Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. General Issues / Questions
  4. Free-Minds.org is another Sect...like Suni and Shia Sects.

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

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Issues / Questions
552 Posts 35 Posters 40.8k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • R Offline
    R Offline
    Rev_John
    wrote on last edited by
    #361

    Peace belH

    I am sorry I do not have much knowledge of the bible, but only what I have been told or seen on lectures. God willing I will read more to reseach for myself one day. Of what I have read I could not accept e.g. making partners to God. So I am inclined to accept that the Bible has been corrupted in one way or another. But as I say more knowledgable brothers have read it and studied it for many years and what I know of it is through them at present.

    Peace

    Hope

    Yes the bible has been corrupted. But it does still say that there is only one God and you should not put anyone equal to God. Jesus even said "you can reject me, but do not reject the Father".

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • N Offline
      N Offline
      noble
      wrote on last edited by
      #362

      Peace bros, sis, humans, and jinns )
      i am sure that all the books the Quran refer to are hidden somewhere, in their pristine form, and in the way they were supposed to be revealed, either in the possession of humans or jinns, and one day, a generation of humans will have the luck, or misfortune, depending on where they stand, to see for themselves those revelations.
      As an example, how come we have so very little access to the Dead Sea Scrolls which come from an area the majority of which is not even within the Israeli borders, and how on earth did they end up within Israel remit, who now claim there is not enough funds to study them all? ???
      How about the huge collection of archives the Vatican collected hidden in their vaults?
      The archives the family of Saud have in their possession?
      The ones the Rabbis possess too that the Quran say they like making pieces of folded papers that they keep...
      I trust Allah, it will come out...

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • G Offline
        G Offline
        guest
        wrote on last edited by
        #363

        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

        1. 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.
        2. 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).
        3. 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).

        Yes, I do agree that we should choose our sources very carefully and efficiently when dealing with our religious belief. However, your conclusion may not be all inclusive i.e. you negated the option that could be derived from 1439.

        1439 - Praise be to GOD for granting me, despite my old age, Ismail and Isaac. My Lord answers the prayers.

        1. Abraham had only one wife (one marriage) from which came both Ismail and Isaac

        2. Ismail was born while the wife was still fertile (say age 43). This age would be consistent with 1439

        3. Wife becomes barren after Ismail is born

        4. Abraham builds the foundation of shrine at about the age 55 with 12 years old Ismail

        5. Around age 55, Abraham and his wife gets the good news of Isaac. That?s when the God removed the infertility of Abrahams wife just like God parted the sea for Mosses and his people

        6. This proves that Ismail and Isaac had the same mother

        I believe this explanation does not violate any Quranic verses nor does it leave any key options out. Please let me know if you find anything wrong with this idea. Thanks!

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • H Offline
          H Offline
          hope4
          wrote on last edited by
          #364

          Yes the bible has been corrupted. But it does still say that there is only one God and you should not put anyone equal to God. Jesus even said "you can reject me, but do not reject the Father".

          Peace Rev.John

          I haven't read much of the bible, but it is something I would like to do at some point. When reading it I will deffinitly be looking out for what you have stated as this is in line with the Quran. I also believe that Jesus would have said what you have quoted as this is also in line with the Quran. It will be nice for you to give us quotes from the Bible regarding particular issues or just generally. This will help with our education of the Bible God willing. As a side note which version of the Bibile do you read? Can it be downloaded on pdf?

          Peace

          Hope

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • N Offline
            N Offline
            noble
            wrote on last edited by
            #365

            Peace all
            It does not bother me either way if Abraham had Ismael and Isaac from the same wife or two different ones...
            however I get very irritated when on the basis of believing either someone can be branded a believer or a non-believer,
            that is mickey-mouse thinking at its most ridiculous, and maybe dangerous!

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • B Offline
              B Offline
              belH
              wrote on last edited by
              #366

              I did not see this question being directed at me, but I'll answer nonetheless.
              You would enforce God's law, which was also enforced by Joseph

              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 doers of wrong."

              1276 So he began with their bags before his brother's bag. Then he brought it (ie. the cup) out of his brother's bag. It was such that We planned for Joseph, for he would not have been able to take his brother under the King's system, except that God wished it so. We raise the degrees of whom We please, and over every one of knowledge is the All Knowledgeable.

              538 The male thief, and the female thief, cut-off/cut their means/resources (plural - three or more) as a punishment for their crime, and to serve as a deterrent from God. God is Noble, Wise.

              Maybe you should answer my question DO PEOPLE HAVE THREE OR MORE HANDS? DOES THE VERSE MAKE SENSE IF WE TRANSLATE "AYDIYAHUMA" AS "THEIR THREE OR MORE HANDS?

              Furthermore, did God create the universe with his three or more hands, or his might/resouces/power (5147)?

              Were David, Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael resourceful or did they have many/three or more hands (3817; 3857)?

              Why does God show us the punishment for theft put into action by Joseph if this is not what he wants us to do? Does God want to confuse us?

              Where does it say that the punishment used by Jospeh is out-of-date/not for us to implement?

              2171 The example of those who reject/are unappreciative is like the one who repeats what he has heard of calls and shouts; deaf, dumb, and blind; they do not use their reason and intellect.

              Peace all,

              The Questions were

              how would you go about enforcing the thief to work and repay what was stolen, especially if he needs to work to repay 50 billion dollar?

              In your answer, did you mean Jail Him, or did you mean take him into slavery? Furthermore, what Kind of Job would make the Thief earn 50 Billion Dollar, as in Medoff Case.

              Also, you said

              Quote
              538 The male thief, and the female thief, cut-off/cut their means/resources (plural - three or more) as a punishment for their crime, and to serve as a deterrent from God. God is Noble, Wise.

              Maybe you should answer my question DO PEOPLE HAVE THREE OR MORE HANDS? DOES THE VERSE MAKE SENSE IF WE TRANSLATE "AYDIYAHUMA" AS "THEIR THREE OR MORE HANDS?
              End Quote

              The two thieves, male and Female, Have Four Hands (which is more than three hands)

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • B Offline
                B Offline
                belH
                wrote on last edited by
                #367

                Now BelH doesn't even understand the meaning of the word "muslim"!

                It goes from bad to worse.

                http//www.radicalacademy.com/logiccritthinking.htm

                Maybe you can teach us...please feel free to tell us the meaning.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • B Offline
                  B Offline
                  belH
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #368
                  1. 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.

                  Peace,
                  His other wife was not in the scene because Abraham had Lift here and her Son, Ismail, in the Uncultivated Valley.

                  1437

                  Our Lord, I have resided part of my progeny in an uncultivated valley near your Restricted House. My Lord, so that they may hold the bond. So let the hearts of the people incline towards them and give provisions to them of the fruits that they may give thanks.

                  The above verse confirms the Biblic story about Abraham leaving hajer and Ismail after Sarah requested him to do so.

                  I believe that God wants us to read the Bible and Torah in order to know about the Complete Quranic Stories, which are written very briefly, eccept for Yousuf story...And for us to know about the complete stories, we will need other sources...and these sources could be God's Books (Torah and Injeel) or Man made Books.

                  Peace

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • A Offline
                    A Offline
                    Ahmad_Bilal
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #369

                    1437

                    Our Lord, I have resided part of my progeny in an uncultivated valley near your Restricted House. My Lord, so that they may hold the bond. So let the hearts of the people incline towards them and give provisions to them of the fruits that they may give thanks.

                    I don't think this passage is talking about Ishmael. And if it is, it's implying that (1) Abraham had more than two sons, or (2) Ishmael also had descendants, and this was referring to Ishmael and his wife and children... Here's what a basic translation of the passage looks like

                    Our Lord, I have settled a part of my offspring in a valley unproductive of fruit near Your restricted/sacred house, our Lord, that they may keep up the salaat/bond/prayer. So, make the hearts of some people yearn towards them, and provide them with fruits; haply they may be grateful. (Q. 1437)

                    Now, in this passage, Abraham is specifically referring only to his offspring, which didn't include the Biblical character "Hagar". So, who is the "them" being referred to? Ishmael and who? If it is referring to him, it's most likely speaking of Ishmael and his descendants, and this wouldn't have anything to do with Hagar; she probably wasn't even there. This implies that Ishmael was an adult male when he separated from his father Abraham, he wasn't a small child who was cast out with his mother.

                    The idea that Abraham abandoned his wife and child in an uncultivated desert valley is horrendous, and there's nothing in the Qur'aan that says this. It's inconceivable that a prophet of God would do this. Therefore, in my opinion, this is more likely a passage referring to Ishmael and his offspring (which are also Abraham's progeny, his grandchildren), not to an infant Ishmael and his poor mother...

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • J Offline
                      J Offline
                      Jack
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #370

                      Rezurriyah/descendants

                      2128 is an excellent reference '...And from our progeny a nation surrendering (muslim) to you.'

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • B Offline
                        B Offline
                        belH
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #371

                        I don't think this passage is talking about Ishmael. And if it is, it's implying that (1) Abraham had more than two sons, or (2) Ishmael also had descendants, and this was referring to Ishmael and his wife and children... Here's what a basic translation of the passage looks like

                        Our Lord, I have settled a part of my offspring in a valley unproductive of fruit near Your restricted/sacred house, our Lord, that they may keep up the salaat/bond/prayer. So, make the hearts of some people yearn towards them, and provide them with fruits; haply they may be grateful. (Q. 1437)

                        Now, in this passage, Abraham is specifically referring only to his offspring, which didn't include the Biblical character "Hagar". So, who is the "them" being referred to? Ishmael and who? If it is referring to him, it's most likely speaking of Ishmael and his descendants, and this wouldn't have anything to do with Hagar; she probably wasn't even there. This implies that Ishmael was an adult male when he separated from his father Abraham, he wasn't a small child who was cast out with his mother.

                        The idea that Abraham abandoned his wife and child in an uncultivated desert valley is horrendous, and there's nothing in the Qur'aan that says this. It's inconceivable that a prophet of God would do this. Therefore, in my opinion, this is more likely a passage referring to Ishmael and his offspring (which are also Abraham's progeny, his grandchildren), not to an infant Ishmael and his poor mother...

                        Peace Ahamad,
                        Are you advising me to reject The Torah Story?
                        Zuria can mean Son or daughter as well.
                        Peace

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • A Offline
                          A Offline
                          Ahmad_Bilal
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #372

                          Are you advising me to reject The Torah Story?
                          Zuria can mean Son or daughter as well.

                          I'm just saying you should really look into the ideas presented in the Tanakh when it comes to biographies of the prophets. The Tanakh alleges that King David committed adultery with a married woman and then killed her husband. It alleges that King Solomon had hundreds of wives, and they led him into idolatry. It alleges that Noah was a public alcoholic, and he committed incest, impregnating his own daughters after the flood. And, on top of all this, it claims that Abraham abandoned his wife and infant child in the desert with no adequate supply of food or water, pretty much leaving them to die... You should study these texts carefully. Everything you read in the Tanakh is not necessarily true, and it doesn't always depict a true or positive image of the prophets of God.

                          And even though the passage could be mentioning a son or a daughter, the "offspring" is mentioned in the plural sense, meaning there was more that one descendant of Abraham there.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • B Offline
                            B Offline
                            belH
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #373

                            I'm just saying you should really look into the ideas presented in the Tanakh when it comes to biographies of the prophets. The Tanakh alleges that King David committed adultery with a married woman and then killed her husband. It alleges that King Solomon had hundreds of wives, and they led him into idolatry. It alleges that Noah was a public alcoholic, and he committed incest, impregnating his own daughters after the flood. And, on top of all this, it claims that Abraham abandoned his wife and infant child in the desert with no adequate supply of food or water, pretty much leaving them to die... You should study these texts carefully. Everything you read in the Tanakh is not necessarily true, and it doesn't always depict a true or positive image of the prophets of God.

                            And even though the passage could be mentioning a son or a daughter, the "offspring" is mentioned in the plural sense, meaning there was more that one descendant of Abraham there.

                            Peace,
                            The Torah should not have any stories about Solomon or David, simply because their time was after the Torah; Moreover, The Crucifixion of Jesus should not be part of the Bible, because at that Time Jesus was raisin to God. We are only asked to believe in the Torah that were given to Moses and the Bible that was given to Jesus. And these are the Two books that God spoke about to Prophet Mohamed and ordered Him to believe in.

                            Also, do not forget that God asked Abraham to do many hard to believe things, such as Sloughing His own Son and abandoning his wife and infant child in the desert with no adequate supply of food or water (which are confirmed by the Quran and Torah).

                            When reading the Other books, we only need to believe in what are confirmed by the Quran.

                            And even though the passage could be mentioning a son or a daughter, the "offspring" is mentioned in the plural sense, meaning there was more that one descendant of Abraham there.

                            What is the singular word for ""?

                            Peace

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • WakasW Offline
                              WakasW Offline
                              Wakas
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #374

                              Maybe you can teach us...please feel free to tell us the meaning.

                              I recommend studying every occurrence of the word in Al Quran. This study technique is simple, powerful, fruitful, but only for those who put in the time and effort

                              = Siin-Lam-Miim = safety/security/freedom/immunity, to escape, salutation/greeting/peace, deliver/acknowledge, pay in advance, submit, sincerity, humility, submission/conformance/obedience, resign/quit/relinquish, to be in sound condition, well without blemish, gentle/tender/soft/elegant. Solomon/Sulaiman.

                              salima vb. (1) pcple. act. 6843

                              salam n.m. 490, 491, 1628, 1687, 3929

                              salam n.m. 494, 516, 654, 6127, 746, 1010, 1025, 1148, 1169, 1324, 1423, 1546, 1552, 1632, 1915, 1933, 1947, 1962, 2047, 2169, 2563, 2575, 2759, 2855, 3344, 3658, 3779, 37109, 37120, 37130, 37181, 3973, 4389, 5034, 5125, 5125, 5626, 5626, 5691, 5923, 975

                              salim n.m. (adj) 2689, 3784

                              salm n.m. 861, 4735

                              silm n.com. 2208

                              sulayman n.prop. 2102, 2102, 4163, 684, 2178, 2179, 2181, 2715, 2716, 2717, 2718, 2730, 2736, 2744, 3412, 3830, 3834

                              sullam n.m. 635, 5238

                              sallama vb. (2)
                              perf. act. 2233, 843
                              impf. act. 465, 2427
                              impv. 2461, 3356
                              n.vb. 465, 3322, 3356
                              pcple. pass. f. 271, 492, 492

                              aslama vb. (4)
                              perf. act. 2112, 2131, 320, 320, 320, 383, 4125, 544, 614, 2744, 37103, 4914, 4917, 7214
                              impf. act. 671, 1681, 3122, 4066, 4816
                              impv. 2131, 2234, 3954
                              n.vb. 319, 385, 53, 6125, 974, 3922, 4917, 617
                              pcple. act. 2128, 2128, 2132, 2133, 2136, 352, 364, 367, 380, 384, 3102, 5111, 6163, 7126, 1072, 1084, 1090, 1114, 12101, 152, 1689, 16102, 21108, 2278, 2731, 2738, 2742, 2781, 2791, 2853, 2946, 3053, 3335, 3335, 3912, 4133, 4369, 4615, 5136, 665, 6835, 7214

                              istaslama vb. (10) pcple. act. 3726

                              LL, V4, p 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141

                              From http//www.studyquran.co.uk/PRLonline.htm

                              All information is correct to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be taken as a fact. One should always seek knowledge and verify for themselves when possible: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • M Offline
                                M Offline
                                MUNZIR_ALI
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #375

                                I recommend studying every occurrence of the word in Al Quran. This study technique is simple, powerful, fruitful, but only for those who put in the time and effort

                                = Siin-Lam-Miim = safety/security/freedom/immunity, to escape, salutation/greeting/peace, deliver/acknowledge, pay in advance, submit, sincerity, humility, submission/conformance/obedience, resign/quit/relinquish, to be in sound condition, well without blemish, gentle/tender/soft/elegant. Solomon/Sulaiman.

                                Great defenition. bravo

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • G Offline
                                  G Offline
                                  guest
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #376

                                  Peace,

                                  I did not see this question being directed at me, but I'll answer nonetheless.
                                  You would enforce God's law, which was also enforced by Joseph

                                  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 doers of wrong."

                                  1276 So he began with their bags before his brother's bag. Then he brought it (ie. the cup) out of his brother's bag. It was such that We planned for Joseph, for he would not have been able to take his brother under the King's system, except that God wished it so. We raise the degrees of whom We please, and over every one of knowledge is the All Knowledgeable.

                                  538 The male thief, and the female thief, cut-off/cut their means/resources (plural - three or more) as a punishment for their crime, and to serve as a deterrent from God. God is Noble, Wise.

                                  Maybe you should answer my question DO PEOPLE HAVE THREE OR MORE HANDS? DOES THE VERSE MAKE SENSE IF WE TRANSLATE "AYDIYAHUMA" AS "THEIR THREE OR MORE HANDS?

                                  Furthermore, did God create the universe with his three or more hands, or his might/resouces/power (5147)?

                                  Were David, Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael resourceful or did they have many/three or more hands (3817; 3857)?

                                  Why does God show us the punishment for theft put into action by Joseph if this is not what he wants us to do? Does God want to confuse us?

                                  Where does it say that the punishment used by Jospeh is out-of-date/not for us to implement?

                                  2171 The example of those who reject/are unappreciative is like the one who repeats what he has heard of calls and shouts; deaf, dumb, and blind; they do not use their reason and intellect.

                                  1276 - He then started by inspecting their containers, before getting to his brother's container, and he extracted it out of his brother's container. We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph; he could not have kept his brother if he applied the king's law. But that was the will of GOD. We exalt whomever we choose to higher ranks. Above every knowledgeable one, there is one who is even more knowledgeable.

                                  Let us analyze this verse to find what the God is trying to teach us. We will only analyze portions of this verse and draw conclusion. Our Lord, please help us find true meaning of this verse. Thank You!

                                  We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph - From this we can deduce the following facts

                                  1. Joseph is a messenger of the God and that He is supporting Joseph?s plan to keep his brother with him.

                                  2. This plan is restricted to Joseph only because the verse clearly says ?We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph?.

                                  3. This scheme is not to be taken as a general law of God to mankind (believers)

                                  We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph; he could not have kept his brother if he applied the king's law- From this we can deduce the following facts

                                  1. Although Joseph has been established as a messenger of God, he is still within the jurisdiction of King?s system (law) which is not the God?s system

                                  2. King?s law does not allow for holding a person against his will

                                  3. Therefore, Joseph could not apply this king?s law to hold his brother

                                  4. Another king?s law allows for holding a person for committing a crime within king?s jurisdiction

                                  5. Joseph knew his half brothers will not allow his brother to stay in Egypt per the promise they made with their father. Therefore, he utilized the king?s steal law (NOT GOD?S LAW) to hold his brother

                                  6. And king?s steal law is "The punishment, if it is found in his bag, is that the thief belongs to you. We thus punish the guilty (1275)." THIS IS NOT THE GOD?s LAW. Keep in mind the verse said ?They said? which does not mean that they are speaking of God's law

                                  Conclusion 538 is God?s law and 1275 is a manmade law. Therefore, we cannot equate 538 with 1275.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • WakasW Offline
                                    WakasW Offline
                                    Wakas
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #377

                                    Peace,

                                    1276 - He then started by inspecting their containers, before getting to his brother's container, and he extracted it out of his brother's container. We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph; he could not have kept his brother if he applied the king's law. But that was the will of GOD. We exalt whomever we choose to higher ranks. Above every knowledgeable one, there is one who is even more knowledgeable.

                                    Let us analyze this verse to find what the God is trying to teach us. We will only analyze portions of this verse and draw conclusion. Our Lord, please help us find true meaning of this verse. Thank You!

                                    We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph - From this we can deduce the following facts

                                    1. Joseph is a messenger of the God and that He is supporting Joseph?s plan to keep his brother with him.

                                    2. This plan is restricted to Joseph only because the verse clearly says ?We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph?.

                                    3. This scheme is not to be taken as a general law of God to mankind (believers)

                                    We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph; he could not have kept his brother if he applied the king's law- From this we can deduce the following facts

                                    1. Although Joseph has been established as a messenger of God, he is still within the jurisdiction of King?s system (law) which is not the God?s system

                                    2. King?s law does not allow for holding a person against his will

                                    3. Therefore, Joseph could not apply this king?s law to hold his brother

                                    4. Another king?s law allows for holding a person for committing a crime within king?s jurisdiction

                                    5. Joseph knew his half brothers will not allow his brother to stay in Egypt per the promise they made with their father. Therefore, he utilized the king?s steal law (NOT GOD?S LAW) to hold his brother

                                    6. And king?s steal law is "The punishment, if it is found in his bag, is that the thief belongs to you. We thus punish the guilty (1275)." THIS IS NOT THE GOD?s LAW. Keep in mind the verse said ?They said? which does not mean that they are speaking of God's law

                                    Conclusion 538 is God?s law and 1275 is a manmade law. Therefore, we cannot equate 538 with 1275.

                                    I'm not one to use emoticons often but I simply must in this case...
                                    rotfl rotfl rotfl

                                    I recommend
                                    http//www.radicalacademy.com/logiccritthinking.htm

                                    All information is correct to the best of my knowledge only and thus should not be taken as a fact. One should always seek knowledge and verify for themselves when possible: 17:36, 20:114, 35:28, 49:6, 58:11.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • J Offline
                                      J Offline
                                      Jack
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #378

                                      We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph; he could not have kept his brother if he applied the king's law- From this we can deduce the following facts

                                      (emphasis mine)

                                      Let's try it with context

                                      1276 - ...But that was the will of GOD. We exalt whomever we choose to higher ranks. Above every knowledgeable one, there is one who is even more knowledgeable.

                                      There is also 1231 and 1250. Obviously, these women didn't sever their own hands. 1256 says that joseph was given authority/makana in the land. Now what does this authority entail?

                                      2241

                                      Those whom if We allow them authority (same word - makana) in the land, they hold the bond (salat), and they contribute towards betterment (zakat), and deter from evil (munkar). And to God is the conclusion of all matters.

                                      He is clearly living under the God's law.

                                      2455

                                      God promises those among you who believe and do good works, that He will make them successors on earth, as He made successors of those before them, and He will enable/m-k-n for them their system which He has approved for them, and He will substitute security for them in place of fear, that they serve/ibada Me and do not associate anything with Me. And as for those who reject after that, they are the wicked.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • G Offline
                                        G Offline
                                        guest
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #379

                                        Peace,

                                        I'm not one to use emoticons often but I simply must in this case...
                                        rotfl rotfl rotfl

                                        I recommend
                                        http//www.radicalacademy.com/logiccritthinking.htm

                                        Please make your point, that is, if you have any. And summarize the content of your link and how it relates to the discussion at hand. This way we can evaluate your understanding of the information you want us to read as well as your ability to relate it to current discussion. Just providing a link is very unproductive and adds no value.

                                        1781 - Proclaim, "The truth has prevailed, and falsehood has vanished; falsehood will inevitably vanish."

                                        88 - For He has decreed that the truth shall prevail, and the falsehood shall vanish, in spite of the evildoers.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • Q Offline
                                          Q Offline
                                          Q_student
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #380

                                          Peace,

                                          . Just providing a link is very unproductive and adds no value.

                                          Excellent Observation.
                                          Hadithis befool by referring to Hadiths
                                          Some befool by referring to inscriptions
                                          Some befool by referring www.blablabla.com
                                          Some befool by referring to code 19

                                          What is the difference then ??????????????????

                                          All of them have same modus operandi.
                                          Regards

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Users