Don't take a Jew or a Christian for a fri |
Post Reply | Page 123 5> |
Author | ||
ajzhyder
Groupie Male Joined: 20 April 2018 Status: Offline Points: 44 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 20 April 2018 at 1:25pm |
|
Al-Kitab mentions several groups of people with certain names or labels, such as Momin, Muslims, Jews, Christians, etc. When Al-Kitab introduces these labels it also gives behaviors or traits of these people. A very important point to understand is that when Al-Kitab mentions for example 'Jews' it means those people who act according to traits given in Al-Kitab for Jews, and not by what the world calls them or not by what label they put on themselves. And when Al-Kitab mentions 'Muslims', then those people who match the characteristics of 'Muslims' in Al-Kitab are meant. The labels that people put on themselves don't matter. If some people call and label themselves as 'Muslims', however, their actions actually match the traits of 'Jews' given in the Book, then they are actually 'Jews' in the eyes of the Lord. Vice Versa, if some people call and label themselves as 'Jews', however they do not match the characteristics of 'Jews' in the Book, they are not 'Jews' in the eyes of the Lord. |
||
DavidC
Senior Member Male Christian Joined: 20 September 2001 Location: Florida USA Status: Offline Points: 2474 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
The bible is more comparable to the hadith than the Qu'ran.
|
||
Christian; Wesleyan M.Div.
|
||
ovibos
Newbie Joined: 14 September 2016 Status: Offline Points: 34 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Please allow me to weigh in ....
Most Jews and Christians believe that the Pentateuch (the Torah) is written by Moses, and most Christians believe that the Gospel is the authentic words of Jesus. But that is not correct. Most scholars believe that Pentateuch is written by at least five different authors that they call as J, E, P, D, and R, and the Pentateuch reached its final form (like we have today) around 400 B.C. What makes scholars think that the Pentateuch is not written by Moses, but by five different authors instead? 1. The different name of God, especially before the Exodus, where J calls God with the tetragrammaton, while E and P call God by Elohim 2. The doublets: stories that written twice or more in the Pentateuch, for example Abraham's wife/sister story, the water in Massah and Meribah story. the quails (Exodus 16 v Numbers 11), etc. 3. The most humble person in the world is unlikely to state that he is the most humble person in the world. (Numbers 12:3) 4. Moses is very unlikely wrote about his own death What is the proof that the Torah has been tampered? Both Protestants and Catholics believe in the Ten Commandments, but they differ on the number of the order where Protestants believe the second commandment is "Do not make any graven image" while Catholics believe that it's part of the first commandment (Do no have any other gods except Him). On the other hand, the Catholics break down the last commandment of the Protestants'version into two different commandments. Which one is right, the Catholic or the Protestant? In my opinion, the Catholics might be right when they combine the first and the second commandment into one, that is: "You shall not have other gods before Me, You shall not make any graven image etc". However, that makes the Ten Commandments becomes Nine Commandments. So, what is the Tenth Commandment? Samaritan Pentateuch has this extra commandment. Besides Samaritan Pentateuch, the Shapira Manuscripts also has the Tenth Commandment. I have read the Shapira Manuscript, and in my opinion the Shapira Manuscript is more logical than the Deuteronomy that we have today. How about the Gospel? Are all words of Jesus in the Gospel really the words of Jesus? It's very unlikely. For example: It is very unlikely that Jesus said this exact words: "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." If Jesus really said this words, he likely to say those words as "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and me whom You have sent." Moreover, we know that Jesus didn't speak Greek. Jesus spoke either Aramaic or Hebrew, or both, but not Greek. However, all Gospels are written in Greek, not Aramaic nor Hebrew. Except for the original gospel of Matthew that was written in Hebrew that Jerome calls it as "matthaei authenticum' or the original Matthew, but now it's long gone. The Gospels that we know today are written in Greek around forty to seventy years after the death of Jesus, based on oral traditions. How accurate were these oral traditions? God only knows. Based on my experience, I only know that oral traditions are usually not that accurate. Is there any really authentic Gospel that contains the exact words of Jesus? Probably. The scholars call it as Q (the short for Quelle), that is the "gospel" that was used by Matthew and Luke as one of their sources when they wrote their own gospel. In conclusion. the Torah we know today might be very different from the Torah in the time of Moses, or even the Torah in the time of Samuel or David. The Gospels we know today might be not the words of Jesus.
|
||
debatedebate
Guest Group Joined: 15 March 2018 Status: Offline Points: 8 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
This is Mushin Khan translation. The word Auliya also appear in 9:23. O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as Auliya' (friends, protectors, helpers, etc.), they are but Auliya' to one another. And if any amongst you takes them as Auliya', then surely he is one of them. Verily, Allah guides not those people who are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers and unjust). (Quran 5 51) O you who believe! Take not for Auliya' (friends, protectors, helpers, etc.) your fathers and your brothers if they prefer disbelief to Belief. And whoever of you does so, then he is one of the Zalimun (wrong-doers, etc.) (Qur'an 9:23) |
||
DavidC
Senior Member Male Christian Joined: 20 September 2001 Location: Florida USA Status: Offline Points: 2474 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
My translation reads ally, not friend. Muhummad had a Christian uncle and a Christian wife, and they appear to have been friends. Muhummad did not allow Christians and Jews to fight, but he did protect them. Pete is right. Any text should taken in context and read carefully. The usually several sentences make up a fully formed thought, and these often have a common theme. |
||
Christian; Wesleyan M.Div.
|
||
Pete
Newbie Male Joined: 27 September 2017 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 11 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Its phrases like that which make me question a religion. There's no reasoning to them whatsoever. Its quite false to claim that a Jew is or isn't a friend to someone because of their religion. It's the same with Muslims and Christians too. In those days when I was a Christian I never felt like I could be more of a friend to a Jew than to a Christian. There has never been a reason to. I can understand that whoever said that (Mohammed?) was speaking about the Jews and Christians who were present at the time it was said but times change. I doubt that most Christians and Jews have negative feelings about Muslims. However there are plenty of evil people in the world who hate for no valid reason other than someone being different than them.
I suggest that any religious text be taken in the context of the time in which it was written.
|
||
asep garut
Senior Member Joined: 02 November 2017 Status: Offline Points: 366 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Airmano, For me it's okay if you want to say that I am the first Muslim you see who put the Hadith above the Quran. But I personally since childhood has been told by my parents that the main source of Islamic law is the Qur'an and then the Sahih Hadith. One of the differences between the Qur'an and the hadith is: Qur'an is authentic in its contents, whereas the hadith is not all authentic. Therefore, what I said that such hadith has similarity with the content in the Qur'an, it means that the hadith is sahih ... because the "matan" (content) of the hadith has a similarity in its meaning. |
||
asep garut
Senior Member Joined: 02 November 2017 Status: Offline Points: 366 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Caringheart, It's true that 60: 9 states so, but here it must be known also about revealing of such verse, what's going on at that time. You said �It essentially
is saying that anyone that does not agree with your religion (anyone that has
fought against, or refused to accept it), you can not be friends with
them. It denies people the free-will to choose their destiny... to choose
whom they can trust and be friends with.� |
||
Post Reply | Page 123 5> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |