Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
General Discussions / Is Qur'an preserved ?
« Last post by inay321 on August 04, 2020, 10:35:54 PM »
Salam

Please watch this video.

https://youtu.be/fDuLG4IJG20

What you will say on this ?

2
General Discussions / Re: Prophet Abraham asked to sacrifice his son?
« Last post by inay321 on August 04, 2020, 10:33:27 PM »
Salam

Brother Joseph. I just read your article 'Ishaac or Ismaeal'.
http://quransmessage.com/articles/ishmael%20or%20isaac%20FM3.htm


You made this point, saying that since Abraham's prayer in 37:100 was for a righteous son, then this adjective is told only about Isaac in 37:112, then the son who is "forbearing" in 37:101 and who was the subject of the dream can only be Isaac ..........

But Ismael, the son of Abraham is not described as "one of the righteous" in the narration in Sura 37, that is tre, it is Isaac who is given this description.
However when we read other Quranic verses we see that Ismaeal is described with that same adjective:
 
[21:85] Also, Ishmael, Enoch and Ezekiel; each one was among the steadfast.
[21:86] We admitted them into Our mercy. They were among the righteous.
 
God does not have to give us all details in one verse!
By reading all relevant verses together, we find that Abraham's prayer to be granted one of the righteous in 37:100, does not automatically point to Isaac, but it indicates that God answered the prayer of Abraham when He granted him Ismaeal as well as Isaac.

Salam

Inayah
3
Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Was it Ishaac or Ismaeal ?
« Last post by inay321 on August 02, 2020, 08:52:56 PM »
Salam

Brother Joseph. I just read your article 'Ishaac or Ismaeal'.
http://quransmessage.com/articles/ishmael%20or%20isaac%20FM3.htm


You made this point, saying that since Abraham's prayer in 37:100 was for a righteous son, then this adjective is told only about Isaac in 37:112, then the son who is "forbearing" in 37:101 and who was the subject of the dream can only be Isaac ..........

But Ismael, the son of Abraham is not described as "one of the righteous" in the narration in Sura 37, that is tre, it is Isaac who is given this description.
However when we read other Quranic verses we see that Ismaeal is described with that same adjective:
 
[21:85] Also, Ishmael, Enoch and Ezekiel; each one was among the steadfast.
[21:86] We admitted them into Our mercy. They were among the righteous.
 
God does not have to give us all details in one verse!
By reading all relevant verses together, we find that Abraham's prayer to be granted one of the righteous in 37:100, does not automatically point to Isaac, but it indicates that God answered the prayer of Abraham when He granted him Ismaeal as well as Isaac.

Salam

Inayah




4
The word فيها , which was used in Quran 13:3 means "in"

In other words, we see a "double marriage", "double mating", "double pairing"--double fertilization IN fruits!

Here is a good resource talking about how double fertilization evolved specifically in "FLOWERING PLANTS" (Angiosperms)--fruit IS an organ of flowering plants--fruit is produced by flowering plants.

https://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_and_General_Biology/Book%3A_General_Biology_(Boundless)/32%3A_Plant_Reproductive_Development_and_Structure/32.2%3A_Pollination_and_Fertilization/32.2D%3A_Double_Fertilization_in_Plants
5
Let's start with:

[Quran 36:36] Exalted is He who created (in) pairs all things.

This is an example of the inferiority of the English translation compared to the original Arabic. This verse does not say "in" pairs all things. Rather, if you look at a word for word translation, it says "the pairs", not "in pairs". That is, Allah created "all the pairs" of the Earth.

[Quran 51:49] And of all things We created two pairs...

In Arabic, (مِنْْ) “min“ could mean "some of"

Definitions:  from, some, some of .

Some of, of. Indicating a segment of; a portion of. In other words, "Some of all things we created pairs" in essence: "a part of all things are made into pairs".

[Quran 13:3] and from all of the fruits He made therein two mates

Same thing as above. A part of all the fruits have in them pairs. In other words: of all the fruits, there are pairs within them (fi-ha). This could be referring to some of the fruits with seeds which are diploid (have two sets/pairs of chromosomes, from the male and female components of the plant)

Believe it or not, this verse is a significant MIRACLE. It is something, the prophet Muhammad could not have known! Let me explain. This verse uses the terminology "zawjayni ith'nayni"--which is weird terminology. Zawjayni means "two"/"pair" and Ith'nayin also means "two". That means 4 in total! (2 pairs)! What???! That doesn't make any sense?!! Actually it does:

Double fertilization: "The launch of seed development in flowering plants (angiosperms) is initiated by the process of double fertilization: two male gametes (sperm cells) fuse with two female gametes (egg and central cell) to form the precursor cells of the two major seed components, the embryo and endosperm, respectively." From: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00452  

This is a peer reviewed scientific article, so cut the BS from those atheist/anti-Muslim websites that claim this Quranic verse is a contradiction because plants only have 1 sperm and 1 egg and that no plants have 2 pairs of sperm and eggs. WRONG THEY ARE!! Double fertilization happens in some fruits (not single fertilization, DOUBLE fertilization). I cannot believe the stupidity and ignorance of anti-muslim apologists and the BS they spew on their websites and forums!

