IslamiCity.org Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Religion - Islam > Interfaith Dialogue
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Question about 22:27  What is Islam What is Islam  Donate Donate
  FAQ FAQ  Quran Search Quran Search  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Question about 22:27

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567>
Author
Message
airmano View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 31 March 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 884
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote airmano Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 February 2016 at 1:43am
Quote Ahmad:

...I just can't comment on it.


No surprise: Airmano

Edited by airmano - 19 February 2016 at 1:43am
The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses (Albert Einstein 1954, in his "Gods Letter")
Back to Top
TG12345 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 16 December 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 1146
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TG12345 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 February 2016 at 4:14am
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

You should be laughing, if the expression "it is raining cats and dogs" is understood by society to mean lots of rain. ...

Originally posted by AhmadJoyia AhmadJoyia wrote:

Oh, really! What makes you think that? If the idioms of a language are taken literally, as you are doing it, its then when people would laugh on such an understanding and not otherwise. Consider this example to refute your comment about the rain.

How does this refute my comment?
On the very same site the following definition is provided:

raining cats and dogs
to be raining in great amounts It was raining cats and dogs by the time I got home.
See also: and, cat, dog, rain

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/Raining+cats+and+dogs

The term "raining cats and dogs" means it's raining a lot, so of course if you say "it's raining cats and dogs" and I assume you are being literal, you have every right to laugh since in society people believe the term to mean lots of rain.

I ask you now to show me evidence that in 7th century Arabia, "every mounted" was not a reference to every mounted animal. Go ahead.
Back to Top
AhmadJoyia View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 20 March 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 1647
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AhmadJoyia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 February 2016 at 2:03am
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

You should be laughing, if the expression "it is raining cats and dogs" is understood by society to mean lots of rain. ...
Originally posted by AhmadJoyia AhmadJoyia wrote:

Oh, really! What makes you think that? If the idioms of a language are taken literally, as you are doing it, its then when people would laugh on such an understanding and not otherwise. Consider this example to refute your comment about the rain.

How does this refute my comment?
Now, when you agree that "it is raining cats and dogs" is understood by society to mean lots of rain, shouldn't we laugh? Your statement highlighted in red says so.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:


On the very same site the following definition is provided:
raining cats and dogs
to be raining in great amounts.
It was raining cats and dogs by the time I got home.
See also: and, cat, dog, rain

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/Raining+cats+and+dogs

The term "raining cats and dogs" means it's raining a lot, so of course if you say "it's raining cats and dogs" and I assume you are being literal, you have every right to laugh since in society people believe the term to mean lots of rain.
Its you who took the position of 'literal' meanings of the verse.
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:


I ask you now to show me evidence that in 7th century Arabia, "every mounted" was not a reference to every mounted animal. Go ahead.
Evidence of what? Why should it not be taken literal? Common sense, I guess, should prevail, without discrimination of who is who.

Edited by AhmadJoyia - 23 February 2016 at 2:10am
Back to Top
TG12345 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 16 December 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 1146
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TG12345 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 February 2016 at 4:01am
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

You should be laughing, if the expression "it is raining cats and dogs" is understood by society to mean lots of rain. ...

Originally posted by AhmadJoyia AhmadJoyia wrote:

Oh, really! What makes you think that? If the idioms of a language are taken literally, as you are doing it, its then when people would laugh on such an understanding and not otherwise. Consider this example to refute your comment about the rain.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

How does this refute my comment?

Originally posted by AhmadJoyia AhmadJoyia wrote:

Now, when you agree that "it is raining cats and dogs" is understood by society to mean lots of rain, shouldn't we laugh? Your statement highlighted in red says so.

Yes, if it is understood by society to mean that.
Everyone knows that it doesn't really rain cats and dogs. Show me evidence that 7th century Arabian society did not believe "all kinds of mounts" was in reference to all kinds of animals that a person can ride on.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:


On the very same site the following definition is provided:
raining cats and dogs
to be raining in great amounts.
It was raining cats and dogs by the time I got home.
See also: and, cat, dog, rain

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/Raining+cats+and+dogs

The term "raining cats and dogs" means it's raining a lot, so of course if you say "it's raining cats and dogs" and I assume you are being literal, you have every right to laugh since in society people believe the term to mean lots of rain.

Originally posted by AhmadJoyia AhmadJoyia wrote:

Its you who took the position of 'literal' meanings of the verse.

See above.
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:


I ask you now to show me evidence that in 7th century Arabia, "every mounted" was not a reference to every mounted animal. Go ahead.

Originally posted by AhmadJoyia AhmadJoyia wrote:

Evidence of what? Why should it not be taken literal? Common sense, I guess, should prevail, without discrimination of who is who.

Funnily enough, this guy would disagree with you:
His explanation on what "every mounted" means starts at 54:24.
http://tafsir.io/22/27

I guess you are going to laugh at him too?...


Edited by TG12345 - 23 February 2016 at 8:42pm
Back to Top
AhmadJoyia View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 20 March 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 1647
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AhmadJoyia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2016 at 8:44pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Funnily enough, this guy would disagree with you:
His explanation on what "every mounted" means starts at 54:24.
http://tafsir.io/22/27
I don't agree with your understanding of his explanation, at all.
Back to Top
TG12345 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 16 December 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 1146
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TG12345 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 February 2016 at 7:21pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Funnily enough, this guy would disagree with you:
His explanation on what "every mounted" means starts at 54:24.
http://tafsir.io/22/27

Originally posted by AhmadJoyia AhmadJoyia wrote:

I don't agree with your understanding of his explanation, at all.

I am going to transcribe what he said, for your benefit and the benefit of others reading this thread. Feel free to tell me why you disagree with my understanding of his explanation on what �every mounted� means.
He said �..Wa ala kulli damirin�and they will come upon each and every single type of animal imaginable. And �damir� or �damura� in the Arabic language basically refers to an anmal that becomes extremely fatigued and tired after a very long journey. So damir is what you call an an animal that is near death after an extremely long, arduous journey. So they will come upon these animals that will be fatigued. They�ll be tired. They�ll arrive in these vehicles that will be running out of gas. Right. So they�ll be arriving on these animals that are completely fatigued and tired�
Back to Top
AhmadJoyia View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 20 March 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 1647
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AhmadJoyia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 February 2016 at 6:48am
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

...They�ll arrive in these vehicles that will be running out of gas....
Even this transcription shows that the the verse has not been taken literally but figuratively.
Back to Top
TG12345 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 16 December 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 1146
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TG12345 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 February 2016 at 7:36pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

...They�ll arrive in these vehicles that will be running out of gas....

Originally posted by AhmadJoyia AhmadJoyia wrote:

Even this transcription shows that the the verse has not been taken literally but figuratively.

I have no idea why he referred to cars as "animals", by "every animal imaginable", he must have meant "every form of transportation imaginable". Which does nothing to clear up the mistake.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.