Non Muslims, how do you explain the existence of the Quran/Sincerity of the Prophet?

[Tyrion]

Hello everyone,

I noticed we have some really intelligent non Muslim members on this forum, so I figured this would be the ideal place to ask this question. (Muslim members are encouraged to post too!) But first, a bit about myself and why I’m asking this:

I’m currently a University Student in California, and as most of you know, when one goes to University they are exposed to a number of different world views, and typically you have your own views challenged. The reason I am able to go out and immerse myself in classes that deal with western philosophies and ideas about man is because I feel like I already have one basic truth, which is Islam. With this knowledge, I then am able to interpret and see ideas through this Islamic lens, so things that many non Muslims claim prove that religion is outdated are reconciled. From what I currently know, I see no reason to doubt that Muhammad (pbuh) was not sincere, and that he was not speaking the words of God. Whenever I read the Quran or read about Islamic history, it just seems very unlikely to me that Muhammad was anything other than the final prophet, and that the Quran was not his word.

What I want to know is, as nonbelievers, how do you explain Muhammad, and the Quran? If you claim it to be his word, why is that? What motives were there? What about all the signs that point to his sincerity? I’m really interested in your responses, and my intention here really is to learn. I apologize in advance if this question has already been tackled in the past, and I hope my post was clear.

 

[PouringRain]

I may not be sure about what you are asking. Are you asking how non-muslims view Mohammed, the qur'an, and Mohammed's motives? Are you wanting to ask for arguments against what you believe as a muslim in the attempt to try and understand how others view Mohammed differently?


As for me personally, I believe Mohammed was a prophet of God, sent to bring the people back to him, and the qur'an is given by inspiration from God.

As far as counter arguments/ theories, I have read many. One of the most interesting things I read said that Khadijah was a monotheist, from a monotheist family, and Mohammed was a puppet used by her family in order to promote that monotheism.

 

[Hiroshi]

Hello everyone,

I noticed we have some really intelligent non Muslim members on this forum, so I figured this would be the ideal place to ask this question. (Muslim members are encouraged to post too!) But first, a bit about myself and why I’m asking this:

I’m currently a University Student in California, and as most of you know, when one goes to University they are exposed to a number of different world views, and typically you have your own views challenged. The reason I am able to go out and immerse myself in classes that deal with western philosophies and ideas about man is because I feel like I already have one basic truth, which is Islam. With this knowledge, I then am able to interpret and see ideas through this Islamic lens, so things that many non Muslims claim prove that religion is outdated are reconciled. From what I currently know, I see no reason to doubt that Muhammad (pbuh) was not sincere, and that he was not speaking the words of God. Whenever I read the Quran or read about Islamic history, it just seems very unlikely to me that Muhammad was anything other than the final prophet, and that the Quran was not his word.

What I want to know is, as nonbelievers, how do you explain Muhammad, and the Quran? If you claim it to be his word, why is that? What motives were there? What about all the signs that point to his sincerity? I’m really interested in your responses, and my intention here really is to learn. I apologize in advance if this question has already been tackled in the past, and I hope my post was clear.

Hi Tyrion.

I find this question of yours interesting. I don't want to become unpopular, or cause any offence to anyone. But I have to say that if the Qur'an is not from God then it would contain mistakes. And there do seem to be mistakes in it.

For instance (everyone knows this example) Moses had a sister called Miriam, a brother called Aaron and a father called Amram. In Arabic these names are Musa, Maryam, Harun and Imran. But of course, Mary the mother of Jesus is also called Maryam in Arabic. Now however much I try, I cannot believe that the Qur'an hasn't got Mary confused with Miriam when I read that Harun is her brother (Soorah 19:28) and that Imran is her father (Soorah 66:12). How can Mary have the same name, the same brother and the same father as Miriam? Hadiths record that even Muslims in Mohammed's day understood Soorah 19:28 to mean that Aaron was the literal fleshly brother of Mary the mother of Jesus.

 

[جوري]

Hi Tyrion.

I find this question of yours interesting. I don't want to become unpopular, or cause any offence to anyone. But I have to say that if the Qur'an is not from God then it would contain mistakes. And there do seem to be mistakes in it.

For instance (everyone knows this example) Moses had a sister called Miriam, a brother called Aaron and a father called Amram. In Arabic these names are Musa, Maryam, Harun and Imran. But of course, Mary the mother of Jesus is also called Maryam in Arabic. Now however much I try, I cannot believe that the Qur'an hasn't got Mary confused with Miriam when I read that Harun is her brother (Soorah 19:28) and that Imran is her father (Soorah 66:12). How can Mary have the same name, the same brother and the same father as Miriam? Hadiths record that even Muslims in Mohammed's day understood Soorah 19:28 to mean that Aaron was the literal fleshly brother of Mary the mother of Jesus.

what is your evidence that it was a 'literal' sibling of Aaron other than the answering Islam website.. I challenge you to bring me an Islamic source where it is understood that Miriam (p) was the literal sibling of Aaron!

all the best

 

[جوري]

قراءة : 650 | طباعة : 68 | إرسال لصديق : 0 | عدد المقيمين : 3







ورد في القرآن عند الحديث عن قصة مريم ، قوله تعالى: { يا أخت هارون ما كان أبوك امرأ سوء وما كانت أمك بغيا } (مريم:28) وقد اعتبر فريق من النصارى، أن القرآن قد وقع في خلط واضطراب، عندما وصف مريم بأنها أخت هارون ، مع الفارق الزمني بين العصر الذي وجد فيه هارون النبي، والعصر الذي وجدت فيه مريم أم عيسى ؛ فأهل التاريخ يتحدثون عن ألف ومئتي سنة بينهما، وربما كان الفاصل الزمني بينهما أكثر من ذلك .
بالمقابل، فإن الكتاب المقدس ( الإنجيل ) قد خلا من هذا الخلط والاضطراب، إذ لم يرد فيه ذكر لـ مريم إلا على أنها أم عيسى ، وابنة عمران ، لا أخت هارون ، وبالتالي فإن في هذا ما يثبت وقوع الخلط والاضطراب في القرآن .
هذا حاصل الشبهة، وما قيل فيها، ومقالنا التالي مكرس للرد على هذه الشبهة وتفنيدها، وردنا عليها من وجوه، منها:
- أن المتأمل في السياق القرآني الذي وردت فيه الآية، يجد ما يدل دلالة واضحة، على أن هذا الوصف الذي وُصِفت به مريم ، لم يكن تسمية قرآنية، وإنما جاء وصفًا حكاه القرآن على لسان قوم مريم ، وما خاطبوها ونادوها به عندما حملت بـ عيسى ، مستنكرين ذلك الحمل، واتهموها في عرضها وشرفها وعفافها .
وحكاية القرآن لأقوال أقوام آخرين أمر وارد ومعهود؛ كما في قوله تعالى: { قالوا يا قومنا إنا سمعنا كتابا أنزل من بعد موسى مصدقا لما بين يديه يهدي إلى الحق وإلى طريق مستقيم } (الأحقاف:30)، فالقرآن هنا ناقل لقول الجن، وإلا فأين ذكر الإنجيل، وهو قبل القرآن ؟ فالله سبحانه نقل ما قالوا فحسب، وإلا فالواقع التاريخي غير ذلك .
وهكذا السياق القرآني في سورة مريم جاء ناقلاً قول اليهود في حق مريم ، قال تعالى: { فأتت به قومها تحمله قالوا يا مريم لقد جئت شيئًا فريًا * يا أخت هارون ما كان أبوك امرأ سوء وما كانت أمك بغيًا * فأشارت إليه قالوا كيف نكلم من كان في المهد صبيًا } (مريم:27-29) فقوله سبحانه: { يا أخت هارون } إنما هو حكاية لتلك المقولة التي صدرت عن قوم مريم ، وإثبات الاسم واللقب لا يدل على أن المسمى واحد. أما معرفة السبب في وصف قوم مريم لها { يا أخت هارون } فهذا أمر آخر، ساكت عنه النص القرآني، وينبغي البحث عنه فيما وراء ذلك .
- على أن سياق الآية - وهذا هو الأهم - لم يرد في معرض ذكر نسب مريم ؛ فالقرآن لم يقل: إن مريم أخت هارون ، وإنما ورد في معرض التوبيخ لها؛ لأنها في اعتقاد اليهود حملت سفاحاً، فما علاقة النسب الحقيقي بالسفاح ؟
- وهنا ينبغي أن يثار سؤال: لماذا قال اليهود: { يا أخت هارون } ولم يقولوا: ( يا أخت موسى وهارون ) أو ( يا أخت موسى )؟ لا شك أنهم لم يقولوا ذلك عبثاً، وإنما نسبوها إلى هارون ؛ لأن هارون - بحسب زعمهم - كان مصدر عار لهم، حيث صنع لهم عجلاً. وأيضاً فإن مريم العذراء - بحسب زعمهم أيضاً - فعلت عاراً؛ لهذا تهكموا بها واستهزؤوا منها قائلين: { يا أخت هارون } .
- ثم يقال أيضًا: إن هذه التسمية في حق مريم ، إما إنها أطلقت في القرآن على سبيل الحقيقة، أو إنها أطلقت عليها على سبيل التشبيه. وحملها على سبيل الحقيقة أمر غير مستنكر؛ إذ ليس ثمة ما يمنع أن يكون لـ مريم أخ اسمه هارون ؛ يؤيد هذا أن التسمية بـ ( هارون ) كانت شائعة ودارجة كثيرًا في بني إسرائيل، وأيضًا ليس في ذكر قصة ولادتها، ما يدل على أنه لم يكن لها أخ سواها. وعلى هذا، فالتعبير القرآني بـ: { يا أخت هارون } يمكن حمله على الحقيقة، فيكون لـ مريم أخ اسمه هارون ، كان صالحًا في قومه، خاطبوها بالإضافة إليه، زيادة في التوبيخ، أي: ما كان لأخت مثله أن تفعل فعلتك .
وحمل هذه التسمية على التشبيه أمر وارد أيضاً وغير مستبعد، خصوصاً إذا علمنا أن التسمية بأسماء الآباء والأمهات تشريفاً بهم، شيء معروف، ولا سيما و هارون كان سيد قومه مهاباً عظيماً له شأن في بني إسرائيل. وقد جاء في السنة النبوية ما يؤيد هذا، ففي ( صحيح مسلم ) وغيره عن المغيرة بن شعبة قال: بعثني رسول الله إلى أهل نجران فقالوا: أرأيت ما تقرؤون { يا أخت هارون } و موسى قبل عيسى بكذا وكذا" ؟ قال المغيرة : فلم أدر ما أقول. فلما قدمت على رسول الله ذكرت ذلك له، فقال: ( ألم يعلموا أنهم كانوا يسمون بأسماء أنبيائهم والصالحين قبلهم } .
على أن في إنجيل لوقا ، ما يفيد أن لـ مريم نسب مع النبي هارون أخي موسى ، عن طريق زكريا ، الذي كان متزوجًا امرأة من ذرية هارون اسمها أليصابات، وكانت امرأته نسيبة مريم ، والصحيح أنها كانت خالتها، ونص الإنجيل هو: { كَانَ فِي أَيَّامِ هِيرُودُسَ مَلِكِ الْيَهُودِيَّةِ كَاهِنٌ اسْمُهُ زَكَرِيَّا مِنْ فِرْقَةِ أَبِيَّا وَامْرَأَتُهُ مِنْ بَنَاتِ هَارُونَ وَاسْمُهَا أَلِيصَابَاتُ. وَكَانَا كِلاَهُمَا بَارَّيْنِ أَمَامَ اللهِ } ( لوقا: الأصحاح الأول/ 5 ) وفيه أيضًا: { وَهُوَذَا أَلِيصَابَاتُ نَسِيبَتُكِ هِيَ أَيْضًا حُبْلَى بِابْنٍ فِي شَيْخُوخَتِهَا } ( لوقا: الأصحاح الأول/36) وبحسب نص الإنجيل نفسه، فلا يبعد أن يكون لـ مريم نسب بعيد مع النبي هارون ، وعلى هذا فلا إشكال في التعبير القرآني .
- ومما يؤيد أن يكون المراد بلفظ ( الأخت ) هنا التشبيه لا الحقيقة، أن لفظ ( الأخ ) في القرآن يرد على سبيل الحقيقة، ويرد على سبيل المجاز، ومن الإطلاقات المجازية لهذا اللفظ قوله تعالى: { وما نريهم من آية إلا هي أكبر من أختها } (الزخرف:84)، فـ ( الأخوة ) بين الآيات أخوة مجازية، وليست حقيقية، وأيضاً قوله سبحانه: { واذكر أخا عاد } (الأحقاف:21)، فالمقصود بـ { أخا عاد }هو هود عليه السلام، ومعلوم أن هوداً لم يكن أخاً لعاد، وإنما كان حفيداً له، وبينهما مئات السنين. وعلى هذا فمعنى أنها أخت هارون : أنها من نسله وذريته، كما يقال للتميمي: يا أخا تميم، وللقرشي: يا أخا قريش، وللعربي: يا أخا العرب. فمعنى قولهم: { يا أخت هارون } أي: يا من أنتِ من ذرية ذلك النبي الصالح، كيف فعلت هذه الفعلة ؟
فعلى ما تقدم وتبيَّن، يكون في معنى قول القرآن: { يا أخت هارون } احتمالان، كلاهما له ما يؤيده: أحدهما: أنها الأخت حقيقة؛ وهذا على معنى أنه كان لها أخ اسمه هارون ؛ والثاني: المشابهة؛ وهذا على معنى أن ثمة قرابة بعيدة كانت تربطها بـ هارون أخي موسى ، أو على معنى نسبتها لرجل صالح في زمنها كان يسمى هارون .
- على أن مما يدحض قول من يقول بهذه الشبهة أن يقال له: كيف يسكت اليهود - وهم ألد أعداء الإسلام- على هذا الخطأ التاريخي الفاحش، ولم يعتبروه مأخذاً على القرآن والإسلام ؟ وهل من شأن هؤلاء القوم أن يغضوا الطرف عن مثل هذا الخطأ، لو كان الأمر كذلك ؟
ومن مجموع ما تقدم يزول الإشكال الذي قد يرد على الآية، وتبطل دعوى الخلط والاضطراب في القرآن التي يدعيها البعض .
ومن المفيد في هذا السياق، أن ننبه إلى أن ما ورد في بعض المصادر من أن محمد بن كعب القرظي قد قال في قوله الله: { يا أخت هارون } قال: هي أخت هارون لأبيه وأمه، وهي أخت موسى أخي هارون ، التي قَصَّت أثر موسى عليه السلام: { فبصرت به عن جنب وهم لا يشعرون } (القصص:11) نقول: إن ما ورد في هذا خطأ محض. ودليل خطئه أن القرآن قد ذكر أنه أتبع بـ عيسى بعد الرسل، فدل هذا على أن عيسى آخر الأنبياء بعثًا، وليس بعده إلا محمد، ولو كان الأمر كما زعم محمد بن كعب القرظي، لم يكن عيسى متأخرًا عن الرسل، ولكان قبل سليمان و داود ، فإن القرآن قد ذكر أن داود جاء بعد موسى ، في قوله تعالى: { ألم تر إلى الملإ من بني إسرائيل من بعد موسى إذ قالوا لنبي لهم ابعث لنا ملكًا نقاتل في سبيل الله } (البقرة:246) وذكر القصة إلى أن قال: { وقتل داود جالوت } (البقرة:251) فدلت الآيات القرآنية على أن موسى و هارون متقدمان على داود في الزمن .


