• 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!

Allah Is Same As Elohim

Apple Pie

Active Member
DreGod07 said:
I wouldn't give you "MY" translation of the text because I wouldn't want you to take my word for it as if it was a correct translation...As you have done.


That is why you must show your verifiable references…





There have been plenty translating the Quran....might I add that their translations aren't very different. This is why I don't rely on one scholar. I actually reasearch multiple scholars to view their translations and accreditations. The ones that I have used are well known accredited scholars.


Then you should be able to show how they came to their renderings.

Do they show their work…?



Wikislam along with you are not a very good reliable souce for islam.. it's history or being tasked with translating that scripture.

Please give us a specific example…




Yours is the ONLY translation that I have encountered that is so far from what true accredited scholars have put forth. You have come here giving us "Your" unverifiable translation of the quran and trying to use biased scholars to prove a point.


Again…

What part is bothering you…?

Or…is it more fun to just generalize….like the others…




You asked where is my translation of the text.... Where is your "VERIFIABLE" trasnslation of the text??????

It is contained in the lexical references that I quote.

Which example is causing you distress…?
 

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
Apple Pie said:
That is why you must show your verifiable references…








Then you should be able to show how they came to their renderings.

Do they show their work…?





Please give us a specific example…






Again…

What part is bothering you…?

Or…is it more fun to just generalize….like the others…






It is contained in the lexical references that I quote.

Which example is causing you distress…?

Again I will continue to look to the known scholars and translators of the quran be they dead or alive. Just maybe the living scholars have found some errors in the translations of the long gone scholars and corrected them.

The scholars i'm using are well known. they didn't just get their degrees out of a cracker jack box or a box of cereal. I have seen NO certification on your part to demonstrate that you are qualified to translate the scriptures.

To answer you I'm not bothered or distressed. I were then I would comment.

As I asked you to verify your translation and you say "It is contained in the lexical references that I quote"

That won't fly because every other accredited scholar disagrees with your translation. Even the people here whos native language is arabic disagrees with you. I believe in your translation "you are generalizing".

But thank you for the debate though....it was fun..(in a way).....:beach:

</IMG>
 

Apple Pie

Active Member
DreGod07 said:
The scholars i'm using are well known. they didn't just get their degrees out of a cracker jack box or a box of cereal. I have seen NO certification on your part to demonstrate that you are qualified to translate the scriptures.


Since you cannot bring forth not a single solitary exegetical stance to buttress your position, it is clear that you don't have one.

Further, if you can discredit E.W. Lane, then we would be most interested in observing this...as his monumental Lexicography has been the scholarly reference standard for the past 150+ years...perhaps you have attempted to google some dirt on him, and you already know the predicament that Islam is in...:)
 

Popeyesays

Well-Known Member
E. W. Lane? That's kind of old and moldy, but there are better even older lexicons:

al-Khalil ibn Ahmad: the first to compile a general Arabic dictionary, Kitab al'Ain. 8th century. This was the first Arabic lexicon. And it's more than a thousand years older than Lane's

Abu Bakr al-Zubaidi: His was an abridgement and re-arrangement of of Kitab al'Ain. In the tenth century.

al-Khuwarizmi: He was a persian and developed a lexicon for scientific, and technical Arabic before Englih had a proper dictionary. 10th century.

Ibn Faris: He compiled al-Mujmal fi l-lughah this was a 'pocket dictionary so-to speak of common words and phrases - also tenth century.

Ali ibn Sidah: He compiled al-Muhkam wa l-Muhit, this used the phonemic arrangement of Kitab al'Ain. He also compiled al-Mukhassas which was arranged according to topic. 11th century

Mubarak ibn al-Athir compiled al-Nihayah fi Gharib al-Hadith, a dictionary of Prophetic tradition.
Ahmad al-Jawaliqi compiled a dictionary of foreign words, Kitab al-Mu'arrab min al-Kalam. 12th century

Ibn Manzur compiled Lisan al-'Arab this has long been considered the pre-eminent dictionary of classical Arabic it held 80,000 entries. 13th century

Further lexicons and dictionaries were published but they were pretty much derived from the previous works.

In 1960 CE The Arabic Language Academy in Cairo produced al-Mu'jam al-Wasit this follows the traditional arrangement but works very well to handle discrepancies in earlier works in 1960

It's a small world, because one of my professors, Jon Manchip White, wrote the introduction to the 1973 Dover edition of An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians Which, by the way is a much better book on the Arab world than his lexicon.

Scott
 

Apple Pie

Active Member
Popeyesays said:
E. W. Lane? That's kind of old and moldy, but there are better even older lexicons:

al-Khalil ibn Ahmad: the first to compile a general Arabic dictionary, Kitab al'Ain. 8th century. This was the first Arabic lexicon. And it's more than a thousand years older than Lane's

Abu Bakr al-Zubaidi: His was an abridgement and re-arrangement of of Kitab al'Ain. In the tenth century.

al-Khuwarizmi: He was a persian and developed a lexicon for scientific, and technical Arabic before Englih had a proper dictionary. 10th century.

Ibn Faris: He compiled al-Mujmal fi l-lughah this was a 'pocket dictionary so-to speak of common words and phrases - also tenth century.

Ali ibn Sidah: He compiled al-Muhkam wa l-Muhit, this used the phonemic arrangement of Kitab al'Ain. He also compiled al-Mukhassas which was arranged according to topic. 11th century

Mubarak ibn al-Athir compiled al-Nihayah fi Gharib al-Hadith, a dictionary of Prophetic tradition.
Ahmad al-Jawaliqi compiled a dictionary of foreign words, Kitab al-Mu'arrab min al-Kalam. 12th century

Ibn Manzur compiled Lisan al-'Arab this has long been considered the pre-eminent dictionary of classical Arabic it held 80,000 entries. 13th century

Further lexicons and dictionaries were published but they were pretty much derived from the previous works.

In 1960 CE The Arabic Language Academy in Cairo produced al-Mu'jam al-Wasit this follows the traditional arrangement but works very well to handle discrepancies in earlier works in 1960

It's a small world, because one of my professors, Jon Manchip White, wrote the introduction to the 1973 Dover edition of An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians Which, by the way is a much better book on the Arab world than his lexicon.

Scott

Hi Scott,

Looks like google let you down...once again...

If you were familar with Lanes Lexicon (which you obviously are not, surprise!)...then you would be cognizant that Lane integrates 100+ of the world's leading Lexical works into his 8 volume lexicon...including your list...

You can do better than this...
 

Popeyesays

Well-Known Member
Apple Pie said:
Hi Scott,

Looks like google let you down...once again...

If you were familar with Lanes Lexicon (which you obviously are not, surprise!)...then you would be cognizant that Lane integrates 100+ of the world's leading Lexical works into his 8 volume lexicon...including your list...

You can do better than this...

Actually, it did not include the 1960 Cairo school dictionary. The other obvious fault is that Lane is not a native speaker of Arabic.

Scott
 

Apple Pie

Active Member
Popeyesays said:
Actually, it did not include the 1960 Cairo school dictionary. The other obvious fault is that Lane is not a native speaker of Arabic.

Scott

Be honest with yourself...

You are grasping at straws...
 

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
Apple Pie said:
Since you cannot bring forth not a single solitary exegetical stance to buttress your position, it is clear that you don't have one.

Further, if you can discredit E.W. Lane, then we would be most interested in observing this...as his monumental Lexicography has been the scholarly reference standard for the past 150+ years...perhaps you have attempted to google some dirt on him, and you already know the predicament that Islam is in...:)


Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh...........

Look... I figured you'd leave this alone.

I don't have to try and google Lane's incomplete Lexicon.......to discredit him....

I know that it is widely used by lots of scholars. It doesn't mean that his lexicon is the be all to end all as you have made it. Hundreds of years before he even created this lexicon the Symetic language of Arabic existed and spoken by thousands of muslims and christians.

I am downloading his lexicon as we speak to find the references you are making. It's not my goal to prove you wrong. I just want to get an understanding as to why you are tranlating Allah as "the god"....I'm also trying to understand why you beleive that your translation is correct when native arabic speaking people are disagreeing with you.
 

Apple Pie

Active Member
DreGod07 said:
I am downloading his lexicon as we speak to find the references you are making. It's not my goal to prove you wrong. I just want to get an understanding as to why you are tranlating Allah as "the god"....I'm also trying to understand why you beleive that your translation is correct when native arabic speaking people are disagreeing with you.

Excellent...thanks for taking the initiative...
 
Top