What do you feel is wrong with Islam?

[Smoke]

-I don't know how people can tolerate so much micro-management in their lives.

I don't, either, but a friend of mine who is a convert to Islam says she likes it for just that reason. Islam tells her what she can eat, what she can drink, how to pray, how to dress, how wash, and she finds security in having rules for every aspect of her life. It's definitely not for me, though.

 

[Smoke]

On the other hand there is no controversy about the origins of the Quran. It was dictated to Muhammed by Gabriel directly from God. One problem I see is the only one who can testify to this is Muhammed, and he is dead.

Another problem is that the Qur'an is not known to have existed before about the end of the seventh century. It is farther removed in time from the lifetime of Muhammad than the gospels are from the lifetime of Jesus.

 

[kai]

I do not now, nor have I ever thought that one HAS to read Herew, Greek or Arabic to understand the word of God. It's either for everyone or it is patently false. That some may think otherwise strikes me as religiously and culturally jingoistic. dont tell me tell muslims the quran has to be in arabic to be authentic thats a fact

Scripture is either eternal and universal or it is not the word of God in the first place.
gods word was in arabic apparently
This does not mean that scripture is not designed for the time and place, but the spiritual truth is eternal.

Regards,
Scott

\

if the oldest surviving shred of the new testement is written in aramaic then you must read it in aramaic ,understand the meaning of the aramaic at the time of writing it or you are not i repeat not reading the true word are you ,otherwise you are reading one of many translations. if gods revelation is in aramaic then how can you trust an aramaic to greek to latin to english translation, it means in fact that you havnt read gods revelation at all but someones interpretation of it into their own language.

thats why muslims read and recite it in arabic and jews read and recite in hebrew and the poor old christians read and recite in any old language they happen to be versed in
from english to spanish to laplander

 

[Smoke]

The Old Testament was written, repeatedly, by maticulously devoted Jewish scribes. The New Testament was put together during the council of Nicea, whereby every possibly fallacious document was discarded. They weren't picking and choosing scripture based on the point they wanted to make. They were subjecting the documents in question to scrutiny, by cross-referencing them with other pieces of scripture. If one text contradicted with another, in a dramatic way, then it was discarded.

The New Testament is known to have existed in pretty much its present form more than a century before Nicaea, yet there was considerable variation in the exact contents for about a century after Nicaea. (The Eastern Churches were reluctant to accept the book of Revelation, for example, and to this day they don't read it in church.) Likewise there was considerable textual variation both before and after Nicaea. There is also considerable textual variation in the Tanach, the Masoretic text being just one variation, and both the Tanach and the New Testament show considerable evidence of having been extensively redacted and edited.

 

[MFaraz_Hayat]

Another problem is that the Qur'an is not known to have existed before about the end of the seventh century. It is farther removed in time from the lifetime of Muhammad than the gospels are from the lifetime of Jesus.

The Quran was completed during Prophet's life.........

 

[K.Venugopal]

The Quran was completed during Prophet's life.........

Naturally, because he was the messenger. But I understand it was not compiled during his lifetime.

 

[Popeyesays]

if the oldest surviving shred of the new testement is written in aramaic then you must read it in aramaic ,understand the meaning of the aramaic at the time of writing it or you are not i repeat not reading the true word are you ,otherwise you are reading one of many translations. if gods revelation is in aramaic then how can you trust an aramaic to greek to latin to english translation, it means in fact that you havnt read gods revelation at all but someones interpretation of it into their own language.

thats why muslims read and recite it in arabic and jews read and recite in hebrew and the poor old christians read and recite in any old language they happen to be versed in
from english to spanish to laplander

There is no Aramaic Gospel in existence. It was Greek. But the word of God is either universal or it is not the word of God.

Regards,
Scott

 

[kai]

There is no Aramaic Gospel in existence. It was Greek. But the word of God is either universal or it is not the word of God.

Regards,
Scott

come on Scott , the dead sea scrolls are written in hebrew mostly but some are in aramaic and koine. now if you cannot read these then you have not read them ,but what you have read is later translations. the word of god is not universal unless you can read it, now you can go down to the local book store and get a KJV and say "thats the word of god" or you can read the ancient hebrew test and say thats the word of god, do you see the difference.

 

[Ringer]

There is also considerable textual variation in the Tanach, the Masoretic text being just one variation, and both the Tanach and the New Testament show considerable evidence of having been extensively redacted and edited.

Is there a source you are basing this claim from so I can look into it for myself?

 

[Smoke]

The Quran was completed during Prophet's life.........

The texts that became the Qur'an don't appear to have been written down at all until the reign of Uthman, or to have been compiled into a book until the reign of Abd al-Malik. I'm aware of the legend that Uthman compiled the Qur'an and had copies sent around, but it seems to be just that -- a legend.

 

[Smoke]

Is there a source you are basing this claim from so I can look into it for myself?

No, I wasn't thinking of any source in particular. Richard Elliott Friedman's Who Wrote the Bible? is a good introduction to the subject, though.

 

[Ringer]

No, I wasn't thinking of any source in particular. Richard Elliott Friedman's Who Wrote the Bible? is a good introduction to the subject, though.

Ok...thanks.

 

[Popeyesays]

come on Scott , the dead sea scrolls are written in hebrew mostly but some are in aramaic and koine. now if you cannot read these then you have not read them ,but what you have read is later translations. the word of god is not universal unless you can read it, now you can go down to the local book store and get a KJV and say "thats the word of god" or you can read the ancient hebrew test and say thats the word of god, do you see the difference.

The Qumran Scrolls contain NO Gospel texts at all Kai, nothing that might be considered Christian. I'm sorry you have not read through the material about the texts, but you won't find any Gospel version amongst them. We have no Aramaic or Hebrew New Testament at all--it's all in Greek except for a few words quoted here and there.

Regards,
Scott

 

[kai]

The scrolls and scroll fragments recovered in the Qumran environs represent a voluminous body of Jewish documents, a veritable "library", dating from the third century B.C.E. to 68 C.E. Unquestionably, the "library," which is the greatest manuscript find of the twentieth century, demonstrates the rich literary activity of Second Temple Period Jewry and sheds insight into centuries pivotal to both Judaism and Christianity. The library contains some books or works in a large number of copies, yet others are represented only fragmentarily by mere scraps of parchment. There are tens of thousands of scroll fragments. The number of different compositions represented is almost one thousand, and they are written in three different languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

There is less agreement on the specifics of what the Qumran library contains. According to many scholars, the chief categories represented among the Dead Sea Scrolls are:
Biblical Those works contained in the Hebrew Bible. All of the books of the Bible are represented in the Dead Sea Scroll collection except Esther.
Apocryphal or pseudepigraphical Those works which are omitted from various canons of the Bible and included in others.
Sectarian Those scrolls related to a pietistic commune and include ordinances, biblical commentaries, apocalyptic visions, and liturgical works.
oh i see you are of course right they wont be any new testement in them they are too old but there is all the old testement except the book of esther.
I think this underlines my point evem more because we have no written account then in the original language of jesus himself or his deciples which surely would have been aramaic, but later tranlations into greek from earlier aramaic writings or oral traditions

Dead Sea Scrolls - Qumran Library

What Language Did Jesus Speak?

 

[Popeyesays]

You're forgetting that we have no writings from James who led the Jerusalem Church. Peter Paul, Luke and John were more comfortable writing in Greek than Syriac/Aramaic. Paul would have been trained rabbinically, but he was a sholar of Greek and the Septuagint, not Hebrew.

Regards,
Scott

 

[kai]

You're forgetting that we have no writings from James who led the Jerusalem Church. Peter Paul, Luke and John were more comfortable writing in Greek than Syriac/Aramaic. Paul would have been trained rabbinically, but he was a sholar of Greek and the Septuagint, not Hebrew.

Regards,
Scott

well although this is fascinating to me Scott its getting off topic somewhat , maybe in another thread , the question of Paul being trained rabbinically intrigues me.
Paul was born in Tarsus, in modern day Eastern Turkey, he was a tent maker by trade, was an avid student under the top Jewish teacher in Jerusalem and was also a Roman citizen

BBC - Religion & Ethics - Paul: Introduction


we are seriously off topic

 

[The Great Architect]

I don't think there is anything wrong with the Islam. A misconception has arisen, in the eyes of many people, that Islam is somehow dangerous. We have created a climate of fear, surrounding Islam in general; and those who believe in its doctrine. This is straight-out wrong.

It has been said before, but there are plenty of murderous, hate-mongering Christians around, too. I wish I knew more practising Muslims.

 

[Popeyesays]

well although this is fascinating to me Scott its getting off topic somewhat , maybe in another thread , the question of Paul being trained rabbinically intrigues me.
Paul was born in Tarsus, in modern day Eastern Turkey, he was a tent maker by trade, was an avid student under the top Jewish teacher in Jerusalem and was also a Roman citizen

BBC - Religion & Ethics - Paul: Introduction


we are seriously off topic

Perhaps, but I did not bring up the Qumran Scrolls.

Regards

 

[kai]

Perhaps, but I did not bring up the Qumran Scrolls.

Regards

dont worry Scott i will take full responsibility for running this thread off the rails :yes:

 

[DarkSun]

Is there a source you are basing this claim from so I can look into it for myself?

I doubt it.