http://www.islamweb.net/media/index.php?page=article&lang=A&id=74894


stick it into google and translate, you'll see the christian desperation..

all the best

 

[Pygoscelis]

Tyrion, I reject Islam for the same reason you reject other religions. I don't think it has anything to do with the sincerity of its believers or claimed prophet. I would not call Mohammed a liar, just as you would not call Appalonius or Buddha a liar. I also don't think it has a whole lot to do with reasons NOT to believe so much as not having reasons TO believe. Why don't you accept all these other ideologies you are now learning about in school as truth? Probably not because you doubt the honesty of their practitioners, but more because you simply have no reason to believe as they do - you have your own thing.

 

[atheistbynature]

I see no reason to suppose the Quran is true, so it doesn't need explaining as such. As far as I am aware there is no way of checking what it says and no other sources that concur with it. It was written a long time ago and only has one author, and no-one else has said to have been told the same thing by god. There is no reason (though I'm sure you'll say there is one) to have to explain it any more than any other holy books past or present.

Although its likely that Mohammed was sincere, or he wouldn't have had any reason to do the things he did this does not mean he was correct.

I'm quite aware I'm not the most knowledgeable person on this subject (please correct me if I'm wrong) but I think my basic points still stand.

 

[Salahudeen]

I see no reason to suppose the Quran is true, so it doesn't need explaining as such. As far as I am aware there is no way of checking what it says and no other sources that concur with it. It was written a long time ago and only has one author, and no-one else has said to have been told the same thing by god. There is no reason (though I'm sure you'll say there is one) to have to explain it any more than any other holy books past or present.

Although its likely that Mohammed was sincere, or he wouldn't have had any reason to do the things he did this does not mean he was correct.

I'm quite aware I'm not the most knowledgeable person on this subject (please correct me if I'm wrong) but I think my basic points still stand.

We believe Abraham, Moses, Jesus and all the prophets called to the same thing as Muhammed, and that is to worship God alone without any partners. We simply believe Muhammed was another prophet just like Jesus,Abraham, Moses, Jonah. And they all called their people to the worship of God alone and nothing else.

If I am not mistaken the 10 commandments concur with what Muhammed brought (Thy shall worship the Lord without associating any partners with him) Think thats it lol. And this is exactly what Muhammed (saw) preached. Just like the other prophets.

 

[Hiroshi]

what is your evidence that it was a 'literal' sibling of Aaron other than the answering Islam website.. I challenge you to bring me an Islamic source where it is understood that Miriam (p) was the literal sibling of Aaron!

all the best

[FONT=&quot] In Sahih Muslim, the Hadith related by Mughirah ibn Shu'bah, #5326, says:[/FONT] [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] "When I came to Najran, they (the Christians of Najran) asked me: You read "Sister of Harun", (i.e. Mary), in the Qur'an, whereas Moses was born well before Jesus. When I came back to Allah's Messenger I asked him about that, and he said: "The (people of the old age) used to give names (to their persons) after the names of Apostle and pious persons who had gone before them.""
[/FONT]



[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]When this Muslim went to speak with the Christians of Najran he was under the impression that Mary was the actual sister of Aaron. And when the Christians objected he could not explain the problem.
[/FONT]

 

[جوري]

[FONT=&quot] In Sahih Muslim, the Hadith related by Mughirah ibn Shu'bah, #5326, says:

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] "When I came to Najran, they (the Christians of Najran) asked me: You read "Sister of Harun", (i.e. Mary), in the Qur'an, whereas Moses was born well before Jesus. When I came back to Allah's Messenger I asked him about that, and he said: "The (people of the old age) used to give names (to their persons) after the names of Apostle and pious persons who had gone before them.""
[/FONT]



[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]When this Muslim went to speak with the Christians of Najran he was under the impression that Mary was the actual sister of Aaron. And when the Christians objected he could not explain the problem.
[/FONT]

and it looks like the Islamic view was cleared right there and then in the days of old by the messenger himself no? follow all the verses in the Quran in the post I linked in Arabic you'll see a proper sequence to the prophets and their relatives as such wasn't even mentioned in the previous scriptures, if such were an actual 'literal error' it would have been apparent then to the naked eye throughout all the verses including suret al ahqaf and suret al baqara and suret az-zukhruf etc. and not a modern day christian fundie addendum--

all the best[/FONT]

 

[Salahudeen]

Hi Tyrion.

I find this question of yours interesting. I don't want to become unpopular, or cause any offence to anyone. But I have to say that if the Qur'an is not from God then it would contain mistakes. And there do seem to be mistakes in it.

For instance (everyone knows this example) Moses had a sister called Miriam, a brother called Aaron and a father called Amram. In Arabic these names are Musa, Maryam, Harun and Imran. But of course, Mary the mother of Jesus is also called Maryam in Arabic. Now however much I try, I cannot believe that the Qur'an hasn't got Mary confused with Miriam when I read that Harun is her brother (Soorah 19:28) and that Imran is her father (Soorah 66:12). How can Mary have the same name, the same brother and the same father as Miriam? Hadiths record that even Muslims in Mohammed's day understood Soorah 19:28 to mean that Aaron was the literal fleshly brother of Mary the mother of Jesus.

This is also one of the reasons I can't believe the bible to be from God, because of all the contradictions and errors. Also if you want to learn Islam it's best to ask your questions to the Muslims and not use hate sites which only have 1 goal.

 

[titus]

how do you explain Muhammad, and the Quran? If you claim it to be his word, why is that? What motives were there? What about all the signs that point to his sincerity?

As someone that is not Muslim there are only two options, really, when it comes to Muhammad. Either he believed what he was saying (and was therefore not right in the head), or he was manipulating people to do what he wanted. He grew up knowing about Christianity and Judaism and therefore had the knowledge necessary to write the Quran and change it in ways that he wanted, and since he was the sole author it made it easy to avoid contradictions. If the Quran had been written in a place that had little or no knowledge of Christianity or Judaism, such as the Americas, then maybe it would give me pause, but to me it seems he simply adapted religions that already existed to create a new one.

The signs that point to his sincerity are basically Muslim sources, none of which would dare say anything to insult him, so their veracity (to many of us non-Muslims) is in doubt.

As for motives, who knows. He was able to gain political power and more because of his teachings, but nobody can truly know what his motives were.

Please take none of this post as an insult. It is not intended as such.

As an analogy, the closest thing I can think of may be the way that Muslims feel towards Joseph Smith and Mormonism. Do you believe his sincerity, and if not then what do you think his motives were? There are probably almost as many answers as there are people with opinions on the matter.

 

[Rabi Mansur]

As an analogy, the closest thing I can think of may be the way that Muslims feel towards Joseph Smith and Mormonism. Do you believe his sincerity, and if not then what do you think his motives were? There are probably almost as many answers as there are people with opinions on the matter.

Good point. Therefore, I think it is incumbent on all people to spend the time doing as much study and research as possible rather than just follow what one's parents or ancestors followed. Maybe Joseph Smith and Muhammad (pbuh) were both sincere, but they both can't be correct.

But I have to say, from my personal experience, there is a lot more evidence (actually a mountain of evidence) that reveals Joseph Smith was a fraud than anything I was able to find against Muhammad (pbuh). Most of the anti-Islamic sites aren't all that reputable IMHO and slant the evidence. With Joseph Smith, it is pretty easy to demonstrate he was a fraud. There are lots of errors in the Book of Mormon and in his other "revelations" but believers are too blind to see.

But you do make a good point. Most Mormons, even if they admit there are problems with their church, still fall back on the argument that their prophets must have been sincere. They feel like their leaders would never lead them astray. Hence, they continue to blindly follow Joseph Smith.

