Thanks to you to Bro Scimi for a most needed thread to clear the air of suspicions of different Gods & different religions but islam proved it they were '' all from one source , One Supreme God The Creator & one Mankind ''
The Concept of God
- Thread starter Scimitar
- Start date
- Replies 55
- Views 17K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | vBulletin 4 php 8.0 patch
Thanks to you to Bro Scimi for a most needed thread to clear the air of suspicions of different Gods & different religions but islam proved it they were '' all from one source , One Supreme God The Creator & one Mankind ''
Scimitar
DAWAH DIGITAL
- Messages
- 7,549
- Reaction score
- 851
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Hmmm,
Bro Goodwill, in the OP, I posted about the Zulu belief and prayer being a mirror to Surah al Ikhlas - the theology is the same.
One God,
Does not beget, nor was HE begotten.
He is unimaginable.
The theological belief about God in Islam is the same as that of the Zulu, that was the point I was making.
God has always sent messengers and prophets to mankind, they were not limited to the Children of Israel - if they were, I'm not sure a God like that would be worth your worship, as this would prove an wholly racist God - but we find this is not the case - that God sent messengers and prophets to the whole world. What those people who received the message did with it - was their choice - that's free will.
What I and others find amazing, is how very real traces of Strict Monotheism, as per the belief in Islam, is prevalent in many cultures and races across the world.
Signs, for a people who reflect.
Scimi
Scimi,
the Bible teaches that the ancestors of the human race were originally monotheists and that God has not left Himself without witness anywhere. For example, you may be aware of Flood stories from cultures around the world that echo the original Flood of Noah’s day as recorded in Genesis 6. My point about the Zulu prayer is that it is not demonstrably an ancient Zulu prayer reflecting ancient Zulu religion. As I have pointed out, the prayer contrasts so sharply with documented traditional Zulu religion that it seems to be merely a Muslim prayer translated into the Zulu language recently, in the 20th or 21st century.
Scimitar
DAWAH DIGITAL
- Messages
- 7,549
- Reaction score
- 851
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
And here, you and I differ on two points.
1) Monotheism suffers corruptions over time, just look at Christianity.
2) Pockets of Zulu and Swazi Monotheists exist today who have not idol worshipped. Thet are a minority in the faiths tradition today.
oh there's a third point too... namely that trinitarian Christianity has also suffered the same as the Zulu tradition. Once monotheist, now polytheist.
As for the prayer, the Zulu sister (AnonymousDamsel from VC) said it was fine. And she speaks the language. Because she's Zulu.
Scimi
I “just look at Christianity” and feel grateful and blessed. Here is a monotheism where God is more than a slaveowner of orphans. And since the Quran confirms the Bible, you are obligated as a Muslim to believe the Bible, too. Ironic.
You have not yet addressed the real issue regarding the Zulu prayer. The question is not whether there are Zulus who are monotheists today, nor is the question whether your Zulu prayer was translated correctly. At the beginning of this thread, unless I misread your intention, you showcased the Zulu prayer as representing some kind of ancient proto-Islam dating back thousands of years. But in order to prove your point, you must do more than quote from Deedat. You must provide the documented origin and date of the prayer and show that the prayer was free and independent of Muslim influence.
Scimitar
DAWAH DIGITAL
- Messages
- 7,549
- Reaction score
- 851
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Cool, which of the 100's of versions is the right one?
You are asking for dates of prayers from a people who had no record of time keeping. You know that right? Surely you also know that when Deedat, from whom I sourced, used the word Zulu, it was their current identification and they originally came from the east of Africa, migrating all the way to the heart of it. This took a long time, do you follow history enough to delve into the anthropology of the places and periods of time involved? Because if you did, you'd realise that dating the origin of the Zulu belief becomes problematic simply because it's older than the heart of Africa which the original Nguni Bantu migrations ended up, circa 9th century CE.
What you also failed to consider was that the belief the Bantu peoples held - was what Deedat identified as Zulu, which is actually a derivative of the Nguni language group.
Do you know what this suggests?
That the belief prayer, could be even older than the Zulu language.
Not sure if you was expecting that.
But hey, it is what it is.
Scimi
The Quran does not confirm the Bible. Why else would the Quran be sent down if none of the previous scriptures, as mentioned before, have been unchanged? That wouldn't make any sense. The Quran confirms the previous scriptures before it that were sent down but, the Quran was sent down as the final message to all of humanity and is protected from the corruption that the previous scriptures had suffered from.
Scimitar
DAWAH DIGITAL
- Messages
- 7,549
- Reaction score
- 851
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Monotheism in the ancient world.
Scottish anthropologist Andrew Lang concluded in 1898 that the idea of an High God or 'All Father' existed among some of the simplest of contemporary and ancient tribes, prior to Western contact.
His theory was first defended by Willhelm Schmidt (1868–1954),in his Der Ursprung der Gottesidee appearing from 1912, opposing the "Revolutionary Monotheism" approach that traces the emergence of monotheistic thought as a gradual process spanning the Bronze and Iron Age Religions of the Ancient Near East and Classical Antiquity.
Alleged traces of primitive monotheism were found extant in many cultures across the globe. Monotheism in Schmidt's view is the "natural" form of theism, which was later overlaid and"degraded" by Polytheism.
Schmidt's hypothesis was controversially discussed during much of the first half of the 20th century. In the 1930s, Schmidt adduced evidence from Native American Mythology,Australian aborigines and other primitive civilizations in support of his views. He also responded to his critics.
For instance, he rejected Rafael Pettazoni's claim that the sky gods were merely a dim personification or embodiment of the physical sky,saying in The Origin and Growth of Religion, "The outlines of the Supreme Being become dim only among later peoples."He adds that "a being who lives in the sky, who stands behind the celestial phenomena, who must 'centralize' in himself the various manifestations [of thunder, rain, etc.] is not a personification of the sky at all."
Bro Goodwill,
You should attempt to learn about monotheism from an historical POV. You'll discover much. We're on the same page regarding monotheism being the proto religion for humanity.
Scimi
Last edited:
Pretty much all of them contain the good news of the Messiah. Christians never needed an Uthman to destroy variant texts.
Brother Keiv, your reasoning is correct. There was no need for God to send another book in the 7th century A.D. because God has always been faithful to preserve the Holy Scriptures. The Quran itself unambiguously confirms the inspiration, preservation, and authority of the Bible. Consider these verses:
The Quran confirms the Bible that existed in Muhammad’s time. Surah 2:87,89,91,97,101; 21:105; 40:53,54.
The Quran teaches that the Bible was preserved up until the time of Muhammad. Surah 2:106.
The Quran teaches that Muslims must believe the Bible too. Surah 2:136; 3:84; 4:136; 29:46.
The Quran teaches that the Bible was given as guidance for all “mankind” and not for the Jews only. Surah 3:3,4.
The Quran teaches that the Bible contains guidance and light and that Jews and Christians should judge by the Bible. Surah 5:43-48;21:48
The Quran teaches that Christians should listen to the Bible and “stand firmly by the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you [Christians] from your Lord.” Surah 5:68.
The Quran teaches that no one can change God’s words. Surah 6:34,114,115; 10:64; 18:27.
The Quran claims that Muhammad is mentioned in the Bible. Surah 7:157. Although Muhammad per se is not mentioned in the Bible, this verse presupposes that the Bible’s message has been preserved.
The Quran says that if Muhammad doubts Islam, he should consult Christians who read the Bible, “the Book before you [Muhammad].” Surah 10:94.
The Quran teaches that, if Muhammad does not know something, Muhammad should ask Christians, “the people of the Reminder” prior to Muhammad. Surah 16:43; 21:7.
The Quran teaches that God supported the believing Christians and that they became dominant over the unbelieving Jews. Surah 3:55; 61:14. Historically, the only Christians who “became dominant” were those who affirmed the death and resurrection of Jesus the Messiah and who affirmed the Bible as we have it today. According to Yusuf Ali’s commentary on 61:14, “those who followed Jesus permeated the Roman Empire, brought many new races within their circle, and through the Roman Empire, Christianity became the predominant religion of the world.”
So “Do not argue with the People of the Book...say, We believe in that which has been revealed...to you.” Surah 29:46.
Scimitar
DAWAH DIGITAL
- Messages
- 7,549
- Reaction score
- 851
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Preserved, you say?
The New Testament is "preserved"????
Bro, that has to be the most ridiculous statement I've read all week on this forum, and I've read quite a few.
Seems your dissemination of Qur'an is faulty - but what can I expect from a Christian who interprets any holy scripture according to his bias? Let's put you straight in sha Allah.
The Qur'an does indeed.
Up til the time of... meaning, when God revealed the Qur'an to Muhammad pbuh, it was time for a new revelation because the old one was confuddled with so many versions and so many sects that the core theology of the Christians was too far gone to revert back to the original path.
The Qur'an teaches that the Torah, Psalms and Injeed were vaildated scriptures, until their corruptions. As for the injeel where is it? I don't see the Gospel of Jesus pbuh anywhere, I see gospels according to four men who never left a last name and are mysterious figures whom the church is still guessing at. So please - do not attempt to paint the various new testaments as the gospel of Jesus pbuh. They are not.
Allah sent down the Torah, and the Gospel, the verse says - not Jesus. It was given to Jesus, and only some men knew that gospel, who then ran for their lives during the passion and crucifxion mess - and practiced their faith in secret... meanwhile, the book you hold is Pauline doctrine, and Paul didn't even know Jesus, so please - remind yourself to not make such hairy mistakes again.
WOW - massive errors on your part lol.
5:43 is describing an incident when the Jews wanted the Prophet Muhammad pbuh to judge their criminals crime according to shariah - but Muhammad pbuh told them to judge according to their own laws, and so the criminal was stoned to death - the Jews were expecting a lighter form of punishment due to them expecting shariah law to be effective for the Jews, but NOOOOOO, Prophet Muhammad pbuh told the Jews, judge him according to your own laws... a lot of Jews regretted being Jewish that day... wanna guess what happened next?
As for 21:48 - another grave error by you, boy oh boy, your ayah references do you no favours bro trust me.
I'm showing you how you are doing this wrong.
21:48 - Just confirms that Moses and Aaron pbut were given the Law - and for the record, Torah, means LAW. As we already established. But that LAW was abrogated by the Jewish rabbi's interpreting the meanings and punishments wrongly... small wonder now, why the Jews of Medina wanted to be judged for their crimes according to the Shariah and not the Torah. Savvy?
Goodwill, you've made many mistakes here - massive ones.
You're burying yourself now bro - here is the ayah:
Say, "O People of the Scripture, you are [standing] on nothing until you uphold [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord." And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. So do not grieve over the disbelieving people.
As I mentioned, the Christians and the Jews were to follow the LAW of the TORAH properly - which is why the ayah specifically mentions "...you are standing on NOTHING UNTIL YOU UPHOLD THE LAW OF THE TORAH..." which they could never uphold, even Jesus pbuh told the Rabbi's they had corrupted the Laws an made the temple a den of thieves. You're so out of context Goodwill, honestly.
The Jews of Medina preferred shariah law over their own corrupted explanations of the Mosaic Law of Torah - the Talmud. And the Talmud - being a man made work and not divine - is compared to the Islamic ahadeeth because the Talmud contains the narrations regarding the practice of the Laws, but, they were totally corrupted by the "lying pen of the scribes" go see Jeremiah 8.
Referring to the Qur'an - because this sure doesn't appeal to any other scripture.
The Torah, disappeared during the captivity in Babylon - it came back because Ezra pbuh recited it for the children of Israel after he was raised back to life again - he'd been dead for 100 years and during those 100 years, the 70 year captivity happened and the Torah was destroyed.
When Ezra was raised back to life, he entered Jerusalem and that's when he eventually taught the Torah to the children of Israel - who did not have a Rabbi amongst them by the way. They changed the "meanings" and this eventually led to all sorts of corruption in Judaism, one of which, is recorded in your bible, namely the event when Jesus pbuh became really angry at the temple because the Rabbi's had turned the temple into a den of thieves.
Nope. It shows that elements of it remained uncorrupted - that is all. When it comes to the most important message - theology - the bible is all over the place. Because, it's not divine - it is not the gospel of Jesus pbuh, but as I mentioned - the gospel of four mysterious figures the church fathers and scholars still remain confused over.
I think it's ridiculous, if I were to read a text book on science written by a man who never left his last name, I would not trust it because the author himself did not see it fit to lend his identity to his work.
The Torah doesn't suffer this, but the New Testament does.
WOW - you are sooo out of context, I'm starting to think you are trolling lol
Read the chapter from verse 88 to 94 and try and claim what you did again
You will not be able to.
Allah informed Muhammad pbuh about the Egyptian captivity Moses pbuh freeing the children of Israel - this event - and this is what Allah is asking the Prophet Muhammad pbuh to have confirmed by the children of Israel - The Children of Israel - Jews, not Christians, and the confirmation was regarding an historical event. The red sea crossing. Pull ya socks up fella.
16:43 - And We sent not before you except men to whom We revealed [Our message]. So ask the people of the message if you do not know.
Muhammad, who had no idea what he was being tasked with as the first Prophet and Messenger to the Arabs with no prior knowledge of the previous prophets and messengers - was now being told by Allah, that HE had indeed sent prophets and messengers to the nations before his own, and if he did not know this, then to seek their truths by asking the children of Israel about these prophets and messengers.
This in no way lends your claim any strength, but serves to only strengthen the claim of Islam even more. That Muhammad pbuh is the final prophet and messenger to all mankind. This is contextual, and not open to interpretation - a bad habit Christians have run with since, well, Constantine.
First - define dominant
because your yard stick by which you measure - is "material"... which is why you fail in your interpretation, and the Qur'an does not require "interpretations" - it is perfectly contextual and understood by Muslims around the world, who find what you just write, ridiculous - the whole post of yours - ridiculous.Now, for the ayaat themelves.
61:14 - O ye who believe! Be ye helpers of Allah. As said Jesus the son of Mary to the Disciples, "Who will be my helpers to (the work of) Allah." Said the disciples, "We are Allah.s helpers!" then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved: But We gave power to those who believed, against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed.
PREVAILED - in what? worldly matters? or in their afterlife because they believed in the correct belief? The latter, obviously. Come on brooo, don't read bias into scripture - that is wrong and unhealthy for your soul because you are guiding it wrongly and into the narratives of those who passed before you and are taking their seat in the fire for being such liars to their own souls and to others whom are impressionable and easily led.
3:55 - when Allah said, "O Jesus, indeed I will take you and raise you to Myself and purify you from those who disbelieve and make those who follow you [in submission to Allah alone] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me is your return, and I will judge between you concerning that in which you used to differ.
This is really not helping your case now is it?
1) Allah raised Jesus pbuh to HIMSELF. No Cruci-fiction.
2) Allah is informing Muhammad pbuh about when the followers of Jesus pbuh, who were more contextually - better Jews than the Jews themselves - had been raised in rank for believing in the correct theology and dissemination of the Mosaic Laws, as being "purified" in belief and conduct. Nothing more, nothing less.
3) and that on the day of judgement, Allah will judge between what they used to differ.
4) This does not help your point. As it actually lays a foreboding trial over those who differed with the Muslims with a hard hearted bias and mockery.
29:46 - And do not argue with the People of the Scripture except in a way that is best, except for those who commit injustice among them, and say, "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you. And our God and your God is one; and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him."
And do not argue with the People of the Scripture except in a way that is best - meaning, with respect and due dilligence, and without emotional attachment, appealing to their better senses such as reason, logic, context and cotext of biblical verses and quranic ayaat, etc
except for those who commit injustice among them, - these we do not entertain. They are not worth wasting time over - we Muslims are a people of deed and conduct, we do not entertain such idiotic situations. We leave those fools to themselves, unless they seek truth. In which case we discuss in a manner which is mutually sound and engaging. But if they persist in their mockery and bias, we say: "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you. And our God and your God is one; and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him."
You wasted your time attempting to interpret the Qur'an yourself when the Qur'an requires no interpretation but contextual study. We do not suffer the corruptions your scripture did. We are not on shaky ground.
Your hubris is cute, though
Next time, come with something more substantial than this wasteful exercise you thought had momentum in it.
God bless,
Scimi
Last edited:
Scimitar
DAWAH DIGITAL
- Messages
- 7,549
- Reaction score
- 851
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Not sure a book bragging about its author is to be considered worthy of acceptance,
Where are the other prophets and messengers mentioned in the New Testament? Agabus? Anna? and Silas? Really? mysterious figures whom even the Hebrews reject as prophets and messengers?
What of Aaron and Moses, Abraham and Lot, Isaac and Ishmael, Ezra and Ezekiel, Daniel and Jeremiah, David and Solomon? where are they in your New Testament?
Anyway, back to the point - what does MESSIAH mean in context? and what does it mean out of context as per the Christian understanding of the word?
You will find the Jews and the Muslims are contextual, whereas the Christians seem to think MESSIAH means BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD - that's not only out of context, but blasphemy to boot.
Seems the Christians destroyed their own doctrine without anyone's help - as for Uthman, he standardised the written form of the Qur'an - and the words Al Qur'an literally mean "The Recital" - it was memorised by heart by thousands of Muslims by the time it was standardised in Arabic script. Your point is moot.
You really are making a pigs ear out of your posts here my bro.
Scimi
Preserved, you say?
The New Testament is "preserved"????
Bro, that has to be the most ridiculous statement I've read all week on this forum, and I've read quite a few.
Seems your dissemination of Qur'an is faulty - but what can I expect from a Christian who interprets any holy scripture according to his bias? Let's put you straight in sha Allah.
The Qur'an does indeed.
Up til the time of... meaning, when God revealed the Qur'an to Muhammad pbuh, it was time for a new revelation because the old one was confuddled with so many versions and so many sects that the core theology of the Christians was too far gone to revert back to the original path.
The Qur'an teaches that the Torah, Psalms and Injeed were vaildated scriptures, until their corruptions. As for the injeel where is it? I don't see the Gospel of Jesus pbuh anywhere, I see gospels according to four men who never left a last name and are mysterious figures whom the church is still guessing at. So please - do not attempt to paint the various new testaments as the gospel of Jesus pbuh. They are not.
Allah sent down the Torah, and the Gospel, the verse says - not Jesus. It was given to Jesus, and only some men knew that gospel, who then ran for their lives during the passion and crucifxion mess - and practiced their faith in secret... meanwhile, the book you hold is Pauline doctrine, and Paul didn't even know Jesus, so please - remind yourself to not make such hairy mistakes again.
WOW - massive errors on your part lol.
5:43 is describing an incident when the Jews wanted the Prophet Muhammad pbuh to judge their criminals crime according to shariah - but Muhammad pbuh told them to judge according to their own laws, and so the criminal was stoned to death - the Jews were expecting a lighter form of punishment due to them expecting shariah law to be effective for the Jews, but NOOOOOO, Prophet Muhammad pbuh told the Jews, judge him according to your own laws... a lot of Jews regretted being Jewish that day... wanna guess what happened next?
As for 21:48 - another grave error by you, boy oh boy, your ayah references do you no favours bro trust me.
I'm showing you how you are doing this wrong.
21:48 - Just confirms that Moses and Aaron pbut were given the Law - and for the record, Torah, means LAW. As we already established. But that LAW was abrogated by the Jewish rabbi's interpreting the meanings and punishments wrongly... small wonder now, why the Jews of Medina wanted to be judged for their crimes according to the Shariah and not the Torah. Savvy?
Goodwill, you've made many mistakes here - massive ones.
You're burying yourself now bro - here is the ayah:
Say, "O People of the Scripture, you are [standing] on nothing until you uphold [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord." And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. So do not grieve over the disbelieving people.
