for muslim, at sa mga taong gusto mag tanong about ISLAM -New Thread

[dwarven24]

Claiming a god revealed the Koran through an angel to an illiterate man is just as unfounded and therefore dubious as the Bible falling from heaven or a god speaking the Bhagavad Gita to a sage.

The authorship of these ancient texts cannot be established with certainty. But one thing is FOR SURE. Men wrote them. And they were men's ideas not God's evidenced by the fact that the Koran specifically, just like other scriptures, is riddled with errors and flawed ideologies and outdated morality thus needs to be updated. There is no one who will believe otherwise but the impressionable and gullible.

Welcome to 2015!

like Bible were written by men? added something to it and deducted later on. how cool is that (word of God)? eh?. LOL!

welcome to the world of criticism sir, where people will look on your 1 bad deed yet ignore the 99 good deeds. LOL!

 

[geezushaberdash]

There's no denying that the Bible was written by men. In fact, it has 40 different human authors. No one is claiming that it was directly sent from heaven or it was God who wrote it himself. The claim is it was written by men through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Still an unfounded claim but much less outrageous than the supernatural claim of an angel speaking the scripture to an illiterate man.

Yes, indeed. Welcome to the age of modern academic criticism when mystifications and mysteries attributed to supernatural causes in the days of yore are being disentangled thus leaving no more room for such preposterouss supernatural claims in this modern times.

The Bible has been subject to various researched and criticisms. It passed and survived most of them.

Textual criticism, itself, reveals the Bible has been unchanged.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_criticism#Old_Testament
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_criticism#New_Testament

Do you want to know about what textual criticism reveals about the Koran?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_criticism#Qur.27an

 

[dwarven24]

There's no denying that the Bible was written by men. In fact, it has 40 different human authors. No one is claiming that it was directly sent from heaven or it was God who wrote it himself. The claim is it was written by men through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Still an unfounded claim but much less outrageous than the supernatural claim of an angel speaking the scripture to an illiterate man.

Yes, indeed. Welcome to the age of modern academic criticism when mystifications and mysteries attributed to supernatural causes in the days of yore are being disentangled thus leaving no more room for such preposterouss supernatural claims in this modern times.

The Bible has been subject to various researched and criticisms. It passed and survived most of them.

Textual criticism, itself, reveals the Bible has been unchanged.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_criticism#Old_Testament
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_criticism#New_Testament

Do you want to know about what textual criticism reveals about the Koran?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_criticism#Qur.27an

unchanged? really? are you sure?. maybe you didn't do more research about it.


oh of course, you'll believe in anything wiki told you same with your "mystery" religion where 3 persons are 1 and yet, you don't bother questioning why the hell i'm in this dilemma, believing in mystery and focusing on other subjects.

 

[geezushaberdash]

The Bible is an open book. It is the most studied, researched and criticized book of all time. No part of it has not yet been examined and scrutinized. With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Old Testament has been shown to have been preserved for more than two thousand years. And the New Testament is impossible to be altered not with textual criticism around as I have previously posted. So those claims of biblical corruption and alteration are nothing but baseless accusations and lies propagated only by people who had their own personal motives to carry out but were never ever even able to prove an ounce of truth to their accusations.

It's you who needs to do a lot more research. Muslims are so quick to dismiss and discredit the Judeo-Christian Bible to have been distorted from the True Word of God because it is what the Koran tells them so but they unwittingly manage to overlook the errors and contradictions in the Koran which are far more numerous than the "supposed" contradictions in the Bible.

And how ironic that you claim that I "believe anything wiki told me" as if wiki is some sort of medium used for evangelization, brainwashing and propagandism when it's you that believe and accept unquestioningly everything that the Koran tells you even without a single fact or outside source backing it up.

 

[manfred]

@Thread/Dwarven/[..]

Ok allow me to bump in here again. So anyway this has led me to a couple of quick questions from link pg below and not trying to offend in my question simply for the matter clarification..

Verse 4:34 of the Quran as translated by Ali Quli Qara'i reads:
Men are the managers of women, because of the advantage Allah has granted some of them over others, and by virtue of their spending out of their wealth. So righteous women are obedient, care-taking in the absence [of their husbands] of what Allah has enjoined [them] to guard. As for those [wives] whose misconduct you fear, [first] advise them, and [if ineffective] keep away from them in the bed, and [as the last resort] beat them. Then if they obey you, do not seek any course [of action] against them. Indeed Allah is all-exalted, all-great.[97]


Well here are my thoughts, for the 1st part option... it says 'advise them' is very normal & good, & the 2nd if ineffective 'keep away from them in bed..its reasonable tho ^ naturally happens. The 3rd is beat 'em as last resort, well it does happen even more so often in this modern times.

So my questions are as follows:
1.) Was the verse quoted on that was coming from the Prophet(peace) himself, or by God, or by an angel and then it was written?
2.) Lastly for the 3rd one option as last the resort(beat 'em), ok let say in our society where-in there's a law for battered women especially in this country. My question is, would the 3rd option still be a superior command over the battered-wife law in the society?

 

[dwarven24]

The Bible is an open book. It is the most studied, researched and criticized book of all time. No part of it has not yet been examined and scrutinized. With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Old Testament has been shown to have been preserved for more than two thousand years. And the New Testament is impossible to be altered not with textual criticism around as I have previously posted. So those claims of biblical corruption and alteration are nothing but baseless accusations and lies propagated only by people who had their own personal motives to carry out but were never ever even able to prove an ounce of truth to their accusations.

tell me now, which passages is not there in the dead sea scrolls and it's in the current Bible you're using today.

It's you who needs to do a lot more research. Muslims are so quick to dismiss and discredit the Judeo-Christian Bible to have been distorted from the True Word of God because it is what the Koran tells them so but they unwittingly manage to overlook the errors and contradictions in the Koran which are far more numerous than the "supposed" contradictions in the Bible.

baseless accusations and lies propagated only by people who had their own personal motives to carry out but were never ever even able to prove an ounce of truth to their accusations.

Bato bato sa langit mataaman wag magalit. LOL!

And how ironic that you claim that I "believe anything wiki told me" as if wiki is some sort of medium used for evangelization, brainwashing and propagandism when it's you that believe and accept unquestioningly everything that the Koran tells you even without a single fact or outside source backing it up.

here's the Qur'an, and you, "mr. expert in everything" looking for a source to backed up the Qur'an, for what? and in which, you didn't even bother reading it, yet, accuse it of anything you want and conclude right away that the Qur'an has contradiction, because of what? because of your bestfriend wiki! LOL!.


can't imagine your God asking you on the day of Judgement, hey you! using my name with the wrong spelling! how in the earth criticize a thing which you didn't even know about?. oh, i'm pretty sure what your answer be like, "Because wiki told me!"

- - - Updated - - -

@Thread/Dwarven/[..]

Ok allow me to bump in here again. So anyway this has led me to a couple of quick questions from link pg below and not trying to offend in my question simply for the matter clarification..

Verse 4:34 of the Quran as translated by Ali Quli Qara'i reads:
Men are the managers of women, because of the advantage Allah has granted some of them over others, and by virtue of their spending out of their wealth. So righteous women are obedient, care-taking in the absence [of their husbands] of what Allah has enjoined [them] to guard. As for those [wives] whose misconduct you fear, [first] advise them, and [if ineffective] keep away from them in the bed, and [as the last resort] beat them. Then if they obey you, do not seek any course [of action] against them. Indeed Allah is all-exalted, all-great.[97]


Well here are my thoughts, for the 1st part option... it says 'advise them' is very normal & good, & the 2nd if ineffective 'keep away from them in bed..its reasonable tho ^ naturally happens. The 3rd is beat 'em as last resort, well it does happen even more so often in this modern times.

So my questions are as follows:
1.) Was the verse quoted on that was coming from the Prophet(peace) himself, or by God, or by an angel and then it was written?
2.) Lastly for the 3rd one option as last the resort(beat 'em), ok let say in our society where-in there's a law for battered women especially in this country. My question is, would the 3rd option still be a superior command over the battered-wife law in the society?

Hi sir,

1. all the revelation from Qur'an is from Allah (The God (Al/Ilah) thru angel Jibreel (Gabriel (Peace be upon him)), every time there's a revelation, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) will recite it to the people around him and those people will write it down on parchments, leaves, bones, rocks, etc.


2. firstly sir, the word "Dharaba" which was use is not really to mean "to beat", it means to just to "TAP". and besides, i think in our time right now, it's the opposite, the wife who beats the husband.



if you want some more explanations and if you have time, you can watch this clips:

or

or

thanks,

Peace

 

[manfred]

@ Thread/Dwarven/[..]

Ok thanks for the video, clearly explains it. Me just pausing for awhile for others..

 

[dwarven24]

@ Thread/Dwarven/[..]

Ok thanks for the video, clearly explains it. Me just pausing for awhile for others..

welcome sir.

 

[natad123]

mawalang galang na ho.. me born again din ba ang ISLAM?

 

[dwarven24]

mawalang galang na ho.. me born again din ba ang ISLAM?

Hi po ma'am, ano po ibig ninyong sabihin na born again?.

 

[geezushaberdash]

Are you not aware that there are academic disciplines dedicated in studying ancient texts including religious scriptures for which the Koran is also a subject of those studies? And studies show all these texts are not free from errors, historical inaccuracies, and internal inconsistencies unlike what your religion would want you to believe that they are inerrant because they came from God.

The Koran should be consistent with facts and should have at least one external source verifying it for it to be credible especially if it's making claims against another religion. Because how can you trust the assertions made by the Koran over the assertions made by other scriptures? How can you determine if it's telling the truth or not if there is no other source to draw confirming information from? That's not how faith should be based on. Faith should still be grounded in facts otherwise you're just adhering to blind faith.

So Muslims cannot answer when they are asked the simple question of how they can be sure if Muhammad was a true prophet or not. They just point out to the Koran for evidence. And that's basically saying, "I believe Muhammad is a prophet because that's what he said so." "The Bible must have been corrupted because it is what is written in the Koran." "Jesus was not crucified because the Koran says that he was not crucified." "The Koran says it and says that so they must all be true." And these are exactly what is called "circular reasoning." Both the one making the claim and the evidence for the claim draw from the same source - Muhammad and the Koran. There are no independent sources backing these claims. As a matter fact, other sources (history, the Bible) refute most of these claims. And yet Muslims claim Islam is the true religion and Christianity is false. True implies being consistent with facts but Islam is long on its list of ideologies and commands but short on facts and historical validity. And it only stands to reason that if something contradicts that is already established as factual, it is the opposite of true.

 

[dwarven24]

Are you not aware that there are academic disciplines dedicated in studying ancient texts including religious scriptures for which the Koran is also a subject of those studies? And studies show all these texts are not free from errors, historical inaccuracies, and internal inconsistencies unlike what your religion would want you to believe that they are inerrant because they came from God.

who studied it? you? oh yes, i forgot, you're just relying on haka-haka. LOL!

The Koran should be consistent with facts and should have at least one external source verifying it for it to be credible especially if it's making claims against another religion. Because how can you trust the assertions made by the Koran over the assertions made by other scriptures? How can you determine if it's telling the truth or not if there is no other source to draw confirming information from? That's not how faith should be based on. Faith should still be grounded in facts otherwise you're just adhering to blind faith.

one way to know, read it!

So Muslims cannot answer when they are asked the simple question of how they can be sure if Muhammad was a true prophet or not. They just point out to the Koran for evidence. And that's basically saying, "I believe Muhammad is a prophet because that's what he said so." "The Bible must have been corrupted because it is what is written in the Koran." "Jesus was not crucified because the Koran says that he was not crucified." "The Koran says it and says that so they must all be true." And these are exactly what is called "circular reasoning." Both the one making the claim and the evidence for the claim draw from the same source - Muhammad and the Koran. There are no independent sources backing these claims. As a matter fact, other sources (history, the Bible) refute most of these claims. And yet Muslims claim Islam is the true religion and Christianity is false. True implies being consistent with facts but Islam is long on its list of ideologies and commands but short on facts and historical validity. And it only stands to reason that if something contradicts that is already established as factual, it is the opposite of true.

you don't know anything about the life of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)? right? so, tell, me, why he is not a prophet?.

about the Bible being corrupted? where it says in the Qur'an? can you give me?.

 

[manfred]

I don't really rely on text( Book) as evidence of proof. I see happenings and videos can be one. I keep track on one channel of miraculous healing by one man. It was awesome to see cancer, diabetic ulcer, lame, blind, schizophrenia, broken bones, almost all common ailment was Healed.

 

[natad123]

Hi po ma'am, ano po ibig ninyong sabihin na born again?.

yung ibang sekta po kung baga..

 

[dwarven24]

I don't really rely on text( Book) as evidence of proof. I see happenings and videos can be one. I keep track on one channel of miraculous healing by one man. It was awesome to see cancer, diabetic ulcer, lame, blind, schizophrenia, broken bones, almost all common ailment was Healed.

i understand that the evidence/proof you're looking is, the one that can be seen or heard. right?.

- - - Updated - - -

yung ibang sekta po kung baga..

meron po mga grupo na nagpapanggap na muslim pero hindi po nila sinusunod ang turo ng Qur'an at ang Sunnah (tradition, teachings of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)), so, hindi ko ma distinguished kung secta ba or what, since ang libro na binabasehan ng lahat ay ang Qur'an lang, ang pagkakaiba lang, ay gusto pa nila itong dagdagan.

 

[manfred]

i understand that the evidence/proof you're looking is, the one that can be seen or heard. right?.

- - - Updated - - -


Right, the one that can be seen and heard and also his works can be seen and heard literally. I'm not referring to the Christian messiah but to a different man of this era working under that 'name'[Christian messiah]simply because that 'name' is correlated with the miracles of healing. Anyway in some aspect I already experience a bit of it from another man who came from Canada, an evangelist. So anyway & by the way I'm not done yet, so I have another question if you will..


So here it is:

1. I want to know how the first man was made. I believe it is written that life all begins from water & so does it mean that man first evolve from water as being a simple life-form then growing into a human being?

 

[dwarven24]

i understand that the evidence/proof you're looking is, the one that can be seen or heard. right?.

- - - Updated - - -


Right, the one that can be seen and heard and also his works can be seen and heard literally. I'm not referring to the Christian messiah but to a different man of this era working under that 'name'[Christian messiah]simply because that 'name' is correlated with the miracles of healing. Anyway in some aspect I already experience a bit of it from another man who came from Canada, an evangelist. So anyway & by the way I'm not done yet, so I have another question if you will..

i see, just being curious and no offense sir, do you have some kind of an illness?.

So here it is:

1. I want to know how the first man was made. I believe it is written that life all begins from water & so does it mean that man first evolve from water as being a simple life-form then growing into a human being?

Islamic view is this:

http://quran.com/38/71
[So mention] when your Lord said to the angels, "Indeed, I am going to create a human being from clay.

this is referring to the 1st creation of man, Adam.

 

[manfred]

i see, just being curious and no offense sir, do you have some kind of an illness?.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Manfred: I used to, so when I went to that Healing Crusade with the title 'God Heals' it diminishes. First I have doubts but the place it was held is very near, its in the Plaza covered gym and only good for 3 days after that they will tour specific places around the world.



Islamic view is this:

http://quran.com/38/71
[So mention] when your Lord said to the angels, "Indeed, I am going to create a human being from clay.

this is referring to the 1st creation of man, Adam.

------------------------------------------------

Manfred: Ok its the same with the Bible.

 

[dwarven24]

------------------------------------------------

Manfred: Ok its the same with the Bible.

is it? can you give me the Bible verse?.

 

[manfred]

is it? can you give me the Bible verse?.

---------------


Ok here:

Genesis 2:7 ►

New International Version
Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.