Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Qur'anic studies today
Today at 11:18 AM

“Why do you disbelieve in...
Today at 07:53 AM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
Yesterday at 09:00 PM

The passing of dprjones
Yesterday at 06:00 PM

Excellence and uniqueness
Yesterday at 02:38 PM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
Yesterday at 02:25 PM

Nostalgia, nostalgia...
March 29, 2020, 08:49 PM

Reading Quran And Inquiri...
March 29, 2020, 02:55 PM

Coronavirus crisis
March 29, 2020, 01:33 PM

Random Science Posts
March 28, 2020, 01:47 PM

Pakistan: The Nation.....
March 27, 2020, 12:20 PM

مدهش----- لماذا؟؟؟؟
by akay
March 26, 2020, 08:37 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 499171 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 254 255 256257 258 ... 301 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7650 - September 25, 2019, 10:43 AM

    Many good-looking girlzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Hahahaha!  Cheesy
    I'm surprised, there is no Daniel Beck and Shaddel... Wink
    Le Coran des historiens/The Koran of Historians

    Unfortunately, I see one just historian...Wink the one who says that the Syrian sources (636-750) were destroyed by the Iraqis. And hence one have no one. Well, one have certain ones about this period. Not by them OFC, but by the people who lived with them Wink
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7651 - September 25, 2019, 10:59 AM

    Unfortunately, I see one just historian...Wink the one who says that the Syrian sources (636-750) were destroyed by the Iraqis. And hence one have no one.


    Who is this?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7652 - September 25, 2019, 11:04 AM

    Antoine Borrut?

    The Future of the Past: Historical Writing in Early Islamic Syria and Umayyad Memory

    https://www.academia.edu/35405793/The_Future_of_the_Past_Historical_Writing_in_Early_Islamic_Syria_and_Umayyad_Memory
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7653 - September 25, 2019, 11:04 AM

    Yes. I note that Kerr is absent.. Besides, I'm curious about the actual step of Dye about the layers theory of the composition of the Quran (Wansbrough) to which quasi all "revisionists" adhere to now. In a shorter time than him OFC...Interestingly Reynolds never stated anything about that ( Wink ) Would he be on the Cuypers (absent of the project... Wink ) side? Wink
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7654 - September 25, 2019, 11:10 AM

    I count 3000 pages..... depressing.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7655 - September 25, 2019, 11:31 AM

    You're not obliged to read all... Wink I will personally choose first some scholars and follow them in the commentary Wink Mehdi Azaiez, Mette Bjerregaard Mortensen, Anne-Sylvie Boisliveau, @DecharneuxJ, Guillaume Dye, Manfred Kropp, Paul Neuenkirchen, Karl-Friedrich Pohlmann, @GabrielSaidR , Carlos Segovia, @teseitommaso, Jan Van Reeth
    Hahaha!

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7656 - September 25, 2019, 04:52 PM

    1/ It is a logical deduction.
    2/  And? Those who take Damascus 636 and Jerusalem 637 are the same. War or not war.


    Like I said, assuming the same Arabs did take Jerusalem and then were in power in Damascus is an assumption. We know from muslim and non muslim sources that there was a fitna among Arabs and Mu'Awiya emerged victorious. Therefore, one can also assume those Arabs were not the same ; that is my personal assumption by the way, supported by other items (but it is not the place nor the time to talk about them Smiley )

    Quote
    Teach us Wink I'm sure I can respond with arguments you're unable to respond...


    Who was Amr Ibn Al As ?


    Quote
    Why Iraqi sources viewed him as a bad Muslim? Because of its education? You sure of that? Really?


    The 9 c sources described him as a bad muslim because he was not a muslim as 9 c people expected a muslim king to behave ; therefore, they wanted to give explanations, his christian upbringing was one.

    Quote
    Yes it would have been surprising. Especially that none contemporary source state it. Therefore it was not.


    No contemporary sources do mention Mu'Awiya taking over the Temple Mount so following your logic he didn't but you state the opposite.

    Quote
    Arius wanted to build on the Temple Mount? Wink You sure of that Wink  Arius?


