The Book Which is Most being read:Qur'an

[hasantas]

“Nobody read Bible!” Why? Because no original Gospel to read, but yet you use this Bible to try and benefit the Quran.

But the fact of the matter hasantas is that you have no proof to back up your claim.

I’ve said nothing about you using metaphorical use. I asked is"sister" in the Quran ever used metaphorically when speaking of relationships between people?
Its yes or no.
Saying “Mary should have had a brother whose name was Aaron” does not answer my question.
I’ve stated in previous comments how Mary does not have a brother. But in Quran it states Mary has a brother named Aaron and their father is named Imran. Which we know is not the case

You say Bible is most read which or more than Qur’an but that is not true. What I mean all Muslims read Qur’an in Arabic which every Muslims read same words. What I mean is just that “same words, same language”.

But for case of Bible. All Christians do not read same book. They read interpretation of same book and indeed what we call as bible is an interpretation of revelation of Jesus. Otherwise Bible even in that situation is sourced from revelation. So I can use to support faith and Qur’an.

It is said “sister of Aaron”. I think it is no metaphorical statement.

 

[SyroMalankara]

You say Bible is most read which or more than Qur’an but that is not true. What I mean all Muslims read Qur’an in Arabic which every Muslims read same words. What I mean is just that “same words, same language”.

But for case of Bible. All Christians do not read same book. They read interpretation of same book and indeed what we call as bible is an interpretation of revelation of Jesus. Otherwise Bible even in that situation is sourced from revelation. So I can use to support faith and Qur’an.

It is said “sister of Aaron”. I think it is no metaphorical statement.

Hasantas,

As it has already been said numerous times, what good is “reading” (more like vocalizing sounds with no understanding of its meaning) something with no context or meaning - especially as you and Islam already admits, you need a scholar to explain it to you?

Here’s a good example, read: “I saw a man on a hill with a telescope.” Now explain its meaning. There are myriad. Just reading does absolutely nothing for you to understand it. If this is what you think is a great feat of Muslims regarding the Quran, well, you are easily impressed.

 

[jimkhong]

If this is what you think is a great feat of Muslims regarding the Quran, well, you are easily impressed.

They are. Almost all of the evidence of the authenticity of the Quran (that it was written by God) is within the Quran itself - basically, the Quran is true because it says so. Maybe I have not looked hard enough, but I have only come across one instance of an external evidence for the authenticity of the Quran - that the language is so beautiful that it can only come from a divine hand.

Too easily impressed. Now, you go figure.

 

[JimmyDFG]

You say Bible is most read which or more than Qur’an but that is not true. What I mean all Muslims read Qur’an in Arabic which every Muslims read same words. What I mean is just that “same words, same language”.

But for case of Bible. All Christians do not read same book. They read interpretation of same book and indeed what we call as bible is an interpretation of revelation of Jesus. Otherwise Bible even in that situation is sourced from revelation. So I can use to support faith and Qur’an.

It is said “sister of Aaron”. I think it is no metaphorical statement.

“You say Bible is most read which or more than Qur’an but that is not true”
If this is not true, show me your proof to say other wise. Otherwise you want us to believe what you think.

What you are saying is the Quran in Arabic is the most read book? correct?
If so, what you’re doing is throwing out the number of times the Quran was read in other languages. Which decreases the number dramatically. Does the Quran in other languages not matter? Or does it have a different massage because its not in Arabic?

If you believe Mary( mother of Jesus ) had a brother named Aaron and a father named Imran. That would be an error on the Qurans part. In past comments I have proven this

 

[MartinJordan]

we call as bible is an interpretation of revelation of Jesus

So this means Islam has its official Bible. Yet you haven’t shown it except take the available Bible’s on the internet and quote verses left and right with no context.

MJ

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Nobody read Bible! Surprised?

Qur’an in Arabic is original revelation that came to Muhammad. All Muslims read Qur’an in Arabic. In that manner Qur’an is most read.

But Christians read not original Gospel but a translation or interpretation in native tongue. Yet there is no original Gospel to read so nobody read Gospel(revelation of Jesus).

“Is sister…” I did not say anything about metaphorical use. I know there are some statements in that way but Mary should have had a brother whose name were Aaron.

Original gospel was delivered orally to the apostles. So when its interpreted by the magisterium of the church he delivered it to(catholic) that is the original.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

You contradict Jesus in many ways. For instance Jesus never claimed to be God but you ascribe Jesus such thing.

Jesus forgave sins when only God could do that.
Jesus accepted worship just like God
Jesus claimed to be Lord of the sabbath when only God had that right.
Jesus said when you see him you see the Father
Jesus said i and the Father are one.

I know Islam wants to try and transform him into a ordinary prophet, but they cant because inspired scripture says otherwise

 

[MartinJordan]

Jesus forgave sins when only God could do that.
Jesus accepted worship just like God
Jesus claimed to be Lord of the sabbath when only God had that right.
Jesus said when you see him you see the Father
Jesus said i and the Father are one.

I know Islam wants to try and transform him into a ordinary prophet, but they cant because inspired scripture says otherwise

They can’t because most Muslims don’t think of Jesus that often to discern.

MJ

 

[hasantas]

Original gospel was delivered orally to the apostles. So when its interpreted by the magisterium of the church he delivered it to(catholic) that is the original.

So nobody can prove that original revelation could have been saved very correctly. Oral way is very likely to confused with myths.

 

[HolyCrusader007]

Qur’an is the book which is most being red. Espesially in nowadays of Ramadan Qur’an is being red in Mosques and homes. In Mosques Hafizs read and other Muslims listen to Qur’an. In Ramadan many Muslim try to read whole Qur’an in Ramadan. That is at least 20 pages per day. Here the fruit is that: People do not read but Qur’an make them to read. I mean it is charm of Qur’an which make people to read. That fascinating of Qur’an is sourced from pure revelation from God. Qur’an(pure words of God) foster moral heart and the mind. And it is also a bit musical. Qur’an teach how to pray and worship. Qur’an teach the moral laws. Qur’an teach or point all sciences. A child can memorize the whole Qur’an. etc. etc. And all those make Qur’an miraculous. Is there any book equal to Qur’an?

As a Catholic I deeply respect Islam. You ask is there any book equal to the Quran…well what do you think Muhammad would say?

Jesus teaches us to be kind to others. I believe Jesus would be against preaching superiority such as that the Bible is the greatest book of all time. I believe Jesus would want a Muslim and Christian to get along, and live as equals.

 

[JimmyDFG]

So nobody can prove that original revelation could have been saved very correctly. Oral way is very likely to confused with myths.

Isn’t that how the Quran and the hadiths were written?

 

[SyroMalankara]

Isn’t that how the Quran and the hadiths were written?

Also, where are the Islamic books that they claim are the original uncorrupted Torah, Gospels and New Testament? If you say our are corrupted and you agree with the uncorrupted one, present me the uncorrupted one you claim to follow.

 

[MartinJordan]

Also, where are the Islamic books that they claim are the original uncorrupted Torah, Gospels and New Testament? If you say our are corrupted and you agree with the uncorrupted one, present me the uncorrupted one you claim to follow.

He can’t. I’ve tried about 12 times. His Imam may have it.

MJ

 

[jimkhong]

He can’t. I’ve tried about 12 times. His Imam may have it.

MJ

Haha. Alternatively try asking any of the debating Muslims which verses of the Bible is uncorrupted and which one is corrupted. Do it before the debate starts. They don’t, can’t, and/or won’t but during the course of the debate (voila) they start quoting verses that support the Quran (presumably those are the ones that are uncorrupted) and they also suddenly remember which ones are corrupted. So, while they claim that some of the Bible is preserved uncorrupted and some have been altered by Christians and Jews, which ones are authentic and which ones are altered seems to be contextual - being dependent on the position required for that debate.

