Meaingless words in the Koran

[Drunk On Love]

If you could offer some commentary.

Are you talking about love in the Quran being "restricted"? I'm not sure what you mean by restricted. I might even agree with you and would therefore have no reason to debate the point.

In terms of "love" in general I was pointing out the Qur'ans common use of terms that I (and many others) would associate with love. If you wish to consider them completely unassociated with love that is certainly your right but I don't think most people would view such associations as a stretch by any means.

Here a few verses in which the English word "love" is generally used in translation:

Chp 2:195 "…and do good (to others); surely Allah loves the doers of good".

Chp 60:8 "God does not forbid you to be kind and equitable to those who have neither fought against your faith nor driven you out of your homes. In fact God loves the equitable." Chapter 60, Verse 8

Chp 9:7So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them. Verily, Allah loves Al-Muttaqun (the pious)

Chp 3:148 So Allah gave them the reward of this world, and the excellent reward of the Hereafter. And Allah loves Al-Muhsinun (the good-doers)

So this word tends to be used in terms of Gods relation to those who are just, do good, or are pious. Terms often translated as "hate" can also be found applied to those who do evil. Maybe those verses are your reason for calling it "restricted?" Are they different than the verses in the Bible talking about God hating evil doers or "Esau I hated .... " etc... ?

If we broaden this to look to terms that are closely associated with love such as compassion and mercy then we see that every single chapter except one starts with the phrase "In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate." This shows that in Islam God is thought to be immanently merciful and compassionate. It implies that these Names and the traits associated with them are especially meaningful in relation to God. I would say "defining terms" for him but I'm not sure if that's a good way of wording it.

 

[Fuzzy]

I find it quite amusing that we can't discuss Islam without people running interference and hindering us from getting the question answered that we asked. Can Islam stand on its own merits? Or does it need to be defended by attacking Christianity or some other religion?

I find it a bit disappointing that agreeing to disagree and recognizing what we have in common seem to be fading arts around here.

 

[Drunk On Love]

So it was specifically my idea that mercy, compassion , and charity are related to love that I didn't really see any reason to defend.

 

[Montalban]

I find it a bit disappointing that agreeing to disagree and recognizing what we have in common seem to be fading arts around here.

I'm still looking forward to your Jewish texts on the Trinity that can help me understand my Christian view of said.

 

[Montalban]

So it was specifically my idea that mercy, compassion , and charity are related to love that I didn't really see any reason to defend.

If you have any commentary that backs your interpretation that would be excellent.

So far you saying so, repeated by you saying so doesn't help.

I have noted that several Islamic opinions show the commands to 'love' are more restricted than what you believe

 

[Drunk On Love]

If you have any commentary that backs your interpretation that would be excellent.

Commentaries that show that "Merciful" and "Compassionate" are among the most important names of God?

So far you saying so, repeated by you saying so doesn't help

I provided quotes from the Quran with the word love. I noted that they were directed towards the good, the pious, and the equitable. Was my summarization of them unreasonable in your view?

I have noted that several Islamic opinions show the commands to 'love' are more restricted than what you believe

In what way is it more restricted than I believe?

 

[Fuzzy]

I'm still looking forward to your Jewish texts on the Trinity that can help me understand my Christian view of said.

 

[Montalban]

Commentaries that show that "Merciful" and "Compassionate" are among the most important names of God?

That doesn't indicate that Moslems have to be universally loving.

I provided quotes from the Quran with the word love. I noted that they were directed towards the good, the pious, and the equitable. Was my summarization of them unreasonable in your view?

It's your view.

In what way is it more restricted than I believe?

I demonstrated this by the experts I cited. Perhaps you believe that posts of your interpretation endlessly repeated equate to evidence?

 

[peaceful soul]

I find it a bit disappointing that agreeing to disagree and recognizing what we have in common seem to be fading arts around here.

It was you who didn't understand what was being said. I simply corrected you; so, why address it to me? Did I make a comment that stated that I had this idea or position?

Since you mentioned: why should we have to talk about things that we have in common? Why can't we talk about things that separate us?

 

[Rationalt]

Are you talking about love in the Quran being "restricted"? I'm not sure what you mean by restricted. I might even agree with you and would therefore have no reason to debate the point.

In terms of "love" in general I was pointing out the Qur'ans common use of terms that I (and many others) would associate with love. If you wish to consider them completely unassociated with love that is certainly your right but I don't think most people would view such associations as a stretch by any means.

Good for propaganda and lying.Let us see what exactly how your bogus Quotes compare with Quranic text.

Here a few verses in which the English word "love" is generally used in translation:

Let us see.

Chp 2:195 "…and do good (to others); surely Allah loves the doers of good".

Do good to others ?.Where did the others came from ???.

That good is for Jihady activities .

Quran 2:195 Spend your wealth for the cause of Allah, and be not cast by your own hands to ruin; and do good. Lo! Allah loveth the beneficent.

Chp 60:8

"God does not forbid you to be kind and equitable to those who have neither fought against your faith nor driven you out of your homes. In fact God loves the equitable." Chapter 60, Verse 8

That actually sounds good But the context is for Abu Bakr wife and her relationship with unbelieving mother.Tafsir Ibn Kathir - Quran Tafsir - The Permissibility of being Kind to Disbelievers who do not fight against the Religion And Allah's s

The next verse 60:10 makes it clear to attract unbelieving women to Islam.

Chp 9:7 So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them.

Verily, Allah loves Al-Muttaqun (the pious)

The whole chapter 9 is a Jihadi murder chapter where Allah promises Heaven for those who kill for Islam.

And quote full verses.

quran 9:7 How can there be a treaty with Allah and with His messenger for the idolaters save those with whom ye made a treaty at the Inviolable Place of Worship? So long as they are true to you, be true to them. Lo! Allah loveth those who keep their duty.

This verse is about Granting permission for Muhammad to attack Meccan arabs who made peace treaty with Muhammad (Prohibiting him from Looting their caravans).

You don't even read the actual Quran .

Chp 3:148 So Allah gave them the reward of this world, and the excellent reward of the Hereafter.

And Allah loves Al-Muhsinun (the good-doers)

So this word tends to be used in terms of Gods relation to those who are just, do good, or are pious. Terms often translated as "hate" can also be found applied to those who do evil. Maybe those verses are your reason for calling it "restricted?" Are they different than the verses in the Bible talking about God hating evil doers or "Esau I hated .... " etc... ?


If we broaden this to look to terms that are closely associated with love such as compassion and mercy then we see that every single chapter except one starts with the phrase "In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate." This shows that in Islam God is thought to be immanently merciful and compassionate. It implies that these Names and the traits associated with them are especially meaningful in relation to God. I would say "defining terms" for him but I'm not sure if that's a good way of wording it.

It will actually broaden your outlook if you actually read the Quran instead of copy pasting from Dawah websites.

This verse ia about Allah the alter ego of Muhammad.It is part of hate disbelievrs verses (continue reading to 3:151).

Quran 3:151 We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve because they ascribe unto Allah partners, for which no warrant hath been revealed. Their habitation is the Fire, and hapless the abode of the wrong-doers.

 

[peaceful soul]

originally posted by Drunk On Love

Are you talking about love in the Quran being "restricted"? I'm not sure what you mean by restricted. I might even agree with you and would therefore have no reason to debate the point.

Restricted means that love is conditional upon Allah's will and a Muslim's behavior towards Allah. Allah doesn't love until someone does something that Allah likes. As soon as he does wrong, Allah abandons him because he doesn't love him anymore. This is especially true if one continually disobeys Allah. At no time does Allah loves unconditionally--love regardless of whether the person obeys or not. He doesn't love the unbelievers at all. He doesn't love the polytheist. He only loves those who obey him. He doesn't care that much about the rest of his human creation since they aren't Muslims (submitters). He shows his love to Muslims only, it seems.

In terms of "love" in general I was pointing out the Qur'ans common use of terms that I (and many others) would associate with love. If you wish to consider them completely unassociated with love that is certainly your right but I don't think most people would view such associations as a stretch by any means.

What do you mean by "associate with love". It is love or not? We are not asking according to your opinion, but by what is stated in Qu'ran.

Here a few verses in which the English word "love" is generally used in translation:

Chp 2:195 "…and do good (to others); surely Allah loves the doers of good".

2:195 And spend in the cause of Allah and do not throw yourselves into destruction, and do good. Truly, Allah loves Al-Muhsinin (those who do good).

This is only love for Muslims.. They are the doers of good.

Chp 60:8 "God does not forbid you to be kind and equitable to those who have neither fought against your faith nor driven you out of your homes. In fact God loves the equitable." Chapter 60, Verse 8

Allah loves those who deal fairly with those who didn't fight them. This is not love towards non-Muslims.

Chp 9:7So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them. Verily, Allah loves Al-Muttaqun (the pious)

The pious are those who are Muslims. Again, there is no love for those who are not Muslims.

Chp 3:148 So Allah gave them the reward of this world, and the excellent reward of the Hereafter. And Allah loves Al-Muhsinun (the good-doers)

Again, the good-doers are Muslims.

So this word tends to be used in terms of Gods relation to those who are just, do good, or are pious. Terms often translated as "hate" can also be found applied to those who do evil. Maybe those verses are your reason for calling it "restricted?" Are they different than the verses in the Bible talking about God hating evil doers or "Cain I hated and .... " etc... ?

The love expressed in those ayat are restricted to Muslims--Muslims who are obedient.

If we broaden this to look to terms that are closely associated with love such as compassion and mercy then we see that every single chapter except one starts with the phrase "In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate." This shows that in Islam God is thought to be immanently merciful and compassionate. It implies that these Names and the traits associated with them are especially meaningful in relation to God. I would say "defining terms" for him but I'm not sure if that's a good way of wording it.

You are both convolving and conflating terms. Let's get back to basics and look at the term love and how it is used in the Qu'ran. That is much simpler. So far, Allah's love is dependent upon believers obeying Allah. Non-believers are left out to dry.

 

[peaceful soul]

Good for propaganda and lying.Let us see what exactly how your bogus Quotes compare with Quranic text.



Let us see.



Do good to others ?.Where did the others came from ???.

That good is for Jihady activities .

Quran 2:195 Spend your wealth for the cause of Allah, and be not cast by your own hands to ruin; and do good. Lo! Allah loveth the beneficent.



That actually sounds good But the context is for Abu Bakr wife and her relationship with unbelieving mother.Tafsir Ibn Kathir - Quran Tafsir - The Permissibility of being Kind to Disbelievers who do not fight against the Religion And Allah's s

The next verse 60:10 makes it clear to attract unbelieving women to Islam.



The whole chapter 9 is a Jihadi murder chapter where Allah promises Heaven for those who kill for Islam.

And quote full verses.

quran 9:7 [/b]How can there be a treaty with Allah and with His messenger for the idolaters save those with whom ye made a treaty at the Inviolable Place of Worship? So long as they are true to you, be true to them. Lo! Allah loveth those who keep their duty.

This verse is about Granting permission for Muhammad to attack Meccan arabs who made peace treaty with Muhammad (Prohibiting him from Looting their caravans).

You don't even read the actual Quran .



It will actually broaden your outlook if you actually read the Quran instead of copy pasting from Dawah websites.

This verse ia about Allah the alter ego of Muhammad.It is part of hate disbelievrs verses (continue reading to 3:151).

Quran 3:151 We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve because they ascribe unto Allah partners, for which no warrant hath been revealed. Their habitation is the Fire, and hapless the abode of the wrong-doers.

Rationalt, I started to provide context but thought to just keep it simple. Thanks for bring out context.

 

[steve_bakr]

Take it up with the Moslems using Moslem. I don't pretend to know better than they do.

Now you know what the correct usage is--and you can research the Arabic yourself. It sounds like you want to use the incorrect form on purpose.

 

[steve_bakr]

You are not understanding the problem here. We question something about Islam. Then we get others pointing out the same or similar issues with Christianity as if the topic is Christianity. I find it quite amusing that we can't discuss Islam without people running interference and hindering us from getting the question answered that we asked. Can Islam stand on its own merits? Or does it need to be defended by attacking Christianity or some other religion?

It doesn't seem unfair to point out parallel issues in both religions--it's called Comparative Religion.

 

[Montalban]

Now you know what the correct usage is--and you can research the Arabic yourself. It sounds like you want to use the incorrect form on purpose.

Read the Moslem sources I cited using Moslem as a term. Sounds like you're posts are just being argumentative

 

[Montalban]

It doesn't seem unfair to point out parallel issues in both religions--it's called Comparative Religion.

It's called tu quoque when using it as an excuse as you're using it here, in order to distract debate from Islam.

It also shows you don't understand the term slander, which you've used quite a bit.

If I were to say "Moslems say to kill all red-haired people" and you argue that Christians offer the same argument then it's not slander to say Moslems do it. You attempt at tu quoque would in fact be an admission that the charge I laid was correct.

It's not slander to call something what it is. It's actually defamation that you mean, as we're discussing this in writing, anyway, so you've not even got the charge correct.

 

[steve_bakr]

It's called tu quoque when using it as an excuse.

Regardless of what it is called, it is valid to bring up parallel issues in the study of religion.

 

[Montalban]

Restricted means that love is conditional upon Allah's will and a Muslim's behavior towards Allah. Allah doesn't love until someone does something that Allah likes.

That may be why there's been to date no Islamic commentary by way of evidence.

The odd thing is I'm actually sure that there must be, somewhere, some modernist Islamic apologetics site that does interpret that way in order to portray Islam as a religion of modernity, and peace.

Although that would be a novel and recent interpretation.

 

[Montalban]

Regardless of what it is called, it is valid to bring up parallel issues in the study of religion.

Is this thread called "Comparisons of Christianity and Islam?"

I'm not aware that it is, and hey, guess what? I'm the author of the OP so I think I should know

Islamic apologetics is removed from logic, I think.

 

[steve_bakr]

It's called tu quoque when using it as an excuse as you're using it here, in order to distract debate from Islam.

It also shows you don't understand the term slander, which you've used quite a bit.

If I were to say "Moslems say to kill all red-haired people" and you argue that Christians offer the same argument then it's not slander to say Moslems do it. You attempt at tu quoque would in fact be an admission that the charge I laid was correct.

It's not slander to call something what it is. It's actually defamation that you mean, as we're discussing this in writing, anyway, so you've not even got the charge correct.

You are now arguing about arguing. I have already asked you not to place your love of contention above your love for our Lord.