Sincerity alone isn't the best test for a true prophet. It takes more than sincerity.

:wa:

 

[YusufNoor]

From what I currently know, I see no reason to doubt that Muhammad (pbuh) was not sincere, and that he was not speaking the words of God.

in general, Westerners could give a crap about Rasoolullah, PBUH. thanks to Muslims as a whole, they see Islam a cause of beheadings, women "opressed" by the niqab, freeking honor killings, suicide bombers who want to trade their life for some real estate and cash for the family, guys who want to "buy" little children to marry, etc...

as for the Qur'an, English translations can be dreadful, EVEN IN books by Muslims [interpreters who first language ISN'T English], leading to crap this:

When this Muslim went to speak with the Christians of Najran he was under the impression that Mary was the actual sister of Aaron. And when the Christians objected he could not explain the problem.

in my neck of the woods, we have Muslims lying to get govt benefits in large numbers, men with multiple wives, but don't support them or their kids. the list goes on and on. [don't even ask about ticking off the neighbors at Jummuah, Fajr, Isha]

MAYBE, just MAYBE a few will be exposed to some decent Muslim, might even be exposed to some dawah. the SINCERE ONES, Allah guides [In Sha'a Allah], leaving us with the haters.

SINCERITY should begin with the Muslims, but it appears that Muslims have much different goals than spreading Islam.

May Allah Subhannahu wa Ta Aala guide us all.

:wa:

 

[Hiroshi]

and it looks like the Islamic view was cleared right there and then in the days of old by the messenger himself no? follow all the verses in the Quran in the post I linked in Arabic you'll see a proper sequence to the prophets and their relatives as such wasn't even mentioned in the previous scriptures, if such were an actual 'literal error' it would have been apparent then to the naked eye throughout all the verses including suret al ahqaf and suret al baqara and suret az-zukhruf etc. and not a modern day christian fundie addendum--

all the best

There is another Hadith (can't find the reference just now) where Aisha expresses surprise and disbelief at hearing that Mary is not Aaron's literal sister. The one bringing her the news tells her that he has investigated and discovered that Aaron and Mary lived centuries apart. It seems that the full historical picture of the Bible characters and their relatives (as found in other passages in the Qur'an) was only made completely clear gradually and with the passing of time. But in earlier parts of the Qur'an these mistakes are evident.

 

[Hiroshi]

This is also one of the reasons I can't believe the bible to be from God, because of all the contradictions and errors.

The Bible is under attack from many critics who claim to see errors and contradictions in it. And it is natural that you should want to throw the ball back into my court. Well, I would be willing to discuss any such errors or contradictions that you have to show me.

Also if you want to learn Islam it's best to ask your questions to the Muslims and not use hate sites which only have 1 goal.

I know that "Answering Islam" make a big deal out of this. But the honest truth is, I did not learn about it from them. I bought a copy of the Qur'an translated by Marmaduke Pickthall and found all the details in a foreword to Soorah 3 "Al-Imran". I might ask, btw, who is the Imran in the title supposed to be? Dawood's translations mentions both Imran the father of Moses and Aaron and also Imran the supposed father of Mary, in footnotes. These were two unrelated men who lived 1,500 years apart.

 

[Hiroshi]

and it looks like the Islamic view was cleared right there and then in the days of old by the messenger himself no? follow all the verses in the Quran in the post I linked in Arabic you'll see a proper sequence to the prophets and their relatives as such wasn't even mentioned in the previous scriptures, if such were an actual 'literal error' it would have been apparent then to the naked eye throughout all the verses including suret al ahqaf and suret al baqara and suret az-zukhruf etc. and not a modern day christian fundie addendum--

all the best

I found that reference now:

Here is what Ibn Kathir narrated:
وَقَالَ اِبْن جَرِير حَدَّثَنِي يَعْقُوب حَدَّثَنَا اِبْن عُلَيَّة عَنْ سَعِيد بْن أَبِي صَدَقَة عَنْ مُحَمَّد بْن سِيرِينَ قَالَ أُنْبِئْت أَنَّ كَعْبًا قَالَ إِنَّ قَوْله : " يَا أُخْت هَارُون " لَيْسَ بِهَارُون أَخِي مُوسَى قَالَ فَقَالَتْ لَهُ عَائِشَة كَذَبْت قَالَ يَا أُمّ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ إِنْ كَانَ النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَهُ فَهُوَ أَعْلَم وَأَخْبَر وَإِلَّا فَإِنِّي أَجِد بَيْنهمَا سِتّمِائَةِ سَنَة قَالَ فَسَكَتَتْ وَفِي هَذَا التَّارِيخ نَظَر
It was narrated from Ibn Jarir, narrated from Yaqub, narrated from Ibn U’laya, narrated from Sa’id Ibn Abi Sadaqa, narrated from Muhammad Ibn Sireen who stated that he was told that Ka’b said the verse that reads, "O sister of Harun (Aaron)!" (of Sura 19:28) does not refer to Aaron the brother of Moses. Aisha replied to Ka'b, "You have lied." Ka’b responded, "O Mother of the believers! If the prophet, may Allah’s prayers be upon him, has said it, and he is more knowledgeable, then this is what he related. Besides, I find the difference in time between them (Jesus and Moses) to be 600 years." He said that she remained silent.
(From the Arabic commentary of Ibn Kathir on Sura 19:28)


This is from Ibn Kathir's commentary. Is it also Hadith?

 

[Tyrion]

Hiroshi,

I'm a little confused as to what you're trying to say here... The Islamic sources you've pointed out only say that the prophet knew and preached that the verse doesn't refer to the Aaron of Moses's time. Perhaps the companions misunderstood, which isn't that hard to believe since we seem to have people here on this board who don't understand the verse.. But the fact the Prophet himself corrected his companions and said one thing is enough to show that there was no mix up in the verse...

 

[جوري]

I actually don't understand what you are arguing for or against? It would seem that if the verse were in error as you suggest or that messenger (p) copied a translated bible that such a reference wouldn't be made, as there is nothing in your books to suggest her lineage and well we all know how the Jews viewed which is precisely the reason for the verse is to mock her, not by calling her the sister of Moses who brought them the commandments but the sister of Aaron who was present when they took a golden calf for worship and as the commentary for the Quran references if you'd bother read -- further, the sequence of the other verses where the lineage of Moses, Solomon, Goliath etc etc. would also be equally in error, and that he wouldn't correct his companions right there and then before a christian millenniums later decides to pick up on that as an error. In other words you have no argument to stand on whatsoever!

Further, it is the job of the messenger to teach, people are in error even about how to perform fast.. one took it literally and put a light strand and a dark strand beneath his pillow and would see which one appeared to him to break fast or remain fasting, and that itself should take care of some of the more strange amongst you who wonder if the Quran is from God, what the use is of the messenger.. the sunna is how we are taught to understand the Quran and how to perform rituals...

All of this in fact are a testament to the messenger's prophethood.. Looking at his entire history, the history of the region, the works that were in existence, superimposing them on reality and the time, it isn't hard to see why the Jews would be lost in the desert for 40 years in a small stretch of land while the Muslims take down a 300 year tyrant empire in a matter of 19 days.. Islam has been powerful since its inception and a couple of fundies with cheesy websites are still not able to curb that modern day with a rate of conversion in the U.S of 20,000 a year!~

all the best

 

[Rabi Mansur]

The Jews refer to Mary in Surah 19 as "O sister of Aaron!"

This actually makes pretty good sense to me. Her cousin was Elizabeth who the NT tells us was of Aaronic descent. Hence, it is likely that Mary was also of Aaron. She is also mentioned as being pious and in the temple frequently. Also consistent. "Sister of Aaron" could be referring to her Aaronic priesthood lineage, I don't see it as a direct statement that she had an actual brother named Aaron.

My two cents.

:wa: