Sanaa Quran no diatrical marks and vowel points, Syriac-Aramaic crossover
-
It depends which side you are looking at the picture.
So I also agree with you ,from the other side view.
GOD bless.
Peace. -
Let me put it to you this way.
As far as we are concerned ,we make the choices and take the decisions.
As far as GOD is concerned, there is no other controller /decision maker except the Creator.GOD is the only power and in does everything.
Hope you get me,otherwise fine.
Keep taking control of your life,you are accountable like we all are.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
There may be people who believe Allah controls what is now and those who think Allah has abandoned everything and made it so difficult and does not control what ends up being read and known as the Qur'an. I am of the party or opinion that believes in the total absolute immediate control over all experience by Allah where no error or mistake ever occurs and so what is known to people as the Qur'an now is as Allah wills, who can just as easily change it or the minds of people and what they see and think with or without their even knowing such has occurred. Allah can add to or subtract magically and people can be made to say "it was always there" or "I've never seen it". Whosever believes in such a Free Power as I describe believes in the Unfettered Fetterer, the Unbound Binder, the Free Willing Determiner even of the Will and Desires be they of any sort leading to good or destruction.
Who agrees and who disagrees with that?
Peace, same Qur'an then and now 1736 and not pursue what not is to you in it knowledge ...
Sana manuscript 165 15-21.2 First 017028-017036 Landscape Kufi Musahif 132171C
https//i.imgur.com/IRGTQLY.jpg
-
The side is pretty irrelevant actually. The important thing is that it's meaningless if you think about it. The argument of God doing everything isn't sound and I've heard it before. It sounds as if from someone who hasn't been thinking it through enough.
The whole point in being here to test your allegiance is meaningless, if you go by your argument, because God did it all.
It's way more logical to assume man has a level of own decision-making and hence can do something. The good deeds have to be done by own volition or God could pass judgment already because God already knows the outcome and the "simulation" would be redundant.
The 'inconsistency' happened due to the author put God as creator of the 'simulation' and also as an 'actor' within His own 'simulation' and narrated as having a 'conflict' with another actor within the 'simulation'.
God forbid a man to eat a fruit but the man eat a fruit so He banished the man from the garden.
Wouldn't God already know what will the man do if he was merely told not to eat the fruit which he can see and grab?The answer is of course He did.. even I can foretell what will happen.
If God doesn't want the man to not eat the fruit, He will not create the fruit or He put an unprenetable barrier between the man and the fruit, such as putting the fruit in some planet in another Galaxy.. or others.."Nothing will happen to us except what God has decreed for us" (951)
"He Knows whatever there is on the earth and in the sea. Not a leaf doth fall but with His Knowledge there is not a grain in the darkness (or depths) of the earth, nor anything fresh or dry, but is in a Record Clear (with Him)." (659)Many other scriptures and authors agree on the above statement (ie Gospel, Torah, Veda, Tao The Ching).
Example
"I, YHVH, am the maker of all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself And spreading out the earth all alone, Causing the omens of boasters to fail, Making fools out of diviners, Causing wise men to draw back And turning their knowledge into foolishness, Confirming the word of His servant And performing the purpose of His messengers It is I who says of Jerusalem, 'She shall be inhabited!' And of the cities of Judah, 'They shall be built.' And I will raise up her ruins again. read more.
"It is I who says to the depth of the sea, 'Be dried up!' And I will make your rivers dry. "It is I who says of Cyrus, 'He is My shepherd! And he will perform all My desire ' And he declares of Jerusalem, 'She will be built,' And of the temple, 'Your foundation will be laid.'" (Isaiah 44)And it's also consistent with today's scientific evidence that time and space is correlated and time and space is merely a 'virtual fabric'. If there is a God then He / It will not have the constraint and limitation which are caused by time and space and certainly He does not 'reside' within the limitation of time and space. (such as in the sky or on top of the mountain)
The things that doesn't make sense is the tale about "The Man and the fruit" and "Mr Iblis and Adam".
And the entire concept that God has enemies, God gets angry, God doesn't get His plan fulfilled by something...It sounds like a fairy tale that the author invented in an effort to explain the "origin of man" and "the origin of Evil".
