[Religion] being friends with the kuffar (non-believer)

My posts are directly from the Quran if you look. Strict interpretation of the Islamic scriptures doesn't allow friendship between Muslim and non-believers, however a majority of people in the world are decent folk who are not hardliners who follow strict religious doctrine. As I said even in the Bible Jews and Christians are told to keep to their own.

I have many Muslim friends, but that doesn't negate the fact that the Quranic scriptures are against friendships between Muslims & Non-Muslims, which is the response to the question posed in the OP.


Notice how adeelsiddiqui and his friends still haven't responded to my post, it's because you can't argue against the truth.

 

Again, really interesting and insightful. I appreciate explaining that all a bit more as it gives context and detail the US mainstream media must doesn't spend time on.

 

It was shown that your translation of the quran was not accurate.

 

Isn't alcohol forbidden by Islamic law?

Guess your friend did become a loooooooooooot more relaxed.

 

No it wasn't, in any way shape or form.

 

Yes, he did. But I guess you would be surprised at the percentage of Muslims who have had at least some alcohol in their lives, certainly more so in Istanbul of all places.

 

There is no such thing? Persian Please...

Sahih International

Spoiler

http://www.saheehinternational.com/

In 1989 three American converts to Islam joined together to form Saheeh International. Initially established to edit Islamic literature in English submitted by authors to Dar Abul-Qasim of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, shortly thereafter the group began to produce material of its own as well. Their most notable work was published in 1997 – a translation of the Qur’an’s meanings. Numerous scholars now regard it as one of the most accurate Qur’an translations available. Another highly acclaimed book by Saheeh International is Clear Your Doubts About Islam: 50 Answers to Common Questions, which is now being used as part of the da‘wah training program at GainPeace.com in the USA.



Executive Director: Amatullah J. Bantley was born in Rochester, Minnesota in 1966 and holds a degree in Business Management. She embraced Islam at the age of 20 and moved to Jeddah a year later. In 1995 she founded The Path to Knowledge, the exclusive distributor for Dar Abul-Qasim publications in the USA for five years. When the previous owner closed Dar Abul-Qasim in 2005 due to poor health, Amatullah aspired to reopen it in hopes of sharing the knowledge she had learned while working with the publisher. After overcoming many obstacles, she obtained ownership in 2007 and now hopes to bring Dar Abul-Qasim into the international arena, concentrating on authentic, well-written Islamic reading material.

Author & Translator: Umm Muhammad, Aminah Assami was born in southern California in 1940 and embraced Islam in 1974 in Syria after completing intensive Arabic language courses. In 1981 she moved to Saudi Arabia, and has taught classes in tafseer and basic fiqh at the Islamic Cultural Center in Jeddah since 1991. She has authored and/or revised more than 80 Islamic books in English, mostly for Dar Abul-Qasim. Her precise translation skills and effective writing style has gained her an impressive reputation appreciated by a dedicated reading audience. Some of her bestselling titles are The Global Messenger, Realities of Faith, The Path to Prayer, The Marriage Procedure in Islam, The Forty Hadith of al-Iman an-Nawawi (in which each hadith is accompanied by explanatory notes), and From the Guidance of Surah Ya Seen.

English Editor: Mary M. Kennedy was born in Orlando, Florida in 1965 and graduated from The Florida State University in 1986 with an English/Business Pre-Law major. She embraced Islam in 1985 and moved to Jeddah in early 1987, where she currently resides. Her expertise in the English language has been a valuable asset to the team’s production of appealing literature. Having been on leave for several years, she returned at the beginning of 2009 to continue her work with Saheeh International.

I could give you an example of each, but y'all have google...follow the links.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran_translations


If translating the Quran into English makes it lose it's meaning, an absurd statement at best, then no Muslim can offer to quote the Quran to a non Arabic person, or give the meaning...he by his own admission has lost the meaning in translation.

I speak several languages and can translate what is said or written into English for the benefit of non Bilingual people, why is Arabic be any different?

It is impossible for anyone to learn a language that cannot be translated into the only one they do know, which means the apologists and muslims who insist that one "must learn Arabic” or ,"Read the Quran in Arabic" in order to understand the Qur’an are committing a logical fallacy.

Either the Arabic of the Qur’an is able to be translated, in which case there is no need to learn Arabic, or it is not able to be translated, in which case it can never be learned by the non-native speaker.

I posted the Arabic verses along with the English translations, all say the same thing, Take Not Christians or Jews as Friends, protectors or Patrons. If you would like to look at the root of the word we can also go there...

Mathloom
Can you explain why Allah would want his followers to associate with the ones that he 'cursed' and then 'Transformed into apes & Pigs?' (5:60)

Or maybe you can translate the Arabic verses that I posted...without losing the meaning, of course.

End of the day, you are wrong in your statement that :

BTW: where does Mohummad & the Quran say that the Sun sets?

Just curious, that's all...I may have lost the meaning when I translated it.





Refuting the claim that 'The Quran can only be understood in Arabic', in detail...

Spoiler

The Quran can only be understood in Arabic


The Muslim Game:

The Qur’an can only be fully understood in Arabic. One cannot criticize Islam without knowing Arabic.

The Truth:

Although Muslims often tell critics of Islam to "read the Qur'an," they are usually unprepared for what happens when their advice is heeded. An honest translation of Islam's holiest book generally reinforces negative opinion. The fallback is to then claim that the Qur'an can only be understood in Arabic.

Of all the efforts to artificially insulate Islam from intellectual critique, this is probably the most transparent. Unfortunately, for those Muslims craving reassurance from the more embarrassing passages of the Qur’an and Sunnah, this cheap tactic of arbitrarily dismissing anything they disagree with still comes at a heavy price, since Islam cannot be protected in this way without sacrificing its claim to being a universal religion.

In the first place, it is fundamentally impossible for anyone to learn a language that cannot be translated into the only one they do know, which means the apologists who insist that one "must learn Arabic” in order to understand the Qur’an are committing a logical fallacy. Either the Arabic of the Qur’an is translatable (in which case there is no need to learn Arabic) or it is not (in which case it can never be learned by the non-native speaker).

Enter the skeptic. While every language has its nuances, how is that Arabic is the only one with words and phrases that are literally untranslatable? More importantly, why in the world would Allah choose to communicate his one true religion for all people in the only language that cannot be understood by all people? Even the vast majority of Muslims and their imams do not speak Arabic.

Even more suspicious is that this amazing linguistic “discovery” was only recently made – and that it corresponds quite remarkably with the contemporary rejection of Islamic practices that were considered acceptable up until the religion’s recent collision with Western liberalism. In fact, the argument that hidden and alternate meanings exist to unflattering Qur’anic passages (justifying slavery, the inferior status of women, sexual gluttony, holy warfare, wife-beating, and religious discrimination) perfectly corresponds with the level of embarrassment that modern scholars have about the presence of such verses in the Qur’an!

No other world religion claims that knowledge of a particular language is imperative to understanding itself and its holy texts. Neither is the same level of effort required to massage a primary message into palatability. While the Bible is distributed pretty much as is by various Christian groups, for example, it is rare to find a Qur’an that does not include voluminous and highly subjective footnoted commentary deemed necessary to explain away the straightforward interpretation of politically-incorrect passages.

An additional problem for the apologists is that they want to have it both ways. On the one hand they declare that (for some strange reason) the "perfect book" can't be translated and that Allah's perfect religion thus cannot be understood by most of humanity without a battery of intercessors and interpreters. Then they turn around and blame the reality of Islamic terrorism on this same "necessary" chain of intermediaries by claiming that the Osama bin Ladens of the world have simply gotten bad clerical advice, causing them to “misunderstand” the true meaning of the Religion of Peace (in the most catastrophic and tragic way imaginable).

Of course, another irony here is that, as a Saudi, the Qur’an-toting Osama bin Laden was a native Arabic speaker – as are most of the leaders and foot soldiers in his al-Qaeda brotherhood of devout Muslims. In fact, many critics of Islam are Arabic speakers as well - a fact that is often ignored by the apologists, who only find Arabic linguistic skills relevant when they are lacking (not that the same pundits have ever been known to care about whether a critic of the Bible speaks Hebrew or Greek).

At this point there is only one avenue of escape for the beleaguered apologist - the weak claim that the Qur’an can only be understood in Classical Arabic, an obscure Quraish dialect which has not been commonly used in over a thousand years and is only known by a few hundred people alive today (generally Wahabbi scholars, who are - ironically enough - accused of taking the Qur'an 'too literally').

It is hardly plausible that the differences between classical and modern Arabic are of such significance that peace and tolerance can be confused with terrorism, but even if this were true, it merely begs the question all the more. Why would such a “perfect book” be virtually impossible for the rest of us to learn - and susceptible to such horrible "misinterpretation" on an on-going basis?

Really, it isn't hard to see through this childish game, particularly since the rules are applied only to detractors and not to advocates. Apologists never claim that Arabic is a barrier to understanding Islam when it comes to lauding the religion, no matter how less knowledgeable those offering praise are than the critics. Neither do they qualify the claim that "Islam is the fastest growing religion" with the caveat that new converts (or the vast majority of existing Muslims) don't understand Islam since they can't read the Quran in Arabic.

Obviously, the real reason for this illogical myth is that the information age is now making the full history and texts of the Islamic religion available to a broader audience, and the contents are highly embarrassing to both Muslim scholars and their faithful flock. Pretending that different meanings exist in Arabic is means of self-assurance and saving face with others.


http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Games-Muslims-Play.htm#arabic

 

what about swingers? how does Allah feel about them?

child rapists? cool/uncool w/ Allah?

Spoiler

we know how the-prophet-that-must-not-be-depicted feels about child rapists.

Spoiler

 

Please refer to the post that discusses the text being mistakenly translated as friendship when that isn't accurate.

 

You should read that last spoilered part of Izak's last post. It is interesting.

 

FranchiseBlade, do some of your own research into the information before declaring that someone is wrong...just saying.

Ready for the knockout blow?

And referring to the link in the post that you hold dear to your heart...

Someone who is very close and intimate? Sounds like a friend to me. But since he is translating the words of the Quran into English, according to Mathloom, how can he know if it is correct, or it hasn't lost it's meaning in the translation.

The fact that the word has several meanings allows muslim apologists to utilise whichever meaning suits them at that time. It is like the duality of the Quran, and use of abrogated verses when needed.

Funny how the link given in the post doesn't detail how Allah cursed the Jews and Christians, then transformed them into apes and pigs in the same Surat, Al-Mā'idah (The Table Spread) - سورة المائدة

Would Allah allow Muslims to be friends with apes & PIGS?

 

I have an idea! Let's make all religions illegal!

 

I read that and disagree with the basic claim the article makes. I also disagree when it claims that the bible doesn't have any problem being translated, because I think there are huge fundamental misunderstandings with the bible based on lack of context and proper translation.

The article comes off as a means for people who have a bias against Islam to rationalize their bias. It isn't surprising given the site it comes from.

I would think that people who have a sincere interest in understanding would want to know more and appreciate the differences in language given that the people the Quran was originally written for would have been reading it in just one language.

 

I was raised about as Catholic as possible (was raised by Jesuits half my life before I turned 18) and know you can find exclusive language in virtually all major religions. My surrogate father (Jesuit Priest Holocaust survivor) taught me life is too short to disqualify a friendship based on religion. I have met and dated many Muslim women and Christian women... I would not read too much into the exclusive dogmatic language of a particular faith.

 

I think that you just choose a side and stick to your guns, arguing in favor of your decision, no matter how ludicrous and wrong you may be.

It has me stumped because you seem like a decent bloke, how can you continually argue against the facts presented?

The only mentions of the Bible in the spoilered article:

So I can't see where you came to the conclusion...

The spoilered article never made such a claim!

Looking at the site RELIGIONOFPEACE, all they do is link news stories that are left out of main stream media and keep a tally on the terrorist activities...(19,986 since 9/11, 209 attacks this month with 911 dead BTW)

Here is the Link again, show me what is a fallacy and what specifically you disagree with...

Spoiler

"The Qur'an Can Only be Understood in Arabic"

The Muslim Game:

The Qur’an can only be fully understood in Arabic. One cannot criticize Islam without knowing Arabic.

The Truth:

Although Muslims often tell critics of Islam to "read the Qur'an," they are usually unprepared for what happens when their advice is heeded. An honest translation of Islam's holiest book generally reinforces negative opinion. The fallback is to then claim that the Qur'an can only be understood in Arabic.

Of all the efforts to artificially insulate Islam from intellectual critique, this is probably the most transparent. Unfortunately, for those Muslims craving reassurance from the more embarrassing passages of the Qur’an and Sunnah, this cheap tactic of arbitrarily dismissing anything they disagree with still comes at a heavy price, since Islam cannot be protected in this way without sacrificing its claim to being a universal religion.

In the first place, it is fundamentally impossible for anyone to learn a language that cannot be translated into the only one they do know, which means the apologists who insist that one "must learn Arabic” in order to understand the Qur’an are committing a logical fallacy. Either the Arabic of the Qur’an is translatable (in which case there is no need to learn Arabic) or it is not (in which case it can never be learned by the non-native speaker).

Enter the skeptic. While every language has its nuances, how is that Arabic is the only one with words and phrases that are literally untranslatable? More importantly, why in the world would Allah choose to communicate his one true religion for all people in the only language that cannot be understood by all people? Even the vast majority of Muslims and their imams do not speak Arabic.

Even more suspicious is that this amazing linguistic “discovery” was only recently made – and that it corresponds quite remarkably with the contemporary rejection of Islamic practices that were considered acceptable up until the religion’s recent collision with Western liberalism. In fact, the argument that hidden and alternate meanings exist to unflattering Qur’anic passages (justifying slavery, the inferior status of women, sexual gluttony, holy warfare, wife-beating, and religious discrimination) perfectly corresponds with the level of embarrassment that modern scholars have about the presence of such verses in the Qur’an!

No other world religion claims that knowledge of a particular language is imperative to understanding itself and its holy texts. Neither is the same level of effort required to massage a primary message into palatability. While the Bible is distributed pretty much as is by various Christian groups, for example, it is rare to find a Qur’an that does not include voluminous and highly subjective footnoted commentary deemed necessary to explain away the straightforward interpretation of politically-incorrect passages.

An additional problem for the apologists is that they want to have it both ways. On the one hand they declare that (for some strange reason) the "perfect book" can't be translated and that Allah's perfect religion thus cannot be understood by most of humanity without a battery of intercessors and interpreters. Then they turn around and blame the reality of Islamic terrorism on this same "necessary" chain of intermediaries by claiming that the Osama bin Ladens of the world have simply gotten bad clerical advice, causing them to “misunderstand” the true meaning of the Religion of Peace (in the most catastrophic and tragic way imaginable).

Of course, another irony here is that, as a Saudi, the Qur’an-toting Osama bin Laden was a native Arabic speaker – as are most of the leaders and foot soldiers in his al-Qaeda brotherhood of devout Muslims. In fact, many critics of Islam are Arabic speakers as well - a fact that is often ignored by the apologists, who only find Arabic linguistic skills relevant when they are lacking (not that the same pundits have ever been known to care about whether a critic of the Bible speaks Hebrew or Greek).

At this point there is only one avenue of escape for the beleaguered apologist - the weak claim that the Qur’an can only be understood in Classical Arabic, an obscure Quraish dialect which has not been commonly used in over a thousand years and is only known by a few hundred people alive today (generally Wahabbi scholars, who are - ironically enough - accused of taking the Qur'an 'too literally').

It is hardly plausible that the differences between classical and modern Arabic are of such significance that peace and tolerance can be confused with terrorism, but even if this were true, it merely begs the question all the more. Why would such a “perfect book” be virtually impossible for the rest of us to learn - and susceptible to such horrible "misinterpretation" on an on-going basis?

Really, it isn't hard to see through this childish game, particularly since the rules are applied only to detractors and not to advocates. Apologists never claim that Arabic is a barrier to understanding Islam when it comes to lauding the religion, no matter how less knowledgeable those offering praise are than the critics. Neither do they qualify the claim that "Islam is the fastest growing religion" with the caveat that new converts (or the vast majority of existing Muslims) don't understand Islam since they can't read the Quran in Arabic.

Obviously, the real reason for this illogical myth is that the information age is now making the full history and texts of the Islamic religion available to a broader audience, and the contents are highly embarrassing to both Muslim scholars and their faithful flock. Pretending that different meanings exist in Arabic is means of self-assurance and saving face with others.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Also, you didn't respond to my previous post...why would that be?
:grin:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wali
http://translate.google.com/?hl=en&tab=wT#ar|en|ولي

Here is the word wali in Arabic: ولي
Copy/paste it into any regular dictionary which is not religious.

Only in some Sunni religious Tafsir (interpretation of verses/Hadith) is it "friend". As mentioned earlier, Tafsir was written at least 1 century after the Prophet and is not even agreed upon within the Sunni sect, nevermind the hundreds of other sects.

To illustrate the irregularity of these interpretations, here is a website which carries most of the major Tafsirs. Verse 5:55 contains the word "Waliyukum" which means "Your (plural) Wali". This is one verse, and all the Qurans are identical in Arabic. Here are the Tafsirs:

Just to highlight the sources posted earlier:
URBANDICTIONARY.COM
SUFIwiki
ISLAMICdictionary
comparativeRELIGION BLOG!!

or my favorite of all, the words of Daniel Pipes, a man who GEORGE W BUSH had to tell "Actually, I disagree, Islam is more peaceful than that."

The first link he posted, the wiki of "Wali". I encourage you to go to it. He left out the first paragraph (where the word friend is not mentioned and the word is described in Arabic. But also, he left out a very important part:

This pargraph acknowledges that it did not appear for around 200 years since the referenced first scholar was born in the year 843 and the Prophet died in the year 632.

Don't fall for statements in random posts, but if it matters much, then speak to a secular Arab and see what they say. This word existed before Islam, and the new meaning of friend came into existance after the Prophet without him alluding to it. At the risk of offending Muslims >> this meaning was added later in Tafsir to serve the imperial and colonial ambitions of the kings of that time. Since they became all powerful, it found its way into some of the new dictionaries. But make no mistake about it, no tafsir can be considered an Arabic dictionary, and the Quran was written with the words of the Arabic language at the time. They were not written with the words of Arabic language hundreds or a thousand years later.

Once again, IzakDavid shows himself to be a dishonest, lying, plagiarizing poster. This after strike 1 when he claimed to have studied Islam, and strike 2 when he copied the arguments of a well-known anti-Islamic website and presented the arguments as his own.

I wonder if he's comfortable copying from the anti-Islam websites, why doesn't he also copy from the mirroring pro-Islam websites specifically set up to refute those claims. As he can see, you don't need to visit any of those stupid websites to refute a stupid claim such as this one.

It is too bad for him, because on any average board there would be tons of Muslims who have no idea about early texts and hadiths and tafsirs because they rely on "Scholars" to do that work for them, interpret it, and feed it to them. That's why many have difficulty and tend to just sling poo back. Over here we have some intelligent people who will not let his shameless and transparent bull**** be spewed without holding him accountable once in a while.

 

All that anger.

Not surprising though, when you have been indoctrinated from early childhood.

 

From your 'Website that carries most of he Tafsirs'

http://www.altafsir.com/index.asp

I guess the translators of the Tafsirs, on the link that you provided, must have also got the meaning lost in the translation.



And the personal attack, expected from Mathloom...

1. No dishonesty was shown. I copied and pasted straight from the worlds most respected online Quran and the Worlds most honoured and respected translations, which you dishonestly claimed didn't exist. Strike 1 for you.

2. You still haven't shown where I lied. Strike 2 for you.

3. I study Islam by reading the Quran, the Hadith & Tafsir, plus the arguments for and against Islam, as well as reading historical books in regards to the era of Mohummad. What more do you want? Strike 3 for you.

4. The Plagiarism claim is void, links and or where I copied and pasted the information from we're provided. Strike 4 for you.

5.
http://www.islamic-dictionary.com/index.php?word=Wali
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wali
http://sufiwiki.com/Awliya
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Awliya
http://quran.com/5/51

Which one of these is an 'Anti-Islamic' site? Your 5th strike.

6. Why should anyone on this board trust what you say in regards to Islam? You yourself have stated, that due to the legal situation in your Emirate country, there are things that you can't say that are not pro-Islam. Strike 6.

7. And then you dare to mention the Banu Qurayza? << MATHLOOM NOTE: these are Jewish tribes of that time which were protected by the Constitution of Medina drafted by the Prophet

What did Muhummad do to this tribe? What did he and his followers do to the women & children?

The men slaughtered, their possessions looted, the women and children raped and then sold into slavery...some protection from Muhummad.

From the facts presented, it is you who is being a dishonest liar. Someone who cannot debate a subject regarding Islam without resorting to ad-hominem personal attacks against the messenger.

The problem is I'm not intimidated by your bully boy tactics, and never will be. How about you argue the facts.



BTW: still waiting for an answer on Where does the Quran and Hadiths say that the sun sets? Please enlighten me, I may have lost the meaning in my translation.

 

For Mathloom...even your apologist are so distorted in their translations that they spend page after page trying to explain that Muslims are allowed to be friends with non-Muslims, then put up Quran 60:1

They wrote the word 'friend', but didn't mean it...The Great Imam Grand Mufti Mathloom will soon explain the mistakes made by the worlds most trusted scholars of Islam. He even knows better than Ishaq...

From the same Pro-Islamic / Anti-Christian (Judeo-Christophobe) website

So which scholar is lying?

I know, the one that suits you in different circumstances. Classic muslim apologetics.

So how did Muhummad really feel about the non-Muslims?

After reading the above, we go back to Answering-Christianity, who make the absurd statement...

Sorry mate, they haven't clarified anything, if anything they have contradicted each other and brought more confusion to the discussion.


Mathloom also has no explanation for...

Waiting for your rebuttal & answers to the questions posed, try to do it without the personal insults if you can...which I highly doubt.


BTW: still waiting for an answer on Where does the Quran and Hadiths say that the sun sets? Please enlighten me, I may have lost the meaning in my translation.

 

To further highlight the dishonesty of Grand Ayatollah Mathloom, the Surat that was being discussed in the thread, and put forward in the OP was Al-Maa’idah 5:51, NOT 5:55 as Caliph Mathloom decided to focus on in his post...treacherous!

But I highlighted the verse 5:51 in my previous post, using the Tafsir website that the exalted Sheikh Mathloom himself provided...

Spoiler

I wonder why he used Verse 5:55 instead of 5:51? Maybe because it highlights and used the word FRIENDS?

Of course Mufti Mathloom will tell you that this was an honest mistake on his behalf, an oversight if you will...