• 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!

Koran & Hadith in plain english?

firedragon

Veteran Member
Which is why it's generally not going to be remotely persuasive to non-Muslims.

I dont intend to persuade anyone.

Again who or what exactly it relates to is largely irrelevant. You focus so much on linguistic quibbles that you tend to forget the actual point being made.

Why do you think its linguistic "quibbles"? Is not that an odhominem fallacy?

The point is that people don't know who or what it relates to and are guessing, hence it is indicative of lost knowledge between the generations.

Are you saying that everyone is "guessing"? Every single muslim who ever lived is just making guess work. And all of them were questioning who this sabians are. Thats it? Do you know every single understanding of this throughout 14k years?

So I told you that linguistically, it means "other religions/left the religion". Why do you reject it? Whats your standard?
 
Why do you think its linguistic "quibbles"? Is not that an odhominem fallacy?

No, pointing out that something is a quibble that is irrelevant to the larger point being made is not a fallacy. You might want to look up what an ad hominem is.

Are you saying that everyone is "guessing"? Every single muslim who ever lived is just making guess work. And all of them were questioning who this sabians are. Thats it? Do you know every single understanding of this throughout 14k years?

So I told you that linguistically, it means "other religions/left the religion". Why do you reject it? Whats your standard?

I'm not rejecting any definition, I'm pointing out the fact that early exegetes couldn't remotely agree on who these mysterious Sabians were.

Were they people of the book? Were they not? Were they monotheists? Were they polytheists? etc.

If it was obvious 'linguistically' then there would be no problem identifying them. As you know, words don't necessarily work that way.

So either we assume that Muhammad never knew who they were (which is unlikely for a variety of reasons), or we assume that this certain knowledge of who they were was lost.

This matches with other evidence that suggests some degree of knowledge was lost between the early generations of Muslims and later generations, at times, tried to fill in these gaps with what amount to little more than (perhaps educated) guesswork.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
No, pointing out that something is a quibble that is irrelevant to the larger point being made is not a fallacy. You might want to look up what an ad hominem is.

It is. If you dont wish to hear it because you are an expert and you think others are inferior, that's your baby.

Ad hominem is when you attack the person, and not the argument. Im sure you know this.

I'm not rejecting any definition, I'm pointing out the fact that early exegetes couldn't remotely agree on who these mysterious Sabians were.

All the early exegetes? You mean all of them?

Were they people of the book? Were they not? Were they monotheists? Were they polytheists? etc.

You missed the whole point. Read up again.

If it was obvious 'linguistically' then there would be no problem identifying them.

Oh of course. In some ahadith it is mentioned that when the prophet Muhammed was preaching Islam, the other Arabs who were so called "polytheists" called him a Sabaa, because he has joined another religion. Just ask when you need clarification.

This matches with other evidence that suggests some degree of knowledge was lost between the early generations of Muslims and later generations, at times, tried to fill in these gaps with what amount to little more than (perhaps educated) guesswork.

Maybe read the linguistic argument I made, and ask quietens based on it. If its not valid, prove its invalid based on the language itself.
 
It is. If you dont wish to hear it because you are an expert and you think others are inferior, that's your baby.

Ad hominem is when you attack the person, and not the argument. Im sure you know this.

Again noting that something is irrelevant and explaining why it is irrelevant is not an attack on the person, it is an attack on the argument. Noting that someone continually makes bad arguments for the same reason and explaining why is also not "ad hominem".

:handpointdown:

Again who or what exactly it relates to is largely irrelevant. You focus so much on linguistic quibbles that you tend to forget the actual point being made.

The point is that people don't know who or what it relates to and are guessing, hence it is indicative of lost knowledge between the generations.

Perhaps you can look up some examples of what ad hominem is to unconfuse yourself.

Oh of course. In some ahadith it is mentioned that when the prophet Muhammed was preaching Islam, the other Arabs who were so called "polytheists" called him a Sabaa, because he has joined another religion. Just ask when you need clarification.

So?

The fact remains that many different exegetes, all of who were better versed in the issue than you, did not think it was obvious who the Sabians were by looking at the word linguistically.

Maybe read the linguistic argument I made, and ask quietens based on it. If its not valid, prove its invalid based on the language itself.

I have already explained why your "argument from linguistics" doesn't solve the problem as to which group were being referred to by the proper noun 'Sabians', and why it is largely irrelevant to the point being made which is about the lack of agreement as to who it referred to and how it illustrates a loss of some degree of knowledge between the early generations of proto-Muslims/Muslims.

Read again and ask questions if you are unsure.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Again noting that something is irrelevant and explaining why it is irrelevant is not an attack on the person, it is an attack on the argument. Noting that someone continually makes bad arguments for the same reason and explaining why is also not "ad hominem".

Nah. You didnt address the argument.

So?

The fact remains that many different exegetes, all of who were better versed in the issue than you, did not think it was obvious who the Sabians were by looking at the word linguistically.

Oh so another ad hominem addressing how well versed I am or not.

tell me. How do you assess how well versed I am or not? What is your methodology? Lets say I am less well versed than you in the arabic language. Still, you have not addressed what I said. You are telling me I am not well versed. Thats ad hominem.

Please pose a good argument. You are an intelligent person and I am sure you understand.

I have already explained why your "argument from linguistics" doesn't solve the problem as to which group were being referred to by the proper noun 'Sabians',

Why do you think its a proper noun? can you explain? How do you understand the so called polytheist of arabia saying Muhammed was a Sabaa as well. Is that a proper noun?
 
Nah. You didnt address the argument.

It is literally quoted below the text.

Oh so another ad hominem addressing how well versed I am or not.

It is now an "ad hominem" to note that you are less well versed in classical Arabic than famous classical scholars whose work has been preserved for near 1500 years?

I thought you had a high opinion of yourself, but that is off the charts.

Never mind, seeing as you refuse to address the points I've made and just resort to silly imagined fallacies like this instead we'll call it a day. It's getting tedious.

Cheers.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
It is now an "ad hominem" to note that you are less well versed in classical Arabic than famous classical scholars whose work has been preserved for near 1500 years?

Its ad hominem when you dont address the argument but attack the person. I can say that again if you want.

Hmm. So who is this classical scholar you are addressing 1500 years back in history?

I thought you had a high opinion of yourself, but that is off the charts.

Ad hominem.

Never mind, seeing as you refuse to address the points I've made and just resort to silly imagined fallacies like this instead we'll call it a day. It's getting tedious.

Why do you not agree that Sabaa means other religions? And why do you insist it's a proper noun?

These are your claims. So why not substantiate them?
 

MyM

Well-Known Member
Well, this is not true!
The original Quran that was in the posession of Muhammad's wife, Hafsa bint Umar, was eventually burned bty Hakim.
The original Quran does not exist, and Uthman and Hakim made changes to it!

Again, please, I explained it all before. You just don't want to listen.
 

MyM

Well-Known Member
Your examples of the Bible are also translations only.

They are versions not one bible is the same. They are also translated, added to, and deleted from. You cannot trust the words of man when God doesn't even endorse the Bible.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
They are versions not one bible is the same. They are also translated, added to, and deleted from. You cannot trust the words of man when God doesn't even endorse the Bible.
You are welcome to your opinion.
 

MyM

Well-Known Member
Realy, if the Quran say Mary protected her Vig**a, and Allah blew into IT! how is this eloquent?
Where does the Bible have such a poor representation about Mary?

That is seriously deranged. I don't know where you are getting your information. Surely you despise deeply. All Allah says, is BE and it was. That is how she conceived. Now, I ask you...what is "begotten"?

The Story of Maryam

“And [mention] when the angels said, “O Mary, indeed God has chosen you and purified you and chosen you above the women of the worlds. O Mary, be devoutly obedient to your Lord and prostrate and bow with those bow [in prayer].’” (Quran 3:42-43)

“And mention, [O Muhammad], in the Book [the story of] Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place toward the east. And she took, in seclusion from them, a screen. Then We sent to her Our Angel [i.e., Gabriel], and he represented himself to her as a well-proportioned man. She said, ‘Indeed, I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, [so leave me], if you should be fearing of God.’ He said, ‘I am only the messenger of your Lord to give you [news of] a pure boy [i.e., son].’ She said, ‘How can I have a boy while no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste?’ He said, “Thus [it will be]; your Lord says, ‘It is easy for Me, and We will make him a sign to the people and a mercy from Us. And it is a matter [already] decreed.’” So she conceived him, and she withdrew with him to a remote place.” (Quran 19:16–22)

“And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of palm tree. She said, ‘Oh, I wish I had died before this and was in oblivion, forgotten.’ But he called her from below her, ‘Do not grieve; your Lord has provided beneath you a stream.’” (Quran 19:23-24)

“And shake toward you the trunk of the palm tree; it will drop upon you ripe, fresh dates. (Quran 19:25)

“So eat and drink and be contented. And if you see from among humanity anyone, say, ‘Indeed, I have vowed to the Most Merciful abstention, so I will not speak today to [any] man.’ Then she brought him to her people, carrying him. They said, ‘O Mary, you have certainly done a thing unprecedented. O sister of Aaron, your father was not a man of evil, nor was your mother unchaste.’ So she pointed to him. They said, ‘How can we speak to one who is in the cradle a child?’ [Jesus] said, ‘Indeed, I am the servant of God. He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet. And He has made me blessed wherever I am and has enjoined upon me prayer and zakah as long as I remain alive And [made me] dutiful to my mother, and he has not made me a wretched tyrant. And peace is on me the day I was born and the day I will die and the day I am raised alive.’” (Quran 19:26-33)

“That is Jesus, the son of Mary – the word of truth about which they are in dispute.” (Quran 19:34)
 

MyM

Well-Known Member
  1. Christians never claimed that the Bible had no mistakes during 2000 years of copying it by hand, as the Muslims falsely claim about the Quran!
  2. The Christians never went and burned the Bible manuscripts like the Muslims did to the Qurans when they burned Muhammad's and Ali's etc.
  3. The Christians have what we call, Manuscript critisizm, where we took all the manuscripts of the world, and newer discovered ancient maniscripts, then we compare to see where scribes made errors when they coppied it by hand etc. We then check and publish these differences, and allow anyone to see the differences. The Muslims dont want anyone to know what differences there are between your 1928 Egyptian version, and the older ones such as the Sanaa, topkapi and tuskent quran
  4. I am not affraid to know about errors in the Bible, because it it did not have errors due to copying it by hand for 3500 years, I would suspect the Bible to be a concoction bt men, such as Uthman and Hakim did to the Quran.
Just keep in mind, Christians never said about the Bible, that which Muslims claim.
The Quran was protected by Allah for 1600 years, and not a single difference is to be found in it.
Well, how can you check if Muslims burned Muhammad's coppy?
The above is mere propaganda, and not fact.
Greetings


You seriously can't compare the two :)

ever read the preface of the NRSV? Christians ARE INDEED SAYIING IT...not muslims :) go read it.

I already explained about the Quran, but you refuse to accept it.
 

MyM

Well-Known Member
Only Muhammad said that. No Christian and Jew believed him and knew he was not a prophet.
Muhammad became a prophet to Arabs when he started to chopp peoples heads of for not believing him.

Why carry so much hate? Mohammad pbuh was a messenger of Allah.

Actually, it is stated in Mohammad's time, the Jews acknowledge him and so did the Christians. Get your facts straight.
 

Sedim Haba

Outa here... bye-bye!
TEN pages now, and not one reply to my OP.

