Where is the Injil?

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful...

 Caringheart wrote:

"The Quran makes it clear that Christians have strayed from Jesus' message." 
and yet you say that the Qur'an promotes no prejudice...
The
 word prejudice (or foredeeming) is most often used to refer to 
preconceived, usually unfavorable, judgments toward people or a person 
because of gender, social class, age, disability, religion, sexuality, 
race/ethnicity, language, nationality or other personal characteristics.
 It can also refer to unfounded beliefs and may include "any 
unreasonable attitude that is unusually resistant to rational 
influence." Gordon Allport defined prejudice as a "feeling, favorable or
 unfavorable, toward a person or thing, prior to, or not based on, 
actual experience."
further:
-Those who 
practice �institutionalized religion,� which focuses more on social and 
political aspects of religious events, are more likely to have an 
increase in prejudice. Those who practice �interiorized religion,� in 
which believers devote themselves to their beliefs, are most likely to 
have a decrease in prejudice.
Prejudice and 
discrimination are negative manifestations of integrative power. Instead
 of bringing or holding people together, prejudice and discrimination 
push them apart. Ironically, even prejudice and discrimination imply 
some sort of relationship, however. If there is no relationship people 
would be completely unaware of another person's or group's existence. 
When there is any relationship at all--even a negative one--there is 
some integration. 
(http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/problem/prejdisc.htm)

 Awww, look at you Caringheart!  Trying to use citations to prove your point, although the quotes you mentioned are not found in the link you gave. 

Also, one has to wonder how the belief that Christians have strayed from the message of Jesus (pbuh) is "prejudiced".  Christians believe that all non-Christians are wrong and destined for hell.  Ask any Christian here and see what answer you get.

Moreover, your continued accusations and finger-pointing of Muslims and Islam is ironic given your incessant stereotypes of Muslims.  Here is what the source you referred to above says about stereotyping:

"Stereotypes are essentially assumptions that are made about a person or group's
character or attributes, based on a general image of what a particular group of people is
like." [1]  

Awkward!!

By the way, I think the Quran answers your ridiculous claims of "prejudice":

"Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your)
 Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly 
with them: for Allah loveth those who are just." (60:8)

I have already mentioned this verse in another thread.  Obviously, you don't read my responses carefully or you just have a very short memory.  

 Caringheart wrote:

You totally missed the point:
"When you read Ehrman, he clearly has an agenda.  But if Muslims take what he[Ehrman] has to say to their logical conclusion, you would have to abandon Islam too.  Why use a scholar who employs arguments which damage Islam?"

Because, as you missed my point, Ehrman's personal opinions about religion are not the issue.  His area of expertise is not religion, but New Testament textual criticism and early Christian history.  Christians, instead of trying to refute his arguments, either attack his credentials or try to persuade Muslims that referring to his work on NT textual criticism somehow makes it a requirement for Muslims to accept his opinions on religion in general.  Such as argument is a childish ruse, which is used in an attempt to forgo providing an actual response to the claims Ehrman makes about the New Testament.

 Caringheart wrote:

I find it amusing that people keep spouting this refrain without actually doing the research into the matter.

 And I suppose you have done the research, right?  Umm, what are your sources again for this "research"?  Still not providing citations, like I asked?  

What I find amusing is that you think you know something that I don't!  I said that there are 1st-century manuscripts of the Quran.  Do you disagree?  Do you want me to provide examples?  Please tell me you want me to provide examples!  Pretty please!!

 Caringheart wrote:

There were 7 different ways of reciting revealed to Muhammad..

Yes, that is true.  These 7 ways of recitation were based on different dialects.

 Caringheart wrote:

Muhammad's followers could choose which to recite - so different people 
would hear different things, and they were different enough to cause 
fights among the followers.  This is why there was so much confusion 
when it came time to create 'the book'... the Qur'an.

Not quite, dear.  This is where your "research" is exposed as half-hearted, and biased.  I have already dealt with this matter in my response to Experiential.  Perhaps if you had read it, you would not be repeating the same ridiculous argument.  Read my response to Experiential from 11/28. 

I don't understand why you people try to pretend that you know so much about a topic that you are so clueless on.  Why humiliate yourself?  

 Caringheart wrote:

There are also 3 different types of abrogation

And as Dr. Ahmad Ali al-Imam explains, only one of these types of abrogation are supported by the evidence.  According to Dr. al-Imam:

"...many reasons exist for objecting to both kinds of abrogation [while accepting 'naskh al-hukm wa baqa al-tilawah']:

1.  All of the examples given are inauthentic, contradictory, or isolated reports in many different versions.

2.  The examples differ from the Qur'an's style, as can be seen by comparing the ends of surahs 2 and 3 with dua al-qunut (usually recited during prayer).

3.  All usulis (usul al-fiqh scholars) agree that the Qur'an is substantiated only by successive reports, whereas the examples given are isolated reports." ("Variant Readings of the Qur'an: A Critical Study of Their Historical and Linguistic Origins", p. 36).

Therefore, only one type of abrogation is supported by the evidence and this is "naskh al-hukm wa baqa al-tilawah" (abrogating the ruling and keeping its recitation).  This is well-known to Islamic scholars and it is nothing new.  It's hilarious and adorable how you think you know something that will blow us away!  

What was that you said about "research"?  

Here is a little bed-time reading for you.  These are books you should read to educate yourself about the Quran's history and its preservation:

1.  "Variant Readings of the Quran" by Dr. Al-Imam.

2.  "The History of the Quranic Text from Revelation to Compilation: A Comparative Study with the Old and New Testaments" by Dr. M.M. al-Azami.

 Caringheart wrote:

this is laughable...
aren't you always trying to tell other people about their religion?  Have you studied your own?  Somehow I do not get the impression that you have.

No, what's "laughable" is that you people cannot respond to any criticism of your religion with reasoned responses but with finger-pointing and red herrings.  Moreover, I don't tell you about your religion on my own merit.  That is why I refer to scholarly sources.  Why do you think I refer to Christian commentaries when quoting from the New Testament?  Why do you think I refer to Jewish commentaries when quoting the Tanakh?  

Oh and for an ignoramus, who thinks she has got the drop on Muslims but who is actually clueless about Islam, to ask if I have studied my religion is the epitome of comedy!  I had a good laugh at that one!  

Edited by islamispeace - 22 December 2012 at 8:51pm