Free-Minds.org is another Sect...like Suni and Shia Sects.
-
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" 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
-
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
-
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 -
Peace Belh,
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.
You don't seem to understand what a translation is. Any translation is basically the translator's opinion of what he or she thinks the original author meant. This is true even if you are reading the great reading in the original Arabic since in your mind you are internally understanding it according to your own opinion. Even literal translations ultimately only reflect the translator's opinion about how a word should be literally translated since virtually all words can have multiple meanings. One of course could have a literal translation that somehow manages to put all the alternative (sometimes dozens) of meanings into the translation of one word separated by slashes or so on but what you will end up with will be virtually impossible to read. Also, due to differences in grammatical structures and so on literal translations end up being incomprehensible nonsense.
The way I see it is that as long as one is aware that the translation is nothing more than the translator's opinion then there is no problem. Otherwise, according to your logic there will be as many sects as the number of different understandings on each point in the great reading (in other words millions or even billions of sects). What you have to acknowledge is that the ultimate original interpretation is with the god. We can only try our best by setting our direction towards the truth and realize that each of us will be at a different point along the path but we are united in our direction. In the ending the losers are those who were not on the straight path to the truth, not those who were at the beginning of the path or have not progressed enough on the path.
Peace,
Ayman
-
i will accept your answer even though you have not defined the word Sect.
A more correct title for the thread could therefore have been Free-Minds.org is just another Group claiming to represent True Islam...like Suni and Shia Groups.
Peace,
As I said before, Since Free-minds.org are Claiming, In their Welcome Page ("WHAT IS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ISLAM AND TODAY'S PRACTICES?", 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 trueIn 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 -
Peace Belh,
The Meaning will not be Lost as it is not Lost in the Arabic Version.
But even many of the Arabic meanings have been lost. For example, your meaning of "kaaba" being some building or hill or rock or whatever in Jerusalem is different to the Sunni meaning of it being a cube in Mecca. So according to you, for them the meaning was lost. They would also say that you lost the meaning. So as you can see, even in the original Arabic, like translations, people can understand the same word in two completely different ways.
Peace,
Ayman
-
This doesn't negate that the same wife bore Ismail when she was young and Isaac when she was old.
Peace all,
I will be constructive in my accusation to Ayman and anyone else who wants to mislead the readers
If Ayman Claims that He is Moslem, then Ayman Had to SAY the following
Say We believe in God and in what was sent down to us and what was sent down to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs, and what was given to Moses and Jesus, and what was given to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make a distinction between any of them and to Him we submit.
2136Ayman had to say that he Believes in the Torah and Injeel.
And if Ayman Refuses to use the Torah and Injeel, beside the Quran as references when Judging an issue, then the following is a Message from the Lord of the Great Reading "The Quran"
Did you not see those who claimed they believed in what was sent down to you and what was sent before you? They wanted to seek judgment using evil, while they were ordered to reject it. It is the devil who wants to lead them far astray.
460If any of the readers chooses to reject the supporting evidences from the Torah and Injeel that support that Abraham had Two Wives, and Abraham Had Built the Restricted House for people to make Hajj too, then they deserve to be Led Far Astray by EVIL.
Peace
-
Peace Belh,
You don't seem to understand what a translation is. Any translation is basically the translator's opinion of what he or she thinks the original author meant. This is true even if you are reading the great reading in the original Arabic since in your mind you are internally understanding it according to your own opinion. Even literal translations ultimately only reflect the translator's opinion about how a word should be literally translated since virtually all words can have multiple meanings. One of course could have a literal translation that somehow manages to put all the alternative (sometimes dozens) of meanings into the translation of one word separated by slashes or so on but what you will end up with will be virtually impossible to read. Also, due to differences in grammatical structures and so on literal translations end up being incomprehensible nonsense.
The way I see it is that as long as one is aware that the translation is nothing more than the translator's opinion then there is no problem. Otherwise, according to your logic there will be as many sects as the number of different understandings on each point in the great reading (in other words millions or even billions of sects). What you have to acknowledge is that the ultimate original interpretation is with the god. We can only try our best by setting our direction towards the truth and realize that each of us will be at a different point along the path but we are united in our direction. In the ending the losers are those who were not on the straight path to the truth, not those who were at the beginning of the path or have not progressed enough on the path.
Peace,
Ayman
Peace Ayman
Thank you for elaborating on this point. I feel with increased study one can eventually establish the truth/meaning/message. This is provided we are not static in our intepretations/understandings and truly possess a free-mind.
Peace
Hope
-
538 The male thief, and the female thief, you shall cut/iqtaaoo their (THREE OR MORE) hands/aydiyahuma as a punishment for their crime, and to serve as a deterrent from God. God is Noble, Wise.
Does this make sense to you?
Aydi (plural of "yad" = hands, means, resources, power, might, etc.
3845 Recall Our servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They were resourceful (ulu al-aydee - lit. with many hands), and with vision.
5147 We constructed the universe with might/power (aydin), and We are expanding it.
Here you can see the god's law put into action by Joseph
1270 When he furnished them with their provisions, he placed the measuring bowl in his brother's bag. Then a caller cried out "O you in the caravan, you are thieves!"
1271 They said, turning towards them "What is it you are missing?"
1272 He said, "We are missing the measuring bowl of the King, and whoever finds it shall receive a camel-load; I guarantee this."
1273 They said, "By God, you know we did not come to cause corruption in the land, and we are no thieves!"
1274 He said, "What shall be the punishment, if you are liars?"
1275 They said, "The punishment is that the person who has it in his bag shall himself be held as penalty. It is such that we punish the evildoers."
The following is from http//www.geocities.com/islamicdiscussions/theft.htm
First, the presumed thieves were given the chance to come forward, acknowledge their wrongdoing, and then give back what they have stolen. They might even get a reward/or state compensation if it is found that they stole out of dire need and poverty.
Second, if they do not do so, they must be proven as thieves. Then, what was stolen, if found, should be restituted to their owners. Thieves should work to repay the fees involved in the whole process. They should also work to repay what was stolen in case they do not give it or the whole of it back.
This process put in application the theft punishment stated in 538 that is to cut off from the thieves resources and power. It leaves also the door open for thieves to repent and reform as God states in 539. This whole process is what is applied to thieves in some Muslim rural areas.
Had Joseph known that God's punishment for theft is marking or cutting hands (which his brothers would have apply), he would not scheme that way in order to keep his brother with him.
Someone would argue that was God's theft law for previous communities and we are not bound by it. Well, when God wants to change something, He specifies it (2187). Furthermore, Quran specifies when some laws do apply only for some communities (1611 and therefore we are not bound to apply them.
So, in conclusion we see that because of the 4 reasons mentioned above and the example of Joseph and his brothers in the Quran we conclude that the punishment for theft is to take away the resources and power of the thief and make him pay back all the cost to the person whose goods he stole. However, if he repents (539) Allah forgives him.
3927 We have cited for the people in this reading from every example, that they may take heed.
-
So, in conclusion we see that because of the 4 reasons mentioned above and the example of Joseph and his brothers in the Quran we conclude that the punishment for theft is to take away the resources and power of the thief and make him pay back all the cost to the person whose goods he stole. However, if he repents (539) Allah forgives him.
Peace,
What do you mean by take him away? Do you mean Jail Him? -
Peace Belh,
If any of the readers chooses to reject the supporting evidences from the Torah and Injeel that support that Abraham had Two Wives, and Abraham Had Built the Restricted House for people to make Hajj too, then they deserve to be Led Far Astray by EVIL.
Even assuming that the Injeel and Torah you refer to are the same Injeel and Torah talked about in the great reading (which they are absolutely certainly not), the great reading is the one that is "muhaymin" (controlling/superceding) on them. So here we have a contradiction between what the great reading says and what the supposed Torah and Injeel (which they are really not) say. Who do we believe? Clearly, we believe the great reading. The god never says that the Torah or Injeel complete the great reading as you falsely believe and provide the more detailed gossip about the two wives and a bunch of other gossip that the god forgot to include to make stories more interesting. You need to focus on what is important and leave aside useless gossip that is not even fit for old ladies.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace,
What do you mean by take him away? Do you mean Jail Him?I recommend you to re-read my post; especially the following bit
the punishment for theft is to take away the resources and power of the thief and make him pay back all the cost to the person whose goods he stole. However, if he repents (539) Allah forgives him.
-
Peace all,
I recommend you to re-read my post; especially the following
How would you go about enforcing him to do so?
Peace Belh,
Even assuming that the Injeel and Torah you refer to are the same Injeel and Torah talked about in the great reading (which they are absolutely certainly not), the great reading is the one that is "muhaymin" (controlling/superceding) on them. So here we have a contradiction between what the great reading says and what the supposed Torah and Injeel (which they are really not) say. Who do we believe? Clearly, we believe the great reading. The god never says that the Torah or Injeel complete the great reading as you falsely believe and provide the more detailed gossip about the two wives and a bunch of other gossip that the god forgot to include to make stories more interesting. You need to focus on what is important and leave aside useless gossip that is not even fit for old ladies.
Peace,
Ayman
You need to be rational when arguing about God's words...
Where in the Quran does God Says the Torah and Injeel are corrupted?
Where in the Quran does God Says Abraham had one Wife, which if said, I would agree with you that the existing Torah and Injeel are wrong?
Where in the Quran does God Say the Hajj is not to Jerusalem, which if said, I would agree with you that the existing Torah and Injeel are wrong?If you cannot provide the supporting Quranic verses that support your argument, then You are Leading yourself and others Far Astray.
-
http//www.geocities.com/islamicdiscussions/theft.htm
Had Joseph known that God's punishment for theft is marking or cutting hands (which his brothers would have apply), he would not scheme that way in order to keep his brother with him.
Good point! Yet another problem for BelH's view..... but only if he clarifies who knew about the plot... if he says Joseph knew (as he seems to imply), then he'll have to explain how Joseph knew the sons of Jacob would say what they did and not the above. As I have already pointed out.
