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 - Lobotomize94

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7
General Discussions / Re: Native Arabic Speakers: Help please
« on: May 11, 2020, 10:41:08 AM »
As always, thank you very much for your detailed response!

As far conclusions go, I'd say it is another inconclusive set of verses. 5:44 says that a portion of the Jews had the role of protecting the Torah, it did not say that they did it successfully. They were entrusted/commanded to be the protectors of the Torah, but elsewhere, the Quran indicates that previous scripture has been tampered with, that the Jews actually tried to distort their Torah etc. 5:44 says that the protection of the Torah was on Humans/Jews, 5:9 says that the protection of the Zikr was on God himself. That's a much bigger deal. Allah never said he would protect the written texts of the Torah.

General Discussions / Re: What's wrong with Quran 9:31?
« on: May 10, 2020, 11:17:31 AM »
Thanks for asking!

I really did struggle with this verse, but it was a dumb struggle.

I'm wondering if others who struggle with this verse the same as I do can read my post and gain insight. So in hindsight, I'm not sure if it should be deleted. I'll leave it up to you  :)

General Discussions / Re: Native Arabic Speakers: Help please
« on: May 08, 2020, 02:16:56 PM »
In the case of 2:79-78.
The clearest point one can posit which is also hard to argue against is that "writing the scripture with their own hands" is attributed to at least a group of the jewish community due to its immediate context with the preceding verses. However, it's less clear who exactly is responsible. Of course one might develop arguments (linguistic or otherwise) to support their position. But I believe its best to just not seek elaboration where the Quran did not provide any.

Hello Ahmad, thank you very much for your response. I do agree about 3:7 as well!

The reason I ask this questions is because the Quran says:

[Quran 4:157]: And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.

This is unambiguous. It is stating that Jesus was not crucified. Yet the new testament clearly says Jesus was crucified. So this is indirect evidence of God speaking to us telling us that the bible has been corrupted. If it weren't corrupted, it wouldn't have said that Jesus was crucified. So this seems like a clear cut piece of evidence that the bible was corrupted as Allah is helping us infer. What do you think?

Yet Quran 5:47 says:

[Quran 5:47]: And let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah has revealed therein. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the defiantly disobedient.

So we see here the in spite of the Gospel's corruption, there is still sufficient truth in there that the gospel contains some of what Allah revealed which should sufficiently lead to the conclusion that Islam is true. And the very next verse (Quran 5:48) says that the Quran is there to guard the previous scriptures. But if the previous scriptures were already guarded by Allah, then why was the Quran needed to guard them? So clearly, they weren't guarded by Allah, Allah left them to corrupt the scriptures, corruption ensued in them, and that is why Quran was needed to confirm and guard their original message.

We also see that Allah commanding people to judge by what was revealed of the Gospel they have is not necessarily a testament to its lack of corruption. The very next verse tells us this through inference.

So what do you think about this?

General Discussions / Re: Native Arabic Speakers: Help please
« on: May 05, 2020, 09:18:10 AM »
@ Wakas,

1. I feel like you are trying to find ambiguity in an unambiguous verse. In context, the verses surrounding 48:13 are talking about those contemporaneous with the prophet. Even more, this verse is in the present tense (not past tense) which again shoots down and interpretation that this verse is referring to a previous prophet. It is about a subject contemporaneous with the prophet, it is in the present tense  I'm not sure how much evidence you need about this verse.

2. Many times the Prophet Muhammad is also referred to as "rasool". The prophet is both a "rasool" and a "Nabi". You also need to address why this verse is about a singular tense--that is a singular prophet and it is in the present tense.

General Discussions / Re: Native Arabic Speakers: Help please
« on: May 04, 2020, 04:38:46 PM »
The verse begins with "wa" / "and".

On Quran 48:13

Yes I know. We do this all the time in the English language. Take this for example:

"Those gang members in the United States have committed heinous acts of violence, rape and murder. They were brought down to justice. And anyone who breaks the law will experience the full extent of the justice."

So you see, I made a general statement after that sentence using the conjunction "and"/"wa" even though gang members was the context. The word "anyone" makes it a general statement.

More importantly, in that verse uses warasūlihi which is singular. Its not talking about some other messenger, this is talking about the prophet Muhammad. The context of this verse is also the polytheists contemporaneous with the prophet Muhammad. So this verse is also including them, it says "anyone who disbelieves in Allah and his messenger".

That means if the polytheists become Christians or Jews, it doesn't count. They must become Muslims believing in Allah and Muhammad. And this verse is a generalization (as I discussed above) so it applies to everyone: you must believe (yu'min--not past tense) in Allah and his Messenger. It didn't say "messengers", it said messenger, meaning it is referencing one specifically.

Did you read the link I provided? I am not talking about which messenger it is. I am talking about the difference in role words, i.e. between prophet and messenger.

Is prophet Muhammad not both a prophet and a messenger? It is very clear that 48:13 is referencing Muhammad. In the context of it, the very verse before it is in reference to Muhammad, and in Quran 48:8-9 it is clearly referencing Muhammad.

General Discussions / Re: Native Arabic Speakers: Help please
« on: May 03, 2020, 12:39:30 PM »
Thank you very much, that explains it well!

Can I ask another question about Arabic?

In English, we use the conjunction "and" as well as "or" when we are referencing two sentences connected to each other. Does this hold true in the Quran as well?

For example, in Quran 2:79, Wiki-Islam said it is only referring to the uneducated Jews in Quran 2:78, BUT Quran 2:78 exists in conjunction with previous verses talking about even educated jews corrupting the scripture. So doesn't that mean Quran 2:79 is talking about the whole thing and not just the verse immediately before it?

In English, if I say [The knowledgeable jews corrupted the scripture, AND, some knowledgeable ones corrupted the scripture, so woe to those who write the scripture with their own hands.]--in English, if I said that, the "so woe to those" is referencing BOTH of the statements before it because they were connected by "And". Is this also true in Arabic? Are we necessarily obligated to believe that Quran 2:79 only references Quran 2:78 and not the subject in general of the previous verses that were connected by the conjunction "and"?

General Discussions / Re: What's wrong with Quran 9:31?
« on: May 02, 2020, 07:08:56 PM »

Nevermind. That was a dumb Question. I can't seem to go back and delete it.

I realize now that Quran 9:31 is saying "they were only commanded to worship one God" (Not 2,3, or 4, but only one God). That is they were not commanded to worship more than one God. This verse is not saying this was the only commandment, rather it was saying they were only told to Worship one God (not any more).

General Discussions / What's wrong with Quran 9:31?
« on: May 02, 2020, 05:29:31 PM »
"They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah, and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him."

Weren't the Jews/Christians commanded to do more than just worship one God? They had 617 commandments. However, this verse says that the only commandment is to worship one God?

Something seems off. Perhaps this is just a rhetorical exaggerrative statement like we use in English language, or perhaps it is referring only to foundational commands?

We also see this in Quran 98:5 --they were only commanded to worship God, establish prayer and give Zakat...but they were commanded MUCH MORE than just that. They were commanded to keep Sabbath for example. Or perhaps this verse is referring to the new commandments of the Jews/Christians, to be Muslims and abandon their previous rituals (like abandoning sabbath) and instead become Muslims who are commanded to worship God, establish prayer and Give Zakat. Or again, maybe this is just another rhetorical exaggerative statement showing how easy it is to be a Muslim?

Bismillah OCCURS IN THE QURAN 115 TIMES, not 114 times

113 of those are at the start of the chapters (Surah Taubah has no Bismillah)
2 of those are found inside chapters. 1 Bismillah in Surah Hud and 1 Bismillah inside Surah Naml

Surah Hud
“He said, “Embark upon it. In the Name of God be its coursing and its mooring. Truly my Lord is Forgiving, Merciful.” (11:41)

Surah Naml
“Verily, it is from Solomon and verily it is, In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful.” (27:30)

So your 'Basmalah' formula is incorrect!

Quran 11:41 is not the full Bismillah. It's just a portion. I believe he was talking about the full Bismillah "Bismallah Al-rahman, Al-raheem"  [In the name of God, the compassionate, the Merciful]

General Discussions / Re: Native Arabic Speakers: Help please
« on: May 02, 2020, 07:57:04 AM »
Dear Lobotomize94

The Quran acknowledges that there were believers in many periods of history before Prophet Muhammed. (Ex: Followers of Prophet Abraham, Prophet Johah & Prophet Moses).

But now, Prophet Muhammed is the last and final messenger. So our belief cannot be complete without believing in him and his message.

If what I have written is not clear, please tell me to elaborate.

Best Regards,

Hello I see that your name is Ahmad. Perhaps you are a native Arabic speaker. I'm a convert and don't really speak that much Arabic.

So I ask that if you are a native speaker, can you show me why in Quran 5:69 --what part of the Arabic makes the word "believe" past tense. Can you go over that word for word in Arabic?

The translation is: and those [before Him] who were Jews or Sabeans or Christians. What part of the Arabic specifically refers to the Jews/Sabeans/Christians in the past tense?

General Discussions / Re: Native Arabic Speakers: Help please
« on: May 02, 2020, 07:55:17 AM »
Few points:

2:62 and 5:69 are in the perfect/past tense, see

I looked at Quran 5:69

I don't see the word "past tense" at all in there. My understanding of Arabic is very very limited, if you are a native speaker, can you break down what makes the word "believe" into "believed" in Arabic? Also what makes it say "and those who were Jews or Sabeans or Christians" rather than "those who "ARE" jews or Sabeans or Christians"

I guess what I'm asking is, how do you know it is past tense? What part of the Arabic tells you that specifically. Like for example "were" in English simply is past tense "are" is present tense. In Arabic, what is that in this verse?

48:13 is linked to previous verses, check context

you have changed "His messenger" into "prophet Muhammad". Are they the same?

I have to say that I disagree with this. While Quran 48:13 in context talks about the Jews/Christians at the time of the prophet and then starts by saying [paraphrasing] "whoever disbelieves in Allah and his messenger is a disbeliever"

"His messenger" = prophet Muhammad. This is singular, not plural. So this is talking about a specific prophet, not all the other prophets specifically. This specific prophet is Prophet Muhammad (which you also understand from reading the context).

What do you think?

Also Quran chapter 98:1-2 makes it clear that the disbelievers must believe this Prophet (singular, not plural) is a prophet of Allah and Quran 98:6 says those among the people of the book and polytheists who disbelieve will be punished.

General Discussions / Native Arabic Speakers: Help please
« on: May 01, 2020, 05:43:30 PM »
Quran 2:62 and Quran 5:69 are interpreted in English as being in the past tense. "those who believed"

Is the Arabic actually in the past tense, or is it in the present tense or is there no tense being shown at all?

If both of the above are true, then this is in direct contradiction to Quran:

[Quran 48:13] And whoever has not believed in Allah and His Messenger - then indeed, We have prepared for the disbelievers a Blaze.

This verse makes it clear that you must believe in Allah and the prophet Muhammad, otherwise you are a disbeliever.

So is Quran 2:62 and 5:69 actually in past tense (or is no tense being specified) as far as Arabic grammar? Especially 5:69. The context of 2:62 fits with the past tense, but what about Quran 5:69?

Thank you very much for these. Please keep it up.

Have you considered Quran 54:1, moon landing thing? Check out what I wrote on this:

General Discussions / Re: What are the odds? Quran and moon landing.
« on: April 19, 2020, 05:39:37 PM »
There is also another layer of complexity/improbability about this verse and Apollo 11.

Quran 54:1 has 22 letters in it.

Here is the direct NASA source, published in 1969 (when Apollo 11 happened), saying "The total weight of the lunar material returned by Apollo 11 was 22 kg, of which 11 kg were rock fragments more than 1 em in diameter and 11 kg were smaller particulate material."

This is from NASA themselves at the time this happened:

Scroll down to page 124 in the document itself (or page 115 in the PDF itself)

So now, this verse is pointing to when the moon has split and how much of the moon split. (you don't necessarily have to split something by one half, you can split it by a  third, two-thirds etc/)

General Discussions / Re: What are the odds? Quran and moon landing.
« on: April 14, 2020, 06:43:17 PM »
Other source:

"The LM lifted off from the Moon at 17:54:01 UT on 21 July"

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7