Autochecked users, Bureaucrats, Editors, oversight, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators
19,746
edits
User talk:Nightmare140: Difference between revisions
→Quran 4:16
Nightmare140 (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (14 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
:Once again I ask you for the 3rd time: Do you think the "two men" version of 4:16 goes against what has been said about the topic in other locations? That is all quoted on that [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Homosexuality page] and this includes [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Homosexuality#Qur.27an verses]. The topic of the people of Lut is mentioned in many places on that page. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 04:25, 30 May 2014 (PDT) | :Once again I ask you for the 3rd time: Do you think the "two men" version of 4:16 goes against what has been said about the topic in other locations? That is all quoted on that [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Homosexuality page] and this includes [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Homosexuality#Qur.27an verses]. The topic of the people of Lut is mentioned in many places on that page. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 04:25, 30 May 2014 (PDT) | ||
No I don't. The point I'm talking about is if "this" and only this verse is talking about 2 men or not, not if the whole thing about homosexuality is true or not. You're saying the Qur'an isn't as clear and detailed as it claims to be. Hell, if you want it to be clearer and more detailed than that, do you want a 20000-page book that no one can read? God claims the Qur'an is clear and detailed, and indeed it is. He doesn't say each and every verse has an independent meaning that could be clearly understood while standing alone, but the Qur'an as a whole stands tall, with each verse clarifying the other ones if necessary. Now, if people can understand a verse, then there's no need to clarify it with other verses, making a 603-page book even bigger. Now, as you can read from Tafsirs, we can infer from other verses and Hadiths the punishments of adultery or homosexuality and apply it here to understand the meaning clearly. So even if you still don't know the partial meaning of the verse (if it's 2 or 2 men), you clearly and fully understand the complete meaning of the subject in hand, so what do you want more? Anyway, let's continue, you again quoted the Grammatical reasoning that was made to prove it, which I already talked about in the last edit. | No I don't. The point I'm talking about is if "this" and only this verse is talking about 2 men or not, not if the whole thing about homosexuality is true or not. You're saying the Qur'an isn't as clear and detailed as it claims to be. Hell, if you want it to be clearer and more detailed than that, do you want a 20000-page book that no one can read? God claims the Qur'an is clear and detailed, and indeed it is. He doesn't say each and every verse has an independent meaning that could be clearly understood while standing alone, but the Qur'an as a whole stands tall, with each verse clarifying the other ones if necessary. Now, if people can understand a verse, then there's no need to clarify it with other verses, making a 603-page book even bigger. Now, as you can read from Tafsirs, we can infer from other verses and Hadiths the punishments of adultery or homosexuality and apply it here to understand the meaning clearly. So even if you still don't know the partial meaning of the verse (if it's 2 or 2 men), you clearly and fully understand the complete meaning of the subject in hand, so what do you want more? Anyway, let's continue, you again quoted the Grammatical reasoning that was made to prove it, which I already talked about in the last edit. --[[User:Nightmare140|Nightmare140]] ([[User talk:Nightmare140|talk]]) 05:40, 30 May 2014 (PDT) | ||
:We just quote authentic, recognized translations and in addition if they are supported by Tafsirs of of well-renowned Islamic scholars, that is more than what needs to be done. If you have a problem with the sources, you can start contacting Islamic scholars around the world and get them to invalidate Yusuf Ali's translation and the two Tafsirs (Tafsir Al-Jalalayn and Tafsir Ibn Kathir) | |||
:I like these kinds of discussions as they result in further improvement of our site. In this case I found out additional Tafsirs should be present on the page. | |||