    You said that all christians say Jesus is the Son of God ; I proved you wrong with the Arianists ; I don't see the link with the Temple Mount. However, I just wanted to highlight that there was different kind of christians and, if Mu'Awiya was a christian, something I have no idea about , he could have been a different kind. It is interesting to highlight that he choosed to reign from Damascus and not from Jerusalem (where according to you he built something on the Temple Mount though no contemporary sources do say so).

    Quote
    Umayyads are Christians and they built later something on the Temple Mount? Who told them to do that? Arianism?


    You said no source say Mu'Awiya is a christian ; I just asked you if the same answer can be brought to the same question but asked about the Umayyads. It does happen that you then get to a different answer ; I don't see again the link with the Temple Mount



  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7657 - September 25, 2019, 05:52 PM

    Quote
    Like I said, assuming the same Arabs did take Jerusalem and then were in power in Damascus is an assumption.


    It is a logical deduction. From the moment where you have no sources to say the contrary, you're dreaming awake.

    Quote
    We know from muslim and non muslim sources that there was a fitna among Arabs and Mu'Awiya emerged victorious.


    And?  Wink

    Quote
    Who was Amr Ibn Al As ?


    If Raymond Dequin  dance told you something, tell it... Maybe he has new sources Wink or a new elaboration. Why not?

    Quote
    The 9 c sources described him as a bad muslim because he was not a muslim as 9 c people expected a muslim king to behave ; therefore, they wanted to give explanations, his christian upbringing was one.


    There's another reason to treat Ummayads as non/bad/whatever/ Muslim. The real one Wink
    Quote
    No contemporary sources do mention Mu'Awiya taking over the Temple Mount 

     

    Of course he did not destroy what was built in 637, since he was not Christian...
    Quote
    so following your logic he didn't but you state the opposite.

    ?
    Quote
    You said that all christians say Jesus is the Son of God ; I proved you wrong with the Arianists

     You proved nothing . Arianists were expelled from Christianity. They were not bearing the name Christians any more (even if they reclaim it) for the majority. They would have won, they would.
    Quote
    However, I just wanted to highlight that there was different kind of Christians and, if Mu'Awiya was a christian, something I have no idea about , he could have been a different kind.


    1/ From a Modern scholarship view that  "there was different kind of Christians"  Yes. But it is anachronistic. For the people of this time, Arianists were not Christians any more. Now, that scholarship tend to deconstruct this or that, and name (almost) everybody as Christians when they read the word "Jesus" with some praise, is another thing .
    2/ The only issue is that none source attests that it was a different "kind of Christian". And Sivers knows it. He's trying to understand.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7658 - September 25, 2019, 06:17 PM

    Quote
    However, I just wanted to highlight that there was different kind of Christians and, if Mu'Awiya was a christian, something I have no idea about , he could have been a different kind.


    We are not looking for groups being called Christians but for groups having Jesus in their beliefs in a differetn way than the mainstream Christians. Van Siver speaks of tritianists, Gallez of Judeo-Christians, what more was floating around? Proto Muslims?

    Apparently there was room and imagination for different cults (re)using Jesus, Moses, Abraham and whoever. Isn't that the issue here?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7659 - September 25, 2019, 07:36 PM

    It is a logical deduction. From the moment where you have no sources to say the contrary, you're dreaming awake.


    We have sources saying they were fighting each other before Mu'Awiya won so they were not the same Arabs who took over Jerusalem in 637 and were holding power in 661. No sources is proving me wrong here except if one takes the muslim fairytale at face value.

    So who was Amr Ibn Al As ? If you don't know as it seems, I suggest you look into it but that is your call.


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7660 - September 25, 2019, 07:44 PM

    Van Siver speaks of tritianists,


    Sivers, like Inarah, use the term christian to label groups where Jesus was the main focus of their beliefs. Now, whatever that word meant vs different currents including Trinitarism, doesn't really matter.

    I however don't think that those groups were sharing the same faith so christian would anyway, for me, be too restrictive to describe their faith.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7661 - September 25, 2019, 10:44 PM

    We have sources saying they were fighting each other before Mu'Awiya won so they were not the same Arabs who took over Jerusalem in 637 and were holding power in 661.No sources is proving me wrong here except if one takes the muslim fairytale at face value.


    What Arabs were fighting each other in Syria Palestine?



    Quote
    So who was Amr Ibn Al As ? If you don't know as it seems, I suggest you look into it but that is your call.


    Just tell who is he for you, it'll be simpler, right?


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7662 - September 26, 2019, 06:35 AM

    What Arabs were fighting each other in Syria Palestine?


    Reflect

    Quote
    Just tell who is he for you, it'll be simpler, right?


    What matters is not who he is for me but :

    1) what was his connection with Jerusalem ?
    2) what was his connection with Mu'Awiya


    You need to make up your own mind on it. It is just like when I said the Muhammad was the Madhi in my view, build your own opinion though it goes against your narrative.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7663 - September 26, 2019, 09:13 AM

    Quote
    Reflect


    As soon as I see Raymond Dequin   dance I pose him the question : "Well Raymond, your pupil tells that Arabs who entered Jerusalem were fighting others ones in the West of the Jordan between 637 and 661 and the first were replaced there by the others in Jerusalem, and he says you showed him the sources which tells those events.

    Quote
    1) what was his connection with Jerusalem ?
    2) what was his connection with Mu'Awiya


    Just tell it, it'll be simpler, right?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7664 - September 26, 2019, 10:27 AM

    Quote
    You need to make up your own mind on it.


    Nope.I do not make up my mind on something you do not  give any information.

    Quote
    It is just like when I said the Muhammad was the Madhi in my view


    The "Muhammad" is the figure who is addressed in the Quranic texts, no one else. That figure have never existed (Mecca, etc...). That very early on this figure be called   Madhi  with the syriac meaning of Penkayé "guide" is perfectly possible (one does not see why Penkayé would have invented this... he just reports what he heard.) That later or in the same time Madhi  was used for Ali or someone else by their partisans is possible as well. Later, the meaning change to characterize a  more or less messianic meaning who comes to settle the issues at the end of the world or not, and/or save this or that.
    For me it is much more simple and clear that all the elaborations of Inarah for one good reason : there was no "Muhammad".All commence here. It is only by this that one can clear the mess.




  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7665 - September 26, 2019, 12:36 PM

    Altara,

    If the Mohammed of the Quran never existed, why are there these texts specifically concerning him, with regard to the unlimited number of wives he is allowed? Seems there was an urgent need to include this stemming from the urgent need of the Mohammed of flesh and blood of the Quran. No?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7666 - September 26, 2019, 12:49 PM

    Altara,

    If the Mohammed of the Quran never existed,

    Oh... I think there were many Muhammads existed by the time they finished writing  the story of Muhammad  ......say in 8 - 9th century .

    , ...........But.....But in Quranic times .. I guess we can also include   Hadith Qudsi in it.,  .. in those years  ~ year 640-690??? ............before the STORY OF PRESENT MUHAMMAD (PBUH) with Aisha  was written .. Not sure  who actually Muhammad was ....  First Muhammad was very important figure in Islamic history.,,  Sure he was good preacher ..

    Quote
    why are there these texts specifically concerning him, with regard to the unlimited number of wives he is allowed?

    that has very simple answer dear mundi., For that you need to read Quran.,  and answer simple question., 

    how many wives Prophet of Islam that you see in Quran has??

    Quote
    ..Seems there was an urgent need to include this stemming from the urgent need of the Mohammed of flesh and blood of the Quran. No?

    well that has looong history in Islam.. and it still continues in many countries

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7667 - September 26, 2019, 01:06 PM

    Yeez,

    Quote
    how many wives Prophet of Islam that you see in Quran has??


    When I read 33:50 to 33:53, the prophet seems to be the leading Guru of an Ashram of the modern sixties, being allowed to go around and pick out whoever he wants. And all that because Allah said so.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7668 - September 26, 2019, 01:37 PM

    Yeez,

    When I read 33:50 to 33:53, the prophet seems to be the leading Guru of an Ashram of the modern sixties, being allowed to go around and pick out whoever he wants. And all that because Allah said so.

      I am glad .. many of you guys are reading Quran., Indeed Quran has some hidden history in it  and in absence of other corroborative evidence from the same time that Quran was published ., the extraction of such hidden history is bit difficult  and one must question everything...

    Any way let us read those  surah Al-Ahzaab verses  dear mundi..

    Quote
    33. 45 O Prophet! surely We have sent you as a witness, and as a bearer of good news and as a warner,

    And as one inviting to Allah by His permission, and as a light-giving torch.

    And give to the believers the good news that they shall have a great grace from Allah.

    And be not compliant to the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and leave unregarded their annoying talk, and rely on Allah; and Allah is sufficient as a Protector.

    O you who believe! when you marry the believing women, then divorce them before you touch them, you have in their case no term which you should reckon; so make some provision for them and send them forth a goodly sending forth.

    O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war, and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts, and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who fled with you; and a believing woman if she gave herself to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired to marry her-- specially for you, not for the (rest of) believers; We know what We have ordained for them concerning their wives and those whom their right hands possess in order that no blame may attach to you; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

    you may put off whom you please of them, and you may take to you whom you please, and whom you desire of those whom you had separated provisionally; no blame attaches to you; this is most proper, so that their eyes may be cool and they may not grieve, and that they should be pleased, all of them with what you give them, and Allah knows what is in your hearts; and Allah is Knowing, Forbearing.

    It is not allowed to you to take women afterwards, nor that you should change them for other wives, though their beauty be pleasing to you, except what your right hand possesses and Allah is Watchful over all things.

    O you who believe! do not enter the houses of the Prophet unless permission is given to you for a meal, not waiting for its cooking being finished-- but when you are invited, enter, and when you have taken the food, then disperse-- not seeking to listen to talk; surely this gives the Prophet trouble, but he forbears from you, and Allah does not forbear from the truth And when you ask of them any goods, ask of them from behind a curtain; this is purer for your hearts and (for) their hearts; and it does not behove you that you should give trouble to the Apostle of Allah, nor that you should marry his wives after him ever; surely this is grievous in the sight of Allah.

    If you do a thing openly or do it in secret, then surely Allah is Cognizant of all things.

    There is no blame on them in respect of their fathers, nor their brothers, nor their brothers' sons, nor their sisters' sons nor their own women, nor of what their right hands possess; and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; surely Allah is a witness of all things.

    Surely Allah and His angels bless the Prophet; O you who believe! call for (Divine) blessings on him and salute him with a (becoming) salutation.

    Surely (as for) those who speak evil things of Allah and His Apostle, Allah has cursed them in this world and the here after, and He has prepared for them a chastisement bringing disgrace.

    and those who speak evil things of the believing men and the believing women without their having earned (it), they are guilty indeed of a false accusation and a manifest sin.

    O Prophet! say to your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers that they let down upon them their over-garments; this will be more proper, that they may be known, and thus they will not be given trouble; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.


    33.60: If the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease and the agitators in the city do not desist, We shall most certainly set you over them, then they shall not be your neighbors in it but for a little while;


    so dear mundi  the verses you mentioned are highlighted ., but for Quran, one must read at least 5 verses below and 5 verses above the verse of interest .,

    Now question to you...  How many verses those 15 verses that you see above from that chapter 33  you see in..... say..

    Sana'a manuscript  or in Codex Parisino-petropolitanus  or in BnF Arabe 328(c) and Birmingham fragment?or in Tübingen ...Kufic manuscripts..  etc etc .. oldest Quran manuscripts that we have??


    I know you are good in  cross checking a specific verse., Could you please check those verses from 33 chapter...   and  I am glad to read your posts., you are a open minded guy..


    with best wishes
    yeezevee

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7669 - September 26, 2019, 04:22 PM

    Yeez,
    Altara,

    33-50 to 33:53 is in Chester Beatty 1615I and DAM 1-29.1

    Both are very early (pre 650 is a conservative estimate). I do agree, these verses seem to be added to accomodate someone with big marital aspirations (the slaves were not limited anyway, leaving them out of the equation), but then it must have been someone active pre 650.

    So after this research, my question to Altara remains. If Mohammed was fictional, why accommodate him with all these earthly marital possibilities?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7670 - September 26, 2019, 04:47 PM

    Yeez,
    Altara,

    33-50 to 33:53 is in Chester Beatty 1615I and DAM 1-29.1

    Both are very early (pre 650 is a conservative estimate). I do agree, these verses seem to be added to accomodate someone with big marital aspirations (the slaves were not limited anyway, leaving them out of the equation), but then it must have been someone active pre 650.


    I would greatly appreciate a link or ANY LINK on that dear mundi

    Quote
    So after this research, my question to Altara remains. If Mohammed was fictional, why accommodate him with all these earthly marital possibilities?

    It solve the problems in wars and warlike situations on those who questioned Islam/Islamic scriptures  in early Islamic expansion  ...   but that is a different problem  from origins of Quran..

    Here,  let me ask you another question .. IF WE REMOVE SOME 30 to 40 verses from Quran (( I will talk about it later why they need to be removed))  would it weaken   Quranic message?  would it weaken MAIN MESSAGE of  Islamic theology??

    in fact some 12 years ago I had a long similar  discussion  with a nicest guy.. A preacher of Islam in /from Pakistan., He agrees with me in many points and evades  critical questions  ..  by saying ..
    Quote
    .SOME OF THE VERSES IN QURAN ARE ONLY FOR PROPHET OF ISLAM FOR HIS TIME....

     off course that is not a satisfying answer., such discussions made him to leave the country because of threats on his life ..

    anyway let us go back to Quran.. So those Sana manuscripts do not have those verses??

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7671 - September 26, 2019, 05:58 PM

    1/
    Quote
    33-50 to 33:53 is in Chester Beatty 1615I and DAM 1-29.1


    I check in Corpus Coranicum. Very simple to do. There are no images of these manuscripts, so that should be an additional check to be 100 % sure.

    I have a list of early manuscripts that I keep whenever there is reliable C14 dating.
    1615I has a C14 of 610-660
    DAM 1-29.1 C14 640-660

    The latter one (DAM) is a Sana manuscript imo.

    2/ What is the Quranic message Yeez? Would you need tp cut the universal polygamy verses too? The child marriage verses? The slavery verses? The apostasy verses? What part should we concentrate on to get the real core of the Quran? Help me with that please.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7672 - September 26, 2019, 07:14 PM

    Altara,

    Yes,
    Quote
    If the Mohammed of the Quran never existed, why are there these texts specifically concerning him,with regard to the unlimited number of wives he is allowed?


    Because he is an example who have to be followed, remember? But he is a special guy, he is the Prophet. Then he has more wives than others Wink


    Quote
    Seems there was an urgent need to include this stemming from the urgent need of the Mohammed of flesh and blood of the Quran. No?


    I'm not sure to perceive what you say.


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7673 - September 26, 2019, 07:26 PM

    Altara,

    I refraze:

    Seems there was an urgent need to include this verse, stemming from the urgent need of the Mohammed of flesh and blood of the Quran. No?


    Example to be followed:

    We dont see any (early) caliphs following the example of the non-limited number of wives which Mohammed was allowed. Yes they had their harems (number of slave women in not limited to no one), but is it known that Caliphs exceeded the number of 4 official wives? And then some interprete the polygamy verse not as a maximum of 4 wives but rather as mary 1, or 2, or 3, or 4 at the time...so even that verse allows more if taken ultra literally.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7674 - September 26, 2019, 08:47 PM



    2/ What is the Quranic message ?  What part should we concentrate on to get the real core of the Quran?


    It is some interesting questions to pose to each academic who work on the Quran.Wink
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7675 - September 26, 2019, 09:10 PM

    Altara,


    Yes,

    Quote
    I refraze:

    Seems there was an urgent need to include this verse, stemming from the urgent need of the Mohammed of flesh and blood of the Quran. No?


    Well... yes, possibly.


    Quote
    Example to be followed:
    We don't see any (early) caliphs following the example of the non-limited number of wives which Mohammed was allowed.


    (Early)  real "caliphs" did not know Muhammad Wink they were neither Meccan nor Medinan.


    Quote
    Yes they had their harems (number of slave women in not limited to no one), but is it known that Caliphs exceeded the number of 4 official wives?

     

     I do not know.
    Quote
    And then some interpret the polygamy verse not as a maximum of 4 wives but rather as mary 1, or 2, or 3, or 4 at the time...so even that verse allows more if taken ultra literally.


    You asked what was the message and the core of the Quran. Saying that  the message and the core is to be (hahaha!)cryptical . It is the first step (I'm serious...) to understand  the message and the core Wink


  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7676 - September 27, 2019, 06:19 AM

    Altara,

    We deviated from my core question here into harems and wives...

    So I refocus:

    If there was no flesh and blood prophet (Mohammed?), why are these special earthly needs for this esoteric prophet included in the Quran? The goodies for all believing men seem to be sufficient to make islam attractive (polygamy, consanguine marriage, concubinage, divine sanctioned looting), why include these super-advantages for the prophet's bedroom if he were not of flesh and blood? That doesnt make sense to me.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7677 - September 27, 2019, 10:11 AM

    Quote
    Altara,


    Yes,

    Quote
    We deviated from my core question here into harems and wives...


    At all.

    Quote
    If there was no flesh and blood prophet (Mohammed?), why are these special earthly needs for this esoteric prophet included in the Quran?


    If there was no flesh and blood god  (Zeus), why are these special earthly needs for this god  included in the Illiad/Odyssey/Hesiod, etc?

    Quote
    The goodies for all believing men seem to be sufficient to make islam attractive (polygamy, consanguine marriage, concubinage, divine sanctioned looting),


    Yes.
    Quote
    why include these super-advantages for the prophet's bedroom if he were not of flesh and blood?


    Because he is the "Prophet" to whom God speaks! this is not the case of "all believing men"!
    Quote
    That doesnt make sense to me.


    Perfectly does for me.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7678 - September 27, 2019, 02:49 PM

    mundi asking tough questions and Altara comes out with simple answers....lol..

    Quote
    Altara,

    We deviated from my core question here into harems and wives...

    Quote

    .................. The goodies for all believing men seem to be sufficient to make islam attractive (polygamy, consanguine marriage, concubinage, divine sanctioned looting), why include these super-advantages for the prophet's bedroom if he were not of flesh and blood? .........


    That doesnt make sense to me.

    ...................Perfectly does for me...................


    well dear mundi., To make sense of any religious scripture you have to be one of these three

    Quote
    1). You are a Prophet or prophet material of a religion that you follow .. in other words you preach stories to fools that follow a faith without questioning its scriptures and its history/origns

    2).  you have to be a strong unquestionable believer of a faith ., in other words.,   you don't care who preaches what and you don't care who criticizes what., ......you are a simple unquestionable believer...........

    3). you are a person who  gives a rat ass to all these faiths  and faith books., because they are faiths/faith books of their time .. they are not for you ., they are not for your time .. you  take the good and throw the shit  in to toilet bowl


    tell me which one are you?? 

    You see .,    I asked a question., you answered with a question   that is not fair  dear mundi Cheesy .. again question was

    There are some 6200 or so verses in the present book Quran., If take out some 30 to 40 verses from the book ..would it make any difference to you ? or even those who follow Islam as their faith??

    incidentally I asked the same question to preachers of Islam many many times...

    with best wishes
    yeezevee

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7679 - September 27, 2019, 08:18 PM

    Quote
    mundi asking tough questions and Altara comes out with simple answers


    Guillaume d'Occam is my teacher. Wink
  • Previous page 1 ... 254 255 256257 258 ... 301 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »