Messages

[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/ ) ?]

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

Dear brother Zack....you said The legal and ethical instructions in the Qur'an are a revelation for 7th century Arabs. Ancient laws for other peoples, whether for Hebrews in the Torah, or Arabs in the Quran, do not have universal application. Instructions for diet, women etc. often have universal principals, but transplanting these Quran laws into the 21st century causes lots of problems.

Are you saying that the laws of the Quran should not be applied in the 21st century? I'm not sure if I understood you correctly
[/quote]

Hello Hamzeh. Yes, as you say above, I believe the legal laws do not have universal application, whether that be the Torah, the Injil or the Qur'an. In some ways, you have confirmed this when you say "God has prescribed a Law(shariah) and a way for every nation. To the Jews a Law and a way. To the Christians a Law and a way. To the Arabs and their surroundings a Law and a way."

Isa came to bring a "Universal Law" which is repeated about 10 times throughout the Injil "Love God and love your neighbour. All the law hangs on these 2 things. Matthew 26:40. The enforcing of a universal legal earthly law created hypocrites and confusion in the time of Isa. It creates confusion in every place and time. The Injil is about getting back to the heart, and not food laws etc.

So yes, I agree... God provided a law for Arabs and their surroundings for the 7th century, but it is not universal. People are free to embrace that law, but the law does not bring someone closer to God. A pure heart does.

Wasalam
Zack

Salam Abdul,

The sharia law..of today is mostly based on Hadeeth...which has no authenticity according to Quran...we are obliged to follow the laws laid in Quran only..nothing more than that...hope you understand...

Regards,
Anjum

Hi Abdul,

I would go further than the comment above. The legal and ethical instructions in the Qur'an are a revelation for 7th century Arabs. Ancient laws for other peoples, whether for Hebrews in the Torah, or Arabs in the Quran, do not have universal application. Instructions for diet, women etc. often have universal principals, but transplanting these Quran laws into the 21st century causes lots of problems.

Wasalam
Zack

['Iesa (Jesus)]

assalamu alaikum

and this one from the 6. surah
84. And We bestowed upon him Ishaque (Isaac) and Ya'qub (Jacob), each of them We guided, and before him, We guided Nuh (Noah), and among his progeny Dawud (David), Sulaiman (Solomon), Ayub (Job), Yusuf (Joseph), Musa (Moses), and Harun (Aaron). Thus do We reward the good-doers.And Zakariya (Zachariya), and Yahya (John) and 'Iesa (Jesus) and Iliyas (Elias), each one of them was of the righteous.
86. And Isma'il (Ishmael) and Al-Yas'a (Elisha), and Yunus (Jonah) and Lout (Lot), and each one of them We preferred above the 'Alamin (mankind and jinns) (of their times).

89. They are those whom We gave the Book, Al-Hukm (understanding of the religious laws), and Prophethood.

Relating to the quote above, there is no way that the above Messengers each brought a written revelation from God. Otherwise there would be over 20 Holy Books. In regards to Isa, in my understanding he definitely did not bring a written message. There is no record of such a thing. What was brought by Isa was a message, and a written account was by eye-witnesses.... with this written account of the Injil being held by the Ahli Kitab at the time of Muhammad. The idea of the Prophets bringing a physical Book rather than an oral Word of God is mixing up later Abbasid Era traditions.

So the issue here is how to interpret these verses of the Quran, where it is not a Book that was given, but an oral revelation. One thing to keep in mind is that the Quran is communicating to an Arab 7th century audience. Why was it communicated as Kitab to its audience? Did that mean something different to what we understand? Did the Arab audience think that only the Kitab meant it was God's revelation, and oral revelation lacked authority, therefore the word Kitab was deliberately used?

The key question is asking question, not just assume that there was a Book revealed to each Prophet.

Wasalam
Zack

[LIKE]

Hello Anjum,

Thanks for your honesty in saying "I just want to feel close to God." I think you have expressed what is the cry of everyone. Don't feel like you need to find "The right prayer ritual" to feel close to God.

To be honest, this is one of the tendencies I see on this forum.... "Finding a verse from the Qur'an to follow then everything will be fine." We can have everything memorised and be totally following the Qur'an only, yet feel far from God! God focus's on your heart, not your head. You can have all the right answers, but it comes back to the heart. Just words brings emptiness.

This is the message of all the Prophets. I would recommend reading through the Psalms, www.revisedenglishversion.com/Psalms/1 , and read them with the understanding that even a Prophet like David / Daud had the same desire... they reflect the human heart cry. Some Muslims would be worried that it is not the Qur'an, that is just the thinking of traditions even later than the Hadith! Pray that God's presence would be revealed to you... speak out all the blessings that God has given you! God's love is LIKE a loving Father's love to his children..., and we can live life and rest in that knowledge.

I will pray for you Anjum,

Wasalam
Zack

[وَاتلُ ما أوحِىَ إِلَيكَ مِن كِتابِ رَبِّكَ لا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمٰتِهِ وَلَن تَجِدَ مِن دونِهِ مُلتَحَدًا]

Qoran claims that GOD s words are sufficient and no other source is needed:
19:27:
وَاتلُ ما أوحِىَ إِلَيكَ مِن كِتابِ رَبِّكَ لا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمٰتِهِ وَلَن تَجِدَ مِن دونِهِ مُلتَحَدًا

You shall preach/recite... what is revealed to you from your Lord. Nothing shall replace/abrogate His words. And you should not find/use any other source.

GOD bless you.
Peace.

Just on the above quote from Good Logic..., firstly I think it is Surah 18, not 19.... Also every translation I see translates the last sentence...None can change His Words, and none will you find as a refuge other than Him.

We need to put ourselves back in the situation to understand what is happening. The Qur'an is all about UNITY. Uniting sectarian groups under a "Code of conduct" that was revealed to Muhammad..... Bringing Arabia under a single creed.

Whether the specifics of this "Code of Conduct" (ie. ethical and legal teachings of the Quran), was ever intended to go beyond Arabia I am not sure has any basis, whilst the essence of islam is universal.

This topic is vital for the Qur'an centric community I believe, that they will be "learners", in particular understanding the historical context of the revelation to Muhammad, so not to confuse the essence of the message with local legal teachings.

Wasalam
Zack

[in order to recognize the Quran's authenticity]

Zack, you cited verse 10:94. This verse, when read in context, isn't asking for people to look for sources outside the Quran and take them for religious authority. It's simply asking people to talk to the receivers of the previous scriptures in order to recognize the Quran's authenticity. And it's not saying that those people have religious authority; it's just instructing people to engage in discussion and find the truth of the Quran.

To understand any topic mentioned in the Quran, put all verses on the topic together. Then figure out what the implicit verses mean in light of the explicit ones. Many verses may seem contradictory at first, but if you take them in light of the clear verses, they make more sense. This is how most Quran-centrists make sense of the text.

Hello Miastar,

Thank you for your response.  I think I partly agree with most you wrote, however
1) Concerning 10:94 "In my opinion, your sentence This verse isn't asking for people to look for sources outside the Quran" seems to be trying to dance around what the verse says. From this and other verses relating to the previous Holy Books..... In the prophet Muhammad's mind, the Qur'an was in totally unity with the Previous scriptures, otherwise this and other verses do not make sense.

2) Back to the initial point... Do you believe that certain verses in the Qur'an DID NOT specifically relate to a specific situation in Arabia during the life of Muhammad? In other words, it was supernaturally revealed not addressing specific local situations?

3) As I said before, I believe the view of the Qur'an was vastly different at the time of its revelation than today. It is extremely unlikely it was a book for a distinct religious group, but to unite a Nation... which was predominantly sectarian Christians. Islam (with capital I) took about 50 years after the death of Muhammad to evolve. The Qur'an is clearly not intended to be a Book that supercedes or even contradicts the previous.

Can I suggest some research of "moderate revisionists" who are essentially Quran centric... meaning they have no question of the Quran's authenticity; regard the Hadith as any historical document written 200 years after an event; yet have a new view of the Quran through placing it in its historical context, often through internal evidence, however often through a growing understanding of its surroundings and environment. With this, the Quran begins to make greater sense.

Zack

Ezekiel 37:26-28: Build the Third Temple
Isaiah 43:5-6: Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel
Isaiah 2:4: Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore."
Zechariah 14:9: Spread universal knowledge of the G-d of Israel - uniting the entire human race as one: "G-d will be King over all the world—on that day, G-d will be One and His Name will be One"

Thank you for your questions.The Jews at the time of Jesus clearly wanted a political King to overthrow the Roman Empire. It was a part of an ethnic pride on their part as seeing themselves as the chosen people. This is seen in John 10 until John 12, where Jesus is declared King as he enters Jerusalem. The theme of Jesus' teaching is the "Kingdom of God" and the formation of a spiritual community. Throughout the Injil, the verses above are quoted as being fulfilled by the this spiruitual kingdom.

Israel wanted a restoring of their local political king, with a Temple, a chosen people of Israel, the priest, and that is how they interpret the above verses. The Injil presents the physical Temple, Chosen People / Nation, Priest etc as being a template for the Kingdom of God. Jesus' teaching presents the essence of this kingdom... LOve your neighbour etc.

Jesus was confronting ethnic pride of the Jews, as he was introducing a fulfillment of Torah / Zabur prophecy that didn't give room for ethnic pride, but focussed on the unseen... the heart.

Wasalam
Zack

PS: I too have "blank areas" in my understanding, that being classical Islam.

The Quran doesn't give religious authority to any other sources.
[/quote]

If I can respond to the above with 3 points:
1) Surah 10:94:   If you are in doubt regarding what We have sent down to you, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before you. The Qur'an itself encourages those who read it to refer to outside sources, namely the Previous Scriptures.
2) When we say to that the Qur'an responds to Historical context , the primary source for the creating of that historical context is the Qur'an itself. For example:
- If we use the verse above, it tells us that Muhammad's followers had within access to people of the Previous scriptures. This one area has numerous external references with the presence of the Syriac Bible in towns throughout Arabia, and in fact much of the Arabic of the Qur'an incorporating Syriac language.
- Surah 6:159 : Do not divide into sects.... This tells us it is highly likely that there was widespread monotheism, but the issue was sectarianism. This we can also confirm from outside sources..

And so all through the Qur'an, it responds to real live situations, through a recitation. The Qur'an is culturally relevant to 7th century Arabia. If we don't understand this, there will be quranists in the future who will be people of violence, taking the text literally, removed from its context.

Being Qur'an centric doesn't mean a person reads the Quran anymore correctly. Two people can read the same text of the Bible, one is Tauhid, the other is a Trinitarian. Viewing the Quran text as as the eternal Arabic Revelation that came from heaven disconnected from its Arab context I would probably say is just as much a later tradition as the Hadith, and is in fact contrary to the Qur'an itself.

Wasalam
Zack

Hi Duster,

Thanks for your post. The presenting of Prophets, including the Prophet Muhammad,  as perfect or near perfect human beings from what I understand is somewhat of a later Islamic tradition. I say "somewhat" as the Qur'an, in preaching a message of repentance to Arabs, does not elaborate on the failings of the Prophets, but focus' on their obedience to preach repentance.

However throughout the Bible, it presents the life story of the prophets, this is different to the Quran. It presents the "Good, the Bad and the Ugly" of Prophets, that even they are fallen human beings, sometimes in a major sin, and throughout, genuine repentance brings them back to God. This is evident through the Psalms, which are often songs from the heart of David crying for mercy.

Therefore the purpose is not to promote sinful acts, but to emphasize mans sinfulness and Gods mercy. The specific instances you mention have a context.... In regards to Noah's nakedness...(Genesis 9) Shem's brothers are presented as the "villians", and Shem as the positive example. There is no indication in the text of homosexuality... that is a massive "reading into the text something that is not there." However Shem's brothers are disciplined for exposing and gossiping on another's error, whilst Shem is held as an example as he gave dignity to another, even though there was a problem, and didn't judge another for it, but instead was compassionate.

About Lots children, again it is not condoning the actions, but the context was they were some of the last of their people, distraught, and made it mistake...

A part of this is for people not to read the Quran as if its the BIble, and not to read the Bible as if it is the Quran. Hope this helps...
Wasalam
Zack

Hello Hassan,

Was there anything in particular you would thinking of that didn't qualify Jesus as the Messiah?

As far as being a King, this was why the Roman authorities opposed Jesus. He was recognised by the masses of lower class as their king. With this, Jesus was a threat to Roman authority in their view. Roman power, with less than 5% of their own people in Palestine, could only be maintained with an allegiance with the Jewish temple authorities, who they collaborated with.

So the figure of Jesus is very political, and that of a king. It is just that we view a king has to have a Palace and wealth. However Jesus presents a different kingdom... one of servanthood, love for the poor, and suffering for the sake of others.

This is the heart of the Injil, and the essence of the Kingship that was introduced by the Messiah.

Wasalam
Zack

[intellect and common sense]

In my opinion, Option b reflects intellect and common sense. For example with the war related verses in the Quran, these is a lot more understandable when taking into account the cultural context of that time that the expansion of a faith was generally through military means.

[opposite]

Our brains do funny things to us. Even though we say we don't follow the later Islamic traditions, we read everything through a lense.

The text says nothing about corruption of previous scripture, but because our minds have been formed by traditions, we read it as if it does.

The Qur'an being "A Guardian" implies the opposite to what is being interpreted here. Guarding something assumes that it is not corrupted. Why would the Qur'an Guard something that is corrupt? That is an insult to the Qur'an.

We can be Qu'ran centric, but reading with a starting mindset, we can be far from the Qur'ans message.

Wasalam
Zack

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

HI Duster,

Just quoting what I wrote on another thread tonight...

The sensitivities of Muslims to the Bible and CHristians to the Quran are simply traditions long after even the Hadith. The quran itself has no issues with the Bible, in fact encourages the approach . (Surah 10:94).

It seems like a part of your confusion and turmoil is how the Quran relates to the Bible. I hope the above clarifies. God's word is in unity with other... not fighting within itself.

One thing I do believe is central...... God is a God of love and compassion. Gods nature is unchanging. Pray "God, help me in this phase in my life" and I believe He will! You need to get beyond just working things out with your mind. God looks at the heart. Believe He will allow you to experience peace!

Wasalam
Zack