Quran (Page 9)

Zanjan: Thank you from all of us.

seri8888: Most of the information are taken from the book " 50 Common Misconceptions About Islam, Muslims and The Quran"

Some other misinformation (which may be partly cause by Mistranslations and or misinterpretions of the Quran)
I MIGHT TRY to cover.

*All Muslims are the same and hold the same views -page 9 post 2

*Muhammad was more than just a human -page 9 post 3,4,6

*No freedom of speech -page 9 post 7

*The Quran rejects evolution -page 9 post 19

*The Quran says the Earth was created in 6 days - page 9 post 23

*72 Virgins for martyrs - page 10 post 8

*Woman/Eve created from the rib of Man/adam - page 11 post 24

*Muslim men have to grow a beard

*Gold and silver are banned for Muslims

*Homosexuals must be put to death

*Dogs are not allowed to be kept by Muslims

*Quran promotes racism

*Quran orders hands to be cut off for theft -page 9 post 5,8

*Halal meat uses an inhumane slaughter method

*The Quran teaches that the flood of Noah was global
~~~~~~

- All Muslims are the same and hold the same views

#Muslims here (in this case) mean the followers of Islam rather than its Arabic literal meaning i.e. one who submits to God's wills/ commandments.

Firstly people will always have some similar and different views even if they are from the same branch, sect and school/order of Islam.

The two major branches are Sunni and Shia

Sunni and Shia differences arose from disagreement over the succession to Muhammad as well as some differences in theological and juridical dimensions.

Sunni Islam is separated into four main schools of jurisprudence, namely Maliki, Shafii, Ḥanafi, and Ḥanbali

Shia Islam, on the other hand, is separated into three major sects: Twelvers, Ismailis, and Zaydis. The vast majority of Shia Muslims are Twelvers

Sufism is the mystical-ascetic dimension and is represented by schools or orders. There are 11 major orders. They are Bektashi, Chishti, Mawlavi, Naqshbandi, Oveyssi, Qadiriyyah, Suhrawardiyya, Tijaniyyah, Shadhili, Muridiyya and Universal Sufism also known as Neo-Sufism and Global Sufism.

seri8888: -Muhammad was more than just a human?

The common practice of exaggerated in exalting Muhammad created the danger
of partnership in God divinity something similar to demigod.

Excessive exaltation of the messenger of God’s rank, the over focussing of how special the messager is instead of focusing on the moral lessons of The Messages (The Quran) , as stated in Quran 18:110 - Say, "I am only a man like you, to whom has been revealed that your god is one God. So whoever would hope for the meeting with his Lord - let him do righteous work and not associate in the worship of his Lord anyone.

Of course all God's messagers, prophets/ revelators have the highest quality at that time and place of the moral-spiritual aspect then the rest of the people.

Now that Muhammad had long gone, it doesn't matter because the messages are still available in the Quran.

If we accept that Muhammad is a human, with no super human ability rather a man with the highest moral-spiritual qualities, then it becomes easy to accept that his actions are not all conveying from God.

Since not all of the actions of the Prophet were divine messages from God, then the Hadiths (historical records of Muhammad saying and doing, which he may or may not said or did) are not God's commandments. Rather, it teaches the examples of noble acts and belief. Provided that the hadith DOESN'T GOES AGAINST THE MESSENGES OF THE QURAN (then for sure you know Muhammad didn't says or do it)

For people who want to oblige Muslims to perform all prophetic actions, even if they were from the custom and have nothing to do with the Quran messages, they are mixing men words with God's words, definitely something I want to stop.(for myself personally, I know we can only control our own actions not others)

Zanjan: "If we accept that Muhammad is a human, with no super human ability rather a man with the highest moral-spiritual qualities, then it becomes easy to accept that his actions are not all conveying from God."

True. And there has been no dearth of those trying to challenge His rank despite the historical facts.

Since Muhammad wasn't an extraterrestrial or some multi-headed organism, there is no debate over Him being a man, one able to speak the language of the land, one who needed to eat, sleep, rest, bathe, work and so forth. He made it clear He wasn't a god - a god would have no need of those things.

However, if He was a man with the "highest" moral-spiritual qualities, He wouldn't have any peers. Such a man must, of a necessity, perform what no other man on earth can; as it's said, 'To whom much is given, from him much will be expected'.

"Super" means "above"... that which is natural. Muhammad's rank was NOT natural to the human species. If it were, there would be many rivals who would appear in every generation.

It follows that He possesses a supernatural ability. He is a Leviathan among men, dressed in humility and mildness so ordinary people wouldn't be terrified. Failure to understand that can only stem from a lack of appreciation and gratitude for this very rare, divine gift to humanity.

Zanjan: "Quran orders hands to be cut off for theft"

Verse 5:38 states:

"As for male and female thieves, cut off their hands for what they have done—a deterrent from Allah. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wise."

However, there's a provision in the following verse 5:39 which states:

"But whoever repents after their wrongdoing and mends their ways, Allah will surely turn to them in forgiveness. Indeed, Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

It stands that remorse is required to obtain mercy but for "mending their ways", time is required to show that this is the case. Also, it doesn't mean to cut off *both* hands at the same time because that would prevent one from earning a livelihood.

In Islam, there are various sensible conditions under which the individual would be exempt from this kind of punishment.

It should be noted that the tribes in Muhammad's day were mostly nomadic. Pagan culture used harsher punishments for all kinds of wrong doing without excuse - they cut off noses and ears and sometimes limbs as well (that last one was a Roman practice). So, the object was to heap permanent shame on the individual if they didn't bleed out first.

Muhammad taught moderation, reducing all excesses. The object was prevention, not to inflict humiliation. (anyone could lose a hand in an accident/act of war) Obviously, maiming is unnecessary in the modern day world of state penitentiaries, funded by the public purse.

The law doesn't act as a preventative for non-believers. However, rehabilitation via religion is sometimes possible.

seri8888: Reply to Zan page 9 post 4
On Muhammad was more than just a human?

Super mean excellent, Prophets are natural but rare and as stated before (where we already agree to disagree) there will no longer be any new prophets with new scripture only God's messagers using the same scripture the Quran.

Prophets had the highest moral-spiritual at their place and time only not the highest of all times and places. So yes at his time and place he was the best person to do the "job".

However sometimes prophets/messengers needed help and some were strengthen with other messengers. Like in 36:14 the 3 messengers of God. In that case they were all equally had the highest moral-spiritual qualities but each with different strength in other areas or they were the best 3 (1,2,3) , but only God knows who was number 1 aka the best at that time and place.

seri8888: *Misconceptions about the Quran preach no freedom of speech

Quran 24:11 - Indeed, those who came with falsehood are a group among you. Do not think it bad for you; rather it is good for you (those who think falsehood is good rather than bad) For every person among them is what [punishment] he has earned from the sin, and he who took upon himself the greater portion thereof - for him is a great punishment.

The right to express ourselves in public without fear of persecution is not the same as spreading of lies.

The balance between rights and responsibilities should be in place and those who cause harm/s with their lies should be held accountable... ideally in this world as well (not just for the rich who can afford defamation case. Actually, ideally shouldn't be any defamation case if everyone has to provide evidence before practicing their freedom of speech, although it would be slower freedom of speech )

Lies and wrong information not only cause harm to the person they slandered but also spread to the wider community. E.g
when someone shout “fire” in a crowded room, causing panic, when there is in fact no fire, should not be allow.

It is a responsibility to each of us to check it for ourselves whether what we read, see or hear is true or false, especially before passing it on.

Calumniate the innocent under the pretext of freedom of speech are not allowed in Quran but it happens so many times, sadly

Some Quran verses related to telling the truth and not to spread lies, that is connected to how to do the "free" speech or expression.

*Talking straight without any deception
33:70 - O you who have believed, fear God (not other people) and speak words of appropriate justice.

*Choosing best words to speak and saying those in the best possible manner
17:53 - And tell My servants to say that which is best. Indeed, Satan induces (dissension) among them. Indeed Satan is ever, to mankind, a clear enemy.

2:83 - And when We took the covenant from the Children of Israel, "Do not worship except God; and to parents do good and to relatives, orphans, and the needy. And speak to people good [words] and establish prayer and give zakah (compulsory alms)." Then you turned away, except a few of you, and you were refusing.

*Speaking politely
31:19 - And be moderate in your pace and lower your voice; indeed, the most disagreeable of sounds is the voice of donkeys.

*Shunning false and deceitful statements
22:30 - That (has been commanded), and whoever honors the sacred ordinances of God - it is best for him in the sight of his Lord. And permitted to you are the grazing livestock, except what is recited to you. So avoid the uncleanliness of idols and avoid false statement

*Not confounding truth with falsehood
2:42 - And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know (it).

4:46 - Among the Jews are those who distort words from their (proper) usages and say, "We hear and disobey" and "Hear but be not heard" and "Ra'ina," twisting their tongues and defaming the religion. And if they had said (instead), "We hear and obey" and "Wait for us (to understand)," it would have been better for them and more suitable. But God has cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not, except for a few.

*Being just when voicing an opinion
6:152 - And do not approach the orphan's property except in a way that is best until he reaches maturity. And give full measure and weight in justice. We do not charge any soul except (with that within) its capacity. And when you testify, be just, even if [it concerns] a near relative. And the covenant of God fulfill. This has He instructed you that you may remember.

seri8888: Quran orders hands to be cut off for theft

The verses 5:38-39 are commonly translated to mean physical cutting off the thief's hand or hands, there are several other meaning, and I wonder why many/most people choose the translation cutting off hand? Perhaps because that is what being practice in their culture?

In that case then hand cutting is a continuation for thief punishment at that time and place. And in Saudi or any other countries that still practice that culture today. (Btw in Saudi culture it only applied to stealing stuff that is not a necessity and that can be obtained in lawful way. E.g. if a person is hungry and steal bread, no hand cutting there)

However in most countries nowadays there is no such punishment, then the current meaning or translation for the time and place would be marking e.g records or tattoo.
Remember I gave an example about the meaning of smallest thing on page 1 post 23. The word remain unchanged but the meaning changes from ant, sand to preons, quarks and leptons, i.e. whatever was the common knowledge at the time and place.

Firstly, it should be noted that the verse makes clear whoever commits theft but repents after and makes amends, then this is acceptable to God, thus no punishment can be administered in this case.

The Arabic word translated as "cut" in 5:38 is "iqtaa" and occurs 14 other times in the same verb form (QaTaA) in The Quran, and with the exception of 59:5 and possibly 69:46 all other occurrences mean the non-physical or metaphorical action of "cutting off relationship" or "ending" [2:27, 3:127, 6:45, 7:72, 8:7, 9:121, 13:25, 15:66, 22:15, 27:32, 29:29, 56:33].

Thus, it is possible to understand the punishment for thieves in four alternative ways:
(1) cutting off their hands
(2) cutting or marking their hands
(3) cutting their means/power to steal, e.g. detention/jail.
(4) cutting their sustenance, e.g. in order to compensate the value of the theft.

It should be said however that the only working example given in The Quran of theft and its punishment is in the story of Joseph 12:73-75

Thus, one possible meaning of 5:38 is to apply it in the manner provided by Joseph's example: the suspected thief is given a chance to confess and return the stolen goods, if not, then if found guilty, would be detained, for a set time and/or in order to work off the cost.

42:40 - And those who, when gross injustice befalls them, they seek justice. The recompense for a crime shall be its equivalence, but whoever forgives and makes right, then his reward is upon God. He does not like the wrongdoers.

Taken from the article
Misconception: Islam and The Quran orders hands to be cut off for theft

Off topic, I was looking at history on hands cutting as punishment. It shows not only the Arabs practice it, but some other countries as well. It doesn't stop just at hands but also other body parts.

https://strangeremains.com/2014/04/06/a-criminals-relic-the-macabre-history-of-severed-hands/?amp=1

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cropping_(punishment)

https://www.historicallocks.com/en/site/h/articles/theft-and-punishment/

Zanjan: Seri wrote: “there will no longer be any new prophets with new scripture only God's messagers using the same scripture the Quran.”

This is your personal belief, perhaps a belief of others as well – since there is no text in the Quran stating that, there’s no truth base for discussion. One could counter this position using other passages in the Quran plus current history but, that’s a matter of perspective, not a correction.

Re: the 3 Messengers”:
“only God knows who was number 1 aka the best at that time and place.”

They each had followers so it follows that somebody besides God knew the reality. They all came from God, Who doesn't compete with Himself. Consequently, no competition existed between them – only humans make it into that.

The Quran doesn't speak of human rights - those didn't exist at the time. It speaks of privileges and respect, justice and altruism. Where it states "do what is best", there was the understanding that this is what GOD likes and has desired for us.

For moderns, that translates to "do what's in the best interest of all". This is unconditional love. There isn't much talk of love in the Quran. However, it comes from the place of unconditional love; perhaps the "unconditional" part is what the people needed to learn and submit to.

seri8888: We already agreed to disagree on this, so it is my bad for mentioning it again. I shouldn't bring it up.

Still something good and important point came out of this.

All our discussion here are our beliefs/ opinions/views, the question is what are those beliefs, opinions, views based on?

You stated that " This is your personal belief, perhaps a belief of others as well – since there is no text in the Quran stating that.."

It is my belief/view/opinion base on the Quran as stated on page 6 post 6, page 7 post 7 and page 8 post 8.

Your opposing personal belief that there will be new prophets/ revelators/ God's messagers/ manifestations of God with new scripture is your personal belief too, perhaps a belief of others as well.

seri8888: There will always be differences on Quran interpretation. As long as the Quran chapter and verse is given, we can check it out that it is really from the Quran and not from the Bible or any other source/s.

seri8888: Re: the 3 Messengers”:
“only God knows who was number 1 aka the best at that time and place.”

Zan stated "no competition existed between them – only humans make it into that"

Agreed, no competition and not for us to judge who is the best Prophets and or God's messagers

seri8888: Zan stated "The Quran doesn't speak of human rights - those didn't exist at the time"

Human rights are human rights, it might not be practiced then (or now) it might not have a name yet or not known as human rights but the foundation of freedom of speech according to the Quran is given. Lies, lying doesn't equates to freedom of speech.

Zanjan: "There will always be differences on Quran interpretation. "

This is why one shouldn't interpret.....one can never defend, justify or argue them. All attempts to *rectify* them will be futile because this is a circle of space that's between the individual and God.
Whereas, misconceptions aren't based on scripture or recorded religious history. Generally, they're notions picked up as hearsay by the unschooled. Ignorance, prejudices, and superstitions can be eliminated through education.


The concept of "Speech" in the Quran pertains to the dissemination of the teachings of Islam. In all religions, it's the believer's DUTY to spread the teachings, to make mention of God, Who charges them all with this commission. This needs to be applied without compulsion, contempt, fear, pride or preference. One's utterance should be elegant and respectful, guided by God.

There's never been any change in this matter throughout history. If, by carrying out this duty to God, one loses their life, then so be it. Martyrdom is the crowning spiritual attainment of man - if you're presented with this opportunity, unlike human rights, no one can take it from you.

Human rights, on the other hand, are those privileges afforded to all humans, regardless of race, nationality, gender, religion, ethnic background, and financial state. These rights apply to basic necessities of life - food, water, shelter, clothing, employment, respect, justice, charitable support and so forth. One's rights can't be upheld at the expense of another's rights.

seri8888: I was discussing Article 19 of the human rights - Freedom Of Speech and related to article 12 of human rights

In regards to interpretation, all understanding of what we read are our interpretation. It is either an interpretation of the source itself, in this case the Quran or our interpretation of other people interpretations such as some exegesis of the Quran.

Zanjan: Modern day documents have nothing to do with the Quran. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights was instituted in 1948 by International input and ratified by the UN General Assembly.
The contributors were a draft committee of NGOs, comprising various social interest groups, including religion. Naturally, it's foundation is justice, order, and respect and love for humanity - these attributes aren't confined to one group. They're expressions of civilization.

Article 12 is more about hate speech and libelous accusations. It can apply to racial profiling and regulating such things as perimeters for census information and media censorship. These principles should be incorporated in a country's Constitution, which transforms them from admonitions into executable laws.

Having said that, historically, Muhammad struck the first ever "Constitution"; however, it applied to one city state - Medina. It wasn't transferable to another city or nation. While based on some Islamic principles, the Quran hadn't been fully revealed at the time of its making in 622 CE. (I haven't read it as it's not scripture)

These days, people invent their own rights whenever they feel like it, imagining everyone should honour their rules. None of those perceived rights are officially approved by humanity; however, some are permitted via law of secular government. They're political issues, changing with the mentality of the times.

Zanjan: "In regards to interpretation, all understanding of what we read are our interpretation."

Since that is your means, then it's the view *you* best like. This isn't applicable to others. I don't interpret at all - to do so is to possibly change the intent of the text. I also know that the Word of God has multiple layers of meaning. It's not given to the weak intellect to comprehend them all.

Meanwhile, God chooses to bestow understanding on an individual or withhold it. This is nothing but manifest justice, a repeated teaching by all Messengers of God.

Further to the problem of interpretation is the dynamics - since I can't compel others to understand a verse the way I do (because they've interpreted for themselves), then if *I* also interpret, I can't leave my self open to new understanding either. This will present a devastating predicament, barring enlightenment in this world.

Historically, the clergy have been to blame for that, leading people away from God and towards themselves. Today, everybody and his dog thinks they interpret correctly yet to no one other than God's Messenger did God give this authority. Reason being humans destroy with it.

To highlight an example: the crap that cranks, militants and fanatics try to pull off about martyrdom. Genuine martyrdom issues from being given an offer one can't refuse - that is, "Renounce your Prophet and join our religion ....or.....die!"

Any other death in the name of religion is unacceptable to the righteous and to God.

seri8888: Zan you're practicing double standard here, how is it okay when you interpret and not okay when I do? Doing the same thing while criticising me for it, is hypocrisy

Zan stated " I don't interpret at all - to do so is to possibly change the intent of the text."

You had made or had used interpretations all along, either your own or some other people interpretations you agreed with. Worst you even add words to the translation, that is changing the intent of the text.

Zan stated "Today, everybody and his dog thinks they interpret correctly yet to no one other than God's Messenger did God give this authority."
Zan, the above is your own personal understanding, your interpretation base on non Quran source.

Prophet Muhammad did not interpreted all of the Quran, only a few and they were recorded in Hadiths (meaning it could really be his saying or it's not his saying but claimed to be his)

The Quran has clear cut verses as well as allegorical verses.

Efforts can be made to find the meaning of Quran allegorical verses, however a single fixed interpretation shouldn't be ascribe to them. Since their full and true meaning can't be fully understand yet as humans are gaining more knowledge (E.g in science), also the probability that humans knowledge in how everything in the universe work will never be reach totally.

See page 1 post 23 on the meaning of Atom/speck/ the smallest thing, hence everyone can understand The Quran but different people will have different level of understanding.

The Quran is not only for the very intelligent or geniuses, the Quran is for everybody who is seeking spiritual and moral guidance that mean average intelligence as most people are. In fact there is a story in the Quran about the most advanced people during Prophet Abraham time who are morally "retarded"

The Quran doesn't authorise scholarly community to interpret it nor should we follow any religious leaders or clergy comprehension of the Quran blindly. Believers should have a direct relationship with God and rely on our own reason. The only ways to understand are by
(1) reading directly from the Quran ourselves (2) we read/listen to scholars comprehension of the Quran aka interpretation or (3) both. The final choice is ours and we are accountable and responsible for it.

Note the words and verses in the Quran remain the same (that is why, when you added words to the translation, it was changing the intent of the text) although there are more than one meaning of the same verses, especially allegorical verses.

Stating the Quran chapter and verse is helpful to see how people can have different understanding/interpretation of the same chapter and verse.

The Quran is unequivocal in clarifying that it's purpose is to communicate to all 81:27 and 21:107

Btw, you do realise that everything you stated in agreeing or disagreeing with my explaination is just your view, your opinion only, just as this is mine.

Zan stated
"Renounce your Prophet and join our religion ....or.....die!

Any other death in the name of religion is unacceptable to the righteous and to God."

What is the connection to the current discussion of understanding the Quran or Quran interpretation? None that I can see.

seri8888: The Quran rejects evolution?

To accept evolution completely is to accept that the impossible happen. Mathematics probabilities show that life from chances are not likely. Like tornados blowing over metal to produce jet plane

God created the universes and everything in (as well as outside) it, including humans, but how exactly is not told in the Quran in detail (Quran is not a science book). Evolution is the best or what we know up to now of how we came to be.

There are scientific fields/ disciplines where some are more exact E.g. mathematics, optics, astronomy and physics, some science are harder or impossible to have empirical measurements. While evolution is not a soft science, it's not in the same category as physics either.

51: 47 - I constructed the universe with might, and I am expending it (theory of expension of the universe)

21: 30 - Do the disbelievers not realise that the heavens and earth were (once) one mass then We split them apart? And we created from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?

50: 38 - I have created the heavens and the earth, and everything between them in 6 stages, and no fatigue touched Me.

When science shows that human life and other creatures took million of years to evolve, some Muslim scholars object because they interpreted the word khalaq translated as creation to mean instantaneous creation. In most intrepretations khalaq has no temporal context in that time does not exist for God, that God exits outside of dimensions and is not limited by time.

6:98 = life has its origins from a single being (LUCA?)

6: 98 - And it is He who produced you from one soul and (gave you) a place of dwelling and of storage. We have detailed the signs for a people who understand.

15:26, 23:12, 37:11 = And the process of life started from the extract of organic soil/mud

15:28 = that they were created from fluid and extract of altered clay

15:29= was bought to life by the blowing of soul into their body

Some Islamic scholars proposed that the verses could have multiple intrepretations metaphorically as the Quran supports the ideas that some verses have multiple meanings.

3:7 - He sent down to you this scripture, containing straightforward verses, which constitute the essence of the scripture, as well as multiple meanings or allegorical verses..

The idea that human evolved.
6:133 - And your Lord is the Free of need, the possessor of mercy. If He wills, he can do away with you and give succession after you to whomever He wills, just as He produced you from the descendants of another people.

Darwin said that probably all organic beings have descended from some primordial form, Darwin didn't discuss the origin of life specifically.
Jamal al Afghani the 19th century Islamic scholars agreed with Darwin that life compete with other life in order to succeed and he also believed that life was created by God, he stated " there is no evidence in the Quran to suggest whether all species were created all at once or gradually"

Hence the existence of Adam doesn't assert there being no humans who could have existed at the time of Adam appearance on earth.

Quran on creation of Adam
15:26 - We created human from sounding clay, from mud moulded into shape...
And
32:7 to 8 - He began creation of human from clay and made his progeny from quintessence of fluid

Diverting from the evolution discussion, a related topic on Adam.

The word Adam is not a name of a man or a woman but a collective singular noun which mean humanity or mankind. Hence Adam is a generic term not a personal name.

All people originated from a common, single source of humanity.
4:1 - O humankind remain conscious of your Sustainer Who created you out of one single self and out of it created its pair/mate (Eve or Hawa is never name in the Quran, only in the hadith) and out of the two scattered a multitude of men and women.

The neutrality of gender of this common single source is supported in conformity with the text by the literal translation of the word khalaq (creation)

Back to Quran on evolution from Common Misconceptions About Islam, Muslims and The Quran

While there is no exact statement worded in a way that satisfies a person that's looking for total support for or against evolution, what I read so far, the Quran support evolution without denying God is the creator.

So yes you would not find in the Quran Evolution is correct or Evolution is bogus either.

The Quran describes a sequence of events that could be incorporated within an evolutionary process, but with God as the initiator and sustainer, with mankind being given unique qualities at a point in time when ready. Some examples are shown below:
21:30 ...We made out of water every living thing...

11:61 ...He produced you from the earth/land...

76:1 Was there not a time when mankind was nothing to even be mentioned?
76:2 We have created mankind from a mixed exudate...

71:17 God made you grow from the earth as a growth/plant

23:12 And We have created man from an extract from clay.

23:13 Then We made him a drop in an established lodging.

71:14 "And indeed He created you in stages...

6:38 There is not a creature in the earth, or a bird that flies with its wings, but are communities like you...

6:133 ...He raised you from the seed of another people.

22:5 ...We have created you from dust, then from an exudate/drop, then from a clinging substance, then from a fetus developed and undeveloped...

32:7 The One who perfected everything He created and He began the creation of man from clay.

32:8 Then He made his progeny from an extract of a humble liquid.

32:9 Then He evolved him, and blew into him from His spirit...

29:20 Say, "Roam the earth and observe how the creation was originated...

To conclude, it seems The Quran does not confirm nor rule out the evolutionary process.
It may be interesting to note that the basic theory of evolution can be found in early Muslim works and was not considered controversial. Perhaps the most well known example of this was in the work 'Al Muqaddimah' (the introduction) by Ibn Khaldun (1377), written more than 400 years before Charles Darwin. Quote:

"One should then take a look at the world of creation. It started out from the minerals and progressed, in an ingenious, gradual manner, to plants and animals. The last stage of minerals is connected with the first stage of plants, such as herbs and seedless plants. The last stage of plants, such as palms and vines, is connected with the first stage of animals, such as snails and shellfish which have only the power of touch. The word 'connection' with regard to these created things means that the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the newest group.
The animal world then widens, its species become numerous, and, in a gradual process of creation, it finally leads to man, who is able to think and reflect. The higher stage of man is reached from the world of monkeys, in which both sagacity and perception are found, but which has not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking. At this point we come to the first stage of man"

Zanjan: Seri, I don't see where you find that I've interpreted anything. Perhaps you can offer a specific instance?

You cited me saying >>> “Today, everybody and his dog thinks they interpret correctly yet to no one other than God's Messenger did God give this authority."
You responded:
“Zan, the above is your own personal understanding, your interpretation base on non Quran source.”

That’s not an interpretation - it’s historical and scriptural fact. Nowhere in the Quran will you find Muhammad appointing anyone to be His interpreter, then or in the future. Historically, He appointed His son-in-law, Ali, to succeed Him but this fact isn’t mentioned in the Quran.

One doesn’t interpret one’s own words. The Prophet delivered the Revelation to mankind without a commentary. Muhammad had nothing to do with the Hadiths – those were all entries made by diverse followers over the next several hundred years after His passing. The Hadiths are NOT Islam. Muhammad said the only the way is Islam. (3:19-20) The meaning of the word “Quran” is “Recitation”.

The depths of the Quran are for the understanding of minds that are FIT to grasp them – understanding can’t be transferred; it isn’t interpretation, it’s knowledge gleaned of one’s own accord, not derived from the knowledge of others. As such, it’s not something one can share with a group. God will inspire whomever He wills without our intervention.

When I said you interpreted, it's because you asserted a statement that wasn't written in the text, presenting it as how the text was written. You didn't include a disclaimer like, 'I think this is what *this verse* is intending to say......'

Zanjan: An official translation doesn’t change the substance and direction of the sentence. No language can be translated exactly word for word – this is the reason Muslims had always insisted the individual had to learn Arabic to read the Quran, which isn’t written in modern Arabic.

The English language is 1,500 years old – “Old English” is practically unrecognizable as English. We didn’t even have the full alphabet then. Likewise, Arabic was making the same transition in the alphabet and words as Old English did at the same time.

Language is intended to change and evolve so, keep in mind that learning Arabic requires learning the classical form. Despite these hurdles, God has promised His Word will be preserved and understood.

“What is the connection to the current discussion of understanding the Quran or Quran interpretation?”

The connection is that the Quran speaks of martyrdom , although it doesn’t use one word to describe it. There is enough content that there’s no way for anyone to misunderstand the event. To ensure this, it's mentioned twice, as is almost everything in the Quran.

Quran 2:154 states: “Do not say regarding those who are slain in the path of God that they are dead; rather they are alive but you are not aware.” Quran 3:169 states: “Do not consider as dead those who are slain in the path of God; rather they are alive and well-provided for in the presence of their Lord.”

Zanjan: The ancients were very close to nature - it was easy for them to see how the forms were connected by purpose and to detect the symbiotic relationships in the natural world.

It doesn't take a genius to recognize the increasing complexity of nature, knowing there was intelligent direction, moving creation forward to a known destination. Like building a bridge, it's not possible to progress without a vision of the next phases, not possible to build anything new without some material to work with.

You read these statements about divine building in stages through all the scriptures of God - every religion has them. When they say to look at nature as proof, there must have been a way for them to see it.

Yet why did successive scriptures have to keep mentioning it? Was it that people had forgotten the connection of the spiritual realities to the physical plane? Did they think these were separate worlds? Or was it that there were creation deniers even back then?

Well, the basics were good enough for believers. God knew that, when the time was right, we'd develop advanced means to answer questions about physical evolution irrefutably. That's a far easier thing to do than transform an uncivilized being into a refined one - like changing copper into gold, that's what the scriptures do.

seri8888: Zan stated"..no one other than God's Messenger did God give this authority. "
And
Zan stated " That’s not an interpretation - it’s historical and scriptural fact."

Agreed that your statement
"..no one other than God's Messenger did God give this authority. " is not an interpretation ( i.e. technically not quoting Quran translation and explaining or describing the meaning) it is your opinion tho your personal view

On it being historical and scripture fact. Which scripture and which historical records? That is false, not a fact if base on Quran

Zan stated" Nowhere in the Quran will you find Muhammad appointing anyone to be His interpreter, then or in the future. Historically, He appointed His son-in-law, Ali, to succeed Him but this fact isn’t mentioned in the Quran.

I stated Muhammad interpreted or explained a few surah of the Quran. This is in historical records aka Hadiths. Yes one doesn't interpret one own words but one explain them. The Quran is God's words not Muhammad's words.

Muhammad didn't appointment Ali to be his successor. That information is from hadiths. There are Hadiths/historical records showing Muhammad had not appointed a successor and had instead intended for the Muslim community to choose a leader from among themselves. And there are also hadiths /historical records that can be interpreted as he chose Ali. This is going on a political historical tangent.

Where did you quoted the Quran chapters and verses and interpreted them in this forum? I let you and whoever that read this forum to read back.

seri8888: *The Quran says the Earth was created in 6 days

7:54 - Indeed, your Lord is Allah (The God), who created the heavens and earth in six أَيَّامٖ ayyamin (epochs) and then established Himself above the Throne. He covers the night with the day, (another night) chasing it rapidly; and (He created) the sun, the moon, and the stars, subjected by His command. Unquestionably, His is the creation and the command; blessed is God, Lord of the worlds.

The word أَيَّامٖ ayyamin is often translated as days (yawn singular and ayyam plural as in 24 hour period) this is not its only meaning in The Quran. It has been used to mean: "event, a moment in time" (1:4, 2:48, 2:85, 2:254 etc), "today, this/that day/moment" (2:249, 3:167, 12:54, 5:3, 40:17 etc), "unspecified length of time, days, period, era" (3:24, 14:5, 3:140, 45:14, 69:24 etc). In classical Arabic dictionaries, such as Lane's Lexicon, it is said its primary meaning is "time" (whether little or not).

It should be noted that a 24 hour day is only possible AFTER the earth and sun have been created, not prior, so this interpretation does not fit from the outset.

Also, The Quran clearly implies time is relative [22:47, 32:5, 70:4] and these verses use the word "yawm", confirming this word does not represent a fixed length of time.

An interesting, albeit speculative, argument has been made that despite not knowing the length of time "yawm" refers to in the earth/heavens creation verses, The Quran implies the creation of the earth took two of these periods/yawm [41:9] thus making the age of the earth 2/6 (i.e. one third) of the total age of the universe. The latest scientific estimate of the age of the universe is approximately 13.8 billion years and the earth 4.54 billion years. If we divide these values (4.54/13.8) it results in 0.33 (i.e. one third), which is a good fit.

From the book 50 common misconceptions about islam, muslims and The Quran


(Going off topic throne here is figurative, God is not a biological creation with butt to sit on chair/throne)

Zanjan: Referring back to my statement >>>“Today, everybody and his dog thinks they interpret correctly yet to no one other than God's Messenger did God give this authority."

You responded>>>
“Zan, the above is your own personal understanding, your interpretation base on non Quran source.”

Then I replied>>> "That’s not an interpretation - it’s historical and scriptural fact."

You challenged this with>>> “On it being historical and scripture fact. Which scripture and which historical records? That is false, not a fact if base on Quran."

If something doesn't exist, you can't say it's false or true. I base my observation on the content of all scripture, including the Quran, and religious history. For you to say THAT is false implies you have information/proof to the contrary – where is it?