a surah like it
-
Peace,
I agree with caveman, you cannot know exactly how they read it. In the Ummayad period they flogged thieves. We only have the ancient arabic meanings. Yad means hands/abilities/resources, what has choosing abilities/resources instead of hands to do with TODAYS perspective? Nothing. If you read the Quran in its overal perspective, cutting hands goes against it's logic. This to be seen now as well in those days. Logic and humanistic thinking is not based on time.
-
Soul2squeezeI'm thoroughly disgusted by this thread.
I read page after page only to have my blood boiled more and more. I don't know where people find the audacity to call God's challenge pointless and yet in the same breath have challenged God. But of course, their challenge is perfectly rational.. it's God's Challenge that is baseless. How twisted one's logic can become.
The title of 'a surah like it' is a direct attack on God's Word period. Please do not splice hairs by trying to find non-sensical loopholes in His Challenge. If you are truthful why don't you come up with one!Please don't be disgusted, please. This challenge while is TO them, is also FOR us.
I threw the challenge to Enquirer before and he replied 'be open-minded and good' and told me, that's enough. Of course he wouldnt answer to further interrogation of meaning (or anything else, if we're honest).
Benefit from this challenge, s2s.
-
Soul2squeezeI'm thoroughly disgusted by this thread.
I read page after page only to have my blood boiled more and more. I don't know where people find the audacity to call God's challenge pointless and yet in the same breath have challenged God. But of course, their challenge is perfectly rational.. it's God's Challenge that is baseless. How twisted one's logic can become.
The title of 'a surah like it' is a direct attack on God's Word period. Please do not splice hairs by trying to find non-sensical loopholes in His Challenge. If you are truthful why don't you come up with one!Please don't be disgusted, please. This challenge while is TO them, is also FOR us.
I threw the challenge to Enquirer before and he replied 'be open-minded and good' and told me, that's enough. Of course he wouldnt answer to further interrogation of meaning (or anything else, if we're honest).
Benefit from this challenge, s2s.
I'd like to echo mquran here. I cannot tell you how much this challenge has increased my faith. Contrary to what enquirer would like to believe, I love it when tough questions are asked and challenges are brought forth. Without fail, the questions they bring forth (as well as the questions I myself ask) are answered (in my mind) logically. And my faith is thereby strengthened.
Far from being afraid to question and doubt, I've found my questions and doubts have always with time/study/patience been logically put to rest.
Peace.
-
DanishAny evidence or references will back-up and support directly in relevance to Quran, so no misunderstandings occur. For example, if the Quran mentions 'cutting of hands' of thieves, then my reference will back up that claim by historical data/analysis to prove that that is exactly what used to happen back then. People twist the meanings of Quran to suit their agendas because their manipulations are from TODAY's perspectives (sometimes a mixture of both the past and current), not 1400+ years ago. No wonder we have so much chaos in understanding it.
This comment betrays a lack of reading. The sunni corpus contains at least 5 different opinions regarding the 'handchopping' nonsense (see Mohamed Hashim Kamali's 'principles of islamic jurisprudence). The reason why this guy chooses this is to uphold his agenda. He's more sunni than the sunnis themselves.
An example of inconsistency Lets take a simple hypothetical situation, in that, Pakistan and India having exactly the same laws for thieves in cutting their hands as per the Quran. Now if the hands of a thief were cut off in Pakistan but a thief in India was imprisoned, assuming the cases were similar and both were found guilty, then this is inconsistant and has nothing to do with time and place.
Totally irrelevant to the issue. Al-quraan is where I get my legislation from, not indians or pakistanis.
Such cases are found in the Quran and will be presented to the upcoming "prophet of doom" to defend, specially when he mocks GOD by taking HIS name in vain and compares it to a man-made historical book to become Allah's Words in such fashions.
Moderators, please take note. Instead of debating, he continues to mock al-quraan. Another breach of rule 2.
Now if you still don't understand what I said above, then there's no point in discussing with you. I would like to mention this though, that I too believe in the Quran for its wisdom to some extent, but not in the pathetic manner others believe by directly mocking GOD and thus notice that I don't take GOD's name when discussing verses of the Quran by venting out on HIM, i.e. GOD said this/that, GOD cannot this/that, GOD must this/that, etc.
