• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Quotes Series: From Quran- Authored by G-d not by Muhammad

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Quotes Series: From Quran- Authored by G-d not by Muhammad

"Usually a direct word will be prefaced by the word "say." "

Quran is authored by G-d as per the criterion suggested by our Christian friend @Muffled in post #97 in this thread . G-d tells Muhammad with the word "say" and or "قُلۡ" in Arabic original language and I have quoted many such verses in my previous posts .
Yet there are other styles (many of them) that depict that the Converse is direct from G-d with Muhammad. Since I daily read some portion of Quran(1/120) very early in the morning, so I will be quoting as I observe them while I read Quran. The words "اَلَمۡ تَرَ" or "Dost thou" is another style of direct address to Muhammad by G-d. And "یٰۤاَیُّہَا النَّبِیُّ" or "O thou Prophet" is yet another one:

[32:29]وَ یَقُوۡلُوۡنَ مَتٰی ہٰذَا الۡفَتۡحُ اِنۡ کُنۡتُمۡ صٰدِقِیۡنَ ﴿۲۹﴾
And they say, ‘When will this victory come, if you are truthful?’
[32:30]قُلۡ یَوۡمَ الۡفَتۡحِ لَا یَنۡفَعُ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡۤا اِیۡمَانُہُمۡ وَ لَا ہُمۡ یُنۡظَرُوۡنَ ﴿۳۰﴾
Say, ‘On the day of victory the believing of the disbelievers will not avail them, nor will they be granted respite.’
[32:31]فَاَعۡرِضۡ عَنۡہُمۡ وَ انۡتَظِرۡ اِنَّہُمۡ مُّنۡتَظِرُوۡنَ ﴿٪۳۱﴾
So turn away from them, and wait. They are also waiting.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 32: As-Sajdah

Right, please?
  1. Is there any such verse in the Torah of the Judaism where G-d has directly addressed Moses, please?If yes, please quote it here. Right, please?
  2. Is there any such verse in the Bible of the Christianity where G-d (not Jesus, as Jesus was never god or son of god) has directly addressed Jesus, please?If yes, please quote it here. Right, please?
  3. Is there any such verse in Kitab-i-Iqan by Bahaullah (where G-d has directly spoken to Bahaullah, Bahaullah was never a god), there cannot be any verse as G-d did not speak to Bahaullah directly? If there is any, please quote it here. Right, please?
Regards
____________
  • I observe that Quran right from its start to its end is a direct Converse and in a sense a continuous dialogue between G-d and Muhammad providing live guidance, and through Muhammad to his companions, to the other people of his time and the world at large and for all times to come to all humanity. Right, please?
  • "یٰۤاَیُّہَا الرَّسُوۡلُ " translated in English with the words "O Messenger" is another style, please refer my post #243 .
  • "وَ لَوۡ تَرٰۤی "/ "If only thou couldst see" as mentioned in post #255.
  • Another mode of direct Converse is direct commandment as in the verse [[32:31] "فَاَعۡرِضۡ" , "وَ انۡتَظِرۡ" So turn away from them, and wait.
 
Last edited:

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
Sorry, I don't agree with one, Sir.
Has one studied Quran from cover to cover and while reading Quran naturally observed this "flat earth" concept ?

Please quote from the Quran translation which was under one's study that mentions the natural word "flat" in it. Right, please?

Regards

"Spread out",now one should consider the shape of the earth,then one should consider how one goes about spreading it out.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
"Spread out",now one should consider the shape of the earth,then one should consider how one goes about spreading it out.
Does one agrees that one was not reading/studying Quran but was just repeating the rhetoric of the Atheism websites about Quran? Right, please?
One should be research minded to find the truth, please.
If yes, I can help one.Right, please?
One is a friend.

Regards
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Does one agrees that one was not reading/studying Quran but was just repeating the rhetoric of the Atheism websites about Quran? Right, please?
One should be research minded to find the truth, please.
If yes, I can help one.Right, please?
One is a friend.

Regards
I think that you are failing to see @England my lionheart 's point.

Which, as I understand it, is that it is weird and probably unwise to attempt to always see the Qur'an under the most favorable light conceivable at each and every moment.

It is certainly self-defeating to present it as eternal divine truth, presumably with indications of things that science "had not learned yet" and at the same time expect the reader to excuse its language as highly allegorical and therefore undeserving of critical analysis.

That, dear @paarsurrey , is in truth asking for the reader to be dishonest in order to protect the reputation of the Qur'an.

No infidel should do that. And sincerely, I would think that Muslims should feel even less inclined to do such a thing, although I acknowledge that this too would be self-defeating in its own, very different ways.
 

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
I think that you are failing to see @England my lionheart 's point.

Which, as I understand it, is that it is weird and probably unwise to attempt to always see the Qur'an under the most favorable light conceivable at each and every moment.

It is certainly self-defeating to present it as eternal divine truth, presumably with indications of things that science "had not learned yet" and at the same time expect the reader to excuse its language as highly allegorical and therefore undeserving of critical analysis.

That, dear @paarsurrey , is in truth asking for the reader to be dishonest in order to protect the reputation of the Qur'an.

No infidel should do that. And sincerely, I would think that Muslims should feel even less inclined to do such a thing, although I acknowledge that this too would be self-defeating in its own, very different ways.

I'm glad at least one person gets my point :)
 

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
Does one agrees that one was not reading/studying Quran but was just repeating the rhetoric of the Atheism websites about Quran? Right, please?
One should be research minded to find the truth, please.
If yes, I can help one.Right, please?
One is a friend.

Regards

There are many translations out there,there's no need to visit atheist websites,the quran is a book of faith and not a science book,if we were to scrutinise the quran on those grounds it would not stand up to it at all.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
I think that you are failing to see @England my lionheart 's point.

Which, as I understand it, is that it is weird and probably unwise to attempt to always see the Qur'an under the most favorable light conceivable at each and every moment.

It is certainly self-defeating to present it as eternal divine truth, presumably with indications of things that science "had not learned yet" and at the same time expect the reader to excuse its language as highly allegorical and therefore undeserving of critical analysis.

That, dear @paarsurrey , is in truth asking for the reader to be dishonest in order to protect the reputation of the Qur'an.

No infidel should do that. And sincerely, I would think that Muslims should feel even less inclined to do such a thing, although I acknowledge that this too would be self-defeating in its own, very different ways.
"that science "had not learned yet" "

I never said that, please. Did I ,please?
I say and repeat it that Science deals in matters/human problems which are materials and physical. Quran is to guide in the ethical, moral and spiritual domains of human life.
I don't agree with the contents of one's post, please.

Regards
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
"that science "had not learned yet" "

I never said that, please. Did I ,please?
I say and repeat it that Science deals in matters/human problems which are materials and physical. Quran is to guide in the ethical, moral and spiritual domains of human life.
I don't agree with the contents of one's post, please.

Regards
Sorry, I may have misunderstood you.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Does one agrees that one was not reading/studying Quran but was just repeating the rhetoric of the Atheism websites about Quran? Right, please?
One should be research minded to find the truth, please.
If yes, I can help one.Right, please?
One is a friend.

I think that you are failing to see @England my lionheart 's point.

Which, as I understand it, is that it is weird and probably unwise to attempt to always see the Qur'an under the most favorable light conceivable at each and every moment.

It is certainly self-defeating to present it as eternal divine truth, presumably with indications of things that science "had not learned yet" and at the same time expect the reader to excuse its language as highly allegorical and therefore undeserving of critical analysis.

That, dear @paarsurrey , is in truth asking for the reader to be dishonest in order to protect the reputation of the Qur'an.

No infidel should do that. And sincerely, I would think that Muslims should feel even less inclined to do such a thing, although I acknowledge that this too would be self-defeating in its own, very different ways.

I'm glad at least one person gets my point
"that science "had not learned yet" "

I never said that, please. Did I ,please?
I say and repeat it that Science deals in matters/human problems which are materials and physical. Quran is to guide in the ethical, moral and spiritual domains of human life.
I don't agree with the contents of one's post, please.

There are many translations out there,there's no need to visit atheist websites,the quran is a book of faith and not a science book,if we were to scrutinise the quran on those grounds it would not stand up to it at all.

Sorry, I may have misunderstood you.

Friend @England my lionheart !

Our friend @LuisDantas has since corrected understanding of my posts and my viewpoint.

I don't agree with one's (@England my lionheart 's) approach to understand the truthful Religion under the paradigm of Science, as both are related to different realms. Right, please?

Regards
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Wrong.
You have read Dhammapada and think Gautama was a messenger from God ?
That is contrary to what he taught.
You may choose to reinterpret buddhism, but there is no basis for your claim.

As for the Bhagavad Gita, which I have read in its entirety many times over fifty years, it teaches that there is no qualitative difference between the individual and God.

Do you agree with that ?

By making it clear that there is no qualitative difference between the individual and God, the Gita is effectively atheistic in the final analysis, which is why Krishna says to “renounce religious ritual and the flowery language of the Vedas, and come directly to Me”.

You could say that buddhism is the realistic , and Bhagavad Gita the idealistic, expressions of self realisation.

Both Buddhism and the Bhagavad Gita teach that self realisation requires no intermediaries, and that what is realised is one’s own nature.

No, I have not read the entire Quran, though I did study with the Mevlevi Sufi order, and excerpts of the Quran were included in our study. Obviously, the main focus of the Mevlevi is the writing of Rumi, also Attar and Hafiz.

“I wish I could show you when you are lonely or in darkness the astonishing light of your own being.”
- Hafiz
I don't agree with one's conclusions.
I believe Buddha and Krishna as Messengers/Prophets of G-d not because of Dhammapada or because of Bhagavad Gita or because of Buddhism and of Hinduism, and I know Buddhism people and Hinduism people may or may not like my believing Buddha and Krishna as Messengers/Prophets of G-d. Right, please?
I have had discussions with the Buddhism people and with Hinduism people in separate threads in RF. I would like that one should discuss things from your own religion's/no-religion's perspective, please.Right, please?

Regards
 
Last edited:

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
Friend @England my lionheart !

Our friend @LuisDantas has since corrected understanding of my posts and my viewpoint.

I don't agree with one's (@England my lionheart 's) approach to understand the truthful Religion under the paradigm of Science, as both are related to different realms. Right, please?

Regards

I agree,understanding a religion cannot be judged on science which I stated before because it fails to stand up to scrutiny,this though makes one wonder how truthful the religion is imo.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Quotes Series: From Quran- Authored by G-d not by Muhammad

"Usually a direct word will be prefaced by the word "say." "

Quran is authored by G-d as per the criterion suggested by our Christian friend @Muffled in post #97 in this thread . G-d tells Muhammad with the word "say" and or "قُلۡ" in Arabic original language and I have quoted many such verses in my previous posts .
Yet there are other styles (many of them) that depict that the Converse is direct from G-d with Muhammad. Since I daily read some portion of Quran(1/120) very early in the morning, so I will be quoting as I observe them while I read Quran. The words "اَلَمۡ تَرَ" or "Dost thou" is another style of direct address to Muhammad by G-d. And "یٰۤاَیُّہَا النَّبِیُّ" or "O thou Prophet" is yet another one:

[33:17]قُلۡ لَّنۡ یَّنۡفَعَکُمُ الۡفِرَارُ اِنۡ فَرَرۡتُمۡ مِّنَ الۡمَوۡتِ اَوِ الۡقَتۡلِ وَ اِذًا لَّا تُمَتَّعُوۡنَ اِلَّا قَلِیۡلًا ﴿۱۷﴾
Say, ‘Flight shall not avail you if you flee from death or slaughter; and even then you will enjoy but a little.’
[33:18]قُلۡ مَنۡ ذَا الَّذِیۡ یَعۡصِمُکُمۡ مِّنَ اللّٰہِ اِنۡ اَرَادَ بِکُمۡ سُوۡٓءًا اَوۡ اَرَادَ بِکُمۡ رَحۡمَۃً ؕ وَ لَا یَجِدُوۡنَ لَہُمۡ مِّنۡ دُوۡنِ اللّٰہِ وَلِیًّا وَّ لَا نَصِیۡرًا ﴿۱۸﴾
Say, ‘Who is it that can save you against Allah if it be His wish to do you harm or if it be His wish to show you mercy?’ And they will not find for themselves any friend or helper other than Allah.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 32: As-Sajdah

Right, please?
For the context of the above verses , please, access the above link.
  1. Is there any such verse in the Torah of the Judaism where G-d has directly addressed Moses, please?If yes, please quote it here. Right, please?
  2. Is there any such verse in the Bible of the Christianity where G-d (not Jesus, as Jesus was never god or son of god) has directly addressed Jesus, please?If yes, please quote it here. Right, please?
  3. Is there any such verse in Kitab-i-Iqan by Bahaullah (where G-d has directly spoken to Bahaullah, Bahaullah was never a god), there cannot be any verse as G-d did not speak to Bahaullah directly? If there is any, please quote it here. Right, please?
  4. Kitab-i-Iqan was written by Bahaullah in 1862 (not revealed by G-d ) and the Covenant was taken by Bahaullah (without any direct Converse/Commandment of G-d, as I understand) in 1863. Therefore, if there had been any direct Converse from G-d Bahaullah would have mentioned it in Kitab-i-Iqan. In the Pre-Covenant period, Kitab-i-Iqan is the only core book of Bahaullah. Right,please?
Regards
____________
  • I observe that Quran right from its start to its end is a direct Converse and in a sense a continuous dialogue between G-d and Muhammad providing live guidance, and through Muhammad to his companions, to the other people of his time and the world at large and for all times to come to all humanity. Right, please?
  • "یٰۤاَیُّہَا الرَّسُوۡلُ " translated in English with the words "O Messenger" is another style, please refer my post #243 .
  • "وَ لَوۡ تَرٰۤی "/ "If only thou couldst see" as mentioned in post #255.
  • Another mode of direct Converse is direct commandment as in the verse [32:31] "فَاَعۡرِضۡ" , "وَ انۡتَظِرۡ" So turn away from them, and wait #261.
    .
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
I agree,understanding a religion cannot be judged on science which I stated before because it fails to stand up to scrutiny,this though makes one wonder how truthful the religion is imo.
One has stated one's Religion: "Atheist".
Can Atheism be judged on science, please?
If not, why not,please?

Regards
 

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
One has stated one's Religion: "Atheist".
Can Atheism be judged on science, please?
If not, why not,please?

Regards

Atheism isn't a religion,it doesn't have a prophet or a book,can atheism be judged on science?,well like I said it's not a religion,it doesn't have a blanket belief,there's no church or mosque,it's only real connection is disbelief without empirical proof imo.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Atheism isn't a religion,it doesn't have a prophet or a book,can atheism be judged on science?,well like I said it's not a religion,it doesn't have a blanket belief,there's no church or mosque,it's only real connection is disbelief without empirical proof imo.
I just quoted what one has written on one's profile and what is being exhibited on one's every post in RF.
Whatever Atheism is whether a Religion or No-Religion or a Worldview or a No-World-View or a Position/No-Position etc ;just tell us when one selected to write "Atheist" did one check if it can be judged on Science and approved by Science or not, please? Or Science just failed in this connection?
Right, please?
Any Atheist/Agnostic/Skeptic, please

Regards
 
Last edited:

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
I just quoted what one has written on one's profile and what is being exhibited on one's every post in RF.
Whatever Atheism is whether a Religion or No-Religion or a Worldview or a No-World-View or a Position/No-Position etc ;just tell us when one selected to write "Atheist" did one check if it can be judged on Science and approved by Science or not, please? Or Science just failed in this connection?
Right, please?
Any Atheist/Agnostic/Skeptic, please

Regards

Wrong please,you don't seem to be grasping what I've said,atheism is "disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods",that's it,you could I guess test each one on science,it would take a while though,not all atheist s are the same though because it's not like being a Muslim Christian or any religion.
 

danieldemol

Veteran Member
Premium Member
...
I don't agree with one's (@England my lionheart 's) approach to understand the truthful Religion under the paradigm of Science, as both are related to different realms. Right, please?

Regards
Not necessarily, wherever any of the Quran, Muhammad, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, or any of his successors makes a claim regarding the material world, these claims can be tested and in some cases have been disproven by science.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Not necessarily, wherever any of the Quran, Muhammad, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, or any of his successors makes a claim regarding the material world, these claims can be tested and in some cases have been disproven by science.
For instance, please?
Please give quotations from Quran in the original Arabic text for a meaningful discussion, please. The translations are never an alternative of the original, please. Right, please?

Regards
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
@paarsurrey , what do you mean by judging atheism with science?

Atheism is just atheism. What can be judged about it other perhaps than whether someone is lying about disbelieving?
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Remember, you put this question in the science forum. There is only one "science". For example, there is no Islamic science that's different than Christian science. Science is independent of religion. So the verses you quoted might be true for most Muslims, but they are not true for non-Muslims.
"science"

Friend @icehorse , the thread is now in the General Religious Debates Forum, therefore , one may like to revisit one's posts, please. Right, please?
Also one may like to reply post #69 by friend @Tony Bristow-Stagg , please remember.Right, please?

Regards
 
Top