Blogging the Qur’an: Sura 20, “Ta Ha”
posted at 8:00 am on April 6, 2008 by Robert Spencer
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
This early Meccan sura “has no rival,” says Muhammad Al-Ghazali, “in its uncompromising affirmation of the Absolute Unity of Allah.” It takes its name from the two Arabic letters that begin it, ta (ﻁ) and ha (ﻩ). Ibn Abbas and other early commentators have suggested that ta ha (طه) is actually a phrase from an ancient Arabic dialect, meaning “O man,” in which case it may be that here Allah is addressing Muhammad, as he does in v. 2 — where once again consoles his downcast prophet, telling him he is not being given the Qur’an in order to distress him. Everything belongs to Allah (v. 6) and he knows all secrets (v. 7), for he has the best names – that is, the highest attributes (v. 8).
Then verses 9-99 tell yet again the story of Moses, which has already been touched on in suras 2, 7, 10, and 17. But, as Al-Ghazali observes, “every time the story appears different aspects of it emerge. Each version has details which are not included in any other version.” But the repeated aspects have their usefulness as well. Al-Ghazali also points out that this sura is very concerned with reminding and bidding the faithful to remember truths that they have already learned: the Qur’an itself is a reminder (v. 3); the believers should pray regularly so as to remember Allah (v. 14); Moses asks Allah to be given Aaron as a helper, so that together the brothers can praise and remember him without ceasing (vv. 29-34); Allah grants this, and warns Moses not to grow slack in remembering him (v. 42); Allah instructs Moses to go speak to Pharaoh so that perhaps Pharaoh will remember or show some fear of Allah (v. 44); Allah never forgets (v. 52), but after the mysterious Samiri fashions the idol of the calf, he tells the people that this is their god, but that Moses has forgotten that (v. 88); Allah tells Muhammad that he told him the whole story of Moses again as a reminder (v. 99); Allah gave the world the Qur’an so as to bring some people to remember him (v. 113); Adam forgot his covenant with Allah (v. 115); Allah will forget on the Day of Judgment those who forgot his signs (ayat, or verses of the Qur’an) in this world (v. 126).
Sufis say that when Moses approached the Burning Bush and heard the voice of Allah (vv. 10-17), he attained the states of fana, or absorption of the self into the deity, and baqaa, life in union with Allah. His shoes, they say, represented his separation from Allah, which is why Allah tells him to take them off (v. 12). According to Ibn Masud Baghavi in Ma’alimut-tanzil, what Moses saw wasn’t actually fire at all, but the heavenly light (Nur) of Allah.
Anyway, Allah equips Moses with the staff that turns into a snake (v. 20) and a hand that would turn brilliant white “without disease” (v. 22), and sends him off to confront Pharaoh. Allah grants Moses’ request to take Aaron along (v. 36) and tells him the story of how he was plucked out of the river by “one who is an enemy to Me and an enemy to him” (v. 39) as a baby and returned to his mother (v. 40). The story is told as if the hearers are already familiar with the outline of the story of Moses from the Book of Exodus.
When Allah tells Moses and Aaron again to go to Pharaoh (v. 44), they respond that they’re afraid “lest he hasten with insolence against us, or lest he transgress all bounds” (v. 46). Allah responds that they should not be afraid, for he is with them, and sees and hears everything – recalling the message of consolation he gave to Muhammad in vv. 5-7. So Moses and Aaron do their duty, telling Pharaoh that Allah is the only God and has “made for you the earth like a carpet spread out” (v. 53), and that punishment awaits the disbelievers (v. 48). But Pharoah rejects their message (v. 56) and says he can match their miracles (v. 58). When his magicians, however, profess their faith in Allah (v. 70), Pharaoh threatens them in language that eerily foreshadows Allah’s own recommended punishment (revealed later) for those who make war against Allah and Muhammad (5:33): he tells them he’ll crucify them, or amputate a hand and a foot on opposite sides (v. 71). Evidently the punishments are fine – the only problem is the person administering them, and for what reason.
Allah saves the Israelites from Pharaoh by parting the sea so that they pass on dry land (vv. 77-79). Moses ascends the mountain to meet Allah, but doesn’t receive the Ten Commandments. Instead, Allah asks him why he hurried up the mountain in advance of his people (v. 82) and tells him that he is testing Moses’ people by allowing Samiri to lead them astray (v. 85). Moses scolds Aaron for doing nothing when he saw them beginning to go astray (v. 92). Samiri explains that he took “a handful (of dust) from the footprint of the Messenger” to fashion the calf (v. 96). Muslim commentators generally agree that he took this dust from one of the hoofprints left by the angel Gabriel’s horse, as Gabriel led the Israelites in battle. Moses punishes Samiri, telling him “thy punishment in this life will be that thou wilt say, ‘touch me not’ (v. 97). Ibn Kathir explains: “This means, ‘Just as you took and touched what was not your right to take and touch of the messenger’s foot print, such is your punishment in this life, that you will say, ‘Do not touch (me).’ This means, ‘You will not touch the people and they will not touch you.’” This may be a hint that Samiri is a Samaritan – a people who generally did not (and do not) intermingle with outsiders.
Verses 100-112 warn about the dreadful Day of Judgment. Then verses 113-123 tell us that Allah has sent down an “Arabic Qur’an” so that people may fear him (v. 113) – this is one of the verses that establishes the proposition that the Qur’an is essentially in Arabic and cannot be translated. Allah tells Muhammad “be not in haste with the Qur’an before its revelation to thee is completed” (v. 114). This is because, says Ibn Abbas, Muhammad would recite revelations rapidly as they were being revealed, trying to remember them. He should trust in Allah’s power to make him remember. After that the Qur’an returns to the story of Adam’s fall; Satan tempts Adam to eat from the Tree of Eternity (v. 120) – not the tree of the knowledge of good and evil as in Genesis. Allah expels Adam and Eve from the Garden but tells them that those who follow his guidance will not lose their way (v. 123).
Verses 124-135 conclude the sura with more warnings: the disbelievers will be raised up blind on Judgment Day (v. 125); Muhammad should be patient with the unbelievers (v. 130), because their punishment is coming (v. 129); nor should Muhammad envy their worldly goods (v. 131); the unbelievers ask for a sign, but they have ignored all of Allah’s previous revelations (v. 133).
Next week: Sura 21, “The Prophets”: “Closer and closer to mankind comes their Reckoning, yet they heed not and they turn away.”
(Here you can find links to all the earlier “Blogging the Qur’an” segments. Here is a good Arabic/English Qur’an, here are two popular Muslim translations, those of Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, along with a third by M. H. Shakir. Here is another popular translation, that of Muhammad Asad. And here is an omnibus of ten Qur’an translations.)
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Hmmm…photo of Heston…RIP
Wind Rider on April 6, 2008 at 8:12 AM
Interesting, and you can see why the gullible think Islam is just Judaism’s brother - instead of the kid that cheated off Judaism’s test.
P.S. RIP Charlton Heston.
emailnuevo on April 6, 2008 at 8:15 AM
Rest in piece, Charlton Heston.
John on April 6, 2008 at 8:32 AM
Another fine actor from my youth, goodby Mr. Heston. I’m sure the anti gun nuts are rejoiceing.
AMartinez on April 6, 2008 at 8:33 AM
I was unaware that the ancient Egyptians used Crucifixion. My guess would be this was Mo’s (PBUH) invention.
Craniac on April 6, 2008 at 8:46 AM
OK, I’ll come right out and say it: Mohammed made up the Qur’an as he went along and as events and convenience dictated.
flipflop on April 6, 2008 at 8:46 AM
PS RIP Chalton Heston
Craniac on April 6, 2008 at 8:47 AM
I read or heard that early in life Muhammad traveled to the holy lands with the intent of becoming a Christian or perhaps Jewish teacher/leader but was rejected and sent away because of his arrogant habit of twisting scripture to fit his own agenda and view point. Is this true? If so, it certainly fits with his habit of re-writing biblical stories to his own liking in addition to his fierce condemnation and hatred of Christian and Jews.
Rod on April 6, 2008 at 8:52 AM
Joseph SmithMoses read from the magic tablets.Dum Dum Dum Dum Dum.
Yes Islam cheats off the other two religions and that’s how I know that Islam is BS from the start, because so are the other two.
Religions dissuade people from truly thinking about the origins of mankind or ethics because they do it for you, albeit poorly.
LevStrauss on April 6, 2008 at 8:55 AM
I met Charlton Heston at an NRA meeting here in New Hampshire about 8 years ago. A more vigorous defender of the 2nd Amendment you’ll not meet.
May GOD bless you and may you rest in Peace Mr. Heston.
mountainmanbob on April 6, 2008 at 8:55 AM
Rod:
There is certainly no Islamic tradition that says this. In them, both Jewish and Christian leaders recognize the youthful Muhammad as a prophet, thereby underscoring the perversity of their communities when they later rejected him.
And there are no Jewish or Christian accounts mentioning Muhammad at all until much later.
Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 8:58 AM
The fact is that Satan knows what God said in His Word and used Mohammed as a mouthpiece to distort and corrupt it for evil purposes. Christ stated that Satan was a liar and the father of lies. This is part of satan’s plan to come against God’s people Israel to destroy them. The west is walking right into the trap.
wepeople on April 6, 2008 at 8:59 AM
When they do, what do they say about him and his movement?
TheBigOldDog on April 6, 2008 at 9:42 AM
For an example, see Andrew Bostom’s Maimonides and the “Meshugga” Prophet.
Shy Guy on April 6, 2008 at 9:48 AM
My all-time favorite movie:
Ben-Hur, starring the late, great Chuck Heston.
jgapinoy on April 6, 2008 at 9:52 AM
What some Christians and Jews don’t understand about Islam, or refuse to understand because they think what they believe is true so they think they can win based on “FACTS”, is that Muhammed had that covered from the get-go. Muhammad was God’s LAST prophet, and everything that Christians and Jews believe is wrong because God told Muhammad the real truth. And since the Koran is that last, literal, true word of God, all other religions are false.
Depending on the mindset of the Muslim, and what he chooses to believe about other religions, he can either believe that all the other religious people in the world are mistaken because they’ve been fooled, or he can believe that all the other religious people in the world are the enemy because they really do know that Islam is the only true religion and they are purposely lying about it for their own evil reasons.
Christians usually get the benefit of the doubt and are considered fools, while Jews are pretty much always Evil with a capital E.
It’s really unfortunate that other religious people feel what they believe in is more correct than Islam. Seeing the Koran compared with the Bible, and things like burning bushes and stone tablets with God word on them, and to know that so many people believe in such nonsense, is really very sad.
Jaynie59 on April 6, 2008 at 9:55 AM
A true American is gone.
Rest in Peace, Charlton.
Kowboy on April 6, 2008 at 10:01 AM
Wow, talk about synchronicity!
Apeking on April 6, 2008 at 10:08 AM
You mean as opposed to people like yourself, “[refusing] to understand because [you] think what [you] believe is true.”
Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye?
TheBigOldDog on April 6, 2008 at 10:10 AM
Mr. Spencer,
I was puzzled by the same verse as Craniac, 20:71.
Is Muhammad confusing Roman and Egyptian punishments? I am not aware of the Egyptians using crucifixion until Roman times.
dentalque on April 6, 2008 at 10:22 AM
On another note, RIP Mr. Heston. Thank you for what you did, you stood for Freedom in your own way.
dentalque on April 6, 2008 at 10:22 AM
Jaynie59 on April 6, 2008 at 9:55 AM
Apparently Allah Knows nothing of genetics
Or weather patterns
Seek and ye shall find
Guardian on April 6, 2008 at 10:24 AM
I believe you are correct, my friend. If I recall correctly, Egyptians stoned people and crucifixion was primarily a Roman method of execution.
mjk on April 6, 2008 at 10:29 AM
Oh, and RIP Charlton Heston. Great man, towering screen presence, my favorite Moses other than the original receipe Moses.
mjk on April 6, 2008 at 10:30 AM
Allah gave the world the Qur’an so as to bring some people to remember him.
SOME people? Then why do they try to convert EVERYBODY?
Anyway, R.I.P., Mr. Heston.
“Sweet Jesus, Harry! You sure did screw the pooch last night, didn’t you?” (True Lies)
Tony737 on April 6, 2008 at 10:32 AM
Exactly! Is this not another example of an (Allah forbid) error in the Qur’an?
How can it be a perfect revelation if there are such factual errors? How do Muslims reconcile this with the facts?
dentalque on April 6, 2008 at 10:37 AM
There are different levels of pooch screws. Some are bigger than others.
(If memory serves is the answer.)
dentalque on April 6, 2008 at 10:39 AM
America lost a wonderful person. I pray God will give his family comfort and He will open His arms to Mr. Heston.
L
letget on April 6, 2008 at 10:40 AM
Thank, Mr. Spencer.
Spirit of 1776 on April 6, 2008 at 10:49 AM
Another great post Robert. I look forward to Sunday mornings after Mass to read your next installment of Blogging the Qur’an. Thanks
We will miss Charlton Heston, he was true to America and a great champion of the Bill of Rights. May his Soul and all the Souls of the Faithfully departed rest in Peace.
