Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Peaceful

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Discussions / Apostle Paul
« on: April 03, 2013, 04:58:48 AM »
Salam Joseph.

I was wondering what your Islamic opinion of Paul is. Many Muslims I talked to or articles I've read about Paul, always insult him and say he 'corrupted' Christ's true message. Could he really have done something at such a massive scale within 30 years of Jesus' death?

I do find it odd that most of his letters refer to Jesus as a servant or lord more than a Son of God. I was also talking with a Reverend Mike and he told me that most of the Epistles that claim that Paul referred to Jesus as 'God' are forgeries. He said Paul, as well as the rest of the Apostles, were still way too Jewish to say this.

Ibn Kathir also said the 3 messengers who supported each other (the people of the City) were Paul, Simon and Peter in Antioch. Is this possible with your Quranic interpretation?

General Discussions / Re: we can have rabbs beside Allah
« on: April 02, 2013, 01:52:25 AM »
Salam Bassam! I enjoyed your debate with Nabeel Qureishi a while back. Very informative.

Thanks for answering and welcome to the forum.  :)

Discussions / Re: Samaritan Error
« on: March 28, 2013, 07:10:59 AM »
Salam Joseph. Your post on Samaritan was closed but I thought of offering this explanation as well.

Numbers 25:6-15
6 Then an Israelite man brought into the camp a Midianite woman right before the eyes of Moses and the whole assembly of Israel while they were weeping at the entrance to the tent of meeting. 7 When Phinehas son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, the priest, saw this, he left the assembly, took a spear in his hand 8 and followed the Israelite into the tent. He drove the spear into both of them, right through the Israelite man and into the woman’s stomach. Then the plague against the Israelites was stopped; 9 but those who died in the plague numbered 24,000.

14 The name of the Israelite who was killed with the Midianite woman was Zimri son of Salu, the leader of a Simeonite family. 15 And the name of the Midianite woman who was put to death was Kozbi daughter of Zur, a tribal chief of a Midianite family.

Based on this, I think the Israelite man who the Quran was referring to as rebelling against God, was Zimri, which seems etymologically related to Samiri. It may not have been referring the a Samaritan at all.

General Discussions / Re: we can have rabbs beside Allah
« on: February 24, 2013, 05:54:19 PM »

Rabb indeed mean Sustainer, Nurturer, Teacher, or as a Mufti recently said "Him who gradually watches you grow."
Rabb is a common word in the ancient middle east that spans the Semitic languages:
It's verb is 'YuRabbu' which means to raise(like a father), or to simply teach.

Hebrew Rabba(Lord-Father) = Arabic translation RabHa = English translation Rabbi
Is used in the Quran once and the Terms usage is never condemned, only their authority, in light of the Torah's.

In one verse, God says "Then let them worship the Rabb of this House." He is obviously also, the Rabb of the Worlds. But it is more personal when used this way.

Arbab is indeed the Plural of Rabb, as Aliha is the plural of Ilah.

I think calling the owner of an estate a 'Rabb' is permissible, as long as the definite article 'Al-' is never used(belongs to God). However, in the modern world it is highly disliked, and should be avoided. For example, Jews in Yemen refer to their Rabbi as Mori of Akhbar after the Islamic conquests because the Muslims disliked the term.

General Discussions / Furqan definition
« on: February 22, 2013, 03:21:51 AM »
I've been reading articles for quite a while now and they discuss the actual meaning of the word 'Furqan.'

Apparently the early Mufasirs and exegetes had a hard time understanding this word up until the 3rd Cen. Hijri.

1. They reduced the word to its jizr or root and the logical root would be FRQ.

2. Verb would be Yufariq or he divides, Al-Farq (the difference) , Mufariq (he who yufariq).

3. The nominal form appears to be Farooq (As in Umar Al-Farooq), but there is no -an suffix in any derivation. [Compare to Uthman]

4. In Syriac, a similar Semitic language, we have the common word Purqan(a) and because there is no P in Arabic it becomes Arabized as Furqan where the letter Fa replaced the Syriac Pa.

5. Purqana means Salvation in Syriac. This is how Arberry translates it in 25:1 and it fits context.

It is obviously synonymous with Quran.

Is it possible that Furqan doesn't mean Criterion / Judge, but actually means the Salvation???
Or is it dual-meaning as 'Daraba' is??

General Discussions / Re: Banning Slavery
« on: February 21, 2013, 01:32:44 AM »
-The Prophet and the Mujahideen(Warriors) MAY take slaves 'Those whom your right hand possess'
-Slaves can be of both sexes (even women can have male slaves)

We need to take all these verses in context brother. It would be a contradiction to say slavery was banned-outright and at the same time the Prophet and the Mujahideen captured people in wars. These were critical circumstances in 7th-century Arabia and the Quran should be viewed in the Arabs' socio-historical context. Obviously, there is no Islamic State and tribal wars are a thing of the past. Hence, instead of capturing, we imprison the enemy-to-society. Every society NEEDS to have measures against corruption and warfare. This was perfectly fine, both ways, in that era, when the Quran was revealed. You are right, the Muslims were told to free slaves as a Favor, but it was never abolished.

Discussions / Re: Trinity in Bible
« on: February 21, 2013, 01:15:19 AM »
Sorry that I asked you in am unwarranted manner.  :)

This is obviously not my belief brother. I was just surprised that you made the claim that there is NO warrant for this type of belief. To be honest, I don't know much of the New Testament. I still have to study it more. However, I have read all 4 gospels and I personally felt that the trinity was clearly in the book. You are the authority on Greek, so I was mistaken to ask you of these trivial matters. Salam.

Discussions / Re: Trinity in Bible
« on: February 20, 2013, 06:20:56 AM »
Matthew 28:19
Jesus says in "The Name of." Shouldn't he have said in the NameS of... if they are 3 separate entities?

John 8:58
I'm aware the Greek says Ego Eimi. The same word God describes himself in Exodus. The flaw results from a Greek source text as a post to an original where the Aramaic translation would be Ehyeh.
Note that when he says this while being arrested, the priests fall to the ground.
“before Abraham was born, I am!” means that Jesus is literally claiming to Exist before Abraham was alive. This would mean he was not a created being like other creatures but had pre-birth experiences and this supports the trinity. How can a mere mortal exist 3000 years before his ancestor, even if he was a prophet?

Matthew 22
 43 He said to them, "How then does David in the Spirit call Him 'Lord,' saying:
 44 'The LORD said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool" '?
 45 "If David then calls Him 'Lord,' how is He his Son?"
Jesus speaks of himself as David's Lord.

Matthew 5
 16 When He had been baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon Him.
 17 And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."
All three beings interact at once.

John 20
26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”
28 Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”
29 Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

Discussions / Trinity in Bible
« on: February 19, 2013, 04:11:52 AM »
Dear Joseph, you stated:

I find no cogent warrant for such a mainstay belief from my study of the Gospels, its intended purpose and wider Biblical scholarship. I believe these doctrines and beliefs to be a consequence of 'evolved theology' and Christian tradition often 'read into' the Biblical documents.

However, what would you make of these verses:
Matthew 28:19
19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Psalm 2:7
7 I will tell of the decree:
The Lord said to me, “You are my Son;
today I have begotten you.
John 6:27
27 Do not work for the food that perishes, but for lthe food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal.
John 8:58
58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.
Luke 24:52
52 And they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy,
Mark 2:7
7 “Why does this man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?

Discussions / Samaritan Error
« on: February 17, 2013, 05:35:44 AM »
Salam, could you please explain this:
Al-Samiri = The Samritan (inhabitant of Samaria)

"We have tested thy people in thy absence: the Samiri has led them astray." So Moses returned to his people... and that was what the Samiri suggested. "Then he brought out (of the fire) before the (people) the image of a calf."

