O People of the Book
-
Peace Samia
Quote Samia
I acctally lean towards this meaning, depending on what's meant by "universal laws"
The above is a joke or you serious.
I lean on this thing depending whatever that thing means.
Great . I expected more from the erudite Samia.
Although you seem to casually discard the first commandment that is the most important (sorry, could not help but sound condescending) since that foundation drives the rest of the commandments. Quraan did not call it universal laws neither do we. These are Gods laws whether you like it or not.
Quote Samia
...Aren't these "universal laws"? Don't you find them in any community,?
Unfortunately I did not find these laws in ?any community?. For example, can you tell me all society's follow ?come not near to shameful deeds whether open or secret 6151?.
Prostitution and gambling legalized, same sex marriages, Gay priests and also gay bishops , women and sex used to sell everything we can think of, promiscuity promoted, teen pregnancies and abortion, AIDS and STD spreading like wild fire and the great society blaming it on unprotected sex and lack of condoms. Great universal law and every society is following 9 out of the 10 commandments. Congratulations.
-
Salaam warner
These previously "ten commandments" and post quraanic "The Straight Path" have been revealed one by one since Noah, when only the first law was commanded (Believe in no other than Go)". The rest was revealed gradually untill the time of Moses when they were all revealed, then confirmed in the quraan as "The Straight Path".
They shaped the human societies and brought them to civilization. People call them "universal law" to avoid the first command, but the point is, whether people are believers or not, they will abide by them, and thus we can say they are universal, i.e for everyone. This does not contradict that they are God's laws, to start with. Also, God did not call them "God' laws", but "The Straight Path".
The important thing is not "what we call them" but "we should abide with them". If some one believes that these are "God's laws" and still does not respect them, I do not think that they are in anyway better than someone who just calls them "universal laws" and respect them.
Prostitution and gambling legalized, same sex marriages, Gay priests and also gay bishops , women and sex used to sell everything we can think of, promiscuity promoted, teen pregnancies and abortion, AIDS and STD spreading like wild fire and the great society blaming it on unprotected sex and lack of condoms. Great universal law and every society is following 9 out of the 10 commandments. Congratulations
So you do not mind calling them "God's laws" while "every society is following 9 or even 8 out of ten of the commandments", but not universal laws?
And mind you, societies still don't accept that. Governments put the rules, not the society. And still they are condemned by the majority of people. So these God's laws really are universal.
And what is "idol worshipping"? It's simply committing any of these nine commandments and arguing that you had to do it because otherwise you would be punished, because this is politics, the business demands so...etc ...etc and hence setting up partners. So just saying "There is no God but God" means nothing if not supported by righteous deeds.
I rewrote this reply in three different ways, and still not convinced as to why you are upset with my reply. Is it because I said these laws are universal?
-
Peace be with you Samia
I understand your position. Thanks for the explanation that how these laws which shaped the human civilization were originated from Gods revelations in the past.
I guess, I rushed thinking you are endorsing Idolfrees nonsense of god within making the laws and that people of the book are guys who understand smoking is bad?.. One does not need a book to understand smoking is bad, the surgeon generals warning on the pack is sufficient.
Otherwise not upset with your reply and my respect for the learned sister is intact.
-
Salaam sister Samia,
i would say that "people of the Book" are people from the time of Musa when The Book was first revealed
Are you sure the book was first revealed to Musa ?
What about the suhuf-e-Ibrahim ? What about what was sent down to Isma'il, Ishaaq, and Yaqoob ?
2136 Say "We believe in God and in what was sent down to us and what was sent down to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs, and what was given to Moses and Jesus, and what was given to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make a distinction between any of them and to Him we submit."
384 Say "We believe in God and what was sent down to us and what was sent down to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Patriarchs, and what was given to Moses and Jesus and the prophets from their Lord. We do not make any distinction between them, and to Him we submit."
8719 The suhuf of Abraham and Moses.
Peace
-
Salaam Tanweer
Is there a verse saying "wa 'atayna Ibraheem al kitaab and we sent Ibrahim (or anyone before Musa" The Book"?
In the two verses you quoted, have you noticed that Musa was not mentioned with the other messengers before him, but apart, and that the verses say "..what was sent down to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs ", but "what was given to Moses and Jesus and the prophets from their Lord"
Could the difference between "sent down" and "given to" implies a differnce in what each had?
Suhuf is hardly a kitaab. It is more general, and is called "the first suhuf", whereas what Musa received is "the book", indicating that it is the final draft which, I suppose, includes "the first suhuf documents".
-
Salaam Samia,
In the two verses you quoted, have you noticed that Musa was not mentioned with the other messengers before him, but apart, and that the verses say "..what was sent down to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs ", but "what was given to Moses and Jesus and the prophets from their Lord"
Could the difference between "sent down" and "given to" implies a differnce in what each had?
In your hurry to make a big deal between "sent down" and "given to" (which to me does not imply any difference anyway), you forgot that the same "sent down" in those same verses is used for "al-qur'aan" too !
2136 Say "We believe in God and in what was sent down to us and what was sent down to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs, and what was given to Moses and Jesus, and what was given to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make a distinction between any of them and to Him we submit."
384 Say "We believe in God and what was sent down to us and what was sent down to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Patriarchs, and what was given to Moses and Jesus and the prophets from their Lord. We do not make any distinction between them, and to Him we submit."
Or will you now propose that "what was sent down to us" is not the Book ?
Did you also overlook that "what was given" in these verses is also used for "the prophets" from their Lord meaning all the prophets ? or do you propose that "nabiyyoon" does not include Ibrahim, Isma'il, Ishaaq, and Yaqoob ?
And did you also overlook "we do not make any distinction between them" part too ? while making a distinction between what was sent/given to them ?
And did you also conveniently overlook that the same word "suhuf" is used for what was sent down to BOTH Musa and Ibrahim in 8719 ? Thus clearly showing that "suhuf" = the Book.
Peace
-
Salaam Tanweer
Did you also overlook that "what was given" in these verses is also used for "the prophets" from their Lord meaning all the prophets ? or do you propose that "nabiyyoon" does not include Ibrahim, Isma'il, Ishaaq, and Yaqoob ?
That is the problem. Why repeat them with different verbs? I do not believe in words being completely synonymous. "Send down" is definietly not "given to". and this calls for more researching.
So, what I undersatnd from what you wrote is suhuf=The Book= alquran? Were all the messengers given one similar thing?
Remeber, I did not say nothing was revealed to previous messengers. I said the Message was revealed gradually, untill it was ompleted for Muhammad. Was Noah given the part about fare trading? Or did his people know the notion of adultry? Were they told not to marry sisters? etc..etc..
So, how does this contradict the verses you quote? And what is it that you do not accept?
-
Salaam Samia,
The same verb "given" is used for all prophets (nabbiyyoon) proving Ibrahim was sent the book.
The same verb "sent down" is used for both al-qur'aan and what was sent to Ibrahim proving Ibrahim was sent the book.
The same word "suhuf" is used for both Musa and Ibrahim proving Ibrahim was sent the book.
Thus you cannot say that the book was first sent to Musa. It was sent before him to Ibrahim, Ishaaq, Isma'il, Yaqoob etc. The BASIC message of the book was always the same. I don't know how much more clear it can be and why you cannot see the obvious. No further comments from me.
Peace