Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. General Issues / Questions
  4. Judeo-Christian Context of the Quran?

Judeo-Christian Context of the Quran?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Issues / Questions
95 Posts 13 Posters 1.7k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • A Offline
    A Offline
    arnoldyasin
    wrote on last edited by
    #9

    Peace and welcome,

    I grew up as a Christian myself, when I saw the same message in the Quran, I accepted it as God's Message. When it comes to the connection between the Bible and the Quran, this maybe of some help

    http//www.mostmerciful.com/understanding-bible-through-koran.pdf

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • L Offline
      L Offline
      lilyfleur
      wrote on last edited by
      #10

      Peace Joel and welcome, welcome,

      I've just recently realized that a lot of my questions could have been answered by reading the FM home page. There is a wealth of knowledge there. Be sure to take a look. You may also want to reference The Message. All the best to you in your quest for better understanding.

      Much peace,
      lilyfleur

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • P Offline
        P Offline
        phoenix1
        wrote on last edited by
        #11

        peace
        I think that the quran is completely independent of the bible. The quran uses some of the same stories and symbolism but I think that the messages are very different.
        I also think that the bible's probably preaching sun worship.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • A Offline
          A Offline
          Angel
          wrote on last edited by
          #12

          What Jesus was on earth is the expectation of God for all people. This makes the cross not something to be accepted at a distance, but a spiritual process that must be embraced as ongoing in the disciple of Jesus.

          That?s a very interesting point Joel .

          It?s fascinating to see how he has been grossly misunderstood over the years hmm.
          Perhaps you can write an article about that?, tiz very interesting. !

          peace

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • J Offline
            J Offline
            jonny_k
            wrote on last edited by
            #13

            Peace "phoenix",

            I also think that the bible's probably preaching sun worship.

            JK- A certain part of it MAY although i havnt read tht one. The problem is tht the Bible aint the Word of GOD PER SE. GOD never spoke of having revealed something called "Bible/Biblos". This is a man made term. But the scriptures from Him includ the Torah, Psalms and Gospel. GOD Bless!

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • T Offline
              T Offline
              Tay
              wrote on last edited by
              #14

              Peace and welcome Joel,

              Personally, I've never heard of Khaleel Mohammed or "the Middle East Quarterly", but what you quoted seems to be in line with the personality of traditional islam. I've found that Yusuf Ali's translation carries with it the same dogma of traditionalists. When I first started reading the qur'an, it was Ali's tranlsation that I had and was, honestly, completely turned off by it. The translation available here is excellent. I'd also recommend Muhammad Asad's translation for a literal translation and the QXP exposition for expanded meaning. Also, a very nice cross-reference and transliteration tool is available here. But with everything, essentially, it is God who guides. So it's best not to fall in love with any one translation or scholar because they all have their flaws and biases.

              Peace,
              Tay

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • P Offline
                P Offline
                phoenix1
                wrote on last edited by
                #15

                K- A certain part of it MAY although i havnt read tht one. The problem is tht the Bible aint the Word of GOD PER SE. GOD never spoke of having revealed something called "Bible/Biblos". This is a man made term. But the scriptures from Him includ the Torah, Psalms and Gospel. GOD Bless!

                peace JK,
                I really don't think that the Torah and Psalms and Gospels were written by God. Seriously. I think that they are mentioned in the quran, but the words probably mean something else.There is a lot of christian influence in traditional quran translations, because of the belief that the bible is an older version of the quran. I'm obviously not sure, though.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • J Offline
                  J Offline
                  jonny_k
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #16

                  Peace "phoenix",

                  peace JK,
                  I really don't think that the Torah and Psalms and Gospels were written by God. Seriously. I think that they are mentioned in the quran, but the words probably mean something else.There is a lot of christian influence in traditional quran translations, because of the belief that the bible is an older version of the quran. I'm obviously not sure, though.

                  JK- I cannot agree with you entirely since the Torah has started to emerge by the first verse Gen 11 showing amazing mathemtical interlocks based on number 7 and also if you go and check my biblemaths post in submiteers/code-19 section youll see a phenomena where when the SAME FORMULA is used on Gen 11 and John 11 we get the constants "pi" and "e" repsectively BOTH to four signficant figures and BOTH neglecting the powers of ten. This is indeed amazing and shows with high probability that these two verses are from GOD. So no its not only the Quran. GOD Bless!

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • P Offline
                    P Offline
                    phoenix1
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #17

                    peace
                    The fact that you are finding mathematical codes in the bible only proves that these codes can be found anywhere.
                    It's like looking finding patterns in grains of sand in a desert or stars in the sky.
                    Why were you looking for pi and e in the first place? I could say that if you multiply all the letters of this post you get my favorite number. Hallelujah, it's a miracle.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • J Offline
                      J Offline
                      jonny_k
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #18

                      Peace "phoenix",

                      peace
                      The fact that you are finding mathematical codes in the bible only proves that these codes can be found anywhere.
                      It's like looking finding patterns in grains of sand in a desert or stars in the sky.
                      Why were you looking for pi and e in the first place? I could say that if you multiply all the letters of this post you get my favorite number. Hallelujah, it's a miracle.

                      JK- No these relations cant be found anywhere. Plz get rid of your prejudice and study the things i bring up for once. Heres the link
                      http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=13465.0
                      GOD Bless!

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • U Offline
                        U Offline
                        unknownuser
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #19

                        Peace and welcome Joel,

                        Personally, I've never heard of Khaleel Mohammed or "the Middle East Quarterly", but what you quoted seems to be in line with the personality of traditional islam. I've found that Yusuf Ali's translation carries with it the same dogma of traditionalists. When I first started reading the qur'an, it was Ali's tranlsation that I had and was, honestly, completely turned off by it. The translation available here is excellent. I'd also recommend Muhammad Asad's translation for a literal translation and the QXP exposition for expanded meaning. Also, a very nice cross-reference and transliteration tool is available here. But with everything, essentially, it is God who guides. So it's best not to fall in love with any one translation or scholar because they all have their flaws and biases.

                        Peace,
                        Tay

                        Tay,
                        Hmmm, interesting. I always thought that traditional Islam only did lip-service to being in the Judeo-Christian tradition, but no one actually looked at the Torah and New Testament for any other reason than to tear them apart or to try to point out inconsistencies - basically, only a surface reading.

                        I took a peek at The Message, and I like it much better than the Ali translation I'm currently reading. There are places in Ali's text where he interjects hadiths as if they were part of the arabic. Perhaps when I can save a bit, I'll getm y hands on a copy.

                        peace
                        I think that the quran is completely independent of the bible. The quran uses some of the same stories and symbolism but I think that the messages are very different.
                        I also think that the bible's probably preaching sun worship.

                        Ehhhhh, ok. So when the God of the Torah strikes Egypt with plagues, one of which is turning the land to darkness, and by implication shaming Ra the Egyptian sun god, it is really only to turn the text around and have it glorify the same god that it shamed earlier?? Please don't give me any ahistorical armchair comparative religion crap. If you definitively believe that, let's see some proof.

                        That?s a very interesting point Joel ).

                        It?s fascinating to see how he has been grossly misunderstood over the years hmm.
                        Perhaps you can write an article about that?, tiz very interesting. !

                        peace

                        Perhaps, and I'm glad you find the topic interesting, but perhaps not yet. )

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • A Offline
                          A Offline
                          Angel
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #20

                          There are many translations available on-line

                          http//www.studyquran.org/

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • A Offline
                            A Offline
                            arnoldyasin
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #21

                            I recommend you these books, they also go into judeo-christian books

                            http//www.ourbeacon.com/7101.html

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • U Offline
                              U Offline
                              unknownuser
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #22

                              I recommend you these books, they also go into judeo-christian books

                              http//www.ourbeacon.com/7101.html

                              Arnold,

                              I took a glance at the article "Thus Speaks the Bible" and there is incorrect information in it, including but not limited to, the suggestion that the KJV was translated from the Latin Biblia Vulgata. Actually, the KJV was a translation from greek manuscripts received from the Greek Orthodox Church, hence the manuscript name Textus Receptus. It was also built upon several other translators' works, such as those who worked on the previous Bishop's Bible. But the Hebrew translation of the KJV is poor, not because of serious errors in manuscript evidence, but because the translators of the KJV did not have nearly the corpus of comparative materials at hand that modern translators have.

                              He also makes assumptions of exegesis without knowledge of the cultural context, such as suggesting that Genesis says that God has a body because it says man was "made in God's image." He also assumes that because it took 40 years to publish the Nag Hammadi Library and the Dead Sea Scrolls, it must have been tampered with. He assumed incorrectly. It largely had to do with snafus in international politics and funding problems.

                              This is what I meant in my original post about "evidence" of Biblical corruption that showed disdain for Judeo-Christian hermenuetics and people who should know better not doing their homework. It is as absurd as someone suggesting that the plural of majesty in the Quran's 1st person pronouns for God really means polytheism. brickwall

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • J Offline
                                J Offline
                                jankren
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #23

                                Hmm, that is pretty interesting information Myowndesert.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • U Offline
                                  U Offline
                                  unknownuser
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #24

                                  There are many translations available on-line

                                  http//www.studyquran.org/

                                  Thanks Angel! ) There's a lot of good stuff on that website!

                                  Hmm, that is pretty interesting information Myowndesert.

                                  I didn't post it to be contentious, but I spent two years in seminary where about the only thing of value that I learned was that there is a very high standard of proof if someone is going to assert something as being true, particularly at the expense of what someone else believes.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • P Offline
                                    P Offline
                                    phoenix1
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #25

                                    Peace Myowndesert,

                                    I'm not totally sure if this claim is true or not, but I think they have a great argument.
                                    http//members.cox.net/deleyd/religion/index.htm#solarmyth

                                    http//freedomdomain.com/relig.htm

                                    here's something posted by a member (namely, Noah)

                                    http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=10331.0

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • U Offline
                                      U Offline
                                      unknownuser
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #26

                                      Peace Myowndesert,

                                      I'm not totally sure if this claim is true or not, but I think they have a great argument.
                                      http//members.cox.net/deleyd/religion/index.htm#solarmyth

                                      http//freedomdomain.com/relig.htm

                                      here's something posted by a member (namely, Noah)

                                      http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=10331.0

                                      Ahistorical comparative religion. Most of the word comparisons are between German and English, not between Greek or Hebrew which are the languages of the Bible. Why? Because they don't work. The greek word for sun is , pronounced HAY-li-os. The greek word for son is s, pronounced WHO-i-os. Take away the masculine nominative singular endings, and you find that it was all the words have in common. Sun's root is HAYL, composed of a rough breathing mark, and eta anda lambda. Son's root is HUI, a rough breathing mark, an upsilon, and an iota. Different roots, different word derivations, they just happen to sound alike in English.

                                      And "Amen" does not come from Egyptian religion. It is Hebrew for "So be it."

                                      Jesus began his ministry at age 30 because it was the age that Jewish priests began service in the temple, not because of astronomical calendars.

                                      The suggestion that the Passover derived from Egyptian sun worship is preposterous. I'll refer to my prevoius comment about the Torah making a point of shaming Egyptian deities through the plagues, including Ra. I could go on and on, but I have to get ready for work.

                                      This is a critical point if you are going to dabble in comparative religion, you must also make a study of history and culture in order to do it objectively. Where can a historic or cultural tie between two groups or religions be shown, such as Francis of Assisi visiting Muslims and borrowing from the call to prayer in writing new liturgical tones? Responsible comparative religion must be rooted in history.

                                      Information like what you posted links to does nothing but trample on cultures, groups, and religions that at least deserve the respect of getting more than a propaganda smearing - even if you don't agree with them. I've heard Arab Muslims complain about the assumptions and conclusions of orientalists, but what you posted in those links was as bad, if not worse.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • P Offline
                                        P Offline
                                        phoenix1
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #27

                                        This is a critical point if you are going to dabble in comparative religion, you must also make a study of history and culture in order to do it objectively. Where can a historic or cultural tie between two groups or religions be shown, such as Francis of Assisi visiting Muslims and borrowing from the call to prayer in writing new liturgical tones? Responsible comparative religion must be rooted in history.

                                        Very true.
                                        But then again, how much can we trust historical accounts? (Just asking, not as an argument for what the links said.)

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • U Offline
                                          U Offline
                                          unknownuser
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #28

                                          Very true.
                                          But then again, how much can we trust historical accounts? (Just asking, not as an argument for what the links said.)

                                          I guess they are all somewhere between outright lies and impartial journalism. Depends on who you ask, and who was the "winner". Kinda like anyone who takes Eusebius' propagandic history of the church as completely factual, or to the other extreme taking the medeival Jewish polemic/satire "Toledot Yeshu" seriously.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Users