DO AYATS 5:5 AND 6:146, PRECLUDE THE PIG AS BEING HARAM...?
-
Hi Raj-ah,
Sorry, I should have explained it more clearly.
6.145 says ?lahma khinzeerin fa-innahu rijsun?
If ?khinzeerin? here means pig then the verse says that pig is not allowed because it is foul.
I do not think God is lying, so the pig?s meat must be worse than any other meat, and therefore forbidden.To me foul means it is bad in some way, and if it concerns food, then the food that is bad must have some negative effect on the human body. And if one type of food is singled out, then this food must be worse than any other food. Otherwise, why specifically mention that particular food?
As there is no proof what so ever, that people eating pork is worse off than people eating other meat, rather the opposite, there is something wrong in this picture. It does not make sense.To my mind all meat from animals are detrimental to our health, but that is another story.
Regds
Ali Omar
-
SaLaM Ali
6.145 says ?lahma khinzeerin fa-innahu rijsun?
If ?khinzeerin? here means pig then the verse says that pig is not allowed because it is foul.
I do not think God is lying, so the pig?s meat must be worse than any other meat, and therefore forbidden.Yes, you are finally getting it.
As there is no proof what so ever, that people eating pork is worse off than people eating other meat
I on occasion smoke weed. I know people who smoke weed on a regular basis. But if you came across them they wouldnt have an extra arm growing outta their body or an extra eye. The reason pork is foul is becoz pig eats its own crap and human crap.
-
For Last and Final Time Dear Priest on this Topic until and unless you have anything new.
I'm not going to bring anything "new". I will continue to bring the Quranic facts, period. Falsehood must tbe continualy renewed.
OK; I already said Let us take your argument to be true for sake of discussion. So 6146 tells us that in Past; Jews were not forbidden to eat pork, Let us agree for sake of discussion. (But to agree with this we have to deny Deutronomy, Leviticus, several Historical facts, all the translators, ignore the languages etc. WOW)
I asked you before is...Al-Quran the Guidance of mankind or is the Torah the Guidance for mankind?
You replied "Sure, Al-Quran is GUIDANCE to mankind" ( see thread DO AYATS 55 AND 6146, PRECLUDE THE PIG AS BEING HARAM...? post Fri Oct 14, 2005 649 am ). So, why are you bringing up the Torah again?
446 Of the Jews there are those who displace words from their (right) places, and say "We hear and we disobey"; and "Hear what is not Heard"; and "Ra'ina"; with a twist of their tongues and a slander to Faith. If only they had said "What hear and we obey"; and "Do hear"; and "Do look at us"; it would have been better for them, and more proper; but Allah hath cursed them for their Unbelief; and but few of them will believe.
541 O Messenger. let not those grieve thee, who race each other into unbelief (whether it be) among those who say "We believe" with their lips but whose hearts have no faith; or it be among the Jews,- men who will listen to any lie,- will listen even to others who have never so much as come to thee. They change the words from their (right) times and places...
Now, given that Al-Quran is the Guidance for mankind and not the Torah, the things you listed i.e. "Deutronomy, Leviticus, several Historical facts", are not relevent. In addition, ayats 446 and 541 makes it clear the Torah cannot be trusted due to tampering. Ayat 6146, proves the Torah was tampered with, at least it parts of it translation anyway.
PBM Ayat 55, very clearly states that, the food of the People of the Book was/is halal for the Muslims and our food is lawful for them.
Ok; There food is Halal for Us and ours to them. So it means if Pig was Halal to them it also becomes Halal for Us, so far your logic has some weight,
Some weight?!
BUT THEN THERE ARE LIMITATIONS IN OUR FOODS FOR WHICH I HAVE QUOTED DIFFERENT VERSES WHICH INCLUDE PIG, therfore if PIG becomes Prohibited for MUSLIMS it also becomes Prohibited for JEWS, we have to follow the Instructions
.These "limitations" which you Tanveer, S.Carrot, Marie, and some others continue to argue, are what you people claim and not what Allah claims and they contradict Allah's Quran. Marie, for example, knows this and that is why she continues to forward the "grammar" argument which has also failed. By your logic, and you've said this, something must be wrong with the pig to make it haram, however, where does Allah, per his Quran, mention, prior to the advent of Al-Quran, that the pig is haram? If it is harmful to those who were given Al-Quran, then it must have been harmful for those prior to the advent of Al-Quran, yet, Allah, per ayat 6146, states exactly/indisputably, what He made haram to a party of those who preceded the advent of Al-Quran and the pig is not found among those haram animals.
Your logic and argument is lame, Quran also doesnot mention the Prohibition for Jews of animals other than the following Now read it carefully.