As I mentioned, the Christians and the Jews were to follow the LAW of the TORAH properly - which is why the ayah specifically mentions "...you are standing on NOTHING UNTIL YOU UPHOLD THE LAW OF THE TORAH..." which they could never uphold, even Jesus pbuh told the Rabbi's they had corrupted the Laws an made the temple a den of thieves. You're so out of context Goodwill, honestly.
The Jews of Medina preferred shariah law over their own corrupted explanations of the Mosaic Law of Torah - the Talmud. And the Talmud - being a man made work and not divine - is compared to the Islamic ahadeeth because the Talmud contains the narrations regarding the practice of the Laws, but, they were totally corrupted by the "lying pen of the scribes" go see Jeremiah 8.
Referring to the Qur'an - because this sure doesn't appeal to any other scripture.
The Torah, disappeared during the captivity in Babylon - it came back because Ezra pbuh recited it for the children of Israel after he was raised back to life again - he'd been dead for 100 years and during those 100 years, the 70 year captivity happened and the Torah was destroyed.
When Ezra was raised back to life, he entered Jerusalem and that's when he eventually taught the Torah to the children of Israel - who did not have a Rabbi amongst them by the way. They changed the "meanings" and this eventually led to all sorts of corruption in Judaism, one of which, is recorded in your bible, namely the event when Jesus pbuh became really angry at the temple because the Rabbi's had turned the temple into a den of thieves.
Nope. It shows that elements of it remained uncorrupted - that is all. When it comes to the most important message - theology - the bible is all over the place. Because, it's not divine - it is not the gospel of Jesus pbuh, but as I mentioned - the gospel of four mysterious figures the church fathers and scholars still remain confused over.
I think it's ridiculous, if I were to read a text book on science written by a man who never left his last name, I would not trust it because the author himself did not see it fit to lend his identity to his work.
The Torah doesn't suffer this, but the New Testament does.
WOW - you are sooo out of context, I'm starting to think you are trolling lol
Read the chapter from verse 88 to 94 and try and claim what you did again
You will not be able to.
Allah informed Muhammad pbuh about the Egyptian captivity Moses pbuh freeing the children of Israel - this event - and this is what Allah is asking the Prophet Muhammad pbuh to have confirmed by the children of Israel - The Children of Israel - Jews, not Christians, and the confirmation was regarding an historical event. The red sea crossing. Pull ya socks up fella.
16:43 - And We sent not before you except men to whom We revealed [Our message]. So ask the people of the message if you do not know.
Muhammad, who had no idea what he was being tasked with as the first Prophet and Messenger to the Arabs with no prior knowledge of the previous prophets and messengers - was now being told by Allah, that HE had indeed sent prophets and messengers to the nations before his own, and if he did not know this, then to seek their truths by asking the children of Israel about these prophets and messengers.
This in no way lends your claim any strength, but serves to only strengthen the claim of Islam even more. That Muhammad pbuh is the final prophet and messenger to all mankind. This is contextual, and not open to interpretation - a bad habit Christians have run with since, well, Constantine.
First - define dominant
Now, for the ayaat themelves.
61:14 - O ye who believe! Be ye helpers of Allah. As said Jesus the son of Mary to the Disciples, "Who will be my helpers to (the work of) Allah." Said the disciples, "We are Allah.s helpers!" then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved: But We gave power to those who believed, against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed.
PREVAILED - in what? worldly matters? or in their afterlife because they believed in the correct belief? The latter, obviously. Come on brooo, don't read bias into scripture - that is wrong and unhealthy for your soul because you are guiding it wrongly and into the narratives of those who passed before you and are taking their seat in the fire for being such liars to their own souls and to others whom are impressionable and easily led.
3:55 - when Allah said, "O Jesus, indeed I will take you and raise you to Myself and purify you from those who disbelieve and make those who follow you [in submission to Allah alone] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me is your return, and I will judge between you concerning that in which you used to differ.
This is really not helping your case now is it?
1) Allah raised Jesus pbuh to HIMSELF. No Cruci-fiction.
2) Allah is informing Muhammad pbuh about when the followers of Jesus pbuh, who were more contextually - better Jews than the Jews themselves - had been raised in rank for believing in the correct theology and dissemination of the Mosaic Laws, as being "purified" in belief and conduct. Nothing more, nothing less.
3) and that on the day of judgement, Allah will judge between what they used to differ.
4) This does not help your point. As it actually lays a foreboding trial over those who differed with the Muslims with a hard hearted bias and mockery.
29:46 - And do not argue with the People of the Scripture except in a way that is best, except for those who commit injustice among them, and say, "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you. And our God and your God is one; and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him."
And do not argue with the People of the Scripture except in a way that is best - meaning, with respect and due dilligence, and without emotional attachment, appealing to their better senses such as reason, logic, context and cotext of biblical verses and quranic ayaat, etc
except for those who commit injustice among them, - these we do not entertain. They are not worth wasting time over - we Muslims are a people of deed and conduct, we do not entertain such idiotic situations. We leave those fools to themselves, unless they seek truth. In which case we discuss in a manner which is mutually sound and engaging. But if they persist in their mockery and bias, we say: "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you. And our God and your God is one; and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him."
