Topics

1

Discussions / The Prophet in Palestine after his Death

« on: July 21, 2017, 10:40:22 PM »

Hello Friends,

One of the most interesting differences with traditional Islamic literature with non-Islamic historical contempoary, or soon after the Prophet, is the following:

-   All later Islamic literature, written centuries after Muhammad, presents Muhammad as being buried in Medina in 632AD.
-   However more than 10 independent sources, near contempoary to Muhammad and in diverse regions and cultures, all speak of Muhammad personally entering Palestine in 634AD.

This subject is studied in the book, “The Death of the Prophet.” A part of the conclusion was that the revised later history was a part of the “Arabization” of the muslim movement.  The other is that when we look at the Qur’an as a whole, its’ emphasis is that they believe they are in the last days before judgement. With this, the focus was upon a move towards Palestine.  In reconstructing events, Palestine is the  primary “Sacred Geography”, with Mecca secondary. A sample of the verses of the view of the end of the Day of Judgement is below.

I would be interested to hear your thoughts….

“The matter of the Hour is as a twinkling of the eye, or nearer” (16:79), warns the Qur’an. The Day of Judgment is “imminent” (40:18) The “Lord’s  “judgment” or “the terror”—“is about to fall” upon the world “none denies its descending,” and “there is none to avert it” (52:7–8 51:6 56:1–2). The chastisement is in fact near (78:40 see also 27:72, 36:49), and the Qur’an promises that the punishments of hell and the bliss of paradise will be known soon “with the knowledge of certainty,” that is, at first hand (102:3–5). The Qur’an rebukes those who disregard its warning, threatening that they will soon behold the Hour and its punishments with their own eyes (19:75). The Qur’an also refers frequently to certain signs, particularly astronomical events, that will herald the Hour’s arrival (for example, 45:17), and some of these, it would appear, had already occurred within recent memory. Surah 77 warns, “Surely that which you are promised is about to fall.”

Zack

2

Discussions / Did Muhammad know the previous scriptures before receiving the revelation

« on: April 12, 2017, 11:40:52 PM »

Hello friends,

From what I understand, it is recommended to start a new topic if the content is dealing with something different. So I would like to respond to the following:

Thank you for your comments. If you notice the verses you kindly quoted they are speaking about before he became a prophet of God.
I stated that after or during his ministry sometime he might of possibly been familiar with the previous scriptures."

I would like to make comment concerning a couple of things..

1) There is nothing to suggest Muhammad did NOT have a reasonable understanding of the previous scriptures. The reference used in 29:48 is more likely a linguistic issue (43.3), "The Book" was in another language (Syriac), and therefore the Arab peoples dependant upon oral traditions of scripture. Because of this linguistic issue, the understanding of Muhammad was limited.

2) On the other hand, Muhammad DID NOT have a thorough understanding of the previous books after receiving the revelation, he continued to have a lack of clarity, in which case the source was the People of the Book (10:94)

3) The Qur'an does not contain the contents of the previous books, only pieces of it. There is no evidence from the Qur'an that Muhammad had a significantly greater knowledge of the Book after the revelation of the Qur'an. (Which from what is increasingly understood by scholars was a process of revelations responding to real events, not a single revelation in a cave.)

4) The idea that before the revelations Muhammad didn't know the content of the Books, and afterwards he did, is removing all the natural element from the life of Muhammad. This is the result of later traditions, where Muhammad was increasingly elevated and removed from the context he lived.

Wasalam

Zack

3

General Discussions / Is there such a thing as "A Convert" in the Qur'an?

« on: November 03, 2016, 05:10:19 PM »

Hello all,

I want to ask if there is a Quran basis for the concept of a "convert." This relates to the following studies of Br. Joseph....

http://quransmessage.com/articles/term%20muslim%20hijacked%20FM3.htm

http://quransmessage.com/articles/what%20is%20the%20true%20defintion%20of%20deen%20FM3.htm

Based on the above articles, it would seem the whole concept of "conversion to Islam" is a tradition that does not have any basis. The true "islam" is a way of life, with the religious label irrelevant. With this, the Qur'an never promotes "conversion," but challenging beliefs.

I was reminded of this with the comment below on another thread....

There are many instances that sometimes people change their religion. They convert. According the discussions going on it is understandable that this conversion is needless. But is there any problem if anyone wants to convert from one religion to another? Is it permissible? If a christian or jew converts to Islam, then can a muslim convert to those religion. Are we free to choose within these monotheist religions?

Wasalam

Zack

4

General Discussions / The best Muslim/Non-Muslim scholarship on the Quran somewhat supports this site

« on: May 21, 2016, 09:02:19 PM »

Hello friends,

This is partly a question for Br. Joseph, the site moderators, and the rest of us. Is anyone familiar with IQSA (International Quran Studies Association:  https://iqsaweb.wordpress.com/about/mission/ ) ? In my view it is one of the best loose networks serious about studying the Quran from an academic viewpoint. The network was created after unbalanced radical re-thinking concerning the Quran by people such as Wansbrough and others. Some general overall views from what I understand (although varied) are:

- The Qur'an at the time of Muhammad is basically as we have it today.... although the Quran text is awkward due to it being intended for oral communication.
- Over 50% of Qur'an words are from a non- Arabic origin, primarily Syriac. (The Foreign Vocab of the Quran: Jeffrey).... I would be interested in hearing Br Josephs view on this, as his articles would seem to de-emphasize the importance of Arabic.
- Islam was not a distinct religion until possibly 50 years after Muhammad, and with the original Shahadat on coins etc. not including Muhammad.
- The Islamic writings in the classical era is not considered a reliable source for reconstructing the Origins of Islam
- Arabia just before the time of Muhammad was somewhat monotheist, and not Jahiliyah as often suggested.
- The purpose of the Quran was to preach a message through using stories known by the Arab community. The stories may or may not be historically accurate. The truth of the Quran's stories is not the point, the point is the preaching of a message.

Anyway just to say that this is based on an academic viewpoint where the inspired revelation is not assumed. I would love to hear from some of the moderators about this.

Wasalam
Zack

5

General Discussions / Are Qur'an Centric Muslims Literalists or Contextualists? A Quranist, BUT WRONG?

« on: March 31, 2016, 08:38:24 PM »

Hello all,

Well here it is, something that has been disturbing me for a while with this forum. There seems to be a regular theme of referring to the Qur'an only, and not to other material. That is fine, but there are a few major problems....

a) Are the words of the Qur'an to be taken literally, with each instruction having universal and eternal application?

OR

b) Was the Qur'an revealed in a historical context, and responding to that context? In other words, the Qur'anic text, such as the war verses,  polemical verses, ethical and legal verses... cannot really be understood without placing it in its cultural context. With that, with changing cultural contexts, the application of segments of the Qur'an is no longer relevant for today!

I believe in (b). The ironic thing is that there is a massive movement in revising the history of Islam, de-emphasizing classical Islamic traditions, and reconstructing the context of the Quran. However for many Qur'anists, (maybe I totally misunderstand the Quranist position) just following the text is enough. This is actually dangerous. In the end, even non-Muslims above (b) can have a better understanding of the message of the Qur'an than Quranists!

Anyway I will leave it there for now, hopefully this makes sense!

Wasalam

Zack

6

General Discussions / A need to go deeper in challenging Post Quranic Traditions

« on: March 30, 2015, 07:58:45 PM »

Hello all,

It has been a long time since I have posted, so thought I would touch base again!!

I posted a part of this on another link, however most of it deals with a different topic, the attitude towards the previous scripture.

As I have mentioned in the past, I believe the Qur'an has a unified message with all of the previous scripture. I am surprised that people on this forum do not take that in to account, with this being the most open-minded of all forums in allowing the Quran to speak for itself. Nearly all of the posts of even many of the senior members of this forum seem to have the assumption that the Holy Books of God are at war with one another! Although this is certainly not surprising, as Christians consider the Qur'an as a handbook for warfare. Someone once said, we read the Holy Books not based on rational thinking, but with eyes influenced by centuries of political baggage!

From what I understand, the Qur'an is consistently presenting itself as a reminder of the former books, and a corrective to incorrect interpretation of the former Books by a segment of Christians at the time of Muhammad.

On the other link, there was discussion concerning the second coming of Jesus.  I am not sure why an investigation of whether Jesus is returning is based on the Qur'an anyway, when that revelation is 550 years after Jesus. Clearly the Gospels need to be carefully examined. The same as if questions concerning Moses, the Torah is the primary source. The response of "We don't go there, it is corrupted" is simply an escape and robs the individual of an exciting journey of learning. Again I am surprised how regularly on this forum the easy escape of "The corruption of scripture" answer is given, when that is the most blatant post-Quranic doctrine that was formalised even long after most other traditions challenged by this site....

I think a new approach this area, instead of taking the easy path of sidelining previous scripture, will attract some of the best minds, both within Islam and Christianity, who are on a journey of rediscovering the message of Muhammad, as well as that of Jesus! It is my view that real engagement of topics is best achieved when there is serious engaging and learning from other peoples... ie... "O people, We created you from a male and female, and We made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another."

In fact, I would go one step further. I have my doubts it is possible to truly understand the Qur'an without a study of Hebrew scripture, the Gospels, and even Church History.

Wasalam
Zack

Wasalam
Zack

7

General Discussions / Who are the pioneers of the Quran-centric paradigm?

« on: May 31, 2014, 07:13:06 PM »

Hello all,

I am sure that like most renewal movements there are those who prepared the way somewhat, and that the "Qur'an centric" (as Br. Joseph likes to refer it) is no different. If I were to read on those who contributed the most significantly to the pioneering of this paradigm, say from 19th century onwards, who would they be? I have read of a name such as Muhammad Hussein Hakyal. Although obviously there are varying views even within this field.

Regards
Zack

8

General Discussions / Your Input: The Islam and Christianity of the Future

« on: May 24, 2014, 12:42:15 AM »

I am writing this partly in response to another link http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=1264.msg5907#msg5907 which was enquiring re how to view the previous scriptures. Relating to this, I want to write down in point form my thoughts how I see what a Holy Book based Islam and Christianity will look like in the future.

Before that, I want to mention 2 points in response to the posting link:

-   I believe the Qur’an is coherent and has a unified message with the previous Holy Books. Supposed doctrines that oppose each other between the Quran / Bible: (eg. Father / Son of God has been discussed in link http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=1234.msg5850#msg5850) are more misinterpretations. In fact, the evidence clearly shows that translations now are now closer to the original manuscripts than the Torah, Zabur and Injil (Old and New Testament) at the time of Muhammad. Blatant mistranslation of words to support in particular a Trinitarian doctrine is no longer possible without being exposed (although still subtle double-meanings can be misleading).

-   One of the biggest underlying departures from scripture that has been held by Christianity and followed by Islam is that of “Replacement Theology”. For Christianity that meant: Christianity replaced Judaism as the true religion; Injil replaced the Torah; Greek replaced Hebrew; Rome replaced Jerusalem; Christians replaced Jews as God’s sole “Ummah”……..You can see how Islam followed: Arabic replaced Greek; Islam replaced Christianity; Qur’an replaced Injil; Mecca replaced Rome; Muslims replaced Christians… This thinking divides and destroys the planet and is not supported by any of the Holy Books. There is one community of Gods people, not two or three.  That is the religion of Abraham…. that religion is one of submission, whether one is Jew, Christian or Islamic label. Islam as a religion replacing Christianity wasn’t anything to do with Nabi Muhammad. Christianity replacing Judaism wasn’t anything to do with Nabi Isa.

In regards to the Islam / Christianity of the future:
a) The catholic creeds of the trinity will be done away with, and Christianity return to the “Shahadat Tauhid” of the Bible.
b) Islam re-acknowledge the Bible as scripture as per the Qur’an. From what I understand and have read from recent Islamic scholarship, the idea of corruption and rejection of scripture is far more recent that Islamic Secondary sources, even post 1000AD. This will include catching up on 1000 years of re-interpreting what the Torah and Injil says.
c) Islam re-acknowledges the death and resurrection of Isa. This again is starting to gain momentum amongst modern Islamic scholars. The idea of the substitution / or non-death of Isa on the cross is an earlier interpretation, maybe as early as the 8th century.  Understanding that the death of Isa on the cross was a central understanding of the “People of the Book” and of history, and yet it never being discussed  by Muhammad; yet a single verse being interpreted to change a central message of the Book endorsed by Muhammad has all sorts of problems.
d) It will become increasingly common for Christians to recognise Muhammad as a Prophet.
e) Islam re-embraces Isa as the figure that God spoke through in a distinct way, and shakes of its suspicion of the name.
f) Although remaining distinctive, a breaking down of the division between Muslim/Christian.

Anyway, I partly see beginning signs of things moving this way, and partly my belief that this is what you end up with when one follows the “quran message”. I would love to hear your thoughts....

Wasalam
Zack

9

General Discussions / Is love and goodness a part of God's nature?

« on: April 11, 2014, 10:42:02 AM »

Dear Joseph

I am reading at the moment of the move of Islam away from Rationalism and recognizing the value of sciences  in the 11th century. It was said to be replaced with an understanding of God as pure "will" / takdir, where God did not act in according to a  loving and compassionate nature, as that would be viewed as a  limit upon his actions. Weather forecasts are a violation of recognizing Gods omnipotence, in that there are no natural laws, only what God wills.

Quotes were from 2:284 that God does as he pleases; 5:40 He punishes who he pleases are used.

This would seem to be a major departure in what is understood of the God of the Torah and Injil. Obviously "who God is" did not suddenly change from one era to the next.

How would you respond to this as a Muslim scholar?

Wasalam

10

General Discussions / The Background of the Kaaba

« on: February 24, 2014, 04:35:35 PM »

I am wondering the view of people here in regards to Ishmael and the Kaaba? Is there evidence that Ishmael reached Mecca and established the Kaaba?

Another question related to this.... There are views that for a certain amount of generations the Kaaba was a legitimate place for the honor of the God of Abraham.

Are these things tradition, or do they have basis?

11

General Discussions / Br Joseph and forum members: What are the 5 books that influenced you most?

« on: February 15, 2014, 12:51:53 PM »

Hello Br Jospeh and Forum Members,

I would love to know, besides the study tools that you use, what are the books that have influenced you most that created the framework and understanding that is presented in the articles on this website, including non-Muslim books?

Daniel

12

General Discussions / Are the Articles of Islamic Faith Foundational for people on this forum?

« on: February 11, 2014, 02:56:27 PM »

Hello all,

I was surprised when on another link I received the following response.....
Salam Daniel, We don't find any term by "Pillars of faith" in the Quran and you are probably referring to a hadith. Thanks anyways!

I meant the articles of Faith for a Muslim; eg. Believe in the Holy Books, Believe in the Prophets etc. Last Days etc...

Maybe I have made an assumption all along. Is this an absolute for those with a Qur'an-centric approach, or is it true that these are post-Qur'an?

Wasalam
Daniel

13

General Discussions / The danger of the "Qur'an only" Approach

« on: January 27, 2014, 10:52:37 PM »

Hello all,

I know the purposes of this site, and the content is fantastic. However to me the approach "We only use what is in the Quran" approach is quite dangerous.

I am a strong believer of Hermenuetics, that is in understanding verses in context. In creating the historical context of verse, this is what brings the Qur'an alive. For example, Surah 2:79.. "So woe to those who write the "scripture" with their own hands, then say, "This is from Allah ," in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn."  When learning context, of Arabized Jews not knowing Hebrew, coming across Aramaic  paraphrases of the Torah (Targums) re-written in Arabic being presented as scripture, it brings  meaning to the text. The more the framework for the verse is understood, the more meaningful the text becomes.

On the other hand, someone passionately religious who picks up the Qur'an without recognising historical context risks being a Jihadist!!

Does this forum encourage understanding the historical context? I am not talking about being tied into the Asbab Al-Nuzul. It would seem that being only tied into the Hadith does not necessarily provide context.

Wasalam
Daniel

14

General Discussions / Help me explain to Christians the "difficult issues" concerning Muhammad

« on: January 27, 2014, 10:18:31 AM »

As you would be aware, there are a few stumbling blocks in Christians embracing a more positive view of Muhammad. I genuinely ask these questions so to seek an adequate answer. Responses that could help could be such things as a) Providing evidence that the particular action was not considered a sinful act in that era b) Evidence that the basis for that information is highly doubtful. c) This action was a sinful act, and Muhammad repented afterwards. (This is a valid response based on the Torah actions of Prophets)   . I noted on the article on Aisha that as it is not in the Quran, it is not something responded to. I understand the Quran focus, however this would be considered bypassing the real issue by most.

The stumbling blocks could include:

- Sexual morality: In particular the apparent marriage to Aisha at an age unacceptably young (8 yrs old?) age. Other issues with excessive number of wives.
- Cases of raids and murder.. Etc.

What are the biggest issues you can think of, and how do you respond? Again, I am asking this to give a valid response, not to be negative. If this is not a valid discussion, I am happy for it to be deleted....

Wasalam
Daniel

15

General Discussions / Crucifixion

« on: November 28, 2013, 12:18:00 PM »

Hello all,

I am wondering what people here have concluded in regards to the crucifixion? For myself, as explained in another post, I believe that the Qur'an and "former Books" held to by Christians have a unity of message. (Although some translation errors exist to support dogma). The crucifixion is clearly presented in the Gospel. I should mention that the standard symbol of the cross (a small t ) is very unlikely to be shape of wood which Isa hung on (would have been old wood in a capital T probably).

Despite the unity of message, in the Qur'an it states: and because  of their saying, “We killed the Messiah,  Isa  son of Mariam,  Allah’s* messenger,” (though they did not kill him nor crucify him,  but it seemed so to them.) Surah An-Nisaa' 157

I have settled on understanding that the Qur'an speaks regularly not of a physical state, but a spiritual truth; often not with a western scientific view, but an Eastern spiritual view. Surah An-Nisaa' 157 is understood by looking at Surah Al-Baqarah [2]  154  in the background........

"Don’t say that those killed in Allah’s* path are dead, but alive, though you don’t realize it." Surah Al-Baqarah [2]  154  ... That is the spiritual reality of a martyr, someone who gives up their lives for the sake of love, for the sake of truth. This is a theme within the Bible, the 12 disciples as priests after they were martyred (Revelation), Isa..... when you lose your life you gain it... etc...

So basically Surah An-Nisaa' 157 is talking about a spiritual reality for the martyr.....

Any thoughts??

Regards
Daniel