6146 And to those who were Jews We made unlawful every animal having claws, and of oxen and sheep We made unlawful to them the fat of both, except such as was on their backs or the entrails or what was mixed with bones
LOL! what, exactly, is the point you struggling to make? What am I supposed to be "reading carefully"? Read the ayat yourself and tell me how can the pig be represented in what Allah made haram? LOL! it is not my that logic is lame, the problem is, a failure on your part to use logic!
Now if we take your Childish argument then Quran does not mention for Jews prohibition of animals that die of themselves, blood, and animals dedicated to other Than God. Therfore according to you we should eat and drink blood becuase it was Lawful for Jews and the food of Jews has been made LAw ful for us, BUT HERE YOU FORGOT THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT THAT QURAN ALSO SAYS THIS, IN ADDITION TO WHAT HAS BEEN SAID
The Jews, having received a Message--the Torah, would have known not to eat animals that die of themselves, blood, and animals dedicated to other than God. This information/guidance/Al-Quran, is for the masses of non- Jewish humanity in general, and, specifically, to the people to whom no warner had previously come--the people of the Last Prophet. You will notice that, the ayat 53 for example, doesn't mention Jews, hence, the information in that ayat is for non-Jewish humanity. Regardless, if the pig was haram, either in part or whole, then in ayat 6146 Allah misspoke, because in that ayat He makes haram to Jew animals with claws and pigs don't have claws, hence, the pig could not have been haram to them or those who come after them.
AND WE FIND NO CONTRADICTION IN WORDS OF ALLAH ALMIGHTY the LORD OF ABRAHAM, MOSES, RAM, JESUS, MUHAMMAD, MINE AND YOURS
.Who is Ram?? Where is this individual mentioned in Al-Quran? Anyway, you are correct, there are no contradictions in Allah's Words. The contradictions are in your words which you then assign to Allah. Tell me...was the pig haram for Abraham? If so, please post the ayat where Allah states that, thanks.
-
I on occasion smoke weed.
LOL!!x10!! THIS EXPLAINS...EVERYTHING! lol lol lol
-
PEACE, ALI OMAR,
6.145 says ?lahma khinzeerin fa-innahu rijsun?
If ?khinzeerin? here means pig then the verse says that pig is not allowed because it is foul. I do not think God is lying, so the pig?s meat must be worse than any other meat, and therefore forbidden.
To me foul means it is bad in some way, and if it concerns food, then the food that is bad must have some negative effect on the human body. And if one type of food is singled out, then this food must be worse than any other food. Otherwise, why specifically mention that particular food?
As there is no proof what so ever, that people eating pork is worse off than people eating other meat, rather the opposite, there is something wrong in this picture. It does not make sense.Of course it makes no sense and that is why Marie, for example, abandoned this silly line of thought. Anyway, nothing is wrong with your Allah given common sense/logic...at least on this topic anyway
Peace.
-
lol x10!! This explains everything! lol
Oh man! That's priceless. lol
Joe
LOL!!! Absolutely priceless!!! I've been laughing non-stop for the past 15mins. It's so true that, if you let some people just ramble on long enough and not interrupt them, they will invariably tell on themselves--in his case--an active addict! How does that saying go?..."it is better to keep quiet and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt". Ba ha ha ha ha!! lol And he continually calls me misguided, what a hoot he is! lol
-
"it is better to keep quiet and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt"
You dont even have to open your mouth. You have made that pretty clear to everyone a long time ago http//www.geocities.com/bigjaxal/s1.gif
Jaxal wrote
I on occasion smoke weed.
Nuff said. lol
-
Allah made an entire category/species of animals haram to the Jews i.e. those with claws. Now, given the very fundamental fact/reality that pigs do not have claws, absolutely precludes their species of animals as being one of the species of haram animals.
Your argument that pig's don't have claws is somewhat in doubt when you read about anatomical texts on pig feet.
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=482919&dopt=Abstract
They actually have two extra digits that don't quite touch the ground which are dew claws (small claws).
http//www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=96
http//evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/lines/IIAanatomy.shtml
Cattle also have remnant digits but are much less developed (?visible at all) than the pig which has visible vestiges.
The accessory, or dew, claws have short conical horn capsules. Those of the pig are quite well developed.
http//137.222.110.150/calnet/Lfoot/page3.htm
-
Salam PB,
PBM Ayat 55, very clearly states that, the food of the People of the Book was/is halal for the Muslims and our food is lawful for them.
Khi- I can easily refute that. The verse does NOT however say that ALL the food of the people of the book is halal. I can give you an example from the Quran. Consider this verse
The Jews even said, "GOD's hand is tied down!" ...
Notice GOD saying "the Jews said" but we know there are righteous Jews too even today who do NOT claim this. Does it mean GOD is wrong or does it show that the grammatical construct in Arabic does NOT mean "the whole of the jews" but a particular portion of th whole? Id say the latter one.
Btw pig was NEVER halal for the people of the book and even evangelists today like Dr. Kent Hovind are against the eating of pork and use the Bible to support that prohibtion. GOD Bless! -
PEACE, IDMKHIZAR,
Khi- I can easily refute that. The verse does NOT however say that ALL the food of the people of the book is halal. I can give you an example from the Quran. Consider this verse
The Jews even said, "GOD's hand is tied down!" ...
Notice GOD saying "the Jews said" but we know there are righteous Jews too even today who do NOT claim this. Does it mean GOD is wrong or does it show that the grammatical construct in Arabic does NOT mean "the whole of the jews" but a particular portion of th whole? Id say the latter one.Sorry, but your analogy fails and you did not refute my claim, here's why. It is NOT necessary for the ayat to mention all the foods are halal, just the ones which are not. For the pig to be haram to the Jews/those who came before Al-Quran, you/we are required to have the ayat which says that the pig was haram to the Jews/those who came before Al-Quran, otherwise, we would be in violation of ayat 16116--making somethig haram which Allah did not definitively state was/is haram. So, please post the ayat where Allah says that the pig was haram to the Jews/those who came before Al-Quran.
Btw pig was NEVER halal for the people of the book and even evangelists today like Dr. Kent Hovind are against the eating of pork and use the Bible to support that prohibtion. GOD Bless!
If the pig was not halal for the People of the Book, then, Allah, would have stated that in Al-Quran, but He did not. He DEFINITIVELY made haram to the Jews/a people who came before Al-Quran, ALL animals with CLAWS and the fat of two animals--the sheep and the oxen. If the evangelists are against eating pork, it is not as a result of the command of Allah, but as a result of their own desire and superstition.
Peace.
-
PEACE, TRUTH,
PRIEST_BOKMEI Allah made an entire category/species of animals haram to the Jews i.e. those with claws. Now, given the very fundamental fact/reality that pigs do not have claws, absolutely precludes their species of animals as being one of the species of haram animals.
Your argument that pig's don't have claws is somewhat in doubt when you read about anatomical texts on pig feet.
Truth, please live up to your user name, o.k.? Pigs have hooves NOT claws and any grade school child will tell you that. Don't you think that Allah knows the difference between a hoof and a claw?? Come on, don't sacrifice Al-Quran to maintain your superstitious notions.
-
Sorry, but your analogy fails and you did not refute my claim, here's why. It is NOT necessary for the ayat to mention all the foods are halal, just the ones which are not. For the pig to be haram to the Jews/those who came before Al-Quran, you/we are required to have the ayat which says that the pig was haram to the Jews/those who came before Al-Quran, otherwise, we would be in violation of ayat 16116--making somethig haram which Allah did not definitively state was/is haram. So, please post the ayat where Allah says that the pig was haram to the Jews/those who came before Al-Quran.
why you asking us to prove it, how anbout you go and ask a jew?
you are really confused man, but I tell ya, you are funny, thanks for the laugh lol
Btw pig was NEVER halal for the people of the book and even evangelists today like Dr. Kent Hovind are against the eating of pork and use the Bible to support that prohibtion. GOD Bless!
If the pig was not halal for the People of the Book, then, Allah, would have stated that in Al-Quran, but He did not. He DEFINITIVELY made haram to the Jews/a people who came before Al-Quran, ALL animals with CLAWS and the fat of two animals--the sheep and the oxen. If the evangelists are against eating pork, it is not as a result of the command of Allah, but as a result of their own desire and superstition.
Peace.confusion, confusion
very clear you are,
those food mentioned were allowed, then they become forbidden as a punishment to their arrogance that you simulate really good
now we need an explanation in how you follow the order of Allah in the Quran to BELIEVE IN THE PEVIOUS BOOKS SENT BY HIM?
By Allah, I'm going to corner you using the Quran lol
peace
-
Sorry, but your analogy fails and you did not refute my claim, here's why. It is NOT necessary for the ayat to mention all the foods are halal, just the ones which are not. For the pig to be haram to the Jews/those who came before Al-Quran, you/we are required to have the ayat which says that the pig was haram to the Jews/those who came before Al-Quran, otherwise, we would be in violation of ayat 16116--making somethig haram which Allah did not definitively state was/is haram. So, please post the ayat where Allah says that the pig was haram to the Jews/those who came before Al-Quran.
why you asking us to prove it, how anbout you go and ask a jew?
What?, does a Jew no more than Allah? My God, you are simply out of touch. lol
you are really confused man, but I tell ya, you are funny, thanks for the laugh
Please don't project your character defects on to me. The only confused and superstitious here is you. You cannot, via Al-Quran, prove any of the nonsense you are spouting lol
Btw pig was NEVER halal for the people of the book and even evangelists today like Dr. Kent Hovind are against the eating of pork and use the Bible to support that prohibtion. GOD Bless!
