[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
literature

Return ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 6463)
Message
File  []
close
z000.png
646364636463
>> No. 6463 Anonymous
31st August 2016
Wednesday 8:26 pm
6463 spacer
Does anyone know of a good book concerning the translation and interpretation of the Quran in simple English? I would really appreciate it.
Expand all images.
>> No. 6464 Anonymous
31st August 2016
Wednesday 8:29 pm
6464 spacer
GCHQlad probably has an app for this. He now probably also has you on his list.
>> No. 6465 Anonymous
31st August 2016
Wednesday 8:29 pm
6465 spacer
>>6463
There are a gazillion sites with it on.
>> No. 6467 Anonymous
31st August 2016
Wednesday 10:20 pm
6467 spacer
>>6463

Seriously. Ask at your nearest igloo.

Protip: Get an English/Arabic translation then buy a fucking E/A dictionary. Nuance is otherwise lost.
>> No. 6479 Anonymous
2nd September 2016
Friday 11:36 am
6479 spacer
>>6464
Spiritual exploration and development is suspect.
>> No. 6480 Anonymous
2nd September 2016
Friday 12:54 pm
6480 spacer
>>6479
That, and in this case it make make you one.
>> No. 6481 Anonymous
2nd September 2016
Friday 1:11 pm
6481 spacer
>>6480
I think its more a side effect of current security measures (though maybe the intended one?).
>> No. 6482 Anonymous
2nd September 2016
Friday 1:59 pm
6482 spacer
You want a book about the translation of the Qu'ran into English, OP?
>> No. 6483 Anonymous
2nd September 2016
Friday 11:43 pm
6483 spacer
>>6482
Not just a translation with old English and a thousand footnotes of what things mean, but a good translation and interpretation of the Quran in perhaps simple English from this century.

>>6480
There are easier ways to getting radicalised.
>> No. 6484 Anonymous
3rd September 2016
Saturday 12:42 am
6484 spacer
>>6483
>interpretation
That's going to be tricky.
>> No. 6498 Anonymous
24th September 2016
Saturday 9:47 am
6498 spacer
https://www.amazon.com/English-Translation-Message-Ahamed-Vickar/dp/0977300900

I read this while incarcerated and it was fairly good.
>> No. 6499 Anonymous
25th September 2016
Sunday 1:06 am
6499 spacer
>>6498

I read it and it's all nonsense made up by some totalitarian warlord. The quran is full of inconsistencies and contradictions. Absurd mix of Sabian /Talmud/New Testament prophecies.
A positive about reading the quran is understanding where ISIS, Boko Haram etc come from as they interpret the book ad verbum.

Spoiler alert https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ6c66G99A4
>> No. 6500 Anonymous
25th September 2016
Sunday 1:29 am
6500 spacer
>>6499

So not unlike the bible then, in that if people bothered to read the thing they would realised the moral codes they promote are barbaric, and are incompatible with modern society.

This is the uncomfortable truth about the Westbro Baptist church. God really does hate fags.
>> No. 6501 Anonymous
25th September 2016
Sunday 1:46 am
6501 spacer

File
removed
>So not unlike the bible then, in that if people bothered to read the thing they would realised the moral codes they promote are barbaric, and are incompatible with modern society.

>if people bothered to read the thing
>they would realised the moral codes
>and are incompatible with modern society

What a guy. Go sing this in public in Iran
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ojnv3fegkfM
>> No. 6502 Anonymous
25th September 2016
Sunday 2:21 am
6502 spacer
>>6500
I'm not a Christian, but my understanding is that the Bible has been changed to fit with the modern times. Although, how anyone can take something that gets changed so often seriously is weird to me. The barbarians who believe the static Quran seem more rational to me.
>> No. 6503 Anonymous
25th September 2016
Sunday 2:50 am
6503 spacer
>>6502
>>6500

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nIRJVmZ4K8
>> No. 6504 Anonymous
25th September 2016
Sunday 3:48 am
6504 spacer
>>6503
It's too early to be edgy. I will watch it when I feel edgier.
>> No. 6505 Anonymous
25th September 2016
Sunday 5:10 am
6505 spacer
>>6502

The bible became codified at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD.

So no, only the interpretation and 'translation' has been changed (parts conveniently ignored and amended to reinforce an interpretation). Weirdly the Torah didn't become codified until the 11th century which makes the Christian account more accurate. The dead sea scrolls are far enough away from either in their content to undermine any concept of divine truth contained within though.
>> No. 6506 Anonymous
25th September 2016
Sunday 1:19 pm
6506 spacer
>>6500
The proper way to respond to them is to point out that God also hates figs.
>> No. 6507 Anonymous
25th September 2016
Sunday 5:03 pm
6507 spacer
>>6505
No. The Da Vinci Code is not historically accurate. The Council Of Nicea did not decide which books would go in the Bible, that was decided a century before by a document called the Muratorian Canon. A fragment of it was found and it had a list of books very similar to the New Testament. Furthermore, a search of what the Church men were saying in the second and third century show that they did not mention any extra books that were then removed by the Council.

>>6502
Purely from a historical perspective, the Quran is the most valid Abrahamic religious text because it was created late enough to have sources from other societies such as the Byzantine and Persian empire comment on it. It was written within one century whereas the Bible is a mish mash of books spanning over five centuries. A lack of independent scrutiny from other civilisations also make the Bible particularly iffy compared to the Quran as we didn't get the account of the Israelites from the Assyrians for example. This is in stark contrast to Islam which faced the wrath of Saint John of Damascus pretty early on.

http://orthodoxinfo.com/general/stjohn_islam.aspx

Furthermore, the archaeological evidence from the various sites mentioned in the Bible do not add up to the historical account. To be fair though, the Quran mentions flying horses and genies and men who were 12 feet tall, so perhaps it's all hogwash.

To GCHQlad: I have a passing interest in theology, this does not make me a radical nor does this deserve being logged
>> No. 6508 Anonymous
25th September 2016
Sunday 7:47 pm
6508 spacer
>>6507
>The Council Of Nicea did not decide which books would go in the Bible, that was decided a century before by a document called the Muratorian Canon

I stand corrected, I wouldn't touch the 'Da Vinci Code', my source is various public educational institutions which evidently have been telling everyone the wrong thing (it seems to be a common enough misconception the Wikipedia page even mentions it).
>> No. 6509 Anonymous
25th September 2016
Sunday 9:02 pm
6509 spacer
>>6507
>this does not make me a radical nor does this deserve being logged

If you've done nothing wrong, you've nothing to fear lad. I'll mark the file for you.

Return ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password