My case for treating them as fictional...
-
As normal lobby,your views are not concordant with those of any quran following fellow,except for kyle.....No wonder ahmed got upset..... ;D
However,i do feel you are stuck on the quran,i mean you seem to be trying everything to make it a decent book,even saying things which really are against the principles of the book,such as saying maybe god didnt author it,or such as only believing those part you verify,this contradicts having faith in the whole book(which the quran also seems to be suggesting in 1736,but this seems an internal contradiction so its not your fault!)....But anyway,i know you are a genuine seeker and an open-minded bloke.... -
peace enquirer,
I don't think I'm "stuck" with the quran, and if there's something that I know is wrong, I won't try to make it seem decent. But the thing is, I think the quran is saying something other than what some people believe, or at least it could be saying that, so I have to do whatever it is that I'm doing right now. I don't think what I said contradicts any of the quran's principles or ideas. The thing is, the quran tells us to believe in the truth, and it CLAIMS to be true, to have been inspired by god. So we have to test that claim.
thanks. -
Fair enough lobby,i did go through this phase myself for some time on this forum,i just dont want you to go round in circles or be scared of 'letting go'......It helped me to study theology and verify if that made sense,also do you still feel the quran can be objective and how would you go about finding its objective message.....?
Remeber,we can read what we want on to the book.....I do also feel you do go away from the general message of what most say the quran is saying...Maybe your a quranic mystic like kyle?
ps; i know we all need to go through our own research and journey,just feel i will give you some food on the journey... -
Peace Lobster,
while I agree that whether the stories are true or not is irrelevant but if you check the QXP translation Shabir quotes many examples to try and prove that the quran contains accurate history.
Whether he is going to be biased >D or >D misleading is something i don't know. I remember reading about the Egyption pyramids and historians say that slaves did not build them, but according to the Judeo-Christian tradition they were built by slaves, that's why so many people believe that they were built by slaves even though they actually won't.
-
attributes are proven through their embodiment
Explain, please.
Angel,
while I agree that whether the stories are true or not is irrelevant but if you check the QXP translation Shabir quotes many examples to try and prove that the quran contains accurate history.
QXP says a lot of things that the quran doesn't say. I like QXP, but a lot of times it stops being a translation and becomes an interpretation/explanation, and the angle that's taken by Shabbir (and Arnold) I just don't agree with.
I think everyone's biased, at least a little bit.
The quran's like poetry. TO actually understand what the author was trying to say, we have to read it carefully, concentrating on each word individually and try (we can only try) to understand what the words meant to the author, not what they mean to others or to ourselves. It's really hard to do that, and with a book as old as the quran, I'd say nearly impossible. And even if one does read it without any biases or preconceptions, different interpretations are still possible. But as far as the quran being a moral guide goes, I don't think it matters what the quran is actually saying, as long as we believe in the right things. -
Peace Lobster,
By "them" I mean the prophets. Abraham, Moses, Jesus etc.
The thing is, in the quran, god asks us for PROOF again and again ("...bring forth your proof if you are truthful...". But regarding these people, it gives us no proof of their existence.
To me, that means that the quran isn't trying to prove these people as actual people from history, and so we can safely assume that whether they existed or not is unimportant and irrelevant to the message of the quran.
So we have to look at them as characters in a fiction book. Everything they do, and everything that is mentioned about them, is for a reason. Everything is there for the underlying message.
Let's discuss.There are three types of statements
- Verifiable as true.
- Unverifiable.
- Verifiable as false.
From a historical prespective a statement such as "John said pigs can fly" can be verifiable as true because perhaps we can prove that John actually said that, despite the content itself being false. You see history is not concerned with content.
On the other hand, from a historical prespective, the accounts of the lives of the prophets in the great reading can be considered "unverifiable". So I can argue that they are true and you can argue that they are false and no one can decisevely win such arguments. But then when you think about it, so are all historical accounts of the lives of any person. For example, even modern figures, say Rashad Khalifa or Abraham Lincoln, people differ greatly on the "historical" account of their lives.
The great reading is clearly not recounting the history of those prophets. If you read one of the many books that were written about the stories of the prophets, you will see right away that 99.9% of the story is not from the great reading. In some cases, just the name of the prophet and one or two lines from an entire 100 page book has some basis in the great reading.
The only account that remotely resembles a story is that of Joseph in Chapter 12. But even there, much detail from a historical account point of view is not present so the objective of Chapter 12 is clearly not to give us a historical account of Joseph's live.
As I said, history is not concerned with content while the great reading is primarily concerned with content and the lessons learned. So in the great reading you find the events of the story of Adam recounted in different ways and same with other stories such as that of Moses. In each way of recounting the story, you get a different prespective and lessons learned and there is no chronological order in the great reading. This is exactly the opposite approach of recounting history where historians are trying to get to as nicely linear and standard as possible story.
So the criteria that you are using to determine what is true and what is false in historical accounts is not appropriate for the great reading. In fact, even using this criteria for historical accounts, you will certainly get many true historical accounts that are completely useless. Just think about it. For example, if you were to write a history of your own life to provide lessons for your future children and grandchildren. Would you put it as follows
- I was born on so and so date and here is the copy of my birth certificate to verify it.
- I graduated from High School on so and so date with a so and so GPA and here is the diploma to verify it.
- I worked as a so and so for this long and here are my tax documents and pay stubs to verify it.
- I married Miss X on this date and here is a copy of our marriage certificate to verify it as true.
- I had so many children and here is their respective birth certificates to verify it as true.
- Postscript by your children Our father died on so and so date and here is his death certificate to verify it.
Is this the legacy that you want to leave for the next generations? Or would you prefer to leave them something more useful? Why do you assume that Abraham and all the prophets would want something less than you?
I would prefer to leave for my children and grandchildren something about me that has some useful wisdom in its content.
The great reading is not a history book. It is a book of wisdom. I know that everything in it is true because it is all wise.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Salam.
Lobster, i believe that these men did exist and i would ask you to check it before you say anything, you always have to verify stuff when you receive it, even if someone tells you it's a sunny day outside or snowing, don't just accept it and live by it, no, go outside and check it over and over untill you are 100% sure. 150% sure.
Ask The Exalted God Most Merciful to forgive you, pray, He has always answered my prayers, God always listens, He listens to the prayers of the believers. And be patient.
Peace.
-
peace Ayman,
I totally agree with you (unless I misunderstood you).
I was saying that the quran's point is not to show that these people are real, and that we MUST believe in their historical existence (maybe we disagree here?). I think that whether they existed or not is irrelevant. That's not what the quran is focussing on, because then it would give us evidence, it would give us the birth certificates and the diplomas and everything. It doesn't. So obviously, it is the underlying message of these accounts that we must focus on.
I say we should just forget that these people ever existed. Then only can we look at the quran without any preconceptions. -
Peace Lobster,
I totally agree with you (unless I misunderstood you).
I was saying that the quran's point is not to show that these people are real, and that we MUST believe in their historical existence (maybe we disagree here?). I think that whether they existed or not is irrelevant. That's not what the quran is focussing on, because then it would give us evidence, it would give us the birth certificates and the diplomas and everything. It doesn't. So obviously, it is the underlying message of these accounts that we must focus on.
I say we should just forget that these people ever existed. Then only can we look at the quran without any preconceptions.Do you think that whether you existed or not is irrelevant? What would make your own existence relevant?
Let me slightly rephrase something I said earlier
The great reading is not a history book. It is a book of wisdom. I know that everything in it is true (including the existence of prophets) because it is all wise.
Peace,
Ayman
-
peace,
Do you think that whether you existed or not is irrelevant? What would make your own existence relevant?
Relevant to what?
If I left my children lessons from my life, does it matter whether I existed or not? Those lessons would hold true anyway.The great reading is not a history book. It is a book of wisdom. I know that everything in it is true (including the existence of prophets) because it is all wise.
Okay, I understand you. But still, just because the message is true, doesn't mean the characters actually existed. That's why I brought up fiction writing. A lot of times the stories contain lessons, but the people in it never actually existed. They are symbols. They either represent concepts or ideas, or they represent us in certain situations.
That's why I think it's irrelevant.
Only what the reading says about them is relevant to its message. The rest only comes in the way. -
Peace Phoenix, all,
I agree with you that the actual existence of any of the prophets and messengers is irrelevant as far as the underlying message is concerned. And actual proof of any history can never really be 100% guaranteed as a true account. Documents can be forged, testimony could be coerced, embellished, or just plain imagined, etc. Taking this path of thought to the most extreme, even your life and everyone/thing around you could be a figment of your own imagination. At the end of the day, it's all about you and how you interact with (and hopefully evolve from) your own mind.
Nevertheless, I kinda disagree with this
I say we should just forget that these people ever existed. Then only can we look at the quran without any preconceptions.
I don't think believing anyone actually existed interferes with the guidance of the qur'an. It's only when one becomes obsessed with the details that the message is lost. But to just say, "OK, Ibrahim was a real person", really does not take away from nor add preconception to one's qur'anic studies.
