Why Should We Believe the Quran is Divine?

Man_of_Faith

What do you mean Amenuel?

I mean that the Arabic that Quran stands for is very very very very very very very very very very very very different from the one that people know here and now nope

Be safe
Amenuel

fye

I mean that the Arabic that Quran stands for is very very very very very very very very very very very very different from the one that people know here and now nope

Be safe
Amenuel

arabic is a language... then what is the quran? your very confusing how is the interpetations that much different you have to translate the parables the read does the translating and understanding for himself?
also is everyone speaking the same arabic why does one word have so many interpretation when entering into english this is also about other post.

Man_of_Faith

arabic is a language... then what is the quran? your very confusing how is the interpetations that much different you have to translate the parables the read does the translating and understanding for himself?
also is everyone speaking the same arabic why does one word have so many interpretation when entering into english this is also about other post.

Quran is a very misinterpreted scripture given birth to a fabricated language by its interpreters. I do not know what else to write.

Be safe Amenuel

fye

so...

I do realize that in asia and the middle-east there are a lot of Arabic words that have carried different meanings like a funny one is "falah" (prosperity) which from going to a masjid or two I've heard means falah (male reproductive organ) lol.

but makes it so misinterpreted?

are you saying as in people don't grasp the old "Arabian knights" Arabic to English with the similtudes and such, or is it not one of those foundation languages like latin and such?

I also remember you posted about the kaba and said people were worshipping it?
i'm a bit out of the loop but you have a opinion or experience with modern islam that you have not shared or I haven't heard.

can you explain your views on islam, mainly just the things you disapprove of because those are the most important ones, and what is your view of the modern muslim,
I personally think they are just people with a book and no messenger but can you explain where your statements and ideas come from they are interesting but then you just cut them down without explaining any of them...it's a forum board speak freely man, it's like leaving a huge blank in the point you were going to make

Osman

I mean that the Arabic that Quran stands for is very very very very very very very very very very very very different from the one that people know here and now nope

Please Man of Faith,

How do you mean? confused

Man_of_Faith

Please Man of Faith,

How do you mean? confused

I mean that somehow the Arabic of Quran is not even remotely resembling the Arabic spoken today, and the grammar is totally different. Why I cannot answer with absolute precision at this time, but what I do know is that the Holy Spirit made Quran written and it was unique in its script and language. There has been people who have attempted to interpret it who were not able to do it but intentionally or unintentionally brought forth a totally wrong interpretation which not even remotely represents what the Author intended to be conveyed by it. Such reality has become testament to me more and more for every passage of Quran I have been working on the past months since I initiated my total reinterpretation project of Quran. It has unraveled something different.

And I now understand why in the Old Testament of the Bible God says that "I am who am I" to Moses and why Jesus decides to utter "I am in the Father and the Father in me". My work on Quran has revealed that it has a similar expression which is the famous "la elah ila allah" which means "to be Who Is is to be Such As Who Is". And no, (la) does not mean "not", that (ma) stands for, in all situations.

Be safe
Amenuel

Osman

And I now understand why in the Old Testament of the Bible God says that "I am who am I" to Moses and why Jesus decides to utter "I am in the Father and the Father in me". My work on Quran has revealed that it has a similar expression which is the famous "la elah ila allah" which means "to be Who Is is to be Such As Who Is". And no, (la) does not mean "not", that (ma) stands for, in all situations.

Peace Man of Faith,

What you're saying is contradicted by the fact that words such as and are well known Semitic words which mean pretty much the same thing in every language, and the way they're used is equally well understood. Such words form the core of the language, I could elaborate with more complex nouns and verbs to prove the language hasn't changed drastically, for instance

No/Not - Arabic (Lam Alif) ~ Syriac 'L' (Lam Alap) ~ Hebrew (Lam Alf)
What - Arabic (Mim Alif) ~ Hebrew (Mim H&#601
What - Arabic - (Shin) ~ Syriac 'Sh-' (Shin)
From - Arabic (Mim Nun) ~ Syriac 'Min' (Mim Nun) ~ Hebrew (Mim)
In - Arabic (B&#601 ~ Syriac ~ Hebrew (Bt)

I've just given you a tiny sample of basic Semitic words and prepositions, and there's a whole world of additional evidence contradicting your claim that Arabic is 'very very very very very' different to what is known now.

A good question for yourself and many others on this forum before starting on the journey of interpreting the Qur'an is

Man_of_Faith

so...

I do realize that in asia and the middle-east there are a lot of Arabic words that have carried different meanings like a funny one is "falah" (prosperity) which from going to a masjid or two I've heard means falah (male reproductive organ) lol.

Fa-Lam-Ha = cut/slit/crack/split/fissure, furrowed/plough/cultivate, agriculture, till the ground, to prosper be successful, attain/acquire, become fortunate/happy, become independent, permanence/lastingness/duration.

Arabic is a very descriptive language and reproductive organ could very well be "What you reproduce/attain/cultivate (with)" , i.e. using the objectifier . It could probably also be used to say what you HAVE attained/cultivated as in talking about your achievement, your harvest.

but makes it so misinterpreted?

The fact that when I have independently analyzed it, it does not add up and when I just had an open mind and browsed ancient lexicons I realized something was fishy and I soon noticed that the understood grammar was beyond criticism, a joke. I have but few people with me, however I am very serious about this and the Arabic speaks for itself in my translations so there is little to argue about; I did not force the translations which are linguistically coherent yet reveal an entirely different discourse. In the end it is probably word against word and people have to decide what kind of translation makes sense and I am not going to give up without a fight and therefore my project contains everything a person evaluating needs, i.e. documentation, own lexicon et cetera; everything with a clear explanation to how I came up with many passages and words. I am sure the actual revealed discourse will make people convinced though; for the logical mind my translation makes much more sense and does not sound like what a sectarian cleric has come up with.

are you saying as in people don't grasp the old "Arabian knights" Arabic to English with the similtudes and such, or is it not one of those foundation languages like latin and such?

I do consider that Quranic Arabic is made or heavily influenced by God. Both Arabic and Aramaic use the same root system.

I also remember you posted about the kaba and said people were worshipping it?
i'm a bit out of the loop but you have a opinion or experience with modern islam that you have not shared or I haven't heard.

Having a holy place is simply against the old Mosaic Decree, but Muslims seem to have done away with it even if it was classified as eternal (for as long as this World is). You should not take an image of anything in Heaven (abstract) or Earth (physical) and worship it, and that includes a cubic building somewhere in the desert. It is hard to realize for most, but it is not much different from shaping a statue of stone and having it represent your god. That is against the Decree.

can you explain your views on islam, mainly just the things you disapprove of because those are the most important ones, and what is your view of the modern muslim,
I personally think they are just people with a book and no messenger but can you explain where your statements and ideas come from they are interesting but then you just cut them down without explaining any of them...it's a forum board speak freely man, it's like leaving a huge blank in the point you were going to make

I know I often keep myself short, but that is because I cannot spend whole days on forums writing when "it is for nothing" with people that are not worth "investing in" (nothing personal) because they are not receptive enough. I do however not exclude anyone interested but that is why I am here and throwing out bait like a fisherman perchance anyone would perceive I am onto something.

I have a parable "I am a goodly shepherd but my fellow shepherd colleagues keep our sheep in a bad meadow and they are too naive, misinformed and do not trust me to move elsewhere and despite my whistling the sheep will simply not run over to where I have found a greener meadow and my colleagues do not believe me. Sadly there is a dense forest covering the sight towards the other meadow so I start to saw every tree down so that the sheep will see it and come running. Eventually after some tedious lonely work I manage to cut a sufficient amount of trees down and remove them so gradually more and more sheep begin to rebel against my colleague shepherds and rush across to the goodly meadow. But the old bad meadow is so famous so the image as the best meadow is hard to erase and foreign shepherds still have problems believing my eventually convinced colleague shepherds and me".

I hope you can see the parable for what it is. It is customary to use these sheep parables so why not.

My statements come from spending my whole life into understanding the Realm of God and every little tiny piece of information and I just do not go wholesale on something but I critically examine everything I run across, and I did the same with Quran and I simply was suspicious about its interpretation for a very long time before I even got involved at the level I am now.

