Jews not following Torah are like donkeys with Books

Fawzia

Bernard Madoff was a donkey carriing books and all the jewish who followed him were donkeys too. Don't you think?

So YES when someone has a book with the LIGHT and still persist in corrupting the world is a DONKEY. what is the problem with that, because your boyfriend is jewish doesn't mean he is a donkey as long as he doesn't act as Madoff.

regards

Bernard Madoff was a scum, a criminal. He didn't break Taurat laws, he also broke the nation's laws.

However, other Jews aren't like that.

The Quran doesn't speak of Jews who become theives, simply Jews who disobey the Taurat.

Here

"The likeness of those who are entrusted with the Law of Moses, yet apply it not, is as the likeness of the ass carrying books. Wretched is the likeness of folk who deny the revelations of Allah. And Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk."

I know bacon eating atheist Jews, there's no reason to characterize them as donkeys with books! Thats' un neccessary & offensive hate speech.

Rami

Bernard Madoff was a scum, a criminal. He didn't break Taurat laws, he also broke the nation's laws.

However, other Jews aren't like that.

The Quran doesn't speak of Jews who become theives, simply Jews who disobey the Taurat.

Here

"The likeness of those who are entrusted with the Law of Moses, yet apply it not, is as the likeness of the ass carrying books. Wretched is the likeness of folk who deny the revelations of Allah. And Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk."

I know bacon eating atheist Jews, there's no reason to characterize them as donkeys with books! Thats' un neccessary & offensive hate speech.

Bacon, come on baby. It is USURY!!!

Fawzia

ROFL, so even with my agreeing to answer you on the condition that you answer my questions regarding your OWN arguments, you won't do it?

Who's being insecure? I don't mind answering ANY , i repeat ANY , points you have about 'jews in the quran and hate speech' issue. Im just waitng for your word as a decent human being that you will stick around and answer all my counter-queries.

Do you think it's fair for you to level charges yet run away to the next topic when challenged? I know you islamophobes need to somehow cling to your delusions to justify your personal vendetta against islam for your personal problems but go do it in the privacy of your own toilet. If you wanna use this forum then you need to be coherent, credible and informed.....or be like you.

So come on Fawzia, we're dealing with YOUR issues here. Don't be a chicken, come forward and deal with your own queries. I answer your queries, you answer mine.

Ooooh! Hate speech from your side keeps increasing! bravo

Chicjen, Islamophobe,bringing personal vendetta out of the toilet etc!

But the Quran is a perfect book right?

So why the need to malign every critique & apostate?

Surely its defensible?

So defend calling Jews, "Donkeys with books." I'll answer after you defend.

herbman

Bernard Madoff was a scum, a criminal. He didn't break Taurat laws, he also broke the nation's laws.

However, other Jews aren't like that.

The Quran doesn't speak of Jews who become theives, simply Jews who disobey the Taurat.

Here

"The likeness of those who are entrusted with the Law of Moses, yet apply it not, is as the likeness of the ass carrying books. Wretched is the likeness of folk who deny the revelations of Allah. And Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk."

I know bacon eating atheist Jews, there's no reason to characterize them as donkeys with books! Thats' un neccessary & offensive hate speech.

you are wrong, breaking the rules means any rules of the Torah, theft is one of them, there are many others.

What about Einstein who creates the nuclear bomb.
What about Sharon and all the jewish persecuting people in Israel, is this not breaking the rules of God?
What about the Jewish lobbies in US who force US to attack IRAQ? is this not breaking the rules of God?
etc etc etc

Yes they are DONKEYS because on the DOJ, they should have just to follow their book to be guided and not offend and corrupt the world.

Peace

Fawzia

But wait a minute, is Allah real?? Do you believe in the god of Israel??
If not, you questions are pointless. If Allah is real and He is the god of Israel speaking to Mohammed, the orphaned Israelite prophet from the Bani-HaShem clan, then yes the God of Israel is right, the Jews who don't follow the Torah are indeed LIKE donkeys with books.

Of course they aren't pointless even if Allah &\or Yahweh are unreal, even if they're unreal they effect billions of lives.

Uttering hate speech against millions is wrong. Even if Allah isn't real & Muhammad is an imposter, by claiming to be a Prophet & calling Jews "donkeys with books," he's insulting millions.

Is it right to declare oneself a Prophet & insult millions?

Tomorrow a person can claim to be the next Jewish Prophet & insult Muslims as donkeys & asses & his followers will repeat calling them such names, would it be right?

If hate speech in the name of humans aren't right, why should Allah be free from this requirement of abstaining from hate speech?