You wasted your time attempting to interpret the Qur'an yourself when the Qur'an requires no interpretation but contextual study. We do not suffer the corruptions your scripture did. We are not on shaky ground.
Your hubris is cute, though
Next time, come with something more substantial than this wasteful exercise you thought had momentum in it.
God bless,
Scimi
Hi, Scimi, I have revised my theses slightly in view of your comments.
The Quran confirms the Bible that existed in Muhammad’s time and confirms the Jewish and Christian revelations that were still “with” the Jews and Christians. Surah 2:87,89,91,97,101; 21:105; 40:53,54 https://quran.com/40/53-63
The Quran therefore implies the Bible’s inspiration, authority, and preservation. Otherwise, the Quran would have confirmed a corrupted revelation.
The Quran teaches that the Bible was preserved up until the time of Muhammad. Surah 2:106 https://quran.com/2/106-116
Bible translations are based on existing manuscripts that predate Muhammad, so the Quran by implication agrees that the Bible has been preserved not only until the time of Muhammad but up until the present day.
The Quran teaches that Muslims must believe the Bible too. Surah 2:136; 3:84; 4:136; 29:46 https://quran.com/2/136-146
The Quran does not teach, as you claimed, that the Bible was valid until it was corrupted, because the Quran does not teach that the Bible was corrupted at all. As we have seen just from the above references, the Quran repeatedly confirms the preservation of the Bible. So Muslims are still obligated by the Quran to believe the Bible too.
The Quran teaches that the Bible was given as guidance for all “mankind” and not for the Jews only. Surah 3:3,4 https://quran.com/3/3-13
The Quran disagrees with your assumptions. If you read the verses in the more literal Arabic translation given at quran.com (hold your cursor over the Arabic text) you will see that the Bible was given as a guidance for “mankind,” which means for all people at all times. Moreover, the Quran says that the Bible was presently existing between one’s hands - بَيْنَيَدَيْهِ baina yadehi (usually translated in English Qurans as “before”)in the 7th century A.D. So the Quran does not assert that the Bible had been whisked away from Christians by Paul long before. The revelation given through Jesus was still intact in the Christian’s “hand.” We will see this phrase again below.
The Quran teaches that the Bible contains guidance and light and that Jews and Christians should judge by the Bible. Surah 5:43-48; 21:48 https://quran.com/5/43-53
This implies that the Bible was preserved and was still authoritative. Otherwise, the Quran would have instructed the Jews and Christians to judge by a corrupt or inaccessible book. Twice in 5:46 the Quran says that the Old Testament existed in the Jew’s hand (between his hands - بَيْنَيَدَيْهِ baina yadehi) and in 5:48 the New Testament is called the Book in the Christian’s hand (“the Book in his hands” بَيْنَيَدَيْهِمِنَٱلْكِتَٰبِ). This again shows that, according to the Quran, our Bible was preserved. It also shows that the Quran viewed the New Testament as a unit, a single book, possessed by and recognized by Christians. Moreover, the Quran goes on to say that Christians are rebels if they do not judge by the New Testament.
The Quran teaches that Christians should listen to the Bible and “stand firmly by the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you [Christians] from your Lord.” Surah 5:68 https://quran.com/5/68-78
Your comments on this ayah were a non sequitur. This ayah is self-explanatory and clearly teaches the inspiration, preservation, and continuing authority of the Bible. Why would the Quran tell Christians to stand firmly by a corrupt or inaccessible book?
The Quran teaches that no one can change God’s words. Surah 6:34,114,115; 10:64; 18:27 https://quran.com/6/114-124
The Quran does not limit the scope of this promise to the Quran. Christians believe that God is a preserver of His word. God is faithful! I’m sorry you don’t believe in His faithfulness as I do.
The Quran claims that Muhammad is mentioned in the Bible. Surah 7:157 https://quran.com/7/157-167 Although Muhammad per se is not mentioned in the Bible, this verse clearly presupposes that the Bible’s message has been preserved since, by appealing to the Bible, the Quran confirms the Bible’s veracity.
Funny that you should claim to reject the Gospels because the human authors did not affix their names when the Quran itself is anonymous. It may be that the four Evangelists did affix their names. In any case, the names of the four Evangelists have been associated with the same books by consistent tradition since time immemorial and there was never any competing tradition or dispute in the early Church over the authorship of the four Gospels.