I think the history, even if cloudy, sets the backdrop for the mind to imagine the stories being told. In mentally visualizing, we watch the inner movie and then look for the guidance within.
Peace,
Tay -
I don't think believing anyone actually existed interferes with the guidance of the qur'an. It's only when one becomes obsessed with the details that the message is lost. But to just say, "OK, Ibrahim was a real person", really does not take away from nor add preconception to one's qur'anic studies.
I think the history, even if cloudy, sets the backdrop for the mind to imagine the stories being told. In mentally visualizing, we watch the inner movie and then look for the guidance within.
hmm
yeah I guess.
But I was thinking that if you have to believe that they existed, then you may use what you find from other sources to interpret the quran. Like muslim scholars have been interpreting the quran based on the bible. Which just doesn't work.
If you believe the quran's really talking about real people, and what is mentioned in it about them is real, then you still only have to trust (to understand the message) only what is mentioned in that book, otherwise the message may become muddled (is that a word?).
And we just don't know if the quran intends to present these people as real or as just symbolic characters. We can't know that.
But I can certainly see your point. -
Peace Phoenix,
But I was thinking that if you have to believe that they existed, then you may use what you find from other sources to interpret the quran. Like muslim scholars have been interpreting the quran based on the bible. Which just doesn't work.
I agree. I think "if you have to" is the key phrase. No one really has to. But again, some people will explore the histories because it interests them. And even if they use their findings to then interpret the qur'an, it's their own perogative, right? As long as no one's forcing it down your throat, all is well.
If you believe the quran's really talking about real people, and what is mentioned in it about them is real, then you still only have to trust (to understand the message) only what is mentioned in that book, otherwise the message may become muddled (is that a word?).
Good job! I see your point, and I agree. I think you've hit on something important. And yes, muddle is a word.
And we just don't know if the quran intends to present these people as real or as just symbolic characters. We can't know that.
You're right, we can't. You gotta remember, bro, that the qur'an is for everyone. Some will be delighted at the stories for their face value and perhaps absorb the guidance subconsciously. Others will sniff out the guidance and toss the details aside. I think it's important to tolerate each other.
When my fiance' listens to a song for the first time, she "feels" the beat and listens to the words. By the 2nd and 3rd time, she has the song memorized. When I listen to a song, I "feel" the words and listen to the beats and melodies. I see the song in layers and dissect the instruments and vocal harmonies, etc. I may listen 20-30 times before the lyrics make their way into my brain. That's her, and that's me, and that's the way it is.
Peace,
Tay -
peace Tay,
I agree. I think "if you have to" is the key phrase. No one really has to. But again, some people will explore the histories because it interests them. And even if they use their findings to then interpret the qur'an, it's their own perogative, right? As long as no one's forcing it down your throat, all is well.
Agree.
Good job! I see your point, and I agree. I think you've hit on something important. And yes, muddle is a word.
thank you.
You're right, we can't. You gotta remember, bro, that the qur'an is for everyone. Some will be delighted at the stories for their face value and perhaps absorb the guidance subconsciously. Others will sniff out the guidance and toss the details aside. I think it's important to tolerate each other.
hmm
yeah, true.When my fiance' listens to a song for the first time, she "feels" the beat and listens to the words. By the 2nd and 3rd time, she has the song memorized. When I listen to a song, I "feel" the words and listen to the beats and melodies. I see the song in layers and dissect the instruments and vocal harmonies, etc. I may listen 20-30 times before the lyrics make their way into my brain. That's her, and that's me, and that's the way it is.
I'd say I'm more like you in that respect.
It sucks though when I really like a song and then I start listening to the words and they're horrible. -
Peace DArgento,
you seem to know a lot about arhaelogical evidence, is there evidence for any of these prophets existing?
The simple answer is no.
There is no evidence of me existing either. For all you know I could be an 8 year old girl playing on the computer or I could be 100 people sharing this ID. However, this is not the point because by logically looking at the content of my posts, I would hope that people trust that I exist. ;D
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace Lobster,
I just want to say that I generally agree with Tay and you.
If I left my children lessons from my life, does it matter whether I existed or not? Those lessons would hold true anyway.
If those lessons are relevant to real-life experiences, then part of their truth is in those experiences. You can't convey those experiences if you were a fictional character that didn't exist.
But I was thinking that if you have to believe that they existed, then you may use what you find from other sources to interpret the quran.
You don't have to unless you are looking to embellish stories to make them entertaining. If you are focused on the lessons learned instead of hero-worship then you don't have to worry about this.
Peace,
Ayman