Challenge: Should the Koran be taken literally or NOT?

[stvdv]

In many threads some people "quoted" verses of the Quran (in fact it was more a copy/past from anti-islam sites) and concluded/made interpretation around those isolated verses.

Even if a word is not translated as it should be, you can understand (most of time) when reading the whole Book that it's about a particular context.

In fact you just did the same while proposing this verse about not being friends.
If you have take the time to read the Quran you would understand this.

If you have take the time to read the Quran you would understand this
Wrong: Muslim scholars translated bad. IS only kills because Muslim scholars have been teaching violence [by misinterpretation]. That is the truth, that is the problem. Natural "non-muslims" read Koran to understand and protect themselves. If you provide faulty translations, please don't blame us. Your translation, your responsibility. Read Koran verse 5:48. It very clearly states "God willed many nations. He tests you. Do good and return to God, all together. And He will tell you whereon you were at variance". So not even needed to be a Muslim. "Do good" is the key. So "Do good translation". Then I will "Do good reading". If you know "wrong interpretation/translation causes IS, don't you want to cure the cause?".

I love verse 5:48 [I wish the Bible had such a good verse, no need to become Christian to be saved]

IMHO

 

[stvdv]

It amazes me just how much disagreement there is, even among Muslims, over the Quran and its interpretation. Various doctrines, pertaining to certain denominations of Islam, rest on the interpretation of a single word in the Quran. It is clear there is much confusion within the religion.

Perhaps they indeed failed to create scripture which plainly conveys what they meant to say. However, I do not think that is the case. For they were smart men, and they knew very well just how their words would be understood.

In these modern times, to appeal to modern sensibilities, apologists are whitewashing the obscene passages of scripture, saying, “Oh! Well of course not. One must understand yada-yada-yada.” This, so that the questioner will brush aside the abhorrent aspects of the religion. But those aspects are truly the face of the religion. In my opinion, the religion’s head is fatally wounded; and plainly, it is beyond recovery. And yet, that fatal wound has been healed, in the sight of many.

Perhaps they indeed failed to create scripture which plainly conveys what they meant to say. However, I do not think that is the case. For they were smart men, and they knew very well just how their words would be understood.
I agree with this. If I see Muslims debate on youtube indeed they are smart and know exactly what is meant. I do see their problem, though. Koran, being the word of God, can't be wrong or changed. I think this is fear [I was scared to doubt my master in the beginning, until I found out that He tested me to learn to trust my conscience, not follow blindly the scriptures]. Many Christians would be scared to take out the 2.5% violent verses from Bible, kind of sacrilege I think. Which is more violent, the Bible or the Quran?
But then I remind the Muslim to verse 5:48 which clearly states "God created different religions to test them. Do good is the key. Not be Muslim. And God decides who passes the test, not humans". This is what I learned from it. That does make sense to me.

apologists are whitewashing the obscene passages of scripture
At least they have the humbleness to say "sorry", or can't face the embarrasment of untruth anymore. But I agree with your point "The face of the religion" is there. Like the Christians have the Crusaders. Germany has Jews killings. Can't whitewash these. At least it's a good step to admit. I think Muslims do have to admit that the Koran is now "out of context" after 1200years, and has become dangerous to certain groups as IS. Ignoring this fact is dangerous. And I don't do that. Solution is simple, just re-edit the violent verses so they make sense in 2018. [so easy with computers and internet]. But I think it's intense fear of God, that makes this impossible for Muslims (and also Christians) to do.

IMHO

 

[A Spirit Runs Through It]

Perhaps they indeed failed to create scripture which plainly conveys what they meant to say. However, I do not think that is the case. For they were smart men, and they knew very well just how their words would be understood.
I agree with this. If I see Muslims debate on youtube indeed they are smart and know exactly what is meant. I do see their problem, though. Koran, being the word of God, can't be wrong or changed. I think this is fear [I was scared to doubt my master in the beginning, until I found out that He tested me to learn to trust my conscience, not follow blindly the scriptures]. Many Christians would be scared to take out the 2.5% violent verses from Bible, kind of sacrilege I think. Which is more violent, the Bible or the Quran?
But then I remind the Muslim to verse 5:48 which clearly states "God created different religions to test them. Do good is the key. Not be Muslim. And God decides who passes the test, not humans". This is what I learned from it. That does make sense to me.

apologists are whitewashing the obscene passages of scripture
At least they have the humbleness to say "sorry", or can't face the embarrasment of untruth anymore. But I agree with your point "The face of the religion" is there. Like the Christians have the Crusaders. Germany has Jews killings. Can't whitewash these. At least it's a good step to admit. I think Muslims do have to admit that the Koran is now "out of context" after 1200years, and has become dangerous to certain groups as IS. Ignoring this fact is dangerous. And I don't do that. Solution is simple, just re-edit the violent verses so they make sense in 2018. [so easy with computers and internet]. But I think it's intense fear of God, that makes this impossible for Muslims (and also Christians) to do.

IMHO

It is my opinion that Christians should not remove obscene passages from the Bible, or edit them, because they are beautiful, in a sense. What makes them beautiful is that, they reveal what things were like before salvation, before transformation. They are beautiful, because they remind us of where we are now, in contrast to where we came from. That is why the apostle Paul was vocal about his prior, violent transgressions; so that the transformative power of the Holy Spirit could be plainly grasped. You see, God is creating a new heaven and a new earth. And so, what is old must be old, and what is new must be new.

I feel sorry for Muslims (those who were born and conditioned to be Muslim) because there is no opportunity for something new to arise out of Islam, for the Quran condemns such. The religion does not teach forgiveness and transformation, not truly.

 

[stvdv]

The religion does not teach forgiveness and transformation, not truly

I am not sure of that. Didn't read the whole Koran yet. I would be surprised though. I find forgiveness and transformation in other scriptures. I did read verse 5:48 speaking on "Do good deed" and in other verses I read "and being rewarded".

 

[A Spirit Runs Through It]

I am not sure of that. Didn't read the whole Koran yet. I would be surprised though. I find forgiveness and transformation in other scriptures. I did read verse 5:48 speaking on "Do good deed" and in other verses I read "and being rewarded".

Think about it. Politics is unforgiving, and Muhammad was a politician. Yes, there are passages concerning forgiveness, but there is not a single one concerning forgiving for forgiveness' sake.

Furthermore, you will not find in the Quran any passage relating that, God loves you for the sinner that you are. There is a whole lot of content about purity, but nothing concerning the impure person having worth.

 

[stvdv]

There is a whole lot of content about purity, but nothing concerning the impure person having worth

There you might have a point. When it comes to being impure persons they tend to be "send to hell" at once, I also got that feeling.
[But I will check a few more verses. You seem to have read maybe some more than I did. I better update myself a bit]

 

[A Spirit Runs Through It]

There you might have a point. When it comes to being impure persons they tend to be "send to hell" at once, I also got that feeling.
[But I will check a few more verses. You seem to have read maybe some more than I did. I better update myself a bit]

I was a true believing Muslim once, and so, I have spent countless hours perusing the Quran. I believe that if you do some more reading you might verify what I am saying about Islam: It is an evil ideology. Because, for much of my life I was a callous bully; and my time practicing Islam nurtured that behavior in me. But my conversion to Christianity has brought about personal change, and insight; a transformation. Therefore I did not say what I said out of ignorance, nor unjustified intolerance, but rather out of experience, and a sense of what is right and good and just.

I think you will find there is much pandering and double-talk in the Quran, many contradictions. You mentioned such-and-such verse, about doing good, etc. But talk is cheap. Politicians say one thing, and they do another. Do not lean upon those verses which pandered to the Christians and the empathetic people of 7th century Arabia; but also, those verses which indulged the callous bullies.

 

[Woberts]

No bible should be taken seriously. They're all just as fake as the next one.

 

[A Spirit Runs Through It]

No bible should be taken seriously. They're all just as fake as the next one.

The Bible is like an instruction booklet which comes with home-assembled furniture. What it is assembling is the Holy Spirit, within the heart. And the Spirit has the power to transform a person, instilling in them empathy and compassion. That is not fake, my friend.

