The Original Languages of Islam are an obstacle

Submitted by jennifer solis (United States), Apr 28, 2008 at 03:11

Hello, Imam Ahmed,

When you just go on the "surface stuff", you can look at some stuff that Christians do and say it's nice.

But if you look at the scripture of the Bible, the COMPLETE Bible (which was written in Greek and Hebrew, and a little Aramaic in the Old Testament - not just Greek and Aramaic, as you state - this is a popular way for Muslims to screw around with the Bible), you can see that Christianity IS BASED ON THE BIBLE.

Not on "how we influence others", as you state.

You write, "Reform doesn't come from what we can speak as far as language goes, but how we influence others, and how we live our lives according to our faith."

Well, what is that "faith" based on?

If you are talking Christianity, you base it on the Word of God. Period.

If someone really wants to know every tiny detail, you study the Greek and Hebrew of the Bible.

And again, after all that, your "faith" is still able to be based on the Bible.

"Reformation of the Church", during the Dark Ages, was required because the Catholic Church had HIDDEN THE BIBLE for almost 1,000 years from the "masses". Only the Latin Vulgate was permitted, and nobody but the Catholic priests could read it. This gave the church the power to deceive, and rule, over the people. People were accused of being witches, and were burned at the stake. People accused of heresy were executed. Anyone possessing a Bible in a language other than Latin (so they could read it) was executed. The Roman Catholic Church ruled with an "iron fist", possible because they alone claimed to know what God and His scripture said.

Are you beginning to see how important original language is?

Are you understanding the importance of the original language of ANY scripture?

Yes, you can just accept the instruction of Arabic-reading scholars of the Qur'an.

But when the Church was in a mess, during these Dark Ages, it took the original languages of the Bible to be exposed (and many were burned at the stake, executed for this) for the horror of the situation to finnaly come to a close.

The Bible was translated from the original languages, GREEK AND HEBREW, by numerous sources.

Consequently, the populace was no longer at the mercy of the ignorance imposed by not knowing what the Bible really said.

Now. CAN THE SAME BE SAID FOR ISLAM?

This is the question. Reformation of Christianity was possible due to close adherance to the Biblical scripture.

Is "reformation" of Islam possible due to close adherance to the Qur'anic scripture?

Well, one way to find out is to KNOW ARABIC, as the Qur'an was written in Arabic.

I know "dhimmi no more" can be somewhat acerbic, but she's got a good point, and she is fluent in Arabic.

Original languages is the key.

Is it possible, just possible, that Islam will never "reform", BECAUSE OF close adherance to scripture?

Or, will it take something like keeping the Meccan verses, but throwing out the Medinaan verses?

Have you ever thought about this, Imam Ahmed?

"Reform doesn't come from what we can speak as far as language goes, but how we influence others, and how we live our lives according to our faith.", again, quoting you.

Well, what if "according to our faith" means Mohammed in Medina?

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".