My views about Islam and why it is so difficult to attain constructive dialogue about them

[LuisDantas]

In any case, Paganism is simply not wrong.

Even taking for granted that there is a sole God; that the Torah was one of his earliest true revelations; and that God wants people to remain true to its message...

... it still does not make sense to believe that God wants people never to interact with or learn from other people.

 

[Flankerl]

So what is the relevance of any of this?

 

[leibowde84]

But that happened before the advent of Islam.There were hardly any Christians in Mecca or Medina, if Quran is correct about the Christians, there is no doubt about that; then the Quran must be correct about the Jews of Medina.
Quote:

View attachment 10043​

Unquote
https://books.google.ca/books?
THE MYSTERY & HISTORY OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE: AN AFRICAN PERSPECTIVE
By SAM OYSTEIN
Please note from the above that there existed some groups of the Jews who later became extinct.

Regards

Why would the Quran being correct about Christians lead you to the assumption that it must be right about the Jews of Medina? I don't follow.

 

[YmirGF]

You left this out....

 

[paarsurrey]

In any case, Paganism is simply not wrong.

Even taking for granted that there is a sole God; that the Torah was one of his earliest true revelations; and that God wants people to remain true to its message...

... it still does not make sense to believe that God wants people never to interact with or learn from other people.

There is no harm in learning good things from others provided these are good. Man is social; one learns from others.
Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

Right you are, Paarsurrey!

 

[Kirran]

There is no harm in learning good things from others provided these are good. Man is social; one learns from others.
Regards

So it is necessarily bad to worship multiple deities?

Why?

 

[paarsurrey]

Hellenism =/= Paganism.

For the purposes of Judaism and Islam who believe ONENESS of G-d, the polytheists be they Hellenists or pagans are same, they may be different otherwise.
The 1906 Jewish Encylopedia discusses them both in the article HELLENISM, I think for the same reason.
Regards

 

[Flankerl]

For the purposes of Judaism who believe ONENESS of G-d, the polytheists be they Hellenists or pagans are same, they may be different otherwise.

You don't get to decide that for us. Stick to your own Religion.

 

[paarsurrey]

Further to my post #120 above, I add:
Jesus’ reasonable argument is:
The Jews believe that they are from the lineage of Abraham and as such fall under the covenant of G-d with Abraham:
"God concluded a covenant with Abraham (Gen. xv. 18, xvii. 2, 7) by which He entered into a special relationship with him and his descendants for all time" that "was renewed on Mount Sinai when, before the giving of the Law, Israel as a people pledged itself to keep His covenant (Ex. xix. 8)." Jewish Encylopedia.
"Judaism knows of no other than the old Sinaitic covenant. Eternal as the covenant with heaven and earth is God's covenant with the seed of Jacob (Jer. xxxiii. 25et seq.)." Jewish Encylopedia.
The Law given under Sinaitic covenant has two most important statutes.
1. Belief in ONENESS of G-d. Deut. 6:5-9
2. Accepting the truthful prophets of G-d. Deut. 18:20
By not following the above statutes and denying Jesus' prophet-hood, the Jews of the time of Jesus had broken the covenant and were thus out of the lineage of Abraham or Jacob.
Jesus charged the Jews correctly. Right?
Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

You truly expect the Jewish People to feel that much bound to ancient scripture?

Even taking your interpretation of it for granted, including the (highly disputable at least) part of Jesus somehow being the prophet that was promised to the Jewish People, it would still be pointless at best.

 

[Kirran]

You don't get to tell Jews or Christians what they believe, or what they should believe.

 

[paarsurrey]

You don't get to tell Jews or Christians what they believe, or what they should believe.

My above post, you would appreciate, is directly connected with the topic being discussed with Kirran vide verse [9:30] and the context verse [9:31]:
[9:30]And the Jews say, Ezra is the son of Allah,and the Christians say, the Messiah is the son of Allah; that is what they say with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before them. Allah’s curse be on them! How are they turned away!
[9:31]They have taken their learned men and their monks for lords beside Allah. And so have they taken the Messiah, son of Mary. And they were not commanded but to worship the One God. There is no God but He. Too Holy is He for what they associate with Him!
Right?
Regards

 

[Kirran]

My above post, you would appreciate, is directly connected with the topic being discussed with Kirran vide verse [9:30] and the context verse [9:31]:
[9:30]And the Jews say, Ezra is the son of Allah,and the Christians say, the Messiah is the son of Allah; that is what they say with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before them. Allah’s curse be on them! How are they turned away!
[9:31]They have taken their learned men and their monks for lords beside Allah. And so have they taken the Messiah, son of Mary. And they were not commanded but to worship the One God. There is no God but He. Too Holy is He for what they associate with Him!
Right?
Regards

'Right?'

What are you asking me here?

 

[paarsurrey]

'Right?'
What are you asking me here?