The author explanation of the "origin of man" is also not inline with today's scientific evidence.If the author's line of thinking were used to explain the "Demise of Dinosaurs" he will came up with "Because Dinosaurs have sinned in the eyes of God, such as Dinosaur eat fruit which they are forbidden to eat, or Dinosaur was asked to bow before a squirrel which He refused to do so which then trigger the anger of God thus God sent out series of calamities which caused the extinction of all Dinosaurs".
-
It sounds like a fairy tale that the author invented in an effort to explain the "origin of man" and "the origin of Evil".
The author explanation of the "origin of man" is also not inline with today's scientific evidence.If the author's line of thinking were used to explain the "Demise of Dinosaurs" he will came up with "Because Dinosaurs have sinned in the eyes of God, such as Dinosaur eat fruit which they are forbidden to eat, or Dinosaur was asked to bow before a squirrel which He refused to do so which then trigger the anger of God thus God sent out series of calamities which caused the extinction of all Dinosaurs".
You mean the Theory of Evolution that still is looking for the non-existent "missing links?" And perhaps you believe that billions of years ago an explosion created matter and that matter then became conscious after a few billion years? Sure, keep believing the ahadith of government scientists... Some scientist on TV comes out with a "new discovery" or your favorite news agency comes out with a "scientific disvovery" and you believe them! There are literally so many proven lies and deceptions behind the Theory of Evolution.
https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkEL4yBJxm8&t=2804s
https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhRiLP32qfs&t=103s
-
Name calling? Name me ayats that would govern any aspect of governance, including administrative, social, financial, military, constitutional, marital acts et cetera? And tell me especially how you are, as community,
Just posted https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9609858.msg410572#msg410572
Those are the laws that make up my country's constitution. We are doing quite well with them.
But if you are looking for how to write, how to sit, how to eat, how to sleep, how to ride, etc Judaism will work best for you. They have 9000 laws if I remember correctly.
-
Peace jafar.
You say,quote
It sounds like a fairy tale that the author invented in an effort to explain the "origin of man" and "the origin of Evil".
The author explanation of the "origin of man" is also not inline with today's scientific evidence.Please answer the following for clarification
1-Brother,we are all ears.tell us the true version of your simple and clarified version of the "origin of man".
Science itself is divided and has not come to an agreement or given evidence for the numerous theories.2-Do you believe there is a "Creator" of this universe? If not, Where did it all come from?
3-We claim what belongs to us,has any man claimed to own the universe or a single part of it (say earth)? To whom does the universe belong?
4-What do you call someone who makes a false claim? How can we claim what has been found on earth as ours or that it came from nothing? Would you be happy for someone to take ownership of your car when it is parked somewhere claiming it came from nothing?
5- Would you acknowledge that there is evidence of "someone/intelligence" designing,planning and constructing this universe? Why? Or why not?
6- If your answer to 5) is yes ,would you agree that this universe belongs to that Creator? If not ,What is your take on it?
Looking forward for your answers brother.
Hopefully we can continue our discussion after that,if not in this thread,I do not mind opening a new thread.
Thank you and GOD bless you.
Peace. -
OK since you refuse lets make it easier; simply insert father/originator missionary delusion whatever?
I already gave you a hint you should look at the whole aya not just father. Fake words like alif-lam or roots/markers like hamza never existed. I suggest you start looking at word Iblees to see for yourself why is it a fabricated definition. There is no devil-like creature and no other Semitic or even Greek languages ever have any similarities of term Iblees. compared to Satan, which itself is not a devil-like dude either.
-
Just posted https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9609858.msg410572#msg410572
Those are the laws that make up my country's constitution. We are doing quite well with them.
But if you are looking for how to write, how to sit, how to eat, how to sleep, how to ride, etc Judaism will work best for you. They have 9000 laws if I remember correctly.
Seriously? Few ayats and you can control the whole state? How will you regulate the market? What will regulate recycling? Police forces? Think logically. Qur'an is not about the governance. It is about the teaching.
You guys are proud of having "a right" for protective wars. Your country is ran by cunning plutocrats. People have no power over constitution.
Perhaps it is you who is looking for how to fight a defensive war. If you believe that is what Qur'an says, perhaps you should look at this issue in the first place.
-
Another example, why is Muhammad referenced as not a father (of mankind). Everybody knows he is not a father of Mankind, that is obvious. It says Maa kaana Muhammad abba. Obviously it has nothing to do with him being a father of mankind, that is logical to say the least, but there is something else Qur'an tells.
-
Peace jafar.
You say,quote
It sounds like a fairy tale that the author invented in an effort to explain the "origin of man" and "the origin of Evil".
The author explanation of the "origin of man" is also not inline with today's scientific evidence.Please answer the following for clarification
1-Brother,we are all ears.tell us the true version of your simple and clarified version of the "origin of man".
Science itself is divided and has not come to an agreement or given evidence for the numerous theories.That's the beauty of 'scientific method'.. I repeat Scientific Method and not Science the religion
Differing / dividing opinion is OK
New hypothesis is Great..
Argumentation is encouraged..
And "Ad Hominem" (personal attacks) is discouraged..
As the objective is to find out the truth and NOT to spread influence / power / dogma.Yet we've also witnessed how 'religious folks' labeled their dogma as 'science' to support their political agenda..
For example "science" as spread by Nazi Germany and their Aryan Race Superiority..
If dogma kicked in then it is no longer 'scientific method'.2-Do you believe there is a "Creator" of this universe? If not, Where did it all come from?
Yes and It is not ridiculous, egocentric and easily pissed off..
3-We claim what belongs to us,has any man claimed to own the universe or a single part of it (say earth)? To whom does the universe belong?
My Personal View, nothing in this universe belong to anyone in this universe.. including your identity, religion or body...
As we all be dead one day it just a matter of time, anything that has a beginning will have an end.That's the pattern of this universe.. and it is applicable to EVERYTHING from a tiny cell lifeform to something as massive as stars or galaxy...
And so does to the element of religion, including but not limited to holy books, holy ideas (dogma), holy relics etc.. it all will have it's end one day... disbanded, buried and forgotten..Oh yes many human has claimed so many things... many of it are downright ridiculous..
They claim that they are God's chosen people, God's chosen speaker, God's chosen leader as thus those who dare to oppose them are the enemy of God. This is why it's ridiculous, how could the all powerful God has an enemy???As for the why human does such things.. the pattern remain the same, it's all driven by political agenda...
God is used to induced FEAR to the people... once fear kicked in then rational thinking is out.... and they will believe in any nonsense as long as their safety can be guaranteed...4-What do you call someone who makes a false claim? How can we claim what has been found on earth as ours or that it came from nothing? Would you be happy for someone to take ownership of your car when it is parked somewhere claiming it came from nothing?
I don't label /call people based on their belief / claim. (idiots, genius, holy, kufr, infidel, shaytan or whatever label)
Everyone are entitled to have their own claim / belief / opinion..
Some are ridiculous, some others partially make sense and some others really make sense...And luckily I don't have a car..
Having said that car are mostly made of iron, aluminium and other heavy elements..
Those elements are created inside a star... explosion of stars to be exact..
Similar to carbon which made up human and other carbon based lifeforms.. also forged inside an exploding stars..The Universe is beautiful, orderly beautiful...
Yet human sometimes came up with ridiculous idea on explaining how it works...Worse of all, human is a brutal species, they often attack and kills those who dare to oppose his/her (ridiculous) opinion.. as they see it as an attack to their EGO.
5- Would you acknowledge that there is evidence of "someone/intelligence" designing,planning and constructing this universe? Why? Or why not?
Definitely, like I said the universe is beautiful, orderly beautiful...
Yet this Tao/God/Force or whatever names one calls It is not a human, doesn't have any limitation caused by time and space.
As time and space itself is the foundational fabric of this universe. Time and space is not infinite it's merely a creation and can be destroyed / lost from the sight of those who are inside this universe. Infact time and space is continuously lost and created as we speak....As such it doesn't make sense when human put a human like attribute to God...
(Getting Pissed Off, Judgmental, Punishing and emotionally imbalance such as writing a book and getting pissed off when someone wrote a bad review about the book)6- If your answer to 5) is yes ,would you agree that this universe belongs to that Creator? If not ,What is your take on it?
The conception of "belonging" and "property" only exists in human mindset..
Specifically human who has evolved into adopting sedentary lifestyle...Yet for the sake of discussion I will say Everything belong WITH God..
All of your ideas, thinking are with God..
You are executing things which has been known by God..
As God doesn't have limitation of time and space...
Not only you but everything in this universes and also everything in other universes...What will be your reply , reaction or action has been known by God... and since God is WITH everything.. it's also a tiny part of an 'act of God'.. so to speak.. And so does anyone else's reaction...
I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists.