Zorro on April 6, 2008 at 10:51 AM
Dentalque…
“It’s a scale really, with a perfect mission on one end, and a total pooch screw on the other, and we werrrre, uh, somewhere in the middle …”
Tony737 on April 6, 2008 at 10:55 AM
Thanks for the laugh, but since this is off topic here and HA has started a Heston post, I will move that line over to there.
dentalque on April 6, 2008 at 11:12 AM
You people are nitpicking the Hell out of Mohammed’s sloppy editing of the Bible.
Why not focus on the major points: Deleting the Ten Commandments, and claiming that Jesus is not the son of God.
Islam’s goal from the very beginning was to destroy all other religions.
logis on April 6, 2008 at 11:27 AM
I do find it interesting that many of the people talking about Heston’s death continue to state that the makers of the Ten Commandments looked to the Quran for inspiration. It is getting a little annoying seeing that same line in all the stories? Robert, what sources (if any) do the scholars claim Muhammad pulled from for this updated, “Hollywood” version of the Mt. Sinai experience. Are there any or is it all revelation? If the latter…I’m really grateful I’m a Christian, lol. RIP Heston
brotherbell on April 6, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Logis-Great point! But do remember, we are all part of one big happy monotheisitic family! Except for us evil tritheists…
brotherbell on April 6, 2008 at 11:57 AM
And when Jewish sources do mention Muhammad they did so circumspectly. You have to remember that a large part of the Jewish community and many of the greatest rabbis were so-called Sephardim or Mizrachim and lived in the Mediterranean basin, mostly among Arabs/Muslims. In circumstances of dhimmitude, rabbinic writings had to be carefully written to avoid a backlash. To be fair, a similar condition existed in Christian Europe, with Jewish sources treated the subject of Christianity and Jesus delicately. Actually, Europe was probably worse because Jews were compelled to submit books to church censors and Europe was demonstrably more murderous to Jews than the Muslim world. It was no fun to be a dhimmi, but it was better than being a Jew in medieval Europe.
In any case, you can see how circumspect Jewish writers were in the works of R. Moses ben Maimon, משה בן מימון a.k.a. Maimonides, a.k.a. the Rambam, who was born in 12th century Muslim Spain and fled to a more tolerant Egypt to avoid Almohade persecution. One of the greatest Jewish scholars of all times, the Rambam was first supported financially by his brother, a merchant. When his brother died at sea, the Rambam now had to support both his and his brother’s families so he apprenticed himself to a physician to learn a trade. As would be expected of a man of his abilities he quickly progressed in that field and in time became the court physician to the Grand Vizier Alfadhil and Sultan Saladin of Egypt. His reputation as a physician was such that he and also treated Richard the Lionheart. (I wonder how many people personally knew both great military commanders of the Crusades). So the Rambam was intimately familiar with Muslims and Islam and he was very careful how he described them in his writings.
In one of his responsas to a Rabbi Obadiah, most likely the famous Norman convert to Judaism, the Rambam says concerning Islam:
One of the Rambam’s most famous smaller work is the Iggeret Teiman, the Epistle to Yemen. The Jews of Yemen were facing the simultaneous problems of violent and coercive proselytizing by Muslims and a syncretistic movement led by a local Jewish false messiah, so the Rambam’s letter necessarily addresses Islam in a critical manner. However, the words Islam, Muslim, or Mohammed never appear in the Iggeret.
The Rambam references “the Madman”, haIsh haM’shuga האיש המשגע (lit: that crazy man), elsewhere and there is no doubt who he is talking about, he just can’t say it openly.
BTW, it’s interesting to note that while the Rambam is quite critical of Christianity (because the Iggeret was written in Arabic for a relatively isolated Jewish community, the Iggeret was never censored) and Islam, he does acknowledge that they are part of God’s overall plan for things. In Hilchot M’lachim U’Milchamotayhem, Laws of Jewish Kings and Their Wars, the Rambam’s comprehensive compendium of Jewish law, halacha (path in Hebrew, similar conceptually to shaaria in Arabic - halacha means “the walk”, and sha’ar in Hebrew means path and is a cognate to shaaria in Arabic), he poses the question:
Why did God send “the Ishmaelite and the Nazarene”?
Note again he did not refer to Mohammed by name. He answers his own question by saying that they prepared the world for the ultimate arrival of the true messiah. Noting that they both are distortions of Judaism he nonetheless acknowledges that Christianity and Islam have indeed taught the world the basic concepts of Jewish theology.
The Rambam’s approach to the two other Abrahamic faiths is nuanced. Like almost all other Jewish authorities he finds Islam to be more monotheistic than Christianity, because of the trinity and Islam’s uncompromising attitude towards statuary. At the same time, though, he says that a Jew can teach Torah to a Christian, who acknowledges the authority of the Tanach, the Hebrew Bible, though they may interpret it differently, while he says that a Jew may not teach Torah to a Muslim, because Islam considers the Tanach to be falsified by the Jews.
Robert, have you done much research on Jewish writings concerning Islam? You might find some worthwhile resources in that corpus.
rokemronnie on April 6, 2008 at 12:14 PM
I think they are picking that up from the Wikipedia entry on the film that attributes that meme to the DVD release:
Could you provide links to the stories that mentioned the Quran. I’m willing to bet that they don’t mention the Jewish sources like Josephus and Sepher ha-Yashar. Islam is so chic to the MSM. Hence it’s always “Haram al-Sharif, the Noble Sanctuary, what Jews call the Temple Mount” instead of “Har haBayit, the Temple Mount, what Muslims call the Noble Sanctuary”. But then the MSM loves to use Mumbai, Beijing and Torino, and those anchors are sure to roll their “R”s when dealing with Latino names, while you never hear the capital of Israel called Yerushalayim. In fact, I’d bet that a Lexis search would show that the Arabic al-Quds more frequently appears in the MSM than the Hebrew name for Jerusalem.
rokemronnie on April 6, 2008 at 12:31 PM
Certainly it would be perverse to reject him while at the same time calling him a prophet. At best it would show a divide within the body of believers.
However, I don’t think it would unreasonable to reject someone you once admired when that person ultimately shows themselves to despise and actively teach against all you believe. So, perhaps they distanced themselves after he showed his true colors?
I’m also surprised to learn that the Christian community would consider him a prophet in any fashion considering the abundant teachings in both the old and new testaments regarding false prophets.
Rod on April 6, 2008 at 1:56 PM
TheBigOldDog:
Many things. St. John of Damascus argues that Islam is a heresy of Christianity. And don’t miss the Maimonides link that ShyGuy provided.
Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 2:08 PM
Good stuff. Thanks for sharing.
TheBigOldDog on April 6, 2008 at 2:08 PM
Apeking:
Yes, I wrote this and uploaded the Heston photo earlier this week, with no idea, of course, of what was going to happen.
Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 2:10 PM
dentalque:
Yes, in this Muhammad is committing an anachronism, although of course a pious Muslim would say that of course the ancient Egyptians practiced crucifixion, because the Qur’an says they did. But there is no actual evidence that they did.
Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 2:12 PM
Tony737:
Because the message is intended for everyone, but Allah does not will that everyone will receive it — yet no one can tell who will receive it and who won’t. See Qur’an 10:99-100.
Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 2:16 PM
dentalque:
Particularly among Muslims, faith is very strong. If the facts don’t bear out that faith, so much worse for the facts.
Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 2:19 PM
logis:
The Qur’an Blog is intended to be, and will be when complete, a commentary on the entire Qur’an, not just parts of it. The two points you mention have, I think, been amply covered in the series even as it stands already.
Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 2:22 PM
brotherbell:
I haven’t seen this. Where are people saying it?
I myself don’t think the Qur’anic version of Sinai is remotely as Hollywoodish as Exodus, but in any case, anything that is not in Exodus that is in the Qur’an regarding Moses and Sinai is likely to come from Talmudic tradition.
Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 2:26 PM
rokemronnie:
No, I haven’t. I do have that bit about Maimonides saying you can teach Torah to a Christian but not to a Muslim in my book Religion of Peace?, unless it got edited out (I don’t remember), but beyond Maimonides I haven’t gone very far.
Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 2:31 PM
Rod:
The early Islamic accounts depict a Christian delegation coming from Najran, in southern Arabia, to meet Muhammad. Along the way, their leader tells them that Muhammad is a true prophet, but that the Byzantines will stop giving them money if they acknowledge his prophetic status, so they must reject him. In other words, their rejection is base and financially motived, not a matter of conscience. This is an assumption that many Muslims have to this day.
Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Why? Could it not be just as likely that he fabricated any additional material?
Rod on April 6, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Rod
Theoretically, yes, but that doesn’t seem to have been his MO. Most everything regarding Biblical characters that is extra-Biblical in the Qur’an has been traced to various Jewish or Christian traditions. Some have speculated — and it is just speculation — that Muhammad wanted his hearers to have heard the stories he was telling from the Jews and Christians. While this would lead some to dismiss him as retailing mere “tales of the ancients,” as the Qur’an notes several times, it would also validate his claim to be a prophet in the Jewish/Christian prophetic line.
Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 2:40 PM
I can certainly see that happening, given the nature of us all and the power of money. However, ” … early Islamic accounts” puts a bit a skepticism into my view of this story. It fits rather nicely with Muhammad’s disdainful view of Christians and Jews.
Rod on April 6, 2008 at 2:49 PM
Can someone point out one example from the movie where the Quran was uniquely used to convey part of the screenplay’s script?
Shy Guy on April 6, 2008 at 2:52 PM
Rod:
Here is a fuller account of that delegation of Christians meeting Muhammad, from an earlier Q-Blog.
Robert Spencer on April 6, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Mr. Spencer
Thank you once again for sharing your knowledge. You are once again making a tough subject understandable.
dentalque on April 6, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Thank you so much. I’ve come late to your blog (actually ignored it, to be honest) and have some catching up to do.
And thank you for all that you do and the countless hours you freely give to sharing your knowledge and understanding of Islam.
I have to admit that I am struggling a great deal to understand this “religion of peace” and the state the world is in because of it.
As a Christian, I am called to reach out to all others in love, compassion, and understanding. As a human, I find this command especially difficult when it comes to those who would kill me for my faith because their faith says I am deserving of death. Makes me wonder if there is any hope for my children and theirs of ever living in a world without jihad.
Will it take all out war, a new crusade? Or is there hope of a Islamic reformation?
Just rhetorical questions - no need to respond.
I’m off to buy your books to get some answers and insight. Think I’ll start with “Religion of Peace.”
Thanks again and God Bless.
Rod on April 6, 2008 at 3:39 PM
The Prophet Spencer, PBUH.
Shy Guy on April 6, 2008 at 4:03 PM
What Jews wrote about Mo is lost forever. Arabian Jews were the ones with close contact with Mo, and they were completely isolated from the western (Sephardic and Ahkenazi) Jewry, a fact which prevented writings from being preserved, and later were decimated by the early Muslims (namely by Halif Omar).
Aristotle on April 6, 2008 at 7:36 PM
This is one of the most scary things about Islam. Their faith is so strong they’re willing to disbelieve what their own senses tell them.
4shoes on April 7, 2008 at 12:11 AM
This is actually one of the most central tenets concerning the Covenant between God and Adam. God will tell Adam what is good and what is evil. God did not create man with the knowledge of good and evil.
The ‘tree of eternity’ is actually something that God created Adam with. Adam was not supposed to die, not created to die (no sin, no suffering, no pain) so why would he need a ‘tree of eternity’. The whole story is absurd and obviously made up by Mohammed.
The amazing thing is learning about it and realizing how screwed up the believers in this religion are. Mo basically told Bible stories and switched them around. I don’t feel anger or hate, I just feel sorry for these people.
Muslims obviously WANT to do good and right by God, they are just so far off base, and they are not able to change their thoughts because of fear. A real ‘true religion’ would not require people to remain in the religion or face death. Such a shame these faithful people are faithful to such obvious and blatant misrepresentations of the Bible.
ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 12:27 AM
What are you basing yourself on?
“And the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and He breathed into his nostrils the soul of life, and man became a living soul.
And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden from the east, and He placed there the man whom He had formed.
And the Lord God caused to sprout from the ground every tree pleasant to see and good to eat, and the Tree of Life in the midst of the garden, and the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil.”
- Genesis 2:7-9
Shy Guy on April 7, 2008 at 2:04 AM
Are you sure? Contrast with:
“Now the Lord God took the man, and He placed him in the Garden of Eden to work it and to guard it.
And the Lord God commanded man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat.
But of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat of it, for on the day that you eat thereof, you shall surely die.”
- Genesis 2:15-17
From a cursory reading, any of your claims can go either way.
Shy Guy on April 7, 2008 at 3:35 AM
well, there are many interpretations of the written Word in the first 12 chapters of Genesis. My interpretation after Adam ate of the ‘tree of knowledge of good and evil’ is that God banished him to till the fields and sentenced man to death.
In other words, I interpret it to mean that if you will die when you eat of the tree, then you won’t die if you don’t eat from it. . . sort of like a promise or covenant. Why would it matter that he’ll die if he eats from the tree (disobeys) if he would just die anyway?
Man didn’t know what was good or bad because he had no concept. He had free will to either obey God or disobey God. The test was mainly whether or not mankind ate from the ‘tree of knowledge of good and evil’. . . meaning that eating the tree means Adam determines that eating the tree is good and not evil. From that point on the Bible is filled with mankind making rules (10 commandments, etc) that were not originally created by God in the garden of Eden. Judges is filled with rules that people needed to abide by (people determining what is good and what is bad). Even up to the point where the people and the government decided that it was ‘good’ to kill Jesus.
Anyway it is too involved to get into my theological understanding of Genesis and God’s covenant on a comment post. Thanks for your interest. I hope this post made some sense.
ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 9:44 AM
You never explained how Mohamed’s claims contradict Genesis 2:7-9. More:
Man-made rules?
“So Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord and all the ordinances, and all the people answered in unison and said, “All the words that the Lord has spoken we will do.”
- Exodus 24:3
“And the Lord said to Moses, “Come up to Me to the mountain and remain there, and I will give you the stone tablets, the Law and the commandments, which I have written to instruct them.”
- Exodus 24:12
“When He had finished speaking with him on Mount Sinai, He gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, stone tablets, written with the finger of God.”
- Exodus 31:18
There are other verses but these should make the point sufficiently.
Shy Guy on April 7, 2008 at 10:04 AM
I thought the possibility that you’d consider the 10 commandments as directly ‘from God’ (as do I).
HOWEVER, if they were so important to Creation, and God is PERFECT (which I believe), why didn’t he give them to Adam? Why was Adam only restricted to not eating from the tree.
And more importantly I was mostly referring to all the laws and rules and regulations later in the Bible. . . AFTER Exodus where it comes up with penalties and punishments for obscure things (I would consider more of a historical context rather than instruction from God to everybody for all time).
Again, too involved to get into on a comment post, but I’m doing my best.
ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 10:26 AM
we don’t consider ‘eye for an eye’ anymore do we? At one time according to the Bible that was considered the ‘good’ way to deal with justice.
ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 10:27 AM
I always thought that it was because if the Fall hadn’t happened and Man was still living in peace with God, Man wouldn’t have needed the 10 Commandments.
crazy_legs on April 7, 2008 at 10:27 AM
And once again, I don’t believe that people can know the difference between good and evil. 2000 years after Christ and I still don’t know whether His death was ‘good’ or ‘bad’.
If He hadn’t been killed, we wouldn’t recognize him as Messiah. But recognizing Him as Messiah, it seems preposterous that He should be killed after doing nothing wrong.
So I ask you. Was killing Jesus a good or bad thing? I don’t think we can know, I don’t think we were created to know, I don’t think there is an answer.
ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 10:30 AM
We Jews always knew that this particular verse was not meant literally. Even your deity, Jesus, knew that.
Here’s a little update for you, though it might be jumping the gun a bit:
QUESTION : (a) Where does the Bible say that these Seven Noahide Commandments were given to Noah, and where does it say that they were given to Adam?
Shy Guy on April 7, 2008 at 10:35 AM
I can only look at it as having its advantages and its disadvantages. If not for the historical outcomes, it would mostly be irrelevant to me.
I think you’re asking the wrong person.
Shy Guy on April 7, 2008 at 10:39 AM
Shy Guy, the ‘eye for an eye’ verse is just one verse in a sea of instances where it says don’t do this, do that, the punishment is this. Are we to believe that all of those are equal to the commandments because they are in the Torah?
I look at the Old Testament as a historical documentation of the Jewish people and their relationship to God the Creator. I don’t really see any of it as necessary to life today other than the fact that we can learn from what happened when people disobeyed God in the past.
Here I’ll point to the commandment about adultery. . . and Solomon. Solomon was the most blessed by God and closest to God. Why then was his blatant disregard for this commandment by taking so many wives not considered ‘disobeying’ God? Solomon’s downfall was taking his wives’ gods and religions. . . not committing adultery with them.
ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 10:42 AM
I understand that now. I didn’t realize you were Jewish when I posted before. It’s like the debate yesterday with Hitchens on ‘the Rev Wright’. Hitchens is appalled by Wright’s statements but is willing to accept that he’s ‘as awful as any Christian preacher’. That dilutes his arguments considerably. But in context, we move forward.
ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 10:44 AM
I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone put it quite that way before. You’ve hit the nail on the head my friend. Bravo!
And RIP Mr. Heston.
srhoades on April 7, 2008 at 10:54 AM
I don’t know how any Christian can view the crucifixion of Christ as anything other than good.
His life was not taken, but rather willfully layed down by Him per the will of His Father.
Without His death, His ressurection could not occur.
awake on April 7, 2008 at 10:57 AM
Hmmm… quotes like these…
…make me sad
BNCurtis on April 7, 2008 at 10:58 AM
Do you use the same rule to measure yourself, or are you exmept?
I wonder.
BNCurtis on April 7, 2008 at 10:58 AM
I find your comment very respectable. I was curious about this, though:
Is there comparable evidence?
BNCurtis on April 7, 2008 at 10:59 AM
awake on April 7, 2008 at 10:57 AM
Granted He laid down His life. But how could mankind be so awful as to LEGALLY kill Him in the most horrific way in history? I look at it as the most terrible time in the history of man-made ‘justice’. His crucifixion pointed out the awful nature of mankind when left to their own decisions on what is good and bad.
Sorry to get off the subject of the blogging the Koran. I’ll stop now because I hijacked this thread waaay too much.
ThackerAgency on April 7, 2008 at 11:02 AM
I do not understand your question. If you want, please rephrase.
Yes. I am most familiar with this Christian doctrine. Not the place to argue on this point. I was pointing out the explicite contradictions between what you claimed the Torah says or doesn’t say versus what are actually in the verses themselves.
No. Polygamy is perfectly permissable according to the Torah. Jacob, Leah and Rachel - remember. It is only for the last 1000 or so years that polygamy has been banned. See Wikipedia: Rabbenu Gershon as an elementary reference.
There is a misnomer about the Torah’s meaning of the word “adultery”. It only refers to cases of consensual relations when the woman is married to someone else.
Live and learn.
But Judaism has always taught that Solomon’s downfall was indeed for disobeying G-d. When did anyone say otherwise? See Crash Course in Jewish History: King Solomon.
Don’t think I have time for more now.
Shy Guy on April 7, 2008 at 11:03 AM
In response to:
Deut. 29:29 says:
I’m thinging that may be a secret thing. I can’t say it’s been revealed.
BNCurtis on April 7, 2008 at 12:11 PM
Secret? Quite revealing, actually:
Oh dear.
Shy Guy on April 7, 2008 at 2:01 PM
Shy Guy,
First, I’m really enjoying your posts, well, up until that last one, where you “dug” us little christians, implicitly calling Yeshua Ha’Mashiach a false prophet. (!) ;-) –no offense taken, btw. …But speaking of “You shall neither add to it nor subtract from it”
I had been enjoying your link to the Noahic Commandments when all of a sudden:
Now, there are several instances of stoning spoken of in the Tenahk; Why risk credibility by exaggerating/spinning the definition of “stoning”?? “I mean, come on!”
(emphasis mine–but it would be kinda hard to poison him, and take him up a convenient cliff -since they were outside the camp–to ‘painlessly’ kill him all without touching him!)
Again, kinda hard for a whole congregation to drug a person, and then for everyone to throw him off a high building (again, outside of a camp) but NO stretching of the natural reading is necessary at all, if we DON’T ADD that new definition of “stoning”…everyone just picks up a rock and heaves ho.
There’s more, but I don’t want to belabor a point.
Auralae on April 16, 2008 at 8:57 AM
{{{{quote from linked article: Rashi of Troyes (d. 1105) said less than a century after Gershom’s death, “all members of the Ashkenazi diaspora are students of his.” As early as the 14th century Asher ben Jehiel wrote that Rabbeinu Gershom’s writings were “such permanent fixtures that they may well have been handed down on Mount Sinai.”}}}}
Here’s where the Protestant in me screams SOLA SCRIPTURA!!
;-) :-) :-)
Is. 64:6 All of us have become like one who is unclean,
and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags;
we all shrivel up like a leaf,
and like the wind our sins sweep us away.
SPRINGS to mind…
Sticking with Torah, there is indeed a law against polygamy–ThackerAgency is exactly correct, Solomon broke this law soundly-and he must have known, since he was commanded to write it down for himself. It’s found in Deuteronomy 17:
But, we can go back much further than that, all the way to Genesis. For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. …how exactly is one supposed to add to that one flesh–does it then become one and a half?? Two? Five???
Let’s just state the obvious here–the very first time a man–whether he be Abraham, Jacob or whomever, feasted his eyes upon any woman other than his wife, he was betraying that covenant. Now-it was forgivable…obviously, as is murder!…but let’s not kid ouselves into believing that G*d condones polygamy in any manner shape or form–He merely forgives it.
LOL–each and every SINGLE instance where polygamy is taught about in the Torah is a negative lesson! There is not one instance where the circumstances are described–the relationships reported, the consequences told, where a second wife is a blessing to the family…instead, there is the jealousy of Sarah, the weaping of Hannah, the pain of Rebecca and Leah. (I’m sure each and every one of their husbands suffered many a headache as well.)
Solomon’s heart WAS moved by multiplying wives unto himself: He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray. 4 As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the LORD his God, as the heart of David his father had been. 1Kings 11:3-4
Auralae on April 17, 2008 at 12:17 AM