Muslims and Psalms

[jcarl]

"We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms," (Sura{?} 4:163).

"Rejected were the messengers before thee: with patience and constancy they bore their rejection and their wrongs, until Our aid did reach them: there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those messengers," (6:34).

To the Muslims, do you believe that the Psalms are incorrupt? I ask this b/c I have a question that hinges on this one, but I want to make sure I understand your position first.

 

[Proud_Muslim]

"We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms," (Sura{?} 4:163).

"Rejected were the messengers before thee: with patience and constancy they bore their rejection and their wrongs, until Our aid did reach them: there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those messengers," (6:34).

To the Muslims, do you believe that the Psalms are incorrupt? I ask this b/c I have a question that hinges on this one, but I want to make sure I understand your position first.

Yes, we believe the Psalms have been corrupted.

 

[Flores]

"We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms," (Sura{?} 4:163).

"Rejected were the messengers before thee: with patience and constancy they bore their rejection and their wrongs, until Our aid did reach them: there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those messengers," (6:34).

To the Muslims, do you believe that the Psalms are incorrupt? I ask this b/c I have a question that hinges on this one, but I want to make sure I understand your position first.

I believe, based on reading, that the original bible have been added to and ommited from. The translations have also affected the meanings and intent. I don't want to use harsh words like corrupt, because it might have not been done on purpose. I also believe that the bible is the book of god and the most of it is still in good shape, yet it has to be read with caution to detect any problems. The Quran, a newer book from the same source, has been protected better, and is not subject to translation due to the fact that the language it was written with is still spoken. The Quran is also quite in agreement with the intent of the author of the bible/god, and could be used to interpret some of the confusing reporting in the bible.

Bring on the bible verse you are interested in discussing, and I'll let you know my take on it.

 

[Proud_Muslim]

Bring on the bible verse you are interested in discussing, and I'll let you know my take on it.

Please note that Flores is an AUTHORITY on Islam, she is well versed MULLAH with 5 years Islamic study at Al Azhar university in Egypt, and she is very qualified to issue all sorts of FATWAS !

 

[Flores]

Please note that Flores is an AUTHORITY on Islam, she is well versed MULLAH with 5 years Islamic study at Al Azhar university in Egypt, and she is very qualified to issue all sorts of FATWAS !

Since I'm the authority now, and following on the most recent FATWA on Female Genital Mutilation. I command you to cut your pinus in half, stuff the rest of it between your balls and sew it all up. Your wife is to use a knife to rip you open on your wedding night and she shall sew you up again after every sex.

http://www.angelfire.com/ar/pilgrim/infibdesc.html
By M.A.S. Mustafa, of Djibouti,
from the thesis of Dr. Alan David

'The little girl, entirely nude, is immobilised in the sitting position on a low stool by at least three women. One of them with her arms tightly around the little girl's chest; two others hold the child's thighs apart by force, in order to open wide the vulva. The child's arms are tied behind her back, or immobilized by two other women guests. The traditional operator says a short prayer: "Allah is great and Mahomet is His Prophet. May Allah keep away all evils." Then she spreads on the floor some offerings to Allah: split maize, or, in urban areas, eggs. Then the old woman takes her razor and excises the clitoris. The infibulation follows: the operator cuts with her raxor from top to bottom of the small lip and then scrapes the flesh from the inside of the large lip. This nymphectomy and scraping are repeated on the other side of the vulva. The little girl howls and writhes in pain, although strongly held down. The operator wipes the blood from the wound and the mother, as well as the guests, "verify" her work, sometimes putting their fingers in. The amount of scraping of the large lips depends upon the "technical" ability of the operator. The opening left for urine and menstrual blood is miniscule. Then the operator applies a paste and ensures the adhesion of the large lips by means of an acacia thorn, which pierces one lip and passes through into the other. She sticks in three or four in this manner down the vulva. These thorns are then held in place either by means of sewing thread, or with horse-hair. Paste is again put on the wound. But all this is not sufficient to ensure the coalescence of the large lips; so the little girl is then tied up from her pelvis to her feet: strips of material rolled up into a rope immobilize her legs entirely. Exhausted, the little girl is then dressed and put on a bed. The operation lasts from fifteen to twenty minutes according to the ability of the old woman and the resistance put up by the child.'