The Quran says that if Muhammad doubts Islam, he should consult with those who read “the Book before you [Muhammad].” This could mean Jews or Christians, since both had books before Muhammad. Surah 10:94
https://quran.com/10/94-104
You recommended reading from verse 10:88 to 94, but my Quran version says that 10:93 begins another section, and therefore another context, that lasts until 10:103. Here Israelites (10:93), non-Jews (10:98), and “all who are on earth (10:99)” are mentioned. In this context verse 10:94 mentions only “the Book before you [Muhammad].” We have seen above that the Quran considers the New Testament as one of the books before Muhammad. The New Testament, in fact, was the Book immediately before Muhammad. With that in mind, see the verses adduced next:
The Quran teaches that, if Muhammad does not know something, Muhammad should ask Christians, “the people of the Reminder” prior to Muhammad. Surah 16:43; 21:7 https://quran.com/16/43-53
These verses also clearly presuppose the inspiration, authority, and preservation of the Bible and that Christians still had access to it.
The Quran teaches that God supported the believing Christians and that they became superior and dominant over the unbelieving Jews. Surah 3:55; 61:14 https://quran.com/3/55-65 Historically, the only Christians who “became dominant” were those who affirmed the death and resurrection of Jesus the Messiah and who affirmed the Bible as we have it today. According to Yusuf Ali’s commentary on 61:14 https://quran.com/61/14-24, “those who followed Jesus permeated the Roman Empire, brought many new races within their circle, and through the Roman Empire, Christianity became the predominant religion of the world.” http://islamhelpline.net/quran/61/14
You asked me in response to define “dominant” and claimed that “Muslims around the world” understand these verses. So why did you reject my interpretation? The interpretation I gave was that of “renowned English translator and commentator of the Qur'an” Abdullah Yusuf Ali, who, in your own words, was a “Muslim from around the world who understood these verses.” Abdullah Yusuf Ali defined “dominant.”
So “Do not argue with the People of the Book...say, We believe in that which has been revealed...to you.” Surah 29:46. https://quran.com/29/46-56
So, in conclusion, if you want to argue over Biblical interpretation, perhaps the Quran gives you permission to do that. But you are forbidden to argue with Christians over the inspiration, authority, and preservation of the Bible, since the Quran confirms these three things and requires you to believe what has been revealed to us.
Blessings.
MidnightRose
Moderator
- Messages
- 816
- Reaction score
- 161
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Hello,
You will need to revise your views again. This is because there is no mention of the Bible anywhere in the Qur'an. Allah mentions the Injil in the Qur'an, not the Bible - which is the current book of the Christians.
The Injil was a revelation that Allah gave to Isa :as:. Allah says in the Qur'an:
"We sent Isa, son of Maryam, and gave him the Injeel." (Surah 57: part of verse 27) See: https://quran.com/57/27
The Bible was not given to Isa :as:.
So Muslims have no relation whatsoever to this Bible that you are talking about. See also: https://www.islamicboard.com/compar...blical-teachings-post2928102.html#post2928102
Addtionally, to comment on the blatant misinformation that you mentioned about the Qur'an:
According to the respected Islamic scholar Mufti Ebrahim Desai:
"The method in which this divine knowledge was passed down to us by our predecessors was from heart to heart which required one to be under the direct tutorship and supervision of ‘Ulama. The first teacher of this ummah was our beloved Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) who taught the Sahaba (radhiyallahu ‘anhum), they then taught the Tabi’een (rahimahumullah), who in turn taught the Tab’e Tabi’een (rahimahullah) and who in turn taught our predecessors. As such, the knowledge of Shari’ah was transferred from generation to generation in this manner."
Source: http://www.askimam.org/public/question_detail/30663
The Qur’an is a narrative of Allah provided to us through Muhammadsaws. It - itself - is of the highest degree of authenticity due to being mutawatir. The Islamic definition of the technical term mutawatir is:
"A mass-transmitted report that is transmitted from one generation to the next in such large numbers, that one could not imagine that they conspired to forge it." (See The Preservation of Hadith)
To paraphrase the senior Islamic research scholar, Mufti Taqi Usmani:
Allah has safeguarded the Qur’an in an extraordinary manner. Due to this, it wouldn’t matter if all the copies of the Qur'an disappeared today. This Qur'an has been and still is in the hearts and minds of millions of people – word for word in the original Arabic – through uninterrupted chains of transmission since the time of the Prophet (:saws:). These people are known as Hufaaz. Attempts to alter the Qur'an throughout history by various entities have failed precisely because of this.
(See An Approach to the Sciences of the Qur’an: Uloomul Qur’an)
Indeed, the late William W. Cooper – a celebrated academic who is widely considered to be the father of management science – stated that as of his research in 2008, “…the number of Hafiz (sic) in the world is estimated to be more than 10 million”. (Click here to access original source.)
_______________________________
Thus, there is no anonymity in the origin and transmission of the Qur'an. We know of it's authenticity - beyond a shadow of a doubt - because the knowledge of Shari’ah (Qur’an, ahadith, etc.) continues to be transmitted this way. The verification of its authenticity can be ascertained by becoming acquainted with the people who are part of this method of education. The image below shows the chains of transmission in ahadith for Shaykh Mansur Memon Madani, Shaykh al-Hadith Abdul Moiz, Shaykh Ibrahim Memon Madani, and Mufti Husain Ahmed Madani. They are all currently teachers at Darul Uloom Canada.
We have unbroken, mutawatir links that lead directly back to the Prophet :saws:.
See also: The Isnād System: An Unbroken Link to The Prophet
Image obtained from: http://enterthesunnah.com/bloggers-short-bios/.
A high quality version can be obtained by clicking on the following link: https://bukhari2013.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/sanad.pdf
You will need to revise your views again. This is because there is no mention of the Bible anywhere in the Qur'an. Allah mentions the Injil in the Qur'an, not the Bible - which is the current book of the Christians.
The Injil was a revelation that Allah gave to Isa :as:. Allah says in the Qur'an:
"We sent Isa, son of Maryam, and gave him the Injeel." (Surah 57: part of verse 27) See: https://quran.com/57/27
The Bible was not given to Isa :as:.
So Muslims have no relation whatsoever to this Bible that you are talking about. See also: https://www.islamicboard.com/compar...blical-teachings-post2928102.html#post2928102
Addtionally, to comment on the blatant misinformation that you mentioned about the Qur'an:
According to the respected Islamic scholar Mufti Ebrahim Desai:
"The method in which this divine knowledge was passed down to us by our predecessors was from heart to heart which required one to be under the direct tutorship and supervision of ‘Ulama. The first teacher of this ummah was our beloved Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) who taught the Sahaba (radhiyallahu ‘anhum), they then taught the Tabi’een (rahimahumullah), who in turn taught the Tab’e Tabi’een (rahimahullah) and who in turn taught our predecessors. As such, the knowledge of Shari’ah was transferred from generation to generation in this manner."
Source: http://www.askimam.org/public/question_detail/30663
The Qur’an is a narrative of Allah provided to us through Muhammad
saws. It - itself - is of the highest degree of authenticity due to being mutawatir. The Islamic definition of the technical term mutawatir is: "A mass-transmitted report that is transmitted from one generation to the next in such large numbers, that one could not imagine that they conspired to forge it." (See The Preservation of Hadith)
To paraphrase the senior Islamic research scholar, Mufti Taqi Usmani:
Allah has safeguarded the Qur’an in an extraordinary manner. Due to this, it wouldn’t matter if all the copies of the Qur'an disappeared today. This Qur'an has been and still is in the hearts and minds of millions of people – word for word in the original Arabic – through uninterrupted chains of transmission since the time of the Prophet (:saws:). These people are known as Hufaaz. Attempts to alter the Qur'an throughout history by various entities have failed precisely because of this.
(See An Approach to the Sciences of the Qur’an: Uloomul Qur’an)
Indeed, the late William W. Cooper – a celebrated academic who is widely considered to be the father of management science – stated that as of his research in 2008, “…the number of Hafiz (sic) in the world is estimated to be more than 10 million”. (Click here to access original source.)
_______________________________
Thus, there is no anonymity in the origin and transmission of the Qur'an. We know of it's authenticity - beyond a shadow of a doubt - because the knowledge of Shari’ah (Qur’an, ahadith, etc.) continues to be transmitted this way. The verification of its authenticity can be ascertained by becoming acquainted with the people who are part of this method of education. The image below shows the chains of transmission in ahadith for Shaykh Mansur Memon Madani, Shaykh al-Hadith Abdul Moiz, Shaykh Ibrahim Memon Madani, and Mufti Husain Ahmed Madani. They are all currently teachers at Darul Uloom Canada.
We have unbroken, mutawatir links that lead directly back to the Prophet :saws:.
See also: The Isnād System: An Unbroken Link to The Prophet
Image obtained from: http://enterthesunnah.com/bloggers-short-bios/.
A high quality version can be obtained by clicking on the following link: https://bukhari2013.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/sanad.pdf
Attachments
Last edited:
Scimitar
DAWAH DIGITAL
- Messages
- 7,549
- Reaction score
- 851
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
MashaAllah, brother Najimuddin got in before me - and the point is extant - the Bible NT is not the Injeel of Isa Alaihis Salaam. But a book of controversial ahadeeth attributed to four men who are mysteriously absent from any other record. This is what the Christians call their holy book, a collection of narrations from anonymous persons - aka the New Testament, and its many MANY versions.
And God is not the author of confusion.
Scimi
And God is not the author of confusion.
Scimi
- Messages
- 9,215
- Reaction score
- 1,600
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Allah :swt: says:
So woe to those who write the "scripture" with their own hands, then say, "This is from Allah ," in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn. [2:79]
in another Surah:
And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, "This is from Allah ," but it is not from Allah . And they speak untruth about Allah while they know. [3:78]
That shows that the previous scriptures were already altered at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an. As the brother pointed out above, the Qur'an only confirms the original scriptures that were revealed on previous Messengers, not their current and distorted versions.
So woe to those who write the "scripture" with their own hands, then say, "This is from Allah ," in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn. [2:79]
in another Surah:
And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, "This is from Allah ," but it is not from Allah . And they speak untruth about Allah while they know. [3:78]
That shows that the previous scriptures were already altered at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an. As the brother pointed out above, the Qur'an only confirms the original scriptures that were revealed on previous Messengers, not their current and distorted versions.