The reliability of Christian and Muslim texts compared

Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
2,024
It's better that poor souls enlighten up, rather than stay in the dark.
Are you not aware that the important thing to realize about true enlightenment is that when it occurs it will seem like a big joke? It’s the ego that makes plans for enlightenment and imagines it as some type of achievement. :)
 
Last edited:

elsbet

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
5,122
I literally stated in that link "bliss, ecstasy, transcendence, union with God" etc. It's not a "place", it's a state after death.

There's heaven and hell, you know the rest.
The linked, standard-issue response to every inquiry.

I still don't believe that it's symbolic though. It sounds like the kind of debauchery that might appeal to adolescent boys or young men with families, all likely of fighting age... a good tool for recruitment.

But it is consistent with everything else I've learned about Islam and the quran (+multiple hadith), so far. .. specifically, it has a different author.


Jo i want to be told why your version of Paradise is better than ours and how it is non material. You can surely answer that question without making us look through the Bible.
lol ... noted

Because all i see in these verses is that people will meet their God, which is something that we will get along with all those other things.
The religion of Comparisons. :p

It isn't about better or worse, at this point, so much as Islam's stark contrast to the Abrahamic faiths. We "only" get to meet our God, as you've said, whereas you get to what... party? If that is what suits you, good. It's a non-issue, afaic... but you cannot say the quran speaks of our God, because it clearly does not. There is no comparison.
 

JoChris

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,168
Frustrations are clearly growing so guys let's keep it polite. I myself grew tired of JoChris' tone and snapped so I do apologise for my conduct in that regard.

I think the Christians need to understand that the muslim mind won't accept faith or sheer belief as an answer or response to some of the issues posed. We need clarity and when something doesn't make sense to us, it's not that we are playing religion wars or holding christianity in contempt, we are actually trying to make sense of what you believe. I'm sure Christians themselves would be the first to admit that there are challenging concepts (as in challenging our intellect and logic) to grapple with and a lot of ambiguous and abstract ideas which people are just expected to understand and accept.
You need to be able to explain your faith and apparent contradictions in the bible with clarity or else you wont have a leg to stand on when discussing.
I was expressing my disappointment because you are one of the non-Christian regulars on this forum I have respect for. For those who have been blessed with a good education like yourself I do expect higher standards of comments. (That is a compliment, honestly.)
 

elsbet

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
5,122
And that kind of misunderstanding will only lead you to error. Failing to understand it results is trash like the rest of your comment.
Nonsense. We both know that. :)


I know the entire story, that is not the point.

The point is that if the Moses one is taken to be "not literal" why is the verse about Jesus taken literally?
King James onlyist? I marvel.

Still... the text does not permit your version-- even out of context, as you've quoted it. You're reading it incorrectly.

HINT: In English, the first letter of proper names are capitalized.​
EXODUS 7:1
And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.​
'god' translated from the Hebrew-->​
... elohim to Pharaoh [אֱלהִים]
(meaning: godlike)​

EXODUS 7:5
And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD...
'LORD' translated from the Hebrew--> ... the Egyptians shall know I am JEHOVAH [יְהוָֹה]
(meaning: Proper name of God)​

For the benefit of others, it reads like this, in context:
And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.​
Thou shalt speak all that I command thee: and Aaron thy brother shall speak unto Pharaoh, that he send the children of Israel out of his land.​
And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt.​
But Pharaoh shall not hearken unto you, that I may lay my hand upon Egypt, and bring forth mine armies, and my people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great judgments.​
And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I stretch forth mine hand upon Egypt, and bring out the children of Israel from among them.​
And Moses and Aaron did as the LORD commanded them, so did they. LINK
EXODUS 7:1-6

Its pretty simple to understand.

I've linked the page with the other translations, including the literal, and the interlinear with the original Hebrew.
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,622
Nonsense. We both know that. :)
Yes, we both know you lack the intelligence to understand what symbolism is. It's not your fault, you were probably born that way.
However you can ask for help and we can walk you through what the concept of an 'allegory' is. Just ask, you might learn something.
Heaven is not a place, it's not physical. You'd have to be delusional to think it was, or that any of it's descriptions were literal.
If it was literal then it would be basically like reincarnating in only a slightly more favorable realm.
It's clearly something far beyond anything we can possibly conceive of. It can only be understood through symbols we associate with pleasure, as God is the greatest pleasure there is, as the source of all existence.

Your insistence to completely ignore the Orthodox Muslim understanding is on you, not on Islam, the Qur'an or the Prophet. :)
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,622
Inevitably you look like an idiot when you go taking symbolism for what the symbol represents and conveys. In the case of the afterlife in Islam, just like in the Bible and in many other religions likewise, cannot be conveyed in language - hence why even the Qur'an itself refers to them as allegories. The afterlife, whether heaven or hell, is a state that can only something experienced, not described.
 

Axl888

Established
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
413
Continuing and concluding the overview of Dan’s Brubaker’s initial publication then:-

“These last two examples of corrections concern coverings, where someone at a later date covered over a portion of the text with a small piece of paper, or parchment, and either left it covered over and blank, or wrote something else over top of it. This, like the erasures, is one of the most obvious examples of correcting a text, proving intentional human intervention.

Correction Addendum 1: Here we have an example of 8 coverings in the Hussaini Cairo Mushaf (Cairo Mushaf al-Sharif, fol. 33v.) in Surah 2:191-193. Let’s go through each of the 8. These are coverings which were left blank. At first Daniel thought they were covered to patch up some damage to the manuscript, but there were no damages on the reverse side. So, it looks like they were intentionally censoring the text eight times.

In the first line all but the first three letters of wa-akhrijuhūm min ḥaythu “drive them out from wherever” of Q2:191 have been covered. In line 5 all but the first two and the last two letters of fa-in-qātalūhum “so if you fight to kill them” of Q2:191 have been covered. In line 6 all but the first five letters of faaqtulūkum kadhālika “then kill them (imper.), such” of Q2:191 have been covered. In line 7 all but the last five letters of fa-inintahaū “and if they desist” of Q2:192 have been covered. In line 8 the first three letters of ghafūr “forgiving”, and the last three letters of رحيم rahīm “merciful” of Q2:192 have been covered. In line 10 all but the first letter of al-dīn li-llah “the religion belongs to Allah” of Q2:193 has been covered. In line 11 all but the last letter of udwān “enmity” of Q2:193 has been covered. And finally, in line 12 the final two letters of bi-l-shahr “in the month” of Q2:193 have been covered.

Correction Addendum 1: In this final example of a correction we find 3 instances of coverings, which were then written over top, in Surah 13:11-12, found in the Hussaini Cairo Mushaf (Cairo Mushaf al-sharif, fol. 430r.).

On the first line pictured, all but the first two letters of بانفسهم bi-anfusihim “in themselves” of Q13:11 has been written over top of such a taping. One can easily see the covering, while the word written over top has a thicker nib, with darker ink, and uses a completely different script with an elongated style of writing.

On the second-to-last line pictured, all but the initial ʾalif of يركمالذى alladhi yurikum “he who shows you” of Q13:12 has similarly been written over top of a taping and is rather elongated. The stretching is not unusual in this manuscript, but it is more pronounced in this spot than is standard for the original scribe. Instead of an entire sentence a later scribe has simply written a few letters and elongated the letters in order to fill the resulting gap.

It is notable that one letter is missing when compared with the 1924 ‘Hafs’ Cairo edition, which has an additional yaʾ between the raʾ and the kaf, ىِذلآمُيكِرُي

On the final line, the وطمعا wa-ṭamaʿā “and hope” of Q13:12 has also been written over a taping, which covered a sentence, but then was replaced with just a few letters, elongated once again.

In all three cases we cannot know what was initially written, but we can see that the new corrections over top all correspond with the ’Hafs’ Caireen 1924 text. Al Fadi wonders whether these coverings were added after 1924, since this manuscript resides in Cairo itself, the very city where the Hafs text was chosen.

In conclusion we can say that these are not examples of Ahruf or Qira’at, which are simply different readings, because those require diacritical marks and vowels, which weren’t even invented when these manuscripts were written.

These corrections are all made with consonantal letters (the Rasm) which anyone can then add their own readings by reciting the text orally (i.e. adding their own vowels, depending on their dialect).

In these 9 episodes Jay and Al Fadi have pretty much destroyed all of the 4 claims Muslims make for their Qur’an. No longer can Muslims claim that the Qur’an is eternal, nor sent down to Muhammad, nor complete at the time of Uthman, nor unchanged in the last 1400 years. These episodes, following just 22 examples of over 4,000 now discovered by Dr Brubaker, clearly suggest that the Qur’an was written by men, corrected and changed by yet other men, and then finally canonized just 85 years ago by still other men.

When we compare the Qur’an with the Bible, we find that the Qur’an begins with thousands of differences, which need to be corrected to one final text in 1924. When we look at the Bible, we find that the differences in it are found much later, but by comparing all 24,000 manuscripts we can know what the original text was, which makes the Bible much better preserved, and much more credible historically than the Qur’an.”

@Red Sky at Morning

I hear the crickets responding to this bro :)
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
13,932
it says the souls of martyrs are in green birds (before judgment day). so after judgment day is over, the martyrs will enter paradise in person not just their souls.
Thank you for the clarification! I did think it sounded a bit odd!!
 
Last edited:

manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,827
Nonsense. We both know that. :)



King James onlyist? I marvel.

Still... the text does not permit your version-- even out of context, as you've quoted it. You're reading it incorrectly.

HINT: In English, the first letter of proper names are capitalized.​


EXODUS 7:1

And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.​


'god' translated from the Hebrew-->​

... elohim to Pharaoh [אֱלהִים]

(meaning: godlike)​

EXODUS 7:5

And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD...


'LORD' translated from the Hebrew--> ... the Egyptians shall know I am JEHOVAH [יְהוָֹה]

(meaning: Proper name of God)​

For the benefit of others, it reads like this, in context:

And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.​


Thou shalt speak all that I command thee: and Aaron thy brother shall speak unto Pharaoh, that he send the children of Israel out of his land.​


And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt.​


But Pharaoh shall not hearken unto you, that I may lay my hand upon Egypt, and bring forth mine armies, and my people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great judgments.​


And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I stretch forth mine hand upon Egypt, and bring out the children of Israel from among them.​


And Moses and Aaron did as the LORD commanded them, so did they. LINK

EXODUS 7:1-6

Its pretty simple to understand.

I've linked the page with the other translations, including the literal, and the interlinear with the original Hebrew.
Capital and small texts exist in hebrew or Aramaic? How do i know this isn't an addition?

And no i'm not a KJV "onlyist" but the person i was talking to, explained to me that in their opinion that is the most accurate text and ofcourse i'd quote what they consider to be accurate.

The religion of Comparisons. :p

It isn't about better or worse, at this point, so much as Islam's stark contrast to the Abrahamic faiths. We "only" get to meet our God, as you've said, whereas you get to what... party? If that is what suits you, good. It's a non-issue, afaic... but you cannot say the quran speaks of our God, because it clearly does not. There is no comparison.
Nobody talked to you elsbet.

Nobody made it a comparison, Jo did. You can't call something "materialistic" and then not show us "non materialistic". You can't say you'll live with God in paradise and then not even be able to explain whether its a literal place or state of being.

Don't quote me halfway through the thread about something you didn't bother reading the context of.
 

manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,827
@Red Sky at Morning

I hear the crickets responding to this bro :)
One more time I hear "Elongation" or "Stretching" i'm going to go insane.


This is what stretching looks like. Did the meaning change? No. Did the words change? No. What changed? The handwriting.
bismillah-tatweel-KFGQPC_3615.gif

Example of elongated text with vowel symbols.

500_F_170530413_MIoNAa3Cd2QwaBNZC4Pmrj0kpMxsFBQS.jpg
240_F_126756225_huylqA3vhGquS66JupW5IsHW7QfN33Ta.jpg


Did the words change? No. Meaning change? No.

You can literally stretch arabic words into oblivion and nothing would change. Its just how arabic script works.
 

Haich

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,650
One more time I hear "Elongation" or "Stretching" i'm going to go insane.


This is what stretching looks like. Did the meaning change? No. Did the words change? No. What changed? The handwriting.
View attachment 25473

Example of elongated text with vowel symbols.

View attachment 25474
View attachment 25475


Did the words change? No. Meaning change? No.

You can literally stretch arabic words into oblivion and nothing would change. Its just how arabic script works.
This was explained on Red's thread, they still don't get it lol
 

Haich

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,650
So I asked a while back what Christain heaven is like...

Anyone care to break it down?
 

elsbet

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
5,122
Inevitably you look like an idiot when you go taking symbolism for what the symbol represents and conveys. In the case of the afterlife in Islam, just like in the Bible and in many other religions likewise, cannot be conveyed in language - hence why even the Qur'an itself refers to them as allegories. The afterlife, whether heaven or hell, is a state that can only something experienced, not described.
Another post to continue with the personal insults because I'm not buying into the symbolism nonsense.

Duly noted.

Look... even if your symbolism idea had any merit, it wouldn't change the fact that the material is utterly unlike anything found in the Abrahamic faiths, regarding the afterlife. It has a different author. Its very similar to the author of the hindu or hare krishna texts, though.
 

Axl888

Established
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
413
One more time I hear "Elongation" or "Stretching" i'm going to go insane.


This is what stretching looks like. Did the meaning change? No. Did the words change? No. What changed? The handwriting.
View attachment 25473

Example of elongated text with vowel symbols.

View attachment 25474
View attachment 25475


Did the words change? No. Meaning change? No.

You can literally stretch arabic words into oblivion and nothing would change. Its just how arabic script works.
How about the covering and the writing on top of it? What can you say about that?

“These last two examples of corrections concern coverings, where someone at a later date covered over a portion of the text with a small piece of paper, or parchment, and either left it covered over and blank, or wrote something else over top of it. This, like the erasures, is one of the most obvious examples of correcting a text, proving intentional human intervention."
 

elsbet

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
5,122
Capital and small texts exist in hebrew or Aramaic? How do i know this isn't an addition?
Who said anything about that?
I'm floored that it doesn't bother you, the way you lie to "prove" your religion is 'good.' You seem blind to the obvious conflict.

The text still does not permit your version-- even out of context, as you've quoted it. You're reading it incorrectly.​
HINT: In English, the first letter of proper names are capitalized.​


And no i'm not a KJV "onlyist" but the person i was talking to, explained to me that in their opinion that is the most accurate text and ofcourse i'd quote what they consider to be accurate.

Nobody talked to you elsbet.

Nobody made it a comparison, Jo did. You can't call something "materialistic" and then not show us "non materialistic". You can't say you'll live with God in paradise and then not even be able to explain whether its a literal place or state of being.
It is always a comparison-- Islam is built on them.

@JoChris still waiting for you to come up with a better paradise.
That's all you. ^^^
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,622
Another post to continue with the personal insults because I'm not buying into the symbolism nonsense.
No, it's that you yourself are preaching to me falsely what our doctrine is and I don't play lightly. Most people don't appreciate someone else lying about what they believe.

For them is a penalty in the life of this world, but harder, truly, is the penalty of the Hereafter: and defender have they none against Allah. The parable of the Garden which the righteous are promised!- beneath it flow rivers: perpetual is the enjoyment thereof and the shade therein: such is the end of the Righteous; and the end of Unbelievers in the Fire.
Qur'an, Surah 13:34-35

For them will be Gardens of Eternity; beneath them rivers will flow; they will be adorned therein with bracelets of gold, and they will wear green garments of fine silk and heavy brocade: They will recline therein on raised thrones. How good the recompense! How beautiful a couch to recline on! Set forth to them the parable of two men: for one of them We provided two gardens of grape-vines and surrounded them with date palms; in between the two We placed corn-fields. Each of those gardens brought forth its produce, and failed not in the least therein: in the midst of them We caused a river to flow. (Abundant) was the produce this man had : he said to his companion, in the course of a mutual argument: "more wealth have I than you, and more honour and power in (my following of) men."
Qur'an, Surah 18:31-34

Verily Allah doth know of (every thing) whatever that they call upon besides Him: and He is Exalted (in power), Wise. And such are the Parables We set forth for mankind, but only those understand them who have knowledge. Allah created the heavens and the earth in true (proportions): verily in that is a Sign for those who believe.
Qur'an, Surah 29:42-44

Those before them (also) rejected (revelation), and so the Punishment came to them from directions they did not perceive. So Allah gave them a taste of humiliation in the present life, but greater is the punishment of the Hereafter, if they only knew! We have put forth for men, in this Qur'an every kind of Parable, in order that they may receive admonition.
Qur'an, Surah 39:25-27

Is then one who is on a clear (Path) from his Lord, no better than one to whom the evil of his conduct seems pleasing, and such as follow their own lusts?
(Here is) a Parable of the Garden which the righteous are promised: in it are rivers of water incorruptible; rivers of milk of which the taste never changes; rivers of wine, a joy to those who drink; and rivers of honey pure and clear. In it there are for them all kinds of fruits; and Grace from their Lord. (Can those in such Bliss) be compared to such as shall dwell for ever in the Fire, and be given, to drink, boiling water, so that it cuts up their bowels (to pieces)?
And among them are men who listen to thee, but in the end, when they go out from thee, they say to those who have received Knowledge, "What is it he said just then?" Such are men whose hearts Allah has sealed, and who follow their own lusts.

Qur'an, Surah 47:14-16

Look... even if your symbolism idea had any merit, it wouldn't change the fact that the material is utterly unlike anything found in the Abrahamic faiths
How so?

Aside from the fact that each Abrahamic tradition has multiple interpretations of the symbolism given to the afterlife, whether "heaven" or "hell", the symbolism has tendencies of repetition.

The most heavily reoccurring symbol for Jannah (heaven) all throughout the Qur'an is "Gardens beneath which rivers flow", not orgies with 1 million virgins taped on live TV.
Judaism varies between saying that 'heaven' is the Garden of Eden (symbolically mirroring Islam there), to the vague term 'HaOlam HaBa" (the world to come) which doesn't describe anything except anticipation, and then there is also the more radical Jewish belief in reincarnation.

Christianity in this regard literally has no solid interpretation of what any of it's symbolism means, and it shows. However the symbolic representations are very much concerned with symbols like the throne, the 'new jerusalem', references also to the Garden of Eden (notice the trend there?), streets of gold and mansions (which the Qur'an actually does mention in one ayat).

To take obvious symbolism literally in place of what the symbol represents, even when told by the text itself not to, is just ignorance.

Call it a personal insult but you are the one here refusing to engage in polite conversion.

Its very similar to the author of the hindu or hare krishna texts, though.
How much Hindu texts have you actually read? I'm intrigued you bring it up. While Hinduism is in fact, generally an idol-worshiping tradition of religions, it does stand to fact that most of their texts are indeed interpreted far far far more symbolically than any Abrahamic texts. They very much embody in an extreme way the Islamic notion of "it is the meaning that is where the salvation lies, not the outer shell of names and symbols".
Hinduism is far more extreme than our Abrahamic tradition for this reason and it has certainly done them well.
 
Last edited:

Axl888

Established
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
413
Writing on top means that the writer noted something. for example in Ayesha's manuscript there is a word (ala'sr) added on top of the word (al wosta) which is a note, an explanation or meaning of the word (al wosta).
the (al wosta) prayer means the Asr prayer (afternoon prayer). so Ayesha added the explanation of that word.
I believe what they are saying is that someone covered the the previous text (or portion of it) with a piece of paper or parchment and either left it blank or wrote new text over the piece of paper or parchment...implying that the real purpose was to change the text, and not to present an explanation (as you claim it to be).
 
Top