-- Albert Einstein -
Seriously? Few ayats and you can control the whole state? How will you regulate the market? What will regulate recycling? Police forces? Think logically. Qur'an is not about the governance. It is about the teaching.
How about first we brush up on our public policy language first?
Difference between law and regulation
http//blogs.findlaw.com/law_and_life/2015/10/whats-the-difference-between-laws-and-regulations.htmlDifference between governance and government
http//www.differencebetween.net/language/words-language/difference-between-government-and-governance/Hmm, police force. Interestingly, its innovation which now have was brought to us by "Quranist" Umar.
You guys are proud of having "a right" for protective wars. Your country is ran by cunning plutocrats. People have no power over constitution.
How about then we remind ourselves that pride is not approved by God? None among us will ever deny that our politicians are corrupted.
However, the topic is not about them, but the similarity constitution of ours has with Quran.Perhaps it is you who is looking for how to fight a defensive war. If you believe that is what Qur'an says, perhaps you should look at this issue in the first place.
I have not fully surrendered to the forced idea that qatal means killing and fighting in all the verses. But this does not mean I will blame the Book for it. I take it slow. Patience has always proved to be great. Many interpretations I said no to turned out to be faulty at the end. It took a few years, but I didn't give in.
Anyways, what Quran can do can only be known by following it. Results speak for themselves. So after you finish your experiment with this manual lets have a chat.
-
Peace jafar.
Thank you for your effort in answering my points.I did not have to go far to find a big irony from you,quote from your answer to my first point
Differing / dividing opinion is OK
New hypothesis is Great..
Argumentation is encouraged..
And "Ad Hominem" (personal attacks) is discouraged..So you agree that we should not mock or ridicule others,nor do books injustice without knowledge/evidence?
I am referring to your "mocking" of Qoran s contents without proper understanding and analysis.
If you wish to discuss this in detail,please open a new thread and we will continue.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
Dr. Puin told us on the phone that Sanaa Quran is the Aramaic and that the differences are the cause. Like translate...
-
Dr. Puin told us on the phone that Sanaa Quran is the Aramaic and that the differences are the cause. Like translate...
Peace -- Sana are Arabic and why did you not verify yourself (1736) or did you not see my prior post?
Sana manuscript 165 15-21.2 First 017028-017036 Landscape Kufi Musahif 132171C
https//i.imgur.com/IRGTQLY.jpg
I already gave you a hint you should look at the whole aya not just father. Fake words like alif-lam or roots/markers like hamza never existed. I suggest you start looking at word Iblees to see for yourself why is it a fabricated definition. There is no devil-like creature and no other Semitic or even Greek languages ever have any similarities of term Iblees. compared to Satan, which itself is not a devil-like dude either.
Another example, why is Muhammad referenced as not a father (of mankind). Everybody knows he is not a father of Mankind, that is obvious. It says Maa kaana Muhammad abba. Obviously it has nothing to do with him being a father of mankind, that is logical to say the least, but there is something else Qur'an tells.
It does not pass cross-reference and verses posted "in context" are nonsensical.
Likewise 3340 it's aba NOT aby
Likewise 3340 it's menfolk yours (no alif) NOT mankind (with alif includes males and females)
Otherwise contradicts having daughters 3359 ... say to spouses your and daughters your
See examples...
2437 mankind (with alif) not distracts them...
https//s1.postimg.org/2answhrtgv/MA_VI_165_Quran_ch24v35-42.jpg
3340 not be muhammad ab/father anyone from menfolk yours...
https//s1.postimg.org/845ijyh9y7/MA_VI_165_Quran_ch33v38-50.jpg
-
How about first we brush up on our public policy language first?
Difference between law and regulation
http//blogs.findlaw.com/law_and_life/2015/10/whats-the-difference-between-laws-and-regulations.htmlDifference between governance and government
http//www.differencebetween.net/language/words-language/difference-between-government-and-governance/How about you prove the country can be run on Qur'an alone? If you believe your state is ran by Qur'anic laws and/or regulations, make it clear. Freedom of religion is in every culture, so why Qur'an?
And how are you going to run the state based on Qur'an alone?
Hmm, police force. Interestingly, its innovation which now have was brought to us by "Quranist" Umar.
I personally don't care about the police, you do. So, where in Qur'an is it? Will you rely on reason instead? Then why do you need Qur'an?
More important, who will execute the 100 lashes punishment provided that most couples cheat at least once? bravo
I have not fully surrendered to the forced idea that qatal means killing and fighting in all the verses. But this does not mean I will blame the Book for it. I take it slow. Patience has always proved to be great. Many interpretations I said no to turned out to be faulty at the end. It took a few years, but I didn't give in.
Anyways, what Quran can do can only be known by following it. Results speak for themselves. So after you finish your experiment with this manual lets have a chat.
I don't need a manual to point out an obvious logical flaws of yours (and some others here). Define me a definsive war first. Then, if you can define it, list me Quranic system which somehow can be used to establish militia, training programs, armed forces et cetera. In case your "defensive war" implies shooting with bows at armed soldiers , then I guess we can discuss this too. If you can't explain the defensive war based on Qur'an alone, you will rely on the side literature, that's clearly what you did in your post. But again, the key question you should contemplate on is, why Qur'an while you obvoisly rely on "acts vs regulation" and a ton of other legal imprints?
-
Likewise 3340 it's menfolk yours (no alif) NOT mankind (with alif includes males and females)
Otherwise contradicts having daughters 3359 ... say to spouses your and daughters your
See examples...
2437 mankind (with alif) not distracts them...
3340 not be muhammad ab/father anyone from menfolk yours...
It is plain obvious he is not a father of mankind, why even mention such nonsensical information in the allegedly holiest book? The point was, it does not make sense the verse itself, just like 234 with Iblees. It does, however, make sense, if we remove our dogma about the devil-like creature and actually understand what ibleees abba means.
-
^^^ nonsensical is taking (aby) root
which means to refuse
to mean "father" in below verses...2282 and not yaba/refused scribe
2282 and not yaba/refused the witnesses234 except Iblis refuse
1531 except Iblis refuse
20116 except Iblis refuse98 and refuse (f/s)
932 and refused
2056 and refuse1789 so refuse
1799 so refuse
2550 so refuse
3372 so refuse they (f/p)likewise father no prefix/suffix is never written with ya ...
1278 father
3340 father -
How about you prove the country can be run on Qur'an alone? If you believe your state is ran by Qur'anic laws and/or regulations, make it clear. Freedom of religion is in every culture, so why Qur'an?
And how are you going to run the state based on Qur'an alone?
I personally don't care about the police, you do. So, where in Qur'an is it? Will you rely on reason instead? Then why do you need Qur'an?
More important, who will execute the 100 lashes punishment provided that most couples cheat at least once? bravo
I don't need a manual to point out an obvious logical flaws of yours (and some others here). Define me a definsive war first. Then, if you can define it, list me Quranic system which somehow can be used to establish militia, training programs, armed forces et cetera. In case your "defensive war" implies shooting with bows at armed soldiers , then I guess we can discuss this too. If you can't explain the defensive war based on Qur'an alone, you will rely on the side literature, that's clearly what you did in your post. But again, the key question you should contemplate on is, why Qur'an while you obvoisly rely on "acts vs regulation" and a ton of other legal imprints?
Oh, in Bender's way
<a href="http//islamicity-index.org/wp/">Ah, after reading this, no Quran for me, the retarded PUAD. But forgive me, US is not the only one and the list in this link has not yet been updated</a>
'(Anyways, first you use the manual called Quran and get the result. Only then we will go over your questions or if God wills he will lead you to answers without anyone's help. You need to meet him. He can explain things better. At this point, you seem to be thinking that Islam from Quran must be as same as Talmudism and Bukharism. Trust me, things don't work like that.
When Quran is applied, even defensive war isn't necessary.
You will know it if you actually follow the Book.
Peace
-
^^^ nonsensical is taking (aby) root
which means to refuse
to mean "father" in below verses...Once again, who is ibless when in fact this word has its concrete meaning in the lexicon (to be broken/blurred)? What is ibless? Just give me one concrete definition. Why call it an arabic word, when you can tell it in English. Why is 'he' refered as kafiirun when it clearly is not a case as I already explained (28-19)? What is etymology of iblees and why, compared to satan, it has no occurances in other Semitic languages?
Who told you iblees is a noun? The sectarian/tafsiir interpretation? How are you even different?
Remove the hamza diacritic and your verb argument is destroyed.
Lane's Book I, p. 12. is used as relationship to fathership, the relationship of a father.
You can't say to mean just a father, that is true, but in combination with it becomes clear as relationship to a father, i.e. broken/blind/confounded/perplexed to a father.
Also answer my theological questions first.