If the pig was not halal for the People of the Book, then, Allah, would have stated that in Al-Quran, but He did not. He DEFINITIVELY made haram to the Jews/a people who came before Al-Quran, ALL animals with CLAWS and the fat of two animals--the sheep and the oxen. If the evangelists are against eating pork, it is not as a result of the command of Allah, but as a result of their own desire and superstition.
Peace.confusion, confusion
very clear you are,
Please don't project your character defects on to me. The only confused and superstitious here is you. You cannot, via Al-Quran, prove any of the nonsense you are spouting lol
those food mentioned were allowed, then they become forbidden as a punishment to their arrogance that you simulate really good
Do you KNOW for a fact what foods were made haram to the Jews, do you, smart boy? If so, go to Al-Quran and show us. Where, in Al-Quran, does Allah say that the pig was haram to the Jews?
now we need an explanation in how you follow the order of Allah in the Quran to BELIEVE IN THE PEVIOUS BOOKS SENT BY HIM?
By Allah, I'm going to corner you using the Quran lol
LOL!!You are truly out of you mind rotfl
Your above ad hominem comments...are not a refutation of my analysis nor does it advance your own analysis. The only thing you've exposed is that, you are determined to support SUPERSTITION in derogation of Allah's Quran and Truth. Allah, did not tell you to take any of the previous Books for your Guidance along with Al-Quran, and, if you maintain that He does, then you are a liar, mate. Again, the corrupted/doubtful Torah, claims that animals with undivided hoofs were haram, however, Al-Quran contradicts that, in that, it says that only animals with claws were haram to the Jews. Now, which Book do you believe has the correct account? Don't you think Allah knows the difference between a hoof and a claw, though apparently, you and Marie do not? lol
Your "argument" has be thoroughly dismantled. If you wish to serve your gods--SUPERSTITION and CONJECTURE, then that is fine by me. bravo
Oh, yeah and...stop being a...SNEAK.
-
My analysis that PGM is not a muslim and just pretending to be, I met a few of those online but always exposed them
I may be wrong, but I will see if he "the non arabic speaker truely understands the arabic words"
now if he kept ranting about the same subject, he has to be one or the other
- He is obssessed with pigs
- He is faking his islam and just to stir the air between muslims
-
My analysis that PGM is not a muslim and just pretending to be, I met a few of those online but always exposed them
I may be wrong, but I will see if he "the non arabic speaker truely understands the arabic words"
now if he kept ranting about the same subject, he has to be one or the other
- He is obssessed with pigs
- He is faking his islam and just to stir the air between muslims
Your above ad hominem...is not a refutation of my analysis nor does it advance your own analysis. The only thing you've exposed is that, you are determined to support SUPERSTITION in derogation of Allah's Quran and truth. Allah, did not tell you to take any of the previous Books for your Guidance along with Al-Quran, and, if you maintain that He does, then you are a liar, mate. Again, the corrupted/doubtful Torah, claims that animals with undivided hoofs were haram, however, Al-Quran contradicts that, in that, it says that only animals with claws were haram to the Jews. Now, which Book do you believe has the correct account? Don't you think Allah knows the difference between a hoof and a claw, though apparently, you and Marie do not? lol
Your "argument" has be thoroughly dismantled. If you wish to serve your gods--SUPERSTITION and CONJECTURE, then that is fine by me. bravo
Oh, yeah and...stop being a...SNEAK...and now a...SLANDERER as well.
-
Another profile record added to Profiler 2005 database
lol
-
Another profile record added to Profiler 2005 database
lol
Your above ad hominem...is not a refutation of my analysis nor does it advance your own analysis. The only thing you've exposed is that, you are determined to support SUPERSTITION in derogation of Allah's Quran and truth. Allah, did not tell you to take any of the previous Books for your Guidance along with Al-Quran, and, if you maintain that He does, then you are a liar, mate. Again, the corrupted/doubtful Torah, claims that animals with undivided hoofs were haram, however, Al-Quran contradicts that, in that, it says that only animals with claws were haram to the Jews. Now, which Book do you believe has the correct account? Don't you think Allah knows the difference between a hoof and a claw, though apparently, you and Marie do not? lol
Your "argument" has been thoroughly dismantled. If you wish to serve your gods--SUPERSTITION and CONJECTURE, then that is fine by me. bravo
Oh, yeah and...stop being a...SNEAK.
Oh, btw, When you turn to personal attacks, you scream out that you have been thoroughly proved wrong....loser lol
-
Please mate
Profiler 2005 does not accept duplicates
can you come with something new so the program has enough info to profile you?
cheers wink