Gospels and Shiite hadiths match up.

[IndigoChild5559]

@IndigoChild5559 maybe to put in perspective, I See hadiths of the family of Mohammad (s) as a beautiful and necessary source of guidance. However, a lot it is corrupted in that the hadiths we attribute to them is mixed with falsehood.

I completely understand Muslims valuing the hadith in addition to the Quran, just as I understand Catholics having their Tradition (with a capital T) in addition to the Bible. In Judaism our sacred text is not limited to the Torah, or even to the Tanakh. We also have the Talmud and the writings of the sages to help guide us in our understanding. Any religious text, whether it is the Torah or the Gospels or the Quran, requires interpretation.

The Quran is a commentary on the Torah to Gospel and books between among many things it is.

That you believe in the Quran and find inspiration in its words to draw closer to God and to become a better person is something I completely understand. I'm fine with you being Muslim. I'm not here to change your beliefs.

I'm aware that Muslims believe the Torah and Gospels are corrupted. You believe some original texts exist that are correct (despite having absolutely zero evidence for this) but that these original texts were altered and what we have today is unreliable.

For me, the Quran is not in any way divine. It was written by Muhammad, either with a scribe or without one, and is his own invention based on his interactions with Jews and Arian Christians. I don't believe for a second that there was any Angel involved. Thus, as an ordinary document written many hundreds of years after the Tanakh and New Testament, it is less reliable about the historical events. If the gospels record that Jesus died by crucifixion and the Quran says no he didn't, it is the Gospels which are the better source, being much much closer to the actual event.

 

[Muffled]

You deceive yourself and get nothing out of this type of talk really.

I believe you have speculated about that but I know better.

 

[FredVB]

"Any religious text, whether it is the Torah or the Gospels or the Quran, requires interpretation."

If any religious text requires interpretation, any interpretation would sometime need other interpretation further. One of those things should actually be enough itself. I know what to trust as revelation.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

"Any religious text, whether it is the Torah or the Gospels or the Quran, requires interpretation."

If any religious text requires interpretation, any interpretation would sometime need other interpretation further. One of those things should actually be enough itself. I know what to trust as revelation.

BTW, do you know how to properly quote someone? It;s pretty simply once you know the trick. You hit the REPLY button on the original post, and you will see the whole think come up in a quote box. If you wish, you can delete portions so that only the sentence or paragraph that you directly want to quote remains. Then when you hit "post reply" not only will the quote be in your post in a quote box, but it will also reference the individual you are quoting, plus provide a link back to their post, if anyone wants to double check it for context. Enjoy

 

[FredVB]

Thanks I guess for sharing to tell me what I show elsewhere of what must be known already, even backing up in text in a quote to reduce a lot of it that would not be addressed, it did not really occur to you that I have my own reasons to choose to use a quote this way, with shading to copy, of another when my response is relevant to the thread, for any to respond to, with possibly including the quote for the context. And the response to that from me was not included, that which was really relevant. But maybe there is no relevant response to that.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Thanks I guess for sharing to tell me what I show elsewhere of what must be known already, even backing up in text in a quote to reduce a lot of it that would not be addressed, it did not really occur to you that I have my own reasons to choose to use a quote this way, with shading to copy, of another when my response is relevant to the thread, for any to respond to, with possibly including the quote for the context. And the response to that from me was not included, that which was really relevant. But maybe there is no relevant response to that.

Suit yourself. Just know that when you don't properly quote, people have NO CONTEXT for your remarks. That tends to be frustrating, and frustrated people often stop reading and go on to the next post.

The other thing is that when you don't quote correctly, the person you are addressing does not get an alert, and has no idea you have responded. That's not really fair of you.

Think about it.

 

[FredVB]

Go ahead and judge and not be aware of sin being involved with that. If it must be known I actually did not want discussion with the poster I quoted and was just showing my post was in response for it being in this thread, without that one being alerted and responding just because of that. I might have responded to another who responds to that subject, but the response here to me has nothing at all to do with that, instead making the attempt to change how I post and making judgment if I do not. That was not any better than speaking further with that original poster. I would not engage further about this triviality and would feel like putting you on ignore on this forum site if there is more about this in response. Nothing I've done yet here involves violating fairness.