Comparing the Bible to the Qur'an.

[Link]

How does hardening their hearts and placing blinders on them help?

Well per Quran, if they heard (understood with perception), they would further turn away.

وَلَوْ عَلِمَ اللَّهُ فِيهِمْ خَيْرًا لَأَسْمَعَهُمْ ۖ وَلَوْ أَسْمَعَهُمْ لَتَوَلَّوْا وَهُمْ مُعْرِضُونَ | Had Allah known any good in them, He would have surely made them hear, and were He to make them hear, surely they would turn away, being disregardful. | Al-Anfaal : 23

And said:

وَلَنُذِيقَنَّهُمْ مِنَ الْعَذَابِ الْأَدْنَىٰ دُونَ الْعَذَابِ الْأَكْبَرِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَرْجِعُونَ | We shall surely make them taste the nearer punishment prior to the greater punishment, so that they may come back. | As-Sajda : 21

And hell surrounds disbelievers in this world, then after death, but in both worlds, they don't fully perceive it. It's on the day of judgment when they will fully perceive it.

He makes people taste their deeds whether good or bad, so that they know where they are going. If you don't see God in this world, you will be further blind in the next.

 

[stevecanuck]

Well per Quran, if they heard (understood with perception), they would further turn away.

وَلَوْ عَلِمَ اللَّهُ فِيهِمْ خَيْرًا لَأَسْمَعَهُمْ ۖ وَلَوْ أَسْمَعَهُمْ لَتَوَلَّوْا وَهُمْ مُعْرِضُونَ | Had Allah known any good in them, He would have surely made them hear, and were He to make them hear, surely they would turn away, being disregardful. | Al-Anfaal : 23

And said:

وَلَنُذِيقَنَّهُمْ مِنَ الْعَذَابِ الْأَدْنَىٰ دُونَ الْعَذَابِ الْأَكْبَرِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَرْجِعُونَ | We shall surely make them taste the nearer punishment prior to the greater punishment, so that they may come back. | As-Sajda : 21

And hell surrounds disbelievers in this world, then after death, but in both worlds, they don't fully perceive it. It's on the day of judgment when they will fully perceive it.

He makes people taste their deeds whether good or bad, so that they know where they are going. If you don't see God in this world, you will be further blind in the next.

Okay. I just think it's a shame that literally billions of people live their lives based on superstition. And unfortunately that nonsense splashes onto so many others who just want to be left alone.

 

[muhammad_isa]

How does hardening their hearts and placing blinders on them help? Everything you claim is contrary to the reality that is the Qur'an.

Well, you read it as "Allah", a person does this or that.

..but Allah , the Most High is NOT a person .. and when the Qur'an says "it is easy for us to punish the guilty", it is a consequence of reality .. the reality that our deeds have consequences.

You might say that G-d could have made a different reality, but that ends up in childish discourse.
We cannot change it .. we can only try to change our own behaviour.

 

[stevecanuck]

Well, you read it as "Allah", a person does this or that.

No, I don't. I read it as The God. And you know I do.

..but Allah , the Most High is NOT a person

And you complete the Strawman.

.. and when the Qur'an says "it is easy for us to punish the guilty", it is a consequence of reality .. the reality that our deeds have consequences.

You might say that G-d could have made a different reality, but that ends up in childish discourse.
We cannot change it .. we can only try to change our own behaviour.

One day you might post something I don't already know. One day.

 

[Augustus]

That's an absurd absolute.

Just because you don’t understand something doesn’t make it absurd, it just reflects a gap in your understanding.

Language is always contextually contingent.

How can you know if someone is being literal, allusive, metaphorical, sarcastic etc. from anything other than the context?

Please pass the salt" needs no back story. Most of what people say to each other is stand-alone

Whether it is or not is only known from context.

'You know Lord Nelson, sir?' 'I had the honour of serving under him at the Nile,' said Jack, 'and of dining in his company twice.' His face broke into a smile at the recollection. 'May I beg you to tell me what kind of a man he is?' …

There is something in philosophy called an electrical particle, is there not? A charged atom, if you follow me. He spoke to me on each occasion. The first time it was to say, "May I trouble you for the salt, sir?

In this example from the book Master and Commander (also a film), pass the salt is the punchline to a joke. It certainly needed a backstory and if you cut out the backstory then it means something different.

