This is for Lawdog...

[SnakeLord]

Bible versions are irrelevant the message is the same

Well, there's one religious man's personal opinion on the matter. Just another few billion to go.

Hey by the way SnakeLord

How's it going?

 

[superluminal]

you're confusing accuracy with holiness; the Quran is only considered accurate in its original language; since Arabic has many fine shades of meaning with no counterparts in many languages.

Sorry sam, but I don't buy that. It sounds a bit arrogant on the part of quran scholars and muslims. The ideas expressed in different languages may take on a huge range of forms, but they are still human ideas. A good translator should be able to take any idea in any language and communicate the meaning in any other.

It also implies that if I learn arabic I somehow come to comprehend certain ideas that I could never convey to english speaking people (even though the idea would have to be expressed to me in english first as part of my language studies). I don't buy it.

Can you give me an example of a word or phrase in arabic which conveys an idea that cannot be expressed adequately in some other language?

 

[S.A.M.]

Sorry sam, but I don't buy that. It sounds a bit arrogant on the part of quran scholars and muslims. The ideas expressed in different languages may take on a huge range of forms, but they are still human ideas. A good translator should be able to take any idea in any language and communicate the meaning in any other.

It also implies that if I learn arabic I somehow come to comprehend certain ideas that I could never convey to english speaking people (even though the idea would have to be expressed to me in english first as part of my language studies). I don't buy it.

Can you give me an example of a word or phrase in arabic which conveys an idea that cannot be expressed adequately in some other language?

Just go online type a verse and look up all the translations; you'll see how a change in nuances can change the way the verse is read or understood. I think in my interactions with (Q), there are some translations of his which I have corrected ( in the Evolution thread, I think)

There are other, practical reasons for the Arabic Quran, most of them directed to preservation of the original content ( all Qurans in the world from the oldest available to the latest reprint are EXACTLY the same), keeping one common language of prayer for all Muslims worldwide. Hence any official translation of the Quran is always accompanied by an Arabic text, so all (devout) Muslims worldwide know the sound of the verses and can recognise them during prayers e.g. in Mecca. It also prevents mischief with the meaning of the Quran, because the original text is available for comparison. This does not mean you cannot read a translation, however most Muslims when they learn to read the Quran, start with the Arabic.

e.g. the word nitfah which traditionally meant drop and now is also used for dust clay particle and clot.

So "man was made from a drop" can become "man was made from dust" or "man was made from a clot" or "man was made from clay".

*edit: super, I found the example, check the next post*

 

[S.A.M.]

So what is the ultimate message of the Quran?

Quran ( meaning recital) is the message of Islam.

Literally, Islam means submission, peace, and salvation. In its most fundamental aspect, Islam is epitomized in the most frequently recited of all Qur’anic phrases, the Basmalahi—In the name of God, the Merciful (al-Rahmani), the Compassionate (al-Rahim). Both words are related to the quality of rahma (mercy and compassion). God manifests Himself through His absolute, all-inclusive Mercy and Compassion, and Islam is founded upon that affirmation.

 

[perplexity]

Literally, Islam means submission, peace, and salvation....

Which is not neccessarily as bad a thing as some seem to think.

Perusing the large variety of religious threads around here one thing comes across to me above all else, that to be your own God is hard work.

--- Ron.

 

[S.A.M.]

Can you give me an example of a word or phrase in arabic which conveys an idea that cannot be expressed adequately in some other language?

one translation of verse # 13:31

Even if a Quran caused mountains to move, or the earth to tear asunder, or the dead to speak (they will not believe). GOD controls all things. Is it not time for the believers to give up and realize that if GOD willed, He could have guided all the people? The disbelievers will continue to suffer disasters, as a consequence of their own works, or have disasters strike close to them, until GOD's promise is fulfilled.GOD will never change the predetermined destiny.

this is the actual translation:

And if there had been a Quran with which mountains could be moved (from their places) or the earth could be cloven asunder, or the dead could be made to speak ( it would not have been other than this Quran). But the decision of all things is certainly with Allah. Have not then those who believed yet known that had Allah willed, he could have guided all mankind? And a disaster will not cease to strike those who disbelieved because of their deeds, or it settles close to their home, until the promise of Allah comes to pass. Caertainly, Allah does not break His promise.

Do you see the differences in meaning? They are subtle, but important.

Another common mixup is between momineen (believer) and muslimeen (Muslim). A believer is one who follows the right way and a Muslim is one who follows Islam. Both terms are used specifically in Arabic, but used interchangeably in English. Similarly for kaafir (nonbeliever in Islam) and mushrik (one who is not a monotheist); they are both called disbelievers in English.

 

[Ophiolite]

I keep telling him to repent before it's too late, but he just tilts his head in confusion and then shits on the carpet. What can you do heh?

Rip up the carpets and put in laminated wood flooring. This will wipe clean.

 

[(Q)]

Just go online type a verse and look up all the translations; you'll see how a change in nuances can change the way the verse is read or understood. I think in my interactions with (Q), there are some translations of his which I have corrected ( in the Evolution thread, I think)

No, you did not correct anything. You merely offered another interpretation, one of many.

There are other, practical reasons for the Arabic Quran, most of them directed to preservation of the original content ( all Qurans in the world from the oldest available to the latest reprint are EXACTLY the same)

No, they are not, they have been canonized just like other religious doctrines. As a self-professed authority, you should have known that.

So "man was made from a drop" can become "man was made from dust" or "man was made from a clot" or "man was made from clay".

Yes, but the Quran does not talk about evolution, it talks about having created all things in their current forms, which is entirely wrong. More propaganda.

 

[S.A.M.]

No, you did not correct anything. You merely offered another interpretation, one of many.

Agreed. Do you know Arabic? Please look up the original and let me also know which one is closer in meaning.

No, they are not, they have been canonized just like other religious doctrines. As a self-professed authority, you should have known that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_and_development_of_the_quran

Having studied early Quran manuscripts John Gilchrist states: "The oldest manuscripts of the Quran still in existence date from not earlier than about one hundred years after Muhammad's death." ("Jam' Al-Qur'an", page 153) He comes to this conclusion because two of the oldest manuscripts, the Samarqand and Topkapi codices are both written in the Kufic script. It "can generally be dated from the late eight century depending on the extent of development in the character of the script in each case."

Uthman's version was written in an older Arabic script that left out most vowel markings; thus the script could be interpreted and read in various ways. This basic Uthmanic script is called the rasm; it is the basis of several traditions of oral recitation, differing in minor points. In order to fix these oral recitations and prevent any mistakes, scribes and scholars began annotating the Uthmanic rasm with various diacritical marks indicating how the word was to be pronounced. It is believed that this process of annotation began around 700 CE, soon after Uthman's compilation, and finished by approximately 900 CE. The Quran text most widely used today is based on the Rasm Uthmani tradition of recitation, as approved by Al-Azhar University in Cairo in 1922.

Yes, but the Quran does not talk about evolution, it talks about having created all things in their current forms, which is entirely wrong. More propaganda.

:m:

 

[(Q)]

Agreed. Do you know Arabic? Please look up the original and let me also know which one is closer in meaning.

It doesn't matter, neither had any meaning in reality, both were complete nonsense. You attempted to show the science of Islam in regards to evolution, which you don't understand, and were promptly refuted, and hopefully educated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_and_development_of_the_quran

It "can generally be dated from the late eight century depending on the extent of development in the character of the script in each case."

It is believed that this process of annotation began around 700 CE, soon after Uthman's compilation, and finished by approximately 900 CE. The Quran text most widely used today is based on the Rasm Uthmani tradition of recitation, as approved by Al-Azhar University in Cairo in 1922.



"Uthman ibn 'Affan was elected as the third Caliph by a Council called the Shura. As the elected leader of the Muslim Ummah (Brotherhood), it was his privilege and prerogative to appoint a Commission to collect all the available verses of the Qur'an from the 'Ummah and undertake the task of preparing a definitive compiled copy of the Qur'an. The Commission established a criteria for this specific purpose. When this Commission, headed by Zayd ibn Thabit - a reputable scribe and personal secretary to the Prophet, came up with a finally compiled copy of the Qur'an, it was approved by 'Uthman for circulation. The Caliph also supervised that the faithful copies of it were made and circulated to various provinces and Islamic countries. Having accomplished that, the next obvious question before him was; how to preserve this canonized text from being tainted at a later date? There were thousands of collected verses from which this final canonized copy was prepared. The majority of this collected verses met the criteria established by the Commission and there were a few that did not. They all were now superfluous. One of the criteria established by the Commission was that any verse that did not have the collaboration from another source, should be rejected. To keep such rejected verses within circulation would be to defeat the ultimate aim and purpose of this
and it's efforts. Hence, 'Uthman felt the need to destroy these superfluous copies of the verses and preserve the approved text from being tainted. A true Believer would say, within these Revelations, Allah had undertaken to preserve His Final Scripture. The third Caliph was just an instrument of Allah to do what Allah had intended to do."

http://www.mostmerciful.com/reply-ans-islam.htm

 

[S.A.M.]

It doesn't matter, neither had any meaning in reality, both were complete nonsense. You attempted to show the science of Islam in regards to evolution, which you don't understand, and were promptly refuted, and hopefully educated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_and_development_of_the_quran

It "can generally be dated from the late eight century depending on the extent of development in the character of the script in each case."

It is believed that this process of annotation began around 700 CE, soon after Uthman's compilation, and finished by approximately 900 CE. The Quran text most widely used today is based on the Rasm Uthmani tradition of recitation, as approved by Al-Azhar University in Cairo in 1922.



"Uthman ibn 'Affan was elected as the third Caliph by a Council called the Shura. As the elected leader of the Muslim Ummah (Brotherhood), it was his privilege and prerogative to appoint a Commission to collect all the available verses of the Qur'an from the 'Ummah and undertake the task of preparing a definitive compiled copy of the Qur'an. The Commission established a criteria for this specific purpose. When this Commission, headed by Zayd ibn Thabit - a reputable scribe and personal secretary to the Prophet, came up with a finally compiled copy of the Qur'an, it was approved by 'Uthman for circulation. The Caliph also supervised that the faithful copies of it were made and circulated to various provinces and Islamic countries. Having accomplished that, the next obvious question before him was; how to preserve this canonized text from being tainted at a later date? There were thousands of collected verses from which this final canonized copy was prepared. The majority of this collected verses met the criteria established by the Commission and there were a few that did not. They all were now superfluous. One of the criteria established by the Commission was that any verse that did not have the collaboration from another source, should be rejected. To keep such rejected verses within circulation would be to defeat the ultimate aim and purpose of this
and it's efforts. Hence, 'Uthman felt the need to destroy these superfluous copies of the verses and preserve the approved text from being tainted. A true Believer would say, within these Revelations, Allah had undertaken to preserve His Final Scripture. The third Caliph was just an instrument of Allah to do what Allah had intended to do."

http://www.mostmerciful.com/reply-ans-islam.htm

So how does this disprove that the oldest surviving copy is same as the latest?

And I said that it was a hundred years after Muhammed, so what did you say different?

P.S. That verse had nothing to do with evolution

 

[(Q)]

So how does this disprove that the oldest surviving copy is same as the latest?

And I said that it was a hundred years after Muhammed, so what did you say different?

The documents were changed over hundreds of years and weren't started until a hundred years after Muhammed.

How is that original?

 

[SnakeLord]

100 years ago. Sheesh.

Anyone here remember England in 1906? There weren't even cars on the streets, planes in the air, no computers, no toilet roll, hell.. no toothpaste.

My grandmother is around 96 or someshit and when I ask her to recall 4 years before she was born she can't remember. I ask her to recall life when she was 5 and she can't remember. I ask her to recall life when she was 10 and it's very vague, (untrustworthy).

100 years ago. Sheesh.

 

[(Q)]

100 years ago. Sheesh.

100 years ago. Sheesh.

Just as Christianity was born from those who attempted to recall conversations and events decades before.

Preposterous.

 

[S.A.M.]

And I said that it was a hundred years after Muhammed, so what did you say different?

The documents were changed over hundreds of years and weren't started until a hundred years after Muhammed.

How is that original?

The Quran was written down loosely during Mohammeds lifetime ( 7th century) and collected by Uthaman from the Prophet's widow ( she was a scribe), companions and contemporaries. The first written copy was completed between 650 and 656 ( Mohammed died in 632). Uthman destroyed all other variants and rejected those verses which he could not corroborate. The anotations and additions of didactics took much longer.

The oldest surviving Quran is from 100 years after Mohammed.

 

[(Q)]

The Quran was written down loosely during Mohammeds lifetime ( 7th century) and collected by Uthaman from the Prophet's widow. The first written copy was completed between 650 and 656 ( Mohammed died in 632). Uthman destroyed all other variants and rejected those verses which he could not corroborate. The anotations and additions of didactics took much longer.

In other words, Islam is based on "loose" writings handed over to Uthman who decided what was correct and what was not, decades after Muhammed's death.

Yeah, original.

 

[S.A.M.]

In other words, Islam is based on "loose" writings handed over to Uthman who decided what was correct and what was not, decades after Muhammed's death.

Yeah, original.

based on duplicates from at least two separate individuals, yes

edit* it helped of course, that the Quran is not read, but recited with meter and rhyme*

 

[perplexity]

Anyone here remember England in 1906? There weren't even cars on the streets, planes in the air, no computers, no toilet roll, hell.. no toothpaste.

Toilet rolls as we know them were first produced in the USA in 1857, and toothpaste dates back at least to the 18th century, and was quite common in Victorian times, albeit not available in squeezy tubes.

--- Ron.

 

[SnakeLord]

Just as Christianity was born from those who attempted to recall conversations and events decades before.

Preposterous.

Indeed, it is laughable at best.

Toilet rolls as we know them were first produced in the USA in 1857, and toothpaste dates back at least to the 18th century, and was quite common in Victorian times, albeit not available in squeezy tubes.

Very interesting and I thank you deeply for that, but I was hoping the point would not be lost in slight historical mis-dating. If I really wanted to know the year of toilet paper invention, I could use google as well.

 

[perplexity]

Very interesting and I thank you deeply for that, but I was hoping the point would not be lost in slight historical mis-dating. If I really wanted to know the year of toilet paper invention, I could use google as well.

I'd rather the impression that slight historical misdating was the point.

Any bets on the date of the first pinch of salt?

--- Ron.