The Qur'an

pbaldy said:
Adam, I'm wondering how your priest/preacher/God would feel about your calling people names. Not favorably I'm guessing. You can treat people with respect even if you disagree with them.
Click to expand...

I've always been a bit conflicted on this. (Ok, not conflicted on this specific situation, but more broadly).
Jesus did a fair amount of insulting, when He was particularly indignant. (i.e. calling people you cheating snakes, fools, etc - which I believe can be fairly compared with a modern day verbiage of just calling somebody an a-hole or a moron)
On the other hand, much of the new testament affirms the expectation that we will love people with the love of Christ (which sometimes focused more on correction, sometimes more on forgiveness, depending - the Holy Spirit guides us I think in these situations).
Then again, it is my personal opinion that the majority of the times in the Bible where we are called to love others is actually referring to other believers. Don't anyone jump on me too hard for that, it doesn't mean I'm saying we should hate unbelievers, I just read the verses and they clearly seem to be talking about within the church - in fact many of them say "each other" or "one another" which quite LITERALLY means one another of you - not others. I do think there is some value in recognizing this (perhaps controversial) interpretation, though ... It would free us up to realize that we most definitely can engage with [society, government, conversations] on an assertive level [when we think it's truly the right thing to do], rather than if we had a super-vague definition of Love (like the secular world does) which basically means to never offend anyone.

Now pbaldy forgive me please in advance, as I'm not actually disagreeing with you, it just made me think of a halfway-related thing that's often occurred to me when reading the Bible and figured I'd bring it up.
 
conception_native_0123 said:
oh, and to add to that....Christ is king of king, and lord of lords. The Qu'ran doesn't mean shit. and richard, stay out of this one, huh? I read that you gave up anyway.
Click to expand...
By the way, how many different ways to spell the Q'uran are there ??
 
Isaac said:
By the way, how many different ways to spell the Q'uran are there ??
Click to expand...
ya know Isaac, since it doesn't mean anything to me, I never considered finding out. Do you want to know? I COULD put some effort in for a stand-up guy like you.
 
Isaac said:
pbaldy forgive me please in advance
Click to expand...

You got it. ;)

I unsubscribed after Adam answered and will again after posting this, so forgive me for that. :p

I probably fall into the "spiritual but not religious" camp. I don't believe any of the books are "divine", they're written by people trying to understand the unknowable. I simply try to live my life by treating others the way I wish to be treated. I don't criticize others for believing otherwise. If believing gives them peace, great.
 
pbaldy said:
You got it. ;)

I unsubscribed after Adam answered and will again after posting this, so forgive me for that. :p

I probably fall into the "spiritual but not religious" camp. I don't believe any of the books are "divine", they're written by people trying to understand the unknowable. I simply try to live my life by treating others the way I wish to be treated. I don't criticize others for believing otherwise. If believing gives them peace, great.
Click to expand...
Fair enough!Fair enough!
 
The problem with figuring out the correct spelling of the Quran is that we REALLY are looking for the correct transliteration of the title "Quran." And it is published in many different Aramaic-rooted languages, which means the transliteration rules differ from one language to the next. Further complicated by some of those languages having multi-valued letter equivalents.

I'm content with the fact that when I wrote "Quran" that Aziz didn't accuse me of maliciously misspelling the name.
 
The_Doc_Man said:
The problem with figuring out the correct spelling of the Quran is that we REALLY are looking for the correct transliteration of the title "Quran."
Click to expand...
Plus there are multiple versions of Arabic with variations on whether short sounds are written. These differences may be carried over and the short sounds are sometimes left out in the translations too. I think maybe that is why apostrophes are used a lot.
 
Wow you guys know a lot about Arabic. I'm glad I asked, learned something new
 
Part of the problem also includes that ancient Hebrew and other languages from that part of the world didn't always include vowel sounds. When you look at a Hebrew type font, you are looking at mostly consonants. Vowel sounds in ancient Hebrew were sometimes omitted as a form of code. When vowel sounds were included, they were written as diacritical marks over or under the letters. AND some consonants have variant pronunciations as well.

From Quora: Modern Hebrew does have vowels, but they are not always represented as distinct letters in the written language. In traditional Hebrew script, only the consonants are represented, while the vowels are indicated by diacritical marks called "nikkud." However, in everyday writing, these vowel markings are often omitted, and readers rely on context and familiarity with the language to supply the vowel sounds. This is similar to other Semitic languages like Arabic, where the consonantal script is used with diacritics to indicate vowels.
Click to expand...
 
Brain Freeze alert, that's a lot of 5 dollar words to learn.

Sounds like a hard language to learn. (English is among the hard languages to learn - I've finally conceded after having dozens and dozens of foreigners assure me of that - its low adherence rate to Rules compared with languages like Spanish makes it require enormous amounts of memorization other languages don't........And the incredibly slight, so slight as to be unnoticeable to more foreigners' ears, vowel differences, are laughable to them and I can see their point.)
 
@Isaac
This is beginning to deviate from the thread, though some of us apparently believe Aziz has beat this horse to death already.

However, the problem with English and those subtle vowel differences is that our English language has a LOT of borrowed words that come from many different source languages. THEN on top of that, we have regional pronunciations. Compare, for example, the accents of Boston and Kansas City and Dallas and Lafayette (Louisiana). THEN add to that the presence of cultural variations such as inner city dialects vs. rural dialects vs. downtown accents. I'm surprised we USA citizens can understand each other from more than about five states away.
 
The_Doc_Man said:
No, I categorically did not.
Click to expand...

You indicated that the knowledge (that is microscopic in nature) was known at the time due to animal husbandry, so you are the one who is disingenuous and LYING. Please STOP LYING.
 
Uncle Gizmo said:
The "Word of God* written
Click to expand...
The sister is correct in what she is saying. The other person is playing games. Who put the words on paper is immaterial. The words themselves are the speech of God, just as the earlier Scriptures were.

The Qur'an is the word of God passed to Gabriel (peace be upon him) who then passed it on to Muhammad (peace be upon him) who then passed it to one of his many scribes who transferred it to whatever material was available.

The man in the video is simply playing games and only the gullible get taken in so easily :)
 
Last edited:
aziz rasul said:
The words themselves are the speech of God, just as the earlier Scriptures were.
Click to expand...
All the scriptures are nothing more sophisticated than the personal prejudices of the delusional people who imagined their hallucinations were communications from a supernatural being. In short, these people were mentally ill.

Every year at Ramadan, Muslims try to recreate the mental illness in themselves through dehydration.
 
aziz rasul said:
You indicated that the knowledge (that is microscopic in nature) was known at the time due to animal husbandry, so you are the one who is disingenuous and LYING. Please STOP LYING.
Click to expand...

Since I am an involved party in this discussion, I must at this point disqualify myself as being the moderator who would take punitive action against another member. It would be unethical of me to do that since I am the aggrieved party. However, Aziz, please understand that false accusations can be considered abusive and this entire thread could be removed because of it.

You are the one who claims ancient knowledge of something that you believe requires microscopic apparatus, but I have merely pointed out that you don't need a microscope in those cases. A drop of any aqueous or organic fluid can be large enough to be seen with the naked eye. What is IN the drop? Maybe not - but your quote line says a "drop." As to a woman's discharge, a clot big enough to see is no problem. Heck, when I get a nosebleed, the clot that comes out is quite obvious to the naked eye. Blood does that, you know.

I am fairly certain that I never said anyone had - or needed - a microscope to see a drop or a clot. I'm not lying about what I said or didn't say and I strongly feel that I am right. However, you are clearly either misunderstanding my point OR you are deflecting from it because you so desperately want your assertion to be true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jon
Uncle Gizmo has also left the building
2
Replies
23
Views
888
isladogs
isladogs
Jon
How the AI apocolypse starts
3 4 5
Replies
89
Views
8,581
AccessBlaster
A
amorosik
How can I read newly received invoice files without having to re-read the old ones?
Replies
19
Views
1,365
amorosik
amorosik
D
Warehouse inventory and sites
Replies
11
Views
1,462
tvanstiphout
T
G
COM Re-Registry Help!
Replies
1
Views
633
sonic8
S

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom