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


A teenage Pure Muslim kil...
Yesterday at 09:33 AM

Discord Group for Ex-Musl...
Yesterday at 02:33 AM

Coronavirus crisis
November 22, 2020, 09:42 PM

Maryam Namazie's Speech a...
November 22, 2020, 02:44 PM

Paris murder
November 22, 2020, 01:04 PM

Chronological History of ...
November 22, 2020, 07:03 AM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
November 21, 2020, 11:01 PM

Hello
November 20, 2020, 07:19 PM

Qur'anic studies today
November 20, 2020, 03:44 PM

The essence of the facts
November 20, 2020, 11:27 AM

The Slave Market
November 20, 2020, 09:48 AM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
November 19, 2020, 05:44 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Wasn't Angel Jibril the messenger, Mohommid the receiver?

 (Read 1498 times)
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Wasn't Angel Jibril the messenger, Mohommid the receiver?
     OP - April 22, 2015, 01:17 AM

    Hi there, I am interested in learning more about Islam, and I have begun by reading the Quoran and learning about it's history. I  have some questions and am not sure where to go to for answers, and found this website, so I hope someone may be able to help me.
    As I understand it, according to islamic history, God sent his messenger, the Angel Jibril (Gabriel in latin) to Mohommid to teach him about love, peaceful relations, compassion, mercy, kindness, charity etc. This message is recorded in the Koran. So God's messenger is the Angel Jibril and the receiver of God's message is Mohommid.

    Mohommid though was not a literate man, but wished for the angel's messages to be recorded in writing. So in fact, it was not Mohommid who wrote the Quoran, nor angel Gabriel, but others, one of whom was a woman and neither of whom actually heard the teachings from the angel. So the Koran is in modern legal terms 'hearsay."

    Now my reading of the Quoran has elicited more confusion, mainly that as I read it I find it filled with contradiction and dichotomy. I perceive that so much of the verses are in direct opposition to the teachings of Jibril, ie kindness, love peace etc and appear to reflect the culture and beliefs of the time, a very brutal time in fact in earths history.

    So if angel Jibril taught of gentleness, and the persons writing the Koran write of a command to act with barbarity and cruelty, then is a lot of the Koran NOT the teachings of the angel and therefore we can assume/assert NOT of God?   Well at least those verses which contradict the angels teaching. And if this is so easily comprehended by me, why then is there so much discord, hatred and cruelty among the peoples of the Koran. Why aren't the immans and those who teach the Koran able to perceive this also and preach only those few verses which reflect Gods message of peace and love? (If all the nasty stuff was removed from the Koran, it would be a much thinner book.) Please feel free to correct me, I will not be offended. Thank you Nevyn
  • Wasn't Angel Jibril the messenger, Mohommid the receiver?
     Reply #1 - April 22, 2015, 02:58 AM

    Is it safe to assume? No, assuming parts of the Quran were divine and other parts are not is not a safe assumption, or even a good one. It requires more explanation and raises far more questions than most other interpretations of the story.

    There are no teachings of Jibril. Nor is it fair to say, if there is a mixture of peaceful verses and terrible verses, that the peaceful verses are the ones that were intentional and the terrible ones must have been a fluke because obviously only the peaceful ones were wanted.

    If you're looking for apologia, there's much more convincing arguments. This idea would be about as confusing to defend as the actual belief an extreme minority of Muslims do have that Jibril was supposed to give the revelation to Ali but got the wrong address. It's just unsubstantiated and there are far more plausible explanations.

    As for what really happened, I think that it's a very human thing to contradict yourself over your lifetime, or even a handful of years. As someone grows and as their experience and status changes, they're bound to change their views, and god forbid it's being documented, or else you might one day be saying how alcohol from the fruits of the trees is a sign of God and then the next day saying, "Actually, avoid that stuff." And how embarrassing: it's all preserved in a book.