Looking forward to see what BelH comes out with next..... if he answers of course.
-
Peace Belh,
But even many of the Arabic meanings have been lost. For example, your meaning of "kaaba" being some building or hill or rock or whatever in Jerusalem is different to the Sunni meaning of it being a cube in Mecca. So according to you, for them the meaning was lost. They would also say that you lost the meaning. So as you can see, even in the original Arabic, like translations, people can understand the same word in two completely different ways.
Peace,
Ayman
You do not need to underestimate the Great Reading and its ability to deliver a Clear Message...If a meaning is not clear in one verse, the other well-established verses will complete its meaning.
-
http//www.geocities.com/islamicdiscussions/theft.htm
Good point! Yet another problem for BelH's view..... but only if he clarifies who knew about the plot... if he says Joseph knew (as he seems to imply), then he'll have to explain how Joseph knew the sons of Jacob would say what they did and not the above. As I have already pointed out.Looking forward to see what BelH comes out with next..... if he answers of course.
I believe I answered most of your points before; however, as I said, You cannot use this story to cancel out the well-established meaning of 5-38. Not only the story did not Have a real thief, but Also the fact that God changes the Punishments and laws of the previous books in the Quran.
Moreover, I do not understand your request clearly.
-
Peace all,
This is to everyone who claims that Today's Torah and Injeel are not the Words of God.
If I catch you again, giving your Sweet Words to the Christians and Jews whom join the Forum, by telling them that they are Moslems if they Follow their Books, then I will not have mercy, and I will expose your other side (as I could have done now, but I decided not to).
Peace
-
Peace all,
This is to everyone who claims that Today's Torah and Injeel are not the Words of God.
If I catch you again, giving your Sweet Words to the Christians and Jews whom join the Forum, by telling them that they are Moslems if they Follow their Books, then I will not be mercy with you and I will expose you (as I could have done now, but I decided not to).
Peace
& & & &
As Ayman told you before they are full of hearsay. Ahmet Deedat was once asked if the bible was Gods word and how do we know its Gods words. He replied the part of the book that God speaks directly is Gods words, the rest is hearsay
Peace
Hope
-
& & & &
As Ayman told you before they are full of hearsay. Ahmet Deedat was once asked if the bible was Gods word and how do we know its Gods words. He replied the part of the book that God speaks directly is Gods words, the rest is hearsay
Peace
Hope
Do the Parts that speak about "Abraham had two wives" and "Pilgrim is to Jerusalem" are Hearsay?
-
http//www.geocities.com/islamicdiscussions/theft.htm
Good point! Yet another problem for BelH's view..... but only if he clarifies who knew about the plot... if he says Joseph knew (as he seems to imply), then he'll have to explain how Joseph knew the sons of Jacob would say what they did and not the above. As I have already pointed out.Looking forward to see what BelH comes out with next..... if he answers of course.
Furthermore, he has to explain how it is possible to cut three or more hands of one thief.
It is crystal clear from 3145 and 5147 that "aydi" can mean/means "resources"/"means"/"power"/"might".You cannot use this story to cancel out the well-established meaning of 5-38.
Is this your fatwa?
Besides, I put the following in bold for a reason, in first post
3927 We have cited for the people in this reading from every example, that they may take heed.
Here is some more
1741 We have cited in this Quran so they may remember, but it only increases their aversion!
1789 We have cited to the people in this Quran of every example, but most of the people refuse to be anything but ingrates!
1854 We have cited in this Quran every example for the people. But the human being is always most argumentative.
3058 We have cited for the people in this Quran of every example. If you come to them with a sign, those who rejected will say, "You are bringing falsehood!"
3059 It is thus that God seals the hearts of those who do not know.
Not only the story did not Have a real thief
Was it a "fake thief", then?
Anyway, it is irrelevant, since the punishment is still described
1273 They said, "By God, you know we did not come to cause corruption in the land, and we are no thieves!"
1274 He said, "What shall be the punishment, if you are liars?"
1275 They said, "The punishment is that the person who has it in his bag shall himself be held as penalty. It is such that we punish the evildoers."
but Also the fact that God changes the Punishments and laws of the previous books in the Quran.
Correct, but not for theft, among other things. Are you sure that you have read my first post fully? I recommend re-reading it again. Pay special attention to the following
Someone would argue that was God's theft law for previous communities and we are not bound by it. Well, when God wants to change something, He specifies it (2187). Furthermore, Quran specifies when some laws do apply only for some communities (1611 and therefore we are not bound to apply them.
Furthermore, why would God give us the/an/a example/story of Joseph explaining the punishment for theft if it wouln't apply to us? Does this make sense to you? Does God want to confuse us? Please refer back to the verses which I have quoted in bold font above.
This is to everyone who claims that Today's Torah and Injeel are not the Words of God.
If I catch you again, giving your Sweet Words to the Christians and Jews whom join the Forum, by telling them that they are Moslems if they Follow their Books, then I will not be mercy with you and I will expose you (as I could have done now, but I decided not to).
"Today's Injeel" ??? What/where is "today's Injeel"?