 

[Proud_Muslim]

Since I'm the authority now, and following on the most recent FATWA on Female Genital Mutilation. I command you to cut your pinus in half, stuff the rest of it between your balls and sew it all up. Your wife is to use a knife to rip you open on your wedding night and she shall sew you up again after every sex.

You moron, you are quoting from angelfire site ???

Female circumcision is banned in Islam, stop promoting hate lies against Islam you idiot.

Here you have REAL FEMINIST MUSLIM SITE, read it you moron:

http://www.jannah.org/genderequity/equityappendix.html

 

[Flores]

You moron, you are quoting from angelfire site ???

Female circumcision is banned in Islam, stop promoting hate lies against Islam you idiot.

Here you have REAL FEMINIST MUSLIM SITE, read it you moron:

http://www.jannah.org/genderequity/equityappendix.html

I thought you were ignoring me...Please do me the honor and stick to your words.

 

[Flores]

You moron, you are quoting from angelfire site ???

Female circumcision is banned in Islam, stop promoting hate lies against Islam you idiot.

Here you have REAL FEMINIST MUSLIM SITE, read it you moron:

http://www.jannah.org/genderequity/equityappendix.html

The moron is you who don't even read sites before posting them. Here's a quote from the site you presented us with

3. SHOULD FEMALE CIRCUMCISION BE BANNED OR RESTRICTED?

Shari'ah (Islamic law) divides actions into five categories; mandatory, commendable, permissible, detestable and strictly forbidden. Female circumcision falls within the category of the permissible. It was probably on this basis that some scholars opposed a sweeping ban of this practice. Before discussing this view, it is important to distinguish between different types of procedures that were and still are called circumcision.


Not only that it's permissible, it's honoroble as described in your beloved site:
Some argued, however, that one Hadeeth, while not requiring female circumcision, appears to accept it: "Circumcision is a commedable act for men (Sunnah) and is an honorable thing for women (Makromah)." [5]

The problem here is that I'm not too concerned with stuffing your pinus between your ball and suing it shut to make you commendable or honorable...It would be enough if I can just sew your mouth shut and circumcise your keyboard.

Of course, you can't even resist hitting the "view post" button and reading my posts even after placing me on ignore, do you know what this demonstrates:

"THAT UGLY PROUD MUSLIM WITH A SICK UNRESTRAINED MIND WILL REMAIN STATUS QUO MALE SHOVENIST PIG REGARDLESS OF HOW MUCH HE CRIES, ISLMAN, VEIL, ECT. THE ISLAM AND VEILS OF THIS ENTIRE WORLD CAN NOT WASH THE FILTH IN YOUR MIND.".

 

[Proud_Muslim]

The moron is you who don't even read sites before posting them. Here's a quote from the site you presented us with

"THAT UGLY PROUD MUSLIM WITH A SICK UNRESTRAINED MIND WILL REMAIN STATUS QUO MALE SHOVENIST PIG REGARDLESS OF HOW MUCH HE CRIES, ISLMAN, VEIL, ECT. THE ISLAM AND VEILS OF THIS ENTIRE WORLD CAN NOT WASH THE FILTH IN YOUR MIND.".

SHUT UP YOU CHEAP SHARMOTA.

 

[Flores]

SHUT UP YOU CHEAP SHARMOTA.

Great, when all else fails, he plays back his old broken record. What happened to putting me on ignore? Can't you resist looking at me? Now, why would anyone woman trust your ass even under a Hijab...You seem to have no self-restraining ability, you would uncover her and rape her regardless of what she is wearing.....Again, blame the miniskirt and the ignore button, forget about your personality disorders.

 

[jcarl]

Ok everybody calm down; we're adults lets act like some.

I believe, based on reading, that the original bible have been added to and ommited from. The translations have also affected the meanings and intent. I don't want to use harsh words like corrupt, because it might have not been done on purpose. I also believe that the bible is the book of god[/B]

"there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those messengers," (6:34)."

Ok yes stuff gets lost in translations(phileo, eros, and agape all become love, etc.) But that doesn't change the intent of the Bible or its meaning(unless you can give me an example.) Indeed scribal, numerical errors have occurred, but with the near identicallity numbers have in Hebrew, that's not surprising.

The Quran, a newer book from the same source, has been protected better, and is not subject to translation due to the fact that the language it was written with is still spoken.

Hebrew is still spoken, as is Greek, though not exactly street language.

The Quran is also quite in agreement with the intent of the author of the bible/god, and could be used to interpret some of the confusing reporting in the bible.

As far as agreement goes, not exactly. In Islam, to my knowledge and correct me if I'm in error, Jesus is nothing more than a prophet. The Bible, portrays him as God and quotes him as stating equality with the Father and Himself. With the claims he made, then either He is God or He is a loony; He cannot be simply a good man or a prophet. He didn't leave that option open to us.

Bring on the bible verse you are interested in discussing, and I'll let you know my take on it.

Well I want to establish something as to a Muslim's view of Psalms before I get into questions(cause I don't want somebody just saying, well it's corrupted)but the first one comes from Psalms 8.

Originally, posted by Proud Syrian
Yes, we believe the Psalms have been corrupted.

Ok, this doesn't match up: if you read the first Quran I quote, it speaks of David receiving the Psalms from God(you guys don't believe in the Trinity so I'm assuming that "We" means the angels who are giving this to Mohammed. Now I'm assuming that you'll say that it was corrupted later. In that case, please give me an example of such a case.

 

[Proud_Muslim]

Great, when all else fails, he plays back his old broken record. What happened to putting me on ignore? Can't you resist looking at me? Now, why would anyone woman trust your ass even under a Hijab...You seem to have no self-restraining ability, you would uncover her and rape her regardless of what she is wearing.....Again, blame the miniskirt and the ignore button, forget about your personality disorders.

Well I should not call you cheap sharmota, because cheap sharmotat at least dont dress bikini like you, so you are even cheaper than those cheap sharmotat.

Ignorning you means ignoring your argument and ignoring your debate, but that again does not mean ignoring the fact that you are ugly disgusting piece of arab rotten rubbish.

 

[everneo]

Well I should not call you cheap sharmota, because cheap sharmotat at least dont dress bikini like you, so you are even cheaper than those cheap sharmotat.

How many sharmotat you know who dont dress bikini.?

 

[Flores]

How many sharmotat you know who dont dress bikini.?

His mom and his sister are regular sharmotas that don't dress in bikini...His wife falls into the category of expensive sharmota. The reason being, you don't require to rent a room to do his wife, you can do it right under her Jijab tent, so it costs more

 

[Flores]

Ok everybody calm down; we're adults lets act like some.

I hear you jcarl, but some men who lacks complete tact and don't know ABC about addressing females need a 2 x 4 rod on their head everytime they speak.

"there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those messengers," (6:34)."

Agreed. But knowledge and understanding and contingent upon understanding the decree of god...These are stated everywhere in the Quran, and the Quran says that many of the human race lacks in understanding. To sum it in short, I read the bible and will even read it to my very young children, subject to MY understanding and MY interpretation.

Ok yes stuff gets lost in translations(phileo, eros, and agape all become love, etc.) But that doesn't change the intent of the Bible or its meaning(unless you can give me an example.) Indeed scribal, numerical errors have occurred, but with the near identicallity numbers have in Hebrew, that's not surprising.

Fine, you don't have to convince me too much that while the bible may have few errors, it's not a peace of trash by any means.

Hebrew is still spoken, as is Greek, though not exactly street language.

You are referring to modern Hebrew, Yet, the people who are supposidely talking in the bible like Jesus for instance never spoke Hebrew. He spoke an ancient language that is no longer spoken, perhaps armaic or ancient Hebrew.
Then again, who cares, mistakes are imminent, yet individual understanding is the key.