    I also think it is very human to harbor in you a lot of good and bad, side by side. And very often we don't even recognize the bad for what it is, and we can rationalize it and make it seem right. Or perhaps we are very concerned and very aware of the needs or feelings of one group of people (let's say orphans) but completely out of touch with another (polytheists). And of course it isn't hard to take a look back in history and see that our understanding of what is humane has changed, and that we have grown as societies toward protecting as many people as much as possible. The Quran is a framework for a time much more dire than ours.

    In the end, Islam--from being one of many religions man conceived, to the Quran, to the ahadith, to what you see of it today--reflects at some point almost everything it is to be human: fallible, confused, conflicting, searching, and so very often mistaken. And with not even the slightest idea of what is around the corner. If you are being truly impartial, the more you see of it, the more you will recognize these religious characters, Allah included, as not only the products but very often analogues of the ingenuity and the fallibility of humans.

    Anyway, welcome! I hope you make an intro thread so we can properly welcome you, and I hope you stick around!

  • Wasn't Angel Jibril the messenger, Mohommid the receiver?
     Reply #2 - April 22, 2015, 03:22 AM

    I think you are assuming that Jibril, and therefore Allah, are filled with love and gentleness and so on. Jibril is a mouthpiece, a creation of Allah completely subservient to him, so he was not a teacher or a source of teachings. He may have transmitted messages from Allah to Mohamed, but nothing else.
    The Quran is considered to be the complete message sent to Mohamad via Jibril. Mohamad is considered to have perfect recall by Muslims, and he himself supposedly confirmed that the Quran is complete.
    So you are not taking these things into account, which are believed by Muslims.
    If you are looking to profile Allah, all we have to go on is the Quran. What the Quran says about Allah, and what the writing implies about him, are all we have.
    So yes, there are some positive messages in there, but you cannot winnow the good from the bad in the Quran, because it is all considered to be Divine and the basis of a religion. It is not ¨inspired¨ like Christians believe about their Holy Book and writings, so it cannot be picked and chosen from.
    All the nasty and petty stuff in there is part and parcel of Islam. The reason you rarely see such behaviours from the adherents of the faith is because most people are more ethical than the Quran is. Muslims are far better than their religious texts. That kindness and gentleness and love that you speak of is not very present in the canons of Abrahamic faiths, but it is present in the followers of those faiths. It is human goodness that you speak of, and not Divine.
    Many Muslims believe that Mohamed is the Quran personified, which has enabled the survival of the Hadith, for better or worse. If Muslims followed all the Sahih Hadith religiously, they would look insane. So here again you can see that people are filtering the texts that they are not allowed to change through their own better judgement.
    Believe in people, rather than beings that have never been seen. Look to your conscience, and not to any book.

    Don't let Hitler have the street.
  • Wasn't Angel Jibril the messenger, Mohommid the receiver?
     Reply #3 - April 22, 2015, 07:04 AM


    As I understand it, according to islamic history, God sent his messenger, the Angel Jibril (Gabriel in latin) to Mohommid to teach him about love, peaceful relations, compassion, mercy, kindness, charity etc. This message is recorded in the Koran. So God's messenger is the Angel Jibril and the receiver of God's message is Mohommid.

    So if angel Jibril taught of gentleness, and the persons writing the Koran write of a command to act with barbarity and cruelty, then is a lot of the Koran NOT the teachings of the angel and therefore we can assume/assert NOT of God?


    I don't really understand where you're getting the first assumption, that the entire message was supposed to be about happy things, from. And then the rest mostly just builds from that point. It sounds somewhat like the argument you're trying to make is that Gabriel always said nice things in the earlier texts, and that's not true. In the Jewish texts, his only mention is in the book of Daniel, and he tries to explain to Daniel some visions Daniel had seen, but it still doesn't make a lot of sense. In the Christian texts, his only canonical appearance is in the first chapter of Luke.

    Mohommid though was not a literate man, but wished for the angel's messages to be recorded in writing. So in fact, it was not Mohommid who wrote the Quoran, nor angel Gabriel, but others, one of whom was a woman...


    I don't see the significance of one of them being a woman, unless you're saying that women are unreliable.

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »