Why don't you go debate the scholars then?
-
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!
The anti-Muslim/Islam nonsense needs to stop
- Thread starter Epic Beard Man
- Start date
No. There is no reason to expect anyone relevant saw him from nearby.
No. Someone wrote what was not true and you have no reason to believe it. You read more into the text than what is actually in it.
Which scholar did you ask?
gnostic
The Lost One
“Feature” threads are automatic function of the forum, if the replies exceed 20 posts...or was that 15 posts?
JesusKnowsYou
Active Member
That's sad.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Id rather ask than assume, but what exactly is sad?
JesusKnowsYou
Active Member
The fact that so many people believe that the Bible is inerrant when it obviously is not.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
That's what I thought. Just wanted to double check before it turns out you think it's sad I don't accept the Bible as perfect and error free, lol.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
"sura 4: 157"
Further to my post #159, I have to state that GoogleTranslate is yet developing and is not error free yet. I put Quran Sura 4: 157 for translation from Arabic original text to English and got the following result:
وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَٰكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُوا فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِّنْهُ مَا لَهُم بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلَّا اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينًا
“And saying We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah and killed him and crucified him, but they almost but those who disagreed with it in doubt it as they knew of only conjecture to follow and killed him with certainty”
Word for word translation given at IslamAwakened is:
Literal (Word by Word) "And for their saying, "Indeed, we killed the Messiah, Isa, son (of) Maryam, (the) Messenger (of) Allah." And not they killed him and not they crucified him but it was made to appear (so) to them. And indeed, those who differ in it (are) surely in doubt about it. Not for them about it [of] (any) knowledge except (the) following (of) assumption. And not they killed him, certainly."
an-Nisa` 4:157 ,
which is same as @ The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Word by Word Grammar, Syntax and Morphology of the Holy Quran
Obviously the translation given by GoogleTranslate is not correct and needs to be improved.
Please give translation of Quran 4:157 rendered by Usama K. Dakdok ,if one has got it, for our study and one's justifications if any for its being correct or otherwise. Right, please?
Regards
___________
#88 SA Huguenot,#89 SA Huguenot,,#104 SA Huguenot, #105 SA Huguenot , #116 SA Huguenot,
Last edited:
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Bull****.
JesusKnowsYou
Active Member
I still believe that the Bible is the Word of God and I adhere to its teachings, but it is far from perfect that's for sure.
How intelligent.
How would you know, anyway? This was before you joined. Butt out.
I personally reported a person for calling for the killing of Muslims and their posts were heavily edited to comply with forum rules.
I appreciate I can only give you a testimony now that the posts where modified though
JesusKnowsYou
Active Member
I haven't been on this site long, but I have seen many angry people.
Have there been no calls by past posters to kill any other group of people?
After seeing all the anger toward me and my beliefs I would not be surprised if posters have called to kill Christians as well.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Have these people been reported to authorities by the people in charge here? They should be on somebody's Watch List.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Overwhelmingy, violence in the name of religion in the world today is coming from the Islamic world. I am using the definition of 'violence in the name of religion' adopted by the UN General Assembly, Human Rights Council. The document is A/HRC/28/66 and can be found online. The file format is not supported here on this forum. All emphases in the quotations below are mine.
The report shows that the causes of religious violence are many and complex. It also warns against trivialization of religious violence:
'Religious communities and their leaderships
'Violence committed “in the name of religion”, that is, on the basis of or arrogated to religious tenets of the perpetrator, can lead to massive violations of human rights, including freedom of religion or belief.'
The report shows that the causes of religious violence are many and complex. It also warns against trivialization of religious violence:
'Religious communities and their leaderships
- Perpetrators of violence typically represent comparatively small segments of the various religious communities to which they belong, while the large majority of believers are usually appalled to see violence perpetrated in the name of their religion. It is all the more important for the majorities and their leaders, who do not endorse the violence, to speak out against it. In some countries, religious communities organize broad demonstrations and use all available media to publicly condemn religious justifications of violent atrocities. However, there are also situations in which the silence of the majority and their leaders is quite “deafening”, thus factually leaving the public stage to small aggressive groups. Speaking out in these situations often requires courage, determination and the ability to seize opportunities to intervene at the right moment when violence arises and can still be contained and curbed.
- Overcoming a culture of silence, wherever it exists, in the face of violent attacks is of paramount importance. Often, perpetrators of violence pretend to act on behalf of a “silent majority”. Religious fanatics furthermore like to portray themselves as “heroes” and a religious avant-garde that ultimately promotes the interests of their community. As long as the majorities and broader communities remain largely silent, extremists can easily play this game. They may feel that they have carte blanche to perform acts of violence and to sell these atrocities as manifestations of religious devotion.
- Overcoming the culture of silence is not an easy task and, depending on the specific situation, such attempts can be quite risky. One problem is that extremist religious groups typically receive or seek to use broad media coverage, whereas voices of peace and reconciliation often remain at the margins of public attention. Although this can be a highly frustrating experience, it should never serve as an excuse for remaining silent. The cynical belief that bad news makes for good sales must not prevent other members of religious communities from bringing forward their views actively. Moreover, in a climate of intimidation, many believers, for fear of reprisals, may refrain from speaking out publicly. In such situations, fellow believers living in safer political environments should lend their voices and clearly condemn violence committed in the name of their religion.
- The Special Rapporteur has seen impressive anti-violence statements issued by representatives of religious communities, that is, statements which are clear, theologically profound and passionate. However, he has also come across public rejections of violence which remain disappointingly abstract, because they are based on the problematic assumption that violence results from a mere “instrumentalization” of religion and, accordingly, has little, if anything, to do with religious motives. Yet, such rejections based on a trivialization of religious motives will themselves remain trivial. As discussed earlier, the instrumentalization thesis one-sidedly attributes the problem to external, non-religious factors while too quickly discarding the potential relevance also of religious obsessions and theological views.
- Religious communities and especially their representatives and intellectual leaders should not succumb to the temptation to reduce the issue of violence in the name of religion to mere “misunderstandings” and external abuses. This would amount to an irresponsible trivialization of the problem. Instead, when dealing with the issue of such violence, theologians and religious leaders should actually expose themselves to the disturbing fact that perpetrators of violence — or at least some of them — may be convinced to perform an act of service to God when killing fellow humans. Taking seriously these ideas, however bizarre and distorted they may seem, is the precondition for giving sufficiently profound responses. Only by confronting the perverse “attractiveness” of violent religious extremism for some people, including people living in precarious and volatile political circumstances, will it be possible to tackle the various root causes of violence, including polarizing religious interpretations and incitement to religious hatred.
- Beyond a clear condemnation of violence committed in the name of religion, communities and their leaders should positively promote empathy, tolerance and an appreciation of diversity. They should challenge the religious extremists’ authenticity claims by exposing the ignorance of their views of the charitable core messages contained in religious traditions. Religious communities and scholars may also play an important role in rehabilitation and reintegration programs for violent extremist offenders and foreign fighters who returned to their country of origin, also with a view to neutralize possible future radicalization efforts.'
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
This fellow is an atheist. He changed his mind about Islam from one of 'trivialization of bad behavior' if you will, to acknowledging the unspoken.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
So you keep saying. Do you ever back up your opinions with actual information?