Liberate wrote:May be his Lord, if he divorces you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, penitent, adorers, fasters, widows and virgin." sura 66:5
transliteration: AAasa rabbuhu in tallaqakunna an yubdilahu azwajan khayran minkunna muslimatin mu/minatin qanitatin ta-ibatin AAabidatin sa-ihatin thayyibatin waabkaran
arabic :
ุนูุณูู ุฑูุจููู ุฅููู ุทููููููููููู ุฃููู ููุจูุฏููููู ุฃูุฒูููุฌูุง ุฎูููุฑูุง ู
ูููููููู ู
ูุณูููู
ูุชู ู
ูุคูู
ูููุชู ููููุชูุชู ุชูุฆูุจูุชู ุนูุจูุฏูุชู ุณูุฆูุญูุงุชู ุซููููุจูุชู ููุฃูุจูููุงุฑูุง
and knowing what you like to do with translations, this is what the neutral online translation says using the rules of arabic : "His Lord might... "
Neutral ? Who determined such a thing ? I think you are giving your online bot translator by CIMOS the authority of something that it doesnt have or even claimed. Did you ever read the instruction manual about its realiability ?
Why is it that the online translator agrees with the majority of accepted quranic translations, and the rules of arabic,
what is your qualification as an arabic scholar?, to dismiss what seasoned scholars, and an independent neutral arabic translation utilising the rules of arabic have to say?
It is an automated translation software
conceived to help translators but
not to replace them. It is capable of providing quickly the
rough draft of an understandable and acceptable translation. MLTS produces a high quality draft translation at rate of about 100,000 words per hour.
The translator can then proceed to the
proof-reading phase and
adapt the translated text to the target environment. MLTS uses a semantic analyser and an universal grammer. Translation Memory capabilities are also included in MLTS
http://www.cimos.com/index.asp?src=traduction
Your use of this online tool is of no validation being that your not an Arabic Translator cause you dont know Arabic nor speak it nor understand its grammar etc.
Ofcourse nobody understands arabic better than you, tell us again
what are your scholarly qualifications in arabic? since you are the greatest arabic translator and interpreter this side of the atlantic. You have dismissed all the accepted english translations of the koran. You even dismissed the widely accepted Yusuf Ali translation, listening to you, someone would leave with the impression that Yusuf Ali didn't understand english properly rather than a Cambridge graduate.
Liberate wrote:Have a look at the above sura and tell me why allah would refer to himself as "his lord?" Was allah only the lord of Mohammed or was he the lord of all the muslims? Why would allah refer to himself in the third person?
"his Lord" This is a personal rather than an impersonal relationship in the matter being spoken of. Through out the Quran Allah speaks of himself in the third person which is nothing rare, thus "his Lord, their Lord, her Lord" is habitually used and not just applied to Muhammad but to various people in the Quran.
Apply some simple logic to what you are saying, you have a revelation alledgedly from A to B quoted by B apparently directly from A with none of the interjections of B as if A was talking as the first person, yet B choses to talk about the direct words of A in the third person. Can you not see that B is putting words into the mouth of A and claiming that A said it.
Since you believe Jesus is G-D and when he was speaking about "the Father" in the third person was he not according to Christianity refering to himself in the third person who is also the Father ie G-D ?
Are you now agreeing that Jesus is God?
Your argument has no basis if you are trying to find common ground explaining that absurdity in that ayah, by showing me something you do not believe and saying "here this is what I think Mohammed is doing", or are you saying Mohammed is allah?
This shouldnt be anything new to you when Jesus speaks of himself in the third person at many times, So why get all bizzaro when you see that the speaker who is Allah speaking of himself in the third person ?
Would you care to cite the passages where Jesus is talking about Himself in the third person.?
Liberate wrote:And why utilise the uncertainty of "May be?" It is an insult to believe that God would utter such a thing. Why would God use the phrase "May be?"
We go back to the Arabic and this is what is found:
'asaa (perhaps/maybe) rabbu (Lord) hu (his) in (if) Tallaqa (he devorced) kunna (you all) an (that) yubdila (He will replace) hu (him) azwaajan (spouses) khairan (better) min (than) kunna (you all).....
"Perhaps his Lord, if he devorced you all, that He will replace for him spouses better than you....."
or
"Perhaps that his Lord will replace for him spouses better than you all if he devorced you...."
'asaa" ~ Perhaps or It maybe is followed by "an" ~ that as a conjuction introducing an achievable action ie. indicating an expected event.
The Arabic word "'asaa" denotes hope in the case of that which is liked or disliked as an opinion or doubt or certainty (Ref. Edward Lane Arabic Lexicon)
In english it denotes doubt, in Arabic it can be any of the three denotations in bold above.
In the context it denotes "certainty" and not "doubt" cause it is aided by "an" ~ that indicating the achievable event which in Arabic is "mansoob".
The Arabic of the Quran indicates if Muhammad desired to devorce his wives, in which he had the choice to do, due to the current circumstances for which his wives were being admonished for, Allah would have replaced them with better wives for him.
Are you honestly trying to tell us maybe doesn't mean maybe in arabic?
QuoteH2O wrote)
In shorter words. You have to approach the Quran first as to how it was revealed
Liberate wrote:
What do you mean here, how it was revealed was a series of
epileptic fits never witnessed in any prophet in the 3,000 + yrs span of judaism and christianity, however
demon possession, and
occultic phenomena regularly witness such behaviour as ringing bells, heart palpitations, sweating on cold days e.t.c.
Your response to that statement is exactly how most Christians view the Quran, in a prejudice and unbiased view as what you have just expressed being remote from a scientific approach.
Now if you say he was possessed then he had no control and nothing would be of his own doing. So he would get all his information from the demon rather than having to go to someone else to get information from the bible. So this would mean the accusations of him copying from the bible goes out the door if he was possessed by a demon.
The composistion of those verses are seen as deliberate and with purpose to their phenomina. It would take complete concentration and awareness of a human being and to be profoundly educated and versed in the Arabic language to develope something as to which Muhammad uttered that you imply as being the result of epileptic fits and all the circumstances surrounding such phenomina.
Let me give you something you can relate to:
Let us imagine for a second you are a sikh, you wear a turban you believe in the unity of god, you abhor pagan practices, and you believe in doing good works and giving to charity, you treat your holy book like it is literally holy with kisses and a sacred spot in your home sometimes a whole room just for it.
Your religion is dated over 1000 yrs after islam, but yet you claim this is the one true religon and the gurus came to resurrect the true religion.
You then claim that islam has corrupted it's holy book and the true religion lies in the works of Guru nanak and Guru Gobin Singh, and this was the one true religion laid down by God any other variant of this religion is because the variants have some aspects of the true religion which they bastardised, muslims are not supposed to cut their hair to a certain length but to let it grow, not letting it grow is haram and will mean eternal hell.
Or maybe you are a Bahai, you abhor pagan practices, and believe in the unity of God, and believe in private prayer.
Your religion is founded over 1200 yrs after islam, yet you claim this is the one true religion and your founder came to resurrect the one true religion.
All the other religions have corrupted the message of the one true religion ressurected by Mirza Ali Mohammed, Mirza Husayn Ali, and Abdul Baha, all persecuted and killed therefore proof of their prophethood!!!
What is islam supposed to make of such a claim?
Do you see then what christianity makes of Islam? especially when it makes claims that allah is the original name of God, arabic is the language of heaven, and the four sacred months not to fight in is the perfect religion from the beginning of mankind.
Before you make the same accusation with judaism over christianity bear in mind the jewish problem with christianity
is one of interpretation, never corruption.
Where is the proof that God (that does not change) sent revelations as poetry for the prophets as 'inspiration' in judaism or christianity, which prophet in the whole of christianity or judaism contemplated suicide after having an encounter with God or an angel of God?. What makes you think this is not the work of satan.?
Quran is interpreted with hadith, ignore hadith quran cannot stand, instead you have 114 verses with no chronology or historical context whatsoever, a jumbled up mess, which is precisely what you believe in when you chose to ignore hadiths. The hadiths show islam to be nothing more than Mohammed's vivid imagination at best and demonic inspired at worst.
Hmm lets see from since I came to this forum I have only been using the Quran in defense and have not once brought forth a hadith other than means to counter act a hadith that is being used against us. An I ignore hadiths that contradict Quran or that contradict other hadiths.
Would you care to cite for us which hadiths you believe?
Quote:
Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 546:
What is the first portent of the Hour? What will be the first meal taken by the people of Paradise? Why does a child resemble its father, and why does it resemble its maternal uncle"
This is Mohammed's response:
"The first portent of the Hour will be a fire that will bring together the people from the east to the west; the first meal of the people of Paradise will be Extra-lobe (caudate lobe) of fish-liver. As for the resemblance of the child to its parents: If a man has sexual intercourse with his wife and gets discharge first, the child will resemble the father, and if the woman gets discharge first, the child will resemble her."
By telling us that there is documentation that the jews tested Mohammed he is indirectly saying he believes this hadith, he is then indirectly saying he believes fish-liver will be eaten in paradise, and the reason why a child resembles the father is because of emission from him first or the mother because of emission from her first, this is nothing more than would be expected from a superstitious mind albeit with a vivid imagination, not from God. But will he now claim this hadith is a fabrication?
Would you care to show us where this hadith contradicts the koran, itself or other hadiths?
Are you sure you are objectively looking for conflicts with the koran and other hadiths or conflicts with your conscience.
Hmm interesting. I read "
Extra-lobe (caudate lobe) of fish-liver" you read "only fish-liver". All this food talk is making me hungry I think I will go to the Sushi resturant and order some fish-liver, you should try it it taste really good and is healthy for you
yummyyy !
I find it very strange your response is to laugh at the hadith?? regardless of the implications of that hadith!!! In the process of defending your religion you chose to laugh at it, reveals a great deal about your character and your motives for being on this forum, why didn't you address the child looking like it's mother or father superstitious nonsense in that hadith or was that a laughing matter to?
Correct I am not a sunni muslim. The Quran nor the Hadith teach us to call our selves a Sunni, Shia, Salafi etc. muslim. Since your the hadith expert here...lol....please show us where it says to call our selves by such unauthorized titles which have not been taught by our Prophet nor mentioned in the Quran ? So where did it come these titles coem from ? Our prophet wasnt a Sunni etc. He was a Haneef Muslims as the Quran declared our Prophet to be and those who follow him.
Apart from you and humble guest how many haneef muslims are there in florida?