Now, did 7th century Arabs have a concept of double fertilization? How did Muhammad (pbuh) know??
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems to be that Allah is appealing to 7th century Arabs' astonishment with duality/dualism of the world and is saying "you see that thing that you are astonished by?--Allah created it". Allah said this in such a way to appeal to 7th century Arabs' dispositions while not making it a contradiction for future generations. Allah may have wanted to make it sound like at first glance to the 7th century Arabs that he was talking about duality in the world (Quran must support 7th century belief and relate to their dispositions) AND the objective nature of reality that will be discovered through science). If Allah said "and everything that exists in the heaven and the Earth are made in pairs", that would be a clear scientific error, but notice how the Quran was careful to avoid this. It is only human interpretation that messes things up; It is only the English translators that mess things up.
6
General Discussions / Re: Prophet Abraham asked to sacrifice his son?
« Last post by Wakas on July 31, 2020, 08:46:34 AM »
It is that time of the year again (according to Traditional Islam): Eid Al-Adha

Questions to ask about the traditional story:
http://mypercept.co.uk/articles/Abraham-Sacrifice-Questions.html

(to this day no-one has attempted to answer all the questions)

Is it time to sacrifice our long held dogmatic beliefs? Perhaps.
7
General Discussions / Re: Clueless about Islam without history
« Last post by Wakas on July 26, 2020, 07:53:03 PM »
Re: example 1
Let's say his name was Jim instead. Can you tell us how this would change the guidance?

Re: example 2
e.g. "it is the truth" is singular.
If we read Quran as a whole is there any clear indication in it that we should follow other books also? No.
8
General Discussions / Re: Clueless about Islam without history
« Last post by Tausif Ahmed on July 26, 2020, 05:02:03 PM »
First of all thank you very much for a very detailed answer.

The points you mentioned, I fully agree with them even before I posted the question.
I did mention before that I do not mean small or irrelevant details.
My question was in no way a support for following hadith collections, Quran is clear on that.

Your POINT 3 is what I also had in mind but I asked..

Quote
Now one reply I can think of to this could be that Quran is sole source of religion and history(to a limited extent, keeping in accordance with Quran) can be read & explained.... but then that would negate the sufficiency of Quran

Well I guess if we take the hadiths etc to be historical sources rather than religious source then that would not negate the sufficiency of Quran?

Yes I am aware of converts doubting Islam after reading hadiths.

Thanks a lot again.

We raise in degrees whom We will, but over every possessor of knowledge is one [more] knowing. [12:76]
9
General Discussions / Re: Clueless about Islam without history
« Last post by Joseph Islam on July 26, 2020, 11:45:11 AM »
Dear Tausif,

As-salamu alaykum

As you have solicited my opinion by email as well on this, foremost, I’d like to share a few points which for me provide a necessary axiom and a basis for a suitable response to your kind self.


POINT 1

The Quran is not intended to be read in silo. Rather, the narratives of the Quran are to be read in toto as a cohesive, self-contained whole [1]


POINT 2

The Quran deters one from eliciting finer details that are not relevant to religious guidance. He has instructed us to rely on clear matters – miraan zahran [18:22] [2]; [3]


POINT 3

The Quran is sole religious authority for believers. This does not imply that the entire Ahadith corpus is false/inauthentic. They are just not 'authoritative' for religious guidance. Take from them what you will but the Quran must remain the primary source of interpretation and authority. [4]


POINT 4

The personal/early life of the messenger is arguably not important for religious guidance. The Quran also steers one clear of focusing on the name/the personality of the Prophet. The focus of the Quran is primarily on his mission. That is why Prophet Muhammad is mentioned numerous times as a 'messenger', 'a messenger of Allah', 'a warner', 'a prophet', 'a bearer of glad tidings' etc. However, very seldom is he mentioned by name. Similarly, one notes an entire following of Christianity is predicated on the teachings of Prophet Jesus where his early life is largely unknown or focused on. I believe there is a message in that too. Ergo, follow the guidance, not the personalities or lifestyles of the individuals as they were simply a product of their environment [5]. Of course, we send our salutations, our admiration and respect to these noble individuals. However, this should not be conflated with the 'religious guidance' itself. Please note where the Prophet himself as a 'husband' was rebuked in verse 66:1. The Quran separated the personality from his mission clearly in this verse. Please also kindly note that there is no mention of any of the prophet’s companions (other than Zayd [33:37] and his contentious adversary - Abu Lahab [111.1]) or any of the prophet’s wives.


