Firemorphic
Activist Membrane
For example, the leaders of ISIS declare that they ARE following the messages in the Quran.
You sound like you are a fundamentalist (btw, you haven't answered any of my questions in four threads so far)
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
For example, the leaders of ISIS declare that they ARE following the messages in the Quran.
You sound like you are a fundamentalist (btw, you haven't answered any of my questions in four threads so far)
God selects the people of authority and gives them the knowledge of the book.
ISIS is the farthest thing from the Quran. Maybe you can enlighten us with their claims and how it's hard to argue against them.
For most books, these issues aren't so important, but for the Quran, clearly they are. For example, the leaders of ISIS declare that they ARE following the messages in the Quran. And I have to say, from a purely logical perspective, it's hard to argue against their claims. It seems clear to me that this is a HUGE problem.
Most of their theological justification rely on material other than the Quran (hadith, Sirah, jurisprudence, history, etc.)
But they must all be consistent with the Quran, correct?
Not necessarily.
Certain schools of thought believe that there are some hadiths which abrogate passages of the Quran.
I agree with you that that happens in practice.
The point of the OP was to hear from Muslims about their belief in the perfection of the Quran.
Out of interest, how do you interpret the terms perfect and timeless? So if a Muslims said the Quran was perfect and timeless, what would you think that this entailed?
timeless = true for all times, not just within a specific historical context
Now I've debated with Muslims who use significantly different definitions of these terms. To me, these are not arguments in good faith.
Timeless, I would assume, relates to it being co-eternal with God.
Even with Orthodox Islam it is accepted that what is doctrinally correct has changed to some degree.
What's the process for this selection and authority giving process? Are there people alive today that have been selected by god and given this authority? If so, which sects agree?
ISIS claims that they are defending Islam against infidels. They hope to restore the caliphate.
Well, this has nothing to do with the Quran.
Millions of people make consequential decisions based on what's in the book. This claim of yours doesn't seem actionable to me. Can you explain how your claim can be used in a real life situation?
Below is just one link - you can easily find many more - that enumerate the basic tenets of Islam. One of them is that the Quran is a gift from god to provide guidance. and that the Quran cannot be corrupted or distorted. This is Islam 101 stuff. It seems clear to me that these basic tenets do not hold up to logical scrutiny.
I said: ISIS claims that they are defending Islam against infidels. They hope to restore the caliphate.
There are NUMEROUS verses in the Quran that instruct Muslims to defend Islam against infidels. I don't think we need to waste each other's time on this point, when quick online searches can verify this.
As for the caliphate, also easily searchable, here is one of the first links I found:
Verses Of The Holy Quran Proving The Caliphate Of His Eminence, Ali
I'm a Universal Declaration of Human Rights fundamentalist, happy to cop to that.
As for answering your questions, seriously, try google.
You want to know which scholars made the most widely used translations of the Quran? Google it dude.
Defending ISIS's ideology is not a 'universal declaration of human rights', yet you ahead and do it anyway.
Google won't tell me what Icehorse read, Google won't tell me how Icehorse came to the conclusions Icehorse came to.
I know over forty English translators, I was never interested (nor asked for) in suggestions from you Icehorse, nice dodge again. At this point it's quite obvious you a very, very narrow perspective (on everything concerning the history of the Qur'an and Islamic history) based of mere feelings rather evidence, you're not very well read at all and nothing to back up your claims.
What I'm saying is that you seem to be using a different meaning for 'timeless' than Muslims making such a claim would mean by it. Then you complain that it is 'bad faith' because people use a term in a different way than you would like it to be used.
You spend a lot of time discussing the topic, so I assume you are interested in learning more about it.
What I meant is that the manner that ISIS is acting has nothing to do with Islam. Yes, the Quran might speak about self-defense but that isn't a Quranic idea. Everyone practices self-defense. And the ISIS belief about the caliphate has no Shia-Islamic basis.
Are you arguing that when Muslims claim their book is perfect, unalterable and timeless, that they don't mean its advice will be true forever?
As we've discussed in the past, I'm not all that interested in scholarly interpretations of scripture. This is not a value judgment. Perhaps there are useful things to learn from such scholarship, but for the most part it seems less important than what's happening in the world today.
What I'm interested in is how scripture impacts what people believe and how they behave.
So when Muslims claim their book to be perfect, unalterable, and timeless, I do them the courtesy of taking them at their word. And if they are deliberately using misleading meanings for common words, then those bad faith claims are on them.