Evidence and Clear Examples of Factual errors & historical inaccuracies in the Quran.

[smaneck]

Historically, both the passage you quoted and this one have been used by the church to use the state to do all many of punishment against those who disagree with them (and no, not just the Catholic Church did this.)

Quite true, as has this passage from Luke:

14:23 And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled.

Other than some of the Anabaptists, none of the Reformers believed in the freedom of religion. That developed only a result of the bloody wars of religion in the 16th and 17th century, and was first articulated by the Enlightenment thinkers who were largely anti-Christian.

[Dan Zebiri]

You have obviously FAILED abysmally to grasp the message of Jesus Christ in the Gospel! Of course He and His disciples are aware of the OT injunctions like those mentioned say, by bartdanr above.

Nevertheless ALL THOSE were already set aside by Him when Christ enunciated the New Covenant in HIS BLOOD, as per Luke :

17 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He said, "Take this and share it among yourselves;

18 for I - Jesus, say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes."

19 And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me."

20 And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.

Luke 22 : 17 - 20

THAT is God's message that was fulfilled in Jesus, it was not a NEW message, but it was prophesied in the OT - Which Jesus referred to Himself.

Offenders mentioned in the Romans passage quoted may have been punished that way before the coming of Christ, in the OT for instance.

BUT, NOW with Jesus Christ's coming, God has a new way of dealing with them, as Christ Himself is the convenor of the New Covenant, the seals of this covenant in His own words are His Body 'given' ie.sacrificed & broken, AND His precious blood that spilled out that resulted from His body being broken.

So, yup, I can agree with bartandr's perception of a new message that was brought on by Jesus Christ now with His coming, crucifixion and subsequent resurrection. All of which have direct relation to the convening of this New Testament/New Covenant established by Jesus Himself. As Jesus himself used the entities of his blood spilled out and his body being broken
to be the signs and seals of this new Covenant respectively. Represented by the Bread (Jesus body) and the Wine (His blood that had poured out) that are to be observed by ALL His followers "until He the kingdom of god comes" as Jesus himself put it!

This was one of the DIRECT Commands that Jesus explicitly gave to his followers to be followed and solemnly observed.

"..Do this in remembrance of Me".: Christ instructed all of them.

We do not judge the God of the OT, as bartandr puts it. Rather we see the injunctions of the OT that were quoted previously, as already set aside and therefore no longer effective with the coming, ministry and vicarious work of Jesus Christ that are expressed by, superseded and sealed forever by the signs of the new Covenant.

The 'sword verses' of Jesus that suesie tries to quote, to show that the Gospel "also teaches violence" are taken out of context by her, obviously.

Dan.

I said the Bible, not the New Testament. The only place the issue is addressed in the New Testament is in Romans.

28. Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.
29. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,
30. slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;
31. they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
32. Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Here is where it is addressed elsewhere in the Bible:

Deuteronomy 13:6-9 "If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people."

Deuteronomy 17:3-5 "And he should go and worship other gods and bow down to them or to the sun or the moon or all the army of the heavens, .....and you must stone such one with stones and such one must die."

118,40 And Elijah said unto them: 'Take the prophets of Baal; let not one of them escape.' And they took them; and Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there.

(Nev'im (Prophets), Melachim (Kings))

Shall I go on?

[Dan Zebiri]

Well, what the Jewish Tanakh and the Christian Bible states plainly and 'explicitly' eg.the sins of Abraham, David, Aaron, Lot etc, are denied and 'concealed' by the quran, to use your terminology.

And who is to judge the 'purposes' of anybody trying to 'distort the truth' when the it is quran itself that does this distortion so VERY WELL! Just take the sura 20 incident where the quran :

He [Allah] said, "We have tempted thy people since thou didst leave them. The Samaritan has led them into error." Then Moses returned ... they [the Israelites] said, "... and we cast them [(gold) ornaments], as the Samaritan also threw them, into the fire." (Then he brought out for them a Calf, a mere body that lowed; and they said, "This is your god, and the god of Moses, whom he has forgotten." ...) ...