Remember the basis of Muslims (not Islam) that there is only one self-evident truth - that the Quran is true and is the sole benchmark of authenticity of any other religious scripture. So, where the Bible and Quran agree, the Bible would be authentic and since at least some parts of the Bible agree with the Quran, at least those parts are authentic, from God and copied from the Quran. But, where Bible and Quran conflicts no proof is required that the Bible is wrong as it is obvious the Bible then contains some falsifications altered by humans. But then how does something that comes before falsify something that comes after? So, a myth of an earlier uncorrupted Torah and Gospel emerged. But since that is the only hypothesis that fits the assertion that only the Quran is true, no proof is required to support this hypothesis.

That assertion that the Quran is true stands alone and need not be proven as it is self-evident. A lot of faith of Muslims is dependent on not questioning it, which to me is very unIslamic. Asking for some very fundamental proof of the Quran’s authenticity or anything else that threaten that narrative then becomes something sensitive and lays one open to allegations of Islamophobia. So, I would avoid being an Islamophobe and would just like to share some differences on the respective scriptures.

1 The Bible is written by a faith community over a period of two millennia, over which you can see how God guides that community into a fuller understanding of the faith and of himself. The Quran is written from the recollection of one man’s encounter with an angel, repeated to his companions over a period of 23 years, over which you can see how he develops as a person as he faces life challanges.

2 The Bible is written for a person, the individual Christian for whom the Bible is a means to enter into a personal relationship with the divine, guiding him/her in understanding him/herself and finding God’s personalised unique plans for his/her salvation. The Quran is written for a community as a manual with prescribed acts to be performed by everyone in that community for a standard path of salvation.

3 The Bible is authentic in all languages with understanding of the unwritten message being more important than memorisation of the actual words themselves. The Quran is authentic only in 7th century Arabic of the Qureshi dialect with memorisation of the actual words being praised rather than interpreting any unwritten message.

4 The Bible acknowledges its position in human history and can be proven by human history in its influence on human history and the influence of human history on it. The Quran denies its position in human history whatever the influence of human history is on its pages.

5 The Bible requires a lot of introspection to read as it explores a person faith, love, humility and the full gamut of human emotions and how those emotions relate to the scripture, God and the community. The Quran requires unquestioning acceptance of its message to carry out the injunctions contained within it, irrespective of what one’s personal opinions or feelings on the matter.

6 (this one is subjective so the language is less restrained) The Bible is a lot easier to read, following a flow and being organised into its respective groups of similar books as well as in a broadly chronological order, with narratives being complete stories in itself. The Quran is organised by length of books not following a chronological order and largely a collection of polemics and injunctions (Imagine reading the book of Proverbs with lots of angry proverbs ), to be read with presumptions of prior knowledge of stories referred within in with few complete stories, the main exception being the Surah of Maryam, written in a different style as it was lifted off a heretical Gospel.

While we are on the point of evidence, see this one more difference:

Jesus claimed to be divine and his claim to divinity is based on his resurrection. His resurrection was witnessed by over 500 people (1Cor 15:6).
Mohammad claimed to be a prophet and his claim to prophethood is based on his reception of the Quran from the angel as well as the Night Journey. How many other witnesses were there in either these events?

I often wonder that if Mohammad were to receive the Quran from the angel today, would his testimony be accepted in any Sharia court in the absence of the evidence of two other male (or four female) witnesses?

 

[BornInMarch]

Qur’an is the book which is most being red. Espesially in nowadays of Ramadan Qur’an is being red in Mosques and homes. In Mosques Hafizs read and other Muslims listen to Qur’an. In Ramadan many Muslim try to read whole Qur’an in Ramadan. That is at least 20 pages per day. Here the fruit is that: People do not read but Qur’an make them to read. I mean it is charm of Qur’an which make people to read. That fascinating of Qur’an is sourced from pure revelation from God. Qur’an(pure words of God) foster moral heart and the mind. And it is also a bit musical. Qur’an teach how to pray and worship. Qur’an teach the moral laws. Qur’an teach or point all sciences. A child can memorize the whole Qur’an. etc. etc. And all those make Qur’an miraculous. Is there any book equal to Qur’an?

But one problem is that Islam prohibits the translation of the Qur’an. While on one hand this is probably why there was never a Muslim Martin Luther or a Muslim Protestant Reformation, it does mean that learning an entirely new language is necessary.

Additionally, how do you determine how many people read a book? You could measure copies in circulation, but with the internet tens of thousands could read the same copy of the same book all at once.

In Christian Majority countries, some hotels leave free copies of The Bible in the nightstand. Do hotels in Muslim Majority countries do the same with the Qur’an?

 

[jimkhong]

In Christian Majority countries, some hotels leave free copies of The Bible in the nightstand. Do hotels in Muslim Majority countries do the same with the Qur’an?

Generally no. Hotels do show the kiblat, the direction of Mecca for prayers. I have seen only one hotel in my country with a Quran in the room. Plenty of hotels have Bible in the room, though. And this is a Muslim majority country with a very chauvinistic Muslim government.

I suspect it is because the way Muslims relate to their scriptures is very different from Christians. While Christians regularly read the Bible with introspective reflection, Muslims tend to read the Quran as a ritualistic act. So, it is more a communal thing for them than for us.

Also, fear of deviant interpretations makes the religious authorities in my country frown on free reading of the scriptures on one’s own without the guiding hand of an accredited ustaz. Many of the Friday sermons in mosques are pre-written by state religious departments. In such atmosphere, one wouldn’t expected unsupervised reading of the Quran for understanding (as opposed to for ritual) to be encouraged.

 

[MartinJordan]

Haha. Alternatively try asking any of the debating Muslims which verses of the Bible is uncorrupted and which one is corrupted. Do it before the debate starts. They don’t, can’t, and/or won’t but during the course of the debate (voila) they start quoting verses that support the Quran (presumably those are the ones that are uncorrupted) and they also suddenly remember which ones are corrupted.

Here it already goes downhill as far as I am concerned. If they remember the ones that are corrupted, where is the Islamic teaching that shows that these were corrupted? It’s only words and no back up with Islam literature that discussed the corruption citing the false Bible verses to compare the doctrines of the Quran of the subject in hand.

So, while they claim that some of the Bible is preserved uncorrupted and some have been altered by Christians and Jews, which ones are authentic and which ones are altered seems to be contextual - being dependent on the position required for that debate.

This is interesting. In Islam Jesus will return right? So, how could it be when Jews are bunched in with Christians when the former are still waiting for the messiah, who is not Jesus. (I understand in the Quran, Jesus is called Christ?). And Christians are awaiting the second coming of Jesus (which is in a way more closer to Islamic version of Jesus than Jews beliefs).

Remember the basis of Muslims (not Islam) that there is only one self-evident truth - that the Quran is true and is the sole benchmark of authenticity of any other religious scripture. So, where the Bible and Quran agree, the Bible would be authentic and since at least some parts of the Bible agree with the Quran, at least those parts are authentic, from God and copied from the Quran.

If verses agree, then where is the Islamic teaching/examination of these particular verses to verify they agree?

But, where Bible and Quran conflicts no proof is required that the Bible is wrong as it is obvious the Bible then contains some falsifications altered by humans. But then how does something that comes before falsify something that comes after? So, a myth of an earlier uncorrupted Torah and Gospel emerged. But since that is the only hypothesis that fits the assertion that only the Quran is true, no proof is required to support this hypothesis.

If no proof is required how do Muslims discern? Don’t they believe in prayer for discernment atleast?

MJ

 

[jimkhong]

This is interesting. In Islam Jesus will return right? So, how could it be when Jews are bunched in with Christians when the former are still waiting for the messiah, who is not Jesus. (I understand in the Quran, Jesus is called Christ?). And Christians are awaiting the second coming of Jesus (which is in a way more closer to Islamic version of Jesus than Jews beliefs).

Yes, Jesus is called called both Messiah and Christ but I don’t think they understand the terms is the same way that we do. While they fully accept Jesus as the Messiah, this is stripped of the divine connotations the term has in Christianity, they see Jesus first coming as the fulfillment of Jewish prophecies, but without the Christian concept of redeemer of souls. This could be due to the instructions Mohammad was believed to have received from Waraqa, an Ebionite whose teachings on Jesus (as Messiah among other teachings) were remarkably similar to Muslims. With his first coming, Jesus was given the title of al-Masih, and this is acknowledged in Muslim reference to Gregorian year numbers as Masihi years.

So, while Muslim idea of the Messiah is closer to Judaism than Christianity, the eschatology is closer to Christianity. Here there is a confusing point that there is another Messiah (al Mahdi) who will appear in the end days who will assist Jesus, who will rule on his own after the death of the Mahdi. This is the guy who is known as ‘redeemer of Islam’ and many have claimed the title of Mahdi - from the third Sunni caliph in 8th century until the IS guy today. (maybe my understanding here is deficient as to why there are two different Messiahs in Islam - would appreciate any help to understand).

In his second coming, Jesus’ role does not seem to be that of a Messiah but as a conquering hero - not unusually militaristic among Muslims since Mohammad was himself a military leader who personally led 27 expeditions (more like raids). Jesus will appear in a place east of Damascus where the Madhi will be fighting against the anti-Messiah (that’s why the IS guys are fighting so hard there as they think they are the Mahdi, paving the way for Jesus Second Coming. After killing the anti-Messiah, Jesus will reign for 40 years during which he will judge the living and the dead (Now interestingly, among the living and the dead would be Mohammad; so go figure who is greater - the one judging or the one judged). The difference with Mt25 is that the criteria is not what you did for the poor but whether you followed the Muslim precepts or not. After that, Jesus will die a natural death (Muslim belief is that he was substituted and did not die on the cross and then ascended into heaven).

Calling Jesus the Christ (Greek = ‘the anointed one’) is another Muslim misunderstanding as they take it as a a simple anointing of a prophet like David was anointed by Samuel. They do not realise that singling out someone as ‘the anointed’ among many anointed prophets imputes something different from other prophets. But here again we are talking about a people who are unused to anointing and do not anoint as part of their ritual. Can’t expect them to understand.

If verses agree, then where is the Islamic teaching/examination of these particular verses to verify they agree?

There is no single Islamic teaching as like the Catholic magisterium. I would say that they are closer in polity to pentecostalist churches where every pastor is independent and may or may not be affiliated with an association of churches of some sort.

So while there is generally some broad consensus on some matters (eg., that Christians have unwittingly/misguidedly/maliciously altered the singular Gospel that the prophet Jesus gave to them), there is no agreed consensus on which verse of the Bible has been altered. If a particular ustaz makes an assertion and it makes sense (and it always makes sense because there is usually no opposing view put forward), then everyone nods their head as another self evident proof of the superiority of the Quran.

Unfortunately some of these assertions are making their rounds on whatsapp and confusing our youths. So I usually do talks based on such video clips for our youths and once you do your research these assertions fall like a house of cards. Most of them misquote the Bible, misunderstand the context or just see only a reflection of Muslims in those passages.

If no proof is required how do Muslims discern? Don’t they believe in prayer for discernment atleast?

Sunni and Shia Islam is very straightforward - that’s what the Quran says about salvation and you just follow. Different schools of Islamic jurisprudence may have different interpretations of what the Quran means by a particular phrase and may use different collections of hadiths to back up their point but they all have the same idea any law must find its origin from the Quran for it to be valid.

So, no room for discernment other than trying to understanding the meaning of the 7th century Arabic used in the Quran. For those of you of legal training, this is like civil law as opposed to common law. If it is in the book, it is valid. If it is not, then it is not.

The exception is Sufi Islam, with its mystical brand of Islam. This then lends Sufism very handily to discernment, which (let’s face it) require some idea of the mystical for you to start discerning. Which is why Sufi Islam is much closer to other religions than other strands of Islam. Which is why some Sunnis hate them so much.

 

[JimmyDFG]

hasantas?

 

[MartinJordan]

Yes, Jesus is called called both Messiah and Christ but I don’t think they understand the terms is the same way that we do. While they fully accept Jesus as the Messiah, this is stripped of the divine connotations the term has in Christianity, they see Jesus first coming as the fulfillment of Jewish prophecies, but without the Christian concept of redeemer of souls. This could be due to the instructions Mohammad was believed to have received from Waraqa, an Ebionite whose teachings on Jesus (as Messiah among other teachings) were remarkably similar to Muslims. With his first coming, Jesus was given the title of al-Masih, and this is acknowledged in Muslim reference to Gregorian year numbers as Masihi years.

So, while Muslim idea of the Messiah is closer to Judaism than Christianity, the eschatology is closer to Christianity. Here there is a confusing point that there is another Messiah (al Mahdi) who will appear in the end days who will assist Jesus, who will rule on his own after the death of the Mahdi. This is the guy who is known as ‘redeemer of Islam’ and many have claimed the title of Mahdi - from the third Sunni caliph in 8th century until the IS guy today. (maybe my understanding here is deficient as to why there are two different Messiahs in Islam - would appreciate any help to understand).

In his second coming, Jesus’ role does not seem to be that of a Messiah but as a conquering hero - not unusually militaristic among Muslims since Mohammad was himself a military leader who personally led 27 expeditions (more like raids). Jesus will appear in a place east of Damascus where the Madhi will be fighting against the anti-Messiah (that’s why the IS guys are fighting so hard there as they think they are the Mahdi, paving the way for Jesus Second Coming. After killing the anti-Messiah, Jesus will reign for 40 years during which he will judge the living and the dead (Now interestingly, among the living and the dead would be Mohammad; so go figure who is greater - the one judging or the one judged). The difference with Mt25 is that the criteria is not what you did for the poor but whether you followed the Muslim precepts or not. After that, Jesus will die a natural death (Muslim belief is that he was substituted and did not die on the cross and then ascended into heaven).

Calling Jesus the Christ (Greek = ‘the anointed one’) is another Muslim misunderstanding as they take it as a a simple anointing of a prophet like David was anointed by Samuel. They do not realise that singling out someone as ‘the anointed’ among many anointed prophets imputes something different from other prophets. But here again we are talking about a people who are unused to anointing and do not anoint as part of their ritual. Can’t expect them to understand.

There is no single Islamic teaching as like the Catholic magisterium. I would say that they are closer in polity to pentecostalist churches where every pastor is independent and may or may not be affiliated with an association of churches of some sort.

So while there is generally some broad consensus on some matters (eg., that Christians have unwittingly/misguidedly/maliciously altered the singular Gospel that the prophet Jesus gave to them), there is no agreed consensus on which verse of the Bible has been altered. If a particular ustaz makes an assertion and it makes sense (and it always makes sense because there is usually no opposing view put forward), then everyone nods their head as another self evident proof of the superiority of the Quran.

Unfortunately some of these assertions are making their rounds on whatsapp and confusing our youths. So I usually do talks based on such video clips for our youths and once you do your research these assertions fall like a house of cards. Most of them misquote the Bible, misunderstand the context or just see only a reflection of Muslims in those passages.

Sunni and Shia Islam is very straightforward - that’s what the Quran says about salvation and you just follow. Different schools of Islamic jurisprudence may have different interpretations of what the Quran means by a particular phrase and may use different collections of hadiths to back up their point but they all have the same idea any law must find its origin from the Quran for it to be valid.

So, no room for discernment other than trying to understanding the meaning of the 7th century Arabic used in the Quran. For those of you of legal training, this is like civil law as opposed to common law. If it is in the book, it is valid. If it is not, then it is not.

The exception is Sufi Islam, with its mystical brand of Islam. This then lends Sufism very handily to discernment, which (let’s face it) require some idea of the mystical for you to start discerning. Which is why Sufi Islam is much closer to other religions than other strands of Islam. Which is why some Sunnis hate them so much.

Thanks Jim.

MJ