Eid Mubarak (10 Viewers)

mikhail · Feb 5, 2004

It really is just a matter of translation.

One of the basic Christian (and indeed Jewish) commandments is "Thou shalt not kill". I don't know if you even know what "thou" or "shalt" means - it's Middle English, and has no place in a modern book (they mean "you" and "will" respectively), but that's not my point. My point is that it's been mistranslated from the original Hebrew, which said "Thou shalt not murder". I don't evcen know where I heard that - possibly here, but it's surely a vital mistranslation - how is biblical murder differant from mere "killing"?

Romano Bellini · Feb 5, 2004

Yeah, I guess I should have put the pics and stats in....but thats all secondary. The primary concern or what my main objective to put forward is that: Science can back up religion.....and also the astonishing precision and specificity with which the Qur'an describes these details, hence why I gave the link so that our friend Mikhail can himself read it/ check out the pics/stats.

mikhail · Feb 5, 2004

Me? Why does everyone pick on me. I'm a theistic engineer. I not only sit on the fence, but I built it too. And I've enough reading material as it is, thank you.

Majed · Feb 5, 2004

i knew what those words mean. Shalt, thou, thy...etc. It's not like it's the first time i read the bible

but being a matter of bad translatiom neither supports or denies his argument. So many meaning from verses in the bible have been altered because of bad translation or even curruption over the years.

All it means to me is that what you read from the bible isn't 100% reliable.

"Kill" is so much different than "murder."

an example of wierd translation:
please read Chapter 7 from this book/article:

http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Code/3671/christin.htm#Chapter 6

Majed · Feb 5, 2004

oops.... i should have read this post before i replied. i already gave you more stuff to read

mikhail · Feb 5, 2004

Ah now, where does Christ say that He's God? It's implied so many times. To the point where He seems painfully modest.

"I know, but I am talking about the vested interests of Christianity,who are hell bent to deify Christ, by using capital letters here and small letters there, to deceive the unwary masses who think that every letter, every comma and full stop and the capital and small letters were dictated by God."
Oh man, we're arguing over full stops. I give up. :wallbang:

Romano Bellini · Feb 5, 2004

Jhon, I thought you may find it interesting....The entire thing about that passage that I reffered to in the Qur'an is fascinating, not only in it's specificity, detail but also the time that it was revealed in....does it not all point to 1 thing?

But, as you have too much too read now

....may be you can browse through the site later

Majed · Feb 5, 2004

then read the whole article when your free

...

Prior to Jesus (PBUH), in the bible, god clrealy says that he is the lord, but somehow when He's (supposedly, as y'all believe

) in the form of Christ, he only implies it for modesty!!

Majed · Feb 5, 2004

my point is.... It makes a HUGE difference! if you knew the exact meaning and everything was precise, you wouldn't have to assume! In other words, the slightest of difference could change the implication, but you chose to ignore that!

your an Engineer, if you change the position of the decimal point by one place when building a bridge, the whole thing oculd collapse

mikhail · Feb 5, 2004

We don't ignore it - I certainly don't. I'm not in any position to defend the Catholic Church, nor am I interested in doing so. Yes, the book Christian theology is based on is written in language that was somewhere between vague and outright misleading to begin with, and is now so old and has been mistranslated and mistranscribed so many times that it's not worth arguing over punctiation over any more. The Vatican should have set about training a group of priests in archeology and linguistics centuries ago to try to recover what little there is to be recovered, but it didn't and it won't. It's a huge bastion of conservatism and it isn't going to listen to anything so new-fangled as reason. Why do you think people like me walk away from it in the first place?

Majed · Feb 5, 2004

:dazed: didn't expect you to say that! then again, it didn't know you walked away from it!

I'm just glad you see it. Many people just follow things blindly, because that's what they were taught since childhood.

Well, you're like many others i guess.... That's kinda how my mom felt before she becamse Muslimah.

Romano Bellini · Feb 5, 2004

Seems we have something in common Majed....did your mum become a Muslima before you were born? How long ago did she revert?

Majed · Feb 5, 2004

sorry Romano, I dont like to give specific info about my family online.....sorry :angel:

but i can tell you that it was way before she even marreid my father (so yes, it was before i was born)

Where are you from BTW? (both sides of your family? if you dont mind me asking )

mikhail · Feb 5, 2004

That's how probably 99% of religious beliefs are formed. What does that tell you about the validity of your religion? Nothing. My parents' political beliefs aren't the same as mine, but I don't think that makes the parties they follow any better.

I remember hearing a friend of the family talk about many of her athiestic (or agnostic) friends, with whom she'd had many lively religious debates. She said that in the end, many of them reverted to the church, mostly in times of grief. She felt that was significant. So do I - I think it signifies how deeply engrained religion is in many of us. It seems deeper even than brainwashing.

I wouldn't convert to Muslim (what's the 'ah' suffix signify?), mostly because it's founding belief is that Allah dictated a book to an illiterate man. I can't believe that. I'll just stick to my principals.

Majed · Feb 5, 2004

For me, I only consider it brainwashing (even if the religion your taught is true) if the religious person has memorized things and was only taught "to know" and not "to think." and even when thinking, you really have to clear your thoughts and think on a higher level.

the Ah is for the female tense. Like Amico and Amicha in Italian.

why is that hard to believe. Back then, ALL the people used to memorize poetry consisting of thousand of lines. It used to be (and still is to many)one of their only forms of public entertainment. Arabs used to gather together weekly to show off new poetry. when outsiders would come to town, they would be asked to recite their poetry from their lands. Besides god's promise that he'll help Mohammed PBUH memorize everything, it's not hard to believe that the prophet can memorize a single book over more than a decade!!

it wasn't sent down all together. Mohammed PBUH received a verse from God then preached it. then he would receive a couple more and so on.

There are many teens here who know the Qura'n by heart. My grandfather was one of them. It's not something wierd.

mikhail · Feb 5, 2004

Even when, having intellectually rejected it, you still believe?

Thanks. It didn't occur to me because we treat all nouns equally in English. Bloody Women's Lib

You misunderstand me. It's not the transcription I don't believe, it's the divine contact in the first place. I don't believe that Allah speaks to us. He may watch, but he lets things run their course.

Majed · Feb 5, 2004

i don't reject it!
i truley believe in Islam, and whenever i would have doubts, I'd talk to someone and he/she'll give me more info about things i havn't known about. then i'd research it and make up my mind on MY OWN. I tried my best to learn about other religions, but it hasn't worked!

If i took everything blindly and not looked for myself, i would be like many intelectualy extremests back home.

yep....we're communicating in an imprecise language right now

there are so many "you" in english (could mean male, female, single plural) In more complete languages there are words for each.

oh well..

But, FYI, The Qur'an wasn't revealed to Mohammed PBUH directly from God. It was via the angel Gabriel (there's no unreliablity issue here since Muslims, Jews, and Christians agree that angel dont sin, they obay God's every command)

gray · Feb 5, 2004

okay i copied something from another site, but that doesn't mean i didn't think about it myself. Why try to phrase things in my own words when somebody's already taken them straight out of my head?

I'm not just taking someone's word for it. I read the page and did the necessary editing

I think mikhail's already explained this. Hebrew and English are very different languages

Please don't undermine my knowledge and make assumptions. It's not like a big secret that he had two sons :rolleyes:

Again Majed, as much as I love you man, I wish you'd stop making assumptions. I was thinking of taking those verses out of the quotes, because i hadn't read them myself, but i thought it would lend more credibility to their inclusion if i went and read the verses. And read them i did.

They may have been born normally, but the things that happened in their lives surely set them apart.

God blessed many people and said that they would be fruitful, but Ismael's blessing is surely not as high as Isaac's

[Genisis 17:9-14]
"9 Then God said to Abraham, "As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. 12 For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner-those who are not your offspring. 13 Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14 Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant."
[Genisis 17:26]
" 26 Abraham and his son Ishmael were both circumcised on that same day."
So Ishmael was also blessed.[/QUOTE]

Which site did you copy these verses from? I hope it wasn't a Christian site, because they could at least spell "Genesis" correctly. But that's beside the point.

Like the verses say, every male among you will be circumcised. That means every male amongst them was blessed equally and had a part in God's covenant. Just because Abraham and Ishmael were circumcised on the same day doesn't indicate that Ishmael was set apart by God in the same way that Isaac was, because if what u said before is true, Abraham had a normal birth and was 'not that special'

I know you explained to a certain extent, and you provided clauses saying "if ___, then _____".... but it's a fact that many unbiased Muslim scholars are still pondering whether it was Isaac or Ishmael, simply due to the fact that the name is not expressly mentioned in the Quran.

Majed · Feb 6, 2004

I'm not attacking or anything! my point of telling that i had a feeling you would write those is that i've read these arguments long ago and they aren't water tight. I was expecting more really...

and like a replied to mikhail, saying that the languages are different neither supports nor contradicts the "only son" argument. I'd really like to learn the exact Hebrew words.

I apologize if this offended you gray, that's honestly not my purpose. but When i read your earlier post, it really raised one of my eyebrows about what you knew.

read this qoute, and you should see why i undermined your knowledge!

or when when you said "his one and only son" you meant in special status?

please accept my apologies :angel:

, but i have a question for you:

Did The verses from the Qur'an, (that you qouted) about the story of the angels telling Sarah that she'll have a son, really support the argument in your first point???
in other words, did you see that The Quran's STORY about how Ibrahim knew he'll have a son (Isaac) really support the claim: " Isaac was the only promised child of Abraham, a fact which the Quran agrees with?"
The Quran says nothing about being the "only promised child," yet you still ppsted the verse numbers. please tell me how you see that the Qur'an agrees with this?

true, but does that mean anything less for The Nation of Ismael (who were also blessed)???
Most, if not all, the prophets came from Isaac's side. Nobody can deny that. We as Muslims believe these prophets carried the true message. That is till, the final prophet will come to earth. and he happened to be from Ishmael (again, who was also blessed)

Sorry, my mistake. I hope my typo didn't offend you. I wrote down all the verse numbers. I only copied the verses themselves.

My point is, Isaac is special (that's why most prophets and kinds came from his side), but Isaac's "specialness" has undermined the fact that Ishmael was ALSO BLESSED (yes, at a less degree of course), but he was also promissed to become a great Nation!!

Sorry Gray, That's NOT a FACT AT ALL. They are not stilll bondering. it was once a question brought up to them and they ended up proving it. there aren't any single signs in the Qur'an that suggest otherwise.

These Illlusions of a huge misunderstanding have come from outside.
Ask any true Muslim SCHOLAR and he'll tell you that it's Ishmael.

I've read in a couple of BS Muslim sites online that there is a big confusion. Well, i've checked their material and nothing suggests otherwise.

Mac · Feb 6, 2004

Great to see such a topic as religion can be discussed without any arguments. Quiet amazing actually

:thumb:

And theres loooads id love to post, but i dont have enough knowledge of either religion to do so. So ill drop outta this one

Eid Mubarak (10 Viewers)

Senior Member

New Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

New Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

New Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 10)