If he believes in al-quraan, then we need to ask WHICH ayaat and WHY? In the end, a new principle will emerge BDTS.
-
Peace
I'm thoroughly disgusted by this thread.
I read page after page only to have my blood boiled more and more.take a chill pill
I don't know where people find the audacity to call God's challenge pointless and yet in the same breath have challenged God. But of course, their challenge is perfectly rational.. it's God's Challenge that is baseless. How twisted one's logic can become.
they don't believe the quran is divine...
Perhaps this challenge is for believers to ponder of all the criteria which makes quran unique and superior to any other text.
that?s just ridiculous! why would a believer want to challenge God?
the challenge is for unbelievers and those who doubt it is the word of god...
Khalifa
If you have any doubt regarding what we revealed to our servant, then produce one sura like these, and call upon your own witnesses against GOD, if you are truthful.Yusuf Ali
And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides God, if your (doubts) are true.Pickthal
And if ye are in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto Our slave, then produce a surah of the like thereof, and call your witness beside Allah if ye are truthful."Progressive Muslims"
And if you are in doubt as to what We have sent down to Our servant, then bring a chapter like this, and call upon your witnesses other than God if you are truthful.but has layer upon layer of meanings.
that's where the claims of inaccuracies and contradictions come from
As for the ridiculous statement that Mohamed wrote it, then why wouldn't he just take the credit himself?
lol you have misinterpreted what i have said...
http//www.submission.org/mo-write.html
Why wouldn't he go down in history as the greatest poet/philosopher/law-maker/history-writer/scientist/psychologist/sociologist of all time?
Dude he has! the guy is idolized by multitudes of people who claim he is an infallible (but illiterate) guy.... The stuff they say about him makes me sick! they believe the guy is practically equal to God.
Any evidence or references will back-up and support directly in relevance to Quran, so no misunderstandings occur. For example, if the Quran mentions 'cutting of hands' of thieves, then my reference will back up that claim by historical data/analysis to prove that that is exactly what used to happen back then
The following is written in the preface of the translation of the message available on Freeminds?
Some Arabic words, like in English, may have more than one related meaning. Thus ascribing the ?wrong? meaning may sometimes create contradictions between verses in the Scripture or give a strange understanding to the topic the verse is addressing.
In such cases, the advice from the Scripture itself is to follow the best meaning derived?
?The ones who listen to what is being said, and then follow the best of it. These are the ones whom God has guided, and these are the ones who possess intelligence.? (The Message 391
One of the clearest examples for using this method is to deal with the issue of ?theft?. There is one verse that gives the law for theft and its interpretation can vary widely depending on which meaning is ascribed to the Arabic words
?The male thief, and the female thief, you shall ?Iqta? (cut / cut-off / sever / separate) ?Aydiyahum? (their hands / resources / belongings / possessions) as a punishment for their crime, and to serve as a deterrent from God. God is Almighty, Wise.? (53
The scholars of today and the past have all gone for the ?cut-off the hand? understanding and thus we witness scenes of amputations being carried out in countries which claim to uphold the Scripture
As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime and Allah is Exalted in power. (53
However, had they gone through the extra step of looking to the ?examples? within the Scripture for application, they would have come to a far different conclusion. The story of Joseph with his brothers provides the clearest and simplest example for how to deal with the subject of theft?
?They said ?By God, you know we did not come to cause corruption in the land, and we are no thieves!? He said ?What shall be the punishment, if you are not truthful?? They said ?The punishment is that whomever it is found in his bags, then to compensate is his punishment. It is such that we punish the wicked.?? (The Message 1273-75)
Thus, the proper meaning/translation of the verse becomes
?The male thief, and the female thief, you shall cut from (Iqtau) their resources (Aydiyahum) as a punishment for their crime, and to serve as a deterrent from God. God is Almighty, Wise.? (The Message 53
Such a meaning also conforms to the overall laws of God?s justice that the punishment should never exceed the crime 16126.
then my reference will back up that claim by historical data/analysis to prove that that is exactly what used to happen back then
But the Arabs rejected the word of God for Hadith and Sunnah. They were destined to disbelieve, I?ll post the exact verse once I have found it?. The Quran talks a lot about how Moses community created a religion that was not authorized by God and just because they did that does not mean you can say the Torah is not the word of God. Muhammad?s community did just what Moses community did which was to take the words out of context and create a new religion that was never authorised by God.
