اعرض مشاركة منفردة
  Post Nr. 5  
قديم 03.12.2012, 12:35
صور فداء الرسول الرمزية

فداء الرسول

مجموعة مقارنة الأديان

______________

فداء الرسول غير موجود

فريق رد الشبهات 
Profile
ID: 203
Join Date: 13.05.2009
Posts: 1.525  [ show ]
Reputation: 2143
Power: 232  
فداء الرسول مبدع بلا حدودفداء الرسول مبدع بلا حدودفداء الرسول مبدع بلا حدودفداء الرسول مبدع بلا حدودفداء الرسول مبدع بلا حدودفداء الرسول مبدع بلا حدودفداء الرسول مبدع بلا حدودفداء الرسول مبدع بلا حدودفداء الرسول مبدع بلا حدودفداء الرسول مبدع بلا حدودفداء الرسول مبدع بلا حدود
تم شكره 213 مرة في 148 مشاركة
افتراضي

2. The Case Against Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer

But Tisdall's explanation is probably the most inaccurate and inexcusable suggestion he has yet put forward. An examination of the another contemporary source of Tisdall's time reveals the answer. The Jewish Encyclopaedia published in 1905, in the same year as the publication of Tisdall's book, states under "Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer":

Josh was the first to point out that in the thirtieth chapter, in which at the end the author distinctly alludes to the three stages of the Mohammadan conquest, that of Arabia, of Spain, and of Rome, the names of Fatima and Ayesha occur beside that of Ishmael, leading to the conclusion that the book originated in the time when Islam was predominant in Asia Minor. As in ch. 36, two brothers reigning simultaneously are mentioned, after whose reign the Messiah shall come, the work might be ascribed to the beginning of the ninth century, for about that time the two sons of Harun al-Rasid, El-Amin and El-Mamun, were ruling over Islamic realm.[8]

Thus, according to Tisdall, Muhammad composed the account found in surah 20: 85-95 using a source that had not yet been compiled until hundreds of years after his death! Long before Tisdall wrote The Original Sources Of The Qur'an, Jewish scholars had already mentioned that Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer post-dated Islam. But surprisingly the famous Rev. W. St. Clair Tisdall was oblivious to this fact!

Abraham Geiger's book Was hat Mohammed aus dem Judenthume aufgenommen? has also been subject to recent criticisms by scholars such as Norman Stillman:

... it did tend to give exaggerated view of the Jewish contribution to the Qur'an. Many of the traditions that he cites are in oriental Christian as well as talmudic and haggadic literature. Our chronology of rabbanic literature is better today than in Geiger's, and many more texts - Muslim, Jewish, and Christian - have since being published. In the light of this we know now that in some instances what was thought to be a Jewish haggadic influence in an Islamic text might well be quite the reverse. The Pirqe de Rabbi Eli'ezer, for example, would seem to have been finally redacted after the advent of Islam.[9]

This view of late compilation of Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer (as well as Midrash Tanhuma!) is also echoed in Encyclopaedia Of Islam:

Regardless of how the story [of al-Samiri] came about, the Kur'an appears to present the earliest record of this midrashic development; aspects of it which are found in the Jewish sources (e.g., Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer and Tanhuma) would seem to date from after the rise of Islam.[10]

A detailed analysis of the dating and composition of Pirke De-Rabbi Eli'ezer is available here.

Since Tisdall lifted most of his material from his master Abraham Geiger, it is not at all surprising to find that Tisdall's sense of poor chronology matches greatly with Geiger's. Other examples of Tisdall's poor and embarrassing scholarship are exposed in his discussions concerning the Prophet's wives teaching him stories from the Bible, Salman the Persian and the story of Cain & Abel as possible Judeo-Christian sources of the Qur'an.

Finally, Stillman advises us in his conclusion:

In conclusion, it should be emphasized that one should be extremely cautious about assigning specific origins to the story discussed here - or for that matter, any other story in the Qur'an.[11]

Christian missionaries would of course choose to ignore this advice as "The Promotion Of Christian Knowledge" by any means is sometimes more important than accuracy and truth!

3. To Moo Or Not To Moo?

The Christian missionaries seem to also have a problem with the golden calf: Did the golden calf moo? They write:

Has Allah given a miracle to this false idol even though idolatery is so detested by him?

We will simply reply by saying that Christians themselves report the idols or statues of Virgin Mary performing "miracles" for believers. This has been reported in both Europe and Latin America. Does that now mean that their (Trinitarian) god has given these idols the power to perform miracles, even though idolatry is so much detested by God?

It is quite clear in the Qur'an that God will test people:

Do men think that they will be left alone on saying, "We believe", and that they will not be tested? We did test those before them, and Allah will certainly know those who are true from those who are false. [Qur'an 29:2-3]

Some of these trials will expose the hypocrisy and falsehoods in the hearts of those who claim to believe; and for others it will strengthen their faith and resolve - for they are indeed the true believers. This whole life is but a test for the true believer. Just as the Children of Israel were tested, other nations were also tested. The people of Thamud for example were tested by the she-camel.

There's no such thing as a free ticket to Paradise!

And Allah knows best!






Signature of فداء الرسول


تحمَّلتُ وحديَ مـا لا أُطيـقْ من الإغترابِ وهَـمِّ الطريـقْ
اللهم اني اسالك في هذه الساعة ان كانت جوليان في سرور فزدها في سرورها ومن نعيمك عليها . وان كانت جوليان في عذاب فنجها من عذابك وانت الغني الحميد برحمتك يا ارحم الراحمين

رد باقتباس