POINT 5

When you pass the Quran to a non-Muslim, do you also hand over the entire corpus of Ahadith (Shia and Sunni canons) and Sira/Maghazi literature to them so that they can make an informed opinion before converting?  My argument to you would be that someone who potentially 'converts/reverts’ does not do so believing in or caring about the prophet or his history. They are arguably agnostic to this at the point of considering the authenticity of the message. How can they have any belief in a prophet when they aren't even convinced of the message at that point? It is arguably the message's authenticity that provides them conviction of the prophethood.

They ‘convert/revert’ in the main based on the power of the Quran's narratives and its ability to convince them that it could only be the word of God. My further argument would be that if one did provide all the Ahadith to a potential ‘convert/revert’, they would possibly find much objectionable content/material which may deter them from considering Islam as an authentic religion based on truth. I have known many ‘converts/reverts’ that weren't aware of the objectionable material attributed to the prophet's life before they took their Shahadah. If they had been, they would arguably never have made that transition.

In contrast, those born in Islam are taught about the prophet first and the message is often left secondary.


FINALLY

You mention (highlighted in brown below):

  • And who believe in what has been revealed to you, [O Muhammad], and what was revealed before you, and of the Hereafter they are certain [in faith]. [2:4]
    Now.... without the parenthesis or a brief history or introduction of Islam... how would they know that this book was revealed on man named Muhammad..?


The word 'ilayka' (ka - pronoun) is in the second person masculine and singular. It is one person to whom this reading is revealed to. The Quran mentions many times that it is a Book that was revealed to the messenger and in a verse clearly states that Muhammad is that messenger of Allah (48:29). With all due respect and in my humble opinion, one would be clutching at straws in desperation to interpret this in any other way whilst keeping the entire Quran as a cohesive unit for interpretation.  If this level of undue scrutiny / approach was taken with any other Scripture or the entire secondary Ahadith corpus in order to demand similar explanations, the entire literary corpora would arguably be decimated.

One should always allow for obvious, best interpretations that derive the ‘best meaning’. [6]

039:018
"Those who listen to the Word (the Quran) and follow the best meaning in it / best of it (Arabic: fayattabi'una ahsanahu) those are the ones whom God has guided and those are the one's endowed with understanding (Arabic: Albabi)"

I hope this helps, God willing,
Joseph


REFERENCES:

[1] HOW TO STUDY THE QURAN – SUGGESTIONS
http://quransmessage.com/articles/how%20to%20study%20the%20quran%20FM3.htm

[2] UNKNOWN TOWNS AND NAMES - WHY FILL IN THE GAPS?
http://quransmessage.com/articles/unknown%20towns%20and%20names%20FM3.htm#

[3] DO NOT COMPLICATE RELIGION - WISDOM FROM SURAH BAQARAH
http://quransmessage.com/articles/wisdom%20-%20baqarah%20FM3.htm

[4] THE QURAN STANDS ALONE AS SOLE RELIGIOUS GUIDANCE
http://quransmessage.com/articles/quran%20sole%20guidance%20FM3.htm

[5] TIME-BOUND SUNNA
http://quransmessage.com/articles/timebound%20sunna%20FM3.htm

[6] DO THE BEST YOU CAN WITH SINCERITY
http://quransmessage.com/articles/best%20you%20can%20FM3.htm
10
General Discussions / Re: Clueless about Islam without history
« Last post by Tausif Ahmed on July 25, 2020, 05:50:14 AM »
I agree.. Most of them are not...

but just knowing the simple thing that this book was revealed on a person named Prophet Muhammad is not possible by reading only Quran..

And I do think knowing a little bit about the person on whom this book was revealed is important.

EXAMPLE 1


For example a person unaware of any history of Islam read the Quran. They will come to the verse:

And who believe in what has been revealed to you, [O Muhammad], and what was revealed before you, and of the Hereafter they are certain [in faith]. [2:4]


Now.... without the parenthesis or a brief history or introduction of Islam... how would they know that this book was revealed on man named Muhammad..?

I am not talking about minor details... I agree if God didn't mention them then they must be insignificant.... but not knowing on whom this book was revealed is insignificant?

EXAMPLE 2

Only once is prophet Muhammad mentioned in Quran in reference to a revelation revealed upon him...

And those who believe and do righteous deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon Muhammad - and it is the truth from their Lord - He will remove from them their misdeeds and amend their condition. [47:2]


Why should we assume that the phrase ""those who believe.. in what has been sent down upon Muhammad" refers to the Quran? There are no verses before & after which explain this.

Peace
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10