Moses said, "And thou, Samaritan, what was thy business?" ...
-- Sura 20:85-88, 95.

Here its not just concealment but downright DISTORTION in the quran. Both the Tanakh and the Bible state that it is AARON who was the culprit who led Israel to worship the golden calf.

The quran gallingly tries to say its the Samaritan...and has any muslim scholar ever convincingly identified AARON with this samaritan? Well, you just show me one, smaneck...

In fact, they all say it is NOT Aaron as he could never have been a samaritan - an ethnic group that was never around in Aaron's time!

This is distortion pure and simple and it is found in the quran, and it is not the only example.

You are the one putting a sinister spin on this. David's sins are alluded to in the Qur'an they are simply not enumerated the way you want them to be. Too bad, it is not your book.



Wrong. Concealment is simply went you don't reveal something. It is only deception when the purpose of concealing is to distort the truth. And example of this kind of deception would be when you quote the verse "slay them wherever you find them" while ignoring the passage which immediately proceeded it namely, "begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors."

Concealment, on the other hand, would be when I notice you doing this but decide to overlook it.

[smaneck]

Nevertheless ALL THOSE were already set aside by Him when Christ enunciated the New Covenant in HIS BLOOD, as per Luke :

17 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He said, "Take this and share it among yourselves;

18 for I - Jesus, say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes."

19 And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me."

20 And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.

And where does Jesus indicate that all the previous commandments have been set aside? If so, is the Ten Commandments now null and void?

Offenders mentioned in the Romans passage quoted may have been punished that way before the coming of Christ, in the OT for instance.

LOL. Excuse me, but Romans was written *after* Jesus not before. Paul is clearly talking about Christians during his *own* time.

[smaneck]

Well, what the Jewish Tanakh and the Christian Bible states plainly and 'explicitly' eg.the sins of Abraham, David, Aaron, Lot etc, are denied and 'concealed' by the quran, to use your terminology.

On the contrary, the Qur'an admits David sinned. You've simply objected to the fact that it wasn't explicit enough as to the nature of his sin to satisfy you. As for Abraham and Lot, I can't think of anything the two of them did which the Bible calls a sin.

The quran gallingly tries to say its the Samaritan...

Sorry, it is pure speculation to translate Samri as Samirtan.

There is no question that the Qur'an and the Bible differ as to who made the golden calf, but the truth is that neither text is contemporary to the vent it is supposed to describe so historically they are equally questionable.

[barnasha]

On the contrary, the Qur'an admits David sinned. You've simply objected to the fact that it wasn't explicit enough as to the nature of his sin to satisfy you. As for Abraham and Lot, I can't think of anything the two of them did which the Bible calls a sin.



Sorry, it is pure speculation to translate Samri as Samirtan.

There is no question that the Qur'an and the Bible differ as to who made the golden calf, but the truth is that neither text is contemporary to the vent it is supposed to describe so historically they are equally questionable.

There are plenty of what Dan might consider "conflicting" accounts of the most important biblical mythology. But the diversity is strength, which each retelling it was made more applicable to a current time or situation.

In those days, people listened for the meaning in the words, not the words themselves.

[smaneck]

There are plenty of what Dan might consider "conflicting" accounts of the most important biblical mythology. But the diversity is strength, which each retelling it was made more applicable to a current time or situation.

I would agree with you there.

[Dan Zebiri]

Remember barnasha & smaneck,

We are not discussing the errors in the Bible here, in this thread, but the errors and inconsistencies int the quran!

You claim :

"But the diversity is strength, which each retelling it was made more applicable to a current time or situation.."

Then show us one OR two reputable orthodox muslim scholar / ulema that even remotely shares or supports your view?

Since the quran claims to be the so-called pure and unadulterated word of God - and explicitly denies that there is even any error in it. These unexplained and unresolved 'diverse retellings..of 'mythologies' as you put it that are also found in the quran flies in the face ot it, and directly nullifies its own claims to validity.

Dan.

There are plenty of what Dan might consider "conflicting" accounts of the most important biblical mythology. But the diversity is strength, which each retelling it was made more applicable to a current time or situation.

In those days, people listened for the meaning in the words, not the words themselves.

[smaneck]

Remember barnasha & smaneck,

We are not discussing the errors in the Bible here, in this thread, but the errors and inconsistencies int the quran!

Sorry, Danny boy, but if we find the same kind of contradictions in the Bible (as we do) then we it is only logical that we take one of two courses.

1. Throw out the Bible as well as the Qur'an.

2. We can recognize that scriptures have different levels of meaning and that neither text should be taken too literally.

"But the diversity is strength, which each retelling it was made more applicable to a current time or situation.."

Then show us one OR two reputable orthodox muslim scholar / ulema that even remotely shares or supports your view?

And who is in the position to decide whose an orthodox Muslim, you?

But if you want a Muslim scholar who argues along these lines, I suggest you read Fazlur Rahman's book on Islam. You also might try reading Sayid Husayn Nasr, but Fazlur Rahman is more profound. Another scholars whose writings you might look at is Muhammad Iqbal, sometimes considered the father of Pakistan.

[barnasha]

"But the diversity is strength, which each retelling it was made more applicable to a current time or situation.."

Then show us one OR two reputable orthodox muslim scholar / ulema that even remotely shares or supports your view?

why would that be relevant? I don't make statements according to how it pleases a particular religion or party, I use my head and think for myself.

[Dan Zebiri]

Well then barnasha, try wrapping your head around another inconsistency in the quran, to see the relevance of the points I raised.

Among the names the quran give to Allah are arrahman and arraheem - that is 'the compassionate' and the merciful'...

However, there are many more such Quranic verses that make the 'mercy and compassion' of Allah really questionable, Like:

كَأَنَّمَا يَصَّعَّدُ فِي السَّمَاء كَذَلِكَ يَجْعَلُ اللّهُ الرِّجْسَ عَلَى الَّذِينَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ

Sura 6:125 Therefore (for) whomsoever Allah intends that He would guide him aright, He expands his breast for Islam, and (for) whomsoever He intends that He (Allah) should cause him to err, He [ALLAH] makes his breast strait and narrow as though he were ascending upwards; thus does Allah lay uncleanness on those who do not believe.

And:

مَن يُضْلِلِ اللّهُ فَلاَ هَادِيَ لَهُ وَيَذَرُهُمْ فِي طُغْيَانِهِمْ يَعْمَهُونَ

Sura 7:186 Whomsoever Allah causes to err, there is no guide for him; and He leaves them alone in their inordinacy, blindly wandering on.

Allah causes PEOPLE TO go astray and become lost! No more guidance is possible for these ones!

And:

أَفَمَن زُيِّنَ لَهُ سُوءُ عَمَلِهِ فَرَآهُ حَسَناً فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يُضِلُّ مَن يَشَاءُ وَيَهْدِي مَن يَشَاءُ فَلَا تَذْهَبْ
نَفْسُكَ عَلَيْهِمْ حَسَرَاتٍ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ بِمَا يَصْنَعُونَ

Sura http://quran.myquran.org/images/audio.gif35:8 What! is he whose evil deed is made fairseeming to him so much so that he considers it good? Now surely Allah makes err whom He pleases and guides aright whom He pleases, so let not your soul waste away in grief for them..

Ie. It PLEASES Allah to MAKE people ERR ie.to stray away from the path of truth.

And one rather incorrigible ayat, here :

أَفَرَأَيْتَ مَنِ اتَّخَذَ إِلَهَهُ هَوَاهُ وَأَضَلَّهُ اللَّهُ عَلَى عِلْمٍ وَخَتَمَ عَلَى سَمْعِهِ وَقَلْبِهِ وَجَعَلَ عَلَى بَصَرِهِ
غِشَاوَةً فَمَن يَهْدِيهِ مِن بَعْدِ اللَّهِ أَفَلَا تَذَكَّرُونَ

Sura http://quran.myquran.org/images/audio.gif45:23 :

"Have you then considered him who takes his low desire for his god, and ALLAH has made him err having knowledge and has set a seal upon his ear and his heart and put a covering upon his eye.

Who can then guide him after Allah?"

SO, islam's Allah makes the God-rejector to err. Allah seals up his ears, his heart and even puts coverings on his eyes - so that he cannot see the light of truth finally...!

Enough said...! You all can catch my drift and THE QURAN'S clear drift from these verses. These are not mere proof texts, but are consistent truths found throughout Islam's holy book the Quran.

And they really do mitigate against the claim that the Allah of Islam is a loving or compassionate God, or even a 'caring one'...!

How can Allah be? When he does all that in these verses above??

Wasalaam, Dan.

See also the following verses :

Sura 4/90 : "Whom Allah leads astray, you will not find for him a way" Surah 4:90 (plus 4:142, 6:125,7:185, 13:27 14:4 16:39,95, 35:9,42:41,45, 45:22,74:34).... And

14:4 ...Then Allah misleads whom He wills and guides whom He wills. ...And

4:88 ....Do you want to guide him whom Allah has made to go astray? And he whom Allah has made to go astray, you will never find for him any way (of guidance).

In sura 4/90 it says "..Whom Allah leads astray..",

in sura 14/4 : "..ALLAH MIS-Leads whom He wills.." This means that ALLAH Himself actively mis-leads and mis-guides a group of people already decided upon by him..

in sura 4/88 : TWICE we get .."Allah has made to go astray.." and "..he whom Allah has made to go astray,."

So, the so-called 'loving, merciful and compassionate' God of islam is contradicted by the other verses of the Quran listed here!

[smaneck]

However, there are many more such Quranic verses that make the 'mercy and compassion' of Allah really questionable, Like:

كَأَنَّمَا يَصَّعَّدُ فِي السَّمَاء كَذَلِكَ يَجْعَلُ اللّهُ الرِّجْسَ عَلَى الَّذِينَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ

Sura 6:125 Therefore (for) whomsoever Allah intends that He would guide him aright, He expands his breast for Islam, and (for) whomsoever He intends that He (Allah) should cause him to err, He [ALLAH] makes his breast strait and narrow as though he were ascending upwards; thus does Allah lay uncleanness on those who do not believe.

And:

مَن يُضْلِلِ اللّهُ فَلاَ هَادِيَ لَهُ وَيَذَرُهُمْ فِي طُغْيَانِهِمْ يَعْمَهُونَ

Sura 7:186 Whomsoever Allah causes to err, there is no guide for him; and He leaves them alone in their inordinacy, blindly wandering on.

Allah causes PEOPLE TO go astray and become lost! No more guidance is possible for these ones!

Gee, that sounds just like St. Paul!

9:10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) 9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.

9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

(King James Bible, Romans)

So, the so-called 'loving, merciful and compassionate' God of islam is contradicted by the other verses of the Quran listed here!

When you are able to explain this passage from Roman's you will have the answer to the Qur'anic passages as well. In the meantime I suggest you read up on St. Augustine and the Protestant Reformers, all of whom believed in the doctrine of predestination. I especially recommend you read Martin Luther's Bondage of the Will.

