Christianity is perfect for chisrtians, Islam is perfect for muslims & judiasm is perfect for the Jews. Also buddhism is perfect for Buddists & so on.
Nobody can or has the right to convince anybody from another faith that their faith, beliefs or religion is flawed.
I just don't get why some people like to insult other religions & try to prove that their religion is the best? it is the best for you but not for others.
I juts hope that people should start to minding their own business & start focusing on themselves to make themseleves better believers instead of wanting others to believe in what they believe in. On the judgement day, you got only yourslelf facing god, alone, so you better work on yourslelf & leave others alone.
Posted by Âutomatic For The People (Member # 12634) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT: Christianity is perfect for chisrtians, Islam is perfect for muslims & judiasm is perfect for the Jews. Also buddhism is perfect for Buddists & so on.
Actually Islam is perfect for everyone but I get your point.
Posted by Shebah (Member # 12165) on :
Very well said Cat.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
Nobody can or has the right to convince anybody from another faith that their faith, beliefs or religion is flawed.
they do we do you do now
who cares catty welcome back where was u? Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Âutomatic For The People:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT: Christianity is perfect for chisrtians, Islam is perfect for muslims & judiasm is perfect for the Jews. Also buddhism is perfect for Buddists & so on.
Actually Islam is perfect for everyone but I get your point.
All religions are supposed to be perfect, but people just don't apply them right. According to any religion, people are supposed to be tolerant but that's last thing I see people do
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
All religions are not perfect for everyone, which is why many see them as irrelevant in a modern world. Perfection is in the eye of the believer. Tolerance and decency is a universal language that can be demonstrated by believers and non believers of religion. Now that just may lead to a more perfect world. Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT: ]Actually Islam is perfect for everyone but I get your point. All religions are supposed to be perfect, but people just don't apply them right. According to any religion, people are supposed to be tolerant but that's last thing I see people do [/QB]
?
tolerant to corruption and lies
no religion say to be so Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: All religions are not perfect for everyone,
it depend on ur*perfection* standard swys some people has no standard for perfection
Posted by Israel (Member # 11221) on :
quote:Originally posted by Âutomatic For The People:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT: Christianity is perfect for chisrtians, Islam is perfect for muslims & judiasm is perfect for the Jews. Also buddhism is perfect for Buddists & so on.
Actually Islam is perfect for everyone but I get your point.
Yeah, it is perfect for Muslims who DON'T know Christ. In other words, Christ is the way..........Do you get my meaning friend? My meaning is that that comment right there is enough to start something. I can certainly start hitting you up with Surah versus that you don't have the answer to, but that doesn't mean that I need to speak on it. I can hear you out and respect where you are coming from. Do the same when you encounter Christians. If not, then we can begin with Surah 2........lol. Salaam
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT: ]Actually Islam is perfect for everyone but I get your point. All religions are supposed to be perfect, but people just don't apply them right. According to any religion, people are supposed to be tolerant but that's last thing I see people do
?
tolerant to corruption and lies
no religion say to be so [/QB]
WHAT?!!!!!!! Tolerant of Corruption?!! who's talking about corruption here?!!! but any way, I think we, the Muslims, are tolerant of corruption because we allow a corrupt leader to rule us for more than quarter of a century
I am talking about being tolerant to other people who are different from us, whether they are from a diffeent religion, belief or race. But I don't know why, Batman, you always change the topic....... it's as if you're slow or pretend to be so
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: All religions are not perfect for everyone,
it depend on ur*perfection* standard swys some people has no standard for perfection
Isn't it posssible for somebody to have standards, ethics & moral codes without being religious? or without following a specific religion?
why do people really need an instruction manual to be good? are you telling me that if you didnt have a religion to follow you'd be a vigilante or a gangster?
Posted by MissJambi (Member # 13261) on :
yup. heres what i say... a jew can get a muslim pregnant. a christian get get a jew pregnant...vice versa, you get the point. no matter where we are from and what we believe in, apparently our 'gods' are all friends because we all got 10 fingers 10 toes, 2 eyes, a nose, etc and we are all compatible when it comes to makin babies so there.
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
Right MissJambi, we are people. Jews are people & Christians are people. If anybody hates an entire group of people because of their religion or race then they are considered racists
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: All religions are not perfect for everyone,
it depend on ur*perfection* standard swys some people has no standard for perfection
God is perfect, Batman. Is that standard good enough for you?
Man made religions, to me, lack perfection, as they were created by men seeking to explain 'God'. Humans have always sought to determine creation and that is a noble quest. I can't buy into religions simply as they don't adequately explain our creator. They make guesses at 'God' based on the time they were written. To me, this is extreme arrogance and trying to enforce your idea of 'God' on others is disrespectful and wrong.
There is no proof of 'God'. There is only belief and faith. You believe what you like. I'll believe what I like. What distinguishes people is how they behave not which version of God they believe in, imho.
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: All religions are not perfect for everyone,
it depend on ur*perfection* standard swys some people has no standard for perfection
God is perfect, Batman. Is that standard good enough for you?
Man made religions, to me, lack perfection, as they were created by men seeking to explain 'God'. Humans have always sought to determine creation and that is a noble quest. I can't buy into religions simply as they don't adequately explain our creator. They make guesses at 'God' based on the time they were written. To me, this is extreme arrogance and trying to enforce your idea of 'God' on others is disrespectful and wrong.
There is no proof of 'God'. There is only belief and faith. You believe what you like. I'll believe what I like. What distinguishes people is how they behave not which version of God they believe in, imho.
And they always have that description of God as scary & vengeful!!!! And tha's not the way i want to view god at all. God is more beautiful & Bigger than such labels !!!!!
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Israel:
quote:Originally posted by Âutomatic For The People:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT: Christianity is perfect for chisrtians, Islam is perfect for muslims & judiasm is perfect for the Jews. Also buddhism is perfect for Buddists & so on.
Actually Islam is perfect for everyone but I get your point.
Yeah, it is perfect for Muslims who DON'T know Christ. In other words, Christ is the way..........Do you get my meaning friend? My meaning is that that comment right there is enough to start something. I can certainly start hitting you up with Surah versus that you don't have the answer to, but that doesn't mean that I need to speak on it. I can hear you out and respect where you are coming from. Do the same when you encounter Christians. If not, then we can begin with Surah 2........lol. Salaam
Although I do respect Christians, jews, hindus, sikhs, atheists and every color and creed on earth and elsewhere but I dont like this threat and I KNOW for a fact , with absolute confidence that there is NOTHING in the sura versus that cant be answered. Check my previous posts if you're not sure and I dont mind beginning where you like, Israel!
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
Exactly, CAT. God, to me, is infinitely merciful and kind, judging fairly on what we do, according to our circumstances - not some figure to cower before in fear.
''And they always have that description of God as scary & vengeful!!!! And tha's not the way i want to view god at all. God is more beautiful & Bigger than such labels !!!!! '': CAT
Posted by VanillaBullshit (Member # 10873) on :
Religion is poopie.
Posted by caterpillar (Member # 10438) on :
the thing alot of people dont seem to get CAT is that no one will want to 'join' a religion if the people in it are bitchin all the time...
If i shop in Tesco i'm not gonna change to sainsburys if i get laughed at and made fun of every time i leave Tescos by the posse from Sainsbury's thinking they are superior to me... nope, i'm gonna reach right down in my bag an throw my tomatoes at 'em.......
We should all be able to shop in peace! lol And maybe, just maybe, when those people from sainsbury's are handing out those nice little chocolate freebies with a smile on their face, i might just venture inside and see what else they have to offer Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by caterpillar: the thing alot of people dont seem to get CAT is that no one will want to 'join' a religion if the people in it are bitchin all the time...
Yes, and they don't get it, if they keep bitching about other religions, nobody from another religion would view them favorably nor would want to join them. they are actualy turning off & scaring everybody.
Posted by shahkerdah (Member # 11270) on :
Islam also sets a real challenge by providing us with an enemy, a real one, so that one doesn't have to create or invent one. The enemy is Satan! It has no powers over humans, but it has been given the ability and freedom to confuse and to seduce. The humans too have their freedom to succumb or to spurn. A real drama requires a real villain, and you cannot prove your love without being able to reject the seductions of the villain.Islam invites us all to face our common and real foe, the foe that cannot be wished away. All our future depends on how we deal with the real enemy. Dont succumb ,and its easy to say so than do .
Agree with Cats!!
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
Ha Ha
LOL @ "Bitching"!!!
Undercover/cats in craddle stop bitching about my religion and I will stop bitching about ur religion
Posted by shahkerdah (Member # 11270) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: Ha Ha
LOL @ "Bitching"!!!
Undercover/cats in craddle stop bitching about my religion and I will stop bitching about ur religion
well it just makes you like her then 1+1=2 just do something nice on the quran or a nice peace from the bible to show there is not a boundry when it comes to faith ..And your not like her at all . there should not be a YOUR OR MY ...
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: Ha Ha
LOL @ "Bitching"!!!
Undercover/cats in craddle stop bitching about my religion and I will stop bitching about ur religion
Batman, why are you s defensive about ur religion? religion is not your mother to defend it's honour !!!!
Posted by caterpillar (Member # 10438) on :
Anyway Batty, whatever happened to 'there's no compulsion in religion'?
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
quote:Originally posted by shahkerdah: Islam also sets a real challenge by providing us with an enemy, a real one, so that one doesn't have to create or invent one. The enemy is Satan! It has no powers over humans, but it has been given the ability and freedom to confuse and to seduce. The humans too have their freedom to succumb or to spurn. A real drama requires a real villain, and you cannot prove your love without being able to reject the seductions of the villain.Islam invites us all to face our common and real foe, the foe that cannot be wished away. All our future depends on how we deal with the real enemy. Dont succumb ,and its easy to say so than do .
SWYS: Now I understand why you confuse me with "Shakerdah" the mental retard of ES. I see she is copying my posting style.
A few days ago I recieved a PM from her titled "HAHAHAHAHAHA", and she sure seemed entertained by the fact that people confuse me with her. Only an unstable person like her would think this is funny.
Don't be fooled, she is spreading confusion on purpose.
Posted by shahkerdah (Member # 11270) on :
quote:Originally posted by Undercover:
quote:Originally posted by shahkerdah: Islam also sets a real challenge by providing us with an enemy, a real one, so that one doesn't have to create or invent one. The enemy is Satan! It has no powers over humans, but it has been given the ability and freedom to confuse and to seduce. The humans too have their freedom to succumb or to spurn. A real drama requires a real villain, and you cannot prove your love without being able to reject the seductions of the villain.Islam invites us all to face our common and real foe, the foe that cannot be wished away. All our future depends on how we deal with the real enemy. Dont succumb ,and its easy to say so than do .
SWYS: Now I understand why you confuse me with "Shakerdah" the mental retard of ES. I see she is copying my posting style.
A few days ago I recieved a PM from her titled "HAHAHAHAHAHA", and she sure seemed entertained by the fact that people confuse me with her. Only an unstable person like her would think this is funny.
Don't be fooled, she is spreading confusion on purpose.
no your confusing cause im am you .. Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: Ha Ha
LOL @ "Bitching"!!!
Undercover/cats in craddle stop bitching about my religion and I will stop bitching about ur religion
Well, since it is Batman asking I will grant his wish.
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
I am not bitching about your religion Batman. I just wanted to correct some of the misconceptions you posted about Christianity. I am not offended by your posts by the way, I am not expecting you to have a deep knowledge of Christianity. So when you write an innacuracy I am not offended.
Also when you post innaccuracies about Islam, I feel tempted to correct you. I want to know where do you get those ideas about Muhammad, being the perfect example with sublime morals etc, etc. It's not that I want to malign Islam, I sincerely want to know how you got to that conclusion. You bring me 'evidence' to support your views but when I refute them with stronger evidence, from the very Quran (or the hadiths), then I am called a hater of Islam. That's not fair play.
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT: I juts hope that people should start to minding their own business & start focusing on themselves to make themseleves better believers instead of wanting others to believe in what they believe in. On the judgement day, you got only yourslelf facing god, alone, so you better work on yourslelf & leave others alone.
I can only speak for myself but honestly I have not seen anyone trying to force his/her beliefs on anyone. This is a discussion forum about religion! It is inevitable that our views will clash. What is your idea of tolerance? To agree with everything you say? If Batman says that Jesus is not God is he being disrespectful towards me? If he says that he considers the hijab obligatory is he being intolerant? I have not seen him threatening anyone to wear the hijab! Nor am I trying to convience anyone of Christianity. We are simply discussing that's all.
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
quote:Originally posted by Undercover:
quote:Originally posted by shahkerdah: Islam also sets a real challenge by providing us with an enemy, a real one, so that one doesn't have to create or invent one. The enemy is Satan! It has no powers over humans, but it has been given the ability and freedom to confuse and to seduce. The humans too have their freedom to succumb or to spurn. A real drama requires a real villain, and you cannot prove your love without being able to reject the seductions of the villain.Islam invites us all to face our common and real foe, the foe that cannot be wished away. All our future depends on how we deal with the real enemy. Dont succumb ,and its easy to say so than do .
SWYS: Now I understand why you confuse me with "Shakerdah" the mental retard of ES. I see she is copying my posting style.
A few days ago I recieved a PM from her titled "HAHAHAHAHAHA", and she sure seemed entertained by the fact that people confuse me with her. Only an unstable person like her would think this is funny.
Don't be fooled, she is spreading confusion on purpose.
Oh God, it is a continual battle with mental midgets on ES. 'Undercover', others have told me that you are Chimps. You both use cut and paste, stealing the words of others, without crediting the source, as a standard ploy. I was suspicious that Cats In The Cradle was Chimps but we'll see. One thing is for sure, the psycho never went away, as sick games are her life.
Ms Psycho: ''Islam also sets a real challenge by providing us with an enemy, a real one, so that one doesn't have to create or invent one. The enemy is Satan! It has no powers over humans, but it has been given the ability and freedom to confuse and to seduce. The humans too have their freedom to succumb or to spurn. A real drama requires a real villain, and you cannot prove your love without being able to reject the seductions of the villain.''
Chimps stole all of the words above, from : http://www.albalagh.net/general/islam_friend.shtml ''Islam also sets a real challenge by providing us with an enemy, a real one, so that one doesn't have to create or invent one. The enemy is Satan! It has no powers over humans, but it has been given the ability and freedom to confuse and to seduce. The humans too have their freedom to succumb or to spurn. A real drama requires a real villain, and you cannot prove your love without being able to reject the seductions of the villain.''
Don't worry, Undercover. Schizophrenics need somewhere to post and there is enough room at the ES Inn for all of the psychotic personalities. Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Undercover:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT: I juts hope that people should start to minding their own business & start focusing on themselves to make themseleves better believers instead of wanting others to believe in what they believe in. On the judgement day, you got only yourslelf facing god, alone, so you better work on yourslelf & leave others alone.
I can only speak for myself but honestly I have not seen anyone trying to force his/her beliefs on anyone. This is a discussion forum about religion! It is inevitable that our views will clash. What is your idea of tolerance? To agree with everything you say? If Batman says that Jesus is not God is he being disrespectful towards me? If he says that he considers the hijab obligatory is he being intolerant? I have not seen him threatening anyone to wear the hijab! Nor am I trying to convience anyone of Christianity. We are simply discussing that's all. [/QB]
Find me a sentence that I wrote which mentioned that people have to agree with me to be tolerant, I certainly never said that. I respect other people's beliefs & i don't wish to change them, nor do i want people to change mine.
Batman calls anyone who disagrees with him as "kafir", he also calls anyone who is non-muslim "kafir".
My original post in this thread was not directed at one person in particular, it was directed to everybody. And just like you're discussing I am also discussing
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
"'Undercover', others have told me that you are Chimps."
Nope. The content of our posts are totally different.
"I was suspicious that Cats In The Cradle was Chimps but we'll see. [Big Grin]"
No it was me. I don't have the password anymore.
"Don't worry, Undercover. Schizophrenics need somewhere to post and there is enough room at the ES Inn for all of the psychotic personalities. [Razz]"
Don't worry SWYS, I am as sane as one can be. It is not me with the multiple personality disorder screaming for attention..
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
Fair enough, Undercover. I'll take you at your word, for now. Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Undercover: Also when you post innaccuracies about Islam, I feel tempted to correct you. I want to know where do you get those ideas about Muhammad, being the perfect example with sublime morals etc, etc. It's not that I want to malign Islam, I sincerely want to know how you got to that conclusion. You bring me 'evidence' to support your views but when I refute them with stronger evidence, from the very Quran (or the hadiths), then I am called a hater of Islam. That's not fair play.
Grooaaan How hopeless!
"YOU" bring evidence "FROM" the quran to refute that Mohammad had great morals????????????
How do you believe that? How can anybody delude themselves so mcuh?
The quran SAYS that Mohammad has great morals. Now, you wanna convince us that you and only you can see in the quran what we dont see....while you dont even speak the language of the quran and have not spent years of your life studying it like the scholars we learn from?
If you really can look yourself in the eye and believe what you're saying, then You ARE hopeless!
And yes you are being offensive. You post very impudent accusations day after day. I have to come in here to prove you wrong everyday. I dont set myself to post similar stuff about your religion. Do you notice this ever? I only reply to YOUR offensive posts. So dont pretend to be the innocent civilised debator. You're an attacker most of the time. if you could restrict yourself to rpesenting the views of christianity without having a go at Islam (out of all other religions) you might be able to lay a claim to innocence.
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
"Batman calls anyone who disagrees with him as "kafir", he also calls anyone who is non-muslim "kafir"."
This is similar to asking: Is Jesus the only way to salvation?
If I say 'yes' I am being intolerant but that's what Christianity teaches.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
It's not very difficult to work out what's tolerant and what isnt. AS I said, it's very easy for me to step over the boundary I set for myself and start firing post that defile christianity but I dont do that out of respect. I'm sure if you try to control yourself in this way a bit, maybe even Batman would moderate his language towards you.
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
quote:The quran SAYS that Mohammad has great morals.
Let us put this claim to the test. In our case we want to know about Muhammad and how he lived his life.
We have enough evidence in the Quran, in the books of history and in the hadith to know that Muhammad's claim is false. Forget about what he CLAIMS to be. Read between the lines and pay attention to what he DOES and commands. His actions speak louder than his words. If I make a claim that I am a compassionate person and then go and torture and massacre people then what does that make me?
Confucius said the greatness of a man is in how much his words and his deeds match. A person who does not walk his own talk is not worthy of trust.
Muhammad claimed to have "sublime morals" (68:4) and be “a good example to follow" (33:21). How can Muslims follow his examples if those examples are not recorded? Denying the hadith make it impossible for Muslims to practice Islam properly or follow the examples of Muhammad and therefore the quranic injunctions cannot be observed. In fact without the haidth, none of the rituals of Islam, such as salat, hajj and fasting can be performed and these are the pillars of Islam. Without the hadith and Sira the very historicity of Muhammad becomes dubious.
It is not up to you or any one else to discard the hadiths because they go against your conscience. You and I cannot sit and choose what we like from the hadithes and discard what we don’t like. What criteria shall me use? Are we supposed to learn about the real Muhammad as he was or the ideal Muhammad that we have created in our imaginations. Who are we supposed to follow? A mythological superman who never existed outside our fantasies or the real Muhammad ibn Abdullah? If you want to deny them, then by what proof can you be sure of the very existence of Muhammad? If you deny the historic facts of ahadith, then you are opening the door for someone to deny the historicity of Muhammad himself.
Muslims often says Muhammad cannot be incriminated based on hadiths because their authenticity cannot be proven. What about the authenticity of the Quran? Can anyone prove the authenticity of the Quran? How do we know that Muhammad did not lie? How do we know the entity that he claimed visited him was not Satan pretending to be Gabriel? How could he know the difference if he never met Gabriel? If Muhammad admitted that he was fooled once by Satan, how do we know he was not fooled more often? If Satan is the master of deceptions, how can we be sure that Islam is not a trick of Satan?
How do we know the Quran that we have today is the original one? Who collected it? Was this person(s) trustworthy? How can we be sure that it is preserved without alteration? If it was possible for the Jews and the Christians to corrupt their books, hundreds of years after they were written, as Muhammad has claimed, to erase his name, how can we be sure that Muslims did not do the same with the Quran only a few years after his death? At that time no copy of the Quran even existed, so although the accusation of Muhammad that the Bible is corrupted is farfetched, it is not illogical to believe that the Quran was corrupted even before it was collected and put into a single binder. Can anyone prove the authenticity of the Quran in a court of law? See how easily you fall in the same traps that you set? All I have to do to demolish your argument is take it and use it against you.
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
The above post was a copy and paste. Just ignore it.
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: I only reply to YOUR offensive posts.
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: What I find difficult with this concept in particular is that if Christ was God, then he was killed by his own creation!!!! Couldnt he come up with a miracle or something? And how can a God die?
This was a question I was asked by a 8 year old Muslim boy. It really does appear that enlightenment is a gift from God. It doesnt really need that much intellect....just abit of instinctive faith.
Posted by Âutomatic For The People (Member # 12634) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: All religions are not perfect for everyone,
it depend on ur*perfection* standard swys some people has no standard for perfection
Isn't it posssible for somebody to have standards, ethics & moral codes without being religious? or without following a specific religion?
It is possible but the person not being religious doesn't change the fact that those standards,ethics and moral codes are most defiantly derived from one religion or another. What most seculare fanatics appear to miss is the fact that their set of moral code was influcned by religion. They learned it from parents,teachers,friends,neighbours, reading ..etc. They did not just make them up from nothing. They were not born in a jungle but in societies of rules, laws and traditions that are based on religon.
The question is, now that they have developed their own set of moral code and believe that they no longer need religion to guide them, can their society survive as long as it has with the help of religious guidance? The clear answer is NO.......
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Of course the post is copy and paste as it clearly comes from someone who has not read any of the information I have tried to no avail to give you. Information that can, incidentally, be verified had you wanted.
AAAAAAND, the snide remark without an S is a single question I posed. A question that could be addressed in a civilised way. This is what discussion boards are about. I did not include any lies or attacks of my fabrication.How does that compare to your behaviour? Anyway, I have no intention to be drawn into self defence because I dont need to. Everybody here who has eyes can see for themselves.
Posted by Âutomatic For The People (Member # 12634) on :
Holy macro, we posted at the exact same second!
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Âutomatic For The People:
]The question is, now that they have developed their own set of moral code and believe that they no longer need religion to guide them, can their society survive as long as it has with the help of religious guidance? The clear answer is NO....... [/QB]
I agree to that. It wont last. It would be a downward spiral. But, hey, that's my own opinion and I'm not on a mission to convert anybody. So everybody's welcome to keep their beliefs as long as they leave mine alone!
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Âutomatic For The People: Holy macro,
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
quote:Originally posted by Âutomatic For The People:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: All religions are not perfect for everyone,
it depend on ur*perfection* standard swys some people has no standard for perfection
Isn't it posssible for somebody to have standards, ethics & moral codes without being religious? or without following a specific religion?
It is possible but the person not being religious doesn't change the fact that those standards,ethics and moral codes are most defiantly derived from one religion or another. What most seculare fanatics appear to miss is the fact that their set of moral code was influcned by religion. They learned it from parents,teachers,friends,neighbours, reading ..etc. They did not just make them up from nothing. They were not born in a jungle but in societies of rules, laws and traditions that are based on religon.
The question is, now that they have developed their own set of moral code and believe that they no longer need religion to guide them, can their society survive as long as it has with the help of religious guidance? The clear answer is NO.......
This is such a predictable, simplistic, old argument. Of course secularists recognise history and the influences of many different religions on the development of the world's nations. Dismissing history is not what secularism is about. Do secularists oppose people having religion? Absolutely not and there is something sinister about those that wish to promote such a view. Why do some religious people fear the beliefs of others so intensely? Religion is seen as a private matter by secularists, nothing more or less. You can be a secularist and be religious and it's curious that this fact is often overlooked by the insecure, religious control freaks out there.
A decent secular democracy encourages all beliefs to thrive by not imposing the views of one religion on society. Religious fanatics are the real threat. Will secular societies survive? The clear answer is YES. Secular societies will THRIVE and are thriving. The tolerance of secularism, in progressive democracies, combined with learning from past mistakes is a far healthier recipe for humanity. Human beings aren't frozen in the past. We are constantly learning, adapting and striving to make things better. Throughout history, religions have been discarded, plagiarised and new forms introduced. People are more than capable of working together, in relative harmony, if given the chance to do so. There is room for the religious and the non religious in respectful societies. It's a shame that some people are too blind to see this.
Question why secularism is taught to be a bad thing, in some countries, by some religions. Is it a self-protection method? Is it meant to discourage and disadvantage those with different or opposing views? The answer is a clear YES.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Now you got me confused SWYS . Is the discussion (at least Auto's post) about religion versus non religion or is it religion versus secular democracy (between which I cant see any relation)?
Is Auto advocating theocratic states? I didnt think so.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Undercover:
We have enough evidence in the Quran, in the books of history and in the hadith to know that Muhammad's claim is false. .................. all the way till the end of ur post .......... is not illogical to believe that the Quran was corrupted even before it was collected and put into a single binder. Can anyone prove the authenticity of the Quran in a court of law? See how easily you fall in the same traps that you set? All I have to do to demolish your argument is take it and use it against you. [/qb]
Now I come to your "idiotic" assertions. The quran may have been collected a few years after Mohammad's death but COPIES OF ITS separate verses DID EXIST, unlike your totally unsusbstantiated "idiotic" claim! You even recounted in one fo your posts that Omar ibn elkattab's story when he hit his siter. You know whay he hit her of course? She wouldnt give him the script of the quran she was reading. Are those stories useful to use for attack and deniable once they are used against your false claims?
And, yes, actually the men who collected the quran are trustworthy people. If you had done any level of simple research about them you could obtain easily their biographies and details about the social structure within which they lived and would have been able to come to this conclusion yourself , or, at least see it written by respectable modern writers who looked at this issue closely. Instead you accuse Ghandi, Bernard Shaw, karen Armstrong, Encyclopedia Brittanica, Wshington Irving, Bosworth Smith, times magazine....ets of lying just because you dont like what they say.
As to discarding hadiths, that shows you've not been listening to anything being said or even doing proper research around what you are talking about. I or any othe rMuslim member here do not discard hadiths that do not fit our conscience. I point out the limitations of Bukhari's method that have been pointed out by many Islamic and non Islamic scholars. I also add that modern hadith scholars have added a stipulation about the content of hadiths in order to confirm its authenticity.
And all your how and how up there can be asked about christianity as well.
You also ask US to read between the lines. I wonder if you have read the whole quran even once! Did YOU read between the lines? or are you looking at second hand quote all the time? Arab Muslims who can read the quran in Arabic use it to pray with everyday 5 times a day. We also spend time reading it outside of prayers. You can easily expect us to read it through from one end ot one end , like , once a month....the least enthusiastic of us would do it once a year so by the time you're 35 ,say, you've read it in its entirety some two dozen times at least. Are you going to tell me that YOU see betwen the lines while the people who have read it so often dont? Besides, we listen to Friday prayer sermons every week where scholars explain the quran, we watch telivision channels where religious programs are broadcast and scholars explain the quran. Undercover, reaaaaallly, you cant be real!
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
As to Muslims, who believe in the quran as the word of God, Undercover's claim regarding the truth of the quran, its accuracy and preservance can be FURTHER refuted by these verses:
ان علينا جمعه و قرآنه [75:17] It is for Us to collect it and to give you the ability to recite it (the Qur'ân).
Also translated by Dr.Ghali as : [75:17] Surely upon Us is the gathering of it and its all-evident reading.
AND إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ (الحجر:9). [15.9]Surely We, Ever We, have been sending down the Remembrance, and surely We are indeed Preservers of it.
[15.9] Verily We, it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur'ân) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption).
As to Undercover's inability to see the truth, note this verse
[36.9] And We have made before them (Literally: between their hands) a barrier and behind them a barrier, then We enveloped them, so they do not behold (the Truth).
AND THIS VERSE خَتَمَ اللَّهُ عَلَى قُلُوبِهِمْ وَعَلَى سَمْعِهِمْ وَعَلَى أَبْصَارِهِمْ غِشَاوَةٌ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ (البقرة:7). [1:7]Allah has set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing; and on their be-holdings (i.e. eyesights) is an envelopment. And for them is a tremendous torment.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Sorry, Dark Angel, your valuable and sensible advice is not being heeded but I cant sit and watch falsehoods being propagated about my religion.
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Now you got me confused SWYS . Is the discussion (at least Auto's post) about religion versus non religion or is it religion versus secular democracy (between which I cant see any relation)?
Is Auto advocating theocratic states? I didnt think so.
''The question is, now that they have developed their own set of moral code and believe that they no longer need religion to guide them, can their society survive as long as it has with the help of religious guidance? The clear answer is NO.......'': AFTP
The argument looks pretty clear to me, evolving from comments on ''secular fanatics.'' and the role of religion in society. Auto appears to be condemning the future of secular states(see above)but doesn't directly state an alternative. Speculating on what he might advocate, I will leave to you. I see absolutely no merit in his weak argument.
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Undercover: "Batman calls anyone who disagrees with him as "kafir", he also calls anyone who is non-muslim "kafir"."
This is similar to asking: Is Jesus the only way to salvation?
If I say 'yes' I am being intolerant but that's what Christianity teaches.
Well, At least anyone who has brains can tell that God created us all equal & that he wouldn't favor a specific religion over the other & won't punish an entire group of innocent people just becuase they follow a specific religion. If God created the three religions, then why would he pick only one to favor? why would he set us all up to go to hell? This implies that God is mean. And i don't accpet that
Posted by welsafty (Member # 5051) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Undercover: "Batman calls anyone who disagrees with him as "kafir", he also calls anyone who is non-muslim "kafir"."
This is similar to asking: Is Jesus the only way to salvation?
If I say 'yes' I am being intolerant but that's what Christianity teaches.
Well, At least anyone who has brains can tell that God created us all equal & that he wouldn't favor a specific religion over the other & won't punish an entire group of innocent people just becuase they follow a specific religion. If God created the three religions, then why would he pick only one to favor? why would he set us all up to go to hell? This implies that God is mean. And i don't accpet that
ان الدين عند اللة, الاسلام, و من ارتضي غير الاسلام دينا , فلن بقبل منة و هو في الاخرة من الخاسرين
God did not send 3 religions, God only sent ONE religion, and one only
Jesses came with Islam , mosses came with Islam, Abraham Came with Islam , it is only Jews and Christians didn’t like it back then just as they don’t like it now, and still trying to change it to suet their own sick desired . وما كان ابراهيم يهوديا ولا نصرانيا , بل كان حنيفا مسلما
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote: why would he set us all up to go to hell? This implies that God is mean. And i don't accpet that [/QB]
excuse me this is not a way to speak about GOd
u dont talk like this ABOUT ur father/mother
please choose ur language Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by welsafty:
God did not send 3 religions, God only sent ONE religion, and one only
Jesses came with Islam , mosses came with Islam, Abraham Came with Islam , it is only Jews and Christians didn’t like it back then just as they don’t like it now, and still trying to change it to suet their own sick desired . وما كان ابراهيم يهوديا ولا نصرانيا , بل كان حنيفا مسلما
DITTO
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
What is wrong with you people? If Christians don't believe ''Jesus came with Islam'', so what? You believe in Islam. Is that not enough to soothe your personal spiritual quest? Must you insist other faiths agree with you? They don't. Get over it. Same applies to christians. Islam is a strong religion. Leave it alone. Posted by welsafty (Member # 5051) on :
Ok, bring back the original message and lets compare and see if the religion in the three messages was any different before Christians decide to worship a wooden cross, and a man and a woman beside God, and call themselves Christians, and before Jews decide that God belongs to them and them only because of their blood, and then chose to call themselves Jews, bring me one part in the old, new testament, original or corrupt that gives a name for the religion, Any part in torah gives the name to the religion as Judaism? Any part of the New Testament gives the name Christianity? Don’t think so. and now tell me once again , was it a matter of convince that God who cared sooo much to tell us about himself and how to worship him, just neglect to tell us the name of his religion ????
Posted by welsafty (Member # 5051) on :
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: As to Muslims, who believe in the quran as the word of God, Undercover's claim regarding the truth of the quran, its accuracy and preservance can be FURTHER refuted by these verses:
ان علينا جمعه و قرآنه [75:17] It is for Us to collect it and to give you the ability to recite it (the Qur'ân).
Also translated by Dr.Ghali as : [75:17] Surely upon Us is the gathering of it and its all-evident reading.
AND إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ (الحجر:9). [15.9]Surely We, Ever We, have been sending down the Remembrance, and surely We are indeed Preservers of it.
[15.9] Verily We, it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur'ân) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption).
As to Undercover's inability to see the truth, note this verse
[36.9] And We have made before them (Literally: between their hands) a barrier and behind them a barrier, then We enveloped them, so they do not behold (the Truth).
AND THIS VERSE خَتَمَ اللَّهُ عَلَى قُلُوبِهِمْ وَعَلَى سَمْعِهِمْ وَعَلَى أَبْصَارِهِمْ غِشَاوَةٌ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ (البقرة:7). [1:7]Allah has set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing; and on their be-holdings (i.e. eyesights) is an envelopment. And for them is a tremendous torment.
-Sura 75:12 why it will be collected if it's already collected in the preserved tablet?
-If it means collected in his mind so why God was causing the verses to be forgotten from the prophet's mind sura 2:106
"None of our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten...." مَا نَنسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْ نُنسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِّنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا أَلَمْ تَعْلَمْ أَنَّ اللّهَ عَلَىَ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ
-Sura 15:9 you mean by Dhikr only Quran but in Sura 16:43 Dhikr is also Turah and Injeel وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ إِلاَّ رِجَالاً نُّوحِي إِلَيْهِمْ فَاسْأَلُواْ أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ Tafseer Tabri
So according to Sura 15:9 Allah is preserving and Guarding his words in Turah and Injeel.
-In sura 36:9 if God made a barriers on some human to see the truth how the human will get over God's will?
-In sura 1:7 God has set a seal on the hearts of some humans for not see the truth. so why you are blaming them?
-If undercover said the Quran is man made and not from God how you want to prove the opposite from Quran it's self !!!
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
Welsafty, you just don't get tolerance, do you? I'm not a christian but I know that christians don't worship ''a wooden cross'. Even if they did. I don't care . What you or christians believe is up to you. Pick holes in the faith of others if you want to. Just expect them to return the attack.
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote: why would he set us all up to go to hell? This implies that God is mean. And i don't accpet that
excuse me this is not a way to speak about GOd
u dont talk like this ABOUT ur father/mother
please choose ur language [/QB]
YA Batman, IF YOU'RE TOO SLOW TOO UNDERSTAND MY POSTS THEN DON'T RESPOND & DON'T GET INTO DISCUSSIONS !!!!!
YOU QUOTED MY SENTENCE ALSO WHEN I SAID THAT I DONT ACCEPT THAT..... SO GUESS WHAT IT MEANT, SMART ASS Posted by welsafty (Member # 5051) on :
wow Loveforever is back, with more bogus attacks, whatever happened to cuper, and the 2 other user id that conveniently took your place in the conversations, and conveniently have been created at the same time
so tell me , have you suddenly learned how to read Arabic, or your boss at the office realized your IDIOCY would sound more credible when you put some Arabic text in it ?
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by welsafty:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Undercover: "Batman calls anyone who disagrees with him as "kafir", he also calls anyone who is non-muslim "kafir"."
This is similar to asking: Is Jesus the only way to salvation?
If I say 'yes' I am being intolerant but that's what Christianity teaches.
Well, At least anyone who has brains can tell that God created us all equal & that he wouldn't favor a specific religion over the other & won't punish an entire group of innocent people just becuase they follow a specific religion. If God created the three religions, then why would he pick only one to favor? why would he set us all up to go to hell? This implies that God is mean. And i don't accpet that
ان الدين عند اللة, الاسلام, و من ارتضي غير الاسلام دينا , فلن بقبل منة و هو في الاخرة من الخاسرين
God did not send 3 religions, God only sent ONE religion, and one only
Jesses came with Islam , mosses came with Islam, Abraham Came with Islam , it is only Jews and Christians didn’t like it back then just as they don’t like it now, and still trying to change it to suet their own sick desired . وما كان ابراهيم يهوديا ولا نصرانيا , بل كان حنيفا مسلما
REALLY? so Christianity & judaism is a lie? You can't deny the existance of these religions...... God also said that we won't be considered proper muslims if we don't believe & acknowlege that other faiths & religions exist. But what you're saying is giving you the excuse of intolerance
Posted by welsafty (Member # 5051) on :
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: Welsafty, you just don't get tolerance, do you? I'm not a christian but I know that christians don't worship ''a wooden cross'. Even if they did. I don't care . What you or christians believe is up to you. Pick holes in the faith of others if you want to. Just expect them to return the attack.
are you sure you are not Christian ? Are you sure they do not worship the cross? What world are you living in?
You know what I see "SayWhatYouSee", I only see another nice member who is preaching the very peaceful message of Loooove and compaction, and fake tolerance, and “oh kids love one another”, and suddenly you will show your true ugly “Islam hating“ face, just like loveforever and undercover Oh and it was convenient enough that you showed up when loveforever disappeared and changed her username after being exposed
Should I comment more?
Posted by ????? (Member # 12336) on :
Believer or not believer, muslim or kafir, Christian or Muslim, what does it matter? Whatever your religion might be, there is no guarantee regarding religion and personality. I prefer to make the difference between good or bad...
Posted by ????? (Member # 12336) on :
Welsafty, do you feel attacked by this kind of postings? Just place yourself above them, you as a person, are not something like a synonymous for whatever which religion. There is a religious expression concerning this: Forgive them God, they don`t know better...
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
Welsafty, you are now trying to falsely claim that I'm christian? Hahahahahahaha. Too funny. This is just further proof of your hopeless inability to grasp anything other than your own narrow scope of belief. Unlike you, I respect the right of all people to believe in whatever religion they choose. Personally, I feel religion is absolutely irrelevant to modern society and that it is divisive and dangerous precisely because intolerant people like you exist. I can see the beauty and poetry in religion but I also see too many flaws to convince me it is anything other than man-made. Others believe it is the word of God and I respect their right to do so.
The reason you detest 'Loveforever' so much is perhaps because she holds a mirror up and you see yourself in her self-righteous reflection. If I were christian or muslim, I would happily and proudly state my beliefs. I'm firmly agnostic but that is something you don't even begin to understand, isn't it? You just have to label everyone with a religion, don't you? Start respecting the rights of others and you might earn a little respect back.
Posted by ZAME (Member # 12914) on :
Muslim, Book 024, Number 5279
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The bell is the musical instrument of the Satan.
Muslim, Book 030, Number 5765 'A'isha reported that Harith b. Hisham asked Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him): How does the the wahi (inspiration) come to you? He said: At times it comes to me like the ringing of a bell and that is most severe for me and when it is over I retain that (what I had received in the form of wahi), and at times an Angel in the form of a human being comes to me (and speaks) and I retain whatever he speaks.
Posted by welsafty (Member # 5051) on :
no I am not like that I never ask for forgivness for those kind, I ask forgivness for those who actually dont know better but when you have the capacity to start thinking how you would attack, i think that takes you out of the (they dont know) equassion.
اللهم لا تزدهم الا ضلالا
Posted by ZAME (Member # 12914) on :
QUOTE]are you sure you are not Christian ? Are you sure they do not worship the cross? What world are you living in?
You know what I see "SayWhatYouSee", I only see another nice member who is preaching the very peaceful message of Loooove and compaction, and fake tolerance, and “oh kids love one another”, and suddenly you will show your true ugly “Islam hating“ face, just like loveforever and undercover Oh and it was convenient enough that you showed up when loveforever disappeared and changed her username after being exposed
Should I comment more? [/QB][/QUOTE]
u idiot i really think you are a homo in the closet hmm yaaaaaa
Posted by ZAME (Member # 12914) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Sorry, Dark Angel, your valuable and sensible advice is not being heeded but I cant sit and watch falsehoods being propagated about my religion.
we all know were it come from
Muslim, Book 024, Number 5279
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The bell is the musical instrument of the Satan.
Muslim, Book 030, Number 5765 'A'isha reported that Harith b. Hisham asked Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him): How does the the wahi (inspiration) come to you? He said: At times it comes to me like the ringing of a bell and that is most severe for me and when it is over I retain that (what I had received in the form of wahi), and at times an Angel in the form of a human being comes to me (and speaks) and I retain whatever he speaks. Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
quote:Originally posted by welsafty: no I am not like that I never ask for forgivness for those kind, I ask forgivness for those who actually dont know better but when you have the capacity to start thinking how you would attack, i think that takes you out of the (they dont know) equassion.
اللهم لا تزدهم الا ضلالا
That you say this: اللهم لا تزدهم الا ضلالا
shows how narrow-minded you are.
You are the one seeking to deviate from the truth or have you forgotten that there is no compulsion in religion? You show how limited your ability to respect others is by expressing such a stupid view.
Shame on you for using such a lame argument.
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee:
quote:Originally posted by welsafty: no I am not like that I never ask for forgivness for those kind, I ask forgivness for those who actually dont know better but when you have the capacity to start thinking how you would attack, i think that takes you out of the (they dont know) equassion.
اللهم لا تزدهم الا ضلالا
That you say this: اللهم لا تزدهم الا ضلالا
shows how narrow-minded you are.
You are the one seeking to deviate from the truth or have you forgotten that there is no compulsion in religion? You show how limited your ability to respect others is by expressing such a stupid view.
Shame on you for using such a lame argument.
Ditto, shame on him
He keeps quoting passages from the quran & he forgot to express his own persoanl views. I can't argue with someone who can't think for himself
Posted by ????? (Member # 12336) on :
What`s the meaning of :اللهم لا تزدهم الا ضلالا ?
Posted by Don't Call Me A Small Fry (Member # 10626) on :
It's rather easy for someone like Welsafty to mud-sling at other people when he can barely form comprehensible and complete arguments using his own views rather than what his religion states. I have to laugh at the way he almost manages to sound magnanimous when referring to those who are ignorant of Islam. What people like him fail to see and understand is that a person's beliefs are their own. It is between them and whoever or whatever they deem as God, the Creator, etc. Trying to force or demean another's views simply brings animosity and ridicule against the aggressor and keeps up an antagonistic fight between the people. And when people do insult another's beliefs and tries to convert or conform them to what they believe is the ideal, it only serves to alienate people who might have otherwise been willing to listen and debate in a practical way.
Posted by Shebah (Member # 12165) on :
quote: What people like him fail to see and understand is that a person's beliefs are their own. It is between them and whoever or whatever they deem as God, the Creator, etc. Trying to force or demean another's views simply brings animosity and ridicule against the aggressor and keeps up an antagonistic fight between the people. And when people do insult another's beliefs and tries to convert or conform them to what they believe is the ideal, it only serves to alienate people who might have otherwise been willing to listen and debate in a practical way.
This is so true. It's a shame a lot of people don't understand this. Not just you welsafty. I mean in general. On this forum and off. Posted by Snoozin No More (Member # 6244) on :
Wow.
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by ?????: What`s the meaning of :اللهم لا تزدهم الا ضلالا ?
It means something like "god make them more ignorant & confused"
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Sorry, Dark Angel, your valuable and sensible advice is not being heeded but I cant sit and watch falsehoods being propagated about my religion.
Don't get ur post, did I say anything bad about my religion? because my religion is your religion
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by ?????: What`s the meaning of :اللهم لا تزدهم الا ضلالا ?
It means something like "god make them more ignorant & confused"
It struck me as truly sad that someone would invoke God's name so disrespectfully. It is clear that the ignorant, intolerant deviant is 'Welldafty', in this debate. And some people argue that ES is an oasis of religious tolerance, with nutters only on the fringes? Thankfully, there are reasonable religious voices here but there are too many using the same lame, hate-filled arguments. I feel sad for them.
Posted by Bettyboo (Member # 12987) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT: Christianity is perfect for chisrtians, Islam is perfect for muslims & judiasm is perfect for the Jews. Also buddhism is perfect for Buddists & so on.
Nobody can or has the right to convince anybody from another faith that their faith, beliefs or religion is flawed.
I just don't get why some people like to insult other religions & try to prove that their religion is the best? it is the best for you but not for others.
I juts hope that people should start to minding their own business & start focusing on themselves to make themseleves better believers instead of wanting others to believe in what they believe in. On the judgement day, you got only yourslelf facing god, alone, so you better work on yourslelf & leave others alone.
It is Christians duty to teach the truth as the scripture teaches. All these religions can't be right. All these religions are worshiping different gods and there is only one true faith that worship the one true God.
Posted by Snoozin No More (Member # 6244) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: All these religions are worshiping different gods
No, all these religions are worshipping the ONE God, just in different ways. Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Sorry, Dark Angel, your valuable and sensible advice is not being heeded but I cant sit and watch falsehoods being propagated about my religion.
Don't get ur post, did I say anything bad about my religion? because my religion is your religion
No, I just meant that I genuinely appologize to you that the topic you created to ask people to show more respect to each other has turned into a fight.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by Snoozin No More:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: All these religions are worshiping different gods
No, all these religions are worshipping the ONE God, just in different ways.
which way is not corrupted??
most ways r administered by Satans delude ppl
among muslims theres a corruption among christian theres corruption
the difference is:
Islam resources is the religion every letter is by a series of narration
chritsiniaty bible no author no narration
Posted by Bettyboo (Member # 12987) on :
quote:Originally posted by Snoozin No More:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: All these religions are worshiping different gods
No, all these religions are worshipping the ONE God, just in different ways.
Not possible. Jews, Muslims, Christians, Buddist, Hinduism, or whatever are worshiping different gods. There is only one true faith and there is in no possible way the one true God allows us to worship him any kind of way. Christians God has a son the Muslim god do not have a son. This is not the same god. Christians' god forbid idolatry; Buddism do not, this is not the same god.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
some worship Money, oppsite sex, lust, fame
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Sorry, Dark Angel, your valuable and sensible advice is not being heeded but I cant sit and watch falsehoods being propagated about my religion.
Don't get ur post, did I say anything bad about my religion? because my religion is your religion
No, I just meant that I genuinely appologize to you that the topic you created to ask people to show more respect to each other has turned into a fight.
LOL........ It's ES baby, things never get quiet around here Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
quote:Originally posted by Snoozin No More:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: All these religions are worshiping different gods
No, all these religions are worshipping the ONE God, just in different ways.
Not possible. Jews, Muslims, Christians, Buddist, Hinduism, or whatever are worshiping different gods. There is only one true faith and there is in no possible way the one true God allows us to worship him any kind of way. Christians God has a son the Muslim god do not have a son. This is not the same god. Christians' god forbid idolatry; Buddism do not, this is not the same god.
NOOOOO, We were talking about the three religions: Islan, Christianity & Judaism all worship one God
AND THAT'S A FACT
Posted by Shebah (Member # 12165) on :
Ditto!
Posted by egyptian999 (Member # 13087) on :
i worship the nile
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
quote:Originally posted by Snoozin No More:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: All these religions are worshiping different gods
No, all these religions are worshipping the ONE God, just in different ways.
Not possible. Jews, Muslims, Christians, Buddist, Hinduism, or whatever are worshiping different gods. There is only one true faith and there is in no possible way the one true God allows us to worship him any kind of way. Christians God has a son the Muslim god do not have a son. This is not the same god. Christians' god forbid idolatry; Buddism do not, this is not the same god.
NOOOOO, We were talking about the three religions: Islan, Christianity & Judaism all worship one God
AND THAT'S A FACT
NO not a fact chritsian creed say they worship jesus the son the father the holy ghost
this is corruption
Posted by Snoozin No More (Member # 6244) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: Not possible. Jews, Muslims, Christians, Buddist, Hinduism, or whatever are worshiping different gods. There is only one true faith and there is in no possible way the one true God allows us to worship him any kind of way. Christians God has a son the Muslim god do not have a son. This is not the same god. Christians' god forbid idolatry; Buddism do not, this is not the same god.
What religion are you, that you believe in multiple gods like this? Posted by Sparkle16 (Member # 13047) on :
Pick up a book called "A History of God" by Karen Armstrong, it is fascinating and about this exact topic. I am reading it right now. How have the three dominant religions shaped and influenced each other. It says that these religions refashioned "the One God" to suit the social and political needs of the followers....what was the original intent, I think only God can answer that one!
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
My dear Batman
I will agree with you for the purpose of this conversation that the current concepts of faith in christianity are not the original ones. However, I would still remind you,please, that this was still the case when the quran was revealed and yet Allah has ordered us to look for the points of intersection with the people of the book and argue gently...AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, to say our God and your God is the same.
[29:46] And do not dispute (This is addressed to the believers) with the population of the Book (Or: family of the Book; i.e., the Jews and Christians) except in the fairest (manner), except for the ones of them who have done injustice; and say, “We believe in that which has been sent down to us and has been sent down to you. And our God and your God is One , and to Him we are Muslims.” (Literally: We surrender to Him).
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
إِلاَّ الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا مِنْهُمْ
و هم ظلموا و اعتدوا
29:46] And do not dispute (This is addressed to the believers) with the population of the Book (Or: family of the Book; i.e., the Jews and Christians) except in the fairest (manner), except for the ones of them who have done injustice; and say, “We believe in that which has been sent down to us and has been sent down to you. And our God and your God is One , and to Him we are Muslims.” (Literally: We surrender to Him).
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I agree to that, too.
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
Batman, you wrong and attack others, then have the cheek to complain when they respond. Are you just a troll? If you can't be tolerant or kind, you do Islam no favours. Please go figure. Posted by Shebah (Member # 12165) on :
No offense Batty. Just saying how I see it.
Batman you obviously do not understand Christianity. It is the same God. Just viewed in a different way. I agree with HP here. You're not paying attention to what Quran tells you. How do you expect others to listen to what you have to say about another religion, when your facts aren't straight about your own, from the Quran?
Being a former Christian, I guess I am more sensitive about how Muslims or people of other religions view Christianity. But the fact is that most Muslims don't have a clue about Christianity. Which is why most Christians do not listen to them. I remember thinking before.....what a bunch of loonies, they have no idea. I mean of course a Christian wont listen when you make up things about their beliefs. Would you? Debating another religion carries a large responsibility. In my opinion. Only the ones who have truly tried to study and see both sides. The ones that try to learn and understand what the other believes are the ones who should tackle it. If you go out there with twisted and unrealistic made-up facts, you are only losing people to Islam, not bringing them to it. Now which is the greater good? Debating with twisted non-facts, or really learning something to try and reach people?
If you cannot respect a Christians beliefs enough to at least get the facts straight, then your causing more harm than good. IMHO
Why do I feel so strongly about this? Because it happened to me. Thank God I started really studying Islam. Why? Because I wanted to really understand what my future husband believed and why. It wasn't until I set aside my biases, and opened my mind that I could see the truth in Islam. Hamdulleh! I finally did.
The way I viewed Islam is not much different than you and a lot of others view Christianity. You have to lose the biases, and really learn the facts. It's hard but necesssary. After all helping people to find God's truth is what's important. Not this persons or that persons truths, but God's.
JMHO
quote: Pick up a book called "A History of God" by Karen Armstrong, it is fascinating and about this exact topic
Is that the book that the movie History of God was based on? If so, I bet it is really good. I watched the movie a few months ago. It was awesome.
I liked the way it put the 3 religions, Judaism , Christianity , and Islam in chronological order, and in a historical perspective.
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: NO not a fact chritsian creed say they worship jesus the son the father the holy ghost
this is corruption [/QB]
Bla bla bla, Batman
You just don't make any sense
You're so slow, you take things literally, you have no idea what symbolism is
You're unbelievable or you're just pretending in order to provoke people into giving you more attention..... and that's what it is
Posted by Don't Call Me A Small Fry (Member # 10626) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: NO not a fact chritsian creed say they worship jesus the son the father the holy ghost
this is corruption
Bla bla bla, Batman
You just don't make any sense
You're so slow, you take things literally, you have no idea what symbolism is
You're unbelievable or you're just pretending in order to provoke people into giving you more attention..... and that's what it is [/QB]
I couldn't agree more, Cat. How are you doing, by the way? Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
Thanks Sparkle & Shebah, I'm gonna find this book & documentary
Posted by Shebah (Member # 12165) on :
You'll love it. Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Don't Call Me A Small Fry:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: NO not a fact chritsian creed say they worship jesus the son the father the holy ghost
this is corruption
Bla bla bla, Batman
You just don't make any sense
You're so slow, you take things literally, you have no idea what symbolism is
You're unbelievable or you're just pretending in order to provoke people into giving you more attention..... and that's what it is
I couldn't agree more, Cat. How are you doing, by the way? [/QB]
Hi, How you're doing? did you change you're name? Posted by Formerly a Lackey,and Moving On Up (Member # 10626) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Don't Call Me A Small Fry:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: NO not a fact chritsian creed say they worship jesus the son the father the holy ghost
this is corruption
Bla bla bla, Batman
You just don't make any sense
You're so slow, you take things literally, you have no idea what symbolism is
You're unbelievable or you're just pretending in order to provoke people into giving you more attention..... and that's what it is
I couldn't agree more, Cat. How are you doing, by the way?
Hi, How you're doing? did you change you're name? [/QB]
I did...you might remember me as "Just Call Me a Lackey." Lol! Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
ربنا يسامحك يا كاتي انا مش هرد Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
Sometimes it looks like Batman actually thinks he is God - virtually dispensing forgiveness or condemnation. Posted by Shebah (Member # 12165) on :
quote:ربنا يسامحك يا كاتي انا مش هرد
Ok I can read it. But my lack of vocabulary keeps me from understanding it. Posted by Formerly a Lackey,and Moving On Up (Member # 10626) on :
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: Sometimes it looks like Batman actually thinks he is God - virtually dispensing forgiveness or condemnation.
LOL~~ I noticed that, too. Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
Good to see you, 'The Artist Formerly Known as CMAL'. Like the new name. Posted by Formerly a Lackey,and Moving On Up (Member # 10626) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: ربنا يسامحك يا كاتي انا مش هرد
Now, Bratty, do you realize the irony of your words by stating that God needs to forgive someone? Posted by Formerly a Lackey,and Moving On Up (Member # 10626) on :
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: ربنا يسامحك يا كاتي انا مش هرد
You're very childish & pathetic ya Batman u remind me of kindergarten days Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
no one understand any thing iam bored/frstrated Posted by Formerly a Lackey,and Moving On Up (Member # 10626) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: no one understand any thing iam bored/frstrated
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shebah:
quote:ربنا يسامحك يا كاتي انا مش هرد
Ok I can read it. But my lack of vocabulary keeps me from understanding it.
he said, god will forgive you for what you said to me, that's why i wont respond
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
Batman, lighten up. The vacancy for God has been filled. Time to try on a new 'Superhero' outfit, me thinks. Those tights must be killing you. Posted by Formerly a Lackey,and Moving On Up (Member # 10626) on :
Maybe a new nicely pressed cape to go along with his outfit? LOL!! He can run around the streets pretending to fly in it and dispense unwanted advice !! Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Formerly a Lackey,and Moving On Up: I did...you might remember me as "Just Call Me a Lackey." Lol! [/QB]
of course i know you're Lackey.... good to see after all these years, er months
have you guys seen "the king of comedy" by robert deniro? he's amazing, i just watched it a while ago
Posted by Formerly a Lackey,and Moving On Up (Member # 10626) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Formerly a Lackey,and Moving On Up: I did...you might remember me as "Just Call Me a Lackey." Lol!
of course i know you're Lackey.... good to see after all these years, er months
have you guys seen "the king of comedy" by robert deniro? he's amazing, i just watched it a while ago [/QB]
Never saw it. But, I like most of Robert DeNiro's movies. And Cat, it hasn't been months...it's been eons.... Posted by Shebah (Member # 12165) on :
quote: quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Shebah:
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ربنا يسامحك يا كاتي انا مش هرد --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok I can read it. But my lack of vocabulary keeps me from understanding it. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
he said, god will forgive you for what you said to me, that's why i wont respond
Well that just burns my butt!
Now I understand why you ladies are saying what you are.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
There's no need to be frustruted Batman. All that's being said here is just about the need to be lenient with people from other faiths when you speak to them about their own beliefs (like Mohammad PBUH used to do) because people will not want to listen to you if you start with attacking them.
I woudl agree that there is a need to respond vigorously when they are attacking your beliefs but....you see, they would see that they have the same right, to respond vigorously to you for attacking thiers. This would not make them receptive to what you say about Islam.
I really enjoyed reading Sheba's post that represents the persepctive of someone who reverted to Islam from another religion. If you are doing da3wa, you absolutely have to take that in consideration. And also seek the guidance from the quran and the example of the prophet PBUH who spoke to people about the right things at the right time...and Insha Allah God will reward you for trying hard and in the right way No guarantees that you wont be frustrated, though. Think how often your prophet was frustrated so stay strong, seek wisdom (and the balance between tolerance and da3wa) and God will support you in sha Allah. Posted by Shebah (Member # 12165) on :
شكرا HP Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: My dear Batman
I will agree with you for the purpose of this conversation that the current concepts of faith in christianity are not the original ones. However, I would still remind you,please, that this was still the case when the quran was revealed and yet Allah has ordered us to look for the points of intersection with the people of the book and argue gently...AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, to say our God and your God is the same.
[29:46] And do not dispute (This is addressed to the believers) with the population of the Book (Or: family of the Book; i.e., the Jews and Christians) except in the fairest (manner), except for the ones of them who have done injustice; and say, “We believe in that which has been sent down to us and has been sent down to you. And our God and your God is One , and to Him we are Muslims.” (Literally: We surrender to Him).
But Sura 9:29 abrogated the verse you mentioned read:
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth,from among the People of the Book(Jews and Christian), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
how God is one if it's mentioned in Sura 5:17 [17] In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Al-Messiah the son of Maryam. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His Will were to destroy Al-Messiah the son of Maryam, his mother, and all, everyone that is on the earth?
How God will destroy his word and his spirit ?
you can't simply cheat batty and non Muslims by these old ways that Islam is merciful with non Muslims.
Posted by Ayisha (Member # 4713) on :
quote:Originally posted by loveforever:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: My dear Batman
I will agree with you for the purpose of this conversation that the current concepts of faith in christianity are not the original ones. However, I would still remind you,please, that this was still the case when the quran was revealed and yet Allah has ordered us to look for the points of intersection with the people of the book and argue gently...AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, to say our God and your God is the same.
[29:46] And do not dispute (This is addressed to the believers) with the population of the Book (Or: family of the Book; i.e., the Jews and Christians) except in the fairest (manner), except for the ones of them who have done injustice; and say, “We believe in that which has been sent down to us and has been sent down to you. And our God and your God is One , and to Him we are Muslims.” (Literally: We surrender to Him).
But Sura 9:29 abrogated the verse you mentioned read:
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth,from among the People of the Book(Jews and Christian), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
how God is one if it's mentioned in Sura 5:17 [17] In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Al-Messiah the son of Maryam. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His Will were to destroy Al-Masih the son of Maryam, his mother, and all, everyone that is on the earth?
How God will destroy his word and his spirit ?
you can't simply cheat batty and non Muslims by these old ways that Islam is merciful with non Muslims.
And back to square one again! Abrogation has been discussed, if you have a problem with understanding it thats your problem.
quote:how God is one if it's mentioned in Sura 5:17 [17] In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Al-Messiah the son of Maryam. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His Will were to destroy Al-Masih the son of Maryam, his mother, and all, everyone that is on the earth?
How God will destroy his word and his spirit ?
This quote shows your lack of understanding of the English language. It is clearly saying that God IS One, only God, One. and the little tiny word IF means if God wanted to He could destroy Jesus as He is not Jesus and has wayyyyy more power than Jesus did.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Loveforever, Even in the middle of a topic about respect and appreciation, you cant hold yourself from having a go at the Quran with this very limited understanding of yours? DO YOU REALIZE WHO ARE THE AGGRESSORS or still you dont?
AND, do you ever read anything that is posted in reply to you or are you so fond of your own voice?
I replied to what you asked here before so what's the point of bringing it up again? You're counting on boring us to death so we shut up? No, my dear. Here it is again: According to Sheikh Ghazaly, Sheikh Qaradawy, Sheikh Alkhazin, Dr. Elwany, Sheikh Khodary, Sheikh Rshid and many others among the contemporaries AND as mentioned by Ibn Kathir and Algalaeyn in their tafseers, according to a long list of names of mofasereen in the early days of ISLAM: THERE IS NO ABROGATION!
The following excerpt from Alghazaly's book:
السياق قاطع بأنه لا مكان للقول بالنسخ التكليفي هنا .. والشيخ رشيد ذكر هذا الموضوع .. فالكلام في آية " وما ننسخ من آية أو ننسها نأت بخير منها أو مثلها ألم تعلم أن الله على كل شيء قدير " هو كلام عن قدرة وليس أحكام تكليفية
TRANSLATED AS:
The conclusions are DEFINITE that there is no place for abrogation in terms of orders { that is in the way it is being portrayed that a verse replaces another with a more violent order from God} and that Sheikh Rashid mentions that the interpretation of the verse that mentions "naskh" reflects a representation of God's power to do so had he wanted.....and NOT that there was a replacement of orders.
sO WHAT does the verse mean (I told u this before as well) that it is the MIRACLES OF THE PROPHETS that are abrogated and forgotten and replaced or renewed by later prophets. The reason you see it translated like that is that in Arabic the word "aya" means (i) quranic verse, (ii) miracle and in many other places in the quran "aya" is translated as miracle or sign.
but, loveforever, I KNOW YOU WONT READ THAT BECAUSE YOU ARE BLINDED BY YOUR HATE. And you want desperately to propagate the twisted interpretation of the quran that you get from traitorous sources for your own purposes.
The verses are all aplicable and the ones that say peaceful are for peaceful and friendly people who dont attack us but for people like yourself, naturally, yes the violent ones apply and with good reason!!! Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by loveforever: you can't simply cheat batty and non Muslims by these old ways that Islam is merciful with non Muslims.
Batty is your friend,now? because he says the things you want? He provides youw ith just what you need I suppose so he is very useful to you Poor Batty. Come and read this so you know what you've done!
LOVEFOREVER, YOU ARE THE CHEATER AND FORGERER because you twist the word of God.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
As to your earlier question :
quote:Originally posted by loveforever: Sura 75:12 why it will be collected if it's already collected in the preserved tablet?
-If it means collected in his mind so why God was causing the verses to be forgotten from the prophet's mind sura 2:106 [/QB]
I would put this question at the intellectual level of a 7 yeard old! When you live in heaven, Loveforever, go read it on the preseved tablet. In the meantime, I'm afraid u have to make do with printed books!!!
As to why YOUR eyes and heart are sealed by God, I refer you to the explanation of verse in surat Albaqqara:
God tells us that these people do not believe whether they were warned (by Mohammad or his message) or not warned regarding how dire their situation is going to be on judgement day. God says that their hearts are sealed against belief and that their eyes are covered and all their senses irreceptive to the message of ALLAH and that they will suffer on judgement day.
People sometimes ask if Allah has sealed their hearts then why he makes them suffer. It's a question of whether Man has a choice at all in his destiny. I usually answer this question by posing a similar situation. You have a child. You warn this child that if he touches the nettles they will hurt him. You send him out to play in the garden after having given him the warning about the nettles but you, as his Mum, know him well enough to have a prior knowledge that he WILL touch the nettles. He's just too curious or too intrigued by them and cant stop himself. So you have given him the choice and warned him of the dangers but you already knew what he will do. It's the same with us and God. Again, the same if you give your daughter a ten pound note and tell her to spend it wisely but you already know in advance what she will do with it. If your children insist on disregarding you, Would you be angry with them? Would you punish them? Wouldn't you think God has a right to punish those who slander Him insistently like yourself?
One last question: HOW DO YOU DARE SAY QURAN IS MANMADE AND THEN DARE TO GET OFFENDED WHEN WE TELL YOU BIBLE IS NOT WORD OF GOD?
I dont need proof that Quran is from God. People who have brains in their heads have noticed that before you. If you are so incompetent , it's not my problem. You have to worry about it when you answer for your lies on some distant day.
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
-pigeon,for the personal insulting i don't care God bless you.
-you mentioned Sura [29:46] "And do not dispute people of the book...." and I mentioned the opposite and last revelation [9:29] "Fight.... people of the book....] you don't like to call it abrogation it's up to you but it's contradicting the first one and I asked you before about the validity and you said it's still valid which means Muslims can use it.
-Abrogation subject has been taught in Al-Azhar before your birth in this life until now, under Quranic Sciences.
قالت عائشة: كان فيما أنزل عشر مرضعات معلومات فنسخن بخمس معلومات.
فتوفي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وهن مما يقرأ في القرآن
And many other books in this islamic library about Abrogation.don't say the above links for Salafi or Hanbli !!
-Regarding Quran or Bible is man made,you tried to prove the Dhikr is only for Quran and I proved to you by the link mentioned that Dikhr is also Turah and injeel which mean Allah still preserving his books according to the verse you mentioned,then you tried to prove that Quran is divine work to undercover by using verses from Quran which seems funny to someone like undercover believes that who authored Quran can also put these verses on God's tongue to certify his work,for the bible we say it's authored by 44 authores through God's inspiration, we don't say God sent an angel to send the words literally to be written as you claim about Quran.
For the rest of your reply no comment it's your understanding.
Posted by welsafty (Member # 5051) on :
quote:Originally posted by loveforever:
how God is one if it's mentioned in Sura 5:17 [17] In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Al-Messiah the son of Maryam. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His Will were to destroy Al-Messiah the son of Maryam, his mother, and all, everyone that is on the earth?
How God will destroy his word and his spirit ?
you can't simply cheat batty and non Muslims by these old ways that Islam is merciful with non Muslims.
لَقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ قُلْ فَمَنْ يَمْلِكُ مِنَ اللَّهِ شَيْئًا إِنْ أَرَادَ أَنْ يُهْلِكَ الْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ وَأُمَّهُ وَمَنْ فِي الْأَرْضِ جَمِيعًا وَلِلَّهِ مُلْكُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَمَا بَيْنَهُمَا يَخْلُقُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَاللَّهُ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Al-Masih the son of Maryam. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His Will were to destroy Al-Masih the son of Maryam, his mother, and all, everyone that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things."
He can destroy anything he creates, this is why whatever he create are subjects to his well,
You are asking how God would destroy his word and his spirit, and rolling your eyes, this is exactly the argument in the verse,
Remember, both Jesus and Mary are DEAD. DESTROYD, NOT BREATHING ANYMORE, DECESED, FINITO, BASTA, KHALAAAAAS , BAAAA7, MAFEEEESH
since Allah have already taken The virgin marry, and Jesus did not stop it, and after that Allah have taken Jesus himself, and yet another time He couldn’t stop it,, that is because both are the creation of God ( and the answer to him only as Subjects), God can create, and then he can destroy it at any time he like, no questions asked,
Just the fact that they are dead is more than enough evidence they are not GODs, when did you ever hear a God who dies, or sleep or eats , or bleeds for that matter???
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I told you before that I AM AWARE that there are Muslim groups that say that abrogation exists and that this is NOT mainstream notion. The majority of Muslim scholars have other views (I mentioned a fe names up there who are landmark scholars in the hsitory of Islam) so dont think you prove anything by mentioning a link or two who say there is abrogation....BUT HEY, DID YOU READ THE CONTENTS OF THE THIRD LINK you got?
It says what I say that the question of abrogation has been interpreted in many ways and that includes making copies, replacing miracles...etc as I mentioned to you when we discussed it before. CAN YOU SEE HOW GOD CHOSES TO MAKE YOU EXPOSE THE TRUTH BY YOIRSELF?
And i told you before that of course the Azhar teaches it. What? Do you expect them to ignore it so that someone like you can come and claim what you do? They have to teach it so that we know what it is about.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
And I recall I gave you links, too .... previously, that explain the MAINSTREAM views regarding this!!!! so you're not proving anything. Just reiterating the fanatic views over and over.
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: And I recall I gave you links, too .... previously, that explain the MAINSTREAM views regarding this!!!! so you're not proving anything. Just reiterating the fanatic views over and over.
I am not using fanatic views,everything are mentioned in Islamic links as you have seen, Sunni path and Al-Eman sites are very moderate but the abrogation subject is very important as you have read any way ,can you read in the link you mentioned above under:
الضرب الثالث: ما نسخ تلاوته دون حكمه
which says the Quran isn't complete and Aiysha said Sura 33 Al-Ahzab was 200 verses not as Othman gathered now 73 verses and another guy said it was almost equal Sura Al bakra number 2.
And also Aiysha said that Othman changed the Moshaf(Quran) and there was a verse was reciting during prophet Muhammed's time as below,try to be honest with yourself pigeon for God's sake,I didn't make up all that.
وأمثلة هذا الضرب كثيرة.
قال أبوعبيد: حدثنا إسماعيل بن إبراهيم عن أيوب عن نافع عن ابن عمر قال: ليقولن أحدكم قد أخذت القرآن كله وما يدريه ما كله قد ذهب قرآن كثير ولكن ليقل قد أخذت منه ما ظهر.
قال: حدثنا ابن أبي مريم عن أبي لهيعة عن أبي الأسود عن عروة بن الزبير بن عائشة قالت: كانت سورة الأحزاب تقرأ في زمن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم مائتي آية فلما كتب عثمان المصاحف لم نقدر منها إلا ما هو الآن.
وقال: حدثنا إسماعيل بن جعفر عن المبارك بنفضالة عن عاصم بن أبي النجود عن ذر بن حبسش: قال لي أبيّ بن كعب: كأين تعد سورة الأحزاب قلت: اثنتين وسبعين آية أوثلاثة وسبعين آية قال: إن كانت لتعدل سورة البقرة وإن كنا لنقرأ فيها آية الرجم.
قلت: وما آية الرجم قال: إذا زنا الشيخ والشيخة فارجموهما ألبتة نكالًا من الله والله عزيز حكيم.
وقال: حدثنا عبد الله بن صالح عن الليث عن خالد بن يزيد عن سعيد بن أبي هلال عن مروان بن عثمان عن أبي أمامة بن سهل أن خالته قالت: لقد أقرأنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم آية الرجم: الشيخ والشيخة فارجموهما ألبتة بما قضيا من اللذة.
وقال: حدثنا حجاج عن ابن جريج أخبرني ابن أبي حميد عن حميدة بنت أبي يونس قالت: قرأ على أبي وهوابن ثمانين سنة في مصحف عائشة: إن الله وملائكته يصلون على النبي يا أيها الذين آمنوا صلوا عليه وسلموا تسليما وعلى الذين يصلون الصفوف الأول.
What is this? THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD IS CLEAR. don't insult other religions & faiths. What do you want to prove or achive? Live & let live. If you don't like another religion, it's either you work harder on understanding it or ignore it. And if you don't like your religion, it's simple, convert. But don't give us a headache please
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT: What is this? THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD IS CLEAR. don't insult other religions & faiths. What do you want to prove or achive? Live & let live. If you don't like another religion, it's either you work harder on understanding it or ignore it. And if you don't like your religion, it's simple, convert. But don't give us a headache please
If Quran says in Sura 9:29
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth,from among the People of the Book(Jews and Christian), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
And in Sura 5:17 [17] In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Al-Messiah the son of Maryam. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His Will were to destroy Al-Messiah the son of Maryam, his mother, and all, everyone that is on the earth?
So who has started by insulting others,it's Islam my dear..
Do you want Muslims to change Quran? this won't happen..it means people of the book have to defend their creed all their life.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Loveforever, it's obvious that whatever I write you dont read OR that you go on reiterating your previous arguments even if theya re responded to just to give a false impression that they still stand. I spoke about this naive sentence that you claim to be a verse. I spoke about it before in at least two threads and I included an excerpt from Taha Elwany's book about it. إذا زنا الشيخ والشيخة فارجموهما ألبتة نكالًا من الله والله عزيز حكيم
Typically you all over.You know one tenth of a story and make it into a totally different story.
Fanatics are known by their faulty opinions. They are called Khawarej by the Prophet. If indeed those sites say that the mushaf is altered, then they can NEVER be credible one bit. Tell me why you assume they are moderate? I'd like to know how you get to this assumption?
Also , Can you answer my earlier question, please? Here it is for your benefit
Loveforever, Even in the middle of a topic about respect and appreciation, you cant hold yourself from having a go at the Quran with this very limited understanding of yours? DO YOU REALIZE WHO ARE THE AGGRESSORS or still you dont?
I find it really interesting when you respond with utter Christian humbleness and say
quote: pigeon,for the personal insulting i don't care God bless you. [/QB]
when every post you submit is DRIPPING hate. Cant you see the hypocrisy of it? well, others can! Your "missionariness" is just about slandering Islam. You're not directing your thoughts to spreading christianity, my dear, just slandering Islam, out of all religions. That's your true agenda.
I started out with you and undercover at a very different level assuming you were genuinely discussing and would be prepared to see the sense of an argument if presented to you clearly but very quickly you proved me wrong with a vengeance.
Go on answer my question in bold up there. I'd like to know what you think.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by loveforever:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT: What is this? THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD IS CLEAR. don't insult other religions & faiths. What do you want to prove or achive? Live & let live. If you don't like another religion, it's either you work harder on understanding it or ignore it. And if you don't like your religion, it's simple, convert. But don't give us a headache please
If Quran says in Sura 9:29
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth,from among the People of the Book(Jews and Christian), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
And in Sura 5:17 [17] In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Al-Messiah the son of Maryam. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His Will were to destroy Al-Messiah the son of Maryam, his mother, and all, everyone that is on the earth?
So who has started by insulting others,it's Islam my dear..
Do you want Muslims to change Quran? this won't happen..it means people of the book have to defend their creed all their life.
It means people of the book have to stay peaceful and friendly to benefit from the peacefulness and friendliness of Islam in the other verses that you conveniently insist on claiming are abrogated in orde to give yourself an excuse to attack Islam. However, if they (peopel of the book ) behave badly to Muslims the way you do then there should only be aggression for them, that's perfectly fair.
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
-YOU ARE BLINDED BY YOUR HATE,YOU ARE THE CHEATER AND FORGERER.. what you call these?
-Sunnipath site is clear from the name if it's fanatic or not,don't you follow Sunna path?
-Al-Eman site is just an Islamic library gathered all islamic books for well-known scholars in one place and there isn't any hatered agenda,do you have any objection on Sheikh-Alsyoiuty,I challenge you to ask any Imam at your nearest Mosque may be Leeds Islamic Centre at Spencer place about the Book I mentioned الاتقان في علوم القرءان and tell me the answer,the point that these sites contain these books about abrogation and the story about incomplete Quran as it's normal issues depending that nobody is reading or care,everything is ok ....and in the same time they are justifiying everthing as you doing now,this fanatic and this is fake so on...naive people by millions..
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
quote:Originally posted by loveforever:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT: What is this? THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD IS CLEAR. don't insult other religions & faiths. What do you want to prove or achive? Live & let live. If you don't like another religion, it's either you work harder on understanding it or ignore it. And if you don't like your religion, it's simple, convert. But don't give us a headache please
If Quran says in Sura 9:29
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth,from among the People of the Book(Jews and Christian), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
And in Sura 5:17 [17] In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Al-Messiah the son of Maryam. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His Will were to destroy Al-Messiah the son of Maryam, his mother, and all, everyone that is on the earth?
So who has started by insulting others,it's Islam my dear..
Do you want Muslims to change Quran? this won't happen..it means people of the book have to defend their creed all their life.
It means people of the book have to stay peaceful and friendly to benefit from the peacefulness and friendliness of Islam in the other verses that you conveniently insist on claiming are abrogated in orde to give yourself an excuse to attack Islam. However, if they (peopel of the book ) behave badly to Muslims the way you do then there should only be aggression for them, that's perfectly fair.
Don't skirt around i can read and understand Arabic better than you,the verse is clear to blinds fight who don't believe in Allah and Mohammed from among people of the books or to buy their souls by paying Jizya(money) and they will be saved.don't ever heard Imam in Mosques speaking about when God permitted his messenger to fight??!
If Chritians believe that Jesus Messiah is Allah and Quran came to say that blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Al-Messiah 5:17 then said Sura 9:123 يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ قَاتِلُواْ الَّذِينَ يَلُونَكُم مِّنَ الْكُفَّارِ وَلِيَجِدُواْ فِيكُمْ غِلْظَةً وَاعْلَمُواْ أَنَّ اللّهَ مَعَ الْمُتَّقِينَ
[123] O ye who believe! Fight the Unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him. How It means people of the book have to stay peaceful and friendly to benefit from the peacefulness are you talking to kids here..
what you will say about Saudi Islamic affairs ministry site or Ibn Katheer.
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
I find it really interesting when you respond with utter Christian humbleness and say
quote: pigeon,for the personal insulting i don't care God bless you. [/QB]
when every post you submit is DRIPPING hate. Cant you see the hypocrisy of it? well, others can! [/QB]
Hahaha...the contrast of that always makes me laugh. Similarly, those piously preaching Islam on one thread, then using the foulest, most vulgar, course language on another. They fool only themselves.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by loveforever: -YOU ARE BLINDED BY YOUR HATE,YOU ARE THE CHEATER AND FORGERER.. what you call these?
-Sunnipath site is clear from the name if it's fanatic or not,don't you follow Sunna path?
-Al-Eman site is just an Islamic library gathered all islamic books for well-known scholars in one place and there isn't any hatered agenda,do you have any objection on Sheikh-Alsyoiuty,I challenge you to ask any Imam at your nearest Mosque may be Leeds Islamic Centre at Spencer place about the Book I mentioned الاتقان في علوم القرءان and tell me the answer,the point that these sites contain these books about abrogation and the story about incomplete Quran as it's normal issues depending that nobody is reading or care,everything is ok ....and in the same time they are justifiying everthing as you doing now,this fanatic and this is fake so on...naive people by millions..
I call these describing what you are doing, loveforever.
So it is just a name? so if I call my domain Christian faith and preach Islam in it you will take it for granted that what I'm preaching is christianity?
It's all clear to me now then how you get these misconceptions.
I am skirting around what exactly? I cant believe you didnt understand what I'm saying! There are peaceful verses for peaceful people and violent verses for aggressors. It's clear enough!
Oh and I do advise you to read the Assyiouty book properly then if you can read Arabic that well. I also advise you to pay attention to Sheikh Mohammad Alghazaly's publications about this issue and to note the opinions of all other scholars I mentioned to u earlier on this issue AND to go review tafseer Ibn Kathir which list at least 10 sifferent meanings for the word naskh before YOU EVEN BEGIN TO SPEAK.
You didnt answer my question about this thread . Do you realize who the aggressor is , at least, on this thread?
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Peaceful verses for peaceful people: Can you still read, loveforever? or are you going to claim these verses are cancelled once again?
8). إِنَّمَا يَنْهَاكُمْ اللَّهُ عَنْ الَّذِينَ قَاتَلُوكُمْ فِي الدِّينِ وَأَخْرَجُوكُمْ مِنْ دِيَارِكُمْ وَظَاهَرُوا عَلَى إِخْرَاجِكُمْ أَنْ تَوَلَّوْهُمْ وَمَنْ يَتَوَلَّهُمْ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمْ الظَّالِمُونَ (الممتحنة:9). Allah does not forbid you (as regards) the ones who have not fought you on account of the religion and have not driven you out of your residences that you should be benign to them and be equitable towards them; surely Allah loves the equitable. 9. Surely Allah only forbids you as to the ones who have fought you on account of the religion, and driven you out of your homes, and backed (others) in driving you out
وَإِنَّ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ لَمَنْ يُؤْمِنُ بِاللَّهِ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكُمْ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْهِمْ خَاشِعِينَ لِلَّهِ لاَ يَشْتَرُونَ بِآيَاتِ اللَّهِ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلاً أُوْلَئِكَ لَهُمْ أَجْرُهُمْ عِنْدَ رَبِّهِمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ سَرِيعُ الْحِسَابِ (آل عمران:199). 199. And surely there are (some) of the Population of the Book (Or: Family of the Book, i.e., the Jews and Christians) who indeed believe in Allah, and what has been sent down to you, and what has been sent down to them, being submissive to Allah; they do not trade the signs of Allah for a little price. Those have their reward in the Providence of their Lord; surely Allah is swift at the reckoning.
وَلاَ تُجَادِلُوا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ إِلاَّ بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ إِلاَّ الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا مِنْهُمْ وَقُولُوا آمَنَّا بِالَّذِي أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَأُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكُمْ وَإِلَهُنَا وَإِلَهُكُمْ وَاحِدٌ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ (العنكبوت:46). 46] And argue not with the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), unless it be in (a way) that is better (with good words and in good manner) except with such of them as do wrong; and say (to them): "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you; our Ilâh (God) and your Ilâh (God) is One (i.e. Allâh), and to Him we have submitted (as Muslims)."
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
quote:Originally posted by loveforever: -YOU ARE BLINDED BY YOUR HATE,YOU ARE THE CHEATER AND FORGERER.. what you call these?
-Sunnipath site is clear from the name if it's fanatic or not,don't you follow Sunna path?
-Al-Eman site is just an Islamic library gathered all islamic books for well-known scholars in one place and there isn't any hatered agenda,do you have any objection on Sheikh-Alsyoiuty,I challenge you to ask any Imam at your nearest Mosque may be Leeds Islamic Centre at Spencer place about the Book I mentioned الاتقان في علوم القرءان and tell me the answer,the point that these sites contain these books about abrogation and the story about incomplete Quran as it's normal issues depending that nobody is reading or care,everything is ok ....and in the same time they are justifiying everthing as you doing now,this fanatic and this is fake so on...naive people by millions..
I call these describing what you are doing, loveforever.
So it is just a name? so if I call my domain Christian faith and preach Islam in it you will take it for granted that what I'm preaching is christianity?
It's all clear to me now then how you get these misconceptions.
I am skirting around what exactly? I cant believe you didnt understand what I'm saying! There are peaceful verses for peaceful people and violent verses for aggressors. It's clear enough!
Oh and I do advise you to read the Assyiouty book properly then if you can read Arabic that well. I also advise you to pay attention to Sheikh Mohammad Alghazaly's publications about this issue and to note the opinions of all other scholars I mentioned to u earlier on this issue AND to go review tafseer Ibn Kathir which list at least 10 sifferent meanings for the word naskh before YOU EVEN BEGIN TO SPEAK.
You didnt answer my question about this thread . Do you realize who the aggressor is , at least, on this thread?
Pigeon you are kindly lady and I won't make a pressure on you more than that,I spent years in researches on Islam and I am expecting, appreciating your defend of your faith,but it's too late. I am the aggressor here,Allah Akbar.
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Peaceful verses for peaceful people: Can you still read, loveforever? or are you going to claim these verses are cancelled once again?
8). إِنَّمَا يَنْهَاكُمْ اللَّهُ عَنْ الَّذِينَ قَاتَلُوكُمْ فِي الدِّينِ وَأَخْرَجُوكُمْ مِنْ دِيَارِكُمْ وَظَاهَرُوا عَلَى إِخْرَاجِكُمْ أَنْ تَوَلَّوْهُمْ وَمَنْ يَتَوَلَّهُمْ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمْ الظَّالِمُونَ (الممتحنة:9). Allah does not forbid you (as regards) the ones who have not fought you on account of the religion and have not driven you out of your residences that you should be benign to them and be equitable towards them; surely Allah loves the equitable. 9. Surely Allah only forbids you as to the ones who have fought you on account of the religion, and driven you out of your homes, and backed (others) in driving you out
وَإِنَّ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ لَمَنْ يُؤْمِنُ بِاللَّهِ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكُمْ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْهِمْ خَاشِعِينَ لِلَّهِ لاَ يَشْتَرُونَ بِآيَاتِ اللَّهِ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلاً أُوْلَئِكَ لَهُمْ أَجْرُهُمْ عِنْدَ رَبِّهِمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ سَرِيعُ الْحِسَابِ (آل عمران:199). 199. And surely there are (some) of the Population of the Book (Or: Family of the Book, i.e., the Jews and Christians) who indeed believe in Allah, and what has been sent down to you, and what has been sent down to them, being submissive to Allah; they do not trade the signs of Allah for a little price. Those have their reward in the Providence of their Lord; surely Allah is swift at the reckoning.
وَلاَ تُجَادِلُوا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ إِلاَّ بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ إِلاَّ الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا مِنْهُمْ وَقُولُوا آمَنَّا بِالَّذِي أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَأُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكُمْ وَإِلَهُنَا وَإِلَهُكُمْ وَاحِدٌ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ (العنكبوت:46). 46] And argue not with the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), unless it be in (a way) that is better (with good words and in good manner) except with such of them as do wrong; and say (to them): "We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you; our Ilâh (God) and your Ilâh (God) is One (i.e. Allâh), and to Him we have submitted (as Muslims)."
In Islam for everything there is an EXIT.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
In Islam for everything there is flexibility....if a religion claims it sets rules for people then it has to cover every contingency....like, u seen research protocols? they do the same.
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
Pigeon, would you give me the Islamic sites that you think it's accredit and righteous?
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I would give you the names of the scholars that I believe to be righteous and the names of their publications if you are genuinely interested. I normally dont seek my information about religion over the internet but at least I know that sheikh ALghazaly, at least, has his own website. Besides, teh spread of the new wahabi/salafi methods over the internet is alarming anyway but I could offer you for example this discussion board where all these ideas are discussed and sources cited by both sides.
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: I would give you the names of the scholars that I believe to be righteous and the names of their publications if you are genuinely interested. I normally dont seek my information about religion over the internet but at least I know that sheikh ALghazaly, at least, has his own website. Besides, teh spread of the new wahabi/salafi methods over the internet is alarming anyway but I could offer you for example this discussion board where all these ideas are discussed and sources cited by both sides.
Is this the accredit site pigeon,plz respect my mind a bit? thanks dear anyway.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I cant believe you didnt read my post Go and look at it again
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I said initially: I DONT GET MY INFO FROM THE WEB so I can only offer you the proper publications and the names of the scholars. I'm willing to buy them for you and send them over, too if you want
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: I said initially: I DONT GET MY INFO FROMT HE WEB so I can only offer you the proper pub lications and the names of the scholars. I'm willing to buy them for you and send them over, too if you want
I checked the site,you are Dr.Noha I guess. Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Have a look at this very basic setting out of the facts about the radical group ideology:
Then go read: Mohammad Alghazaly's book : The sunna between the hadith people and the jurisprudence people السنة النبوية بين أهل الفقه و أهل الحديث http://www.alghazaly.org/index.php?id=54
A review of the book:
دوري في هذه المقالة لا يتعدى العرض الأمين – إن شاء الله – لكتاب الشيخ محمد الغزالي " السنة النبوية بين أهل الفقه وأهل الحديث" على قدر ما تسمح به مساحة المقال . يلاحظ الشيخ أن الحقائق الرئيسية في المنهاج الإسلامي لا تحتل المساحة العقلية المقررة لها ..زمان كان البدوي يخاطب الفرس أيام الفتح الأول قائلا : جئنا لنخرج الناس من عبادة العباد إلى عبادة الله الواحد ، واليوم صار اهتمام المتدنين بمسائل فرعية من قبيل نقض الوضوء للمس المرأة أكثر مما يشغله إجراء انتخابات مزورة !!. علماء السنة وضعوا خمسة شروط لقبول الأحاديث النبوية ، ثلاثة في السند ( راو واع – تقي ذو ضمير – اطراد هاتين الصفتين في سلسلة الرواة ) واثنان في المتن ( عدم الشذوذ بمعنى ألا يخالف ما هو أوثق ، والثاني هو غياب العلة القادحة أي عيب يبصره المحققون ) ..هذه الشروط كافية جدا لدقة النقل وقبول الآثار والمهم هو إحسان التطبيق . يؤكد الشيخ أن في السنة متواترا له حكم القرآن الكريم ، وفيها الصحيح المشهور الذي يفسر كتاب الله ..ولكن الحديث قد يصح سندا ويضعف متنا بعد اكتشاف الفقهاء لعلة كامنة فيه تأسيا بما فعلته السيدة عائشة رضي الله عنها حينما رفضت حديث أن الميت يعذب ببكاء أهله ( وهو المثبت في الصحاح !!) لتعارضه مع قول الله تعالى ( لا تزر وازرة وزر أخرى ) ، وأوضحت أن ذلك للكافر حيث قال "إن الله ليزيد الكافر عذابا ببكاء أهله عليه ". وهذا المنهج هو نفس فعل أبي حنيفة الذي رفض حديث " لا يقتل مسلم في كافر " برغم صحة سنده لتعارضه مع النص القرآني " النفس بالنفس " فالقصاص شريعة الله والأحناف قدموا ظاهر القرآن على حديث الآحاد . ويؤكد الشيخ على أنه لا علاقة للخلاف بكفر ولا إيمان ..فحديث فقأ موسى لعين ملك الموت صحيح سندا ولكن متنه يثير الريبة إذ يفيد أن موسى عليه السلام يكره الموت ولا يحب لقاء الله وهذا بالطبع مرفوض ثم هل الملائكة تعرض لهم العاهات كما تعرض للبشر ؟ ..يؤكد الشيخ أن الاشتغال بصحة هذا الحديث غير مفيد لأنه لا يرتبط بعقيدة ولا يتصل بعمل ..وبرغم ذلك فإن شارح هذا الحديث اعتبر ناكري الحديث من الملاحدة !!..يقول الشيخ أن وصم منكر الحديث بالإلحاد استطاله في أعراض المسلمين ، وهو يرى أن في متنه علة قادحة تنزل به عن مرتبة الصحة ..ورفضه أو قبوله خلاف فكري وليس عقائديا بحال . نفس المثال يؤكده الشيخ في حديث مسلم الذي يفيد أن الله تعالى يكتب الرزق والأجل على الجنين في رحم أمه بعد أثنين وأربعين يوما بينما يذكر البخاري أن ذلك يتم بعد أربعة شهور ..بين الروايتين تفاوت واضح ولكن أي مسلم يذهب إلى الله تعالى بإيمان واضح وعمل صالح فلن يضيره الجهل بأحد الحديثين أو كليهما معا . لنفس الشيء يستغرب الشيخ ما رواه ثابت عن أنس أن رجلا أتهم بأم ولد رسول الله فأمر علي بضرب عنقه وهو الأمر الذي كاد أن يحدث لولا أن وجده علي مجبوبا أي مقطوع الذكر !!. ..يقول الشيخ أنه يستحيل أن يحكم على رجل بالقتل في تهمة لم يحقق فيها او يسمع له فيها دفاع ..والظاهر أنه نجا من القتل بسبب عاهته ويتساءل أو لو كان سليما أبيح دمه ؟!!..هذا أمر تأباه أصول الإسلام وفروعه كلها . ..................... وأحيانا يكون الحديث صحيحا سندا ومتنا ولكنه قيل في ظروف تاريخية فحديث " خاب قوم ولوا أمرهم إمرأة " كان حينما كانت فارس تتهاوى وتتقلص فإن الوثنية السياسية جعلت الملك ميراثا لفتاة لا تدري شيئا ..فكان هذا الحديث وصفا للأوضاع كلها دون أن يعني هذا انتقاصا من قدرة المرأة على الحكم السليم فالقرآن قص علينا قصة ملكة سبأ التي قادت قومها إلى الإيمان والفلاح بحكمتها وذكائها ويستحيل أن يرسل حكما في حديث يناقض ما نزل عليه من وحي . يؤكد الشيخ أن هذا ليس حكما عاما فانجلترا بلغت عصرها الذهبي أيام الملكة فيكتوريا ..وأنديرا غاندي حققت لقومها ما يصبون حينما شطرت الكيان الإسلامي لشطرين ..الكفاءة هي المهمة في رئاسة الدولة . كما يستغرب الشيخ الحديث الذي يحبذ صلاة المرأة في غرفتها لتعارضه مع الواقع العملي لشهود النساء صلاة الجماعة معه طيلة عشر سنين ..ولقوله صلى الله عليه وسلم " لا تمنعوا إماء الله مساجد الله " ولاستبقاء الخلافة الراشدة صفوف النساء في المساجد بعد وفاة الرسول الكريم ..أبن حزم أراح نفسه وأراح غيره – حسب تعبير شيخنا – حينما كذب أحاديث منع النساء من الصلاة في المساجد وعدها من الباطل ..يقول شيخنا أن الحديث يعتبر شاذا إذا خالف الأوثق . ...................... في هذا الكتاب صك الشيخ تعبير " الفقه البدوي" وبسببه تعرض الكتاب لكثير من التجريح ..يقول شيخنا أننا لسنا مكلفين بنقل تقاليد عبس وذبيان إلى أمريكا واستراليا ولكننا مكلفون بنقل الإسلام وحسب ..والمأساة أن المسلمين مولعون بضم تقاليدهم لعقائد الإسلام لتكون دينا مع الدين ..فما أيسر الإسلام وأيسر أركانه لولا ما أضافه أتباعه من أنفسهم واشترطوا على الناس أن يأخذوا به ..ويضرب بذلك مثلا وهو النقاب الذي لم يفرضه الإسلام . كما أنه يجب أن نختار من الآراء الفقهية ما يناسب عادات القوم فلا معنى لأن نفرض عليهم رأي مالك أو أبن حنبل إذا كان رأي أبي حنيفة أقرب لمشاربهم ..مشهور عن الأوربيين تقديرهم للفنون الجميلة ( كالسيمفونيات والأوبرا ) فهل من المعقول أن نترك مهمة إصلاح عقائدهم ونضع عائقا لهذا الإصلاح الخطير بدعوتهم لترك الغناء والموسيقى ؟ خصوصا وتحريم الغناء يقوم على جملة من الأحاديث الواهية الموضوعة التي لا وزن لها في التمحيص العلمي ..إن الإسلام ليس دينا إقليميا ولا فقها بدويا ضيق النطاق ، وحينما يوضع مع الإسلام في كفة واحدة وتقولون هذه الصفقة لا ينفصل أحدها عن الآخر فستطيش كفة الإسلام وينصرف الناس عنه . .............. عقائد الإسلام تقوم على المتواتر النقلي والثابت العقلي ، ولا عقيدة لدينا تقوم على خبر واحد أو تخمين فكر ..أما التلاوة القليلة للقرآن الكريم والقراءة الكثيرة للأحاديث فلا تعطيان صورة دقيقة للإسلام بل تشبه سوء التغذية لخلل في توازن العناصر .. حديث مسلم " كل ذي ناب من السباع فأكله حرام " يتعارض مع القرآن الكريم " قل لا أجد فيما أوحي إلي محرما على طاعم يطعمه إلا أن يكون ميتة أو دما مسفوحا أو لحم خنزير فإنه رجس أو فسقا أهل لغير الله به " ..تكرر هذا المعنى في أربع مواضع من القرآن الكريم منها سورة المائدة التي هي آخر ما نزل من الوحي . كما يرفض رواية نافع في الغارة بغير إنذار لأنها تتعارض مع حرية التدين وتتناقض مع قوله تعالى " وإما تخافن من قوم خيانة فانبذ إليهم على سواء ، إن الله لا يحب الخائنين " فليس في تاريخ الثقافة الإنسانية كتاب ينشىء العقل المؤمن ويعرض آيات الله في الأنفس والآفاق لتكون ينابيع فكر يتعرف على الله ويستريح إلى عظمته كما وقع في هذا القرآن ..وتصوير الإسلام بأنه يتحرش بالآخرين ويتعطش لدمائهم فهو افتراء على الله والمرسلين .. يؤكد الشيخ أن القرآن أطال الحوار مع مخالفيه وفي طول السور وعرضها مناشدة حارة للإنسان أن يثوب إلى ربه ..ولم تبدأ سياسة العصا الغليظة إلا بعد أن أوجعت عصى الأعداء جنود المؤمنين وكسرت عظامهم ..هنا نزل قوله تعالى "أذن للذين يقاتلون بأنهم ظلموا وأن الله على نصرهم لقدير " ..فإذا ذكر المسلم حديث "أمرت أن أقاتل الناس حتى يقولوا لا إله إلا الله " في معاملة أعداء الإسلام كان ممكن يحرفون الكلم عن مواضعه ويتعامل بغباء شديد مع هدى النبوة ..لم يقل الرسول هذا الحديث يوم صعد الصفا ودعا للتوحيد وذكر بالبعث ..ولا قيل يوم عودته كسير القلب من الطائف ..ولا يوم اختفى في الغار ليضلل مطارديه ولا قالها يوم أعطى الناس حق اللحاق بمشركي مكة وترك الدين إذا استبهظوا تكاليفه ..ولا قالها في عمرة القضاء قبل فتح مكة بعام وهو يطوف الكعبة وحولها مئات الأصنام فلم يكسر صنما ولا نقض عهدا .. لقد قيل هذا الحديث قبل وفاة الرسول بعام بعد جهاد الرسول لوثنيات أعطاها الإسلام حق الحياة ( لكم دينكم ولي دين ) ولم تعطه إلا الموت . ......................... الحكم الديني لا يؤخذ من حديث واحد مفصول عن غيره ..وإنما يضم الحديث إلى الحديث ، ثم تقارن الأحاديث المجموعة بما دل عليه القرآن الكريم ، فإن القرآن الذي تعمل الأحاديث في نطاقه لا تعدوه (إنا أنزلنا إليك الكتاب بالحق لتحكم بين الناس بما أراك الله "..فالأحاديث التي ترغب في الفقر يقابلها التوجيه النبوي " إنك إن تذر ورثتك أغنياء خير من أن تتركهم عالة يتكففون الناس " / والتاريخ يشهد أن العشرة المبشرين بالجنة كانوا من أغنياء المسلمين بل زعم الرواة أن أحدهم خلف من الذهب ما تعمل فيه الفئوس ..يقول الشيخ أن المشكلة ليست في امتلاك المال الواسع وإنما كيف تمتلكه وفيم تنفقه ؟ ويتناول الشيخ بحذر شديد حديث مسلم " إن أحدكم ليعمل بعمل أهل الجنة حتى ما يكون بينه وبينها إلا ذراع فيسبق عليه الكتاب فيعمل عمل أهل النار فيدخلها ..الخ " فيقبله إن كان تنويها بشمول العلم الإلهي أما المعنى القريب فيرده لأنه مخالف للكتاب والسنة ..فنحن بجهدنا أو كدحنا ننجو أو نهلك ..وعقيدة الجبر تطويح بالوحي كله " من كفر فعليه كفره ، ومن عمل صالحا فلأنفسهم يمهدون " و " ذلك جزاء أعداء الله النار جزاء بما كانوا بآياتنا يجحدون " فلن تؤاخذ أبدا بشيء لم تفعله أو تغلب على أراداتك يوما فيحسب عليك ما لم تشأ ..والمشكلة تكمن في أحاديث صحيحة السند غير أن متونها تقف أمامها واجمين لنبحث عن تأويل لها أو مخرج مثل حديث "إن الله خلق خلقه في ظلمه فألقي عليهم من نوره فمن أصابه من ذلك النور اهتدى ، ومن أخطأه ضل " إن الله تعالى يطلب من الإنسان أن ينصف نفسه من نفسه " اقرأ كتابك كفى بنفسك اليوم عليك حسيبا " فهل يقال له ذلك وهو مجبور مسكين ؟ ................... وبأحاديث الجبر ينتهي كتاب الشيخ محمد الغزالى جزاه الله خيرا على اجتهاده ، مصيبا كان أم مخطئا ..ولكنه في الحالتين جدير بأن يقرأ كله بإمعان .
Then look at what he says about abrogation:
بطلان نسخ القرآن والمقصود بالنسخ هو القول بتعطيل العمل بآيات من القرآن الكريم، واعتبارها مجرد ذكرى يتعبد بتلاوتها فحسب، مع إبطال ما جاءت به من الأحكام الشرعية.
وهو ما رفضه الغزالي بشدة ووصفه بقوله: "هذا باطل، وليس في القرآن أبدًا آية يمكن أن يقال: إنها عطلت عن العمل، وحكم عليها بالموت.. هذا باطل.. كل آية يمكن أن تعمل، لكن الحكيم هو الذي يعرف الظروف التي يمكن أن تعمل فيها الآية، وبذلك توزع آيات القرآن على أحوال البشر بالحكمة والموعظة الحسنة".
بل يتعجب الشيخ الغزالي من المسلمين حين يقولون بالناسخ والمنسوخ، على أساس أن الناسخ الأخير أبطل ما صدر قبله من أحكام، وهم يلجئون إلى هذا الفهم إعمالاً للنص الأخير، ودفاعًا لما يتوهم من تناقص بين ظواهر الآيات.
و يصرح الشيخ أن التناقض بين الآيات في الأحكام تناقض لا أساس له من الصحة، وأن التشريعات النازلة في أمر ما، مرتبة ترتيبًا دقيقًا بحيث تنفرد كل آية بالعمل في المجال المهيأ لها، فإذا ذهب هذا المجال وجاء غيره تلقفته آية أخرى بتوجيه يناسبه وهكذا، فهل هذا التدرج في التشريع يسمى نسخًا؟.
ومع ذلك قد قبل الشيخ الغزالي النسخ إذا كان يقصد به أنه "تفصيل بعد إجمال، أو تقييد بعد إطلاق، أو تخصيص بعد تعميم، بيد أن ذلك شيء غير الزعم بأن هناك آيات بطل حكمها، أو وقف تنفيذها..".
ويرى أن القائلين بالنسخ بعيدون عن التفسير الموضوعي للقرآن الكريم، سواء كان هذا التفسير يتبع قضية واحدة في طول القرآن وعرضه، أو كان استكشافًا للوَحْدة التي تشمل أجزاء السورة، والتي تجعل آياتها معالم لصورة بينة التقسيم، مُتَعانِقة المعاني والأهداف، ولا يعد من النسخ التدرج في التشريع، كما الشأن في الخمر والربا، فليس في القرآن آية كانت تقول بحلهما، ثم جاءت آيات أخرى تحرمهما.
أما التدرج في الكشف عن حقيقة حكمٍ ما فإنه يبدأ تلويحًا يفهمه الأذكياء، ثم تزداد الإبانة بما يكاد يوحي بالحكم، ثم يجيء الحكم حاسمًا بالمعنى المراد، وقد تم تحريم الربا والخمر بهذا الأسلوب المتأني، وليس في القرآن نص بإباحة الخمر أو الربا !.
وفي آيتي الأنفال، الأولى التي ترى أن قتال المسلم أمام عشر من المشركين، ثم خفف الحكم ليكون المسلم مطالب بأن يقاتل اثنين، يرى الشيخ أنه ليس هناك نسخ، فالرخصة تستخدم في حينها، والعزيمة باقية.
ويرد الشيخ الغزالي على الأدلة التي قال بها مثبتو النسخ، كقوله تعالى: "ما ننسخ من آية أو ننسها "، فهو يرى أن الآية هنا المعجزة، وليس الآية الدالة على التشريع، وأن النظر إلى ما قبلها وما بعدها يؤكد أن معنى الآية هنا المقصود بها المعجزة. ويرفض الغزالي رحمه الله أن يكون هناك قرآن نزل ثم سحب قائلا: "ومن الشائعات التي انطلقت في ميدان النسخ أن هناك قرآنًا أُنزِل ثم سُحب! والمعروف في ديننا أن القرآن لا يثبت إلا بالتواتر الذي يفيد اليقين، وأن خبر الواحد لا يُثبِت قرآنًا أبدًا، فالزعم بأن قرآنًا كان ثم رُفع كلامٌ لا يُلتفَت إليه" (مائة سؤال عن الإسلام).
ولكن الشيخ الغزالي يقبل أن يكون القرآن ناسخا للسنة النبوية، وهو أمر يتماشى مع ما يراه من علو القرآن على السنة النبوية، ومن سبيل ذلك تحويل القبلة، ومنع تسليم النساء المسلمات لمشركي قريش
This doesnt mean that Islamonline is an "accredited site" . It has a disclaimer on it saying everyone is responsible for what they say.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
yes but as u see I have a problem with participation as I dont have an Arabic keyboard and I have to use an online Arabic keyboard to type which is very time consuming.
It's a very "elitist" board actually with everybody there sir'ing and ma'aming each other and people who participate are at a very high level of knowledge. That's why they take good care to reference everything they cite very carefully. You'll be able to get to the SOURCES they get their info from using their accurate refereincing and you will be able to see how both sides discuss these issues , at least, a change from the one sided perspective.
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
"ما ننسخ من آية أو ننسها "، فهو يرى أن الآية هنا المعجزة، The Aya here refers to miracle as Shiekh said but how the miracle will be abrogated and forgotten to the prophet?! the close interpretation that it refers to the quranic verses,because miracles can't be forgotten.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Miracle replced by miracle refers to renewal. It's Mankind who forget the miracles of the prophets and go astray again then God sends another prophet with other miracles. There are strong arguments against the possibility of abrogation of verses as you put it and there are several other opinions about the meaning of "naskh" listed even in Ibn Kathir. Other scholars mentioned by ALghazaly have stated their arguments as well. Check out his books. There's an excerpt of one of them in that other thread where we talked abotu abrogation before.
Abrogation of the peaceful verses is an idea that is propagated by radical groups to justify their being so hot on THEIR concept of jihad , which in itself is twisted and faulty. Jihad has its set of rules and restrictions that THEY want to erase and disregard . It's the Bin Laden mentality.
If YOU go on propagating THEIR ideas, you're simply feeding the fire. You're propagating what you want to eradicate.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
The writer in my first link has also published a book with the same title that look into the issue even deeper. Very good read.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
There it is what I copied before into another thread. I did promise to translate but I cant get round to do it at the moment. But , u,loveforever can read it..as well as other who read Arabic. I appologize to those who dont. It's just that this info is not available in translation
النسخ في القرآن كتاب الشيخ محمد الغزالي اسم الكتاب : كيف نتعامل مع القرآن في مدارسة أجراها الأستاذ عمر عبيد حسنة مع الشيخ محمد الغزالي - الطبعة الأولى 1412هـ / 1992 م دار الوفاء للطباعة والنشر والتوزيع ص 77..... [ طالما أن الخلود سمة القرآن الكريم ، فهذا يعني من وجه آخر خلود المشكلات والقضايا الإنسانية التي جاء القرآن لمعالجتها في أصولها ، وإن تغيرت في بعض فروعها وألوانها.. أي أن القرآن خالد ، والقضايا الإنسانية المطلوب علاجها أيضاً خالدة . ولا تزال في الإنسانية حالات كفر ونفاق ، وضعف في الإيمان واستكبار وعلل نفسية، وصور من الولاء والبراء والسقوط والنهوض ، والنصر والهزيمة .... إلخ فكيف يمكن والحالة هذه أن نعمل بعض الآيات ونعطل بعضها بسبب القول بالنسخ؟ وفي الوقت نفسه نقول بالخلود؟ وكيف يمكن مواجهة الحالات المتعددة التي ستطرأ على الحياة الممتدة المتطورة ، ومعالجتها بحل واحد انتهت إليه الجماعة المسلمة الأولى ، في ظرف تاريخي معين ، وشروط ميلاد وتطور معروفة ؟ هذه قضية هامة في نظري ، ولابد أن نعرض لها بشيء من الإفاضة والتفصيل إلا إذا اعتبرنا المجتمع الإسلامي الأول هو البداية والنهاية ، وبذلك نكون قد وقتـّنا ( أي جعلناه موقوتاً) القرآن بشكل عملي وإن كنا نرفض ذلك بشكل نظري..] ويقول في صفحة 78.... [ المجتمع القديم الذي نزل فيه القرآن هو مجتمع بشري ، وأحواله صورة مما يعتري البشرية على امتداد الزمن إلى انتهاء الحياة . فالحكم في أي صورة من هذه الصور هو حكم بطبيعته ممتد ، لأنه ليس خاصاً بهذه الصورة بل هو يتجدد مع كل صورة مشابهة لها إلى قيام الساعة. ومن هنا جاء الخلود. ] وفي صفحة 79..... [ لكن حينما نأتي لنقول : هذه الآية نسخت التي جاءت لمعالجة حالة معينة، نسخت بعد انتهاء الحالة في مجتمع النبوة فمعنى ذلك أن هذه الحالة سوف لن تتكرر في البشرية، وليست بحاجة إلى هذا الحل. لا يمكن أن يقع هذا في القرآن .. آية بطلت لأن حكمها انتهى ، والشخص أو الجزء الذي اتصل بها تلاشى ، لا يوجد هذا في القرآن إطلاقاً ] وفي صفحة 80 الذين قالوا بالنسخ في بعض الآيات التي كانت في مرحلة من المراحل تشكل حلاً لمشكلة قائمة ، وقدمت لها حلاً ، ثم حينما ارتقى المجتمع وجاءت مرحلة أخرى ، قالوا : بأن الآية السابقة نسخت مع أن المجتمعات تتكرر فيها مثل هذه الحالة السابقة التي كانت ! هذا عيب الذين يقولون بالنسخ : إنهم يظنون أن حكماً انتهى أمره لأن القصة لا تتكرر .. القصة إذا تكررت تكرر معها المتصل بها .. ويقول أيضاً صفحتي 80 ، 81 : شاع بين المتأخرين من المفسرين من أن النسخ ، بمعنى إبطال آيات في القرآن موجود .. وجدت أن الشيخ الفقيه المؤرخ الأستاذ الخضري رفض النسخ رفضاً باتاً وقال : لا يكون إلا تخصيص عام ، أو تقييد مطلق أو تفصيل مجمل .. والشيخ رشيد رضا فعل هذا بما هو أوضح وتكلم عن آية " وما ننسخ من آية أو ننسها " البقرة :106 فبين أن الآيات تكليفية وتكوينية ، وأن الذي تنسخه آية سورة البقرة هنا هو الآيات التكوينية ، وليست هناك آيات تكليفية نسخت بهذه الآية .. ومعنى التكوينية معروف وهو خوارق العادات التي كانت يؤيد بها الأنبياء ، وهي التي تتغير بتغير الأزمنة .. أما الآيات التكليفية فأنا نظرت إليها نظرة واقعية عند قوله تعالى "وإذا بدلنا آية مكان آية والله أعلم بما ينزل قالوا إنما أنت مفتر" النحل : 101 الخازن قال أن هذه الآية جاءت رداً على أسئلة بأن محمداً يقرر حكماً ثم ينسخه ! فتساءلت : هذه الآية من سورة النحل مكية ، أين هي الأحكام التي تـنـدر المشركون بها لأنها نسخت بعد أن نزلت وحدث اضطراب في تقرير الأحكام بسبب ذلك ؟ .. لا يوجد .. وهذا الكلام عن سبب نزول الآية مختلق. ولم يوجد أحد من المشركين قال : أن محمداً يقرر حكماً شرعياً ثم ينسخه .. ما وجد .. لأنه ما وجد حكم في مكة نسخ بآية مكية .. لم يعرف في تاريخ النزول ولا في تاريخ البشرية أن حكماً نزل في مكة نسخ بآية مكية ، القرآن لم يعرف ذلك.. فإذاً الكلام باطل ، ولا توجد أحكام بطل معناها .. وكل ما هنالك أن هناك عدة آيات نظر فيها ، وكان النظر قاصراً مثل قوله تعالى " الآن خفف الله عنكم وعلم أن فيكم ضعفاً " الأنفال : 66 فالآيات الأولى تأمر بوقوف الواحد لعشرة ، ثم نسخت بأن يقف لاثنين.. الشيخ الخضري رحمه الله قال : إن هذه رخصة مع عزيمة ، والرخصة مع العزيمة ليست نسخاً. الحكم الدائم الباقي : أن يقف المسلم لعشرة.. ويعود ليقول في صفحة 82 : ( والزعم بأن 120 آية من آيات الدعوة نسخت بآية السيف ، هو حماقة غريبة دلت على أن الجماهير المسلمة في أيام التخلف العقلي والعلمي في حضارتنا جهلوا القرآن، ونسوا بهذا الجهل كيف يدعون إلى الله وكيف يحركون الدعوة وكيف يضعون نماذج حسنة للعرض الحسن .. ولعل هذا من أسباب فشل الدعوة الإسلامية ووقوف هذه الدعوة في كثير من الأيام عن تبليغ رسالتها ، ظن أن السيف هو الذي يؤدي واجب التبليغ ! وهذا باطل باتفاق العقلاء. فقصة النسخ ، أو تحنيط بعض الآيات ، فهي موجودة لكن لا تعمل ، هذا باطل ، وليس في القرآن أبداً آية يمكن أن يقال أنها عطلت عن العمل وحكم عليها بالموت .. هـــــذا باطـــــــل .. كل آية يمكن أن تعمل ولكن الحكيم هو الذي يعرف الظروف التي يمكن أن تعمل فيها الآية ، وبذلك توزع آيات القرآن على أحوال البشر بالحكمة والموعظة الحسنة. ) وبالنسبة لآية " وما ننسخ من آية أو ننسها " البقرة 106 يقول في صفحة 83 : السياق قاطع بأنه لا مكان للقول بالنسخ التكليفي هنا .. والشيخ رشيد ذكر هذا الموضوع .. فالكلام في آية " وما ننسخ من آية أو ننسها نأت بخير منها أو مثلها ألم تعلم أن الله على كل شيء قدير " هو كلام عن قدرة وليس أحكام تكليفية وإلا قال : ( ألم تعلم بأن الله عليم حكيم ، مثلاً بدل " قدير" ).
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I think, due to the importance of this information, I'll take a break from this forum and go translate it then come back.
Posted by Bettyboo (Member # 12987) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
quote:Originally posted by Snoozin No More:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: All these religions are worshiping different gods
No, all these religions are worshipping the ONE God, just in different ways.
Not possible. Jews, Muslims, Christians, Buddist, Hinduism, or whatever are worshiping different gods. There is only one true faith and there is in no possible way the one true God allows us to worship him any kind of way. Christians God has a son the Muslim god do not have a son. This is not the same god. Christians' god forbid idolatry; Buddism do not, this is not the same god.
NOOOOO, We were talking about the three religions: Islan, Christianity & Judaism all worship one God
AND THAT'S A FACT
They all worship one god but not the same god and that's a fact!
Posted by Bettyboo (Member # 12987) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
quote:Originally posted by Snoozin No More:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: All these religions are worshiping different gods
No, all these religions are worshipping the ONE God, just in different ways.
Not possible. Jews, Muslims, Christians, Buddist, Hinduism, or whatever are worshiping different gods. There is only one true faith and there is in no possible way the one true God allows us to worship him any kind of way. Christians God has a son the Muslim god do not have a son. This is not the same god. Christians' god forbid idolatry; Buddism do not, this is not the same god.
NOOOOO, We were talking about the three religions: Islan, Christianity & Judaism all worship one God
AND THAT'S A FACT
NO not a fact chritsian creed say they worship jesus the son the father the holy ghost
this is corruption
Christians worship God, the Father!
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: They all worship one god but not the same god and that's a fact! [/QB]
what? how does this make any sense?
Posted by Bettyboo (Member # 12987) on :
quote:Originally posted by Snoozin No More:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: Not possible. Jews, Muslims, Christians, Buddist, Hinduism, or whatever are worshiping different gods. There is only one true faith and there is in no possible way the one true God allows us to worship him any kind of way. Christians God has a son the Muslim god do not have a son. This is not the same god. Christians' god forbid idolatry; Buddism do not, this is not the same god.
What religion are you, that you believe in multiple gods like this?
I don't believe in multiple gods. Where in the heck you get that from?
Posted by Shebah (Member # 12165) on :
quote: Christians worship God, the Father!
That's what I always thought.
Question: How many times in your life have you or other Christians around you prayed in the following way; ...... in Jesus name I pray. ???
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
I suggest you read the Bible in the original Greek. All of it. Otherwise you can't claim to understand Any of it. Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Undercover: I suggest you read the Bible in the original Greek. All of it. Otherwise you can't claim to understand Any of it.
Oh but I am not interested in attacking the christian faith all over the web. I dont particularly need to read the Bible.
Hey but the bible is not originally in Greek , is it? I thought it was Amaraic.
Posted by Shebah (Member # 12165) on :
quote: Hey but the bible is not originally in Greek , is it? I thought it was Amaraic.
True. Hebrew.....OT. Aramaic.....NT.
At least that's my understanding.
What I find interesting in the translating any old text, is the effect of culture and period of when they were written, or written about.
EX: There is this one pastor that I still love to listen to. He teaches so much about the History, Language, Culture, etc of the Bible.
I think that changes a lot of what is understood.
JMHO Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
hmm
I hope this clarifies things a bit.
Bible: What was the original language?
The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew, and the New Testament was written in Greek.
HISTORY OF TRANSLATIONS
The first translation of the English Bible was initiated by John Wycliffe and completed by John Purvey in 1388.
A few chapters of the books Ezra (ch. 4:8-6:18; 7:12-26) and Daniel (ch. 2:4 to 7:28), one verse in Jeremiah (ch. 10:11, and a word in Genesis (ch. 31:47) are written, not in ancient Hebrew, but in Aramaic. Aramaic is about as closely related to Hebrew as Spanish is to Portuguese. However, the differences between Aramaic and Hebrew are not those of dialect, and the two are regarded as two separate languages.
From which language was the KJV was translated. Here is how it came about: 54 college professors, preachers, deans and bishops ranging in ages from 27 to 73 were engaged in the project of translating the KJV. To work on their masterpiece, these men were divided into six panels: two at Oxford, two at Cambridge, two at Westminster. Each panel concentrated on one portion of the Bible, and each scholar in the panel was assigned portions to translate. As guides the scholars used a Hebrew Text of the Old Testament, a Greek text for the New. Some Aramaic was used in each. They consulted translations in Chaldean, Latin, Spanish, French, Italian and Dutch. And, of course, they used earlier English Bibles—at least six, including William Tyndale's New Testament, the first to be printed in English. So what language did they use? Everything that was available.
The first American edition of the Bible was probably published some time before 1752.
The reason the apostles wrote their New Testament books in Greek is that Greek was the dominant language, the lingua franca, of the world in which they lived. Prior to the 4th century B.C., Aramaic was the dominant language of the Mediterranean world, reflecting the long dominance of the Mesopotamian empires. But during the Golden Age of Greece, and especially as a result of the sweeping conquests of Alexander the Great, the Greek language increasingly dominated the international life of the ancient world. The Roman Empire, which overthrew the Greek powers, was known for its military and political superiority, and adapted the higher culture of Greece. Latin became the language of empire, while Greek remained the language of literature and philosophy.
Well, thanks, Undercover. That is instructive. I appreciate useful posts like these. And they serve Christianity a lot better.
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Miracle replced by miracle refers to renewal. It's Mankind who forget the miracles of the prophets and go astray again then God sends another prophet with other miracles.
so what the benefit of the sacred texts isn't for reminding all generations about prophets,if you are right it means prophet Mohammed as the seal of prophets he should performed miracles greater than anybody came before including Jesus but as everybody knows Jesus was unique in everything birth,miracles,end so how your explaination can apply on prophet Muhammed's case.
Abrogation of the peaceful verses is an idea that is propagated by radical groups to justify their being so hot on THEIR concept of jihad , which in itself is twisted and faulty. Jihad has its set of rules and restrictions that THEY want to erase and disregard . It's the Bin Laden mentality.
If YOU go on propagating THEIR ideas, you're simply feeding the fire. You're propagating what you want to eradicate.
Abrogation not only based on one verse but there are another two verses: First Sura 16:101 [101] When We substitute one revelation for another,and Allah knows best what He reveals they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not. وَإِذَا بَدَّلْنَا آيَةً مَّكَانَ آيَةٍ وَاللّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا يُنَزِّلُ قَالُواْ إِنَّمَا أَنتَ مُفْتَرٍ بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ
The four greatest Scholars in Islamic History consensused about the abrogation is present in Quran and God knows the best as they said.
Second Sura 22:52 [52] Never did We send a Messenger or a prophet before thee, but, when he framed a desire, Satan threw some (vanity) into his desire: but Allah will cancel anything (vain) that Satan throws in, and Allah will confirm (and establish) His Signs: for Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ مِن رَّسُولٍ وَلَا نَبِيٍّ إِلَّا إِذَا تَمَنَّى أَلْقَى الشَّيْطَانُ فِي أُمْنِيَّتِهِ فَيَنسَخُ اللَّهُ مَا يُلْقِي الشَّيْطَانُ ثُمَّ يُحْكِمُ اللَّهُ آيَاتِهِ وَاللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ
As you see from the verse above that scholars said prophet Muhammed was sitting with Quraish and said the verse 53:19 Manat and Al-lat are good Gods then Jabreal blamed him and said these verses were from Satan,then the above verse came to prove that God changes the Satanic verse by divine verse.
So from the above you can't based only on Ghazali and leaving other scholars and as I told you that Al-Azhar is teaching the abrogation as a subject,it's hard for one or two scholars to deny all that,and how prophet Muhammed couldn't distinguish between satanic verses and God verses styles by the way!!
The main point as Al-ghazaly said in his book فكيف يمكن والحالة هذه أن نعمل بعض الآيات ونعطل بعضها بسبب القول بالنسخ؟ وفي الوقت نفسه نقول بالخلود؟ He said How we can accept abrogation and the eternal of Quran?he hit the nail.this equation lead him to refuse the abrogation and to accept Quran without holes.
But he forgot to mentioned that if for every occasion and event God revealed verses as solution or wisdom it means most of Quran matching the events that happened before and the verse that revealed for this event can't match or life now,because the law always fitting its era WHICH prove that Quran can't be eternal but only historin book.
For example Muslim women still following verse in Quran that divorced woman has to stay four months untill married again to be sure she isn't pregnant althought she can make pregenancy test within five minutes, many examples not our issue and Jesus didn't give new law but he said I came to complete the law,Jesus's law was spiritual where anyone can follow it in anytime and this is why there is New and Old testeamnt,the propblem of prophet Muhammed that he left Jesus and returned back to the Law of Moses as Warqa Ibn Noufal said to Khadija about prophethood of Muhammed "this is the Law/code of Moses" and he excluded Jesus at all while Jesus said "Give what for Cesar to Cesar and what for God to God".Don't you agree?
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Loveforever, I been thru these tafseers several times. You have selected the one sentence from a whole page that conveys what you want to say and omitted to list all the other explanations that the commentators have listed. This is such a vicious circle. You dont have to come and tell me there are people who say it is possible. I KNOW that. I am telling you there are even more people who say it is not possible. The question in the end of your post is posed by Ghazaly to say this cannot be possible because the quran is eternal... (Oh, for God's sake, Loveforever, you said you understand Arabic very well, come on!)
LOOK, Let me step out of my Muslim self for a moment and meet you on completely pragmatic grounds. One of the members of this board said once before that the problem with Islam is that it did not undergo reform like christianity did. Lets assume for a minute (only for the purpose of this conversation) that abrogation is true and Now some leading scholars and well respected religious figures say that it isnt true.That , consequently, means :1- the peaceful verses that regulate the relationship with the people of the book are still standing 2- The capital punishment for apostates does not exist.
Wouldn't that suit you? I say it should. It gives you what you want, doesn't it? Then why are you setting yourself up against it so much? Wouldnt it suit the whole world and propagate peace and udnerstanding? Then why do you work so hard at convincing muslims and non muslims that abrogation is true and turn around the effect?
In a PM I received from Undercover previously she insists that Muslims are only Muslims if they are fanatics and that all the rest of us are pretend Muslims because we dont live the same way that Mohammad lived and do what he did (from her point of view). Do you recognize what the effect of such assertions on pious moderate Muslim youth? If you keep on drumming such ideas into their heads, you are simply creating more terrorists.
I ask you, for God's sake, are you doing this on purpose, Loveforever? Is this a way for legitimizing the continuous conflict between west and Islam? so to give legitimate grounds for occupation of muslim countries, maybe? I mean, because it doesnt make sense on the religious or humanistic grounds at all ....so I have no choice but to pose a political theory!
Posted by Ayisha (Member # 4713) on :
Loveforever, when you were muslim is this how people got you to convert? Just because it made some sense to you at that time doesnt mean it makes sense. It must have been hard to have these questions thrown at you and you not know how to answer, must have helped convince you they were right, but there are answers and gratefully provided by homing here, If you are so happy with your chosen religion why do you have to keep trying to convince yourself you have chosen the right one?
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
Originally posted by homing pigeon: Loveforever, I been thru these tafseers several times. You have selected the one sentence from a whole page that conveys what you want to say and omitted to list all the other explanations that the commentators have listed. This is such a vicious circle. This is untrue I mentioned the beginning of Tafsir coz it's too long and I gave you the links to read.
You dont have to come and tell me there are people who say it is possible. I KNOW that. I am telling you there are even more people who say it is not possible. The question in the end of your post is posed by Ghazaly to say this cannot be possible because the quran is eternal... (Oh, for God's sake, Loveforever, you said you understand Arabic very well, come on!) The main point here that you can't say abrogation is a lie fake as you said before or hater's claim because part of scholars confirmed that it present in Quran,you should say no consensus on that which it's the truth I understand,but your denying in that way is dishonest.
Wouldn't that suit you? I say it should. It gives you what you want, doesn't it? Then why are you setting yourself up against it so much? Wouldnt it suit the whole world and propagate peace and udnerstanding? Then why do you work so hard at convincing muslims and non muslims that abrogation is true and turn around the effect?
Because it will contradict with Quran it's self Sura 4:82
[82] Do they not consider the Qur-an (with care)? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.
Abrogation=contradiction=discrepancy=read the verse again.
I ask you, for God's sake, are you doing this on purpose, Loveforever? No purpose at all just discussion and open some doors for who is concern.
Posted by El Don (Member # 13215) on :
**** off all and stop this and join us in Eldon Motel where you can do what you want Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I'll address this point:
quote: so what the benefit of the sacred texts isn't for reminding all generations about prophets,if you are right it means prophet Mohammed as the seal of prophets he should performed miracles greater than anybody came before including Jesus but as everybody knows Jesus was unique in everything birth,miracles,end so how your explaination can apply on prophet Muhammed's case.
Every prophet was equipped with the miracles that would impress his people the most; his people as in the population he is first to address in the beginning of his mission. So because Moses's people were very well versed in the art of magic, God supported Moses with Magic miracles. When Pharoah called in the mightiest magicians of his realm to face up to Moses (the equivalent of a logic debate today, I guess!) the magicians recognized that what they were doing is magic but what Moses was doing was for real, soemthing out fo their world so they (being the experts on this) bowed down to the miracle and backed off accepting Moses and his God. With Jesus, his people were well versed (for their age) in the arts of healing and medicine so Jesus was supported by the gift of healing the ill and bringing back people from death. Similarly, Mohammad was sent to people whose main strength was linguistics and was supported by a miracle that challenges their most supreme abilities. On top of that, every prophet was supported by a set of extra miracles; in the case of Mohammad, it was for example the israa and miraaj...when he told his people about it, they tried to examine him by asking him what the place looked like in Jerusalem when they all knew he had never been there but some of them had been and knew the answers. He did tell them. He was also supported by the miracle that allowed his tiny army in Badr to defeat the huge unbeliever army with the help of a thousand angels sent down to fight with them. That sort of miracle,again is suitable for th Arabian desert culture. It is equivalent to Moses spliting the sea and going thru it which is suitable for Pharoah's magician culture. Today, you feel that Jesus is unique becuae probably you are impressed the most by his miracles....maybe we are like this in this time and age BUT remember those miracles were not sent for US, they were sent as proof to the peopel who first received them in order to establish the creed. And one of the interpretations of the concept of abrogation is about abrogation of the AGE OF MIRACLES altogether.
(By the way, I got that link from Farida on the Arabic discussion board I told u it was useful)
while Alghazaly's book, the sunna between hadith and jurisprudence ,that I gave u a link to earlier would address your remarks upon the hadith contents by displaying the big picture of collection of hadiths and history of what Mohammad did and the approach to their verification which should place some perspective in the way you view the more dubious hadiths that are in Bukhari. This is stuff that I gave a summary about before...so if what you need is the detail, check out the books.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I object to describing my position on abrogation as dishonest. It's like demanding that I admit that Bin Laden's view of jihad may be correct and that there is no consensus there.Or that I acknowledge the shi'a views on this or that. It's pointless.
The majority of Muslim scholars do not believe in abrogation. Ibn Kathir mentions it because it is talked about out there . He mentions it for academic completeness. It doesnt mean that he endorses it. He is just presenting the facts. Now when the major religious figures in the Muslim world take the information from the mother books and work out that Abrogation is not true, this is the consnsus that I give you. I'm not under an obligation to consider views of errant groups as well. I, as a person belonging to moderate muslim system (al3aqeeda alwasateya), have been warned against them. There are many hadiths that bring this warning up. I'm surprised you havent come across them.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by El Don: **** off all and stop this and join us in Eldon Motel where you can do what you want
Your motel is in business because of the fanatic views being discussed here....people get frustrated enough to come to u...so go count ur blessings and let them be!! Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I would also like to point out a few things that come back to link with the topic of abrogation.
- The few very early companions (not scholars) who thought abrogation was possible took this belief with a proviso of faith in God, Abraham-style faith, that if indeed it is there, there must be a very good reason for it. Their belief in abrogation did not lead them in the natural line you're taking that if abrogtaion is true, then the quran cant be divine. - The reports of these people when recorded in Ibn Kathir will take on, to some extent, the same shade of reservation (not denial, mind you) that has been placed on the bukhari system of collection of hadiths. How's that? When did Ibn Kathir live and die? IBN Kathir was born in 701 hijri. when did Alqortoby live and die? I dont have his birth date handy but he died in 1273 AD(verifiable from wiki). They never met these companions (like Ibn Abbas for example, who was the prophet's cousin and lived at the same time as him. He features in Ibn Kathir a lot because he was known to have a very good grasp on the quran.) and therefore the recording of the companions' views is passed on with a series of "3an3ana"..this person heard it from that person and so on. So it has the same limitation of the bukhari system. However, the idea here is that the reservations in this case are less relevant because IBN Kathir and other comentators are interpreting the quran based on THEIR study of it, only guided by the views of the companions, which as u have seen offer a range of views everytime....so that Ibn Kathir and Tabarry and others ultimately have to make up their own minds based on their taking in all the available information. The whole information is presented, anyway, for your guidance, for academic purposes. There wer no sloppy academics in the medieval islamic era
I'd also like to point out that the culture in Arabia was oral. History, poetry..etc were preserved orally across the ages...and a man's integrity depended on his spoken word to the point of life or death.....so, u c, it wasnt totally barking mad for bukhari and others to go collecting the hadiths in the way they did....
So where lies the problem? The further away you go from Arabia, the culture changes, the oral preservation of heritage is no longer the norm. Things start to get dropped, altered or extra bits added, some of which is wild and untrue. This was the basis of the beginning of the collection of the quran .... and the basis of the untrue claim that Othman changed the contents of the book; the truth of this story is that in the sprawling and extending Islamic empire, one of the state governors somewhere in Persia sent an urgent message back to Othman telling him he was concerned about the way the quran is being recited in his province because people are beginning to make mistakes in it; no oral culture and Arabic is not the antive tongue. He reported that there were some written versions of the book that were written down in those provinces in circulation that definitely had mistakes in them. At the time, there was only one written copy of the full true quran kept in safe keeping by .... cant remember which of the companions (have to go back and ask my mother becuase she teaches this bit). Othman ordered that every copy of the quran available other than this copy to be burned and they set about making a single approved copy for every province to be sent out to them.
As to the compilation of the copy that was in safe keeping. How do we know it is free from errors. You need to know the way they went about to compile it and how many quality control levels they employed. This is a long story and before I write it down I'm gonna go double check it with my mum and her references to make sure everything I say is correct.
You also need to keep in mind the political strife that was rampant towards the end of Othman's days and how the situation progressed leading to the development of the shi'a later on. It is acknowledged among hadith scholars that this political situation might have contributed to the smuggling in of fake hadiths into the Bukhari and others. The reason being that the shi'a having a problem with Ayisha and some other companions wanted to discredit them and so on. After all, they were all ordinary people liable to what we are all liable to. Bukhari's system might have helped exclude many thousands of unsubstantiated reports and hadiths but even Bukhari can not swear that he managed to exclude every doubtful one. That os the reason why modern hadith scholars have introduced new rules for verification of the hadiths. These are listed in ALghazaly's book that I mentioned in my previous post. Applying these rules, would exclude almost every one of the hadiths that you are unhappy with,loveforever.
Posted by shahkerdah (Member # 11270) on :
I love Jesus, Moses, and Muhammad. I love all the Prophets of God. Thats why Islam is the religion of all Prophets begining with Adam and ending with Muhammad peace and blessings be upon them. ameen.
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
-I hope by your reply pigeon you can understand why First Council of Nicaea held by 1800 bishops on 325 AD to anounce the right faith from the other heretical ones and why they accepted the four canonical Gospels.it's the time for Muslims to do the same.
-I am totaly agree on your historical points,but my point that fathers of Islamic scholars mentioned many confused stuff on Islam in their Books that Sunna and Alazhar accpeted like Sahih Bukhari —Sahih Muslim —Sunan Abi Da'ud -Sunan Nisai — Al-Muwatta —Sunan al-Tirmizi — Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal and another bunch of books if I came now and quoted anything from any of these books you should accepted because Islamic council accredited them as genuine islamic heritage records but now Muslims discovered that they mentioned unbelievable events and deeds by prophet of Islam which conflict by the stereotype of righteous prophet infallible,who is the guilty me who is reading these books or Al-azhar that he is silent and accepting the contents of these books,if you are skeptic and other about these Tafsir and Sira books which you say they are untrue then the Islamic Council by the president Sheikh Qaradawi should be held and announce which books are authorised but leaving Muslims to flounder and non Muslims to use these stuff in their work against Islam.this silence is driving me crazy why the Islamic councils and Al-Azhar leaving all these books available without even warning which one is fake and you know that this silence consider acceptance.
Now due to this farce everyone starts to depend on his mind and accept what seems right to him and matching his rosy image ,do you agree?
Posted by Cosmogirl (Member # 8748) on :
Thank god someone else has the sense to look to the Nicean council for understanding. It was here that the various religions sat and BATTLED out what was to be in the Holy texts, who was who in the sotries and which of the Gods were to be revered. It was here that the concept of "trinity" divided Christianity and Islam, and it was here that the other Gods were "retired".
Religion pre-dates organized government, and each society had to find a way to order its members, and to control behavior. Knowing that faithful members will be praying 5 times a day seems a pretty sure bet to be able to control what and where they are no?
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Why is it so difficult to convey the concept that all the sunna books you mentioned are true and accredited within their limitations? I have no problems that the Azhar accepts them and I am not asking for them to be banned. I myself use them in the way that Alghazaly and other modern hadith scholars have suggested.
It's like looking at a research report about new medications. There could be some conflicting data there but that doesnt mean that the whole study should be rejected.
It is exactly for this reason that early hadith scholars like Bukhari and Muslim would not let anybody have their collections of hadith without having studied hadith science with them first. Apparently there is a problem with the availability of information in an uncontrolled way...people make conclusions when they are not quite ready or qualified to do so. Like self prescribing medication after self diagnosing from internet without haviing studied medicine. In some countries, you can just walk into a pharmacy and buy the medicine,too.
I dont agree that a Nicean Council is needed. I would certainly oppose with a vengeance that any group of people would sit and rewrite the quran for me so would every Muslim in existence .....but any QUALIFIED person is welcome to have a go at the sunna books and review the authenticty of their contents according to the additional conditions placed by jurisprudence scholars. The Bukhari is not at the level of the quran or anywhere near it. This, however, is not going to eliminate the early sahihs from existence....so how is that going to help? Already, the Azhar has pointed out which hadiths are considered "definitive" قطعية الدلالة and which are not i.e. ظنية الدلالة while the sahihs are still appreciated.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I have a question to you, Loveforever, why do you think that anything good or reasonable will be somebody's rosy view rather than the reality? Why dont you credit the possibility that it is the reality?
Posted by krishna (Member # 12633) on :
my religion is best...NO! my religion is best...Neither is right, my religion is best...wanna fight about it!!! the fact of the matter is....god exists in each one of us, and he/she [(whatever you prefer)actually beyond the plurlatives] and all this entity wants us to do is to connect. it's not that my teacher is better than your teacher. everybody has different propensites toward god. some are attracted by love, servitude, knowledge, good works, or even friendship (something that APPEARS to be lacking here). Buddha appeared for a certain group of people, as did yeshua, as did krsna. it doesn't matter who you follow, because the goal is the same...just different paths...now you kids try to behave youselves...OK?
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by krishna: the fact of the matter is....god exists in each one of us, and he/she [(whatever you prefer)actually beyond the plurlatives] and all this entity wants us to do is to connect.
The whole post is good but i like this part the most
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
The concept of abrogation was invented to explain why Muhammad contradicted himself over the years. Consider the verses about wine. In one place the Qur'an says that wine has “some profit” (2:219) for mankind, but elsewhere declares it an “abomination, of Satan’s handwork” (5:90). Muslim scholars generally agree that the wine verses are a relatively clear instance of abrogation. Without abrogation, a pious Muslim would have to declare that "Satan's handiwork" offers "some profit" for mankind.
To quote Robert Spencer:
The Quran is basically a cut-and-paste job, with statements taken out of their original context. Verses are only partially ordered in terms of sequence and categorical subject matter. Chapters are mixed up in terms of temporal order of revelation. We need the Hadiths and Sira to sort out the chronological order of revelation. This is important for establishing a coherent storyline.
The chronology is also needed in deciding issues of abrogation. The doctrine of abrogation is approved in the Quran, whereby later revealed verses cancel out earlier ones where there is a contradiction between them. One needs to know the order. (Those of the Quran-Only Muslims who reject abrogation must nevertheless try to resolve some obvious contradictions, e.g., 2:256 is contradicted by 9:5 and 9:73-74, and others).
The other problem is categorization. The Quran is not organized into different categories of subject matter. But if we don’t know the exact meaning and usage of certain words and phrases (as would be detrmined by reading the hadiths and sira), how do we know the categorical subject matter of the verse? For example, does a particular instance of “those in whose hearts is a disease” refer to adulterers or hypocrites?
1. Removing the context provided by Hadith and Sira ends up making some verses even more objectionable. Without the Hadith and Sira, how does one explain these verses:
33:60 (Hilali-Khan) "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease (evil desire for adultery, etc.), and those who spread false news among the people in Al-Madinah, cease not, We shall certainly let you overpower them, then they will not be able to stay in it as your neighbours but a little while. 33:61. Accursed, wherever found, they shall be seized and killed with a (terrible) slaughter. 33:62. That was the Way of Allah in the case of those who passed away of old, and you will not find any change in the Way of Allah."
The verses call for killing of hypocrites. And what is “spreading false news,” and why does it receive the death penalty? Who are "those in whose hearts is a disease"? (Note that the parenthetical insertion pertaining to "adultery" in the above quote of 33:60 from Hilali-Khan is based on tafsir and Hadith). Some answers to these questions can be found in the contextual information provided in the Hadith and Sira. The tafsirs generally rely on those sources. Removing the Hadith and Sira, in the Quran-only approach, removes many of the apologetic options that defenders of Islam may use for in explaining away these verses (e.g., that the hypocrites in question had allegedly attempted sabotage or had committed treason). Consequently, the Quran-Only Muslim is left with trying to explain why the killing of mere hypocrites, or those who spread false news, is a religious duty. The defender of the Quran-only approach, in this case, can only imagine that "Allah" must have had a "just cause" to order Muhammad to order Muslims to kill the hypocrites. But what is a "just cause"? The Quran is too ambiguous, and contains too many injunctions to kill disbelievers without clear or sufficient justifications provided in the text (e.g., 9:5, 9:29, 9:12-14, 9:123, 8:39, 8:35), for us to have any confidence in a notion of "just cause" that is derived only from the Quran itself (i.e., without importing context from Hadith and Sira, and without importing modern legal principles and moral values).
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: Christians worship God, the Father!
It is important that God as "Father" must not be viewed within a biological context. God as "Father" refers rather to a relationship; a description of the covenant and fellowship relationship between God and man.
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
This commentary was made by a premier Pakistani scholar.
On verses 2:106, 107
At first, Muslims used to pray with their faces turned towards the Baytul-Maqdis at Jerusalem; later on, Allah commanded them to turn towards the Ka’bah. Similarly, certain other injunctions were abrogated altogether, or replaced by others. …
"The people belonging to all the Shari’ahs are unanimous in accepting the validity of abrogation and its actual occurrence both. …
Imam al-Qurtubi says:
"It is essential to understand the question of abrogation, and great benefits flow from such an understanding, which no scholar can dispense with, and no one can deny abrogation except the ignorant and the dull-headed."
In this connection, al-Qurtubi has related a very illuminating incident. The fourth Khalifah Sayyidna ‘Ali saw a man preaching in the mosque. He asked the people what the man was doing. On being told that he was preaching, the blessed Khalifah said: "He is not doing anything of the sort, but only announcing to the people that he is such and such a man and the son of such and such, and asking them to recognize and remember him." Calling the man to his side, he asked: "Do you know the injunctions which have been abrogated and those which have abrogated the earlier ones?" When he confessed that he did not, the Khalifah turned him out of the mosque, and ordered him to never preach there.
In "The Qur’an and its Exegesis" Helmut Gätje quotes Zamakhshari and Baidawi on 2:106:
Zamakhshari and on 2:106:
(As the occasion of the revelation of this verse) the following is related: The unbelievers had challenged the canceling of verses and said: "Look at Muhammad, how he commands his companions to do something, and then forbids it to them and commands the opposite. He says something today and retracts it tomorrow." Thereupon this verse came down.
The sahih (authentic) Hadith contain numerous examples of Companions saying that various verses have been abrogated. Are the Companions reliable? And if they’re reliable, shouldn’t their narrations be accepted or at least given the benefit of the doubt unless other Islamic source material proves otherwise?
Ibn Sa’d states plainly that Gabriel recited the Quran twice to Muhammad in the year that he died and thereafter Muhammad met with Ibn Masud to review what had been abrogated. Neither Muhammad or Ibn Masud were familiar enough with the other Scriptures to evaluate them. Is Ibn Sa’d’s statement unreliable?
If one reads the Sira, one finds the historical facts and cannot escape abrogation.
How did all these different Companions derive the same incorrect understanding of abrogation, i.e. that one Quranic verse cancels another? Who taught them this false doctrine, or did they individually and independently come up with it? Why didn’t Muhammad or another Companion correct them?
Were all of them so far removed from Muhammad and was their understanding the Quran so inaccurate, that they could all invent, accept, and teach the same error?
Isn’t it possible that the Companions could have learned the doctrine of abrogation from Muhammad? After all, what does Aisha gain by saying that ten sucklings were abrogated by five? Why would Muhammad have to meet with Ibn Masud to discuss what was abrogated if nothing was abrogated?
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I've responded to all that before. It's a waste of time to do it again. If you read those responses you wouldnt be here bringing this up again but obviously all you can do is insist on what you want to see. Thankfully, there are other people who have a head over their shoulders and can put 2 and 2 together. You're nto bringing in any new arguments, just reiterting old ones.
Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Undercover:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: Christians worship God, the Father!
It is important that God as "Father" must not be viewed within a biological context. God as "Father" refers rather to a relationship; a description of the covenant and fellowship relationship between God and man.
it is a symbol
Posted by loveforever (Member # 11738) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: I have a question to you, Loveforever, why do you think that anything good or reasonable will be somebody's rosy view rather than the reality? Why dont you credit the possibility that it is the reality?
The possibility gives probability for the idea to be correct or wrong because our religion beliefs not based on evidences we have seen but on sacred texts we inherited along with historic support if available, we are only believing what we believe based on our communities high educated scholars that confirming our beliefs are right, at school,Mosques,Churches…all of us have blind faith to our religion although for most things we need a physical evidences and logically proofs to believe in something to the degree of follow it as fact.
We believed that Moses splited the sea and Jesus rised deads which it’s conflict with our logic and natural laws but we believed because others believed the same and trying to convince us that all these miracles and events happened in past were true, everything based on thinking and thoughts can't be absolutely right but what is related to sacred things like books or prophets we always thinking as we have raised that it should be infallible, for example if someone said Jesus killed and raped this will conflict with our stereotype on Jesus sinless concept though nobody living actually saw him this also apply on prophet Muhammad(with big difference),then at the end everyone will try to accept the good things and refuse the negative ones about inherited sacred things otherwise it means accepting the shock of being on the astray path infront the media propaganda that we are right and others are wrong ,the issue is very important for our eternal life, where we are going? Sometimes I envy the atheisms and deisms for their laying back of these arguments.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT:
quote:Originally posted by Undercover:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: Christians worship God, the Father!
It is important that God as "Father" must not be viewed within a biological context. God as "Father" refers rather to a relationship; a description of the covenant and fellowship relationship between God and man.
it is a symbol
Often when debates come up with Christians on the divinity of Christ, the passage from chapter ten in the book of John comes up; this passage is verse 30, which basically reads:
30 I and my Father are one
Now I don’t understand why many Christians would quote this verse, specifically Trinitarians, because what does this verse prove? Trinitarians do not believe Jesus is the Father, so why do they quote it? Are they quoting it to try and show that Jesus is equal to the Father? Well that isn’t true, since the Gospel of John shows the opposite, in fact if we quote one verse back we read:
29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
This is verse 29, it comes right before verse 30, and in verse 29 Jesus says the Father is greater than ALL, this obviously includes Jesus since he is not the Father. So therefore how to Christians try and assume that this verse shows equality between Jesus and the Father is beyond me, just a verse before it Jesus says the Father is greater than everyone!
In fact this is not the first time that Jesus says the Father is greater than him, he does it again later:
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I (John 14:28)
So here we once again have Jesus claiming the Father is greater than him, so how is Jesus equal to the Father when Jesus says the contrary? Now Christians have come up with a way of trying to explain this verse off, they say that Jesus was talking as a man here, that as a man the Father is greater than him, they try and say that the Father meant he is greater than Jesus in rank and authority and not in essence.
However so what did Jesus mean in John 10 when Jesus said the Father is greater than ALL? Jesus placed himself in the category of ALL people, so therefore the Christian response will not work for John 10:29. It must be said though that the Christian response does not work for John chapter 14:28 neither, because the Christian argues from silence and is arguing something they have yet to prove. Christians cannot prove that Jesus has 2 natures, they can never get a single quote from the lips of Jesus saying I am man and Divine, that I have 2 natures and I gave one up and took on the man nature, this is non-existent, so therefore the response is from silence provided with no proof or a solid basis.
1-The fact is the Bible shows that the Father is greater than Jesus in essence, the Father is all-knowing and Jesus is not.
2-The Father gives Jesus everything from miracle to doctrine.
3-Jesus begs the Father to save him, obviously showing that life and death is controlled by the Father and NOT Jesus.
For all these arguments the Christian will say as man Jesus is not all-knowing, as man Jesus receives things from the Father, however so I will kindly ask the Christian bring this proof from the words of Jesus, they shall never be able to do it, this doctrine is an invention and not something to be found from Jesus.
So therefore in conclusion, John 10:30 proves nothing in support of the divinity of Jesus, it does not show equality, since Jesus made it clear that the Father is greater than him, so therefore Jesus is not equal with the Father.
quote:Originally posted by loveforever: The possibility gives probability for the idea to be correct or wrong because our religion beliefs not based on evidences we have seen but on sacred texts we inherited along with historic support if available, we are only believing what we believe based on our communities high educated scholars that confirming our beliefs are right, at school,Mosques,Churches…all of us have blind faith to our religion although for most things we need a physical evidences and logically proofs to believe in something to the degree of follow it as fact.
We believed that Moses splited the sea and Jesus rised deads which it’s conflict with our logic and natural laws but we believed because others believed the same and trying to convince us that all these miracles and events happened in past were true, everything based on thinking and thoughts can't be absolutely right but what is related to sacred things like books or prophets we always thinking as we have raised that it should be infallible, for example if someone said Jesus killed and raped this will conflict with our stereotype on Jesus sinless concept though nobody living actually saw him this also apply on prophet Muhammad(with big difference),then at the end everyone will try to accept the good things and refuse the negative ones about inherited sacred things otherwise it means accepting the shock of being on the astray path infront the media propaganda that we are right and others are wrong ,the issue is very important for our eternal life, where we are going? Sometimes I envy the atheisms and deisms for their laying back of these arguments.
Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on ur perspective) this is what faith is about. FAITH does not happen in the mind.
But now u're confusing me. You're beginning to talk from a non religious perspective whereas only recently you were talking from a christian perspective. Which is it? Because if I am addressing a christian, I dont have to address the idea of faith since you would presumably already have it. A christian believes that Jesus was born of a virgin mother wihtout any proofs and that Jesus brought back people from the dead and so on. So if we're talking to another person who possesses this elusive entity "faith", the approach is always going to be different.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
One thing is for sure, the psycho never went away, as sick games are her life. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
If I were christian or muslim, I would happily and proudly state my beliefs. I'm firmly agnostic but that is something you don't even begin to understand, isn't it? You just have to label everyone with a religion, don't you? Start respecting the rights of others and you might earn a little respect back.
![[Mad]](mad.gif)