The standard meaning of pass the salt needs context of a meal and salt.

Statements such as "I hate heavy metal music" automatically means all such music unless otherwise specified.

No they don’t. It could mean you love heavy metal music, or that you hate most of it or even that you don’t understand what it is.

Only context decides.

"Enemy" is a far cry from the underlined. Your attempt to soften the hatred is noted.

"Fight those who believe not in Allah" is a far cry from the underlined. Your attempt to soften the command to kill is noted.

So? Your point is?

It’s obvious most Muslims don’t treat most non-Muslims as enemies and seek to fight them.

You don’t care to learn anything about secular scholarship on Islam and you don’t seem to care for what Muslims actually believe and why either.

What does it matter how you think they should interpret it based on your own half-baked methodology that has neither historical or theological substance?

 

[Augustus]

I believe Islam must reform, because as it stands, its fundamental tenets are incoherent, and that incoherence understandably breeds mistrust.

So yes, scholars have put a positive spin on the book. But if we take Muslims at their word - which we ought to - the positive spin is inconsistent with one of Islam's core tenets which is that the book is perfect, unalterable, and timeless.

The next key point is that the book declares itself to be easy to understand. So if we ignore the scholarly, apologist's interpretations, and read the book parsimoniously - as it says we should - it's easy to see all the book's divisive and dangerous flaws.

The book obviously isn’t easy to understand as there are parts that no one has ever understood. Their original meaning has been lost.

Interpretations have always varied and the religion has always evolved.

There are many modernist strains of Islam, maybe they will gain more influence maybe the opposite will happen.

There are many approaches to the text that can have many results, timeless doesn’t necessarily mean you need to live in the 7th c forever.

What do you want reformist Muslims to do with their traditions?

 

[icehorse]

Interpretations have always varied and the religion has always evolved

What do you want reformist Muslims to do with their traditions?

The Bible has be revised / reformed, why not the Quran?

 

[Augustus]

The Bible has be revised / reformed, why not the Quran?

Interpretation has been continually since the 7th c

 

[Link]

Okay. I just think it's a shame that literally billions of people live their lives based on superstition. And unfortunately that nonsense splashes onto so many others who just want to be left alone.

I use to think similar while I believed in God and Angels, but not chosen Messengers.

A lot of the Quran seems to being arguing by design, but really, is arguing by the signs (such as horses, night and day) in outward, that it points to the fact God would favor us with inward guidance and something more meaningful and purposeful.

For example Surah Nahl by outward signs and outward favors is arguing for inward favor of guidance of God and the form of it.

The problem is you are focusing on details and ethical issues, instead of seeing first what is the over all argument for Nubuwa, Resalah and Imama in Quran.

You are also not seeing the argument for God's existence and oneness (all arguments for oneness prove he exists too, they are two birds one stone approach).

 

[Dimi95]

The Bible has be revised / reformed, why not the Quran?

Muslims have very strong faith and commitment , they obey and they submit - just as they claim.If they are instructed not to change one word - they won't do that , even if that gives benefit and greater good.

Let's say that happens.What After?

That will split Islam on half - at least , for them that's the most holy thing on this Earth and they will fight to defend that book,even between themselfs.

And i admire that dedication , if Christianity as belief had so many dedicated followers, we would end the debate about what is truth a long time ago..

But as Jesus said:

Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

 

[icehorse]

Muslims have very strong faith and commitment , they obey and they submit - just as they claim.If they are instructed not to change one word - they won't do that , even if that gives benefit and greater good.

Let's say that happens.What After?

That will split Islam on half - at least , for them that's the most holy thing on this Earth and they will fight to defend that book,even between themselfs.

Well Christianity has survived reform, right?

And as far as Muslims being split, they've been split for almost the entire existence of the faith - will horrific results.

 

[Dimi95]

Well Christianity has survived reform, right?

And as far as Muslims being split, they've been split for almost the entire existence of the faith - will horrific results.

Be specific what you mean by reform , because i can give you examples for "changes" in the Book that did apsolutly nothing in meanigs, it had zero influence on the concept of the message.Verses that are multiple time repeated , they were erased and you can find explanation in the book for it.
We are also devided mostly about authority and meaning of some ideas.
Take also for example the idea of the original sin, i as Orthodox will always stand for :
"The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself."
That's why you will see more converts to Islam on the West.The idea that Catholic People preach original sin as it was consequence offends me personally .That's why Muslims stands strong on that debate.
If anyone wants to learn more about it , should ask i will gladly answer every question.
They ask me oftenly why i don't belive that Pope is the highest authority of the Church.The Pope is the succesor of Paul , The Chief of the Sinners.
The Highest authority of the Church(body of Christ) is Christ.
We are the Body of Christ , The Pope , me and everybody else who belives in Christ.
They are so focused of the New Testament and forget about the Old.
The Bible is both of them.
"The church has no central doctrinal or governmental authority analogous to the head of the Catholic church(the Pope) , but the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinopol is recognized by them as primus inter pares (first among equals)."
Look at what is noted , we will always stand for Christ - all of us , no metter what.
Different ideas but One God.

You don't have to belive it , but look at it and ask yourselfs , are they reasonable?

About what i bolded in your post

Take that and think , what would they do if something like that happend.
What will your answer be? Would they survive the after ?

I have spend a long time of my life with majority of people who were Muslims.
I have eaten with them on the same table, i have played as a kid with them , fough but also made peace with them.
Because i took the importance of Jesus words equally and i have threated them equally.

Peace be on you is what Jesus said..
That's why i always say to Muslim People - Selam Aleykum , and i mean it!
And Blessing is always a good thing , never forget that!

I know how Muslims think , because i lived with them so long..
They would tear apart between themselfs even when changes would be only brough as askable.

 

[stevecanuck]

Just because you don’t understand something doesn’t make it absurd, it just reflects a gap in your understanding.

Language is always contextually contingent.

How can you know if someone is being literal, allusive, metaphorical, sarcastic etc. from anything other than the context?


Whether it is or not is only known from context.

'You know Lord Nelson, sir?' 'I had the honour of serving under him at the Nile,' said Jack, 'and of dining in his company twice.' His face broke into a smile at the recollection. 'May I beg you to tell me what kind of a man he is?' …

There is something in philosophy called an electrical particle, is there not? A charged atom, if you follow me. He spoke to me on each occasion. The first time it was to say, "May I trouble you for the salt, sir?

In this example from the book Master and Commander (also a film), pass the salt is the punchline to a joke. It certainly needed a backstory and if you cut out the backstory then it means something different.

The standard meaning of pass the salt needs context of a meal and salt.

Good example, and I get your point.

In terms of Qur'anic context, the existence of the book is it's own back story. That is demonstrated by the fact that especially those surahs believed to be received during the Medinan period are almost context-free. If 'Allah' didn't rely on context to get his message across it speaks to the generic nature of them. It must mean his proclamations are so generalized and obvious that context is simply not needed. That is exactly how I take them.

But, again, I consider all of these considerations moot, as the only thing that matters is what the vast majority of adherent Muslims believe, and they seem to be just fine with the lack of situational context.

 

[stevecanuck]

No they don’t. It could mean you love heavy metal music, or that you hate most of it or even that you don’t understand what it is.

Given that degree of latitude I'm going to assume that everything you post is in the context of complete agreement with me.

 

[stevecanuck]

@Augustus

Here's where you jumped the shark. If you think a clear statement can be turned into anything, it gives you license to say black is white, thereby rendering any attempt to talk to you pointless.

Statements such as "I hate heavy metal music" automatically means all such music unless otherwise specified.

YOU: No they don’t. It could mean you love heavy metal music, or that you hate most of it or even that you don’t understand what it is.

Only context decides.

 

[Augustus]

Good example, and I get your point.

In terms of Qur'anic context, the existence of the book is it's own back story. That is demonstrated by the fact that especially those surahs believed to be received during the Medinan period are almost context-free. If 'Allah' didn't rely on context to get his message across it speaks to the generic nature of them. It must mean his proclamations are so generalized and obvious that context is simply not needed. That is exactly how I take them.

But, again, I consider all of these considerations moot, as the only thing that matters is what the vast majority of adherent Muslims believe, and they seem to be just fine with the lack of situational context.

Almost all Muslims very much consider situational context essential to understanding the Quran.

This has been true for 1300 years and is equally true for the most progressive and most fanatical believers.

Which Muslim sect can you identify that doesn’t add some form of context to their interpretation of any individual passages of the Quran?

 

[Augustus]

@Augustus

Here's where you jumped the shark. If you think a clear statement can be turned into anything, it gives you license to say black is white, thereby rendering any attempt to talk to you pointless.



YOU: No they don’t. It could mean you love heavy metal music, or that you hate most of it or even that you don’t understand what it is.

Only context decides.

Again just because you don’t understand, doesn’t mean you are correct in your self-righteousness. it just means you have another gap in your knowledge.

It could be a form of jokey sarcasm.

No different from saying “Great weather today” when it’s 0c and raining.

Come in, it’s not rocket science to understand words can be used to mean their exact opposite in specific contexts.

It also doesn’t mean this is true in all contexts, just some.

You understand your mistake now, yes?

 

[stevecanuck]

Again just because you don’t understand, doesn’t mean you are correct in your self-righteousness. it just means you have another gap in your knowledge.

It could be a form of jokey sarcasm.

No different from saying “Great weather today” when it’s 0c and raining.

Come in, it’s not rocket science to understand words can be used to mean their exact opposite in specific contexts.

It also doesn’t mean this is true in all contexts, just some.

You understand your mistake now, yes?

What I understand is your desperate attempt to introduce nuance where very little exists.

 

[Augustus]

What I understand is your desperate attempt to introduce nuance where very little exists.

2:62 Surely they that believe, and those of Jewry, and the Christians, and those Sabaeans, whoso believes in God and the Last Day, and works righteousness -- their wage awaits them with their Lord, and no fear shall be on them; neither shall they sorrow

5:69 Surely they that believe, and those of Jewry, and the Sabaeans, and those Christians, whosoever believes in God and the Last Day, and works righteousness -- no fear shall be on them, neither shall they sorrow

Would you say the above passages requires no context or nuance because its perfectly clear it means good Muslims, Jews, Christians and Sabians all get into heaven?

Or does context only matter when it suits your polemics?

Bonus points if you can tell me who the Sabians actually are given that at least some of them appear to be accepted by God.

But, again, I consider all of these considerations moot, as the only thing that matters is what the vast majority of adherent Muslims believe, and they seem to be just fine with the lack of situational context.

Almost all Muslims very much consider situational context essential to understanding the Quran.

This has been true for 1300 years and is equally true for the most progressive and most fanatical believers.

Which Muslim sect can you identify that doesn’t add some form of context to their interpretation of any individual passages of the Quran?

Your inability to name a single sect who considers context unimportant in understanding the Quran is noted.

As is your complete ignorance of the diversity of both historical and contemporary Islamic thought and Quranic interpretation from the 7th c to the present day, and the variety of nuance that has existed in all kinds of Islamic jurisprudence.

If you don't think situational context matters, what do you think the purpose of sirah, hadith and occasions of revelation actually are? Reporting of secular historical facts?

 

[Dimi95]

"This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My Favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion”
al-Maa’idah 5:3

Can anyone answer me why when a regular person who has no knowledge of religion and faith , the first thing that he acknowledges from the Quran as state of mind is fear.
I know for a fact that mercy is used more often , specificly it's doubled comparing to punishment..

Also,
The beggining and the end , I will quote the actual first verse in the Quran and the first verse(belief by Muslims)that was revealed to Muhhamad.

"In the name of God (Allah), the Compassionate and Merciful.Praise be to God, Lord of the worlds,the Compassionate and Merciful,Master of the Day of Judgement.Thee we worship and from Thee we seek help."

And,
"Read: In the name of Allah Who created...

The first impression of such a book , shows me a proportion of forcefulness.I am taking the stand of "unbelivers".I am arguing this from another perspective , not spiritually.

I can assume what will be answered,but it does not answer the meaning of the question as it was presented.

What's the purpose ? All beliving at the end , we would all agree ?
Then why it doesn't show equallity in the answers that we recive.

Surah Al-Furqan 25:63
The servants of the Most Merciful are those who walk upon the earth in humility, and when the ignorant address them, they say words of peace.

We use these things only when it suits us to use them.
Where is the humility then?

I will show you an example to express my meaning:
You go to a restourant and you order something nice , and when they are putting your meal on the table , you first look at it , does your eye think is it nice or not.
If it does not look nice , the first thing that you hope is that it will taste better as it looks , but because of the first impression there is equall though that would taste the same as it looks.
Use the same words and only change the first impression of the meal with your eyes, it will still have the same meaning.
Different words , but same meaning.