literary talent

owlwink

Don't you love the way many of the prime religions revolve around a set text and its history, both completely unstable forms to establish a religion around. More than likely fictional tales (may as well pray to the toothfairy). Even if one of them was the true one (which one is). Interesting how they are always written in a ambivalent style that tends to place power and control on the preachers. Bane of existence masked under a face of fate. (no I am not lost, just finding my own way, rather than obeying a fragmented establishment.

Hero Of College

owlwink wrote: »

Don't you love the way many of the prime religions revolve around a set text and its history, both completely unstable forms to establish a religion around. More than likely fictional tales (may as well pray to the toothfairy). Even if one of them was the true one (which one is). Interesting how they are always written in a ambivalent style that tends to place power and control on the preachers. Bane of existence masked under a face of fate. (no I am not lost, just finding my own way, rather than obeying a fragmented establishment.

Well the Bible developed over a longer period of time, where as the Koran got scribbled down in nothing flat.

owlwink

I didnt realise that the solidity of a religous text was based around the length of time it took to write and how long it has existed. If all forms are unknowable how can you assume that the earlier ones are right. Can you be ageist towards a religous text??????????????????

Playboy

eh ... so do you have a point or are you just posting random thoughts you are having? Is there something about Islam or specifically the Koran that you want to talk about? Have you read the Koran? .. thats usually a good starting point before you criticize.

owlwink

yes i have boy.

owlwink

Very interesting how the exact same starting argument was locked on the christianity sections, whilst here it has been left alone.

Interesting indeed .........ponder?????????????
Any takers/???

DinoBot

owlwink wrote: »

Don't you love the way many of the prime religions revolve around a set text and its history, both completely unstable forms to establish a religion around. More than likely fictional tales (may as well pray to the toothfairy). Even if one of them was the true one (which one is). Interesting how they are always written in a ambivalent style that tends to place power and control on the preachers. Bane of existence masked under a face of fate. (no I am not lost, just finding my own way, rather than obeying a fragmented establishment.

I'll bite
Well I like the way you discount the possibility that a religion can be set up by "a set text and its history, both completely unstable forms to establish a religion around" but then go on to say "Even if one of them was the true one (which one is)"

So, please tell. Which one is true ?

philologos

owlwink wrote: »

Very interesting how the exact same starting argument was locked on the christianity sections, whilst here it has been left alone.

Interesting indeed .........ponder?????????????
Any takers/???

Simple, because I reported it due to you violating the charter on the Christianity forum. If the mods on the Islam forum see it fit to lock they will probably do so also.

owlwink

DinoBot wrote: »

I'll bite
Well I like the way you discount the possibility that a religion can be set up by "a set text and its history, both completely unstable forms to establish a religion around" but then go on to say "Even if one of them was the true one (which one is)"

So, please tell. Which one is true ?

That is something you have to ask yourself.
My mind is set on a personal religion

DinoBot

owlwink wrote: »

That is something you have to ask yourself.

Thats daft ! you said one is true not I.

I am in no need of a riddle :rolleyes: bye

Hobbes

owlwink wrote: »

Very interesting how the exact same starting argument was locked on the christianity sections, whilst here it has been left alone.

Interesting indeed .........ponder?????????????
Any takers/???

It is only not locked because I didn't see the thread sooner. Welcome to the forum owlwink I hope you have read the charter.

Thanks.

owlwink

I apologise for any inconveniance caused..

Alice Junge

what's this all about it seems to be quite a meander !

EamonnKeane

Hero Of College wrote: »

Well the Bible developed over a longer period of time, where as the Koran got scribbled down in nothing flat.

Um, not exactly...

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia,[41] the text in the Qu'ran is traced to six sources:

The Old Testament canonical and apocryphal and the hybrid Judaism of the late rabbinical schools. During Muhammad's time the Jews were numerous in many parts of Arabia, especially around Medina. Later Judaism and Rabbinism are equally well represented. Abraham Geiger finds parallels between parts of the Koran and Jewish Agadot including Medrashim such as the Medrash Tanchuma. He posits that some of the other parts of the Koran may come from Medrashim that were lost. He cites stylistic connections between the Medrashim and the Koran [42][43]

The New Testament (canonical and apocryphal). On his journeys between Syria, Hijaz, and Yemen, Muhammad had opportunity to come in close touch with Yemenite, Abyssinian, Ghassanite, and Syrian Christians, especially heretic.

Sabaism, a combination of Judaism, Manichaeism, and Babylonian polytheism

Zoroastrianism. One suggestion of Zoroastrian influence on Islam is based on the conclusion by the Jewish orientalist, Ignaz Goldziher, in his book "Islamisme et Parsisme",[44] that the incident of Isra and Mai'raj in Islam (Muhammad's ascension to the heavens) resembles the Iranian "Divina Commedia" called Arda Wiraz Namag. Ibn Warraq quoted the Christian missionary, Tisdall, on this, claiming that the book Arda Wiraz Namag was composed 400 years after Muhammad.

However, in this regard, Encyclopaedia Iranica states that: "The Arda Wiraz-namag, like many of the Zoroastrian works, underwent successive redactions. It assumed its definitive form in the 9th-10th centuries AD".[45] Gignoux says the following about the same: "It is known that the whole of the Pahlavi literature was written tardily, roughly speaking after the Muslim conquest, and that it however transmitted extremely old traditions to us, from Sassanide and even pre-Sassanide times".[46]

Hanifism, the adherents of which, called Hanīfs, must have been considerable in number and influence, as it is known from contemporary Arabian sources that twelve of Muhammad's followers were members of this sect.[citation needed]

Native ancient and contemporary Arabian polytheistic beliefs and practices. Wellhausen has collected in his "Reste des arabischen Heidentums" (Berlin, 1897) all that is known of pre-Islamic Arabian religious belief, traditions, customs, and superstitions, many of which are either alluded to or accepted and incorporated in the Qu'ran. From the various sects and creeds, and Abul-Fida, the well-known historian and geographer of the thirteenth century, it is clear that religious beliefs and practices of the Arabs of Muhammad's day form one of the many sources of Islam. From this source Islam derived the practices of polygamy and slavery, which Muhammad sanctioned by adopting them.[citation needed]

DinoBot

EamonnKeane wrote: »

Um, not exactly...

At last an unbiased view of the origon of the quran from the Catholic Encyclopedia :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

af_thefragile

owlwink wrote: »

Don't you love the way many of the prime religions revolve around a set text and its history, both completely unstable forms to establish a religion around. More than likely fictional tales (may as well pray to the toothfairy). Even if one of them was the true one (which one is). Interesting how they are always written in a ambivalent style that tends to place power and control on the preachers. Bane of existence masked under a face of fate. (no I am not lost, just finding my own way, rather than obeying a fragmented establishment.

I think i'll have a little go at this.

So for the starters, yeah prime religions do revolve around a set text and its history. Now in what way are those unstable forms to establish a religion around?
Here we've got a solid proof of God and his teachings in the form of the Quran. Its a set text, definitely something that cannot be modified or tampered with (there's only one version of Quran which hasn't changed since it was first written). Thats makes the Quran a more solid base to establish a religion around. Its not a set of rules and regulations. Its a way of life. Its a guidebook or a manual to life. It in no way places power and control on preachers. The preachers are bound by what the Quran says and can't imply anything on you thats outside the book and the teachings of the Prophet. And Quran is not ambivalent in anyway (maybe the Bible is, but the Quran is one of the most straightforward book you'll ever read).
Guess i'm starting to sound like all the "preachers" around here (and by no means am i a preacher!). But yeah, you can't say the Quran is an unstable base to create a religion upon. If not a book of guidelines and history, what else would you base a religion upon?
Islam is nothing close to worshipping the Tooth Fairy. The Tooth Fairy has no history or evidence to it (now you might argue even Allah doesn't have any solid evidence too, well the Quran is an evidence of that). Well, if you don't wanna believe in the evidence, its okay. But as i stated before the Quran is not just a history book with a bunch of rules in it. Its a guide book to life. Believing in it is completely your choice.


I always say this and i'll say it again here. Islam is anything but blind faith. God gave all his signs and "proofs" in the Quran. Now its upto you to believe in it or not. If you're doubtful, you can go research on it and see for yourself what you read in it makes sense to you or not.

The Quran is a test of faith. It has all the details about life, death and God in it. Now its upto you if you wanna choose to believe or disregard it. Its a test of faith and depending on how well your faith is, you'll either get through or fail!

And again at the end of the day its no harm in believing. If there's really no God, well, then your believes are not gonna make any difference. If there infact is a God, then well, maybe your believes will save you! So its better to die a believer just in case!
Rather than dying a non-believer skeptic and maybe face major disappointment if you were actually wrong...

EamonnKeane

af_thefragile wrote: »

Quran is not ambivalent in anyway (maybe the Bible is, but the Quran is one of the most straightforward

Puin, 1999: "The Qur’an claims for itself that it is ‘mubeen,’ or clear, but if you look at it, you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply doesn’t make sense. Many Muslims will tell you otherwise, of course, but the fact is that a fifth of the Qur’anic text is just incomprehensible. This is what has caused the traditional anxiety regarding translation. If the Qur’an is not comprehensible, if it can’t even be understood in Arabic, then it’s not translatable into any language. That is why Muslims are afraid. Since the Qur’an claims repeatedly to be clear but is not—there is an obvious and serious contradiction.”

af_thefragile

^But i found it pretty clear...
You do need to have a certain knowledge of the background and history of where its coming form to be able to understand it better. But i don't think its that incomprehensible.
Yeah, many times one verse can lead to many different interpretations, but that doesn't quite mean its difficult to comprehend.

There are loads of books out there which give detailed explanation of every verse in the Quran. Maybe reading those could clear up your views. Its not like its a very vague book that no one seems to object about afraid to become a heretic.
A lot of the Quranic verses are pretty deep and have loads of history behind them. But as i said, there are many books out there that'll give you a detailed explanation of every verse in the Quran to make things simpler.

the_new_mr

Sorry to bring up an old thread but I think I need to remind everyone here (especially EamonnKeane and af_thefragile) that this forum is not for proselytizing in either direction.

On the topic of discussion, I think it's worth mentioning that there are plenty of verses that urge the reader to reflect. To place a question in their mind that they are to come up with the answer to.

Some examples:
Al-Baqara:219
"They will ask thee about intoxicants and games of chance. Say: "In both there is great evil as well as some benefit for man; but the evil which they cause is greater than the benefit which they bring." And they will ask thee as to what they should spend [in God's cause]. Say: "Whatever you can spare." In this way God makes clear unto you His messages, so that you might reflect"

Al-Imran:191
"[and] who remember God when they stand, and when they sit, and when they lie down to sleep, and [thus] reflect on the creation of the heavens and the earth: "O our Sustainer! Thou hast not created [aught of] this without meaning and purpose. Limitless art Thou in Thy glory! Keep us safe, then, from suffering through fire!"