Bacon, come on baby. It is USURY!!!

Allah isn't only speaking of usury here,He's referring to all non Taurat observing Jews, so nice Jews eating bacon are insulted as well.

Fawzia

you are wrong, breaking the rules means any rules of the Torah, theft is one of them, there are many others.

What about Einstein who creates the nuclear bomb.
What about Sharon and all the jewish persecuting people in Israel, is this not breaking the rules of God?
What about the Jewish lobbies in US who force US to attack IRAQ? is this not breaking the rules of God?
etc etc etc

Yes they are DONKEYS because on the DOJ, they should have just to follow their book to be guided and not offend and corrupt the world.

Peace

Don't twist & turn Allah's words please. I have my own opinions of Israel which I prefer not to discuss now, but that isn't what Allah says at all.

Allah &\or Yahweh\Muhammad weren't mentioning theft by name or crimes you mentioned by name, they were referring to all Taurat breaking behavior!Any behavior which contravenes Taurat & Jews become donkeys with books!

He says that Jews who don't follow the Taurat are like donkeys with books. As simple as that. So any bacon eating atheist Jew who has not the slightest interest in Israel or manufacturing atom bombs is called a "donkey with books" as well. So is any Jewish woman living in with her boyfriend, who leads an otherwise extremely moral life.

herbman

Don't twist & turn Allah's words please. I have my own opinions of Israel which I prefer not to discuss now, but that isn't what Allah says at all.

Allah &\or Yahweh\Muhammad weren't mentioning theft by name or crimes you mentioned by name, they were referring to all Taurat breaking behavior!Any behavior which contravenes Taurat & Jews become donkeys with books!

He says that Jews who don't follow the Taurat are like donkeys with books. As simple as that. So any bacon eating atheist Jew who has not the slightest interest in Israel or manufacturing atom bombs is called a "donkey with books" as well. So is any Jewish woman living in with her boyfriend, who leads an otherwise extremely moral life.

That would mean she/he is not anymore jewish!!!!!! Just atheist which is a free choice.

Who is denounced here is jewish pretending following the Torah without applying it. Do you get it or no?

Fawzia

That would mean she/he is not anymore jewish!!!!!! Just atheist which is a free choice.

Who is denounced here is jewish pretending following the Torah without applying it. Do you get it or no?

And who decided to throw her out of Judaism? You Herbman? Reform, Reconstructionist, Humanist Jews etc do have members who indulge in pre marital sex or have bacon. They remain Jewish. I personally know many such people, most are decent, law abiding folks.

Its not your prerogative to decide who's Jewish & who's not.

And where did Allah say "pretending to follow but not applying it?"

This is what Allah says

The example of those who were given the Torah, but then failed to uphold it, is like the donkey that is carrying a cargo of books. Miserable indeed is the example of the people who denied the revelations of God. And God does not guide the wicked people.

Thus, Allah says that they were given the laws, yet didn't uphold them.

He says nothing whatsoever about pretending or openly rejecting.

Thus Jewesses prohibited from consuming bacon but still indulging in bacon sandwiches it are like "donkeys with books." Is it right to use such hate speech against such folk, if they're decent, law abiding?

bkanwar2

Dear Fawzia, I have been reading your posts with keen interest. I personally feel the deep rooted pain in these, unlike many others. I do not know, what you really intend to achieve by these posts. But, I feel it may accomplish one goal. Wake some of, more than one billion sleepy people up and may either some of them come back to real AlKitab to help themselves as well others by understanding it; or else all of thhem leave "THE CURRENT MAHJOOR AlKitab" for good. Either, way it would be good for humanity.

Badar

Mazhar

My boyfriend is a Reconstructionist Jew, identifies himself as a Jew, but doesn't believe in God\s, his sister who also identifies herself as Jewish, has a Japanese American Buddhist boyfriend,

Brother enjoys the company of sister with her boyfriend while having his own girlfriend by his side. Is this Reconstructionist "a movement in the United States, begun in the 1920s, emphasizing the idea that Judaism is a worldwide religious civilization and advocating continuous adaptation to contemporary conditions"

abdalquran

Ooooh! Hate speech from your side keeps increasing! bravo

Chicjen, Islamophobe,bringing personal vendetta out of the toilet etc!

Lets not forget 'racist', that's the jewel in the crown. A racist against her own people (and I don't mean Iranians either )

But the Quran is a perfect book right?

So why the need to malign every critique & apostate?

You gotta quit that delusion, pal. You're not a critic, you're a hater. Have you not looked at your anti-Muhammad rants on this thread. I got you to spill EVERYTHING thanks to your personal vendetta. Well done.

Surely its defensible?

So defend calling Jews, "Donkeys with books." I'll answer after you defend.

Aha, you will eh. We shall we see. Please see my next post.

Fawzia

Brother enjoys the company of sister with her boyfriend while having his own girlfriend by his side. Is this Reconstructionist "a movement in the United States, begun in the 1920s, emphasizing the idea that Judaism is a worldwide religious civilization and advocating continuous adaptation to contemporary conditions"

Seriously, are you folks nuts? Incapable of reading?

Yes, my boyfriend has a sister, so? He also has a girlfriend that is me.

I know his siter, I have met her many times, again whats' wrong with that?

She told me that her boyfriend is a Japanese Buddhist, I have met the boyfriend too, when a bunch of our friends went out for lunch one day. My boyfriend's sister told me that she's attended Buddhist meditation sessions.

What, WTF are you imagining Mazhar? Did I write that my boyfriend, his sister, her boyfriend & me have orgies? lol!lol! lol! ;D

Nope, we are extremely decent people, we don' do such stuff, the maximum we've done is have bacon, a taboo in my ex religion & my boyfriend & his sister's religion.

I know many Muslims who've been turned stupid due to Islamic doctrines & repeated inbreeding, but I didn't realise that the situation was as bad as all that! ;D

Fawzia

Lets not forget 'racist', that's the jewel in the crown. A racist against her own people (and I don't mean Iranians either )

You gotta quit that delusion, pal. You're not a critic, you're a hater. Have you not looked at your anti-Muhammad rants on this thread. I got you to spill EVERYTHING thanks to your personal vendetta. Well done.

Aha, you will eh. We shall we see. Please see my next post.

Again repeating the same stuff. As a person who despises racism, do you feel that calling people, "donkeys with books," is racist or not?

I am not Allah, attacking me won't make your Allah any better.

Yeah I dislike Islam, I've made no secret of that since I joined this forum, why do you need to get me to "spill" anything?

I told everything right at the beginning. Heck, every Muslim terrorist attack is called a "conspiracy" by many Muslims, now every apostate like me also has some deep, dark secret agenda?

lol! lol!lol! ;D

So with your strong objections to racism, please tell me,

Is calling people "donkeys with books," racist or not?

abdalquran

So defend calling Jews, "Donkeys with books." I'll answer after you defend.

I don't believe it's calling 'jews' donkeys with books for the following reasons

The word used is 'alladhina haadoo' which if you literally translate as 'jew' would equate to 'those who jewed'. This doesn't make linguistic sense at all. The word 'haadoo' if you see any arabic dictionary (lol, yeah right) and even in the Quran itself (7/156 - see phrase hudnaa ilaika) means 'they turned'. It's referring to people who are unlike believers, unable to commit to faith.
62/6 decries their mentality which is an exclusivist mentality. This mentality is universally present and one can test this mentality even in Sunnis or Salafees who say that THEY are God's chosen ones.
62/7 calls these people adh-dhalimeen or oppressors. THIS is the real trademark of their mentality and you can find the explanation of this word in many places in Quran. It is not referring to any religious group.

Now, instead of your usual derisive laughter which attempts to mask any lack of answers, I expect you address these three points should you disagree with them.

And now, your questions

Lets begin with these

You quote 62/5 which chastises the jews for not carrying the tauraat
According to you, this means that Quran wants them to follow the TORAH and that's why you quoted the laws from the Torah and you claimed Muhammad wanted them to follow these.

Is this correct or wrong? Upon your answer, we will proceed

Fawzia

I don't believe it's calling 'jews' donkeys with books for the following reasons

The word used is 'alladhina haadoo' which if you literally translate as 'jew' would equate to 'those who jewed'. This doesn't make linguistic sense at all. The word 'haadoo' if you see any arabic dictionary (lol, yeah right) and even in the Quran itself (7/156 - see phrase hudnaa ilaika) means 'they turned'. It's referring to people who are unlike believers, unable to commit to faith.

Gee thanks!

"Those who Jewed indeed!" As you admit, this literally translated means, "Those who Jewed," ie linguistically meaningless. So that makes your perfect Quran not only full of hate speech, but linguistically flawed as well.

If I write, "Those who Muslimed," what does it mean? Thus even by your own admission & translation, the Quran is linguistically flawed. laugh

If you write, "Those who Muslimed, they turned," its grammatically very ill, so is your Allah's sentence construction!

Rami

Mohammed ALSO has freedom of speech.

Islam ALSO has the right to defend itself.

Let this be a clear message to all the wannabe donkeys out there. voodoo

abdalquran

Gee thanks!
"Those who Jewed indeed!" As you admit, this literally translated means, "Those who Jewed," ie linguistically meaningless. So that makes your perfect Quran not only full of hate speech, but linguistically flawed as well.
If I write, "Those who Muslimed," what does it mean? Thus even by your own admission & translation, the Quran is linguistically flawed. laugh
If you write, "Those who Muslimed, they turned," its grammatically very ill, so is your Allah's sentence construction!

First and foremost, there were THREE points I made. Where are your other two answers. Your failure to upkeep your word shows your character.

To answer your question

This is why it cannot possibly mean 'jew'. The word is used IN THE QURAN ITSELF (verse 7/156 as I showed you) to mean 'turn'. Your favourite translators call it 'turned' in 7/156 yet due to Sunni racist bias, they translate 62/5 as 'jews'. And you, the consumer translations think the Quran itself is saying it.

62/5 is talking about people who have turned yet cannot commit themselves. They cannot carry tauraat (which we will see later once you answer my questions).

Right, I await you now to upkeep your word, 'Fawzia'. Lets see how much integrity you have.

Fawzia

First and foremost, there were THREE points I made. Where are your other two answers. Your failure to upkeep your word shows your character.

To answer your question

This is why it cannot possibly mean 'jew'. The word is used IN THE QURAN ITSELF (verse 7/156 as I showed you) to mean 'turn'. Your favourite translators call it 'turned' in 7/156 yet due to Sunni racist bias, they translate 62/5 as 'jews'. And you, the consumer translations think the Quran itself is saying it.

62/5 is talking about people who have turned yet cannot commit themselves. They cannot carry tauraat (which we will see later once you answer my questions).

Right, I await you now to upkeep your word, 'Fawzia'. Lets see how much integrity you have.

Can't you construct a short post without newer personal attacks? ???

From racist to chicken to lacking integrity to lacking character to lacking knowledge of classical Arabic etc! rotfl

I can only go on to later stuff if the earlier explanations are clarified right?

As it happens they're not, so how & why do I answer & deal with more?

You yourself admitted

I don't believe it's calling 'jews' donkeys with books for the following reasons

The word used is 'alladhina haadoo' which if you literally translate as 'jew' would equate to 'those who jewed'. This doesn't make linguistic sense at all.

If it means, "those who Jewed" it shows a grammatically flawed sentence, so what am I to do with this grammatically flawed sentence please?

How do I proceed?

Then you disagree with 4 translators I provided, ones accepted & recognized by millions of Muslims globally.

Why should I accept your translation as any more authentic & meaningful tht 4 people combined?

AND if the Quran is either grammatically flawed or incapable of being translated or even understood correctly by 4 different writers, then it isn't a very good book in the first place!

Then it shouldn't claim to be a universal religion applying & trying to proselytize millions of non Arab Muslims, nor should it apply to modern Arabs who don't all follow Classical Arabic either! !

Infact, if a holy book which claims to be in "clear language" has so much confusion in the simplest translations or understandings, then it should stop making its grandoise claims! peace

abdalquran

I can only go on to later stuff if the earlier explanations are clarified right?

Actually, wrong. The other 2 answers are not linguistic, they are contextual so as it happens, you owe me two answers besides the bottom two answers concerning the torah aswell.

You yourself admitted

If it means, "those who Jewed" it shows a grammatically flawed sentence, so what am I to do with this grammatically flawed sentence please?

How do I proceed?

You proceed by answering why you agree with your translators why you choose to translate it to mean 'jew' when
a. the dictionaries themselves gives a host of meanings.
b. the quran ITSELF uses the word in a different way.

You need to tell me why you side with these folks.

Then you disagree with 4 translators I provided, ones accepted & recognized by millions of Muslims globally.

Why should I accept your translation as any more authentic & meaningful tht 4 people combined?

Because my translation is consistent with the QURANIC usage of the word. The author of the Quran used the VERY SAME root to mean something else yet for this ayah 62/5, your translators understood 'alladhina haadoo' as 'jews'. This is quite simply to do with the constructed history where Muhammad was portrayed as an anti-semite. Now since you speak of 'genuine scholarship' , why don't you tell us why you believe in the history of ibn hisham which is a redaction of the original ibn ishaq's seerah? This is the seerah which first proposed the meaning as 'jews' and it came ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS after Muhammad.

AND if the Quran is either grammatically flawed or incapable of being translated or even understood correctly by 4 different writers, then it isn't a very good book in the first place!

Hmm, this is coming from the person who thinks its beneath her to study Arabic! You refuse to get into the subject because of your malignant opinion of the Muslims but you don't mind choosing a side when it comes to this. Where's your personal integrity, 'Fawzia'?

Then it shouldn't claim to be a universal religion applying & trying to proselytize millions of non Arab Muslims, nor should it apply to modern Arabs who don't all follow Classical Arabic either! !

Infact, if a holy book which claims to be in "clear language" has so much confusion in the simplest translations or understandings, then it should stop making its grandoise claims! peace

LOL, if the book was confusing, it wouldn't tell us HOW to read it!

Quran We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur'an, in order that you may logically think (la3allakum ta'qiloon).

The arabic language of the Quran, with its systematic roots and derivatives uses words in such a way that, if you translate a word wrongly, it would appear awkward in other contexts. That's why, after 1400 years of Sunni accretions, we can see past the hadith-racist influenced translations and see Quran ITSELF uses the words. Of course, that requires studying the language, something beneath you.

I await my other two answers. Don't forget them, ok ? Your decency obliges you.

Fawzia

Actually, wrong. The other 2 answers are not linguistic, they are contextual so as it happens, you owe me two answers besides the bottom two answers concerning the torah aswell.

You proceed by answering why you agree with your translators why you choose to translate it to mean 'jew' when
a. the dictionaries themselves gives a host of meanings.
b. the quran ITSELF uses the word in a different way.

You need to tell me why you side with these folks.

Because my translation is consistent with the QURANIC usage of the word. The author of the Quran used the VERY SAME root to mean something else yet for this ayah 62/5, your translators understood 'alladhina haadoo' as 'jews'. This is quite simply to do with the constructed history where Muhammad was portrayed as an anti-semite. Now since you speak of 'genuine scholarship' , why don't you tell us why you believe in the history of ibn hisham which is a redaction of the original ibn ishaq's seerah? This is the seerah which first proposed the meaning as 'jews' and it came ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS after Muhammad.

Hmm, this is coming from the person who thinks its beneath her to study Arabic! You refuse to get into the subject because of your malignant opinion of the Muslims but you don't mind choosing a side when it comes to this. Where's your personal integrity, 'Fawzia'?

LOL, if the book was confusing, it wouldn't tell us HOW to read it!

Quran We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur'an, in order that you may logically think (la3allakum ta'qiloon).

The arabic language of the Quran, with its systematic roots and derivatives uses words in such a way that, if you translate a word wrongly, it would appear awkward in other contexts. That's why, after 1400 years of Sunni accretions, we can see past the hadith-racist influenced translations and see Quran ITSELF uses the words. Of course, that requires studying the language, something beneath you.

I await my other two answers. Don't forget them, ok ? Your decency obliges you.

Super abdulquran! bravo

So even in so much as a single verse there's way so much linguistic & grammatical confusion. Even after abandoning all sorts of hadiths, Quran can't stand by itself as every small bit has been mis interpreted & mis translated.

Its a confusing book, but still gives instructions on "how to read," even with those elaborate instructions, there's so much confusion over every little bit & piece! ;D

Yes, I refuse to go into lengthy periods of study of Arabic, if Islam can only be interpreted like that, it should stop making its grand claims of being a universal faith!

Classical & modern Arabic differ substantially too, so extremely few people on earth are able to read the book.

Tell me, do you ask every convert to Quranist Islam to read Arabic as well, or are these accusations only levelled at the rejectors?

While all converts are welcomed with open arms, without the slightest comprehension of Arabic? ???

The Quran by your admission can be easily mistranslated.

So all the 1 billion plus Muslims on earth, to be able to follow a fulfilling & satisfying, not to mention non anti semitic & non misogynistic etc faith-will have to spend years, whatever their birthplace, boning up on classical Arabic?

Don't they have other qualifications to gather? Jobs to find? Extra curricular activities? Later marriage & children?

People need to study loads of things in life. AND, they need to live their lives. As it happens, there's so much problem of literacy & skilled workers in multiple Islamic nations, why should people devote years to bone up on a classical language which is incapable of translation? That would lead to further diverting precious time & resources from the urgent needs of the time,learning science & technology, essential job skills etc.

If Islam is a faith incapable of translation, then it should've abandoned its pretences of being a global faith right at its inception, stuck to Arabia & prevented even classical Arabic from accumulating new words & expressions! peace