The attack Quran thread

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Also, it looks like in that Venus Aphrodite painting that they sort of kept the female genitalia shape there but made it out of her hair. Sneaky!

 

[Estro Felino]

That was a good question! I'm a bit of an artist myself and I love art, and naked ladies too. Should I be lowering my gaze or because the depiction is not of a human, do you think its ok that I'm looking at these breasts? How about if its pornographic imagery or imagery of other inappropriate or indecent sorts of things, which are "simulated" or otherwise "actual" sex acts by "performers" who I'm not married to (and who aren't my slaves either, drat!).
Now, due to my genes, my biology, what happens when I see images like these, is little chemical triggers go pew pew in my brain, and then there is a choosh (an onomatopoeia) of chemicals that get sent out and hormones or whatever, that make one want to pursue more or pursue further stimulation and arousal, and whatever else follows that, sex acts like masturbation or actual sex (unlikely available to most of us here). Which we are supposed to do with our wives (or otherwise those who our right hand possess or whatever? What is that again exactly?). The Qur'an seems to have not clarified about the watching of sex acts of others, but has said to lower the gaze when facing women directly, should we read in between the lines and extend things to not looking at imagery or photographs? The photographs are depicting acts which would generally be considered crimes or sinful and an evil way of life!

Anyway, the archeologists (perverts that they are) have discovered Ancient Islamic Culture Baths and things which are full of art, even art which can be considered erotic or with images of naked women plastered all over the place. Also, through a very long Islamic History, it seems many Muslims cultures seemed to tolerate the existence of and production of erotic art at times, nudes, sex acts drawn, things like that, but perhaps not as prevalent as some periods and cultures. There seemed to be a fluctuating sense of the acceptability of such things or leniency with such, and in many cases it seems that it may have been the upper classes (even in the case of European art) that ever accessed these sorts of images for the most part (perverts that they are)!

Actually Botticelli wanted, as Greek and Roman artists, to portray and celebrate the spiritual meaning of female beauty. Whose Venus is the symbol or the archetype.
There is Venus who covers herself out of shame...
The ashamed Venus was a recurrent theme in Roman and Greek sculptures.

What is interesting to underline is that the merciless fashion industry would define this Venus "chubby"...since Kate Moss is the standards...

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Wrong. "responsabilities don't matter" you say? It is impossible for someone to twist something to mean "respobsilities dont matter". Responsibilities don't matter?

Awesome. Among my wife being a gold digger, and a man having the responsibility of providing and protecting the family being "a gold digging wife" interpretation in your head, this is your conclusion. Awesome.

I haven't said anything like this as you framed it at all. This is a new low.

I'm getting a very heavy Hamza Tzortzis vibe here. Same kind of self-contradictory pseudo-intellectual discourse, with some sauce on top in the form of some arrogant passive aggressive ad hominims.


"cheers".

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Appealing to authority. Logical fallacy.

No. Appealing to expertise. That's not a fallacy.

It's like asking your doctor for a diagnosis for your health issues instead of your car mechanic.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Its logically not sound. Linguistically, its honestly ridiculous.

Apparantly, the actual translators of the quran didn't think it was ridiculous.
Apparantly, the many publishers that print and distribute the quran don't think that either, since they continue to print and distribute those qurans with those translations.

CLEARLY this is not as "obvious" as you folks try to make it look.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Great. Thanks for quoting the verse you are referring to.

Hellbound. Please note that in the verse you quoted, the word slaves is inside brackets, and not in the sentence. The sentence used here is "Ma malakut aymaanukum" and honestly I am very well aware of this. It doesn't mean slaves in any sense whatsoever. People assume it means slaves so they put the word slave inside brackets as inference.

What is the other verse that you speak of?

Another unfortunate "translation error"?

The quran seems to have lots of these.

Poor non-arabic speaking muslims.... they never had a chance, amirite?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

"Why" someone claims Ma Malakut Aymanukum meant slaves is a mystery really. One can only speculate. But if you read the Quran, all the verses, and all the verses mentioning Yamin or oaths you will easily realise that it can never mean slaves. Impossible.

Sounds like the translators of the quran apparantly made extremely obvious and incredibly stupid errors.

Curious, curious, isn't it?

How do you explain this?

 

[firedragon]

Apparantly, the actual translators of the quran didn't think it was ridiculous.
Apparantly, the many publishers that print and distribute the quran don't think that either, since they continue to print and distribute those qurans with those translations.

CLEARLY this is not as "obvious" as you folks try to make it look.

1. What is not ridiculous because publishers didnt think so? Pls explain with an analysis.
2. Why do you trust these "publishers" so much? Could you provide an analysis?

 

[firedragon]

Sounds like the translators of the quran apparantly made extremely obvious and incredibly stupid errors.

Curious, curious, isn't it?

How do you explain this?

Already done. Please refer to the thread.

 

[firedragon]

Another unfortunate "translation error"?

The quran seems to have lots of these.

Poor non-arabic speaking muslims.... they never had a chance, amirite?

Do you have anything you have analysed and understood to say?

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

If you were to, based on your own knowledge, select out of the best available Qur'an translations into English that you mentioned, the most readable, your very favorite and the most precisely accurate, could you list the greatest to the lesser but still great in order from best to less? I would like to know what you think and why, so I might then buy that best and most precise sterilized translation that has nothing bad in it for me and for other people I want to read it to or give it to.

What I'm looking for is something that totally or almost entirely lacks the translation errors and beatings and whatever aspects people contend with that aren't really present anyway, that translates very accurately (I can't expect the hands for wings thing, but still there must be one translation at least that is outstanding above all for accuracy and consistency and doesn't have the wife beating or other issues people bring up and is totally cleansed of these issues and is almost word for word accurate).

Could you list me your very best to less so and why? Since you're not interested in making a translation yourself just yet, we depend on the English and so do the newcomers to Islam I deal with occasionally, so I want to know which version is the best of the ones that are cleaned up and don't have these issues, and second best and so on and why you think your second best ranking is second best in your opinion etc.

This is more important and useful than arguing with disbelievers about things, so help a believer first please and then you can go back to talking to people who don't care one bit about anything you say or prove and will never change their minds.

 

[firedragon]

If you were to, based on your own knowledge, select out of the best available Qur'an translations into English that you mentioned, the most readable, your very favorite and the most precisely accurate, could you list the greatest to the lesser but still great in order from best to less? I would like to know what you think and why, so I might then buy that best and most precise sterilized translation that has nothing bad in it for me and for other people I want to read it to or give it to.

What I'm looking for is something that totally or almost entirely lacks the translation errors and beatings and whatever aspects people contend with that aren't really present anyway, that translates very accurately (I can't expect the hands for wings thing, but still there must be one translation at least that is outstanding above all for accuracy and consistency and doesn't have the wife beating or other issues people bring up and is totally cleansed of these issues and is almost word for word accurate).

Could you list me your very best to less so and why? Since you're not interested in making a translation yourself just yet, we depend on the English and so do the newcomers to Islam I deal with occasionally, so I want to know which version is the best of the ones that are cleaned up and don't have these issues, and second best and so on and why you think your second best ranking is second best in your opinion etc.

This is more important and useful than arguing with disbelievers about things, so help a believer first please and then you can go back to talking to people who don't care one bit about anything you say or prove and will never change their minds.

Hmm. To respect your request I believe I already did give you some scholars who have translated the whole Qur'an, also some other scholars who have provided specific insight based on Quran be Quran tafsir.

Nevertheless, read Ayman and Layth's translation. Also you could read Laleh Bakhthiars translation. They are direct translations based on Quran bi Quran tafsir methodology. If you analyse them and have specific question I will definitely be happy to respond with the analysis that you are deserving. Peace.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

On the notion of translations, why do Muslims insist sometimes that the Quran can only be properly read in Arabic?

If the English copy is sanitized, wouldn't that mean that any talk of violence in the English version mean the Arabic one is so evil ir should be burned on sight?

If the English and other languages are corrupted to sound more violent, why would people with names like Abdullah Yusuf Ali (i.e. Muslims) deliberately spread the reputation that their faith is a violent one?

Yet if the two versions are more or less the same, why then will Muslims tend to reject passages from English copies?

Also if it is so important that people read the Quran in its original language, why are so few Muslims able to actually read?
Nearly 40% of Muslim world’s population unable read or write: IINA Report

 

[firedragon]

On the notion of translations, why do Muslims insist sometimes that the Quran can only be properly read in Arabic?

If the English copy is sanitized, wouldn't that mean that any talk of violence in the English version mean the Arabic one is so evil ir should be burned on sight?

If the English and other languages are corrupted to sound more violent, why would people with names like Abdullah Yusuf Ali (i.e. Muslims) deliberately spread the reputation that their faith is a violent one?

Yet if the two versions are more or less the same, why then will Muslims tend to reject passages from English copies?

Also if it is so important that people read the Quran in its original language, why are so few Muslims able to actually read?
Nearly 40% of Muslim world’s population unable read or write: IINA Report

What specific incident, chapter and verse are you referring to?

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Hmm. To respect your request I believe I already did give you some scholars who have translated the whole Qur'an, also some other scholars who have provided specific insight based on Quran be Quran tafsir.

Nevertheless, read Ayman and Layth's translation. Also you could read Laleh Bakhthiars translation. They are direct translations based on Quran bi Quran tafsir methodology. If you analyse them and have specific question I will definitely be happy to respond with the analysis that you are deserving. Peace.

Ok, and I think maybe I'll take those as the rankings in your opinion (if you don't mind or object), since I wondered what you ranked them.

1. Ayman
2. Layth
3. Laleh Bakhthiar

 

[firedragon]

Ok, and I think maybe I'll take those as the rankings in your opinion (if you don't mind or object), since I wondered what you ranked them.

1. Ayman
2. Layth
3. Laleh Bakhthiar

Brother. I didnt rank them. Also, Ayman and Layth did one translation together. Not separately.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

On the notion of translations, why do Muslims insist sometimes that the Quran can only be properly read in Arabic?

If the English copy is sanitized, wouldn't that mean that any talk of violence in the English version mean the Arabic one is so evil ir should be burned on sight?

If the English and other languages are corrupted to sound more violent, why would people with names like Abdullah Yusuf Ali (i.e. Muslims) deliberately spread the reputation that their faith is a violent one?

Yet if the two versions are more or less the same, why then will Muslims tend to reject passages from English copies?

Also if it is so important that people read the Quran in its original language, why are so few Muslims able to actually read?
Nearly 40% of Muslim world’s population unable read or write: IINA Report

You can read the Qur'an in multiple translations and with access to resources available in one places at www.islamawakened.com . Honestly, if you read it, and you can even compare it to the Bible at Bible.cc or something the Bible Hub website that has multiple translations for each verse of the Bible (and original languages too), the Qur'an is not very violent at all overall, its pretty much barely violent in any language, and most translations are actually pretty close to the word for word translations available and only some tiny areas there are some disputes or debates which cropped up (and in good ways, since they might help convince people not to beat their wives with toothbrushes or whatever, which pretty much nobody probably actually does even or ever did for the most part ever, I find it highly unlikely to have ever happened or at least not in some major amount or number of people).

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Brother. I didnt rank them. Also, Ayman and Layth did one translation together. Not separately.

Thank you for clarifying! Would it be possible for you to rank them from your absolute favorite or the best in your opinion to the lesser but still good? If not, that is ok!

 

[firedragon]

Thank you for clarifying! Would it be possible for you to rank them from your absolute favorite or the best in your opinion to the lesser but still good? If not, that is ok!

Yeah bro. I absolutely cannot rank them.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

On the notion of translations, why do Muslims insist sometimes that the Quran can only be properly read in Arabic?

If the English copy is sanitized, wouldn't that mean that any talk of violence in the English version mean the Arabic one is so evil ir should be burned on sight?

If the English and other languages are corrupted to sound more violent, why would people with names like Abdullah Yusuf Ali (i.e. Muslims) deliberately spread the reputation that their faith is a violent one?

Yet if the two versions are more or less the same, why then will Muslims tend to reject passages from English copies?

Also if it is so important that people read the Quran in its original language, why are so few Muslims able to actually read?
Nearly 40% of Muslim world’s population unable read or write: IINA Report

I don't think its important to read the Qur'an, since a huge proportion of Muslims throughout history seemed to be able to practice Islam with only some passing familiarity with the Qur'an, so practicing what happens to be represented in and taught in the Qur'an and understanding the message and techniques and putting them into practice are actually more important I think.

Then if one can read the Qur'an directly, that is better possibly, but I don't think Arabic is required truly and I think the translations are good enough mainly and have led to many people improving their lives supposedly and their ethics and stuff like that.

Finally, if one can read the Classical Arabic and takes great care into carefully analyzing and studying the linguistics due to their own interest and desire to learn and enhance their understanding and have even more fun with the Qur'an, they might like to go further in that way, but I don't think its required at all in order to understand and practice Islam or be a Muslim.