This seems to be a chronological error because the Samaritans did not exist until the 8th Cen. BCE. The Exodus, which was 500 years prior could not have had a Samaritan.

Is this word, Samiri, mistranslated and if so, what is the correct translation?

General Discussions / Re: Banning Slavery
« on: February 17, 2013, 05:15:24 AM »
As far as I know it is not banned(correct me if i'm wrong!).

This is what it says of slavery:
-It's ALWAYS better to FREE a slave (hence, God's preference).
-Slaves are equal to believers in FAITH, in society they are NOT equal.
-God does not forbid slavery.
-The Prophet and the Mujahideen(Warriors) MAY take slaves 'Those whom your right hand possess'
-Slaves can be of both sexes (even women can have male slaves)

-Slavery, Polygamy, etc. were Cultural norms at Muhammad's time and were Socially acceptable at the time.
-Many look at the Quran via their own cultural lens, which is wrong.

-Some belief Zaid (ibn Haritha) was the boy-slave who Muhammad freed and was made the first scribe.
-Muhammad (according to tradition) freed about 60 people, but also enslaved many in battles.
-Slavery in Arabia was NOT Ethnocentric (Zaid was a brown Arab, Bilal was black, Suhayb was white, etc.)

General Discussions / Re: Muhammad Asad, Legends?
« on: January 28, 2013, 05:58:03 AM »
My simple question is do you believe the Quran contains MYTHS???

This is what Asad believed, whether u like it or not. I bolded everything he said to prove my point.

If you do not, then you realize why I said this is an act of Kufr (sorry if I seem harsh, but the truth is always bitter).

As per your Question, I don't care whether other people take verses literally or figuratively, but saying the Quran contains Myths appears to me to be utter blasphemy.

General Discussions / Re: Muhammad Asad, Legends?
« on: January 27, 2013, 10:14:35 PM »
Hope, this is a Verse (8:31), I can't believe you would say that. :'(

I never said Asad questioned the Divine Origin. I gave you 2 explicit references:
p. 578, fn. 17
p. 498, fn. 77

Islamist, the link I'm making is rational and perfectly valid. Again:

the Qur'an alludes to the many poetic legends which were associated with his name since early antiquity and had become part and parcel of Judaeo-Christian and Arabian lore long before the advent of Islam. Although it is undoubtedly possible to interpret such passages in a "rationalistic" manner, I do not think that this is really necessary. Because they were so deeply ingrained in the imagination of the people to whom the Qur'an addressed itself in the first instance, these legendary accounts of Solomon's wisdom and magic powers had acquired a cultural reality of their own and were, therefore, eminently suited to serve as a medium for the parabolic exposition of certain ethical truths with which this book is concerned: and so, without denying or confirming their mythical character, the Qur'an uses them as a foil ...

Muslims and Christians always debated on the historicity of their respective Holy Books. Asad (Allah be pleased with him) essentially removes any chance of debate and throws in the 'accuracy' towel for the Muslims. The implications are magnanimous. I hope you all understand the point I'm conveying.


General Discussions / Re: Muhammad Asad, Legends?
« on: January 26, 2013, 10:03:27 PM »
Yes, you're right. It's not my business how other people interpret the Quran, literally or figuratively.

The point I'm trying to covey is he believes this entire story in the Quran is a MYTH! He is essentially saying P Mohammed heard these stories and used them as the backdrop for his moral messages. I didn't make these claims blindly. I thought long and hard over this Verse:

When Our Signs are rehearsed to them, they say: "We have heard this (before): if we wished, we could say (words) like these: these are nothing but tales of the ancients."

Can someone really be a Muslim if he questions the validity of the Quranic stories???

Yes Muhammad Ahmed's translation is pretty good. Do you know of any other like his?


Pages: [1] 2 3 4