 

[stvdv]

No bible should be taken seriously. They're all just as fake as the next one.

And thus spoke the Flying Spaghetty Monster.

 

[stvdv]

Not true, very false.
We were taught in school to be friendly and that is according to the Islamic teachings.

The Jurisprudence of the Islamic Civilization by Dr. Mohammad Imara
That sounds really nice that Allah will protect the Christians and their churches. Sadly I see the opposite nowadays in the news. How come? multi-interpretable? Or do IS Muslims don't read these texts. I never read the source. Mohammed is mentioned. Can these verses be found in Koran? If in Koran and as clearly stated here, it would solve 90% of nowadays trouble]. I don't explect (non)Muslims/Christians to read more than Koran/Bible

Thanks for the nice video, but 1 saw 1 big flaw [1):Wrong + 2):Correct]. So I see it as a bit cheeky [if coincident then oke, if on purpose then VERY bad]
[The cheeky part, IMHO, being: The don'ts are vice versa; but the do's are NOT. Maybe I'm the only one noticing this and finding it strange. I know I can be picky, but feel I might be right here. Hopefully my mistake and it is both ways for both. Then I will be happy to be corrected]
[I love the reciter. I think it is: Mishary Rashid Alafasy. Even when I didn't know koran, I enjoyed listening to him reciting Koran]

1): The below sounds very nice, BUT: it seems to suggest mutual respect but if read correct is 1 way respect [Christians need to accept Muslim laws NOT vice versa]
That what is against the Christians is against the Muslims
That what is against the Muslims is against the Christians
That what is for the Muslim is for the Christians
Until the Christians become the partners of the Muslims


2): The below IS very nice, BECAUSE: it really suggest mutual respect and can't be misread at all [Muslims need to accept Christian laws AND vice versa]
That what is against the Christians is against the Muslims
That what is against the Muslims is against the Christians
That what is for the Muslim is for the Christians
Until the Christians become the partners of the Muslims
That what is for the Christians is for the Muslim
Until the Muslims become the partners of the Christians

 

[stvdv]

But talk is cheap. Politicians say one thing, and they do another

I think I understand what you mean. My post above discovered 1 of this seemingly cheeky tries of Muslims. Or is this my imagination? Sometimes I see tigres when there are only pussycats.
My post #91: Challenge: Should the Koran be taken literally or NOT?

 

[Sakeenah]

@A Spirit Runs Through It you clearly haven't read the many verses in the Quran and narrations about mercy,forgiveness and love. Here are a few of them.

Quran verses:

"We have not sent you except as a mercy to the worlds."
( 21:107)

Say: O My slaves who have transgressed against themselves (because of sins), do not despair from the mercy of Allah. Verily, Allah forgives all sins. Verily, He is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful." [Al-Qur'an 39:53]

"And He is Oft-forgiving, All Loving" (85:14).

"...Allah loves those who are just" (5:42).

"And among His signs is that He has made for you,
from yourselves, spouses, in order that you live together with them in peace and tranquility;
and He has made between you love and mercy.
Surely, in this are signs for people who reflect (30:21),"


Hadiths:
The prophet Muhammad said: Allah is gentle and loves gentleness. He gives to those displaying gentleness what he does not give to those displaying violence" (Ibn Majah)

The prophet Muhammad said: Those who are merciful will be shown mercy by the Most Merciful. Be merciful to those on the earth and the One in the heavens will have mercy upon you.”

The prophet muhammad said: Allah will not be merciful to those who are not merciful to the people.

 

[FearGod]

That sounds really nice that Allah will protect the Christians and their churches. Sadly I see the opposite nowadays in the news. How come? multi-interpretable? Or do IS Muslims don't read these texts. The source is mentioned but not familiar to me. Not from Koran, is it, Mohammed is mentioned though? This verse should be put in Koran [as clear as stated here, and would solve 90% of trouble we talk about in this post]. Because Koran is first islamic book read, also by non-Muslims. Don't expect non-Muslims to read all Muslim scriptures. Muslims don't read all non-Muslim scriptures either.

Thanks for the nice video, but 1 saw 1 big flaw [1):Wrong + 2):Correct]. So I see it as a bit cheeky [if coincident then oke, if on purpose then VERY bad]
[The cheeky part, IMHO, being: The don'ts are vice versa; but the do's are NOT]
[Hopefully my mistake and it is both ways for both. Then I will be happy to be corrected]

1): The below sounds very nice, BUT: it seems to suggest mutual respect but if read correct is 1 way respect [Christians need to accept Muslim laws NOT vice versa]
That what is against the Christians is against the Muslims
That what is against the Muslims is against the Christians
That what is for the Muslim is for the Christians
Until the Christians become the partners of the Muslims


2): The below IS very nice, BECAUSE: it really suggest mutual respect and can't be misread at all [Muslims need to accept Christian laws AND vice versa]
That what is against the Christians is against the Muslims
That what is against the Muslims is against the Christians
That what is for the Muslim is for the Christians
Until the Christians become the partners of the Muslims
That what is for the Christians is for the Muslim
Until the Muslims become the partners of the Christians

Doesn't make any difference, if he said that Christians should be forced into Islam
otherwise being killed then it'll be offensive, but no, the message is very peaceful and it means
that Muslims should protect the Christians and their assets.

 

[stvdv]

Doesn't make any difference, if he said that Christians should be forced into Islam
otherwise being killed then it'll be offensive, but no, the message is very peaceful and it means
that Muslims should protect the Christians and their assets.

Oke, that is your feeling. Now I am curious if Christians notice this subtle difference. I know I am a bit sensitive, mabye too much

[as regard to the blue lines in the link below. Which I think do make a subtle difference, with huge impact for a Christian at least. IMHO]
Challenge: Should the Koran be taken literally or NOT?

 

[FearGod]

Oke, that is your feeling. Now I am curious if Christians notice this subtle difference. I know I am a bit sensitive, mabye too much

[as regard to the blue lines in the link below. Which I think do make a subtle difference, with huge impact for a Christian at least. IMHO]
Challenge: Should the Koran be taken literally or NOT?

Partners in peaceful way, whats wrong with it?

 

[Woberts]

The Bible is like an instruction booklet which comes with home-assembled furniture. What it is assembling is the Holy Spirit, within the heart. And the Spirit has the power to transform a person, instilling in them empathy and compassion. That is not fake, my friend.

OK, props to you. That's the first time I've heard the bible compared to a furniture instruction manual.

 

[Woberts]

And thus spoke the Flying Spaghetty Monster.

You misspelled the name of the Lord! You heretic!

 

[stvdv]

Partners in peaceful way, whats wrong with it?

Agreed, that one SEEMS to sounds good enough as it were given. But MIGHT lead to misinterpretation as explained below. It can be a stretch, but I see so many misinterpretation of Koran, that I suggest to avoid it if it's easy to avoid [I can be sensitive but feel it's appropriate here]

Until the Christians become the partners of the Muslims
This can be interpreted as Christians need to join Muslims BUT partners under Muslim laws [esp. considering given by Mohammed]
Until the Muslims become the partners of the Christians
This can be interpreted as Muslim need to join Christians BUT partners under Christian law [would be fine considering if Mohammed had said it]
BUT if given both, then there is no misinterpretation whatsoever

It's a subtle difference in feeling, I agree:
To avoid any subtle misinterpretation and if you want it in 1 line, I feel the best would be:
Until the Christians and Muslims become each others partners
[Then there is no need to write other books to get the correct context later on]

That what is for the Muslim is for the Christians = suggests Christians should follow what is for Muslims
That what is for the Christians is for the Muslim = suggests Muslims should follow what is for Christians

The 2 don'ts were given both explicitly. Giving no room of misinterpretation. So I feel it would be smart to also give the 2 do's explicitly

 

[stvdv]

You misspelled the name of the Lord! You heretic!

Just checking if the diciples of the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" were a little awake and alert
[I just can't lie. You are right. My mistake. Thanks for educating me]

Glad you called me "heretic" though. That means you do believe in God. Makes me happy "the more the merrier"