verse 62/5
Khalifa
The example of those who were given the Torah, then failed to uphold it, is like the donkey carrying great works of literature. Miserable indeed is the example of people who rejected GOD's revelations. GOD does not guide the wicked people.Yusuf Ali
The similitude of those who were charged with the (obligations of the) Mosaic Law, but who subsequently failed in those (obligations), is that of a donkey which carries huge tomes (but understands them not). Evil is the similitude of people who falsify the Signs of God and God guides not people who do wrong.Pickthal
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.Shakir
The likeness of those who were charged with the Taurat, then they did not observe it, is as the likeness of the ass bearing books, evil is the likeness of the people who reject the communications of Allah; and Allah does not guide the unjust people.Sher Ali
The likeness of those who were charged with the Law of Torah, but did not carry out its commandments, is as the likeness of an ass carrying a load of books. Evil is the likeness of the people who reject the Signs of Allah. And Allah guides not the wrongdoing people."Progressive Muslims"
The example of those who were given the Torah, then failed to uphold it, is like the donkey carrying great works of literature. Miserable indeed is the example of people who rejected God's revelations. God does not guide the wicked peopleverse 17/4
Khalifa
We addressed the Children of Israel in the scripture "You will commit gross evil on earth, twice. You are destined to fall into great heights of arrogance.Yusuf Ali
And We gave (Clear) Warning to the Children of Israel in the Book, that twice would they do mischief on the earth and be elated with mighty arrogance (and twice would they be punished)!Pickthal
And We decreed for the Children of Israel in the Scripture Ye verily will work corruption in the earth twice, and ye will become great tyrants.Shakir
And We had made known to the children of Israel in the Book Most certainly you will make mischief in the land twice, and most certainly you will behave insolently with great insolence.Sher Ali
And WE had clearly conveyed to the Children of Israel in the Book `You will surely do great mischief in the land twice, and you will surely become excessively overbearing.'"Progressive Muslims"
And We decreed to the Children of Israel in the Scripture, that you will make corruption twice on earth, and that you will become very high and mighty.one thing man will learn from history is that man will never learn from history- Aidid Safar
You?ll probably refute what I have said above and claim that I am "making excuses" to justify my belief that it is the word of God.
Such cases are found in the Quran and will be presented to the upcoming "prophet of doom" to defend, specially when he mocks GOD by taking HIS name in vain and compares it to a man-made historical book to become Allah's Words in such fashions.
The Prophet of Doom is a book right?
when will it be published in the UK, it should be interesting.
I apologize for the long post.
peace,
sugar -
Your assumption seems to be that actors within history were objectively correct. Could not those "back then" who historically cut off hands of thieves also be people who happened to "twist the meanings of the Quran to suit their agendas because their manipulations" were from YESTERDAY's perspectives?
Funnily enough, Danish DOESN'T question this. Of course he wouldn't, because it suits him even though the hadith about hand-chopping are all divergent. Cavey, if you can hold of it, find Kamali's Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence. This book itself shows that this whole hand-chopping thing was so divergent and all the hadith regarding it are 'sahih', its pathetic. Another book to look at is 'why there are disagreements between madhabib' by tim winter (shiekh abdul hakim murad). Plenty of juicy bits in there.
-
Mq am i missing something or have I just misunderstood him? confused
Danish i get this slightly annoying feeling that we are just gonna go round in circles. I believe the Quran is divine for many reasons.... but for each reason i have ever given unbelievers in the past the facts i had mentioned had been "belittled" by them to a point where it seemed pointless explaining to them why i believe the Quran is divine.
We will certainly question those who received the message, and we will question the messengers.
You are not responsible for guiding anyone. GOD is the only one who guides whoever chooses (to be guided)
As for those who disbelieve, it is the same for them; whether you warn them, or not warn them, they cannot believe.
GOD seals their minds and their hearing, and their eyes are veiled. They have incurred severe retribution.
(RK translation)
peace,
sugar -
Sugar Mq am i missing something or have I just misunderstood him?
You're missing something but not much. 'Prophet of Doom' is result Danish's slanderous methods towards yours truly. He does this to distract us from the actual debate which the moderators have agreed upon because he's quite berefts of arguments. Come on, the man pastes websites he himself can't read D
-
You're missing something but not much. 'Prophet of Doom' is result Danish's slanderous methods towards yours truly. He does this to distract us from the actual debate which the moderators have agreed upon because he's quite berefts of arguments.
I just typed "Prophet of Doom" right now in Google and have come across this, confused once i am old enough to have a credit card i shall be ordering that... i can't wait to get my credit card... i have soooo much to buy on the net....(just 6 months to go- i am currently counting down the days yay yay yay)
Come on, the man pastes websites he himself can't read
am i missing something again? confused
peace,
sugar -
I just typed "Prophet of Doom" right now in Google and have come across this, confused once i am old enough to have a credit card i shall be ordering that... (just 6 months to go- i am currently counting down the days yay yay yay)
Well, I haven't read that one but I have read 'what the koran really says' by ibn warraq. They all use the Danish method to intepret al-quraan (i.e. whatever hadith can defame, use it)
Come on, the man pastes websites he himself can't read
am i missing something again? confused
peace,
sugarDanish loves to quote a website called 'suralikeit' in order to show believers in the divinity of al-quraan that people had come up with some discourses better than al-quraan. The problem is, he himself can't read that page
-
Peace all
I think the challenge to those who doubt the divinity of the Quran is excellent ! Mquran and CavemanDoc you're both absolutely correct it has so much value. I think in the heat of my frustrations with this thread, I didnt make myself clear. What I meant by challenging God was when a few posters pointed out with twisted logic how God's Challenge to mankind made no sense and that it isn't even a fair challenge. That to me is beyond arrogance.As for sugar I think you make a great point. You're right the challenge stated in the quran is for disbelievers, but also I think it is indirectly for believers to strengthen their reasoning. As Mquran and CavemanDoctor stated hearing the other side or even anticipating what the other side may say allows one to think deeper into the quran. So in that sense I meant that it helps us think of all the ways the quran is superior.
but has layer upon layer of meanings.
that's where the claims of inaccuracies and contradictions come from
Without side tracking too much, I don't believe there is one set meaning for one particular word in the quran - or else there would be no way for the book to be dynamic enough to fit all times and cultures. I think this is a miracle of the quran in and of itself, that there are so many shades of meanings for certain words, in order to be able to have a wide criteria of interpretations of laws that are all acceptable to God. Of course, when applying meanings you can't just choose any old meaning out of the dictionary on a whim. It has to correlate with the overall message of the quran. So we can't choose the meaning of beating your wife for example just because it's in the dictionary. It contradicts with too many other ayat and the overall message of the quran. I agree with you, there are contradictions and inaccuracies when people choose the wrong meaning that can't possibly be one of the meanings, as stated above. By the way sugar, it's very refreshing how intelligent you carried yourself throughout this thread and with a high degree of dignity despite all the unnecessary insults thrown your way. Excellent job!
Peace -
Ah and sugar, if I'm not mistaken, it is Danish who thinks someone, possibly a man named Mohamed who wrote it. So I was referring to his allegations not yours lol
peace all
-
Your assumption seems to be that actors within history were objectively correct. Could not those "back then" who historically cut off hands of thieves also be people who happened to "twist the meanings of the Quran to suit their agendas because their manipulations" were from YESTERDAY's perspectives?
Funnily enough, Danish DOESN'T question this. Of course he wouldn't, because it suits him even though the hadith about hand-chopping are all divergent. Cavey, if you can hold of it, find Kamali's Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence. This book itself shows that this whole hand-chopping thing was so divergent and all the hadith regarding it are 'sahih', its pathetic. Another book to look at is 'why there are disagreements between madhabib' by tim winter (shiekh abdul hakim murad). Plenty of juicy bits in there.
Thanks for the recommendations mquran. I'll try to check them out. Speaking of Kamali, have you read his "Freedom, Equality and Justice in Islam" ? I've been formulating a lot of thoughts on divine justice/heaven/hell/judgment recently and I'm gonna write a lengthy article on it in the near future.
Peace.
