YieldedOne
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 628
- Reaction score
- 15
So, naidamar. What it do, homie? What's your thoughts on it?
:?
:?
Isa: "Great Commandments" as Essential to True Muslim Faith
- Thread starter YieldedOne
- Start date
- Replies 78
- Views 17K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | vBulletin 4 php 8.0 patch
Ramadhan
IB Legend
- Messages
- 6,469
- Reaction score
- 1,053
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
I agree with most of what Siam wrote, with an addition:
In terms of preaching religious tolerance, you are preaching to the believers, grandpa.
You should go to christian forums instead and preach tolerance there.
Facts:
- christians in the world's largest muslim country enjoy rights that muslims in the west can only dream of.
- compare how many muslims have christians killed and the other way around?
In terms of preaching religious tolerance, you are preaching to the believers, grandpa.
You should go to christian forums instead and preach tolerance there.
Facts:
- christians in the world's largest muslim country enjoy rights that muslims in the west can only dream of.
- compare how many muslims have christians killed and the other way around?
YieldedOne
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 628
- Reaction score
- 15
naidamar:
In terms of preaching religious tolerance, you are preaching to the believers, grandpa.
1) What I'm talking about is deeper than mere religious tolerance. It's about having a real "common ground" between Islam and Christian that is not contrived and is verifiable by any who want to actually look at the data. That's extremely important, I believe.
2) Grandpa? LOL! Whatever, lil' whipper-snapper...:giggling:
****************************************
naidamar:
You should go to christian forums instead and preach tolerance there.
1) I do visit Christian forums...and I have talked about this idea on those forums. I'm currently interacting there as well.
2) I'm not trying to preach (what use is that?). I just wanted to verify the strength of my line of thinking with intelligent Muslim brothers and sisters. Again, I feel the thinking is very strong...and I just wanted to make sure.
3) I do plan on responding to THIS GUY. His name is John Piper, and he's a Christian minister from MN. He's one of those who doesn't believe that Muslims and Christians believe in the same God, doesn't feel there's any real common ground between Islam and Christianity...and didn't like "A Common Word".
I want to tell him that he's wrong on ALL COUNTS.
****************************************
Naidamar:
Facts:
- christians in the world's largest muslim country enjoy rights that muslims in the west can only dream of.
- compare how many muslims have christians killed and the other way around?
I don't care if they are Christians or Muslims, if they are not loving God through loving their neighbor, their behavior is far less than Allah calls for. Christians have done their share of ungodly behavior. So have Muslims. Any unloving behavior sucks in my eyes. That's just me.
Thanks, everyone.
In terms of preaching religious tolerance, you are preaching to the believers, grandpa.
1) What I'm talking about is deeper than mere religious tolerance. It's about having a real "common ground" between Islam and Christian that is not contrived and is verifiable by any who want to actually look at the data. That's extremely important, I believe.
2) Grandpa? LOL! Whatever, lil' whipper-snapper...:giggling:
****************************************
naidamar:
You should go to christian forums instead and preach tolerance there.
1) I do visit Christian forums...and I have talked about this idea on those forums. I'm currently interacting there as well.
2) I'm not trying to preach (what use is that?). I just wanted to verify the strength of my line of thinking with intelligent Muslim brothers and sisters. Again, I feel the thinking is very strong...and I just wanted to make sure.
3) I do plan on responding to THIS GUY. His name is John Piper, and he's a Christian minister from MN. He's one of those who doesn't believe that Muslims and Christians believe in the same God, doesn't feel there's any real common ground between Islam and Christianity...and didn't like "A Common Word".
I want to tell him that he's wrong on ALL COUNTS.
****************************************
Naidamar:
Facts:
- christians in the world's largest muslim country enjoy rights that muslims in the west can only dream of.
- compare how many muslims have christians killed and the other way around?
I don't care if they are Christians or Muslims, if they are not loving God through loving their neighbor, their behavior is far less than Allah calls for. Christians have done their share of ungodly behavior. So have Muslims. Any unloving behavior sucks in my eyes. That's just me.
Thanks, everyone.
Last edited:
Ramadhan
IB Legend
- Messages
- 6,469
- Reaction score
- 1,053
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
As I -and others- have said, there's nothing contrived about Islamic belief, and about who muslims worship.
How many times have I told you:
Muslims worship the God that Ibrahim, Musa, Isa and Muhammad (pbut) all worshipped.
there's nothing contrived about God the creator of everything who has no partner, who has no son.
It is not muslims problem that christians find that hard to accept and it is not muslims problem that christians worship the God that Nicene creed worship, instead of the God that Ibrahim, Musa, Isa and Muhammd (pbut) worshiped.
Now, away you go and ask christians whether they worship the God that Ibrahim, Musa, Isa, and Muhammad (pbut) worshiped.
And come back here if the answer is affirmative.
the limitiations of your point------
there are so many I don't know where to start----nevertheless.....
1) why should Muslims limit themselves to "rules" that would apply only to Muslim-Christian dialogue?---waste of time when there are so many faiths and so many interfaith dialogues can take place.....
2) if there are concerns about uncivilized dialogue---then establishing basic rules of manners/ettiquette should take care of the problem.---rules that would apply to all interfaith dialogues---not just Muslim-Christian
3) why should Muslims make new limited definitions of "what it means to be a Muslim"---just to accomodate some Christian need for "interfaith dialogue" based only on THEIR criteria? We already have a criteria for what it means to be a Muslim and this criteria isn't simply theoretical, but also practical. WE LIVE IT.
4) why should Muslims limit our understanding of the full "authentic" message of Jesus Christ(pbuh) to the two commandments mentioned by you/Christians? We already have guidance not only of his message, (and of all the Prophets before him) but also how to concretely apply it and live it---its in the Quran.
---Your "major point" is limiting because it limits taqwa to the 'love yr neighbor" bit, whereas Islam already has a fully developed and nuanced concept of taqwa.
If you want to build a criteria---would it not be better to build it from a full, "authentic" background rather than an incomplete/flawed background?---so read the Quran, understand Islamic philosophy and law then find "common ground" with the teachings of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) that you already have in yr NT---that would work better for you---then you can come to us Muslims with a proper and more complete "criteria"......and with the help of the Guidance of the Quran---this criteria will be applicable/achievable as well.
For example, one of the teachings of Prophet Jesus(pbuh) is about Usury(interest)---it is also mentioned in the Quran----however, the Quran also provides the overall principles for economics and bussiness that make this teaching applicable and achievable...........social justice is another area......
By the way----Buddhist, Hindus...etc are also creations of the ONE God and the "children of Adam". A Just, Compassionate and Merciful God provides Guidance and Truth to all mankind. To be exclusive would be unjust.
Quran Surahy 16, verse 36
"for We certainly sent amongst every people a Messenger, (with the command) "Serve God and turn from evil": Of the people were some whom God Guided and some on whom error became inevitably (established). ...." (partial verse)
We all have a solid "common ground" we are all brothers and sisters in humanity----its a powerful concept........Universal enough to be inclusive yet can function within the narrower limits of "Muslim-Christian" dialogue as well.
Though your 'major point" is narrow in scope and exclusive---it is nevertheless workable and perhaps can be seen as a starting point for Christians.
there are so many I don't know where to start----nevertheless.....
1) why should Muslims limit themselves to "rules" that would apply only to Muslim-Christian dialogue?---waste of time when there are so many faiths and so many interfaith dialogues can take place.....
2) if there are concerns about uncivilized dialogue---then establishing basic rules of manners/ettiquette should take care of the problem.---rules that would apply to all interfaith dialogues---not just Muslim-Christian
3) why should Muslims make new limited definitions of "what it means to be a Muslim"---just to accomodate some Christian need for "interfaith dialogue" based only on THEIR criteria? We already have a criteria for what it means to be a Muslim and this criteria isn't simply theoretical, but also practical. WE LIVE IT.
4) why should Muslims limit our understanding of the full "authentic" message of Jesus Christ(pbuh) to the two commandments mentioned by you/Christians? We already have guidance not only of his message, (and of all the Prophets before him) but also how to concretely apply it and live it---its in the Quran.
---Your "major point" is limiting because it limits taqwa to the 'love yr neighbor" bit, whereas Islam already has a fully developed and nuanced concept of taqwa.
If you want to build a criteria---would it not be better to build it from a full, "authentic" background rather than an incomplete/flawed background?---so read the Quran, understand Islamic philosophy and law then find "common ground" with the teachings of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) that you already have in yr NT---that would work better for you---then you can come to us Muslims with a proper and more complete "criteria"......and with the help of the Guidance of the Quran---this criteria will be applicable/achievable as well.
For example, one of the teachings of Prophet Jesus(pbuh) is about Usury(interest)---it is also mentioned in the Quran----however, the Quran also provides the overall principles for economics and bussiness that make this teaching applicable and achievable...........social justice is another area......
By the way----Buddhist, Hindus...etc are also creations of the ONE God and the "children of Adam". A Just, Compassionate and Merciful God provides Guidance and Truth to all mankind. To be exclusive would be unjust.
Quran Surahy 16, verse 36
"for We certainly sent amongst every people a Messenger, (with the command) "Serve God and turn from evil": Of the people were some whom God Guided and some on whom error became inevitably (established). ...." (partial verse)
We all have a solid "common ground" we are all brothers and sisters in humanity----its a powerful concept........Universal enough to be inclusive yet can function within the narrower limits of "Muslim-Christian" dialogue as well.
Though your 'major point" is narrow in scope and exclusive---it is nevertheless workable and perhaps can be seen as a starting point for Christians.
YieldedOne
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 628
- Reaction score
- 15
Naidamar:
As I -and others- have said, there's nothing contrived about Islamic belief, and about who muslims worship.
How many times have I told you:
Muslims worship the God that Ibrahim, Musa, Isa and Muhammad (pbut) all worshipped.
there's nothing contrived about God the creator of everything who has no partner, who has no son.
I'm afraid you've mistaken me. I didn't say that Islamic belief was contrived. (That would be rude, now, wouldn't it?) I talked about having a common ground between Islam and Christianity that is not contrived in nature. Just for clarification.
***************************
Naidamar:
It is not muslims problem that christians find that hard to accept and it is not muslims problem that christians worship the God that Nicene creed worship, instead of the God that Ibrahim, Musa, Isa and Muhammd (pbut) worshiped.
You keep saying the same thing, brother naidamar. Namely that Abraham, Moses, Jesus, (and Muhammad) are not church-creed trinitarians. Which seems frankly obvious to me. But this KEEPS missing the point. You may believe that the "One God" spoken of in the Nicene creed is unintelligble, but others do not. And the fact is that the "One God" spoken of in the Nicene Creed is seen by Christians to be the ONE God to whom Abraham, Moses, and Jesus covenantally related. You can ask any knowledgeable Christian that, and they will agree.
********************************
Naidamar:
Now, away you go and ask christians whether they worship the God that Ibrahim, Musa, Isa, and Muhammad (pbut) worshiped. And come back here if the answer is affirmative.
Heh. You've added the Muhammad part, but what should I expect, I guess? At any rate, I believe that the answer would be the same, barring Christian ignorance about Muhammad. That is to say, I could easily see Christians who don't know about Muhammad and his relationship to the God of the "People of the Book" following ignorant stereotypes and saying that they DON'T worship the same God as Muhammad. "He's a Muslim and he don't believe in God's Son! We don't worship the same God!!" Luckily, I know of more informed Christians on discussion boards for whom the answer WOULD be the affirmative. So, there you go.
********************************
Talking about "limitations"...
Siam:
1) why should Muslims limit themselves to "rules" that would apply only to Muslim-Christian dialogue?---waste of time when there are so many faiths and so many interfaith dialogues can take place.....
Wow. There sure is some kind of importance on this board about "wasting time". I've seen that quite a bit from the Muslims here. Interesting. At any rate, to just place this in the scope of limitation to rules of interfaith dialogue/engagemet seems quite inaccurate, if not reductionistic. The idea is based upon how Muslims can view Jesus/Isa's "Great Commandments" as relevant to Muslim faith using 1) the Quran 2) authoritative sources which help discern authentic Torat and Injeel [ala Maulana Maududi's "The Meaning of the Quran"] and 3) the Quranically-specifically "holy books" wherein the Torat and Injeel exist. This idea provides the "common ground" that I've been talking about. So, to restate, this whole thing is not merely about seeking some mutually beneficial rules of engagement for interfaith dialogue. There's other things for that. This is more specific and localized more in the relationship between Islam and Jesus, reaffirmer of the Torat and bringer of the Injeel.
****************************************
Siam:
if there are concerns about uncivilized dialogue---then establishing basic rules of manners/ettiquette should take care of the problem.---rules that would apply to all interfaith dialogues---not just Muslim-Christian.
The concern is not merely about uncivilized dialogue, obviously. It's also about the dividing categories that Muslims and Christians place themselves in as if there is no common ground. Unto both groups being violent with each other (See Muslim/Copt situation in Egypt). Again, there are already rules of etiquette set up by different pan-faith societies. That's not the quintessence of what this is, though it is related.
********************************************
Siam:
3) why should Muslims make new limited definitions of "what it means to be a Muslim"---just to accomodate some Christian need for "interfaith dialogue" based only on THEIR criteria? We already have a criteria for what it means to be a Muslim and this criteria isn't simply theoretical, but also practical. WE LIVE IT.
My line of thinking basically makes this claim: Because of who Jesus/Isa is as Prophet and Messenger of God...and reifier of the Torat and bringer of the Injeel...the "Great Commandments" (Deut 6:4-6; Lev. 19:9-18) are relevant (important) to Muslim faith. Given what the Quran says about 1) Jesus 2) the Torat and 3) the Injeel...as well as what M. Maududi says about how to distinguish them...it seems that this is speaking ABOUT Muslim faith from the perspective of Muslim faith. This is not about Christians imposing criteria on Muslims at all. Just look at the argument again. For any intelligent Muslims who actually WANT to use Maududi's work to discern authentic Torat and Injeel, this would apply. You see that, right?
*******************************************
Siam:
4) why should Muslims limit our understanding of the full "authentic" message of Jesus Christ(pbuh) to the two commandments mentioned by you/Christians? We already have guidance not only of his message, (and of all the Prophets before him) but also how to concretely apply it and live it---its in the Quran.
Let's get this very clear. I am NOT saying that Muslims should ditch everything they know about Jesus from the Quran and displace and/or replace them with the Great Commandments. My line of thought doesn't mandate such a thing at all. I am saying that the Great Commandments of Jesus are an aspect of the message of Jesus that CANNOT be ignored, given what the Quran says on the matter. Especially when there are means available to NOT ignore it (ala Maududi's work).
********************************************
Siam:
Your "major point" is limiting because it limits taqwa to the 'love yr neighbor" bit, whereas Islam already has a fully developed and nuanced concept of taqwa.
This would only be true if I attempted to DISPLACE or REPLACE taqwa with the Great Commandments, but again, I'm not doing that. I'm just saying this: Let's take the Quran (and what it says about Isa, Torat, and Injeel) and M. Maududi's commentary seriously in this discourse to inform us on the relevance of the Great Commandments to Muslim faith. See the difference?
************************************************
Siam:
If you want to build a criteria---would it not be better to build it from a full, "authentic" background rather than an incomplete/flawed background?---so read the Quran, understand Islamic philosophy and law then find "common ground" with the teachings of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) that you already have in yr NT---that would work better for you---then you can come to us Muslims with a proper and more complete "criteria"......and with the help of the Guidance of the Quran---this criteria will be applicable/achievable as well.
It seems that you don't see that I'm using the Quran and what IT says about Isa, Torat and Injeel. The biblical Scriptures are not used "on their own"--basically trying to impose Christian belief and doctrine on Muslims--, but only as a RESPONSE to what was said about Isa's teaching in the Quran.
Let's break down how easy this is. Let's say that I'm an Christian seriously contemplating Islam, ok? Possibly to the point of conversion, ok? And let's say that I have 1) a Quran, 2) Maududi's "The Meaning of the Qur'an", 3) a Hebrew version of the Torah and 4) a Greek New Testament. [I know a little Hebrew and Greek, let's say. Actually, I do.
] Now when I look at Quranic texts about Isa and what he taught...I keep getting told by the Quran that Jesus "confirmed the Torah" via his bringing of the Injeel. And I get told by the Quran that it behooves a "person of the Book" to understand what this was. So, then I get out Maududi's work in order to see how to look for the authentic Torat and Injeel in the Old and New Testaments respectively. It is regarded as one of the best commentaries on the Quran so I use it. (That's what commentaries are for, right). I go by Maududi's specifications and go to the Hebrew Torah and the Greek New Testament. I just so happen to notice that Deut 6:4-6 and Lev. 19:9-18 completely fit Maududi's criteria for "authentic" Torat. Then I look at Matthew 22:34-40...and see that this passage completely fits Maududi's criteria for authentic Injeel. Moreover, I notice that in the Injeel passage, Jesus/Isa specifically says that "all the Law and Prophets" are summarized in the reaffirmed OT passages. Now, I go BACK to the Quran to read how Allah himself is said to have given Jesus authority as Prophet to reaffirm the Torah and bring the Injeel. Now as a THOUGHTFUL, RATIONAL, INTELLIGENT person who is looking at all this information, how could I not come to the conclusion that even if I went ahead and CONVERTED to Islam, that the Great Commandments would still be relevant to my faith...even as a Muslim? How could I come to any other conclusion? Seriously.
************************************************
Siam:
By the way----Buddhist, Hindus...etc are also creations of the ONE God and the "children of Adam". A Just, Compassionate and Merciful God provides Guidance and Truth to all mankind. To be exclusive would be unjust.
Quran Surahy 16, verse 36
"for We certainly sent amongst every people a Messenger, (with the command) "Serve God and turn from evil": Of the people were some whom God Guided and some on whom error became inevitably (established). ...." (partial verse)
We all have a solid "common ground" we are all brothers and sisters in humanity----its a powerful concept........Universal enough to be inclusive yet can function within the narrower limits of "Muslim-Christian" dialogue as well.
With respect to the underlined points, I would say the same thing as a person who believes in the One God worshipped by Jesus, Abraham, Moses, and David. We would not differ there.
******************************************
Siam:
Though your 'major point" is narrow in scope and exclusive---it is nevertheless workable and perhaps can be seen as a starting point for Christians.
I will take this to mean that my "major point" is sound, credible and, most importantly, defensible. I haven't heard anything from anyone otherwise. The "narrow" and "exclusive" aspects only exist insofar as the major point deals specifically with the relationships between the Quran, Isa, the Torat, and Injeel. (which obviously wouldn't involved things like the Baghavad Gita or anything like that).
*******************************************
Great interaction, y'all! Much thanks!!! Kudos!
:awesome:
As I -and others- have said, there's nothing contrived about Islamic belief, and about who muslims worship.
How many times have I told you:
Muslims worship the God that Ibrahim, Musa, Isa and Muhammad (pbut) all worshipped.
there's nothing contrived about God the creator of everything who has no partner, who has no son.
I'm afraid you've mistaken me. I didn't say that Islamic belief was contrived. (That would be rude, now, wouldn't it?) I talked about having a common ground between Islam and Christianity that is not contrived in nature. Just for clarification.
***************************
Naidamar:
It is not muslims problem that christians find that hard to accept and it is not muslims problem that christians worship the God that Nicene creed worship, instead of the God that Ibrahim, Musa, Isa and Muhammd (pbut) worshiped.
You keep saying the same thing, brother naidamar. Namely that Abraham, Moses, Jesus, (and Muhammad) are not church-creed trinitarians. Which seems frankly obvious to me. But this KEEPS missing the point. You may believe that the "One God" spoken of in the Nicene creed is unintelligble, but others do not. And the fact is that the "One God" spoken of in the Nicene Creed is seen by Christians to be the ONE God to whom Abraham, Moses, and Jesus covenantally related. You can ask any knowledgeable Christian that, and they will agree.
********************************
Naidamar:
Now, away you go and ask christians whether they worship the God that Ibrahim, Musa, Isa, and Muhammad (pbut) worshiped. And come back here if the answer is affirmative.
Heh. You've added the Muhammad part, but what should I expect, I guess? At any rate, I believe that the answer would be the same, barring Christian ignorance about Muhammad. That is to say, I could easily see Christians who don't know about Muhammad and his relationship to the God of the "People of the Book" following ignorant stereotypes and saying that they DON'T worship the same God as Muhammad. "He's a Muslim and he don't believe in God's Son! We don't worship the same God!!" Luckily, I know of more informed Christians on discussion boards for whom the answer WOULD be the affirmative. So, there you go.
********************************
Talking about "limitations"...
Siam:
1) why should Muslims limit themselves to "rules" that would apply only to Muslim-Christian dialogue?---waste of time when there are so many faiths and so many interfaith dialogues can take place.....
Wow. There sure is some kind of importance on this board about "wasting time". I've seen that quite a bit from the Muslims here. Interesting. At any rate, to just place this in the scope of limitation to rules of interfaith dialogue/engagemet seems quite inaccurate, if not reductionistic. The idea is based upon how Muslims can view Jesus/Isa's "Great Commandments" as relevant to Muslim faith using 1) the Quran 2) authoritative sources which help discern authentic Torat and Injeel [ala Maulana Maududi's "The Meaning of the Quran"] and 3) the Quranically-specifically "holy books" wherein the Torat and Injeel exist. This idea provides the "common ground" that I've been talking about. So, to restate, this whole thing is not merely about seeking some mutually beneficial rules of engagement for interfaith dialogue. There's other things for that. This is more specific and localized more in the relationship between Islam and Jesus, reaffirmer of the Torat and bringer of the Injeel.
****************************************
Siam:
if there are concerns about uncivilized dialogue---then establishing basic rules of manners/ettiquette should take care of the problem.---rules that would apply to all interfaith dialogues---not just Muslim-Christian.
The concern is not merely about uncivilized dialogue, obviously. It's also about the dividing categories that Muslims and Christians place themselves in as if there is no common ground. Unto both groups being violent with each other (See Muslim/Copt situation in Egypt). Again, there are already rules of etiquette set up by different pan-faith societies. That's not the quintessence of what this is, though it is related.
********************************************
Siam:
3) why should Muslims make new limited definitions of "what it means to be a Muslim"---just to accomodate some Christian need for "interfaith dialogue" based only on THEIR criteria? We already have a criteria for what it means to be a Muslim and this criteria isn't simply theoretical, but also practical. WE LIVE IT.
My line of thinking basically makes this claim: Because of who Jesus/Isa is as Prophet and Messenger of God...and reifier of the Torat and bringer of the Injeel...the "Great Commandments" (Deut 6:4-6; Lev. 19:9-18) are relevant (important) to Muslim faith. Given what the Quran says about 1) Jesus 2) the Torat and 3) the Injeel...as well as what M. Maududi says about how to distinguish them...it seems that this is speaking ABOUT Muslim faith from the perspective of Muslim faith. This is not about Christians imposing criteria on Muslims at all. Just look at the argument again. For any intelligent Muslims who actually WANT to use Maududi's work to discern authentic Torat and Injeel, this would apply. You see that, right?
*******************************************
Siam:
4) why should Muslims limit our understanding of the full "authentic" message of Jesus Christ(pbuh) to the two commandments mentioned by you/Christians? We already have guidance not only of his message, (and of all the Prophets before him) but also how to concretely apply it and live it---its in the Quran.
Let's get this very clear. I am NOT saying that Muslims should ditch everything they know about Jesus from the Quran and displace and/or replace them with the Great Commandments. My line of thought doesn't mandate such a thing at all. I am saying that the Great Commandments of Jesus are an aspect of the message of Jesus that CANNOT be ignored, given what the Quran says on the matter. Especially when there are means available to NOT ignore it (ala Maududi's work).
********************************************
Siam:
Your "major point" is limiting because it limits taqwa to the 'love yr neighbor" bit, whereas Islam already has a fully developed and nuanced concept of taqwa.
This would only be true if I attempted to DISPLACE or REPLACE taqwa with the Great Commandments, but again, I'm not doing that. I'm just saying this: Let's take the Quran (and what it says about Isa, Torat, and Injeel) and M. Maududi's commentary seriously in this discourse to inform us on the relevance of the Great Commandments to Muslim faith. See the difference?
************************************************
Siam:
If you want to build a criteria---would it not be better to build it from a full, "authentic" background rather than an incomplete/flawed background?---so read the Quran, understand Islamic philosophy and law then find "common ground" with the teachings of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) that you already have in yr NT---that would work better for you---then you can come to us Muslims with a proper and more complete "criteria"......and with the help of the Guidance of the Quran---this criteria will be applicable/achievable as well.
It seems that you don't see that I'm using the Quran and what IT says about Isa, Torat and Injeel. The biblical Scriptures are not used "on their own"--basically trying to impose Christian belief and doctrine on Muslims--, but only as a RESPONSE to what was said about Isa's teaching in the Quran.
Let's break down how easy this is. Let's say that I'm an Christian seriously contemplating Islam, ok? Possibly to the point of conversion, ok? And let's say that I have 1) a Quran, 2) Maududi's "The Meaning of the Qur'an", 3) a Hebrew version of the Torah and 4) a Greek New Testament. [I know a little Hebrew and Greek, let's say. Actually, I do.
] Now when I look at Quranic texts about Isa and what he taught...I keep getting told by the Quran that Jesus "confirmed the Torah" via his bringing of the Injeel. And I get told by the Quran that it behooves a "person of the Book" to understand what this was. So, then I get out Maududi's work in order to see how to look for the authentic Torat and Injeel in the Old and New Testaments respectively. It is regarded as one of the best commentaries on the Quran so I use it. (That's what commentaries are for, right). I go by Maududi's specifications and go to the Hebrew Torah and the Greek New Testament. I just so happen to notice that Deut 6:4-6 and Lev. 19:9-18 completely fit Maududi's criteria for "authentic" Torat. Then I look at Matthew 22:34-40...and see that this passage completely fits Maududi's criteria for authentic Injeel. Moreover, I notice that in the Injeel passage, Jesus/Isa specifically says that "all the Law and Prophets" are summarized in the reaffirmed OT passages. Now, I go BACK to the Quran to read how Allah himself is said to have given Jesus authority as Prophet to reaffirm the Torah and bring the Injeel. Now as a THOUGHTFUL, RATIONAL, INTELLIGENT person who is looking at all this information, how could I not come to the conclusion that even if I went ahead and CONVERTED to Islam, that the Great Commandments would still be relevant to my faith...even as a Muslim? How could I come to any other conclusion? Seriously.************************************************
Siam:
By the way----Buddhist, Hindus...etc are also creations of the ONE God and the "children of Adam". A Just, Compassionate and Merciful God provides Guidance and Truth to all mankind. To be exclusive would be unjust.
Quran Surahy 16, verse 36
"for We certainly sent amongst every people a Messenger, (with the command) "Serve God and turn from evil": Of the people were some whom God Guided and some on whom error became inevitably (established). ...." (partial verse)
We all have a solid "common ground" we are all brothers and sisters in humanity----its a powerful concept........Universal enough to be inclusive yet can function within the narrower limits of "Muslim-Christian" dialogue as well.
With respect to the underlined points, I would say the same thing as a person who believes in the One God worshipped by Jesus, Abraham, Moses, and David. We would not differ there.
******************************************
Siam:
Though your 'major point" is narrow in scope and exclusive---it is nevertheless workable and perhaps can be seen as a starting point for Christians.
I will take this to mean that my "major point" is sound, credible and, most importantly, defensible. I haven't heard anything from anyone otherwise. The "narrow" and "exclusive" aspects only exist insofar as the major point deals specifically with the relationships between the Quran, Isa, the Torat, and Injeel. (which obviously wouldn't involved things like the Baghavad Gita or anything like that).
*******************************************
Great interaction, y'all! Much thanks!!! Kudos!
:awesome:
Ramadhan
IB Legend
- Messages
- 6,469
- Reaction score
- 1,053
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Your motive is getting transparent by the day.
I keep saying the same thing because you keep blabbering the same garbage.
No matter how contrived your attempt is at trying to make it as if we worship the same God, no, muslims and christians do not worship the same God.
So, what is contrived is your logic. You only deceive yourself.
Now, christians worship jesus.
while muslims and jesus worship the same God.
Tell me, where in the OT that says Ibrahim and Musa (pbut) worshiped jesus and holy spirit.
Also show me where in the NT that says Jesus worshiped his own self and holy spirit as God?
If you have found your answer, come back here, if not, stop wasting our time with your garbage.
You need to have your brain checked if you believe that Jesus worship his own self.
Now, the more important question that you conveniently did not write is:
Do christians worship the God that prophet Muhammad SAW worship?
Do christians acknowledge Muhammad SAW as the last prophet of God?
Now, go back to your folks, ask them those questions, and if the answer is affirmative, then yes we have common ground.
if not, stop wasting our time.
Last edited:
YieldedOne
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 628
- Reaction score
- 15
Naidamar:
Your motive is getting transparent by the day. I keep saying the same thing because you keep blabbering the same garbage.
and...
If you have found your answer, come back here, if not, stop wasting our time with your garbage.
You know what, brother naidamar? I really believe that I've been giving you respect in our entire discourse. I've not berated you or your beliefs. I would ask that you do the same for me, ok? I'm just asking this nicely...as a brother in humanity and a "person of the Book." I would like for you to treat me as I've treated you. If you can't do that, then you and I can just agree to disagree. Much love and respect, brother. :sunny:
************************************************
Naidamar:
Do christians worship the God that prophet Muhammad SAW worship? Do christians acknowledge Muhammad SAW as the last prophet of God?
Most Christians are not giong to acknowledge Muhammad as the final prophet of God. I think you well know that.
**************************************************
Naidamar:
Tell me, where in the OT that says Ibrahim and Musa (pbut) worshiped jesus and holy spirit.
Also show me where in the NT that says Jesus worshiped his own self and holy spirit as God?
I'll say this one more time and then leave it: Abraham, Moses, and Jesus were NOT trinitarian, that is they did not worship Jesus and the Holy Spirit as God. So, if that is the only way that you want to define things, then there you go.
Peace out, my brother. May Allah bless you in all you do!
YO
Your motive is getting transparent by the day. I keep saying the same thing because you keep blabbering the same garbage.
and...
If you have found your answer, come back here, if not, stop wasting our time with your garbage.
You know what, brother naidamar? I really believe that I've been giving you respect in our entire discourse. I've not berated you or your beliefs. I would ask that you do the same for me, ok? I'm just asking this nicely...as a brother in humanity and a "person of the Book." I would like for you to treat me as I've treated you. If you can't do that, then you and I can just agree to disagree. Much love and respect, brother. :sunny:
************************************************
Naidamar:
Do christians worship the God that prophet Muhammad SAW worship? Do christians acknowledge Muhammad SAW as the last prophet of God?
Most Christians are not giong to acknowledge Muhammad as the final prophet of God. I think you well know that.
**************************************************
Naidamar:
Tell me, where in the OT that says Ibrahim and Musa (pbut) worshiped jesus and holy spirit.
Also show me where in the NT that says Jesus worshiped his own self and holy spirit as God?
I'll say this one more time and then leave it: Abraham, Moses, and Jesus were NOT trinitarian, that is they did not worship Jesus and the Holy Spirit as God. So, if that is the only way that you want to define things, then there you go.
Peace out, my brother. May Allah bless you in all you do!
YO
Last edited:
YieldedOne
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 628
- Reaction score
- 15
And what is up with the "don't waste our time" thing? Is that just a standard statement of exasperation that everyone uses around here or what?? Need a new line or something. Ha!
:haha:
:haha:
"don't waste time"---can be an expression of frustration at the very limited perspectives of western non-muslims. They tend to think in "black and white" terms.
So let me say this another way----Your primary premise is flawed.....You believe that Muslims are interested in finding out what is "authentic" in the Torah presently held by the Jews and the NT presently held by the Christians. ----But you see, We Muslims already know what is authentic Torah, Injeel, Zabur, the scrolls of Prophet Abraham(pbuh)......etc----so, why should we expend effort to find out what we already know? (If you were asking help from Muslims to enhance YR knowledge of the full teachings of Jesus Christ(pbuh)----that would be a different matter altogether)
As to comparing the Quran with other wisdom teachings---including those of the Christians and Jews, this has already been done by many Muslim scholars (and from very early in Muslim history)---so...we Muslims already have a body of scholarly work in this area. ----and you can read tafsir (English)by Yusuf Ali, who has also included references to Torah, Talmud, Rabbinical writings, NT and apocrypha ...etc.
You said most Christians are not going to acknowedge that Prophet Mohammed(pbuh) is a Prophet of God, therefore they will not acknowledge that the Quran contains any authentic message from God (The same God they claim to worship)----therefore this whole excersie is from the perspective of convincing Christians that the Quran contains messages that the NT confirms are teachings of Prophet Jesus(pbuh).----As far as Muslims are concerned we have already known for 1400 years that the Quran contains the wisdom teachings of all the Prophets of God, including Jesus Christ(pbuh)---we not only know what they are ---but also how to implement them practically in our daily lives.
In conclusion---this whole excersise, while it may be a good first step for Christians---does not contribute anything new to Muslims.---However, inasmuch as Christians are interested in enhancing their own knowledge of the full teachings of Jesus Christ(pbuh) and how they can be implemented in today's world, We Muslims can be of help. This type of exploration---one that radically reforms today's society to be more in line with the principles of Justice tempered with compassion and mercy, Liberty balanced with responsibility, Equality and fraternity, Trusteeship of the government towards the governed and of humans towards all of God's creations......then yes, these are areas of co-operation that will contribute to both Muslim and Christian lives for the better. (However, irrespective of Christian co-operation---these are topics that are already being discussed and will inevitably have an impact on society---simply because of the demographics----for further info see radical reform by Tariq Ramadan)
Yet, we must all start from someplace --- baby steps are much better than standing still, so I want to encourage you and wish you well in your endeavors and hopefully what begins as a limited dialogue---can eventually, someday, expand to other areas................
So let me say this another way----Your primary premise is flawed.....You believe that Muslims are interested in finding out what is "authentic" in the Torah presently held by the Jews and the NT presently held by the Christians. ----But you see, We Muslims already know what is authentic Torah, Injeel, Zabur, the scrolls of Prophet Abraham(pbuh)......etc----so, why should we expend effort to find out what we already know? (If you were asking help from Muslims to enhance YR knowledge of the full teachings of Jesus Christ(pbuh)----that would be a different matter altogether)
As to comparing the Quran with other wisdom teachings---including those of the Christians and Jews, this has already been done by many Muslim scholars (and from very early in Muslim history)---so...we Muslims already have a body of scholarly work in this area. ----and you can read tafsir (English)by Yusuf Ali, who has also included references to Torah, Talmud, Rabbinical writings, NT and apocrypha ...etc.
You said most Christians are not going to acknowedge that Prophet Mohammed(pbuh) is a Prophet of God, therefore they will not acknowledge that the Quran contains any authentic message from God (The same God they claim to worship)----therefore this whole excersie is from the perspective of convincing Christians that the Quran contains messages that the NT confirms are teachings of Prophet Jesus(pbuh).----As far as Muslims are concerned we have already known for 1400 years that the Quran contains the wisdom teachings of all the Prophets of God, including Jesus Christ(pbuh)---we not only know what they are ---but also how to implement them practically in our daily lives.
In conclusion---this whole excersise, while it may be a good first step for Christians---does not contribute anything new to Muslims.---However, inasmuch as Christians are interested in enhancing their own knowledge of the full teachings of Jesus Christ(pbuh) and how they can be implemented in today's world, We Muslims can be of help. This type of exploration---one that radically reforms today's society to be more in line with the principles of Justice tempered with compassion and mercy, Liberty balanced with responsibility, Equality and fraternity, Trusteeship of the government towards the governed and of humans towards all of God's creations......then yes, these are areas of co-operation that will contribute to both Muslim and Christian lives for the better. (However, irrespective of Christian co-operation---these are topics that are already being discussed and will inevitably have an impact on society---simply because of the demographics----for further info see radical reform by Tariq Ramadan)
Yet, we must all start from someplace --- baby steps are much better than standing still, so I want to encourage you and wish you well in your endeavors and hopefully what begins as a limited dialogue---can eventually, someday, expand to other areas................
Here is some encouragment from the Talmud
"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world's grief
Do justly now
Love mercy now
Walk humbly now
You are not obligated to complete the work
but neither are you free to abandon it"
Its really upto us to make this world a better place----and any small effort can cause a ripple that expands................
By the way, ---my fav translators of the Quran tend to be Pickthall, Yusuf Ali and M. Asad.(both M.Asad and Yusuf Ali come with tafsir.) Any translation includes the biases of the translator.
"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world's grief
Do justly now
Love mercy now
Walk humbly now
You are not obligated to complete the work
but neither are you free to abandon it"
Its really upto us to make this world a better place----and any small effort can cause a ripple that expands................
By the way, ---my fav translators of the Quran tend to be Pickthall, Yusuf Ali and M. Asad.(both M.Asad and Yusuf Ali come with tafsir.) Any translation includes the biases of the translator.
YieldedOne
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 628
- Reaction score
- 15
Siam, I'd really like to thank you much for your engagement of my material and your gracious, attentive tone. You've been ever so helpful. May Allah bless all of your steps, bro! Mad love!
:rock:
**********************************
Siam:
By the way, ---my fav translators of the Quran tend to be Pickthall, Yusuf Ali and M. Asad.(both M.Asad and Yusuf Ali come with tafsir.) Any translation includes the biases of the translator.
I'm so glad you mentioned that...
Muhammad Asad's commentary on Surah 3:1-3...
3 Most of the commentators are of the opinion that ma bayna yadayhi - lit., "that which
is between its hands" - denotes here "the revelations which came before it", i.e., before
the Qur'an. This interpretation is not, however, entirely convincing. Although there is
not the least doubt that in this context the pronominal ma refers to earlier revelations,
and particularly the Bible (as is evident from the parallel use of the above expression in
other Qur'anic passages), the idiomatic phrase ma bayna yadayhi does not, in itself, mean
"that which came before it" - i.e., in time - but, rather (as pointed out by me in surah 2,
note 247), "that which lies open before it". Since, however, the pronoun "it" relates here
to the Qur'an, the metaphorical expression "between its hands" or "before it" cannot possibly
refer to "knowledge" (as it does in 2:255), but must obviously refer to an objective reality
with which the Qur'an is "confronted": that is, something that was coexistent in time with
the revelation of the Qur'an. Now this, taken together (a) with the fact - frequently
stressed in the Qur'an and since established by objective scholarship - that in the course
of the millennia the Bible has been subjected to considerable and often arbitrary alteration,
and (b) with the fact that many of the laws enunciated in the Qur'an differ from the laws
of the Bible, brings us forcibly to the conclusion that the "confirmation" of the latter
by the Qur'an can refer only to the basic truths still discernible in the Bible, and not to
its time-bound legislation or to its present text - in other words, a confirmation of
whatever was extant of its basic teachings at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an: and
it is this that the phrase ma bayna yadayhi expresses in this context as well as in 5:46
and 48 or in 61:6 (where it refers to Jesus' confirming the truth of "whatever there still
remained [i.e., in his lifetime] of the Torah").
4 It is to be borne in mind that the Gospel frequently mentioned in the Qur'an is not
identical with what is known today as the Four Gospels, but refers to an original, since
lost, revelation bestowed upon Jesus and known to his contemporaries under its Greek name
of Evangelion ("Good Tiding"), on which the Arabicized form Injil is based. It was probably
the source from which the Synoptic Gospels derived much of their material and some of
the teachings attributed to Jesus. The fact of its having been lost and forgotten is
alluded to in the Qur'an in 5:14. - Regarding my rendering of al-furqan as "the standard
by which to discern the true from the false", see also note 38 on the identical phrase
occurring in 2:53.
Let me pull out some points here...
1) In the commentary on verse 3, M. Asad specifically states that the "basic truths still discernible in the Bible" or "whatever was extant of its basic teachings at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an" are what is being talked about. This would DEFINITELY be the Shema and the "Love Your Neighbor" passages. Again, you can SKIP the translated BIBLE and go back to the Hebrew text itself. And I guarantee you that the Hebrew text was extant whenver the Quran was created (as was the Greek New Testament)!
2) M. Asad specifically states that the Gospel of Jesus was "probably the source from which the Synoptic Gospels derived much of their material and some of the teachings attributed to Jesus." If we look carefully we see that the idea of the Two Great Commandments of Jesus are in 2 of the 4 Gospels. So, if we were being intellectually honest, we'd have to say that there is a good chance that the Two Great Commandments are part of the "source" from whence these Gospel fragments came.
NOW...when you put Maududi's commentary TOGETHER WITH M. Asad's commentary...there really seems to be little doubt at this point. I don't see how any intelligent, informed, reasonable Muslim can just ignore the authority of both Maududi and Asad on these issues.
Siam, do you have any reason that both of these commentaries should be ignored on this issue? I get the impression that you are a very well read, thoughtful, and conscientious practictioner of faith. Is this making sense, brother?
**********************************
Siam:
You said most Christians are not going to acknowedge that Prophet Mohammed(pbuh) is a Prophet of God, therefore they will not acknowledge that the Quran contains any authentic message from God (The same God they claim to worship)----therefore this whole excersie is from the perspective of convincing Christians that the Quran contains messages that the NT confirms are teachings of Prophet Jesus(pbuh).----As far as Muslims are concerned we have already known for 1400 years that the Quran contains the wisdom teachings of all the Prophets of God, including Jesus Christ(pbuh)---we not only know what they are ---but also how to implement them practically in our daily lives.
I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there on the bolded part, my brother. The issue is not more about convincing Christians of the validity of the Quran or anything like that. Again, look at my thought project. Even if I--myself--were to seriously think about becoming a Muslim (I think many Muslims would be happy about the prospect of a Christian converting to Islam)...with what I now know, I would still be advocating what I am. Again, we aren't dealing with specifically Christian thought at all here. It's based upon the following things: 1) the Quran 2) Commentaries (Maududi, Asad, etc) 3) Hebrew Torah, and 4) Greek New Testament. No "Bibles", bible translations, or Christian commentaries involved!
Seriously, Siam. If you were to give me advice on my possible conversion, and I was talking to you about these things that I've looked up about the relevance of Isa's Great Commandments, what would you tell me, me being a Christian newly converting to Islam? Would you tell me to ignore Maududi's and Asad's perspectives on the Torat and Injeel...and solely focus on the Quran? Woudl you tell to ignore Maududi's and Asad's take in Surah 3:1-3...but take the other stuff? If you would say that, then why would Maududi and Asad go through the trouble of mentioning those things in their commentaries...for Muslims?
Again, this is not mainly about how CHRISTIANS feel about things. It's an assertion that per Quran and commentaries on it, Isa's Great Commandments (found in the Torat and Injeel) are relevant to "true" Muslim faith.
*********************************************
Siam:
Here is some encouragment from the Talmud
"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world's grief
Do justly now
Love mercy now
Walk humbly now
You are not obligated to complete the work
but neither are you free to abandon it"
Its really upto us to make this world a better place----and any small effort can cause a ripple that expands................
That's one of my favorite Scriptures...
He has told you, O man, what is good;
and what does the Lord require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God?
Micah 6:8
:rock:
**********************************
Siam:
By the way, ---my fav translators of the Quran tend to be Pickthall, Yusuf Ali and M. Asad.(both M.Asad and Yusuf Ali come with tafsir.) Any translation includes the biases of the translator.
I'm so glad you mentioned that...
Muhammad Asad's commentary on Surah 3:1-3...
3 Most of the commentators are of the opinion that ma bayna yadayhi - lit., "that which
is between its hands" - denotes here "the revelations which came before it", i.e., before
the Qur'an. This interpretation is not, however, entirely convincing. Although there is
not the least doubt that in this context the pronominal ma refers to earlier revelations,
and particularly the Bible (as is evident from the parallel use of the above expression in
other Qur'anic passages), the idiomatic phrase ma bayna yadayhi does not, in itself, mean
"that which came before it" - i.e., in time - but, rather (as pointed out by me in surah 2,
note 247), "that which lies open before it". Since, however, the pronoun "it" relates here
to the Qur'an, the metaphorical expression "between its hands" or "before it" cannot possibly
refer to "knowledge" (as it does in 2:255), but must obviously refer to an objective reality
with which the Qur'an is "confronted": that is, something that was coexistent in time with
the revelation of the Qur'an. Now this, taken together (a) with the fact - frequently
stressed in the Qur'an and since established by objective scholarship - that in the course
of the millennia the Bible has been subjected to considerable and often arbitrary alteration,
and (b) with the fact that many of the laws enunciated in the Qur'an differ from the laws
of the Bible, brings us forcibly to the conclusion that the "confirmation" of the latter
by the Qur'an can refer only to the basic truths still discernible in the Bible, and not to
its time-bound legislation or to its present text - in other words, a confirmation of
whatever was extant of its basic teachings at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an: and
it is this that the phrase ma bayna yadayhi expresses in this context as well as in 5:46
and 48 or in 61:6 (where it refers to Jesus' confirming the truth of "whatever there still
remained [i.e., in his lifetime] of the Torah").
4 It is to be borne in mind that the Gospel frequently mentioned in the Qur'an is not
identical with what is known today as the Four Gospels, but refers to an original, since
lost, revelation bestowed upon Jesus and known to his contemporaries under its Greek name
of Evangelion ("Good Tiding"), on which the Arabicized form Injil is based. It was probably
the source from which the Synoptic Gospels derived much of their material and some of
the teachings attributed to Jesus. The fact of its having been lost and forgotten is
alluded to in the Qur'an in 5:14. - Regarding my rendering of al-furqan as "the standard
by which to discern the true from the false", see also note 38 on the identical phrase
occurring in 2:53.
Let me pull out some points here...
1) In the commentary on verse 3, M. Asad specifically states that the "basic truths still discernible in the Bible" or "whatever was extant of its basic teachings at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an" are what is being talked about. This would DEFINITELY be the Shema and the "Love Your Neighbor" passages. Again, you can SKIP the translated BIBLE and go back to the Hebrew text itself. And I guarantee you that the Hebrew text was extant whenver the Quran was created (as was the Greek New Testament)!
2) M. Asad specifically states that the Gospel of Jesus was "probably the source from which the Synoptic Gospels derived much of their material and some of the teachings attributed to Jesus." If we look carefully we see that the idea of the Two Great Commandments of Jesus are in 2 of the 4 Gospels. So, if we were being intellectually honest, we'd have to say that there is a good chance that the Two Great Commandments are part of the "source" from whence these Gospel fragments came.
NOW...when you put Maududi's commentary TOGETHER WITH M. Asad's commentary...there really seems to be little doubt at this point. I don't see how any intelligent, informed, reasonable Muslim can just ignore the authority of both Maududi and Asad on these issues.
Siam, do you have any reason that both of these commentaries should be ignored on this issue? I get the impression that you are a very well read, thoughtful, and conscientious practictioner of faith. Is this making sense, brother?
**********************************
Siam:
You said most Christians are not going to acknowedge that Prophet Mohammed(pbuh) is a Prophet of God, therefore they will not acknowledge that the Quran contains any authentic message from God (The same God they claim to worship)----therefore this whole excersie is from the perspective of convincing Christians that the Quran contains messages that the NT confirms are teachings of Prophet Jesus(pbuh).----As far as Muslims are concerned we have already known for 1400 years that the Quran contains the wisdom teachings of all the Prophets of God, including Jesus Christ(pbuh)---we not only know what they are ---but also how to implement them practically in our daily lives.
I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there on the bolded part, my brother. The issue is not more about convincing Christians of the validity of the Quran or anything like that. Again, look at my thought project. Even if I--myself--were to seriously think about becoming a Muslim (I think many Muslims would be happy about the prospect of a Christian converting to Islam)...with what I now know, I would still be advocating what I am. Again, we aren't dealing with specifically Christian thought at all here. It's based upon the following things: 1) the Quran 2) Commentaries (Maududi, Asad, etc) 3) Hebrew Torah, and 4) Greek New Testament. No "Bibles", bible translations, or Christian commentaries involved!
Seriously, Siam. If you were to give me advice on my possible conversion, and I was talking to you about these things that I've looked up about the relevance of Isa's Great Commandments, what would you tell me, me being a Christian newly converting to Islam? Would you tell me to ignore Maududi's and Asad's perspectives on the Torat and Injeel...and solely focus on the Quran? Woudl you tell to ignore Maududi's and Asad's take in Surah 3:1-3...but take the other stuff? If you would say that, then why would Maududi and Asad go through the trouble of mentioning those things in their commentaries...for Muslims?
Again, this is not mainly about how CHRISTIANS feel about things. It's an assertion that per Quran and commentaries on it, Isa's Great Commandments (found in the Torat and Injeel) are relevant to "true" Muslim faith.
*********************************************
Siam:
Here is some encouragment from the Talmud
"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world's grief
Do justly now
Love mercy now
Walk humbly now
You are not obligated to complete the work
but neither are you free to abandon it"
Its really upto us to make this world a better place----and any small effort can cause a ripple that expands................
That's one of my favorite Scriptures...
He has told you, O man, what is good;
and what does the Lord require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God?
Micah 6:8
Last edited:
YieldedOne
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 628
- Reaction score
- 15
One more for good measure...
Commentary by Zohurul Hoque and Husain Nuri...
3:3-4 The revelation of the Qur’ān was not complete at the time of revelation of this verse, yet Allāh chose to refer to the Qur’ān as kitāb or Book to imply in course of time it would be completed and compiled into a book. It was revealed with ‘truth’, a term that connects not only to its content, but also to its source, process of revelation, coherence and purpose.
As a rare of example of the Qur’ān’s worldview, it verifies the truth in earlier scriptures, particularly in the Tawrāt and the Injīl, vestiges of which are still available in the form of the Torah and the Bible. Although ‘Isā came to confirm Mūsā’s book Tawrāt (3:50; 5:46; 61:6), it must be remembered that the Old Testament is not necessarily the Torah used by the Jews. The Jewish interpretation of Torah has two sections, the Torah Shebiksav (the written Torah) and Torah Sheb’al Peh (the Oral Torah, that eventually was compiled into what is called Talmud). The written Torah has 24 books, only 5 of those books were revealed to Moses, various saints wrote the rest. (YO's Note: Both Deuteronomy and Leviticus are WITHIN those 5 books!!!!)
Similarly, popularly understood four Gospels in the New Testament are not the same Injīl (Evangel or Gospel) revealed by Allāh to ‘Isā. The original Injīl was invariably in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus. The precursor of the present day Bible was translated from the original Aramaic into Greek and later translated into English. The current Gospels contain remnants of original Injīl, but for all practical purpose, the original Injīl has long been lost. The scope of this commentary would not permit us to go into the details of early Christianity and compilation of the Bible. It must be understood that when the Qur’ān testifies the Tawrāt or the Injīl were guidance for mankind it is not referring to the present versions.
Ok. That's THREE Muslim commentaries...with NO Bible or Christian commentaries being used.
I rest my case.
Commentary by Zohurul Hoque and Husain Nuri...
3:3-4 The revelation of the Qur’ān was not complete at the time of revelation of this verse, yet Allāh chose to refer to the Qur’ān as kitāb or Book to imply in course of time it would be completed and compiled into a book. It was revealed with ‘truth’, a term that connects not only to its content, but also to its source, process of revelation, coherence and purpose.
As a rare of example of the Qur’ān’s worldview, it verifies the truth in earlier scriptures, particularly in the Tawrāt and the Injīl, vestiges of which are still available in the form of the Torah and the Bible. Although ‘Isā came to confirm Mūsā’s book Tawrāt (3:50; 5:46; 61:6), it must be remembered that the Old Testament is not necessarily the Torah used by the Jews. The Jewish interpretation of Torah has two sections, the Torah Shebiksav (the written Torah) and Torah Sheb’al Peh (the Oral Torah, that eventually was compiled into what is called Talmud). The written Torah has 24 books, only 5 of those books were revealed to Moses, various saints wrote the rest. (YO's Note: Both Deuteronomy and Leviticus are WITHIN those 5 books!!!!)
Similarly, popularly understood four Gospels in the New Testament are not the same Injīl (Evangel or Gospel) revealed by Allāh to ‘Isā. The original Injīl was invariably in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus. The precursor of the present day Bible was translated from the original Aramaic into Greek and later translated into English. The current Gospels contain remnants of original Injīl, but for all practical purpose, the original Injīl has long been lost. The scope of this commentary would not permit us to go into the details of early Christianity and compilation of the Bible. It must be understood that when the Qur’ān testifies the Tawrāt or the Injīl were guidance for mankind it is not referring to the present versions.
Ok. That's THREE Muslim commentaries...with NO Bible or Christian commentaries being used.
I rest my case.
YieldedOne
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 628
- Reaction score
- 15
So Siam, I really don't think my premise is flawwed at all. Actually, I think it's VERY, VERY defensible!
Major Point:
Qur'anically speaking, a person cannot be a "true, faithful Muslim" (ala Hammudat Abd Al-Ati's exact words) without heeding Jesus/Isa's Torat-Injeel teaching about "loving the neighbor as oneself".
-------
Whole thread at a glance
Major Point:
Qur'anically speaking, a person cannot be a "true, faithful Muslim" (ala Hammudat Abd Al-Ati's exact words) without heeding Jesus/Isa's Torat-Injeel teaching about "loving the neighbor as oneself".
-------
Whole thread at a glance
Thankyou for Micah 6:8.
If we were to combine Micah 6:8 with the sentiments in "love yr neighbor"---perhaps this is what we would get-----
Surah 41, verse 34-36
34. Nor can Goodness and Evil be equal. Repel (evil) with what is better. Then between whom was hatred, become as it were, friends and intimates.
35. And no one will be granted such goodness except those who excercise patience and self restraint----none but persons of greates good fortune
36. And if at any time an incitement to discord is made to you by satan, seek refuge in God. He is the one who hears and knows all things.
I have been unable to convince you that I find your perspective (---as phrased in yr "major point")limiting. You have been unable to clarify what the purpose(or the point) is ^o)---and we will simply be going in circles if we continue.
As to your other comment-----
"Seriously, Siam. If you were to give me advice on my possible conversion, and I was talking to you about these things that I've looked up about the relevance of Isa's Great Commandments, what would you tell me, me being a Christian newly converting to Islam?"
----I would ask you to seriously contemplate the phrasing of the shahada---(the first part of which expresses the tawheed)
it goes--"there is no god but God and Muhammed is the messenger of God." Look at the phrasing closely--what is the purpose of the negation "there is no god but..."? It means that one must discard all false ideas/concepts of god before we can arrive at Truth. In order to be a seeker of Truth---we must begin with doubt. Al Gazzali(1058-1111) says "Doubt is to find Truth---Those who do not have doubt cannot think and those who cannot think cannot find Truth". The negation is completed with the phrase---"But God"-what does this mean?---the answer is in the 2nd part of the shahada---in the Guidance of the messenger of God--Prophet Muhammed(pbuh)
"Would you tell me to ignore Maududi's and Asad's perspectives on the Torat and Injeel...and solely focus on the Quran?"
----The Quran is understood in context (hadith/sunnah) therefore I cannot ask you to focus "solely" on the Quran, Yet, I would strongly reccommend you initially focus solely on Islamic teachings. Perhaps once you have attained to faith (Iman) I would encourage you to explore further. (However, most converts have already looked at all other religions---often, Islam is the last religion they look at.....I personally prefer such a path for a convert, for then, one would have arrived at Islam with conviction.......)
"Woudl you tell to ignore Maududi's and Asad's take in Surah 3:1-3...but take the other stuff? "
----The Quran itself says it must be understood as a whole---it cannot be broken into peices. (Which is one reason I find your approach limiting)
"then why would Maududi and Asad go through the trouble of mentioning those things in their commentaries...for Muslims?"
---To put in context what asad means----The Quran corrects and completes all previous revelations. Therefore, Muslims can find wisdom in all previous revelations and thus respect them---but the full (correct and complete) message/revelation of God is the Quran (in arabic). The message of the Quran does not need any additions to it---that is---we Muslims do not need to figure out what the Torah says or what the NT says----because the corrected and completed message/Guidance of all previous prophets is already contained in the Quran. This does not negate the wisdom found in previous revelations nor does it diminish the respect we Muslims hold for the previous revelations. It means the Quran makes "whole" the revelations that had previously been lost or corrupted.
---In other words, Muslims follow the message of Prophet Jesus(pbuh) more correctly and completely than Christians can ever hope to follow.
"I rest my case"----I hope you do.
If we were to combine Micah 6:8 with the sentiments in "love yr neighbor"---perhaps this is what we would get-----
Surah 41, verse 34-36
34. Nor can Goodness and Evil be equal. Repel (evil) with what is better. Then between whom was hatred, become as it were, friends and intimates.
35. And no one will be granted such goodness except those who excercise patience and self restraint----none but persons of greates good fortune
36. And if at any time an incitement to discord is made to you by satan, seek refuge in God. He is the one who hears and knows all things.
I have been unable to convince you that I find your perspective (---as phrased in yr "major point")limiting. You have been unable to clarify what the purpose(or the point) is ^o)---and we will simply be going in circles if we continue.
As to your other comment-----
"Seriously, Siam. If you were to give me advice on my possible conversion, and I was talking to you about these things that I've looked up about the relevance of Isa's Great Commandments, what would you tell me, me being a Christian newly converting to Islam?"
----I would ask you to seriously contemplate the phrasing of the shahada---(the first part of which expresses the tawheed)
it goes--"there is no god but God and Muhammed is the messenger of God." Look at the phrasing closely--what is the purpose of the negation "there is no god but..."? It means that one must discard all false ideas/concepts of god before we can arrive at Truth. In order to be a seeker of Truth---we must begin with doubt. Al Gazzali(1058-1111) says "Doubt is to find Truth---Those who do not have doubt cannot think and those who cannot think cannot find Truth". The negation is completed with the phrase---"But God"-what does this mean?---the answer is in the 2nd part of the shahada---in the Guidance of the messenger of God--Prophet Muhammed(pbuh)
"Would you tell me to ignore Maududi's and Asad's perspectives on the Torat and Injeel...and solely focus on the Quran?"
----The Quran is understood in context (hadith/sunnah) therefore I cannot ask you to focus "solely" on the Quran, Yet, I would strongly reccommend you initially focus solely on Islamic teachings. Perhaps once you have attained to faith (Iman) I would encourage you to explore further. (However, most converts have already looked at all other religions---often, Islam is the last religion they look at.....I personally prefer such a path for a convert, for then, one would have arrived at Islam with conviction.......)
"Woudl you tell to ignore Maududi's and Asad's take in Surah 3:1-3...but take the other stuff? "
----The Quran itself says it must be understood as a whole---it cannot be broken into peices. (Which is one reason I find your approach limiting)
"then why would Maududi and Asad go through the trouble of mentioning those things in their commentaries...for Muslims?"
---To put in context what asad means----The Quran corrects and completes all previous revelations. Therefore, Muslims can find wisdom in all previous revelations and thus respect them---but the full (correct and complete) message/revelation of God is the Quran (in arabic). The message of the Quran does not need any additions to it---that is---we Muslims do not need to figure out what the Torah says or what the NT says----because the corrected and completed message/Guidance of all previous prophets is already contained in the Quran. This does not negate the wisdom found in previous revelations nor does it diminish the respect we Muslims hold for the previous revelations. It means the Quran makes "whole" the revelations that had previously been lost or corrupted.
---In other words, Muslims follow the message of Prophet Jesus(pbuh) more correctly and completely than Christians can ever hope to follow.
"I rest my case"----I hope you do.
YieldedOne
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 628
- Reaction score
- 15
Yeah. I think I will rest my case. Heh. Like you said, it doesn't look like we are going to progress much farther on this at all. It simply seems that the Torah and Injeel are relativized unto the Quran such that it's functionally not a consideration, because it's thought that all one needs is in the Quran. Not even Quranic commentaries by noted authorities can match that sensibility, it seems.
Thanks, Siam. This whole interaction has been a jump into the "pool" of interfaith dialogue with Muslims...and it's definitely been an informative one. Allah's blessings be upon you and everyone else who's been so great!
Over and out,
YO.
Thanks, Siam. This whole interaction has been a jump into the "pool" of interfaith dialogue with Muslims...and it's definitely been an informative one. Allah's blessings be upon you and everyone else who's been so great!
Over and out,
YO.
YO---yes, the Torah and NT, as presently held by the Jews and Chrsitians are not a consideration in advancing/enhancing our(Muslim) understanding of God's message.(theologically) This is because the Quran ITSELF says that God has now completed the religion (The same religion that was sent since the time of Prophet Adam(pbuh)). This is not something Muslims have made up from thin air---nor are any of the Muslim scholars you mentioned unaware of this fundamental point. (The message of the authentic /original Torah and Injeel are IN the Quran)
However, Understanding the Torah and Injeel presently held by the Jews and Christians is important to Muslims (non-theologically) because the Quran also advises Muslims to seek knowledge. All knowledge is from God, even scientific, medical, philosophical etc. Thus, interfaith dialogue that uses the Torah and/or Injeel as "common ground" will be workable----as long as you do not expect Muslims to take the Torah and Injeel presently held by the Jews and Christians as "additions" to the Quran---even partially.
I know that this is a lot of nuance and may be difficult to understand. ---especially since I havn't been able to express it very well....The difference may be subtle but it is important. Therefore, the best use of what you are trying to do (which I still don't really get) may be to use the Quran and NT and the commonalities found there to build a "common language" of dialogue. This should not require of Muslims (or Christians) any "agreements" that infringe on our beliefs.
However, Understanding the Torah and Injeel presently held by the Jews and Christians is important to Muslims (non-theologically) because the Quran also advises Muslims to seek knowledge. All knowledge is from God, even scientific, medical, philosophical etc. Thus, interfaith dialogue that uses the Torah and/or Injeel as "common ground" will be workable----as long as you do not expect Muslims to take the Torah and Injeel presently held by the Jews and Christians as "additions" to the Quran---even partially.
I know that this is a lot of nuance and may be difficult to understand. ---especially since I havn't been able to express it very well....The difference may be subtle but it is important. Therefore, the best use of what you are trying to do (which I still don't really get) may be to use the Quran and NT and the commonalities found there to build a "common language" of dialogue. This should not require of Muslims (or Christians) any "agreements" that infringe on our beliefs.