone so there is question of integrity. At the moment for me a shadow is cast on Azami's book at this point. If any one explain this it would help.

 

[Hugo]

How can such an argument be fallacious, would you rather expect a book full of mistakes to be divine?

A divine book has to be free from error and this has to be but one of it's preconditions. It's completely and totally illogical to argue otherwise. And yes I can prove that the Qur'an is true but this is not where the problem lies, the problem is accepting and believing in it once the truth is made clear.

I will try to explain why this is fallacious.

1. Firstly, you are engaging in 'proof by definition' because you say a divine book has to be free from error (we need to also define what that means). There is no way that you can shown this to be true or an acceptable definition because anyone can create their own definition and offer that as truth and there is no way it can be tested.

2. Secondly, the reasoning here is essentially circular and you are falling into a trap so is the Qu'ran divine because it is error free or is it is error free because it is divine? (after Socrates).

3. Thirdly, we have the notion of something being divine and any argument built on that is fallacious because it is unfalsifiable meaning the explanation contains a claim (divinity) that is not falsifiable: there is no way to check it is true and no way to show it is false. Consider the line "He lied because he's possessed by demons." Now this could be the correct explanation but there's no way to check it. You can check whether he's twitching and moaning, but this won't be evidence about whether a supernatural is involved. The claim that he's possessed can't be verified if it's true, and it can't be falsified if it's false. So, the claim is too odd to be relied upon for an explanation of his lying and is an instance of fallacious reasoning. (based on a note in iPod app called "cheetSheet" a summary of common fallacies)

5. I can add to this list but I think this is sufficient.

4. Perhaps Uthman will tell us if a thread exits (or might be created) to test you 'proof' although at this stage it is too vague to deal with or perhaps you meant error free = true another definition?

 

[Hugo]

oh I see.. I guess it doesn't matter that I have quoted chapter 3 verse 7 about three to four times on this thread.. I really don't think he reads any replies here, given the repetition of the same resolved points with each thread.. it is tedious!

With regard to threads I was thinking of Al-Baqara 2:187 and yes it is easy to be misled here and indeed as you no doubt know it needed the intervention of the prophet himself to make the meaning of this verse clear. Bit odd don't you think that if this is God's very word that so simple a thing can be misunderstood. But not matter, no one watches for the dawn now?

 

[MSalman]

^lol, I have to laugh at your poor logic and double standards. Do you not think that same can be said about the bible? Humans are not divine or understand things the same way. How the validity of God's words is proven by the fact that it should not be misunderstood? Can you please show us a single text on this planet on which everyone agreed upon on its every single thing?

So should I repeat your nonsense back to you?

PS: Are you sure you are talking about surah 2 ayah 18?

 

[Hugo]

^lol, I have to laugh at your poor logic and double standards. Do you not think that same can be said about the bible? Humans are not divine or understand things the same way. How the validity of God's words is proven by the fact that it should not be misunderstood? Can you please show us a single text on this planet on which everyone agreed upon on its every single thing?

So should I repeat your nonsense back to you?

PS: Are you sure you are talking about surah 2 ayah 18?

I have no idea what poor logic you are talking about or why it might be double standards. I agree with you that we don't necessarily understand words, sentences etc the same way. My point was that if one argues that it is God that is saying something directly in the Qu'ran then can anything he says be unmeaning, it is you who argue that the Qu'ran is clear do you not?

Of course the same can be said about the Bible or any book for that matter because we as humans have to make sense of what is said so religious books are not exempt they are written in ordinary everyday language else we could not understand them at all don't you agree?

Sorry about the mistake and thanks for pointing it out the ref should be 2:187 and I used Pickthal.

 

[Hugo]

Hugo - what can it mean to judge a fact by the end product, is not a fact the end product? I don't think you know what a 'fact is'. Of course there are contenders. Let's say poetry - are you seriously saying there is no poetry better that that found in the Qu'ran and if so show it to be so.

The end product is indeed a fact and can be for the more mystifying ends of things. And no, there are no contenders, though the Quran reads like poetry it isn't a poetry book. I have gone ahead and listed for you, all that was brought by the Quran. Islam isn't merely a religion, it is a complete, political/economic/social/moral/spiritual system. Plus it is melodious.. if you fixate on aspect, you'll have missed the point, as you often do and then dwell as nauseam on non-points!

Hugo - it is your opinion there are no contenders but that will not make it a fact will it and if the opinion is wider that just you you still end with a fallacy. That you feel content and happy in your faith is a good thing but try not to think that other are not just as content and happy in theirs.

Hugo - two things, but if you look around you will find Islamic sites that try to show that Prophet Mohammed is mentioned in the Song of Solomon. However, to get to the points, you were supposed to bring something from then Qu'ran comparable to Psalm 8, you issued the challenge and failed.

Hugo - I looked at the videos and some of the view were stunning and in the second one how fitting it seemed to me that we also add Psalm 150 a song of praise from the whole creation and that would bring me to me feet in praise and joy.

Hugo - sadly this is absolutely true but you cannot seriously suggest that persecution of thinkers and scientists did not happen in Islamic societies? Yes, I think you may be right, moral truths are universal and one does not have to be a Muslim or Christian to lead a good and useful life.

Like the example I have given of Christianity in the middle ages, I give the example of Islam in the age of enlightenment.. in fact the one that was oppressing our scientists was still the church, as was the case with Ibn Rushd whose books were banned by Pope Alexander the IV

Hugo - did the Pope make Ign Rushd sit at the door of the mosque in Cordoba so that so called believers could spit on him as they entered. If you can only see wickedness and oppression in everyone else but never in your own faith you do a disservice to you faith and humanity.


Hugo - Peter denied not denounced. But what is your point, that humans should have no failing or weaknesses? Perhaps you would do well to read the whole story of Peter. Did you think God only works through the great but never through the humble or those that fail, if you do you make God the measure of your own mind.

The point is, your god was about to die (forsaking himself) and the folks he left behind to carry out his message were confused at best should really be foretelling of the future of christianity, that he (your god) in order to correct his short comings had to in a cryptic act, use his nemesis Paul to abrogate his commandments.. through a man who wasn't even a chosen disciple and the former lover of Popea (the wife of Nero) .. I'll leave that to your deductive reasoning as it is often over active.. we can only hope it equally active in this situation as well.

Hugo - how can you write such scurrilous rubbish, what web sites do you visit? I have more respective for Islam and indeed you that to look for such remarks about Islam - and there is no shortage of site that ridicule Islam and its Prophet.

Hugo - what point is this making? The Bible is full of prayers and so we know how to pray with no without words at all, with lofty words, with broken half formed words, in sadness and in joy. Go look at Psalm 150 and you will see there is no single way and creation itself praises God, its all about our being a living sacrifice to Him - can you agree to that.
The point I am making is of the importance of sunna, and sane 'disciples'
I am not here for sacrificial or self-immolating purposes.. seems very counter intuitive.

Hugo - here you go again about this self-immolation and I have no idea what you are talking about and your only purpose seems to be to avoid my questions.

I genuinely don't understand what that means.. if it lost all purpose, why do you continue rehashing questions that have already been answered?

all the best!

Look at this pots and see the question and how you avoid them. I have tried as best I can to answer your objections or question your answers

 

[جوري]

I can hardly understand what this is saying and even when I went to emedicine.com/plastic/... (not very nice is it to use and not cite the source unless you wrote it?) I still failed to understands where the analogy was. The essence of arguments based on analogy is simplicity and clarity not complexity and fog.

So if I state a moral law; let's say one about honesty do you mean that Islam or Christianity some how raises this law to another plain because those without religion have no sense of right and wrong?

I might agree with you if you said that religions have the necessary vocabulary to speak about morality - is this what you mean?

My comment had nothing at all to do with Islam vs. Christianity or any other religion or ideology and was to CZ. not to you, just that alone should have elucidated the direction of the analogy-- do you have a persecution complex?
It has to do with the common moral code shared by all (atheists and theists) and how religion defines that code.

I thank you however, for your observations here, as it gives a very clear account of how you misread and deduce conclusions that have no bearing on what is actually written.

and yes indeed, I have written it myself, for I have to know a thing about parotid gland tumors and their varieties even if I am to look them up for reference and to use them in an example don't you think? whether on e medicine or uptodate or Robin's review of pathology, I guarantee said tumors will share the same names on any site and in order for me to leech it from anywhere I'd have had to have learned it at some point for instant ease of finding what looking for! as with everything it is written and conceived by my person for I challenge you to bring me a paragraph from anywhere on the web that states what I just have... the comments which I have quoted from the book and to corroborate the author's notes I have cited as such, not all of us rely on the wit of orientalists and nonsensical logorrhea to loan credence to what we write, you really ought to try it sometimes..

all the best

 

[جوري]

1. Let us be clear here, Skye quotes from Azami's book but its up to you to find the page as she make no attempt to make it clear. (its page 282)

2. However, what is interesting here is that the first para under sections 4 quoted above can be found at islam-is-the-only-solution.com/jesus-jihad-and-jizyah.htm in an article written by Shahid Bin Waheed and posted in 2005 indeed almost the whole section from section 3 page 281 onwards is substantially the same. Whist it is understood the quotations would be the same it would be unusual to say the least that Waheed and Azami's own words agreed (unless they are the same person?).

Now I don't know what is going in here but someone is copying from someone so there is question of integrity. At the moment for me a shadow is cast on Azami's book at this point. If any one explain this it would help.

your link:
islam-is-the-only-solution.com/jesus-jihad-and-jizyah.htm

doesn't work.. if you'd like people to comment and not be sent on a wild goose chase (and not actually point you out as the perpetrator of wrong doing). then do several things
1- Quote the passages in question (for comparison).
2- write what it is that has gotten you miffed about the passages in a clear concise manner.
3-provide workable links, along with quoting the passage in question.
4- Try on your own private time to contact either authors and see if there is something of a nom de plume although, I doubt that Dr. Al-Azami wastes his time on blogs when he has several books out in publication of which I have two.


Try to do your homework and not delegate the task to others if you expect that what you write should be taken seriously!

all the best

 

[جوري]

With regard to threads I was thinking of Al-Baqara 2:187 and yes it is easy to be misled here and indeed as you no doubt know it needed the intervention of the prophet himself to make the meaning of this verse clear. Bit odd don't you think that if this is God's very word that so simple a thing can be misunderstood. But not matter, no one watches for the dawn now?

Do tropes and figure of speech still exist in the English language or are they extinct now that we are so 'advanced'?

are such terms as, "falling in love", "racking our brains", "climbing the ladder of success" etc? exist?
do people still go out looking for:Best Places to Watch The Sunset -

I'd say, it is easy to be mislead only if you are a christian, for where else in any monotheistic religion do people take men for gods? and give the gods mothers, and alter egos etc?
and indeed, the call to prayer especially in Ramadan is done by watching the sun disappear into the horizon, I was fortunate enough to travel to places, where the call to prayer was made from the minaret as the 'sun set' signaling the end of fast and the rejoicing of the blessings of God!
Fortunately in Islam, everything is defined and well preserved, that even your feeble attempts seem rather comical.

all the best

 

[جوري]

Hugo - it is your opinion there are no contenders but that will not make it a fact will it and if the opinion is wider that just you you still end with a fallacy. That you feel content and happy in your faith is a good thing but try not to think that other are not just as content and happy in theirs.

My comments have nothing to do with contentment of faith.. It it more an espousal of both heart and mind to reach a cohesive conclusion. Which unfortunately isn't the case in Christianity, for one has to leave all wit behind to accept the fallacy of the man/god combo.
I always like to use the analogy of someone having a heart attack.. what is the first thing that you can do?
1-give them oxygen?
2-give them an aspirin
3- Give them morphine
4-give them a fibrinolytic agent?
5- take them for an angioplasty right away
6- Give them MONA and heparin and o2
7- take them for a triple bypass right away
8- ask for a cardiology consult

Do any of the above seem wrong to you? in fact all of them have truth, all of them 'technically' correct. but only one is most correct, and only one will get you marked correctly on your exam, or in real life!

Hugo - two things, but if you look around you will find Islamic sites that try to show that Prophet Mohammed is mentioned in the Song of Solomon. However, to get to the points, you were supposed to bring something from then Qu'ran comparable to Psalm 8, you issued the challenge and failed.

I don't see how prophet Mohammed being mentioned in the song of Solomon has to do with this topic. Using the example above, it should be clear to you, that not everything in Christianity is incorrect, we can only judge by its agreement with Islamic text. All that agrees with Islam can be taken as true, all that disagrees can be discarded.

I find nothing in your bible comparable to the Quran, I brought you from the Quran that which is better. I can't bring the Quran down to a lower denominator where it can better fit with the bible. One is the word of men, and the other is the word of God, how can there be room for comparison?

Hugo - I looked at the videos and some of the view were stunning and in the second one how fitting it seemed to me that we also add Psalm 150 a song of praise from the whole creation and that would bring me to me feet in praise and joy.

I am glad you liked it (even if it were for the views)

Hugo - did the Pope make Ign Rushd sit at the door of the mosque in Cordoba so that so called believers could spit on him as they entered. If you can only see wickedness and oppression in everyone else but never in your own faith you do a disservice to you faith and humanity.

I think depriving folks of science, banning and torching books and torturing people to death (as was done during the inquisition) is a far worst crime than what you purport-- No oppression has ever happened in Islam because of faith, rather the dark desires of men!

Hugo - how can you write such scurrilous rubbish, what web sites do you visit? I have more respective for Islam and indeed you that to look for such remarks about Islam - and there is no shortage of site that ridicule Islam and its Prophet.

What does, what happened to Christ by his own disciple compare or have to do with islamophobes and their websites?

Hugo - here you go again about this self-immolation and I have no idea what you are talking about and your only purpose seems to be to avoid my questions.

I don't think I have avoided the question at all, you asked for the importance of Sunna when we have the Quran, and I have told you, it is to elucidate how things are to be done. Sure the Quran tells us to pray and the number of times, but it doesn't tell us how, and there is where the tradition of the prophet comes in.. you should have a look at this video
http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...64-want-see-jews-pray-does-look-familiar.html

adopted from Islamic prayer as per the comments of the worshiper in question. I have merely asked you to contrast that, with what you do in your church, since none of your founding fathers elucidated that for you, and Jesus himself as per your bible picked disciples that were confused at best, that he later abrogated his commandments (if I am to take Jesus as God) through his nemesis (saul/Paul)

Look at this pots and see the question and how you avoid them. I have tried as best I can to answer your objections or question your answers

I haven't avoided any questions, I have clarified them. If you are unhappy with the answers giving you, that is rather a problem that you need to deal with personally, as it has no bearing on what I have written or the exchange here.

all the best!

 

[MSalman]

I have no idea what poor logic you are talking about or why it might be double standards.

poor logic because your saying that everyone should agree upon whatever God has said and not misunderstand what He is saying: other words, there should be not difference. This is an atheist argument and has many problems and this is not the thread to discuss it in details

double standards because your consider our difference to be problematic but same thing can be said about the Bible. So really, there is no point of bringing such an argument or it holds no value when it backfires on you.

My point was that if one argues that it is God that is saying something directly in the Qu'ran then can anything he says be unmeaning, it is you who argue that the Qu'ran is clear do you not?

and who said or where is the text which says somethings in the Qur'an can be meaningless? Again, the same argument can be applied to any text and that is because we are humans. So really, your whole point pretty much pointless. Even if we agree with it, it holds no value in your favour: The Qur'an is not from God or the Qur'an must be understood by everyone.

The argument that the Qur'an is clear is not a black or white issue. It requires further explanation and even If I tell you, having known you for past few months, you will repeat same rubbish again. However, I will do it for sake of others:

There are ayaat which are very clear and can be understood by everyone. There are ayaat which may seem simpler but they require further clarifications and explanations. In addition, not everyone is qualified and have tools to understand and interpret the Qur'an. Thus the Qur'an make it obligatory upon those who are not knowledgeable to ask the people of knowledge. The argument which you brought falls under the second category because it requires bit detail explanation in regard to fiqh. Moreover, it is an evidence for Qur'an's command to ask the people of knowledge because not every one has the knowledge to understand rulings correctly.
​

rest later, insha'Allah

and Allah knows best

 

[Hugo]

poor logic because your saying that everyone should agree upon whatever God has said and not misunderstand what He is saying: other words, there should be not difference. This is an atheist argument and has many problems and this is not the thread to discuss it in details

Hugo - please show me where I said such a thing because I think you are inventing this

double standards because your consider our difference to be problematic but same thing can be said about the Bible. So really, there is no point of bringing such an argument or it holds no value when it backfires on you.

Hugo - differences can be problematic so I don't see where double standards comes in here and I don't know where I brought any argument on this.

and who said or where is the text which says somethings in the Qur'an can be meaningless? Again, the same argument can be applied to any text and that is because we are humans. So really, your whole point pretty much pointless. Even if we agree with it, it holds no value in your favour: The Qur'an is not from God or the Qur'an must be understood by everyone.

The argument that the Qur'an is clear is not a black or white issue. It requires further explanation and even If I tell you, having known you for past few months, you will repeat same rubbish again. However, I will do it for sake of others:

Why is it I repeat rubbish by you presumably cannot, please explain? I think any one with even a passing interest in Islam knows there are difficulty words and verses just like most other books. Where we might differ is that I cannot accept that authority as you describe must forever be subservient to reason that is the way of stagnation; one never learns to think for yourself so the Islam you describe is condemned to live in a past that will not pass.

I think it better that you take the time to read what I said which was if God says something then it cannot be meaningless else why bother to say it? Clearly, this does not necessarily mean WE can understand it.

I don't want points in my favour, stop inventing motives for me and start being aware of your own. This is about learning not sophistry. I never said the Qu'ran was not from God, I said that it is not possible to prove it is or prove it is not.

 

[Hugo]

My comments have nothing to do with contentment of faith.. It it more an espousal of both heart and mind to reach a cohesive conclusion. Which unfortunately isn't the case in Christianity, for one has to leave all wit behind to accept the fallacy of the man/god combo.
I always like to use the analogy of someone having a heart attack.. what is the first thing that you can do?

Hugo - to say this shows you know nothing of Christian faith. When one comes to faith it for me anyway not about 'reaching a conclusion' as if its some examination question. It's about hearing God's call. Have you never considered Abraham, any rational man would not have left his home at God's call to wander who knows where; he just believed God, he had faith and a promise but nothing else of substance. Was his heart and mind in it, yes but it was simple faith and a hold on the promise that made the difference.

You see there is not a long list of things we must know or things we believe when we comes to faith, it is simply God's call and our response to it. As we move through life we learn more and more of God but like Abraham we hold on by faith. The mistake you make in your analogy is that to choose the correct answer one must be an expert but when we come to God at the beginning of faith its a simple response to want to follow where he leads and that is based on faith not expert opinion. Do any of the above seem wrong to you?.

All that agrees with Islam can be taken as true, all that disagrees can be discarded. I find nothing in your bible comparable to the Quran, I brought you from the Quran that which is better. I can't bring the Quran down to a lower denominator where it can better fit with the bible. One is the word of men, and the other is the word of God, how can there be room for comparison?

Hugo - I pity you, you make God the measure of your own mind and to even suggest that things like the book of Isaiah, the Psalms, the Sermon on the Mount to name a few are not comparable is to consign what is unquestionably good, noble and beautiful to the dogs is unbelievable in any rational person.

I think depriving folks of science, banning and torching books and torturing people to death (as was done during the inquisition) is a far worst crime than what you purport-- No oppression has ever happened in Islam because of faith, rather the dark desires of men!

Hugo - this is just a fallacy and I assume that you mean that if something bad happened it was not true Islam. Well if that is the quality of your argument then I apply it to the inquisition on the basis that was not true Christianity. To not speak up when you see wrong anywhere is to be a part of that wrong

adopted from Islamic prayer as per the comments of the worshiper in question. I have merely asked you to contrast that, with what you do in your church, since none of your founding fathers elucidated that for you, and Jesus himself as per your bible picked disciples that were confused at best, that he later abrogated his commandments (if I am to take Jesus as God) through his nemesis (saul/Paul)

I am not sure I can follow this. Islamic prayer format was taken from the Jews so its not Unique. I don't think you have any idea what we do in church with regard to prayer but typically we have set communal prayers just as you do but also open prayers and of course often hymns are prayers.

If you find that not to your liking that is ok by me but you have to understand that others might find it baffling and boring that you say the same prayers over and over again and perhaps for the vast majority of Muslims without much understanding.

To me its where our hearts and mind is when we prayer that matters, that we prepare ourself for it and focus on God.

 

[MSalman]

^*smack*

please show me where I said such a thing because I think you are inventing this

this is implied by your following statement as I pointed even earlier

Bit odd don't you think that if this is God's very word that so simple a thing can be misunderstood.

differences can be problematic so I don't see where double standards comes in here and I don't know where I brought any argument on this.

well, my apology - it is not really double standards but same problem exists within your own belief. So fix that first before raising the argument "Bit odd don't you think that if this is God's very word that so simple a thing can be misunderstood." against Islam

Why is it I repeat rubbish by you presumably cannot, please explain?

you mean I do not? because unlike you I do not dance around the issues and repeat same argument for which I have been corrected or I was wrong.

I think it better that you take the time to read what I said which was if God says something then it cannot be meaningless else why bother to say it? Clearly, this does not necessarily mean WE can understand it.

Liar, you did not say meaningless! You said: "Bit odd don't you think that if this is God's very word that so simple a thing can be misunderstood".

I have asked once before and I am asking you again, please tell me where do you get the idea that Allah has said meaningless things in the Qur'an. And could you please elaborate on what do you you mean by meaningless?

PS: this is not going anywhere - I am off

 

[Hugo]

Do tropes and figure of speech still exist in the English language or are they extinct now that we are so 'advanced'?

are such terms as, "falling in love", "racking our brains", "climbing the ladder of success" etc? exist?do people still go out looking

I'd say, it is easy to be mislead only if you are a christian, for where else in any monotheistic religion do people take men for gods? and give the gods mothers, and alter egos etc?and indeed, the call to prayer especially in Ramadan is done by watching the sun disappear into the horizon, I was fortunate enough to travel to places, where the call to prayer was made from the minaret as the 'sun set' signaling the end of fast and the rejoicing of the blessings of God! Fortunately in Islam, everything is defined and well preserved, that even your feeble attempts seem rather comical.

all the best

Are there any Muslims in the far north, they would wait a very long time for sunset or daybreak so the sceptical might argue that God must have forgotten this when the Qu'ran was delivered? You see its easy to poke fun at other peoples beliefs.

I can only speak for myself but I find it profoundly sad that everything is defined so I have no room to move. Surely a God who made the heavens, the stars, the smallest flower would allow a bit of imagination is his followers and today is different from yesterday and tomorrow is totally unknown so Christians like Abraham walk by faith not sight.

 

[Hugo]

well, my apology - it is not really double standards but same problem exists within your own belief. So fix that first before raising the argument "Bit odd don't you think that if this is God's very word that so simple a thing can be misunderstood." against Islam

you mean I do not? because unlike you I do not dance around the issues and repeat same argument for which I have been corrected or I was wrong.

Liar, you did not say meaningless! You said: "Bit odd don't you think that if this is God's very word that so simple a thing can be misunderstood".

I have asked once before and I am asking you again, please tell me where do you get the idea that Allah has said meaningless things in the Qur'an. And could you please elaborate on what do you you mean by meaningless?

PS: this is not going anywhere - I am off

When it comes to dancing it seems you are better at it than me.

I am always wrong because you have corrected me
I am a liar and for that I demand an apology, this is a board where we respect each other. I said if I recall it that God cannot be unmeaning and in a reply I said it in an alternative form God cannot be meaningless.

My query was about how so simple a thing as threads could be misunderstood, its not deep subject is it yet if you read the hadith some had to ask the prophet what it meant. Surely, its a fair question to ask why God could not be understood?

 

[جوري]

Hugo - to say this shows you know nothing of Christian faith. When one comes to faith it for me anyway not about 'reaching a conclusion' as if its some examination question. It's about hearing God's call. Have you never considered Abraham, any rational man would not have left his home at God's call to wander who knows where; he just believed God, he had faith and a promise but nothing else of substance. Was his heart and mind in it, yes but it was simple faith and a hold on the promise that made the difference.You see there is not a long list of things we must know or things we believe when we comes to faith, it is simply God's call and our response to it. As we move through life we learn more and more of God but like Abraham we hold on by faith. The mistake you make in your analogy is that to choose the correct answer one must be an expert but when we come to God at the beginning of faith its a simple response to want to follow where he leads and that is based on faith not expert opinion. Do any of the above seem wrong to you?.

Perhaps it is about simple faith, but if it is simple faith then Buddhism is just as attractive as any other ideology or organized religion. Why one believes as they do, has to be built on some standards, and if at the very crux of the argument is something so contradictory and counter intuitive to all that has been brought by Abrahamic faith prophets, then I don't see how is can be accepted. Simple faith tells me I'd be just as well off a Mandean as I'd an agnostic. Islam teaches us to think to arrive to God, which is in fact what Abraham himself has done, what you are asking people to do, is forgo of all logic and accept nonsense that wasn't even instituted by Jesus himself and not until the 4th century to be more in concert with former Grecian paganism.. God, impregnating a mortal woman, to have Zeus, except even there, they don't expect you to believe that they are all on in the same.

2:130 And who turns away from the religion of Abraham but such as debase their souls with folly? Him We chose and rendered pure in this world: and he will be in the Hereafter in the ranks of the Righteous.

Abraham wasn't an idolator, he didn't believe in self-immolating gods who are at times akin to animals whether lambs/or lions.

Thus, Islam is what goes with the nature of man, not against it. The concept of a divine being shouldn't be some twisted hyperbole that you'd need a table of scholars to untangle it for you or simply dismiss it for 'faith'. It should be clear enough for the most complex to the most simple minds.

Hugo - I pity you, you make God the measure of your own mind and to even suggest that things like the book of Isaiah, the Psalms, the Sermon on the Mount to name a few are not comparable is to consign what is unquestionably good, noble and beautiful to the dogs is unbelievable in any rational person.

You can pity, all you want. I never said, anything about dogs or throwing it to the dogs.. but one questions, why it is, that you disregard all the beauty of the 'OT' for this new documents where you can't trace back authorship.. there is alot of beautiful literature out there and poetry and pros. but that is as far as they go. To make the leap from a beautiful afternoon with a book to the change that comes from accepting God's word as a complete way of life is rather disparate. Also, if I were you, I'd refrain from jumping to ridiculous conclusions that are obviously the temporal workings of your own mind. I notice you do that for everything, whether written by members or authors. Which makes you dishonest at best!

Hugo - this is just a fallacy and I assume that you mean that if something bad happened it was not true Islam. Well if that is the quality of your argument then I apply it to the inquisition on the basis that was not true Christianity. To not speak up when you see wrong anywhere is to be a part of that wrong

There is nothing fallacious as the mere definition of inquisition or crusades was created to suppress and murder in the name of religion. When you use the term Muslim terrorists, that is the working of your own choosing as no Islamic system supports it. However, when countries work on papal orders, or ban books on papal orders or murder and torture on papal orders what they considered heretics, then frankly, I am not sure how else to label it!

I am not sure I can follow this. Islamic prayer format was taken from the Jews so its not Unique. I don't think you have any idea what we do in church with regard to prayer but typically we have set communal prayers just as you do but also open prayers and of course often hymns are prayers.

Actually if you've read his own comments and followed the thread, you'd have discovered, it is the other way around. Jews don't pray like this, the gentleman however believes that, that is how traditional prayer should be, other Jews don't agree with him.
I have gone to catholic school, I know how prayers and mass are held. Also 'supplicating' or treating God as a wish granting genie doesn't really constitute prayer. Your take home message is, that is what constitutes the importance of sunna! So God doesn't come later and retract his commandments through someone like saul!

If you find that not to your liking that is ok by me but you have to understand that others might find it baffling and boring that you say the same prayers over and over again and perhaps for the vast majority of Muslims without much understanding.

To me its where our hearts and mind is when we prayer that matters, that we prepare ourselfs for it and focus on God.

Salat comes from silah (denoting relationship) a Muslim gets to talk to have a direct relationship with God five times a day or as many times of their choosing. I have sat in enough masses to know what boredom is not as conceived by my own person as I had an inquiring mind, but of the company of the ladies in my class.
as for uttering without understanding, that is definitely your take on it.. there wouldn't be islam, iman, ihsan, ikhlas, if folks didn't reach different levels of religiosity through their daily prayers.
also if you are fixating on the 'prayer' aspect, you'll have completely missed the point of the analogy, which is why we need a teacher to elucidate for us, what is correct, so we are not waiting for the letters of saul to abrogate God's commandments so we'd feel better about losing a few useless articles of faith!

all the best

 

[Hugo]

your link:
islam-is-the-only-solution.com/Jesus-Jihad-and-Jizyah.htm

doesn't work.. if you'd like people to comment and not be sent on a wild goose chase (and not actually point you out as the perpetrator of wrong doing). then do several things
1- Quote the passages in question (for comparison).
2- write what it is that has gotten you miffed about the passages in a clear concise manner.
3-provide workable links, along with quoting the passage in question.
4- Try on your own private time to contact either authors and see if there is something of a nom de plume although, I doubt that Dr. Al-Azami wastes his time on blogs when he has several books out in publication of which I have two.

Try to do your homework and not delegate the task to others if you expect that what you write should be taken seriously.

Here is the link and the document in question is about 4,500 words long and that is too big for convenience in a posting. In any case my tendency is to point to the source directly so there is no ambiguity and no chance that anything is missed.

I have stated my view that Dr Azami is a careless scholar and I have identified a serious difficulty and given you the page numbers in his book and the web source. Rationally, you should be concerned because it calls into question the credibility of the whole book because someone is being plagiarised.

You are the one with a high opinion of the book but if you want to ignore this and not check the link then that is matter for you. If you can exonerate him that will be excellent and a good result but if you cannot then this book will draw down ridicule for Islamic scholarship.

http://www.islam-is-the-only-solution.com/Jesus-Jihad-and-Jizyah.htm

 

[جوري]

Are there any Muslims in the far north, they would wait a very long time for sunset or daybreak so the sceptical might argue that God must have forgotten this when the Qu'ran was delivered? You see its easy to poke fun at other peoples beliefs.

I can only speak for myself but I find it profoundly sad that everything is defined so I have no room to move. Surely a God who made the heavens, the stars, the smallest flower would allow a bit of imagination is his followers and today is different from yesterday and tomorrow is totally unknown so Christians like Abraham walk by faith not sight.

Your questions are not unique or fun poking, they require an answer and God does indeed as us in the Noble Quran, to seek wisdom from the people of knowledge. Rather than loan it the hyperbolic definition of your choosing?

here is your question/skepticism answered :


When the Sun Never Sets: Prayer Times & Islamic Law Date 09/Sep/2008 Question Islam is said to be universal. Unlike previous religions, Islam is meant for all people, at any time, any place, and under all circumstances. My question is, how do people living in upper Canada, Scandinavia and other northern places perform their five daily prayers when there are months when the sun never sets (a phenomenon known as the midnight sun)? Or during others when darkness stays for months? Someone living there will probably find Islam's daily prayers irrelevant to his living conditions (and yes, of course, there were people living there 1400 years ago too). Well, I know that today, in cities like Yellowknife in upper Canada, they simply follow the prayer times of another city south of Canada where the phenomenon doesn't occur (in this case, Edmonton). I guess the real question is: how could a universal religion ask people to follow something which doesn't occur on the whole planet?
Topic Aspects of Worship Name of Counselor Jasser Auda
Answer
Salam, Inquirer