As far as agreement goes, not exactly. In Islam, to my knowledge and correct me if I'm in error, Jesus is nothing more than a prophet.

And in your view a prophet is a bad thing..I just say that because you use "nothing more than". In my view, a prophet is an incredibely honorable position. A position of trust and direct communication. Imagine a select few individuals who are selected by god to see the TRUTH in full and to try to communicate this truth to humans...How can that be a small position...Who cares about sonship, daughtership, ect...I know people who would trust a complete stranger over their corrupt son or daughter anytime of the day.

The Bible, portrays him as God and quotes him as stating equality with the Father and Himself.

Never, I disagree with you and it's my right since my neck is the one on the line. Jesus prayed to the father, cried to the father, glorified the father, fasted for the father, asked for help from the father, ect...Nevertheless, I don't hate you for thinking different than me and I won't try to change your mind.

With the claims he made, then either He is God or He is a loony; He cannot be simply a good man or a prophet. He didn't leave that option open to us.

It's not an option, it's the truth. Why did you limit yourself to, god or a loony? Jesus is the noble messanger of god sent to us by god to show us the way and the light of god. He is literally the way and the light. He is the flash light that humans can use to understand god better through Jesus words and actions...That's my take on this.

Well I want to establish something as to a Muslim's view of Psalms before I get into questions(cause I don't want somebody just saying, well it's corrupted)but the first one comes from Psalms 8.

My position remains that I must judge each and every Sura or scripture separately. I'm not giving you a blanket statement so you can use againest me later to corner me.

 

[567]

Proud you are really sick person. A disgrace to muslims. Sick really sick.

 

[jcarl]

I hear you jcarl, but some men who lacks complete tact and don't know ABC about addressing females need a 2 x 4 rod on their head everytime they speak.[/B]

I've found it best to ignore those like that, but what you're doing I have no real problem with.

Agreed. But knowledge and understanding and contingent upon understanding the decree of god.

It is possible for the interpretation to be wrong. This is where hermeneutics comes into play, there can only be one correct interpretation of a passage, that of the author's intent. Applications can be numerous, but there is can still only be one interpretation.

You are referring to modern Hebrew, Yet, the people who are supposidely talking in the bible like Jesus for instance never spoke Hebrew. He spoke an ancient language that is no longer spoken, perhaps armaic or ancient Hebrew.

Agreed Jesus spoke Aramaic.

Then again, who cares, mistakes are imminent, yet individual understanding is the key.

The whole idea is that the scribal and copyist errors are indeed imminent, though not truly as abundant as one would think with such a large manuscript and a difficult language, but God obviously kept the Bible from doctrinal error, as that would be against his will, the bottom line, is that the original manuscripts were totally inspired.

And in your view a prophet is a bad thing..I just say that because you use "nothing more than".

It's not so much that I disregard prophets altogether, but when Jesus is saying stuff like in John 8:58, John 5:18, Mark14:61-64, Matthew 28:17-18, and John 14:13-14, it seems quite clear that he was hinting, to understate it, that he was something much greater than a prophet. Even in Matt. 19:17, he is leading us to the inescapable conclusion that he is either God or not a righteous person.

In my view, a prophet is an incredibely honorable position. A position of trust and direct communication.

Yes, it is, but if one claims to be more than that, than they are a liar.

Jesus prayed to the father, cried to the father, glorified the father, fasted for the father, asked for help from the father, ect...

What we see here are the two natures of Jesus. He is God and has the powers/characteristics thereof. As such he is able to surrender those powers when he chooses.

It's not an option, it's the truth. Why did you limit yourself to, god or a loony?

I didn't limit Him. He did it himself. When He claims to be God, He is either right or wrong. He cannot be in the gray area, as none exist

My position remains that I must judge each and every Sura or scripture separately. I'm not giving you a blanket statement so you can use againest me later to corner me.

Ok I can accept that.

Psalm 8. It talks of a Son of Man. To whom is that referring if it isn't Jesus?

 

[otheadp]

Yes, we believe the Psalms have been corrupted.

but otherwise, there are absolutely no other problems between Islam and Judaism... right?

 

[skywalker]

but otherwise, there are absolutely no other problems between Islam and Judaism... right?

well besides you? hmm I have to think.

 

[Flores]

It is possible for the interpretation to be wrong. This is where hermeneutics comes into play, there can only be one correct interpretation of a passage, that of the author's intent. Applications can be numerous, but there is can still only be one interpretation.

I agree with part of what you are saying, but not with your conclusion that there is only one interpretation. I think you might mean, there's only one bottomline....And the bottomline is, GOD IS THE ONLY WORTHY CAUSE FOR HUMANS. The words (QURAN/BIBLE/ECT...) themselves are not the way to god, our lives are...and so interpretations of the words in our life and bound to be numerous and to god is the final word in whether our lives met the intent or not. The bottomline is whether our lives was spent in the cause of god or not. For example, A man who never married or had kids may dedicate his life to doing good and caring for his parents and his way may be acceptable...(IF HE DID IT FOR FEAR OF GOD). Another man may spend his years cleaning the environment and that's okay (IF HE IS DOING FOR FEAR OF GOD, NOT FOR HIS OWN GLORY), another may dedicate his life to medecine ...and the list goes on. You can do numerous rightous things, but if they are not done in the name of god, they're nothing, because god is the only worthy cause.

Similarly, Jesus lived in the name of god, died in the name of god, done everything in the name of god...Not because he's god...but because he was trying to teach christians that GOD IS THE ONLY ONE WHO IS GOOD AND WORTHY....and while Jesus lived in the name of god, he couldn't find it in his heart to call himself good, because as he put it, none is good but god.

the bottom line, is that the original manuscripts were totally inspired.

Jesus was inspired indeed, yet the writers were mere copiers and recorders who made mistakes, made changes when they couldn't understand the original text, ect....

It's not so much that I disregard prophets altogether, but when Jesus is saying stuff like in John 8:58, John 5:18, Mark14:61-64, Matthew 28:17-18, and John 14:13-14, it seems quite clear that he was hinting, to understate it, that he was something much greater than a prophet. Even in Matt. 19:17, he is leading us to the inescapable conclusion that he is either God or not a righteous person.

Obviously, you are not getting what Jesus is saying....His words are really profound and powerfull...but may not travel except to those that can understand their meanings. The most pure life to be lived is one that is spent TOTALLY in god's cause. Most prophets spent greatly in god's cause, but still maintained their little selfish times to themselves. Jesus expended more..not because he is god, but because his soul is transparent and pure and thus he lived his life almost totally in god's way..I bet you that Jesus had god on his mind even when he went to pee and poop..I bet you Jesus cried and asked for mercy all the time. Jesus was described in the Quran and Hadith as a man who lived so much in the way of god that water beads always stayed on his skin because of his constant undivided attention to god....Yet when such a man was asked if he was good, he declined to receive anything to himself, because his life is already all spent in the way of god who is the only one worthy of glory...DO YOU GET IT?

Yes, it is, but if one claims to be more than that, than they are a liar.

Jesus wouldn't care if you call him a liar, because he is nothing of himself. He has dedicated himself totally to god, so while you are insulting him, he cares not of the insults....He is consumed totally by god.

What we see here are the two natures of Jesus. He is God and has the powers/characteristics thereof. As such he is able to surrender those powers when he chooses.

I hate to see you make such a simplification of Jesus. Jesus didn't push a button to obtain powers and surrender them....JESUS DENIED HIMSELF....Do you understand the concept of SELF DENIAL? Jesus lived for god most of the time, but still he had to eat and drink to survive, and he did minimal self maintenance while denying himself the rest of the time.

I didn't limit Him. He did it himself. When He claims to be God, He is either right or wrong. He cannot be in the gray area, as none exist

Please reconsider your position.

Psalm 8. It talks of a Son of Man. To whom is that referring if it isn't Jesus?

And it talks of a son of david, and a son of god, and son of a whole lot of other people. The son of Man means that Jesus is human who is born from man. In the Quran, Jesus is called the Son of Mary.