/lit/ - Literature

>>16511592
Secondly, the use of rhyme in the Qur'an can give the impression that it's poetry. Well, this device was common in Arab rhetoric, it lended a sort of formality to words (notice in Shakespeare's earlier plays, like Richard II, lofty speech uses rhyme), and it also aided memorization, this is vital in a largely illiterate society, and the Qur'an itself is fundamentally an oral work. Also Arabic rhymes much more easily than English, which is why it's not a good idea to ever try to mimic that aspect of it in English. So other than that what's the English that best imitates the Arabic style? That would without a doubt be Arberry's (pic related). Some confused souls would assert Pickthall or Ali, but that is incorrect as there is a significant difference between a "literary" translation, and a translation that actually seeks to imitate the Qur'an's style. Ali and Pickthall are beautiful stylists but it's not going to give you an idea of the Quranic style. Let's compare Arberry and Nasr (the author of The Study Quran) to give a couple of example from al-Fatiha (the first Surah, or chapter) of Arberry's attention to style. There's a phrase for Allah, Rabbee al-'alaameen (if you are interested in more precise pronunciation, a guide to Arabic alphabet pronunciation will be in the pertinent thread): Arabic uses quantitative stress, like Greek and Latin (think of Roman Catholic cantillation used in high mass), rather than qualitative like English, here it's pronounced Rabbeel 'alameeeen (the definite article is typically either turned into a contraction, as with al-Shams letters--contracted as as-Shams--or pronounced as the last syllable of the preceding words, as in what you see here, called al-Qamar). The Study Quran renders this Lord of the worlds. Arberry renders it The Lord of "all Being" (this is actually a fair translation of العلمين which in this context refers to everything), which we can see more neatly reflects the sound of the Qur'an. Another phrase is Yowmee al-Deen (pronunciation of the definite article is both attached to the end of the first word and al-Qamar, which renders it silent here; Deen is extended in tajweed to deeeeeeen). This phrase refers to judgement day, The Study Quran translates it as the Day of Judgement. Arberry opts for the Day of Doom, using Doom in its older sense of judgement or reckoning (ultimately comes from Old English for fate but by Middle English meant judgement), and indeed this day was referred to be Christians as Doomsday. Certainly Doom functions more like Deen in rhythm and sound. Deen in Arabic refers etymologically to debt, it's the word for religion but also the word for reckoning as here, connoting the settling of accounts. If you're interested in seeing more about how Arberry approached translation see his introduction.

In future threads in this series I will go over other English tafsirs of the Qur'an, including the Study Quran, so stay posted.

Questions and comments welcome.

Mohammed was a false prophet. Repent and accept our Lord Jesus Christ - God incarnate that resurrected on the Third Day - and His one Holy Catholic Church before it’s too late.

Thanks for the effort posts Muslim anon! I don't have anything to say right now, but i'll be following your threads.

No thank you

>>16511594

more paragraphs pls

>>16511613
If you stick around for future threads, I'll cover an extensive explanation for why Muslims reject this, which can't hurt a Christian to know.

>>16511628
Sure, we'll see how it goes, there's a lot to explore

>>16511648
Thanks, Insha'Allah, I'll paragraph the next thread much more

>>16511648
Just Google sand money quotes you little chimp

>>16511592
Kill yourself, goatfucking sandnigger

>>16511592
proselytisers must die
there is not "increasing" interest here, there is just one or two people making endless shitty threads about their backwards pedo rapist cult

>>16511592
When I started reading the Quran it was nice, but I was naive at the start. Now I see that it is a work of Satan himself to lead people astray.

>But why would Satan tell people to follow God?
Telling somebody to do something that is good for them is not the same as telling somebody to do what is BEST for them. It is good to follow God, yes, but the Bible also denies the crucifixion of Jesus and his status as the Son of God.

>>16511690
>but the Bible also denies
I meant Quran.

"that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."

The Quran denies John 3:16 and thus leads its readers down the wrong path.

>>16511695
I will explain all that thoroughly in the pertinent thread isha'Allah but of course this will require you to entertain opinions contrary to yours if you wish to appreciate the theological basis of all that

>>16511592
It’s impossible to appreciate the Quran if you can’t read Arabic.

>>16511748

not true

>>16511592
Wrong board, heathen.

>>16511737
I'm open to your interpretation of the Bible and Quran. As it stands, though, I am wary of the message the Quran is sending.

>>16511592
>>16511594
Nice thread. I'm a none denominational Christian and considering Islam but I have issues with saying that the Bible is corrupt. That God allowed his word to be corrupt and we had to wait 600 years to find the truth again from an Arab prophet. also, the way the quran explains the corruption is that there was a book of the Bible that taught tawhid and Islam but then it was corrupted by people who changed what was written inside. Why would God allow that as well as wait 600 years so that Christianity would develop from a simple religion to an empire with its own laws, dogmas, councils and tradition as well as saints martyrs and teachers who helped created modern society and then send those saints to hell, which in Islam is described in far more horrific detail than Christians have ever done until the time of Dante.

GARDENS OF FLOWING STREAMS BITCH

>>16511767
Fair enough

>>16511748
I would say even with Arabic complete appreciation requires extensive study. That doesn't mean you cannot gain a high level of appreciation otherwise, but there are different grades. We're not aiming for scholarly levels here though just enough to grasp why the Qur'an is held in high regard and the power it has over so many

>>16511769
In the Islamic narrative, the Old Testament became corrupt during the Babylonian captivity. Jesus, peace be upon him, was sent to correct the errors. As for his Gospel, Muslims don't think it was corrupted so much as neglected, they believe it was used as a basis for the Greek Gospels but was in Aramaic and fell out of popularity with Greek Christians after Paul.

Christians living prior to the Qur'an's revelation or never knowing of Islam are considered saved in Islam. Insha'Allah in a future thread I will talk about the importance of Christians in pre-Islamic Arabian history, which are covered in our religious history and considered the most guided people of the time

>>16511769
Islam has three stances on the bible

True

False

Unclear

True passages of the bible are those confirmed in the Quran. For example, Noah building a ship and the Earth flooding

False passages in the Bible are those contradicted by the Quran. For example, Jesus’s crucifixation in the bible vs Quran denying that

Unclear are those passages in the bible that is neither confirmed nor denied by the Quran. In this case, it’s neither true or neither false. Ex. The Tower of Babel

>>16511777
Get got, that was hot. Keep posting, OP.