Thank you for your question. However, the example that you are mentioning here as something that is at odds with the universality of the message of Islam, is the very same example that could be used to argue otherwise.
In fact, the whole reasoning process in the Islamic law (referred to as 'ijtihad'), is based on the 'universality' feature of the Islamic law. The following aims at providing an outline of how this feature of universality works in the system of Islamic law.
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was sent as a human example to all mankind. But because of the very fact that he was 'human', Muhammad gave as that example in a specific geographical location (Arabia) and in a specific point in history (7th century CE). There is no possible human way by which the example of the Prophet could be introduced free from the dimensions of space and time.
The Muslim scholar, Al-Tahir Ibn Ashur wrote a chapter of a book on a purpose and a high principle of Islamic law, which he called, 'The Universality of the Islamic Law.' In this chapter, Ibn Ashur considered the effect of the Arabic dimensions of history, geography, and customs on the Islamic scripts themselves. The following is a summary of Ibn Ashur's argument.
First, Ibn Ashur explained that it is necessary for the Islamic law to be a universal law, since it claims to be "applicable to all humankind everywhere on earth and at all times," as per a number of Quranic verses and hadith that he cited.
Ibn Ashur mentioned, for example:
*{Now as for you, O Mohammad, We have not sent you otherwise than to mankind at large.}* (Saba' 34:28)
*{Say [O Mohammad]: "O mankind! Verily, I am an Apostle to all of you."}* (Al-A`raf 7:158)
and the hadith: "An apostle used to be sent specifically to his own people, while I have been sent to all of mankind." (Al-Bukhari)
Then, Ibn Ashur elaborated on the wisdoms behind choosing the Prophet from amongst Arabs, such as the Arabs' isolation from civilization, which prepared them, "to mix and associate openly with other nations with whom they had no hostilities, in contrast to Persians, Byzantines, and Copts." (Ibn Ashur, Maqasid Al-Shariah Al-Islamiyah, ed. Mohamed El-Tahir El-Mesawi, Kuala Lumpur: Al-Fajr, 1999.p. 234.)
Yet, for the Islamic law to be universal, "its rules and commands should apply equally to all human beings as much as possible," as Ibn Ashur confirmed. That is why, he wrote, "God had based the Islamic law on wisdoms and reasons that can be perceived by the mind and which do not change according to nations and custom."
Thus, Ibn Ashur provided explanation as to why the Prophet forbade his companions to write down what he says, "lest particular cases be taken as universal rules." Ibn Ashur began applying his ideas to a number of narrations, in an attempt to filter out the Arabic dimension from Islamic rulings. He wrote:
Therefore, Islamic law does not concern itself with determining what kind of dress, house, or mount people should use ... Accordingly, we can establish that the customs and mores of a particular people have no right, as such, to be imposed on other people as legislation, not even the people who originated them ...
This method of interpretation has removed much confusion that faced scholars in understanding the reasons why the law prohibited certain practices… such as the prohibition for women to add hair extensions, to cleave their teeth, or to tattoo themselves...
The correct meaning of this, in my view... is that these practices mentioned in Hadith were, according to Arabs, signs of a woman's lack of chastity. Therefore, prohibiting these practices was actually aimed at certain evil motives … Similarly, we read: ... *{believing women should draw over themselves some of their outer garments'}* (Al-Ahzab 33:59)… This is a legislation that took into consideration an Arab tradition, and therefore does not necessarily apply to women who do not wear this style of dress… Ibn Ashur, Maqasid Al-Shariah Al-Islamiyah, p.236)
Therefore, based on the purpose of 'universality' of the Islamic law, Ibn Ashur suggested a method of interpreting narrations through understanding their underlying Arabic historical and geographical context, rather than treating them as absolute and unqualified rules.
Now, to answer your specific question, I would say that the timings of the Islamic regular five daily prayers are not set in stone and are not only subject to the 'signs' shown by the sun in the middle parts of earth.
The five prayers do indeed apply in the other remote parts of earth but require some 'ijtihad', or free thinking, in order to decide about prayer times in light of our understanding of the wisdoms and purposes behind the five prayers.
The purpose of prayers is to face God and pray for him in a certain way regularly over every 24 hours. Thus, the opinions that asked Muslims to either pray according to the nearest major city with regular timings, or according to an even distribution of prayers over 5 intervals regardless of the light/darkness, are all valid opinions. They only show the flexibility of the Islamic law.
I hope this answers your question. Please keep in touch.
Salam.
http://www.readingislam.com/servlet...sh-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE

 

[GreyKode]

Actually if you've read his own comments and followed the thread, you'd have discovered, it is the other way around. Jews don't pray like this, the gentleman however believes that, that is how traditional prayer should be, other Jews don't agree with him.

I dare you Hugo to corroborate that statment, do you even know the format of the muslim prayer?