The beauty of the Quran.

diamond lady
#1
And they say, Why are not miracles sent down to him from his Lord? Say: The signs are only with Allah and I am only a plain warner. Is it not a sufficient (miracle) for them that We have sent down to you the Book which is recited to them? Verily, here in is a mercy and a reminder for a people who believe. (Quran)


" Quran " - It comes from the Arabic root word " qa-ra-'a " and it means "recitation."
It is best understood as " The Recitation ."
Here are some of my favorite Quran recitations, with the English translation
Enjoy listening.


Chapter ar rahman (the most Merciful)
YouTube - Saad Al-Ghamdi--Surah Ar-Rahman w/translation



 
diamond lady
#2
Chapter Noor (The Light)

YouTube - The Light of Allah-Beautiful Recited




‘’Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth. The parable of His Light is as (if there were) a niche and within it a lamp, the lamp is in glass, the glass as it were a brilliant star, lit from a blessed tree, an olive, neither of the east nor of the west whose oil would almost glow forth, though no fire touched it. Light upon Light! Allah guides to His Light whom He wills. And Allah sets forth parables for mankind, and Allah is All-Knower of everything’’. (Quran)


 
Vereya
#3
Do Muslims celebrate the New Year?
 
diamond lady
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by Vereya View Post

Do Muslims celebrate the New Year?

I apologize for responding late to your question.
Muslims have their own new year ‘’the Islamic new year”
For more info see link

BBC - Religion & Ethics - Al-Hijra

salaam
 
Machjo
#5
I've read the Qur'an many a time and highly recommend it to all.
 
Machjo
#6
If you're looking for a more literary English translation, try J.M. Rodwell's translation, minus the footnotes. Many Muslims criticize his translation because the footnotes are quite anti-Islamic (he was a reverend, and his objective in translating the Qur'an, which he spelld Koran, was precisely to disparage it). The footnotes aside, however, his translation is quite fair in my opinion, and is far more poetic than the wooden translations done by Muslims. They may be Muslim scholars, but obviously haven't mastered English literary style; Rodwell has. His translation reads like the King James Bible, not surprisingly considering they were translated about the same time period.
 
Machjo
#7
J. M. Rodwell Quran translation

You could try this link to read Rodwell's translation minus the introduction and footnotes.
 
gopher
+1
#8  Top Rated Post
Rodwell was the translation I used on this forum a couple of years ago when we discussed the Koran and its messianic teachings. You may recall that some still felt that Islam does not recognize Jesus as messiah when it clearly does.
 
Machjo
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by gopher View Post

Rodwell was the translation I used on this forum a couple of years ago when we discussed the Koran and its messianic teachings. You may recall that some still felt that Islam does not recognize Jesus as messiah when it clearly does.

Prejudice is blinding. If I ought to judge the Jewish Faith by the Torah and the Christian Faith by the Evangile, it's only right that I judge Islam by the Qur'an. Unfortunately, some expect toplay by double standards in their determination to undermine another religion. Perhaps such persons could learn from the example of Rodwell. Though his introduction and footnotes were qute anti-islamic, his translation wasn't. They don't have to agree with Islam but, like Rodwell, should at least be honest and not disgrace their integrity through dishonesty either.
 
Scott Free
#10
Religion is a virus.
 
Machjo
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by Scott Free View Post

Religion is a virus.

Now there's a way to promote peace on earth. Just call people's beliefs 'viruses'. That'll warm them up to us.
 
Cliffy
#12
Religions are not judged by their books but by their actions. Religions have been the the roots of violence toward each other's beliefs for ever. religion has been used as an excuse for the murder and maiming of untold billions over the last few thousand years and to call them a virus is an understatement. A cancer would be more appropriate.

There may be some really nice, poetic writings in the koran, just as there is in the bible, but there is also the incitement to war against the infidels, just like in the bible. By definition, the holy books of all religions are oxymorons.
 
SirJosephPorter
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by gopher View Post

Rodwell was the translation I used on this forum a couple of years ago when we discussed the Koran and its messianic teachings. You may recall that some still felt that Islam does not recognize Jesus as messiah when it clearly does.

Gopher, I don’t think Muslims regard Jesus as the Messiah, they regard him as a Prophet, there is a big difference. Jesus is among a long line of Prophets, starting with Abraham and ending with Mohammed.

I think Muslims also believe that Mohammed was the last Prophet, there won’t be any more, and revelation of God’s is complete with Mohammed.

However, I don’t think Muslims regard Jesus as a Messiah; they regard him equally highly along with Mohammed, Abraham and a whole bunch of other Prophets.

If Muslims regarded Jesus as the Messiah and Mohammed as a Prophet, they would regard Jesus more highly than Mohammed, which is clearly nonsense.
 
SirJosephPorter
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

Religions are not judged by their books but by their actions. Religions have been the the roots of violence toward each other's beliefs for ever. religion has been used as an excuse for the murder and maiming of untold billions over the last few thousand years and to call them a virus is an understatement. A cancer would be more appropriate.

There may be some really nice, poetic writings in the koran, just as there is in the bible, but there is also the incitement to war against the infidels, just like in the bible. By definition, the holy books of all religions are oxymorons.

Quite right, Cliffy, Bible and Koran indeed do say some nice things (love thy neighbour etc). Unfortunately, they also say some very nasty things (death to infidels, thou shalt not suffer a witch to live etc.).

Ultimately it is upto the followers of a particular religion, whether they are going to use their religion to do good (for charity, compassion, love etc.) or for evil (terrorism, gay bashing, hatred, prejudice, bigotry etc.).

I have said it before, most religions tend to be quite amorphous in nature, they say contradictory things at the same time. It is up to the followers to decide which of the contradictory sayings to take to heart, and which once to ignore. So yes, a religion is very much judged by the actions of its followers, not what it says in some dusty, ancient book.
 
Machjo
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by SirJosephPorter View Post

Gopher, I don’t think Muslims regard Jesus as the Messiah, they regard him as a Prophet, there is a big difference. Jesus is among a long line of Prophets, starting with Abraham and ending with Mohammed.

"Remember when the angel said, “O Mary! Verily God announceth to thee the Word from Him: His name shall be, Messiah Jesus the son of Mary,
illustrious in this world, and in the next, and one of those who have near access to God; And He shall speak to men alike when in the cradle and when grown up; And he shall be one of the just."


"The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, is only an apostle of God, and his Word which
he conveyed into Mary, and a Spirit
proceeding from himself."
"The Messiah disdaineth not to be a servant of God, nor do the angels who are nigh unto Him."

These are just some of the references to the Messiah in the Qur'an. So yes, Muslims believe Jesus to be the Messiah, the Annointed one, and at the same time as a Prophet equal to the others. They see no conflict in this:
"The apostle believeth in that which hath been sent down from his Lord, as do the faithful also. Each one believeth in God, and His Angels, and His Books, and His Apostles: we make no distinction between any of His Apostles.
And they say, “We have heard and we obey. Thy mercy, Lord! for unto thee must we return.”


[/quote]I think Muslims also believe that Mohammed was the last Prophet, there won’t be any more, and revelation of God’s is complete with Mohammed.[/quote]

Most Muslims do. It's based on:

"Muhammad is not the father of any man among you, but he is the Apostle of God, and the seal of the prophets: and God knoweth all things."

The vast majority of Muslims take this 'seal' to mean 'end', 'last', etc. A few Muslims, however, question this understanding arguing that a seal can be broken to open a book, which suggests that Muhammad has sealed up some knowledge that is to be revealed at a later time by another who will unravel some of the mysterious sayings of the Qur'an. According to this understanding, another would need to come to break the seal. So you are partially right, but not all Muslims agree with the majority. A good example in Christianity would be those Christians who reject the Nicene Creed or who reject the common interpretation of the trinity (after all the word 'trinity' does not even appear in the Bible any more than 'last of the Prophets' appears in the Qur'an, but, like Muhammad being the last of the Prophets, is based on a particular understanding of particular verses).

[/quote]However, I don’t think Muslims regard Jesus as a Messiah; they regard him equally highly along with Mohammed, Abraham and a whole bunch of other Prophets.[/quote]

See above. They (neither do I, by the way) see no contradiciotn between claiming that Jesus is the Messiah (annointed one) and his being equal to Muhammad, the seal of the Prophets. After all, if "we make no distinction between any of His Apostles", and Jesus is the Messiah, then by implication so are Moses and Muhammad, as they are one and the same.

[/quote]If Muslims regarded Jesus as the Messiah and Mohammed as a Prophet, they would regard Jesus more highly than Mohammed, which is clearly nonsense.[/quote]

That would not be possible owing to "we make no distinction between any of His Apostles".
 
Scott Free
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by Machjo View Post

Now there's a way to promote peace on earth. Just call people's beliefs 'viruses'. That'll warm them up to us.

I was being kind. If I pretended their belief was rational and healthy I would be contributing to the illness. A person can't start healing until they realize they're sick.
 
SirJosephPorter
#17
So yes, Muslims believe Jesus to be the Messiah, the Annointed one, and at the same time as a Prophet equal to the others. They see no conflict in this:

I am sorry, Machjo, but that doesn’t make sense. Messiah is something much more than a Prophet. Messiah is an emissary of God, maybe even an incarnation of God (like Jesus was Son of God); a Prophet is simply a learned man, somebody who communicates the word of God to the masses.

So it doesn’t make sense that Muslims would regard Jesus as Messiah and still think him to be no more important that Mohammed the Prophet. A Messiah is by definition more Godly, more divine than a Prophet.

If Muslims regarded Jesus as a Messiah and Mohammed as a lowly Prophet, Islam would be considered an offshoot of Christianity, similar to Mormonism. Mormons regard Jesus as the Messiah and Joseph Smith as a Prophet.

Mormons consider themselves to be Christians (even though religious right disagrees). Muslims do not consider themselves to be Christians. If they regarded Jesus as the Messiah, I would expect them to worship Jesus, why don’t they?
 
Machjo
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by SirJosephPorter View Post

So yes, Muslims believe Jesus to be the Messiah, the Annointed one, and at the same time as a Prophet equal to the others. They see no conflict in this:

I am sorry, Machjo, but that doesn’t make sense. Messiah is something much more than a Prophet. Messiah is an emissary of God, maybe even an incarnation of God (like Jesus was Son of God); a Prophet is simply a learned man, somebody who communicates the word of God to the masses.

So it doesn’t make sense that Muslims would regard Jesus as Messiah and still think him to be no more important that Mohammed the Prophet. A Messiah is by definition more Godly, more divine than a Prophet.

If Muslims regarded Jesus as a Messiah and Mohammed as a lowly Prophet, Islam would be considered an offshoot of Christianity, similar to Mormonism. Mormons regard Jesus as the Messiah and Joseph Smith as a Prophet.

Mormons consider themselves to be Christians (even though religious right disagrees). Muslims do not consider themselves to be Christians. If they regarded Jesus as the Messiah, I would expect them to worship Jesus, why don’t they?

Well, let's take an example between the Christian and Jewish Faiths:

11 And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come? 12 And he answered and told them, Elias verily cometh first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought. 13 But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.
Mark 9:11-13

19 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? 20 And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. 21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.
John 1:19-21

1 And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, 2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. 3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him. 4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. 5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him. 6 And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid. 7 And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid. 8 And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only. 9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead. 10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? 11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. 12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. 13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.
Matthew 17:1-13

Now, is John the Baptist Elias or is he not Elias?

This is a point of the New Testament that Jews will often quote to undermine the Christian Faith. I personally believe that there is no contradiction here and that the apparent contradiciton can be resolved by understanding that when John the Baptist denies being Elijah, he understands that the Jews are asking about the material body. In body, no he isn't Elijah since he was born of a different woman.

Later, Jesus refers to the spirit of Elijah. In spirit, Elijah and John the Baptist speak the same word of God, they are animated by the same God, and so in spirit they are one and the same. And in this way, Elijah does fulfil the prophecy of the Old Testament that he shall come before the day of the Lord. John the Baptist fulfils this prophecy by fulfilling the spiritual role of Elijah. In this respect, why could the four on the hill (i.e. Jesus, Moses, Elijah and John the Baptist) not be one and the same? If we should say that two of them can be one and the same, then how could we say that the other two could not be one and the same without good reason, and what would that reason be?

And if Elijah can return in a different body, then why could Jesus not return in a different body? Again, we'd need a good reason to argue that one prophecy could be fulfilled that way but not the other. If we say one can, then the other is also possible. If we say the other can't, then the first is not possible either, in whcih case Jesus would be a false prophet.

By the same extention, why could Muhammad not be the spiritual return of Jesus just as John the Baptist was the Spiritual return of Elijah? If this is the case, then Muhammad is the Messiah just as Jesus is the seal of the Prophets. The Qur'an itself confirms this lack of distinction:

The apostle believeth in that which hath been sent down from his Lord, as do the faithful also. Each one believeth in God, and His Angels, and His Books, and His Apostles: we make no distinction between any of His Apostles. And they say, “We have heard and we obey. Thy mercy, Lord! for unto thee must we return.”

If this is the case, then all of the Prophets are annointed by God, they are all the annointed one, the Messiah, at least in spirit. Again, if we say that it is not possible for Muhammad to have fulfilled the prophecies of the return of Jesus, then it is equal to the Jewish argument that John the Baptist could not possibly have fulfilled the prophecies of the return of Elias, in which case both Jesus and Muhammad would be false prophets.
 
SirJosephPorter
#19
in which case both Jesus and Muhammad would be false prophets

Now you are beginning to catch on, Machjo. Here you are spot on.
 
Cliffy
#20
If this is the case, then all of the Prophets are annointed by God, they are all the annointed one, the Messiah, at least in spirit. Again, if we say that it is not possible for Muhammad to have fulfilled the prophecies of the return of Jesus, then it is equal to the Jewish argument that John the Baptist could not possibly have fulfilled the prophecies of the return of Elias, in which case both Jesus and Muhammad would be false prophets.

Bingo!
Jesus was a fictional character and from what I can gather, Muhammad was a brutal gang leader who rewrote the story of Jesus to make himself look good.
 
diamond lady
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by Machjo View Post

J. M. Rodwell Quran translation

You could try this link to read Rodwell's translation minus the introduction and footnotes.

Sorry, but what an awful translation

I prefer this one, easier to read

http://abdurrahman.org/qurantafseer/...nd_Hilalee.pdf
 
Machjo
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by diamond lady View Post

Sorry, but what an awful translation

I prefer this one, easier to read

http://abdurrahman.org/qurantafseer/...nd_Hilalee.pdf

We have to distinguish between a literary translation and a scholarly one. A literary translation does not aim at translating the exact technical meaning of the original text, but rather the spirit of the text in an eloquent fashion. By that standard, Rodwell is still the most literary translation so far in the English language.

Sure Abdu'l-Rahman's might be more scholarly in its technical precision, but that does not make for a reading that's particularly pleasing to the ear.

If I'm looking for technical precision, I'd rather just read the original version.

At the same time, however, I acknowledge that some persons prefer more technical translations of texts.
 
Machjo
#23
You actually find that one easier to read? But it uses so many words that are not normally used in English. Rodwell's comes across as more natural to the native ear I find, probably because he himself had a good mastery of English. He uses a simple vocabulary but to maximum effect.
 

Similar Threads

56
JESUS in the QURAN
by ahmadabdalrhman | Jan 26th, 2009
162
Astronomy and the quran
by eanassir | Oct 3rd, 2007
15
First Muslim in Congress to use historic Quran
by selfactivated | Jan 4th, 2007
12