Is the Koran unreliable if there are differing interpretations?

[hyd]

I have stated that the Bible is unreliable on the point whether Hindus go to hell - because backspace says they don't, whilst jude says they do - and both claim their belief is what the Bible teaches.

That is actually picking and choose what believe and what not to believe from Bible.... that is pretty common.

[shaad_lko]

Salam,
I dont think Bible is unreliable on that count. Two people can understand differently from even the Quran, and as for quoting anyone can quote anything from anywhere - doesnt really make the text unreliable.

As for who goes to Heaven and Hell, that judgment belongs to Allah, except for those about whom we have explicitly been informed (like Pharaoh, Abu Lahab and his wife..) - frankly I do not see any point in saying Hindus are hell-bound, when you admit that some of them do not acknowledge that they are idolaters. Also, idolatry is a manifestation of Shirk, so we should be precise in saying that Allah says Shirk is unforgivable (well, even Christians have idols of Jesus and Mary).

[hyd]

Salam,
I dont think Bible is unreliable on that count. Two people can understand differently from even the Quran, and as for quoting anyone can quote anything from anywhere - doesnt really make the text unreliable.

As for who goes to Heaven and Hell, that judgment belongs to Allah, except for those about whom we have explicitly been informed (like Pharaoh, Abu Lahab and his wife..) - frankly I do not see any point in saying Hindus are hell-bound, when you admit that some of them do not acknowledge that they are idolaters. Also, idolatry is a manifestation of Shirk, so we should be precise in saying that Allah says Shirk is unforgivable (well, even Christians have idols of Jesus and Mary).

Actually, that is not the issue, let me clarify, if backspace is EH from DubaiForums then he doesn't believe in hell at all. The issue is not who will and who will not, Bible it is clear there is hell, but it seems like some new Christian belief that hell doesn't exist.

[backspace]

Thanks - I will take it up with any Muslims that tell me they think like you say they do.

I find it odd/improbable you've never come across Muslims with different beliefs than you regarding hell.

Most Muslims say Christians and Jews are sent to hell for eternity because they reject Islam and the prophet - where the Koran says the latter is a needed article of faith since Muhammad. (before Muhammad, Muslims tell me belief in Jesus was required and before Jesus, belief in Moses)

Could you please explain how the following Muslim scholar does not show the Koran is unreliable (based on your logic) if he, citing the Koran, comes to a different conclusion on this fundamental issue than you?

Some who are not in the habit of making a deep study of the Koran have hastily jumped to the conclusion that, according to this verse, belief in Islam is not necessary. They say that anybody, whether he is a Muslim, a Jew a Christian or any other, who sincerely believes in God and the Last Day and does good deeds will be saved. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The Koran emphatically declares in a number of verses that belief in the Holy Prophet and in his revelation is essential. Says God: Surely those who disbelieve in Allah and His Messengers and desire to make distinction between Allah and His Messengers and say, ' We believe in some and disbelieve in others, ' and desire to take a way in between, these indeed are veritable disbeliers ' and We have prepared for the disbelievers an humiliating punishment (4 : 15, 152). Again, And those who believe in the Hereafter believe therein (i.e. the Koran) and they strictly observe their Prayers (6 :93). From thse two verses it becomes clear beyond any shadow of doubt that according to the Koran (1) belief in the Prophets is part and parcel of belief in God, and (2) belief in the Hereafter excludes belief in God's revelation as well. Elsewhere the Koran says, Surely the true religion with Allah is Islam (complete submission) and whoso seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him and in the life to come he shall be among the losers (3:20, 86). This verse along with the two quoted above definitely proves that the objection mentioned above is entirely baseless and is born of utter ignorance of the real Koranic teachings....

So, out of curiosity, is what "they say" what you say?

Are you saying: "anybody, whether he is a Muslim, a Jew a Christian or any other, who sincerely believes in God and the Last Day and does good deeds will be saved"?

According to this Muslim scholar, you couldn't be further form the truth.

So, all 'who do not follow the gospel' will be eternally deprived from God. So that's all Muslims and all Hindus then - correct?

The verse I was referring to is speaking of unbelievers who persecute Christians. But I think I've already explained the Bible does not explicitly use the Greek/Hebrew term for hell (Gehenna/Hades) referring to unbelievers that I'm aware of.

[jude3]

Salam,
I dont think Bible is unreliable on that count. Two people can understand differently from even the Quran, and as for quoting anyone can quote anything from anywhere - doesnt really make the text unreliable.

As for who goes to Heaven and Hell, that judgment belongs to Allah, except for those about whom we have explicitly been informed (like Pharaoh, Abu Lahab and his wife..) - frankly I do not see any point in saying Hindus are hell-bound, when you admit that some of them do not acknowledge that they are idolaters. Also, idolatry is a manifestation of Shirk, so we should be precise in saying that Allah says Shirk is unforgivable (well, even Christians have idols of Jesus and Mary).

Thanks. SOme common sense from a Muslim.

Shafique, is the moderator wrong?

[Shafique]

The Islamic stance is quite clear - and shaad has just confirmed what I've been saying.

As hyd pointed out, when backspace presented his 'new religion' on Dubaiforums, he was arguing that the Bible does NOT say Hindus go to Hell. I contrasted that with jude's earlier statement (that was in no way qualified) that 'Hindus are hell bound'.

This, I pointed out, was an indication that the Bible is open to interpretation on some fundamental issues - such as the salvation of non-believers in Pauline Christian dogma.

Given this is now evidently the case - the choice for those looking at the Bible is whether to choose Judes' interpretation over that of Unitarian Christians and Muslims who don't agree with the later additions to Christianity - such as the deification of Jesus, Trinity, original sin etc.

Cheers,
Shafique

[backspace]

Salam,
I dont think Bible is unreliable on that count. Two people can understand differently from even the Quran, and as for quoting anyone can quote anything from anywhere - doesnt really make the text unreliable.

No argument there. It looks like some are just trolling at this point.

[Ron]

Backspace is usually the delete button...please don't come back as another cloaked character...sheesh, some peoe really love this forum...

[Hannahh]

The likelihood of ANYONE going to hell is directly dependent on their knowledge of the laws and their knowledge of sins. Non muslims are at a disadvantage because they have not updated their information.

It has NOTHING to do with actual 'distinctions' i.e. being Hindu versus being Christian except to say that the likelihood of a person using the proper information and NOT accepting Islam is practically non existant and therefore they have a greater likelihood (non muslims of all types) of making mistakes and committing sins out of ignorance.

And YES, they are responsible to know those things in most cases.

[Paulpablo]

As for what Islam says - God is quite clear in the Quran. The only sin that is not forgiven by God is 'shirk' - associating partners with God.

The religion you follow is REALLLLLLY relaxed, so i could commit genocide, have sex with a million girls then kill them and do whatever i want as long as i go and worship the right god afterwords?

[Jamiela]

Hi backspace

The quran says that the unbelievers are going to hell. It is a grave error that some people make in saying that 'People of the Book', as they are referred to in the quran will go to hell. Unbelievers, I believe, are those who do not believe in God, do not acknowledge that a single blessing they receive on earth is by the hand of God, who just take His blessings and do not give thanks. Christians and Jews pray in their own ways, according to their scriptures.

It does not mention Hindus at all. Judgement is for God alone. We are not meant to judge who will go to hell or not. We can not possibly know what lies in the heart of a man(or woman).

Peace be with You

It is true that many untruths have crept into the older religions as God has only deemed it fit to protect the Holy Quran from corruption, the final scripture, which makes perfect sense since God wants us to follow His final message once we have been shown the truth and not the older messages which were only meant for a certain time-peroid, before the next revelation, which would supercede it.

Muslims see the Chistian belief in Jesus as a son of God to be extremely misguided. Many people cry 'shirk', or 'blasphemy'. 'Shirk' is associating partners with God, most High, but those who believe these untruths in innocence, will be judged fairly by God, not sentenced to an eternity of Hell. God does not say anywhere in the quran that 'The People of the Book' will go to hell. Fullstop. And God mentions them in many places. The Christians who lived at the time of Prophet Muhammad (Pbuh) also believed that Jesus was the son of God and yet Allah says in the quran that they will enter paradise.

The quran says that we should not look for the allegorical in its verses. The laws are straightforward. Don't twist the words to make it say what you want it to say.

[Paulpablo]

Do you believe that the laws within the quran are reliable? if there is supposed to be nothing in the quran that is left out then do you believe all criminals convicted of DNA evidence were witnesses werent involved should be released if it doesnt mention DNA evidence in the quran? Do you think the people who have prosecuted witches under islamic and christian laws will go to hell? Do you think that the quran is perfect if even people who speak arabic cant seem to understand it and the majority of the world who doesnt speak arabic has less chance of understanding it?

[shaad_lko]

Laws are only one aspect of the Quran - and they need not always be applied. One has to appreciate the context in which they are stated and were revealed. Of course DNA evidence must be used where available. "Nothing in the Quran to be left out" refers to the fact that the Quran is preserved over generations just the way the Prophet (sws) gave it to his community.

Islamic law cannot be compared to Christian (or any other religious law) for that matter- it has a very high standard of evidence and due diligence, though it could be misappropriated like any other law by those in authority. Nobody says Quran is the perfect English book but everyone accepts two facts:

1) It is the pinnacle of Arabic literature - even Arab non-Muslims accept this. Anyone who knows a bit of Arabic can objectively attest to its mastery over emotion and brevity.
2) It is the best book of guidance (moral, spiritual, religious) - this is due to it being free from historical distortion and preserved in its original form.

[Paulpablo]

nothing being left out of the quran doesnt mean the quran is perfectly preserved, it means nothing is left out, no law or piece of guidence left out. You cant just change the words around to fit whats correct. The quran offers no guidence in terms of sex with minors, dna evidence, piracy, internet downloading these ARE things which im sure you would agree are important yet they are left out.
The quran is very detailed and its possibly the best legal guidence that was availiable over 1000 years ago but thats why its so easy to prove that it isnt perfect because it is so detailed, you can blatently see where it does leave parts out that are important parts of todays laws.
In the section regarding how to deal with theft its very detailed to the point of showing when to give mercy on thieves and when a theive should have his hands chopped off and it gives information on how to deal with theft under different circumstances wether from public or private property. But this is exactly why you can see it HAS left things out, for example copywrite laws, downloading crime internet crime music copywrite and so on and so on arent mentioned at all, almost as if the person who came up with these laws was a man who had no knowledge of the future.

[shaad_lko]

nothing being left out of the quran doesnt mean the quran is perfectly preserved, it means nothing is left out, no law or piece of guidence left out. You cant just change the words around to fit whats correct. The quran offers no guidence in terms of sex with minors, dna evidence, piracy, internet downloading these ARE things which im sure you would agree are important yet they are left out.

sorry, my guess is that you are neither an expert in theology, nor in linguistics, much less in Arabic so you are simply not in a position to comment on what the Quran says about itself. Unfortunately since your mind is already closed with your own opinion, best of luck with that.

In the section regarding how to deal with theft its very detailed to the point of showing when to give mercy on thieves and when a theive should have his hands chopped off and it gives information on how to deal with theft under different circumstances wether from public or private property.

Its a verse, not a section and the difference is paramount, but I have no hope from you..