That I am answering your question regarding verse [9:30] that you asked me, on Jun 20, 2015 post #71 ,with reference to the context.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

@ Kirran

and others

I have explained two of the three verses of Quran.
If you follow the line given by me to understand a verse of Quran from the context verses you will solve the third one yourself (in fact any number of verses) as Quran is in a system.
Regards

 

[Kirran]

I have explained two of the three verses of Quran.
If you follow the line given by me to understand a verse of Quran from the context verses you will solve the third one yourself (in fact any number of verses) as Quran is in a system.

Easily said. But actually, no, you haven't explained why 9:30 is there, it really doesn't make sense and is incorrect. You've given it a try, but actually it is incorrect that 'Jews believe Ezra is Son of Allah' because even if, bizarrely, the Jews of Medina did believe this, that isn't what is said in the Qur'an. It says 'the Jews' not 'the Jews of Medina'.

23:14 and 16:15 remain entirely unexplained.

 

[paarsurrey]

Easily said. But actually, no, you haven't explained why 9:30 is there, it really doesn't make sense and is incorrect. You've given it a try, but actually it is incorrect that 'Jews believe Ezra is Son of Allah' because even if, bizarrely, the Jews of Medina did believe this, that isn't what is said in the Qur'an. It says 'the Jews' not 'the Jews of Medina'.

23:14 and 16:15 remain entirely unexplained.

I am not here to necessarily convince one to my side. I am convinced that the verses have been explained reasonably and rationally if one ponders on the verse and the verses in the context. One could differ with me and remain unconvinced though, it is OK.
Regards

 

[Tumah]

It is on the person who makes the objection to prove that the Jews of Medina did not believe in this concept as the Jews of Medina were addressed specifically in a part of the verse.
The discussion in the context is not Ezra but something else.
You may take help, if you like, from Jewish friends in the forum or from elsewhere with whom the issue concerns directly.
They should prove that Jews of Medina did never have this concept.
Jews were divided in sects and denominations; this trend continued. New sects/denominations emerge and the old ones vanish.
Quran is not a book of history. Quran deals ethical,moral and spiritual issues in a reasonable and pragmatic way.
Regards

I would agree with you, yes, that when a person seems to have a plausible theory, the way to discredit it, is by disproving it.
However, your claim is that when the Jews migrated to Medina, they merged with other denominations they maintained a belief completely foreign to Judaism.

The first problem is that if the Jews merged with their pagan neighbors, then within just a few short generations, you wouldn't have any more Jews just pagans.
The second problem, is that historically Jews don't seem to intermarry, which has made us especially valuable for genetic studies. So you're working against a trend here.
The third problem is suggesting that Jews running from Christians, would take a belief that is congruent with Christians just in a Jewish framework.
The fourth problem is that you want to say that the Jews adapted pagan beliefs, but the specific belief that is claiming to have been adapted doesn't seem to be found among any pagan tribes of the neighborhood. It is (according to the claim) specific to Jews and not pagans.
The fifth problem is that its more likely that a non-Jew should be mistaken about Jewish beliefs, then that an entire sect of Jews should change their beliefs.

Taken altogether, what you have here is an extraordinary claim. And when it comes to extraordinary claims, you don't say that the onus is on the disbeliever to disprove it. You say, that the believer has to provide extraordinary evidence.

 

[paarsurrey]

I would agree with you, yes, that when a person seems to have a plausible theory, the way to discredit it, is by disproving it.
However, your claim is that when the Jews migrated to Medina, they merged with other denominations they maintained a belief completely foreign to Judaism.

The first problem is that if the Jews merged with their pagan neighbors, then within just a few short generations, you wouldn't have any more Jews just pagans.
The second problem, is that historically Jews don't seem to intermarry, which has made us especially valuable for genetic studies. So you're working against a trend here.
The third problem is suggesting that Jews running from Christians, would take a belief that is congruent with Christians just in a Jewish framework.
The fourth problem is that you want to say that the Jews adapted pagan beliefs, but the specific belief that is claiming to have been adapted doesn't seem to be found among any pagan tribes of the neighborhood. It is (according to the claim) specific to Jews and not pagans.
The fifth problem is that its more likely that a non-Jew should be mistaken about Jewish beliefs, then that an entire sect of Jews should change their beliefs.

Taken altogether, what you have here is an extraordinary claim. And when it comes to extraordinary claims, you don't say that the onus is on the disbeliever to disprove it. You say, that the believer has to provide extraordinary evidence.

I made no such claims sir.
I stated "Later they migrated from Medina and might have joined/merged with other denominations and changed or reformed their concepts." Please see my post #80 in the thread.
Please revise your argument/s, therefore.
Regards

P.S
Would one please enlighten us as to when and why the first Jewish migration from north to Yathrib occurred from the Jewish sources of that time?