-
Danish any "evidence" you come up with the alleged inaccuracies of the Quran, like arnoldyasin already said can be proven as incorrect understandings.
Any evidence or references will back-up and support directly in relevance to Quran, so no misunderstandings occur. For example, if the Quran mentions 'cutting of hands' of thieves, then my reference will back up that claim by historical data/analysis to prove that that is exactly what used to happen back then. People twist the meanings of Quran to suit their agendas because their manipulations are from TODAY's perspectives (sometimes a mixture of both the past and current), not 1400+ years ago. No wonder we have so much chaos in understanding it.
Your assumption seems to be that actors within history were objectively correct. Could not those "back then" who historically cut off hands of thieves also be people who happened to "twist the meanings of the Quran to suit their agendas because their manipulations" were from YESTERDAY's perspectives?
Can't have your cake and eat it too.
You mean just like the scribes (men) ?back then? who collected narrations of Muhammad and compiled them in a book form. If you think all history is dubious, then what is left out of this book you call Quran written over 1400+ years ago, yet blindly accepting the historical events mentioned therein just because it says so?
You obviously are beguiled to accept the Quran AS IS because of your extreme denial, blind belief and superimposed framework of mind to believe that a man-made written book came floating down from thin air and viola, became Allah?s Words.
Doc, you should learn to read vital signs of your patients on this forum, recommend remedy and then prescribe correct medicine. Your prescriptions are nothing but politicized advertisements to sell drugs and some here are just lovin it. The ?prophet of doom? who is jumping around in excitement to debate me certainly needs your help and I suggest Ativan or Valium prescribed on a regular course.
And btw, what makes you think I can't eat my own cake? ???
-
You mean just like the scribes (men) ?back then? who collected narrations of Muhammad and compiled them in a book form. If you think all history is dubious, then what is left out of this book you call Quran written over 1400+ years ago, yet blindly accepting the historical events mentioned therein just because it says so?
I did not say all history is dubious (though I am certainly suspicious of it). My point was you assume that someone "back then" was automatically correct simply because he/she lived "back then"; you then accuse us of twisting meanings of the verses to fit today's perspectives. Could not those people "back then" have done the same thing you accused us of? Could not someone in 9th century Spain (where, with or without the Qur'an, he probably lived in a culture where hand-chopping was common) have also "twisted meanings of the verses" to fit their perspective?
You obviously are beguiled to accept the Quran AS IS because of your extreme denial, blind belief and superimposed framework of mind to believe that a man-made written book came floating down from thin air and viola, became Allah?s Words.
You do not know why I accept the Qur'an. A word to the wise try not to assume so much; it's unbecoming of you. K pal?
Doc, you should learn to read vital signs of your patients on this forum, recommend remedy and then prescribe correct medicine. Your prescriptions are nothing but politicized advertisements to sell drugs and some here are just lovin it. The ?prophet of doom? who is jumping around in excitement to debate me certainly needs your help and I suggest Ativan or Valium prescribed on a regular course.
Good analogy; probably more well-thought out than 95% of your posts on this forum.
And btw, what makes you think I can't eat my own cake? ???
You are free to eat as much of your cake as you want. Just don't get engorged with your own arrogance and presumptions, as it's not too healthy. How's that for reading vital signs?
Peace.
Note I'm not an actual medical doctor. (
-
Yet another thread that for some reasons reminds me of Hooray For Hollywood feat.the awfull trumpet of Harry Arms.
peace
-
Ah and sugar, if I'm not mistaken, it is Danish who thinks someone, possibly a man named Mohamed who wrote it. So I was referring to his allegations not yours lol
peace all
lol
I assumed you misinterpreted what i said (like Danish did) and after i explained what i meant i assumed you still misinterpreted me (or took what i said out of context) so i was kinda annoyed voodoo, i apologize for sounding rather impolite when i was replying to your post. peace
Danish loves to quote a website called 'suralikeit' in order to show believers in the divinity of al-quraan that people had come up with some discourses better than al-quraan. The problem is, he himself can't read that page D
That site is blocked on my computer, but is it in Arabic or something? Do you understand Arabic?
peace,
sugar -
That site is blocked on my computer, but is it in Arabic or something? Do you understand Arabic?
Yes, the surahs are in Arabic along with their translations/transilerations. One of them is given below and the pic (in Arabic) is at the bottom of this page.
Sura Al-Usfoor
(1) wanadribul amthala lin-nasee la?allahom yatathakkaroon*(2) famathalu usfooren thaki?yen* ka usfuren thaki?yen* ra?a tabasheerash-shita?ee farahala janooban yanshudud?dif?a wafeera
(3) wamathalu usfooren ghirren ghabi?yen ka usfooren ghirren ghabi?yen ra?a tabasheerash-shita?ee fa?aghmada aynayhee wanama kareera
(4) wa?ith* amarnar-ri?yaha ta?sifu war?ra?da yaksifu waja?alna hawlahoo zamhareera
(5) tara yanshudu dif?al janoobi lakinna rabbaka kana a?zama takdeera
(6) wa?amtarna alyhee min fawkiheema?an ghazeera
(7) wahakamna alayhee min ba?du alla yateera
( fahawayna bihee ardan wa?atanahoo min ladunna kash?areera
(9) hawa warabbuka a?lamoo ayna hawa, hawa ila kurbee nakaten atkhamnaha katheera
(10) fa?afraghatin?nakatoo ma fee batnihafanazala alayhee wasara tahta rawthiha maghmoora
(11) kala ummee lam tarda alay?ya wa la?w radiyat laman tahat hayatee ala hathihis*-soora
(12) walaken ma an ba?atha rawthuha?dif?a fee jismihee hattan?tafada farahan wa huboora
(13) wa akhatha*l-usfooru yughanni fasami?a sawtahu hirron ba?atha bihee rabbuka liyutimma amran kana makdoora
(14) farafa?a anhur?rawtha fasurral?usfooru suroora
(15) lakinnal hirral?tahamahoo wakana ikaboo rabbika kabeera
(16) walil?latheena* amanoo wa?amiloos salihatee mimma saradna thalathu hikamen la?allakom tatathakkaroon*
(17) An la tahsabul latheena* yakthifoonakom* birrawthi a?da?a lakom ith* kad yakoonu fee rawthihem naf?an lakom wa antom la ta?lamoon
(1 An la tahsabul latheena yrfa?oonar rawtha ankom asdika?a lakom ith kad yakoonu fee thalika athan lakom wa antom ta?mahoon
(19) wa an itha kuntom fee makenen dafi?en wa law kana ghata?ukom mina?rawthi fakna?oo bima?wakom wa la tantikoo wa la tamshoo fil ardi marahan la?allakom taslamoon.
Translation
(1) And We set forth parables for men in order that they may remember(2) The parable of a smart bird is that of a smart bird which beheld the first signs of winter so he migrated to the south seeking abundant warmth
(3)And the parable of a gullible dumb bird is that of a gullible dumb bird which beheld the first signs of winter so he closed his eyes and went to sleep delightfully
(4)And as we ordered the winds to blow and the thunder to peal and surround him with a shivering cold
(5)He took off seeking the warmth of the south but your Lord has the greatest judgment
(6) And We caused the rain to fall from above him with plenty of water.
(7) And then we decided to disable him from flying
( And caused him to fall to the ground then gave him a feverish shivering
(9) He fell down and your Lord is most knowing where he fell, he fell near a female camel We have over fed
(10) And there the camel emptied what was in her belly over him and so he was covered by her dung
(11) He said My mother was not happy with my lifestyle otherwise my life would not have ended this way
(12) But as soon as her dung warmed up his body he began shaking happily and joyfully
(13) The bird began singing and there heard him a cat that your lord had sent to accomplish a mission that was predetermined
(14) He removed the dung from over him and the bird was very happy
(15) But the cat ate him and the punishment of your Lord was very great
(16) Those who believe and do good works should learn from what We have recited three morals that you may remember
(17) That you should not consider those who throw dung on you as your enemies for there may be in their dung benefits for you while you do not know
(1 That you should not consider those who remove the dung from over you as your friends for there may be harm to you while you are blinded (not knowing the reason behind their action)
(19) And that if you were in a warm place even if your cover was nothing but dung you should be satisfied with your haven and you should not speak or walk on earth showing off your satisfaction that you may be safe.