/islam/ - Islam

anon.cafe Muslim Community

SAVE THIS FILE: Anon.cafe Fallback File v1.1 (updated 2021-12-13)

Want your event posted here? Requests accepted in this /meta/ thread.

Max message length: 20000

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

Board Rules

(used to delete files and postings)

29:64 "And this worldly life is not but diversion and amusement. And indeed, the home of the Hereafter - that is the [eternal] life, if only they knew."

Dhu al-Qarnayn فلان 12/29/2021 (Wed) 20:23:19 ID: 290ff2 No.316
How do Muslims explain Surat al-Kahf? All evidence points to it being directed lifted from Syriac versions of the Alexander Romance, parts of the Surah being almost exact quotations and paraphrases of said work, which of course predates the Qur'an. How do Muslims explain the fact that the 'horns' of Dhu al-Qurnayn's name refer to the horns of Alexander the Great that appear on coins circulating in the Middle East, which were of course the horns of the pagan god Ammon? And this said, where is the wall of Yajuj and Majuj? I believe this to be the weakest part of the Qur'an.
The Qur'an narrates the true story of the Ahl al Kahf. The circumstance that this story may have been mentioned before in similar forms doesn't detract from it at all.
>>316 >where is the wall of Yajuj and Majuj? God knows best.
>>319 Pre-Islamic fictional Christian sources refer to the story of Dhu al-Qarnayn. Why does the Qur’an reproduce lies?
>>319 Correct. The stories belonged to Allah in the first place. The Quran sets the record straight, and has the story bring more good in the process. Any similarity is simply a result of effective story principles, universally accessible to all literate cultures. The Romance is effective in its own civilization, but hardly anyone knows it. Far more people are familiar with it, especially in its text form, in the proper Quranic version and context. Any version differing from the Quran was a distortion of the true account. Europeans are especially guilty of distorting things, being a vile trait influenced by their drama culture, which makes them neurotically seek new versions of things, which are usually trivial or harmful, and almost always disregarding seeking real substance.
>>327 we believe the pre-islamic stories were corruptions of actual History (about Alexander ? another emperor ? nothing is said on the matter). The Quran merely restores that specific story to truth God knows best
From https://islamqa.info/en/answers/22029/ "3 – The difference between this righteous slave, and the Macedonian Alexander who was a kaafir, is well known to Muslim scholars. Ibn Katheer (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Badaayah wa’l-Nahaayah (1/493): “It was narrated that Qutaadah said: Alexander was Dhu’l-Qarnayn and his father was the first of the Caesars, and he was one of the descendants of Saam ibn Nooh (Shem the son of Noah). As for Dhu’l-Qarnayn, he was Alexander son of Philip… ibn Roomi ibn al-Asfar ibn Yaqaz ibn al-‘Ees ibn Ishaaq ibn Ibraaheem al-Khaleel. This is the genealogy of him given by al-Haafiz ibn ‘Asaakir in his Taareekh. (He is known as) the Macedonian, the Greek, the Egyptian, builder of Alexandria, on the events of whose life the Greeks based their calendar. He came much later than the first Alexander. This was approximately three hundred years before the Messiah. The philosopher Aristotle was his minister and he is the one who killed Daar ibn Daar (Darius) and humiliated the kings of Persia and invaded their land. We have drawn attention to him because many people think that they are one and the same and that the one who is mentioned in the Qur’aan is the one whose minister was Aristotle, which has resulted in a lot of mistakes and far-reaching corruption. The former was a righteous believing slave and a just king, and the latter was a mushrik and his minister was a philosopher. There were more than two thousand years between the two, so what comparison can there be between them? They are not alike at all and they have nothing in common, except in the mind of a fool who does not know anything.” 4 – The Christians have no information in their holy book about the second Alexander, let alone the first. All they have is the story of the visions of Daniel, which they claim refer to the rule of this infidel Alexander, and the division of his kingdom after his death. 5 – If we assume that there is a difference between what the Qur’aan says and what their book says about a person or an event, why should that be regarded as strange? There are many such differences, especially in the stories of the Prophets such as Ibraaheem (Abraham), Nooh (Noah), Loot (Lot), Moosa (Moses), Dawood (David) and ‘Eesa (Jesus) (peace be upon them). The Christians have no reliable and continuous chain of narration for this book in which they believe, and they know nothing about those who translated it. Moreover it contains dozens of contradictions which effectively nullify any claim to infallibility or to have been written with inspiration from the Holy Spirit. It is sufficient to note the contradictions in the genealogy of Jesus (peace be upon him)! So how can we take what is in these distorted books as a standard by which to judge the Holy Qur’aan which is preserved by Allaah?!"

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms

no cookies?