:In regards to your comments about Quran getting long if additional detail was added, no it would not. Ideally Quran should not be [https://www.google.com/search?q=quran+repetitive&spell=1&sa=X&ei=f-uIU8CoGoWSqAbizoC4DQ&ved=0CCYQvwUoAA&biw=1920&bih=860 repetitive] and for example contain the same statement [http://quran.com/55/37-78 31 times] (''"So which of the favors of your Lord would you deny?"''). 30 of these verses should have been deleted from the Quran and the same words could have been used to fill out many details or perhaps include amazing [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Miracles miraculous] verses which would attempt to prove the 'divine' origin of the Quran. In the case of 4:16, it would take only one arabic word to clarify the meaning of this important verse. Mistakes like these further prove the non-divine origin of the Quran and this is realized by those [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/People_Who_Left_Islam who have left Islam] and some of them have submitted testimonies on our site using an [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Special:Form/newapostate online form]. You're welcome to use that form in the future if you change your mind about Islam. But such debates are for the [http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/ FFI forum] which you can visit. | |||
:Let me know if you have any other issues relating to this article or comments that could result in the improvement of the page. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 13:41, 30 May 2014 (PDT) | |||
I know that u quote authentic, recognized translations and well-renowed Islamic scholars, but you're ignoring the fact that Muslims believe only the Qur'an doesn't contain mistakes (in addition to Hadiths that were truly told by Prophet Muhammad PBUH), so even scholars and translators commit mistakes (example: Ibn-Abbas (Or Ibn-Kathir, I don't remember) said while explaining a verse that the Earth is flat. Does that mean Islam believes Earth is flat? No, it's just that he committed a mistake based on what they thought back then) | |||
I, too, like these discussions because whenever I take part in one, I find out that Islam is always prejudged. | |||
As for why the same verse was repeated 31 times, I don't know why, and no one can know why because God is all-knowing (but I'm sure it has to contain some "miraculous" meaning as you were saying, so discussions about Islam based on the "reason" of saying something in the Qur'an are invalid because God knows the reasons of what we do, but the opposite isn't correct. So, the "divine" origin of the Qur'an as you like to quote it is proved not by the reason (although it is proved based on the reaspons in some places that we know about), but rather by the divine "meaning", "miraculous" verses and other fields... | |||
Don't worry, I'll not change my mind anytime soon because I'm sure of my religion. And again I'll repeat, repeating something for its importance is not considered a mistake, and not mentioning something is also not considered a mistake. | |||
As for faithfreedom, I registered there when you suggested that I do, but I've still not gotten an answer yet... Seems they didn't accept my membership for some reason (or I made a mistake of some kind, but I don't think so)--[[User:Nightmare140|Nightmare140]] ([[User talk:Nightmare140|talk]]) 04:39, 31 May 2014 (PDT) | |||
:You and me are some anonymous username on the internet and we do not have the religious authority to say multiple recognized famous Islamic scholars, Tafsir authors and translators made a mistake. Also other anti-homosexuality verses have to be considered to know what the meaning was and you have been completely ignoring those verses (people of Lut) and other hadiths. It is clear the Quran is anti-homosexuality. You cannot look at one Quran verse and decide it must mean something that you want it to mean and ignore everything else and what scholars have said. Everything has to be considered while interpreting the Quran but ok, how someone interprets the Quran is up to them. | |||
:You can email the FFI people here and ask them about forum issues [http://www.faithfreedom.org/contact-us/] but yes they'll be happy to debate with you. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 05:54, 31 May 2014 (PDT) | |||
Note that I did not say the Qur'an isn't against homosexuality. I'm just saying that I think this particular verse doesn't have to do with it. | |||
Also, you should know that when I said Muslims believe scholars and translators would be wrong and that only the Qur'an and Hadiths (the ones we're sure of) don't have mistakes, I didn't decide that on my own. It's an Islamic rule. | |||
As for the FFI forum, I'll try talking to them. --[[User:Nightmare140|Nightmare140]] ([[User talk:Nightmare140|talk]]) 06:51, 31 May 2014 (PDT) | |||
:Ok. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] <span style="font-size:88%">([[User_talk:Axius|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Axius|contribs]])</span> 07:23, 31 May 2014 (PDT) | |||