So, I was right. The bible did not state that all the 66 books are divinely inspired. Only some Christians belive so.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Christian Forums is looking to bring on new moderators to the CF Staff Team! If you have been an active member of CF for at least three months with 200 posts during that time, you're eligible to apply! This is a great way to give back to CF and keep the forums running smoothly! If you're interested, you can submit your application here!
So, I was right. The bible did not state that all the 66 books are divinely inspired. Only some Christians belive so.Bible offers this difference, it doesn't make the claim because the content speaks for itself, there is a testimony.
That is stretching it a bit too far. I've known many practicing Christians who do not think that way... and they are Christians.ALL CHRISTIANS believe THAT GOD's WORDS are recorded in the Bible.
Montalban quoted Genesis. You may argue that Genesis contains the words of God,although we could contest that. That certainly does not follow that the NT writings are also 'words of God'.Bible states that God spoke to the Prophets, and they recorded HIS WORDS. Are you mentally challenged not understand what Montalban is saying?
OK. Maybe I should ask are all the 66 books the words of God. Forget the 'divinely inspired' part.First of all, learn to follow your own arguments, you said "NOTHING in the bible that says the 66 books are the words of God." Now you are saying "bible did not state that all the 66 books are divinely inspired." These are different statements, care to elaborate and come to a middle point???
So, I was right. The bible did not state that all the 66 books are divinely inspired. Only some Christians belive so.
Does the Qu'ran state that it is the word of God? If so, where? What is the chronology of the passage? Was it Mohammad's last utterance of revelation, or was it earlier in his prophet hood?
Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other Than Allah, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy. (Quran 4:82)
Any particular reasons? The reference to the Quran was made in many surahs revealed to Muhammad (pbuh). Pls see http://www.hilalplaza.com/Quran_Koran.htmOK. Now tell me at what point in time was this ayat revealed? Was it at the end of Mohammad's life or somewhere earlier in his revelatory period? I am looking for chronology of this ayat in respect to the others.
What difference does it make when an ayat was revealed If GOD says in the Quran that it was from him whether it was an early revelation or a late it makes no difference.He does not recant afterwards saying no it is not from him.OK. Now tell me at what point in time was this ayat revealed? Was it at the end of Mohammad's life or somewhere earlier in his revelatory period? I am looking for chronology of this ayat in respect to the others.
care to point them out with correct references please, not slander or lies.There is discrepancy in the Koran, much!
first the tafsir(exegisis)OK. Now tell me at what point in time was this ayat revealed? Was it at the end of Mohammad's life or somewhere earlier in his revelatory period? I am looking for chronology of this ayat in respect to the others.
You merely quoted Genesis. I believe your bible contains other books which can be questioned as 'words of God' and which you have not surfaced anything to suggest otherwise.I have stated what I believe, and why.
I have evidenced "Words of God" in the Bible.
I can even question Genesis as being the Total word of GOD. An Issue being raised in another thread where it is mentioned that angels came to earth and had sex with humans thus giving birth to giants,who created havoc on the earth is questioanble whehter this is from GOd when we have a babylonian concepts of GODs coming to earth and copularing with humans male and female. So we can even start questioning Genesis.You merely quoted Genesis. I believe your bible contains other books which can be questioned as 'words of God' and which you have not surfaced anything to suggest otherwise.
That is stretching it a bit too far. I've known many practicing Christians who do not think that way... and they are Christians.
Montalban quoted Genesis. You may argue that Genesis contains the words of God,although we could contest that. That certainly does not follow that the NT writings are also 'words of God'.
OK. Maybe I should ask are all the 66 books the words of God. Forget the 'divinely inspired' part.
Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other Than Allah, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy. (Quran 4:82)
I only refer you to a particular verse. Frankly, I did not check when it was revealed. Maybe there are other Muslims here who could refer you to the chronology of the verse I referred earlier, and the various verses I referred to the link.
care to point them out with correct references please, not slander or lies.
thank you
Peace
yaqovzadeek
aka james the just
You merely quoted Genesis. I believe your bible contains other books which can be questioned as 'words of God' and which you have not surfaced anything to suggest otherwise.
And there are loads of other stuff in genesis itself, that are questionable.I am saying there is no word of GOD in the bible at all. But ? A big BUT
peace brother
Yaqovzadeek
aka james the just
Okay, Bushmaster, thank you.
first the tafsir(exegisis)
82. Do they not then consider the Qur'an carefully Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely, have found therein contradictions in abundance).
Allah commands them to contemplate about the Qur'an and forbids them from ignoring it, or ignoring its wise meanings and eloquent words. Allah states that there are no inconsistencies, contradictions, conflicting statements or discrepancies in the Qur'an, because it is a revelation from the Most-Wise, Worthy of all praise. Therefore, the Qur'an is the truth coming from the Truth, Allah. This is why Allah said in another Ayah,
[أَفَلاَ يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْءَانَ أَمْ عَلَى قُلُوبٍ أَقْفَالُهَآ ]
(Do they not then think deeply in the Qur'an, or are their hearts locked up (from understanding it)) Allah then said,
[وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ عِندِ غَيْرِ اللَّهِ]
(Had it been from other than Allah,) meaning, had it been fraudulent and made up, as the ignorant idolators and hypocrites assert in their hearts,
[لَوَجَدُواْ فِيهِ اخْتِلَـفاً]
(they would surely, have found therein contradictions), discrepancies and inconsistencies,
[كَثِيراً]
(in abundance). However, this Qur'an is free of shortcomings, and therefore, it is from Allah. Similarly, Allah describes those who are firmly grounded in knowledge,
[ءَامَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا]
(We believe in it, all of it is from our Lord.)(3:7) meaning, the Muhkam sections (entirely clear) and the Mutashabih sections (not entirely clear) of the Qur'an are all true. So they understand the not entirely clear from the clear, and thus gain guidance. As for those in whose heart is the disease of hypocrisy, they understand the Muhkam from the Mutashabih; thus only gaining misguidance. Allah praised those who have knowledge and criticized the wicked. Imam Ahmad recorded that `Amr bin Shu`ayb said that his father said that his grandfather said, "I and my brother were present in a gathering, which is more precious to me than red camels. My brother and I came and found that some of the leaders of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah were sitting close to a door of his. We did not like the idea of being separate from them, so we sat near the room. They then mentioned an Ayah and began disputing until they raised their voices. The Messenger of Allah was so angry that when he went out his face was red. He threw sand on them and said to them,
«مَهْلًا يَا قَوْمِ، بِهَذَا أُهْلِكَتِ الْأُمَمُ مِنْ قَبْلِكُمْ، بِاخْتِلَافِهِمْ عَلى أَنْبِيَائِهِمْ، وَضَرْبِهِمِ الْكُتُبَ بَعْضَهَا بِبَعْضٍ، إِنَّ الْقُرْآنَ لَمْ يَنْزِلْ يُكَذِّبُ بَعْضُهُ بَعْضًا، إِنَّمَا يُصَدِّقُ بَعْضُهُ بَعْضًا، فَمَا عَرَفْتُمْ مِنْهُ فَاعْمَلُوا بِهِ، وَمَا جَهِلْتُمْ مِنْهُ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلى عَالِمِه»
(Behold, O people! This is how the nations before you were destroyed, because of their disputing with their Prophets and their contradicting parts of the Books with other parts. The Qur'an does not contradict itself. Rather, it testifies to the truth of itself. Therefore, whatever of it you have knowledge in, then implement it, and whatever you do not know of it, then refer it to those who have knowledge in it. )" Ahmad recorded that `Abdullah bin `Amr said, "I went to the Messenger of Allah one day. When we were sitting, two men disputed about an Ayah, and their voices became loud. The Prophet said,
«إِنَّمَا هَلَكَتِ الْأُمَمُ قَبْلَكُمْ بِاخْتِلَافِهِمْ فِي الْكِتَاب»
(Verily, the nations before you were destroyed because of their disagreements over the Book.) Muslim and An-Nasa'i recorded this Hadith.
the noble Quran explains:
This Surah comprises several discourses which were revealed on different occasions during the period ranging probably between the end of A. H. 3 and the end of A. H. 4 or the beginning of A. H. 5. Although it is difficult to determine the exact dates of their revelations, yet it is possible to assign to them a fairly correct period with the help of the Commandments and the events mentioned therein and the Traditions concerning them. A few instances are given below by way of illustration :Peace
- We know that the instructions about the division of inheritance of the martyrs and for the safeguard of the rights of the orphans were sent down after the Battle of Uhd in which 70 Muslims were killed. Then naturally the question of the division of the inheritance of the martyrs and the safeguard of the rights of their orphans arose in many families at Al-Madinah. From this we conclude that vv. 1 -28 were revealed on that occasion.
- We learn from the Traditions that the Commandment about salat during war time was given on the occasion of Zat-ur-Riqa'a, an expedition which took place in A. H. 4. From this we conclude that the discourse containing v. 102 was revealed on that occasion.
- The last warning (v. 47) to the Jews was given before the Banu Nadir were exiled from Al-Madinah in Rabi'-ulAwwal, A. H. 4. From this it may safely be concluded that the discourse containing v. 47 must have been revealed some time before that date.
- The permission about tayammum (the performance of ablutions with pure dust, in case no water be available) was given during the Bani-al-Mustaliq expedition, which took place in A. H. 5.. Therefore the probable period of the revelation of the discourse containing v. 43 was A. H. 5.
yaqovzadeek
aka james the just
It's a beautiful summery for the proliferation of memes.Thanks for the info.
Dawkins used the term to refer to any cultural entity (such as a song, an idea or a religion) that an observer might consider a replicator. He hypothesised that people could view many cultural entities as replicators, generally replicating through exposure to humans, who have evolved as efficient (though not perfect) copiers of information and behaviour. Memes do not always get copied perfectly, and might indeed become refined, combined or otherwise modified with other ideas, resulting in new memes. These memes may themselves prove more (or less) efficient replicators than their predecessors, thus providing a framework for a hypothesis of cultural evolution, analogous to the theory of biological evolution based on genes.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?