[beanfarmer]

smaneck, While the Qu'ran makes predestination a sure thing, the Bible leaves the question open with all the who so ever passages. I am surprised that with your extensive knowledge of Christian theology you did not mention arminian theology which is counter calvinistic theology. Even Paul leaves it open in eph 2;8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast. When I was in seminary we had an assignment to do a paper on the calvin arminian debate. I thought back to my days at the u of i where I had a luthran professor who described the delimna thus "He said it was like being on the 5th floor of a burning building. The firemen are holding a tarp and they tell you to jump. You jump but when you land you realize that you were pushed. A graduate student in the class said that God had done it, so the man had no choice. Forrel responded that he had jumped. The student said so the man did it, Forrel replied "He was pushed." The student didn't understand, but it made perfect sense to me. Forrel was willing to live with the not knowing because that was what the Bible said. "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." "All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out."'

Being the most nieve person in seminary, I did not know that he was a tention theologen. I noticed that with greek the participle would agree in gender with the word it was referring to so if the that in the passage agreed with grace in gender it would be calvinistic or your view and with faith it would be arminian since grace and faith were masculen and feminen but Paul chose nuter for that thus leaving it in question. I think he did it on purpass because he did not know whether it was preordaned or that anybody could be saved.

[smaneck]

smaneck, While the Qu'ran makes predestination a sure thing, the Bible leaves the question open with all the who so ever passages.

Erasmus would agree with you but not the Protestant Reformers.

There are passages in the Qur'an which can just as easily be used to argue for free will. And I don't know any Qur'anic passage that is so clear on the issue of Predestination as the ones from Romans.

I am surprised that with your extensive knowledge of Christian theology you did not mention arminian theology which is counter calvinistic theology.

And the Muslim equivalent of that was known as the Mutazalite school. Shi'ite theology tends to be Mutazalite but it is also enjoying a resurgence in various parts of the Sunni world, Indonesia in particular.

I picked those passages from the Bible which said basically the same thing as the passages Dan had taken from the Qur'an. As I said, if he can find an explanation for those passages in Romans he will find an explanation for the Qur'an as well. Therefore, all you need to do is take

Even Paul leaves it open in eph 2;8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

That doesn't sound Aminian to me!

When I was in seminary we had an assignment to do a paper on the calvin arminian debate.

When I teach the Reformation I have my students reenact the debate between Luther and Erasmus.

I think he did it on purpass because he did not know whether it was preordaned or that anybody could be saved.

Some Protestants (not many, I'll grant you) would hold that Predestination requires that eventually everyone *is* saved.

I personally prefer al-Ghazali's formula which is that we should believe as though it were all in God's hands, and act as though it were all in our own.

[beanfarmer]

[QUOTE=smaneck;3042357]Erasmus would agree with you but not the Protestant Reformers.
here is what luther said “If I am predestined, I shall be saved, whether I do good or evil. If I am not predestined, I shall be condemned regardless of my works.” I would be glad to debate in detail against these wicked statements if the uncertain state of my health made it possible for me to do so. For if the statements are true, as they, of course, think, then the incarnation of the Son of God, His suffering and resurrection, and all that He did for the salvation of the world are done away with completely. What will the prophets and all Holy Scripture help? What will the sacraments help? Therefore let us reject all this and tread it underfoot.

from http://www.orlutheran.com/html/mlpredestination.html

There are passages in the Qur'an which can just as easily be used to argue for free will.

where?

I picked those passages from the Bible which said basically the same thing as the passages Dan had taken from the Qur'an. As I said, if he can find an explanation for those passages in Romans he will find an explanation for the Qur'an as well.

Where specifically in romans?

That doesn't sound Aminian to me!

If you leave out my argument maybe, but When you concider the participle would agree in gender with the word it was referring to so if the that in the passage agreed with grace in gender it would be calvinistic or your view and with faith it would be arminian since grace and faith were masculen and feminen but Paul chose nuter for that thus leaving it in question. I think he did it on purpass because he did not know whether it was preordaned or that anybody could be saved.

When I teach the Reformation I have my students reenact the debate between Luther and Erasmus.

where did you teach?