Free-Minds.org is another Sect...like Suni and Shia Sects.

noble

Peace
We have a huge problem with uber feminists who tell you that if a man can have more than one wive, why not them have more than one husband, but tough luck for them, it is extremely rare for men to accept or admit that they are married to the same wife (or go and find a community that tolerate that). < ---- that was an acidic joke
but joke and polyandry aside...
it is probably OK that in a society where there are not enough males for one reason or another, it might be possible for controlled polygamy to be implemented. Some women even feminists argue that they would rather have their husbands with a second wive than him mocking about in hiding with a mistress...
In my reading of the Quran, polygamy per se is not forbidden, but is not actively encouraged either.
However the marrying of widows with orphans on the other hand is encouraged for those who can handle it (i.e. particularly dutifully).
If we were in a proper Muslim State, I do not think we could legislate against polygamy, however, it could work like this, for the first wife the state could help profusely from state funds, however anything extra, that will be a luxury for the claimant, meaning you can get a second wife, but there will be conditions, the first condition being that you can afford it, etc.
and God knows best...
I think that free-minds wants to address the usual audience that get exposed to its message in the west, and that is the first hurdle against communities such as muslim, mormon, etc are the issues of polygamy and underage sex, by saying that it is not the case, you at least do not put off the reader from going into the web-site, and learning better..., and there is some arguments against marrying more than one wife in these complicated societies we live in anyway, so it is not false, in my view...
as always it is a matter of context...

afridi220

Do you believe that He Was married to Sarah; then, He divorced Sarah in order to marry Hajer; then, he divorced Hajer in order to remarry Sarah?

I think you got your informations from here )
http//www.gausia.com/OtherMerriage.htm

belH

I think you got your informations from here
http//www.gausia.com/OtherMerriage.htm

No...From God's Book

http//www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen16.pdf

afridi220

No...From God's Book

http//www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen16.pdf

nope

belH

That's a traditional story, it's not supported in the Qur'aan. As far as we know, based on the Qur'aan, both Ishmael and Isaac were born of the same mother (i.e. Sarah).

Peace Ahamed,
The Torah tells us that Abraham were married to two Women whom conceived one son each, Ismail (hajer 's) and Issac (Sarah's).

http//www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen16.pdf

Layth

Salam,

Just to add my two cents worth...It seems from the Quran that Abraham was indeed married to two women. One who bore him Ismail, and, many years later, another who bore him Isaac.

The evidence for this can be found as follows

When Abraham is raising the foundation of the Temple, he is helped by Ismail, who, to help in such task, must at least have been a young adult.
When Abraham is visited in old age by the angels, and is given news of a son, he says his wife is barren and could not possibly have children (thus ruling her out from being Ismail's mother).
The conversation of Abraham with the angels always refers to one wife (he never says "one of my wives is barren"...he simply says "my wife is barren&quot which means that the mother of Ismail is no longer on the scene (having either passed away or been divorced) when Isaac is born.

Please chose your sources carefully. The current Torah/Bible is pretty much the same as todays Hadith (i.e. full of lies and conjecture).

Samia

Peace
Evidence Please

Regards

Well, the first thief was caught on camera and the second red-handed with the stolen purse in his hands......
Then they confessed when they were confronted by eye-witnesses. The judge accepted the evidence. I hope you do, too whatever

Samia

Why are you running away from answering my Question Why Free-minds.org are translating 5-33 different from 5-38?

Running away? Why? Someone told you I signed this translation or participated in it?
I hope you don't ask me next time why Shakir said this or Yusuf Ali said that...
It's just like that.

Samia

Well, One is for the Cub and one for the thief, as I said before.

However, Yousuf's Brother story is not and cannot be used to cancel out 5-38 as I showed the reasons before.

Did I say that?
You said to Wakas "ask Samia", and Samia responded

Ask samia if there are two (2) Hwa in the "two red arabic words" or not? Further, ask her if one belongs to the Thief and one belongs to the Cup or not?

Wakas

peace Layth,

Salam,

Just to add my two cents worth...It seems from the Quran that Abraham was indeed married to two women. One who bore him Ismail, and, many years later, another who bore him Isaac.

The evidence for this can be found as follows

When Abraham is raising the foundation of the Temple, he is helped by Ismail, who, to help in such task, must at least have been a young adult.
When Abraham is visited in old age by the angels, and is given news of a son, he says his wife is barren and could not possibly have children (thus ruling her out from being Ismail's mother).
The conversation of Abraham with the angels always refers to one wife (he never says "one of my wives is barren"...he simply says "my wife is barren&quot which means that the mother of Ismail is no longer on the scene (having either passed away or been divorced) when Isaac is born.

Please chose your sources carefully. The current Torah/Bible is pretty much the same as todays Hadith (i.e. full of lies and conjecture).

IF it is taken literally as raising a physical building.
It can also mean WHEN the "angels" visited Abraham his wife was barren, i.e. at that time, not for all times past and present. She may have just been post menopause..... hence the age.
wives can be divorced or pass away, yes.

Based on the evidence presented.

noble

Peace all,
one thing I personally find very objectionable with some peeps in free-minds is that idea they have about allegorical and metaphorical aspects in the Quran which they take as far as arguing that Prophets, Angels, Jinns, and Quranic Stories inclusive of Hell fire and Paradise are just parables to teach us lessons and do not really exist or have not really existed in the past...
This makes a mockery of the Quran and Allah's Message, and removes any binding, because the whole thing becomes a work of pop bubblegum psychology, the kind of stuff you listen to at self improvement seminars, or philosophy seminars about the meaning of life...
I guess those who think that come from that kind of background too, in my opinion, not that I diss them, I flirted with this kind of thing for a while, but the message given is pretty shallow and only scratches the surface of reality, even if it says the opposite...

belH

Please chose your sources carefully. The current Torah/Bible is pretty much the same as todays Hadith (i.e. full of lies and conjecture).

Peace all,

Layth, There are no evidences in Quran say that the Torah and Injeel are or will be corrupted, but will be guarded as the Quran.
After all, The Ziker includes the Quran and what were revealed before the Quran.
To stand before God and say that we thought the Torah and Injeel are corrupted, and therefore, we did not give any weight to its contents will be hard to argue without authority from Quran. Actually, the only authority we Have is the hadiths that say that.

Based on the above, Would you agree that Today's Translations of the Torah, Bible, and Quran are full of lies and conjecture, but the Original Versions (Hebrew Torah, Aramaic Injeel, and Arabic Quran), which exist today are not corrupted.

Running away? Why? Someone told you I signed this translation or participated in it?
I hope you don't ask me next time why Shakir said this or Yusuf Ali said that...
It's just like that.

You are running away from saying the Truth...The truth that 5-33 free-minds.org's translation is correct and 5-38 is not...5-38 translation represents the Translator understanding and not the actual word by word translation. 5-38 translation is a Sectarian Translation as Shia and Suna's Translation of 24-2.

belH

peace Layth,

IF it is taken literally as raising a physical building.
It can also mean WHEN the "angels" visited Abraham his wife was barren, i.e. at that time, not for all times past and present. She may have just been post menopause..... hence the age.
wives can be divorced or pass away, yes.

Based on the evidence presented.

Peace Wakas,
If you believe in the Torah, Injeel and Quran, you wouldn't be Lost as you are today...you will know the True story of Abraham and Yousuf, and You will know that Hajj is to Jerusalem where Abraham built the Restricted House.

noble

Peace belH, all,
to realign back to the title of this thread and belH accusation that Free-Minds.org is a Sect...like Suni and Shia Sects.

Can belH ever so kindly enlighten me as what he means by the word Sect (in detail) that he labels Free-Minds.org, Suni and Shia?

We can then move better forward, because I am really unsure what is the purpose of this thread now... &nbsp

hope4

You are running away from saying the Truth...The truth that 5-33 free-minds.org's translation is correct and 5-38 is not...5-38 translation represents the Translator understanding and not the actual word by word translation. 5-38 translation is a Sectarian Translation as Shia and Suna's Translation of 24-2.

Peace

Sorry to butt into the conversation, but a little confused here. If you translate something word to word from one language to another will it make sense on the other end? Or do we look to translate something to presurve its meaning which is not necessarily word to word? Which is more important?

Peace

Hope

belH

Peace belH, all,
to realign back to the title of this thread and belH accusation that Free-Minds.org is a Sect...like Suni and Shia Sects.

Can belH ever so kindly enlighten me as what he means by the word Sect (in detail) that he labels Free-Minds.org, Suni and Shia?

We can then move better forward, because I am really unsure what is the purpose of this thread now... &nbsp

Peace,
As I said before, Since Free-minds.org are Claiming, In their Welcome Page ("WHAT IS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ISLAM AND TODAY'S PRACTICES?&quot, that Their Understanding of Islam is the True Islam, then anyone who does not agree with their understanding can accuse them that they are a Sect (A group who hijacked Islam).
Thus, I'm in dispute with Free-minds.org until they do one of the following
1-Prove to me that their understanding is the right one; example why this is true

In Islam, Thieves do not have their hands cut-off, but are made to work until they return that which is stolen (1276), Vs. Sunni and Shia teachings which brutally amputate the hands causing disability...

2-Free-minds.org becomes Moderator and not Judge between the different understanding of Quran.

Otherwise, both have the right to accuse each others of being sectarians (because both claim that they represent the true Islam)

I hope you would save this post so you would not have to ask the same question again.
Peace

belH

Peace

Sorry to butt into the conversation, but a little confused here. If you translate something word to word from one language to another will it make sense on the other end? Or do we look to translate something to presurve its meaning which is not necessarily word to word? Which is more important?

Peace

Hope

Peace,

Translate Word by Word and let the Reader, who Does not know Arabic, decide about his understanding...otherwise, we will be misleading the readers who do not know arabic, by feeding them the translator understanding and not the True Message...The Majorities of Today's Bible, Torah, and Quran Translations are misleading because of the Translators being affiliated with different Sects that want to enforce their understanding in the translation.

ayman

Peace Layth, Wakas, everyone,

Just to add my two cents worth...It seems from the Quran that Abraham was indeed married to two women. One who bore him Ismail, and, many years later, another who bore him Isaac.
The evidence for this can be found as follows

When Abraham is raising the foundation of the Temple, he is helped by Ismail, who, to help in such task, must at least have been a young adult.

This doesn't negate that the same wife bore Ismail when she was young and Isaac when she was old.

Also, where does it say in the great reading that Abraham raised the foundation of the Temple? The exact wording used in "from the house"

And Ibrahim raised the foundations from the house with Ismael "Our lord accept this from us, you are the hearer, the knowledgeable".

Since one cannot raise physical foundations from a house then this favors the alternative understanding that brother Wakas was hinting at. Those foundations should be understood in the same way as we understand foundations in passages like these with no problem

Those before them have schemed, but the god came to their buildings from the foundations, thus the roof fell on top of them, and the retribution came to them from where they did not know.

9109-110. Is one who founds his building on forethought of the god and His acceptance better, or one who founds his building on the edge of a cliff which is about to crumble, so that it crumbled with him into the fire of Hell? the god does not guide the wicked people. Such a building that they built continues to cause doubt in their hearts, except that their hearts are severed. The god is knowledgeable, wise.

If we can understand those passages with no problem then why change 2127 to make it say "of the Temple" to force the meaning of a physical foundation? You even disregarded your own translation where you correctly translated the Arabic "min" as "from"

FREE-MINDS
2127. And as Abraham raised the foundations from the Dwelling with Ishmael ?Our Lord accept this from us, You are the Hearer, the Knowledgeable.?

When Abraham is visited in old age by the angels, and is given news of a son, he says his wife is barren and could not possibly have children (thus ruling her out from being Ismail's mother).

This is false. Abraham's wife clearly says that she can't have children because she is old not because she has always been barren regardless of age. In fact, barren is no where mentioned in 1172 and simply "old" is mentioned. In 5129 old is mentioned first and sterile is mentioned in relation to old.

FREE-MINDS
1172. She said ?O my, how can I give birth when I am an old woman, and here is my husband an old man? This is indeed a strange thing!?

His wife then approached in amazement. She slapped upon her face, and said ?I am an old sterile woman!?

Compare the above to Zakariah's wife who is described as "infertile" and there is no mention of her age

FREE-MINDS
340. He said ?My Lord, how can I have a son when old age has reached me and my wife is infertile?? He said ?It is as such that God does what He pleases.?

So according to those clear signs, Abraham always had one wife and she simply had Ismael when she was young and Isaac when she was old.

The conversation of Abraham with the angels always refers to one wife (he never says "one of my wives is barren"...he simply says "my wife is barren&quot which means that the mother of Ismail is no longer on the scene (having either passed away or been divorced) when Isaac is born.

I agree that there was always one wife on the scene. As we saw, this is perfectly in line with his wife having Ismael when she was young and Isaac when she was old.

Peace,

Ayman

hope4

Peace,

Translate Word by Word and let the Reader, who Does not know Arabic, decide about his understanding...otherwise, we will be misleading the readers who do not know arabic, by feeding them the translator understanding and not the True Message...The Majorities of Today's Bible, Torah, and Quran Translations are misleading because of the Translators being affiliated with different Sects that want to enforce their understanding in the translation.

Peace BelH

I understand your concerns and what you mean. However, is the meaning lost if we translate word to word? Or in a more simple way if we translate word to word will it make sense?

Peace

Hope

belH

Peace BelH

I understand your concerns and what you mean. However, is the meaning lost if we translate word to word? Or in a more simple way if we translate word to word will it make sense?

Peace

Hope

Peace Hope,
Would you prefer That Your LORD's Messages be delivered to You "Word by Word" , or would you prefer an "Interpretation of the Message" that is done by a Human who can make mistakes?

The Meaning will not be Lost as it is not Lost in the Arabic Version.
Peace