To Priest BOKMEI
-
IDMKHIZAR,
You continue to ask for a verse where GOD forbids the pig for the Jews. I ask you DOES GOD NEED TO MENTION ALL THE PROHIBITION OF THE PREVIOUS PEOPLE IN THE QURAN? Certainly thats not a necessity is it?
If it weren't necessary for Allah to mention all what is haram, then how would one know...for a certainty...what is haram and what is not?
Wonder what kinna flawed logic ur bent on.
My logic is just fine thank you, it's your commons sense that is flawed.
Btw 6146's purpose is definitely not to proof that those were the only prohibitions to the Jews otherwise GOD would have clearly said so, wouldnt He?
Ayat 6146 tells us exactly what species of animals Allah made haram to the Jews...animals with claws...not animals with hooves, get it?
Thus my point stands, the grammatical form lahnmul khinzeer proofs khinzeer is the animal pig and this further proofs that pig was prohibited to the Jews.
LOL! o.k.
See wer doing a reverse proof here from forward to backward generations NOT backward to forward. We prove that swine is prohibited to us believers and since the food of Jews is allowed to us hence swine was also prohibited to the Jews. Thus no contra at all n case closed unless other valid arguments are brought up which are unlikely. Repeition of the same would be circular and leads us nowehere. GOD Bless!
You haven't proven anything until you can find where Allah...DEFINITIVELY, made the pig haram to the Jews and those before them. Until you can do this, ayat 55 along with ayat 6146, proves that the pig is halal.
-
Welcome back DHUL_QARNAIN
peace
-
"This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear Allah"
THAT BOOK?
In 23 These people are currently, in the present, YU?MINUNA, trusting in THAT book.
what are you saying exactly?
-
Salaam Grourself,
Nice to see some old faces here.
Share you're understandings please , what/ which is "That Book" if it's not "This Book".
Salaam.
-
Peace All,
For some reason, the translators have ignored the tense in these and many verses.
22-6
I?m paraphrasing
THAT book is what ayat (2) and the next verses are referring to, not THIS book which is a mistranslation.
The people who are mentioned are those who at the time of this revelation were, currently, in the PRESENT, yu?minu, trusting, in the previous revelation. Aamanu is PAST tense, trusted in , yu?minu is present tense.
These people are trusting what came before and what is now being revealed to the messenger. Those who have already (past tense) kafaru, rejectED that book, will not accept this messenger.
The plain Arabic is very clear and easy to understand. The translators have mutilated these verses and others by ignoring the tense and at the same time obscuring the addressee.
-
fine bro if you mean by "that book" that it is the Quran, as I believe that "this book" also means the Quran then I have no problem to accept it as "That book"
The tense of the verb "Yumino" has no point here bro
peace
-
sorry bro i don't get what you mean
is verse 22 talking about the Quran
Yes?
No?
Peace
-
No & yes since the portion of the message that is mentioned as that book, and the reading are the same message. As the sura goes on it includes the reading,...what was revealed to you and what was revealed before...
Ok, do you mind if I ask if you speak arabic?
-
Salam DHUL-QARNAIN,
If it weren't necessary for Allah to mention all what is haram, then how would one know...for a certainty...what is haram and what is not?
JK- I said its not a necessity for GOD to directly mention everything that was made haram for the previous generations since that is not much of importnace to us. He did mention all that is haraam fot us and the meaning plus the grammatical form of the phrase "lahm ul khinzeer" proves that it's the PIG MEAT and not "contaminated meat" which is made haram. Saying otherwise would be saying that GOD makes grammatical mistakes.
Ayat 6146 tells us exactly what species of animals Allah made haram to the Jews...animals with claws...not animals with hooves, get it?
JK- Like i said again and again 6146 are NOT the only prohibitons for the Jews. They mention ONLY PART of them. If the verse meant that then GOD would have said "and for the Jews We ONLY prohibited animals with claws" which is NOT the case.
LOL! o.k.
JK- Why lol? Thats how it is.
You haven't proven anything until you can find where Allah...DEFINITIVELY, made the pig haram to the Jews and those before them. Until you can do this, ayat 55 along with ayat 6146, proves that the pig is halal.
JK- I did just that using the reverse proof method. GOD Bless!
-
Salaams All,
Just pondering not that I am a pig eater -
The word Khanazeer = a deseased animal ,as well, So why shouldn?t it be taken as such.
005.003
Forbidden to you (for food) are dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine???.Or
005.003
YUSUFALI Forbidden to you (for food) are dead meat, blood, the flesh of the diseased???..http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume2/00000368.pdf
Salaams.
-
Salam mz357,
Salaams All,
Just pondering not that I am a pig eater -
The word Khanazeer = a deseased animal ,as well, So why shouldn?t it be taken as such.
005.003
Forbidden to you (for food) are dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine???.Or
005.003
YUSUFALI Forbidden to you (for food) are dead meat, blood, the flesh of the diseased???..http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume2/00000368.pdf
Salaams.
JK- Thats because my dear bro mz THE GRAMMATICAL FORM USED IN 53 "LAHM UL KHINZEER(CAN ONLY MEAN FLESH OF SWINE)" WITH THE DEFINITE ARTICLE ONLY IN THE MIDLLE DOES NOT ALLOW THE LATTER WORD TO BE AN ADJECTIVE. This has been explained over and over again. Your above staed meaning of the word can apply if the form would have been "AL lahm UL khinzeer" (can mean the swinish/diseased meat) with the definite article preceding both or in case of "lahmun khinzeer(can also mean both)" where it doesnt precede either of them. Do you understand it now? GOD Bless!