I disprove of

A separate objectified god that you can whatsoever not associate yourself with and that it is out of question
Senseless rituals and rites
A god that spits out his anger in a scripture because he does not get the attention he thinks he deserves (even if he does)
A god that encourages worldliness
A god that says "kill the disbelievers until they perform my ritual called salat"
A god that will come (as if it is physical) with angels in waves on the "final day".
A god on a throne (objectified deity)
A holy house somewhere on Earth (e.g. Mecca)
A god that speaks in its holy passages of its scriptures as if it is a worldly human writing (now that is false because it is the interpretation that just simply sucks)
A god that on the first encounter with someone (Moses) first of all tells him that "I am with you as long as you perform my contact prayer (and only exactly as I taught you)". (Fortunately the passage says that "I am with you as long as you follow my guidance, but that is another story).

If you seek more I can easily probably write an A4 with points too.

I just see it as a fabricated revamped Pagan religion where all the separate multiple worldly gods have become one. I have learned that God is "Such Who Is"; it is a symbiotic phenomenon where there is for real absolute Oneness to the point that God is the only unit in existence and the only way to be alive is to merge in it, i.e. "under His umbrella", become assimilated.

Be safe
Amenuel

Man_of_Faith

Peace Man of Faith,

What you're saying is contradicted by the fact that words such as and are well known Semitic words which mean pretty much the same thing in every language, and the way they're used is equally well understood. Such words form the core of the language, I could elaborate with more complex nouns and verbs to prove the language hasn't changed drastically, for instance

No/Not - Arabic (Lam Alif) ~ Syriac 'L' (Lam Alap) ~ Hebrew (Lam Alf)
What - Arabic (Mim Alif) ~ Hebrew (Mim H&#601
What - Arabic - (Shin) ~ Syriac 'Sh-' (Shin)
From - Arabic (Mim Nun) ~ Syriac 'Min' (Mim Nun) ~ Hebrew (Mim)
In - Arabic (B&#601 ~ Syriac ~ Hebrew (Bt)

I've just given you a tiny sample of basic Semitic words and prepositions, and there's a whole world of additional evidence contradicting your claim that Arabic is 'very very very very very' different to what is known now.

A good question for yourself and many others on this forum before starting on the journey of interpreting the Qur'an is

It seems like the distortion is only worse than I thought in that case. Thanks for giving me claims that 'la' means 'no' in Syriac though. I will investigate. That can lead towards tipping down a whole mountain.

does sometimes mean 'no' in Arabic and sometimes 'what' depending on grammar. That is however not supported by my discoveries where always means no.

Be safe
Amenuel

unknownuser

A good question for yourself and many others on this forum before starting on the journey of interpreting the Qur'an is

!

Osman

It seems like the distortion is only worse than I thought in that case. Thanks for giving me claims that 'la' means 'no' in Syriac though. I will investigate. That can lead towards tipping down a whole mountain.

does sometimes mean 'no' in Arabic and sometimes 'what' depending on grammar. That is however not supported by my discoveries where always means no.

Be safe
Amenuel

The rule around Ma <like many aspects of the language> is dependent upon its context.

Osman

!

)

Man_of_Faith

Okay. I read you.

I am not impossible, but this is not supported by my very extensive research. It just seems so sad if the corruption is deeper than only limited to Arabic.

I just did some brief investigation

It is not wrong to say means not in Arabic even by conventional grammar.

Samples from Hebrew

yeish li chadashot bishvilkha - I got news for you

(seems very similar to the use of in Arabic, the real interpretation)

?iyn
not, no, without, there is no

What I do think is that the influence from (the fake) Arabic was immense among the Jewish people as well back then. 'lo/la' I doubt is a no word in the original tongue.

I am very persistent because there simply exists no sign in Quran that would mean 'no/not', even if it conflicts with Aramaic/Syriac/Hebrew. There has been conflicts before which only revealed further falsehood.

I am glad that you brought this up though, it gave me more to think about. It is a clear indicator to why the Old Testament looks like it does which uses a lot of Aramaic/Hebrew.

It is the same with that Qatal has for a long time been perceived as kill/slay while it does not mean that but it means master/subdue a person but also to successfully convince them.

Be safe
Amenuel

Man_of_Faith

The rule around Ma <like many aspects of the language> is dependent upon its context.

That is nonsense. No usable language would be so unspecific, especially a scripture like Quran allegedly from God, that you could have a passage where it would either mean what or no.

Be safe
Amanuel

Osman

That is nonsense. No usable language would be so unspecific, especially a scripture like Quran allegedly from God, that you could have a passage where it would either mean what or no.

Be safe
Amanuel

I'm sorry but you're completely incorrect, many languages have a context-based dependency on meaning, it's called Pragmatics.

It's clear that you're another person who frequents this forum who has very little knowledge of both Arabic and linguistics in general yet simultaneously makes many, MANY sweeping statements and claims without knowledge necessary to back it up - this is the height of arrogance.

I don't mean to insult Amenuel but until you begin to do some real research you're only decieving yourself. This is an endemic problem among many frequenters of Free-Minds.

If you want I can provide you plenty of examples in Arabic grammar where context is absolutely necessary for correct understanding.

unknownuser

La! aush fi alsharq alwasath, wa ta'elam qaleelann min huna!

Haha, it's not the best, but I can pick up the general theme from arabic conversations and texts!

I respect Man Of Faith's effort. However I feel that what would be more useful, is a dictionary listing all possible word meanings from the words of the Quran. I assume that MOF has done something of the sort more or less, it's a shame if he does not share it. Mind you I am not saying he's all correct but at least it'll be out there for scrutiny and study.

good_logic

Peace Osman.

All the languages belong to GOD. HE created them like He created us. Arabic is not the "holy language" of GOD!

Does it matter if one does not understand Arabic? Will he/she not be able to understand Qoran?

Of course those who can read Arabic can appreciate the excellence of the literature structure of the Qoran.
But also those who do not, can appreciate the excellence of the message by reading the Qoran in any language.

Anyway, probably about 80% of the "Muslims" in this world cannot read, understand or speak Arabic. Yet they managed to follow Bukhari and co with no problem?

in my opinion, only those who understand the purpose of the book will understand why it is in Arabic or non-Arabic. ,

God knows that that the true believer will get His message in any place that was destined to be, in any language that they speak.
God would not send a message that cannot be given to everyone clear and unambiguous.

In short, It is the message of the Qoran that actually counts.

To me it is not an issue. I do not understand Arabic,but I am trying my best to understand Qoran.

GOD bless you.
Peace.

Osman

Peace good logic,

Peace Osman.

All the languages belong to GOD. HE created them like He created us. Arabic is not the "holy language" of GOD!

Who started talking about Arabic being the "holy language"? Please stop putting words into my mouth.

Does it matter if one does not understand Arabic? Will he/she not be able to understand Qoran?

You've missed the point.

The issue relating to Man of Faith is that he's making many linguistic claims about Arabic yet its clear he doesn't know much of Arabic or linguistics in general.

good_logic

Peace Osman.

Iwas making a general statement. I am not putting words in your mouth.

When you said,quote

It's clear that you're another person who frequents this forum who has very little knowledge of both Arabic and linguistics in general ...

I answered this particular statement of yours.

Hope that clarifies for you.
Thank you.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

Osman

Peace good logic,

Please stop it, you clearly weren't making a general statement.

Does it matter if one does not understand Arabic? Will he/she not be able to understand Qoran?

Of course those who can read Arabic can appreciate the excellence of the literature structure of the Qoran.
But also those who do not, can appreciate the excellence of the message by reading the Qoran in any language.

Anyway, probably about 80% of the "Muslims" in this world cannot read, understand or speak Arabic. Yet they managed to follow Bukhari and co with no problem?

in my opinion, only those who understand the purpose of the book will understand why it is in Arabic or non-Arabic. ,

God knows that that the true believer will get His message in any place that was destined to be, in any language that they speak.
God would not send a message that cannot be given to everyone clear and unambiguous.

In short, It is the message of the Qoran that actually counts.

To me it is not an issue. I do not understand Arabic,but I am trying my best to understand Qoran.

Again you completely missing the point, it does matter if those same people want to start making gradiose claims and stating anything else to be 'nonsense' when the reality is in fact the opposite.

It's clear that you're another person who frequents this forum who has very little knowledge of both Arabic and linguistics in general ...

I answered this particular statement of yours.

Hope that clarifies for you.
Peace.

And this is the problem with Free-Minds, there are too many self-styled experts swanning about making a whole host of grandiose claims.

Maybe the problem is that I keep comparing Free-Minds to the other forums I'm frequenting where people actually engage in meaningful debate. I've heard more sense come from the Flat Earth forum than here.

I think a lot of people here have taken the term 'Free-Minds' too literally and let their brains fall out.