Not even a link to a children's book.

I'ma gonna unwatch this thread now.
 

SA Huguenot

Well-Known Member
Again, please, I explained it all before. You just don't want to listen.
OK, so where is the first Quran of Muhammad that was entrusted to one of his wifes.
If you give it to me, I will then take your 1924 Quran and start to compare it.
For you I will do it all for free.
 

SA Huguenot

Well-Known Member
They are versions not one bible is the same. They are also translated, added to, and deleted from. You cannot trust the words of man when God doesn't even endorse the Bible.
Well, lets look at the English Qurans as you are doing to the English translation of the Bible.
Not even Rashad Khalifa and Sahee agrees.
What about Sawar, who translated it true, and Yusuf ali that whitewashes the bad words in the quran.
I also have the Dakdok English, and a totally new quran by Drew Ali!

Who decided if God gave his so called "Endorsement"?

Show me how Allah endorsed the Quran?
 

SA Huguenot

Well-Known Member
That is seriously deranged. I don't know where you are getting your information. Surely you despise deeply. All Allah says, is BE and it was. That is how she conceived. Now, I ask you...what is "begotten"?

The Story of Maryam

“And [mention] when the angels said, “O Mary, indeed God has chosen you and purified you and chosen you above the women of the worlds. O Mary, be devoutly obedient to your Lord and prostrate and bow with those bow [in prayer].’” (Quran 3:42-43)

“And mention, [O Muhammad], in the Book [the story of] Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place toward the east. And she took, in seclusion from them, a screen. Then We sent to her Our Angel [i.e., Gabriel], and he represented himself to her as a well-proportioned man. She said, ‘Indeed, I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, [so leave me], if you should be fearing of God.’ He said, ‘I am only the messenger of your Lord to give you [news of] a pure boy [i.e., son].’ She said, ‘How can I have a boy while no man has touched me and I have not been unchaste?’ He said, “Thus [it will be]; your Lord says, ‘It is easy for Me, and We will make him a sign to the people and a mercy from Us. And it is a matter [already] decreed.’” So she conceived him, and she withdrew with him to a remote place.” (Quran 19:16–22)

“And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of palm tree. She said, ‘Oh, I wish I had died before this and was in oblivion, forgotten.’ But he called her from below her, ‘Do not grieve; your Lord has provided beneath you a stream.’” (Quran 19:23-24)

“And shake toward you the trunk of the palm tree; it will drop upon you ripe, fresh dates. (Quran 19:25)

“So eat and drink and be contented. And if you see from among humanity anyone, say, ‘Indeed, I have vowed to the Most Merciful abstention, so I will not speak today to [any] man.’ Then she brought him to her people, carrying him. They said, ‘O Mary, you have certainly done a thing unprecedented. O sister of Aaron, your father was not a man of evil, nor was your mother unchaste.’ So she pointed to him. They said, ‘How can we speak to one who is in the cradle a child?’ [Jesus] said, ‘Indeed, I am the servant of God. He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet. And He has made me blessed wherever I am and has enjoined upon me prayer and zakah as long as I remain alive And [made me] dutiful to my mother, and he has not made me a wretched tyrant. And peace is on me the day I was born and the day I will die and the day I am raised alive.’” (Quran 19:26-33)

“That is Jesus, the son of Mary – the word of truth about which they are in dispute.” (Quran 19:34)
OK, so give me your version of Q66:12!
 

MyM

Well-Known Member
OK, so where is the first Quran of Muhammad that was entrusted to one of his wifes.
If you give it to me, I will then take your 1924 Quran and start to compare it.
For you I will do it all for free.


lol seriously, Do you know Arabic language?
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
If you give it to me, I will then take your 1924 Quran and start to compare it.
This whole dialogue is pointless, unless you can tell us exactly how the Qur'an was changed..
I mean, what was Islam originally, according to you?

Was it changed from G-d being Three to G-d being One, for example? :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: MyM
Top