London terror attack

[Dave Hounddriver]

2 hours ago, earthdome said:

While your quote is accurate to fully understand it would require reading it in context

Do you mean the very short quote "Thou shalt not kill"?  Or are you defending the much longer, in depth quote with the link for those who want to read it in context?  If I may assume the latter then I find it ironic that people would search in depth when the quote itself is a link to its source.  Did you notice you can click on it and get a myriad of other translations of that text?  You may use your own judgement, of course.

[earthdome]

30 minutes ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

Do you mean the very short quote "Thou shalt not kill"?  Or are you defending the much longer, in depth quote with the link for those who want to read it in context?  If I may assume the latter then I find it ironic that people would search in depth when the quote itself is a link to its source.  Did you notice you can click on it and get a myriad of other translations of that text?  You may use your own judgement, of course.

A search because there can be many different sources of information on the same quote with different interpretations for people to consider. i.e. It is not as cut and dried as just reading the quote.

[Dave Hounddriver]

9 minutes ago, earthdome said:

A search because there can be many different sources of information on the same quote with different interpretations for people to consider.

It seems you still replied without reading my post and clicking on the quote.  Let me make it easier:

On 6/7/2017 at 11:58 PM, Dave Hounddriver said:

: Cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them

When you click on the quote you get a page that shows many different sources of the information and many different interpretations of it.  To make it easier for those who will not click, here is a screenshot of the page it links to.  Of course you are encouraged to do your own search; but if you find a better source of information on that same quote than I have already linked to then please offer a link of your own rather than make an off the cuff remark.

 

[Jake]

3 hours ago, earthdome said:

Of course those who are greedy for power can use religion and take short quotes out of context to manipulate those who are ignorant to do things to further their lust for power.

This is an open question for anyone to conduct a deeper research -- who, what, where interpret martyrdom shall be rewarded with 70 virgins?  It sounds facetious or flippant, especially coming from me......but I'm really curious, OK?  

[robert k]

51 minutes ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

Do you mean the very short quote "Thou shalt not kill"?  Or are you defending the much longer, in depth quote with the link for those who want to read it in context?  If I may assume the latter then I find it ironic that people would search in depth when the quote itself is a link to its source.  Did you notice you can click on it and get a myriad of other translations of that text?  You may use your own judgement, of course.

I saw the several translations and they all fairly closely agree, whats more they all appear to agree in intent. I suppose there could be an interpretation that it was all allegorical and really the quote is about puppies, kittens, rainbows and unicorns, but I consider that so unlikely that I'm not going to search for it.

I'm also fairly certain that "Thou shalt not kill" was really meant to be "do not murder" because the bible does mention killing in a few places. Besides, even vegetarians kill plants.

[earthdome]

10 minutes ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

It seems you still replied without reading my post and clicking on the quote.  Let me make it easier:

When you click on the quote you get a page that shows many different sources of the information and many different interpretations of it.  To make it easier for those who will not click, here is a screenshot of the page it links to.  Of course you are encouraged to do your own search; but if you find a better source of information on that same quote than I have already linked to then please offer a link of your own rather than make an off the cuff remark.

 

I raised the point because very few people will click on the link. Especially if the quote validates their existing perceptions (confirmation bias), right or wrong, on an issue. Perhaps by raising questions others will look a bit deeper below the surface and learn more about an issue than a quote which could be misleading. I was not speaking of the translation of the words. Rather there are different interpretations of the meaning of that quote based on the context of what was happening at the time of the quote, etc.

[AlwaysRt]

1 hour ago, earthdome said:

I raised the point because very few people will click on the link. Especially if the quote validates their existing perceptions (confirmation bias), right or wrong, on an issue. Perhaps by raising questions others will look a bit deeper below the surface and learn more about an issue than a quote which could be misleading. I was not speaking of the translation of the words. Rather there are different interpretations of the meaning of that quote based on the context of what was happening at the time of the quote, etc.

Here is a pretty dang good link for those that want to know more The Qur'an (Oxford World's Classics) less than $8 for electronic version and you can decide for yourself instead of on what others tell you it says.

[robert k]

37 minutes ago, AlwaysRt said:

Here is a pretty dang good link for those that want to know more The Qur'an (Oxford World's Classics) less than $8 for electronic version and you can decide for yourself instead of on what others tell you it says.

Downloading that might get you on a watch list though?

[Dave Hounddriver]

40 minutes ago, AlwaysRt said:

you can decide for yourself instead of on what others tell you it says.

I am reluctant to continue this discussion, as it borders on off topic and religion, but the reality is we are talking about understanding what we read and researching other points of view.  Thus the problem I immediately see with your link (Yes I went to it and formed an opinion from a cursory look at it) is that it is a version of a translation.  My link gave translations to English from a variety of sources and you will see (if you go there) that no two are the same. I can only guess at how many translations of the Bible and the Quran there are but I know that an entire religion is primarily based on the translation of a single key word.

Thus you are still relying on what some other person tells you it means in English.

Edited June 11, 2017 by Dave Hounddriver

[AlwaysRt]

34 minutes ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

I am reluctant to continue this discussion, as it borders on off topic and religion, but the reality is we are talking about understanding what we read and researching other points of view.  Thus the problem I immediately see with your link (Yes I went to it and formed an opinion from a cursory look at it) is that it is a version of a translation.  My link gave translations to English from a variety of sources and you will see (if you go there) that no two are the same. I can only guess at how many translations of the Bible and the Quran there are but I know that an entire religion is primarily based on the translation of a single key word.

Thus you are still relying on what some other person tells you it means in English.

True, but just like there are widely accepted translations of the Bible (it wasn't originally written in English either), the link I gave is probably the #1 accepted 'accurate' translation. I believe it is best to read the underlying text and not base what we 'know' from another's interpretation of the text. There is a big difference between translation and interpretation. It also seems to me the majority of extremists have never read the text (even when they know the original language) and subject themselves to the interpretations of a leader who is motivated by justifying their own agenda.

I understand we are getting close to that 'religious discussion' line which is why I have made no comments on my thoughts of the contents of the text or how it has been interpreted.