>>16511851
According to Islam, what is the reason for God making Mary be born to a virgin? You don't believe he is the Son of God, so what gives?

>>16511879
>For example, Jesus’s crucifixation in the bible vs Quran denying that
It's a universally accepted historical fact that Jesus died on the cross. Will you admit that your disbelief in the crucifixion is a theological presupposition?

>>16511881
Not OP here but Adam is also not considered a son of God. There's a Qur'anic verse says something like God say 'be' and that thing comes to be.

I'm fairly sure OP will say this will be discussed in greater detail in an upcoming thread, which is cool otherwise this thread will be derailed.

>>16511891
Not OP here but if Muhammad is the final prophet and the Qur'an is true and the Qur'an says something contrary to the Bible then it's the Bible which is wrong in that instance.

>>16511891
The Quran says that someone else was made to look like Jesus so that when they came to kill him, they took the wrong person and Jesus was raised up to second heaven.

We just don’t know who that person was exactly. Some scholars believe it was Judas as punishment for betraying Jesus and other scholars say someone volunteered to take Jesus’s place to die as a martyr

Thanks anon :3

>>16511879
The Qur'an never actually affirms the whole earth was flooded

>>16511881
In the Qur'an Jesus, peace be upon him, is unique among prophets because he is the Messiah and because he was gifted with a very high degree of miracles starting with his birth. Maryam, may Allah be pleased with her, is considered the greatest woman of creation and was an ascetic. But this is beside the point since Jesus being called the Son of God by Christians has nothing to do with his conception but the idea that he is eternally begotten; it's a preincarnate status.

>>16511891
I don't know if it's universally accepted, but of course our belief here is religious and I will explain it in a future thread Insha'Allah

>>16511910
The Qur'an does not say anyone took his place. It says the Jews thought they crucified him but were uncertain. It could have been someone made to look like him or just someone of mistaken identity with the same name or any number of things. The scholars who give these explanations are engaging in pure speculation as no Hadith elaborates. We do not know if Judas existed and if he did he might not have betrayed or might have been slandered for condemning Paul or anything else. And Allah knows best.

>>16511592
I really appreciate this, anon. Am reading an older English 'Lord of the Worlds' version right now (an old Everyman Rodwell) and doing what I can to understand with supplemental reading, etc. Effort posting here is appreciated by the denizens who matter, so don't get discouraged by all the crap you're bound to receive. I'll follow along closely and ask questions when I have them. Thanks for what essentially is a great opportunity. Appreciate your concern.

>>16511948
So you believe that Jesus is not the Son of God and that he did not die on the cross.

Thanks for taking your time to answer, but since history backs the Bible's account of Jesus instead of the Quran, I just can't help but feel that the Quran is Satanic.

>>16511974
Anon, it can't be Satanic because it's more plausibly predicted by God himself in the OT than even Christianity is, the references of which, though plausible, are far more indirect. This is simply a fact, and I'm a Christian.

>>16511974
>Jesus is not the Son of God and that he did not die on the cross
All Muslims believe this, I'm not convinced that you have any proof as to the historicity of the crucifixion story as told in the Bible, and I'm concerned that you are leaping to illogical conclusions regarding Satanism in the Qur'an.

>>16511924
Sure

>>16511962
Thanks, happy it's of benefit.

>>16511974
How you feel is not something I can control but if you would like we can explore this particular point more in the narrative or theology thread

Bump

>>16511685
hes doesnt seem to be prosletyzing, rather, just explaining the religion. Prosletyzing would be more akin to the second reply in this thread

i am christian, but I love other cultures, thank you for the explication of the Qu'ran

>>16511592
>>16511594
What translation of the Qu'ran should I read, as an English-speaker, to best appreciate it as a piece of literature? I have been repeatedly told not just that translations of the Quran are insufficient for unclear reasons, but that the Quran cannot be "understood" without first believing it is the word of god, which sounds rhetorically dishonest, for somebody who is trying to make a neutral investigation of Islam.

>>16513610
Sure.

Islam is not exactly a culture, indeed even to the Arabs it was a tremendous culture shock (hence why it was so stringently opposed even though Arabs already believed Ishmael was a prophet of Allah and saw the Ka'aba as his temple) and in some ways is anti-cultural in its opposition to music, images and architectural embellishment (decorating mosques is considered either disliked or outright haram depending on jurisprudence). Hence most cultural aspects of Islam are almost in spite of Islam rather than a product of it. This has lead to an academic distinction between Islamic (pertaining to the religion), and Islamicate (pertaining to cultural practices associated with the religion, this includes things like the Taj Mahal, 1,001 Nights, Hookah, Belly Dancing, and so on, all of which are actually haram). Islam has an ascetic tradition which goes even beyond the minimum austerity but that's for a future thread.

>>16513726
Arberry's and I explain why in the second post. His translation is neutral also because he wasn't a Muslim and he wrote it right at a time where the west had no agenda to make Islam look either barbarous or progressive, this there is no political or religious agenda. I will go into more religious tafsirs later but I started with his for reasons I explained in the second post of the op

>>16513779
sorry for not reading your second post OP, airheaded move by me

>>16513899
No problem, I know people don't come on /lit/ to read walls of text, which is why I decided to post this as a series rather than as a multi multi page OP. I will go into understanding the narrative of the Qur'an which will facilitate you "following" it in many ways but even without that you should be able to get at least enough out of Arberry to get an idea of the impression it made on the Arabs when it was first revealed since many became Muslim solely based on hearing it recited

Hey this thread is great, thanks for going through and doing it, I'll keep reading week to week and grab my old english translation Qur'an to follow along. Might help complement the 3 years of bible study.

>>16511851
I find Islam to be a beautiful religion and I have considered converting but this always bothered me.

I perfectly understand saying Moses brought the torah to teach tawheed and Sharia, this even the jews wouldnt dispute. But there is literally 0 historical evidence for the claims about christianity that muslims make. I understand Islam as a universalized judaism that follows the same beats as Moses, Sinai, and the Torah, but this pattern really does not apply to Jesus even in the slightest.

Prior to Islam there are no stories of Jesus revealing a holy book or bringing in a new source of Law. In fact, all these things are explicitly denied by the Gospels. Jesus came to abolish the mosaic law not add to it.

Again, I understand Islam putting Muhammad as a prophet in line with the Jewish prophets, but the narrative Islam spins around Jesus is literally i) unheard of prior to Muhammad, and ii) contrary to the entire teaching of the Gospels.

>>16514471
To continue, even secular scholars agree that there is no disputing that Jesus was crucified. I do not understand why Islam sees Muhammad, Moses and Jesus as three of the same kind when there is nothing in i) christianity or ii) any recorded version of the gospels or history of the time that likens Jesus to Moses as a lawgiver with a book.

>>16511592
I have the Arberry translation but still can't get into it. Recommend me a chapter that will make me see that there's greatness in the Quran.

>>16514342
You're welcome, happy you find it worthwhile

>>16514471
I don't really want to go into the historical claims of the Qur'an, let alone wider Islamic literature, within this particular thread as these discussions rapidly soak up whatever thread they're in. So I have set aside the next thread for that. I will say it's not realistic to expect 99% of texts from antiquity to survive, let alone ones considered heretical. Myriad other Gospels are mentioned in passing by church fathers, some that weren't in Greek. This probably only reflects a small portion of others

As for the distinction between Islam and Judaism there are several key factors in theology, juridical method, precedent, and many other things that distinguish it on a fundamental level. For example in Islam it is a praxiological precept that "deeds are but by intent", which is very different from Judaism which considers action as having primacy over intent. Also most schools of Islam do not have as relativistic approach to law as Judaism, difference of opinion doesn't make all opinions correct. This is also a topic I will explore in detail but in the jurisprudence thread.

>>16514497
Actually Jesus and Moses, peace be upon them, are contrasted by Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. After the battle if Badr, 'Umar wanted to behead a the prisoners whereas Abu Bakr wanted to spare them, may Allah be pleased with them both. Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, compared Umar to Moses and Abu Bakr to Jesus in temperament. Jesus is very distinct in Islam because he embraced a very high level of asceticism including celibacy and his following often did as well, he was blessed with a very high degree of miracles. He and Moses are linked as prophets of extraordinary will along with three others. Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, is likened to both because he reflected elements of both.

>>16514602
Try reading it backwards. If you want to stick around for the narrative thread that might however give you a strong appreciation of the narrative if you can't appreciate the style. If you want to come back in for the thread on Arabic then I will go over some of the beauty and elements unique to that language, but that's up to you

>>16511592
I have the oxford worlds classics translation, translated by abdel haleem, know anything about it?

>>16514606
Thank you for the reply. I await your next thread.

I believe you misunderstood me in your comment. I did not mean that Jesus and Moses are typified to be similar in temperament. I meant to show that Jesus and Moses are typified to have had the same message and mode of transmission. The conditions for Prophethood (in the sense of being both messenger and lawgiver) in Islam means that one brings down

1) A set of Laws from God
2) An injunction to believe in One God only
3) A book

It seems as though Muhammad thought that Moses and Jesus both filled these criteria, and placed himself as also filling such criteria. Now, in the case of Moses there is a clear parallel to Muhammad. Both bring Law (halakah and Sharia), a book (Torah and Qu'ran), and are persecuted for teaching Tawheed. Jesus does not bring a book, does not bring Law, and does not teach Tawheed. I therefore fail to see how the claims of the Qu'ran can then be justified if they typify Jesus as being like Moses or Muhammad when he fails these three conditions of Islamic prophethood.

>>16514497
AsSalamu aleikum wr Allah wb

Not OP, but i want to point you out that there is historical evidence prior to Muhammad (pbuhahf) which contains some of the same claims about Jesus (pbuh) that the Qur'an makes.
For example, if you read the Gnostic Gospel of the Childhood of Jesus, you can find the story of Jesus making some birds out of clay, breathing upon them, and giving them life, which is mentioned in the Qur'an.
Also, if you read the Gnostic Apocallypse of Peter and the Second treatise of the Great Seth you can find indications towards Jesus (pbuh) not dying on the cross.
In fact during the first centuries of christianity there was a real debate about whether or not Jesus a.s. died on the cross. There is a book by Irenaeus of Lyon called Against Heresies in which he compiles a lot of different christian beliefs, one of them being that the man who was crucified was Simon of Cirene and not Jesus Himself (pbut).

I can give you the precise quotations if you are interested, or you can go and search them yourself

>>16514685
Yes I have heard of these. Although the Gnostic gospels seem to be inspired by Iranian religions that saw Jesus as a great teacher in the fight against good and evil. I do not put stock in these as being written by those who knew him.

>>16514715
You need to reconsider that stance too, because some gnostic gospels, like the gospel of Thomas, are dated as early as 60-120 a.D., which would make them older than some biblical writings.
And of course you also need to consider that by accepting Paul's letters and John of Patmos's book you are also accepting books written by people who didn't know Jesus a.s.

>>16514741
Paul did have a mystical vision of Jesus and the pauline letters are theological, not historical. If we are talking history and life of Jesus the four canonical gospels, and even the gnostic gospels for that matter, do not ever make mention of jesus as a Rasul who brings a book and a law. This is my main objection and I have yet to have a Muslim persuade me out of it. I do not mean this to be harsh, I respect Islam immensely. But I believe its characterization of Jesus to be false.

>>16514632
>>16514632
It's nice, definitely agenda driven. For example the word for disbelievers means rejectors. Now in one verse it says those who do not rule by the law are disbelievers (5:44, referring to the Jews straying from the law but also Muslim rulers), and here translation is changed to "rejecting [God's law]". This is a response to Muslims who alledge the House of Saud apostacized and trying to paint them as not apostates (which they objectively are). So there is a political bias there. Same with most English translations which I will cover Insha'Allah

>>16514684
Muslims believe the Gospel was a collection of sayings of Jesus in Aramaic or Hebrew similar to the Gospel of Thomas in format but not content and that his mission was to correct corruption of law by rabbis. Rabbis were seen as put above God by the Quran and I will cover the reasons for that Insha'Allah

>>16511769
>I'm a none denominational Christian and considering Islam
You being non denominational is why you’re thinking about moving away from the Truth and into a less than ideal religion. Visit your local Catholic or Orthodox Church before you make a mistake, my guy.

>>16514754
>and even the gnostic gospels for that matter, do not ever make mention of jesus as a Rasul who brings a book and a law. This is my main objection and I have yet to have a Muslim persuade me out of it.
I agree here with you and think that you have a very though question which mainstream islam cannot answer. But i think there is an answer.
Would you be interested in watching some documentaries which i believe explain the answer to your objection?
I think i could possibly answer you with many difficulties and derailing the thread immensely, but really the videos i would like you to see explain it really well?
Just say yes and i will answer you with the links InshaAllah

>>16514754
Jesus was, according to the Qur'an, not bringing a brand-new law but decluttering the law of Moses from rabbinical tampering (probably exegesis of the Torah ended up getting mixed with it) as well as permitting some things made temporary haram as a punishment to the Jews. I will elaborate on this in the appropriate thread

>>16514471
>mosaic law not add to it
In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says:
'Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.'

So, I don't know what to tell you anon.

>>16514900
Please do!

>>16514991
But doesnt a Rasul need to bring a law and a book? I do not believe there is any indication jesus BROUGHT the Injeel.

>>16515028
fulifllment here meaning fulfilling the spirit instead of the letter. I believe an islamic messenger must bring new law.

>>16511592
/thread

>>16514684
>Jesus does not bring a book, does not bring Law, and does not teach Tawheed.
I disagree with all three of these statements, I'd only recommend further investigation yourself and I will also search for some antithetical to what I have for knowledge on this, as it's really not worth derailing this thread over as it's too much of a seperate topic and will potentially totally take over the thread, keeping the powder dry.

>>16515077
I'd really like to hear a response. I am from a Muslim family and once I learned about christianity and once I took history courses and Islamic theology courses this really began to bother me.

Please show me historical sources attesting to Jesus 1) BRINGING a gospel. There are no known Gospels that come from Jesus, only Gospels ABOUT jesus. 2) If you can find evidence for 1 what Laws did he bring? 3) if you find evidence for 1 and 2 show me where he contradicts his trinitarian teachings in the canonical gospels.

Again I do not mean to derail this thread or be argumentative for the sake of it. I am genuinely open to finding evidence to support the Qu'ranic account of Christ, but most Muslims handwave and say "corruption" and move on.

>>16511769
>That God allowed his word to be corrupt and we had to wait 600 years to find the truth again from an Arab prophet.
What islam (and the Bible too) argues for is the continual sending of Prophets, Messengers and Vicegerents throughout the whole history of mankind. Your statement is not exactly accurate since islam claims there were prophets after Jesus (pbuh) and before Muhammad (pbuhahf) who clarified the correct understanding of Jesus's a.s. teachings, until Muhammad came and made a new Covenant.
A similar situation happened when Jesus a.s. came to the Jews, because the Jews were holding so many different beliefs and were so astray from the correct religion of God swt that they sentenced their own Messiah a.s. to death. One could ask how did God allow His chosen people to be astray and to change the law in practice, and then wait so many years to send the truth again via a carpenter? The answer is He did not. He sent His swt Prophets to the children of Israel, but they were not listening.
>Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. - Matthew 21:43

>>16514830
>Muslims believe the Gospel was a collection of sayings of Jesus in Aramaic


Not him but Moses has a book of laws like Muhammad.
Jesus never had a book, unless Muslims will claim he wrote down a collection of his sayings.

>>16515057
>I believe an islamic messenger must bring new law
It's a fine point, the question is really whether or not Jesus changed any of the laws or what according to Islam is required to be considered messenger status, I'm sure it's quite easily sourced. I'm also certain that the law Jesus taught his followers is not the same law as the pharisees and saducees were teaching at the time. There are numerous examples of difference between Judaic law at the time of Jesus and what became Christian law, theologically speaking.

I'm not sure about abolishment of the letter of the law also being fulfillment of the spirit of the law. Also, we must refer to OP and the topic of this thread.

>>16511592
Thoughts on the work of Henri Lammens?


"Some Orientalists have alleged that it has been touched up in order to bring the language to the standard of perfection set by the pre-Islamic poets. In that case we must suppose that these purists in their revision have paid no attention to the extremely primitive rhymes of the most recent Suras and above all that they have passed over slight faults of grammar and style which it would have been so easy to rectify. (Qoran 20, 66: inna followed by a nominative; 49, 9, dual subject of a plural verb.) In 2, 106; 4, 40-41, the predicate is singular in the first clause of the sentence, and in the plural in the second although relating to the same grammatical subject. In 27, 61; 35, 25, passim, Allah speaks in the third person; then, without transition, in the first. Thus in 2, 172, the celebrated philologist Al-Mubarrad read al-barr instead of al-birr, in order to avoid this singular construction: ‘piety is he who...’ In spite of all this there is no occasion for surprise in the fact that the Qoran, especially the Medinese Suras with their more polished phrases, less interspersed with ellipses and anacolutha than the pre-Hijran ones, has served as the standard for fixing the rules of national grammar...

>>16515145
The editors of the ‘qirav’a mashhura’, or textus receptus, worked under the domination of a servile scrupulousness for tradition. Otherwise they would not have been able to resist the temptation to improve, by means of equivalents readily furnished by the lexicon, the poor rhymes terminating the verses. They would not have scattered broadcast through the collection, sometimes in the course of the same Sura, groups of verses which have a logical connection. They would have tried to delete or tone down the principal repetitions and tautologies which make its bulk unwieldy. Revision after the author's death would have modified the verses relating to Zainab (Qoran 33, 37), and brought into agreement the differing versions of the same prophetic legend. In the enumeration of the prophets it would have separated and distinguished between those of the Old and those of the New Testament, and such a re-editing would have brought consistency into the story of Abraham's relations with Ishmael and Isaac, which are completely dissimilar as related in the Mekkan or the Medinese Suras. In deciding what order to assign to the Suras a critical revision would at least have adopted some criticism less primitive than that of length. Above all, it would have cut out the most glaring anachronisms: the confusion between the two Marys (19, 22), between Haman, minister of King Ahasuerus, and the minister of Moses' Pharaoh (Qoran 28, 5-7, 38; 40, 38); the fusion into one of the legends of Gideon, Saul, David and Goliath (2, 250, etc.); the story of the Samaritan (sic)who is alleged to have made the Jews worship the golden calf (20, 87, etc.). The Qoranic Vulgate has respected all this, and left everything exactly as the editors found it."

>>16515062
These aren't threads for polemics or apologism which tends to very low quality posting. I'm not here to talk about "scientific miracles" or that sort of thing. If you want to start a thread in good faith on these points I will be happy to engage with every one and you can link it here

>>16515102
Mark 1:15, 8:35, Mark 19:29. In fact most verses in the Four Gospels referring to a Gospel are referring to something he brought. The Qur'an does not say he brought a whole new series of laws just that he reformed Mosaic law.

>>16515046
Ok fren, this is gonna take some time but i guarantee you it's worth it.
First you need to watch the last episodes of this docuseries. This is a link to the playlist starting from chapter 20, so going from 20 to 25 the main topic is the link between Christianity and Islam. The whole series is very worthwhile so you might be interested in watching it all.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvzXaB3X25A&list=PLlKt9qZtUhOA-qyqFM2pOxBrzsjMK3q7h&index=20
Then there is this chapter of a live show which discusses the narrative of the Passion of the Christ as it emerges if we consider the Biblical, Gnostic and Quranic accounts:
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMAKc2Dguck
And this is an episode of the same show discussing the matter of the Covenants (the concept is very similar to what you see as a condition for being a Rasul, which is bringing forth a new law), and why the Bible doesn't witness to Laws from Jesus a.s., though it does point out the fact that Jesus established a new Covenant during the Last Supper.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w0I1lTTm1E
I think these videos are enough to answer your question. Yes, it seems like a lot, but again, your question is very very difficult.

As an extra i would recommend you this other documentary discussing the islamic stance on Paul's books:
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSl9R4I3kyU

>>16515102
Not the guy who you relied to, but there exists no answer. Jesus was said to of brung a message, but he was never ‘given the Gospel’ as the Muslims say. The Gospels—even the theoretical Aramaic and Hebrew gospels that were never found—were written by people around Jesus’s earthly ministry, with specific theological importance placed on certain teachings of Jesus, while the other teachings and interpretations were written in other Gospels. Eventually, only 4 Gospels were chosen, which were believed by Christians to be ‘God breathed’ and inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Even if Muslims want to admit Mark, or Matthew; perhaps even Luke, all of them accept that Jesus is the Son of God given a mission to bring forth the kingdom of God on earth. Jesus was eventually crucified, and then resurrected. In John, it goes into rigorous theological rationale: Jesus is the Word of God who is God, who has incarnated in this world to give life and light to all who accept Him.

Such thing is uncomputable in the Muslim mind, albeit, scoffed at. Scholars have given incontrovertible evidence that the earliest followers of Jesus had a high Christology, even to the point where people like Paul was calling Jesus the equal of God.

The Trinitarian teaching was derived from close examination of the scriptures, Jewish tradition, and Greek philosophy. The doctrine of one God with one essence, consisting of 3 ‘persons’ is not a philosophical impossibility. Indeed, such an idea—a multi-personal God—was accepted by Jews before the 1st century. A good book about this is “Two Powers in Heaven” by Alan F. Segal.

The most prominent message of even the earliest branches of Christianity was Christ’s crucifixion under Pontius Pilate and consequential resurrection. Ironically, these are the two things Muslims deny about Jesus. It’s their loss, I suppose.

>>16511592
Salam OP,

I truly can't put into words how much I appreciate this effort of yours to explain the Quran and Islam on this board. This includes not only the threads you'll be making but also your thoughtful and informative responses to questions from non-Muslim anons. You seem quite knowledgeable, and I'll be looking forward to the coming threads.

May you be richly rewarded.

Sincerely,

>>16515145
>>16515148

>>16515235
>These aren't threads for polemics or apologism which tends to very low quality posting. I'm not here to talk about "scientific miracles" or that sort of thing. If you want to start a thread in good faith on these points I will be happy to engage with every one and you can link it here

>>16515109
>Muslims will claim
this is exactly what happens and why the two religions are indeed seperate religions, and trying to prove the Islamic view of Jesus by using sources outside of the Islamic exegesis is in all honesty the point where it is better to say that Allah knows best and will determine who is right and wrong on the day of judgment.

>>16515102
To be succint, I need only say that as a Muslim I believe without reservation in everything that Muhammad brought with him, and that whatever is in the Qur'an is the truth and Qur'an says there's a book called the Gospel (Injeel) so there must be.

As for the Laws it's answered here >>16515140 furthermore there are certain obvious things like dietary laws which are evidently different between Jews and Christians.

The actual word 'trinity' is not even once mentioned in the Bible, and Jesus says somewhere in there 'The Lord Our God, The Lord is One'.

>>16511767

You're both delusional retards who need religion as a crutch to understand the world, you are infants

>>16515246
Muslims don't deny Paul was a Trinitarian. We believe the Trinity was innovation. As for the atonement and incarnation theology and the crucifixion (or the meaningfulness of the lack therefore), I will cover that in the narrative and theology threads Insha'Allah

>>16515248
Salam, Jazak Allahu khayran

>>16515261
>The actual word 'trinity' is not even once mentioned in the Bible
Doesn’t matter. The word ‘tawhid’ isn’t mentioned in the Qur’an either.

>>16511592
>interpret this text according to the texts own begging
I AM GOING TO RAPE THE KORAN SO HARD

>>16511651
Islam is outdated and it’s teachings are dangerous and inhumane.

>>16515254
cop out post

>>16515281
Ok fair enough. Thoughts on Jesus saying that 'The Lord Our God, The Lord is One'?

>>16515276
>Muslims don't deny Paul was a Trinitarian.
I have certainly seen Muslims deny Paul was a Trinitarian, trying to say Trinitarianism was invented in the 3rd or 4th centuries. Something which is obviously incorrect, as many people wrote about Trinitarian doctrine centuries before such occurrences.
>We believe the Trinity was innovation.
Something I really don’t get whatsoever, a God consisting of Multiple persons is not something that should be disheartening to those who actually know what they’re talking about; however, I don’t even think the Qur’an knows what it’s talking about coming to Trinitarian doctrine, almost retorting that the doctrine is of Allah, Jesus, and Mary—not the Father, the Son, and Holy Spirit.

Nevertheless, it matters not. The Crucifixion and Resurrection narratives, or the lack of thereof in Islam, being addressed, is something I look forward to.

>>16515298
I believe it with every fibre of my being.

Let me ask you this question, what do you think “God is one” actually means? God is one book, God is one baseball, what?

>>16515300
I don't know if you are the person i replied to earlier, but the second link >>16515237 addresses just that.

>>16515327
I would rather not watch that. Do you have a written form of the information in the video?

>>16515309
Surah al-Ikhlas (Arberry translation)

Say: 'He is God, One, God, the Everlasting Refuge, who has not begotten, and has not been begotten, and equal to Him is not any one.'

>>16515300
>The glorious Triad, beyond being, beyond good and beyond divinity.
"Three persons." Why, dear anon? Please, next time, consider exposing the doctrine in its most appropriate way, tarnishing this abasing language.

>>16515332
This doesn’t exactly give me any meanwhile information. I agree that there is one God, but I need a refinement of a deceiving ‘rudimentary’ word.

What does ‘God does not beget, nor is begotten’ exactly mean?

Why didn't Arberry convert to Islam?

>>16515339
Consider, too, that you are in conversation with Muslims; haven't you read Damascene's words?

>>16515289
>>16515296

I'm not here to argue points that aren't pertinent to the thread. If you want to bring them up in the threads dealing with those topics in the series, Insha'Allah I will answer them. The primary purpose of this series is as an informative and to the Qur'an for people to whom it is totally alien. I am not here to argue for Islam. If you do want to ask questions or criticize the Qur'an then that is fine and I will answer as I can but keep them to the appropriate threads so things don't degenerate.

>>16515300
Yes many Muslims say the Trinity was introduced at Nicaea. This however is a belief they got more from contemporary secular scholars than classical Islamic scholars

>>16515339
“Three persons” is just a superficial translation of “three hypostases.” I don’t want to confuse anyone.

>>16515349
Most contemporary secular scholars believe that Trinitarian theology was derived before the council of Nicaea anyway. If you really want to see some scholars that actually believe that such doctrine WAS invented during that council, they would probably be the same people who believed Muhammad didn’t exist, that revisionist garbage and what not.

>>16515332
>>16511592
OP, may we discuss this surah?

>>16515344
I will cover all that in the theology thread Insha'Allah

>>16515345
Allah guides whom He will. But a scholar of Homer is probably not going to convert to Greek religion. By Arberry's time Islam was a foreign curiosity, something for the Shriners. Wasn't a threat in colonialism, terrorism, or immigration, the Ottomans were done. Despite it's big following (which was dwarfed by Christianity then) it was regarded as an interesting relic like Zorastrianism or Samaritanism

>>16515406
Sure.

Good but easy discussion. I gotta go now anyway, farewell.

Mashallah

>>16515384
>>16515368
Regardless, I'm not here to explain why some Muslims draw on secular anti Christian scholarship without closely inspecting it. That particular point has nothing to do with the Qur'an, Hadiths or premodern Muslim scholarship

>>16515384
Yes sure although I will note it wasn't revealed in response to Christians but pagans who thought minor deities were Allah's offspring. However it has come to be associated with Christianity by many, a direct counterpoint to the Nicene Creed, which is seen as evidence the Qur'an situational revelation doesn't change its eternal relevance. Everlasting Refuge here is used to translate a word meaning someone who provides and isn't provided for and on whom others depend but depends on none. The definite article here indicates He is "the" ṣamad (one of His names), that is distinguished from "a" ṣamad, normally a powerful leader who answers to no one and is independently wealthy and powerful, like a Bedouin tribal patriarch or a king who is no one's vassal. The word rhymes with "one" and "begotten" in Arabic.

>>16515497
>>16515384
And "the Everlasting Refuge" has phonetic similarity is that that the phrase "Allahu ṣ-ṣamad" also stresses the s (two "ss" with a brief break between them from the back of the mouth) then followed by a "snap" short syllable then one stretched and longed, this is mimicked in the natural English pronunciation of "laSSting re-fuuge"

>>16511592
وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاتو

>>16515551
How are you, brother?

>>16515551
مراحب اخي المسلم. اخذلك سجادة

>>16511592
thought this was the back of a special yugioh card or smthn

>>16515553
I'm fine alhamdulillah, and yourself are you well?
masha'Allah you are doing such things with these threads, I will support you as best I can insha'Allah
>>16515564
shukran habibi (thank you my dear)

I'm a native English speaker.

>>16515612
الحمدلله

Habibi technically means "my love" or "my beloved".

>>16515612
ما هذا؟ انت لا تتحدث العربية؟ وتنعت نفسك بل المسلم. مالاسف

>>16515634
I think it's implied but thank you
>>16515654
يمكنني استخدام تطبيقات المترجم بفعالية. أعتمد على إخواني في التفضل بتصحيح أي أخطاء

>>16515654
3/4 Muslims can't read or speak Arabic though it is obligatory to learn. Most practicing Islam doesn't require it but making the effort to acquire the language of the Qur'an is an obligation upon every Muslim. The point of these threads is mostly for non-Arabic speakers so trying to alienate them is counterproductive

>>16515786
لا تتحدث معي مجددا أيها الكافر الواطي

>>16515786
اقسم باسم اللة سوف أقطع قرقبتك وارمها للكلاب الضالة

Bump

Bump

OP, thanks for this effort-post. I have a few friends from work who are Muslim and I have wanted to learn more about the religion and culture for a while. The one I mostly talk to has given me her copy of the Quran that her mosque gives out; titled "The Clear Quran" and translated by a Dr. Mustafa Khattab.
I will await your threads and hope you continue. I feel like I still miss out with translation and the information you give will fill in the gaps

>>16517240
legacy.quran.com allows you to read any chapter and common translation

>>16515786
Most Muslims can "read" Arabic.

What does the Qur'an say about 4ch'an?

Thank you OP.
I am currently considering Islam and I appreciate this as a place to explore and ask questions.
I am mainly drawn to tawhid, which I feel is neglected in Christianity. I respect Jesus and his teachings but I have always felt like people immediately reneged on these and shifted their worship instead on Jesus himself.
And of course I value the few Sufi writings I have looked into immensely, but lacked the context.
I am afraid that from what I have seen of Islam people also are focusing too much on the personhood of Muhammad rather than his recitation.
I also am having a hard time understanding the importance of hadith when the Quran is supposed to be the complete and final revelation.
Is there any resources that could help me contextualize these?

>>16514471
>Jesus came to abolish the mosaic law not add to it.
Wrong. Paul was a liar and Jesus followed the law

>>16515287
The Koran is a fanfiction about Madoka/Homura and is berry nice.

>>16517463
Paul is a liar, and Jesus followed the law, but Jesus came for people who yearn to follow the law but cannot. Did Jesus come for unrighteous gentiles? NO. Did Jesus come for greeks? NO. Jesus came for mediocre Jews, bad Jews, samaritans, and righteous Gentiles. Only those attempting to follow the law does Jesus speak to.

Doubt me? Review Jesus' actions in the Canonicals with gentiles: he only deals with righteous Gentiles trying their best.

The typical group of the torah who Jesus would deal with would be "the multitude," of Egyptian non-Jews following in Israel's footsteps. Jesus came to raise them up to God, not to lower God to the place of the unrighteous gentile.

Also Saul was a fucking secret policeman whose mission was to destroy Jesus' message.

>>16517240
Insha'Allah

His translation is a bit politically correct, just so you know. For example on the resurrection the Qur'an says those who are virtuous will have faces turned white whereas the wicked will have faces turned black. Khattab translates this as bright and "gloomy" instead, presumably because someone might think it's racist, or something (despite the fact that Islam is really the only religion which explicitly says an Arab is not better than a non Arab and a white man not better than a black man). If your interest is cursory I don't see a problem but you might find some conflict over what I go over and what you read there as I'm not going to be dressing up the Qur'an in any way to be more palpable to American values, which are excessively sensitive sometimes anyway. Muslims in America in particular have had an anxiety since 9/11 to reconcile the Qur'an with American values, which it can't be although neither can the Bible if we're honest. I prefer to just be straightforward while at the same time acknowledging legitimate difference of opinion within classical thought.

>>16517414
Yes in the sense most English speakers can read Latin, but I mean understand.

>>16517446
I will cover all that in jurisprudence Insha'Allah. Hadiths are narrations of the wont (Sunnah) of Muhammad, the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. The Sunnah is a part of the religion as affirmed in the Qur'an. However what the Sunnah entails is not primarily found Hadiths according to all jurists (although all jurists use Hadiths, the criteria for using them vary, as does the role they play), this was a principle difference of opinion among early orthodox Muslim jurists (and still is) which I will cover Insha'Allah. It's pretty interesting

>>16517699
I am looking forward to the thread, friend.
I will continue reading the Quran in the meantime.
I also have the Very Short Introduction series on Muhammad that I am slowly reading.

Does the Qur'an disavow esotericism or indirect interpretations of the Qur'an? It appears the majority of Muslims seem to favor rejection of esoteric meaning in the text despite its very metaphorical language, i.e., "The Messiah is the Word of God and a Spirit from Him", "Your mother will be an abyss"

>>16517716
I will provide more sources on him in the narrative thread Insha'Allah which you can check out if you're interested.

>>16517770
Most Sufis favor esoteric readings but not as an alternative to the exoteric which they also affirm, rather as additional meaning. Besides then there is a range of opinion on that. The most anti- esoteric are the Zahiri (means Apperentist in Arabic, the "z" here is a poor transliteration of a sort of "th" pronounced from deep in the mouth), they favor an ultra strict textualism. The most famous proponent of this school was Ibn Hazm, who is generally considered a genius although eccentric in many of his opinions due to his inflexible approach. Modern adherents include men like al-Shawkani (who converted Yemen to Sunnism) and al-Albani (an Albanian who overhauled the grading of Hadiths). A Zahiri dynasty, the Almohads, proved much more pious than most Muslim dynasties but, as you might expect, much less tolerant as well. On the absolute other end of the spectrum are the Shia, who are a bit like Origen in their approach, Kashani's tafsir is a mainstream example. Part of this is because the dynasty that converted Persia to Shia, the Safavids, were Sufis, but more of it is because Shia emphasize spiritual leadership that is authoritative in interpretation by virtue of being invested with mystical knowledge which they see as taught by Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, to Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, and to his descendents. I will cover this in more detail in relevant threads Insha'Allah

>>16517770
When I was learning about Qur'anic exegesis there's some overt and some covert meanings. For example the verse about the boats being at anchor had a covert meaning which wasn't understood until continental drift was proven, it's to do with mountains having anchors, I'm sorry I forget which verse but I remember being taught about it and speaking about it with an Egyptian brother. So there was and still is a contextual overt explanation in the story and also a covert explanation which was unknown until the advancement of the sciences made it apparent.

Quran is one of the worst books I ever read.

>>16517699
>Islam is really the only religion which explicitly says an Arab is not better than a non Arab and a white man not better than a black man
Islam would've been so much more based as an Arab ethno-religion but no they had to become universalist cucks like the christians

>>16518891
Yes the scientific miracles approach, it's very popular nowadays but I'm not very much a fan of it as the esoteric verses are most often too ambiguous to be clearly referring to what they say they do and it seems arbitrary. A few examples are pretty good but mostly the very clear ones.

>>16519234
Islam faced huge opposition at the outset specifically because it went against tribal traditions and the original Muslims were referred to as a "hodgepodge" by the Quraysh as they were a motley mix of tribes and races. Right before the treaty of Hudaybiyyah, Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, was called a tribal traitor for this by a Quarayshi emissary who said the Muslims lacked blood unity and would buckle and flee when confronted by the full might of the Quraysh, the greatest of the Arab tribes. To the this, Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, said, "Go suck Lat's [the goddess the emissary worshipped] clitoris". The man was deeply offended and of course the Quraysh were conquered a couple of years later by the Muslims

>>16511592
It's 'whosoever believeth' not whosoever lives a good life, goes to church, gets baptized, turns from sin, etc. It's also once saved always saved because salvation does not depend on your works, it's eternal life as a free gift and you can't lose something that lasts forever. It's be called temporal life if it were possible to lose your salvation.

If you believe the gospel (pic related), ask Jesus to save you right now.

>>16519558
Why do you feel it is appropriate to be proselytising Christianity in a Qur'an aesthetics thread, anon?

>>16519234
There's a certain egalitarianism in Islam and if you're curious you can read up on Malcolm X. He was with the racist and heretical Nation of Islam until he went on hajj pilgrimage and he talked about that before he was murdered. It's quite well known.

There’s also this rather famous verse 13 from surah 49 al-Hujurat:

O mankind, We have created you male and female, and appointed you races and tribes, that you may know one another. Surely the noblest among you in the sight of God is the most godfearing of you. God is All-knowing, All-aware

>>16519234
It says God separated the world into nations and religions, so they wouldnt become a single nation. Also the Land of Abraham belongs to his descendants

>>16519364
>Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, said, "Go suck Lat's [the goddess the emissary worshipped] clitoris".
Wow.

>>16519364
>Abu Bakr
He did not mince words.
>Al-Bukhārī reports that ʿUmar – Allāh be pleased with him – came to the Black Stone (performing ṭawāf, circumambulation), kissed it, and said, “I know that you are a stone, you do not cause benefit or harm; and if it were not that I had seen Allāh’s Messenger – peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him – kiss you, I would never have kissed you.”

>>16511695
Islam doesn't deny that Jesus [pbuh] was the messiah. Islam also claims also that Jesus [pbuh] will return and they have a grave waiting for him next to Muhammed [pbuh].

I think many Christians are suffering from too much of an exclusivism. Yes, fair enough about what we believe. This doesn't mean that other God fearing people wont inherent the life of to come. we can't be dogmatic about things we only have faith in. Thats kind of against the point- the faith is about love one another, especially our enemies. Too much of a crusader mindset amongst- particularly- prots these days.
>>16511881
As I said above, its was prophesied by Isaiah [pbuh] that [7:14] that the messiah will be born of a virgin. This happened.
>>16511910
imo this would account for why he would say "why have You forsaken me" even though he thought he was going to be crucified as you can see from the prayers in Gethsemane.
>>16511974
Again, your being too dogmatic and fanatic. Jesus came to save sinners not the righteous, pious muslims are not and can not be described as Satanists. You could look at it another way and say some muslims commit atrocities but so do some Christians and jews. People are capable of evil when they have lost sight of what God wants from us- which is to love and have mercy on each other, walk in humility and love justice, but this notion of a separate evil entity called Satan is frankly blasphemous imo. If anything its just another angel of temptation that presents trials to test our faith in God. As long as people have faith in God I really don't think it matters exactly the details of that belief are, so long as they are essentially good, loving, merciful people.
>>16514471
Fulfill, not abolish. "Love your enemies and pray for them", Jesus teaching is an explanation of the heart of the mosaic law.
>>16514684
>Jesus does not bring a book, does not bring Law, and does not teach Tawheed.
Your looking at this too literally. The gospel in the sense of the news that the Kingdom of God is hear, now is the book, his life and deeds are the book, this the nature of the messiah. He brings the fulfilment of the law, its actual manifestation on earth, a pure expression of it as an example, in this sense he brings the law like he brings the gift of salvation. On tawheed, look at the Lord's prayer, thats tawheed all up and down.
>>16511592
Nice work OP, may Allah be pleased with you. Are you familiar with Dawood's translation? Any thoughts on his work? I thought it was good.

Anyone have good online Qur'an? I found tanzil.net has translations

>>16511685
cope
if a person is honestly seeking the truth, seeking God, what are you afraid of? Only an atheist or something with immense doubt & ignorance fears a thread like this

>>16511685
cope
if a person is honestly seeking the truth, seeking God, what are you afraid of? Only an atheist or someone with immense doubt & ignorance fears a thread like this

What do you guys think of translations by Orientalists? Thomas Cleary did some great work translating Daoist and Buddhist texts, he also has a Quran translation out.
The Qur'an: A New Translation
by Thomas Cleary, Michael Hatak, et al.

>>16515062
Pretty much this.
>t.ex muslim

>>16526546
OP makes a good argument for Arberry

>>16511592
OP, what do you think of the Abdullah Yusuf Ali translation. I've heard people say that the style is a bit difficult, although that's one of my favorite things about it. Also the footnotes. What do you think?

My family's Muslim, thank you for creating this thread OP

>>16511592
Kill yourself pooskin.

>>16515062
9/11 boomb

Al-Fatiha
In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate (1) Praise belongs to God, the Lord of all Being, (2) the All-merciful, the All-compassionate, (3) the Master of the Day of Doom. (4) Thee only we serve; to Thee alone we pray for succour. (5) Guide us in the straight path, (6) the path of those whom Thou hast blessed, not of those against whom Thou art wrathful, nor of those who are astray. (7)

>>16526612
Based fellow murtad.

>>16527200
>my family
so not you?