Basic Islamic Questions

StephenC wrote: Ilyas (Elijah) was also a great prophet of God.  Didn't he also go Heaven alive?  Was not Isa (Jesus) also transported to Heaven alive by God? (Most Muslims believe Jesus was raised to heaven alive by God, while some scholars believe that he was indeed rescued but died before his ascension.[7]) How do we know that Muhammad (Isa, and/or Ilyas) went to Heaven alive?  Where in the Qur'an does it state this?

Your question makes the assumption that if something is not in the Quran, then it cannot be true. Since the first generation, the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) has been regarded as a source for those things that are important, but not part of the recited revelation.

Next, by scholarly concensus, 17:1 is agreed upon to be a reference to the event known as "miraj".

"Secondly what Jibrael alaihis salaam brought could not have been forged by any creature so there is no question of it being satan." Pardon my lack of knowledge, but what EXACTLY did Jibrael bring?

direct revelation from Gd.

Again, doesn't the Qur'an state that Satan deceives? How would Muhammad know the difference?  Could you tell the difference?

I responded to this already.

Hope this helps.

"Please elaborate on what you mean by directly, and please clarify the reason for asking the question?"

In my limited study of the Qur'an and discussions with members of the Islamic faith, I understand that it is believed that Muhammad received his revelation (which was later written by others into the Qur'an) from

I read S. II. 23 as a challenge as to how we know that there is a revelation and that it is from God.

In reading various translations, I find that there seems disputes as to the exact means of almost every Sura.

For example,

Sura 003.004

YUSUFALI: Then those who reject Faith in the Signs of Allah will suffer the severest penalty, and Allah is Exalted in Might, Lord of Retribution.
PICKTHAL: Aforetime, for a guidance to mankind; and hath revealed the Criterion (of right and wrong). Lo! those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah, theirs will be a heavy doom. Allah is Mighty, Able to Requite (the wrong).
SHAKIR: Surely they who disbelieve in the communications of Allah they shall have a severe chastisement; and Allah is Mighty, the Lord of retribution.

"severest penalty", "heavy doom", and "severe chastisement" can mean differ things.  "Severest penalty" is the worst thing (imho, to be seperated from God for eternal would be the severest penalty) thing to happen to a person.  A "heavy doom" and a "severe chastisement", while bad, is not the same.

So is Sura 3.4 a "perfect sura" if different scholars can not agree exactly on its mean?

"The idea of Gd speaking to man takes many forms. As an example, the Church claims Gd spoke to a whore. So Christians believe that Gd spoke to Moses and to a whore. What does this mean for Moses? Or for the whore for that matter? What conclusion can be reached? "

Again, pardon my lack of knowledge, but where does it say that God spoke to a whore?

I also understand (but maybe mistaken) that according to the Prophet Muhammad, the Qur'an is a continuation of previously written scriptures (also known as the Old Testament or Toran and the New Testament).

If that understanding is accurate, then does the Qur'an delete the authority of the older scriptures or does it complete them?

StephenC wrote: "Please elaborate on what you mean by directly, and please clarify the reason for asking the question?" In my limited study of the Qur'an and discussions with members of the Islamic faith, I understand that it is believed that Muhammad received his revelation (which was later written by others into the Qur'an) from I read S. II. 23 as a challenge as to how we know that there is a revelation and that it is from God.

I am not sure how 2:23 fits into this?

In reading various translations, I find that there seems disputes as to the exact means of almost every Sura. For example, Sura 003.004 YUSUFALI: Then those who reject Faith in the Signs of Allah will suffer the severest penalty, and Allah is Exalted in Might, Lord of Retribution. PICKTHAL: Aforetime, for a guidance to mankind; and hath revealed the Criterion (of right and wrong). Lo! those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah, theirs will be a heavy doom. Allah is Mighty, Able to Requite (the wrong). SHAKIR: Surely they who disbelieve in the communications of Allah they shall have a severe chastisement; and Allah is Mighty, the Lord of retribution. "severest penalty", "heavy doom", and "severe chastisement" can mean differ things.  "Severest penalty" is the worst thing (imho, to be seperated from God for eternal would be the severest penalty) thing to happen to a person.  A "heavy doom" and a "severe chastisement", while bad, is not the same.

1) You are reading a meaning of the Quran, and not the Quran. The Quran is in Arabic, and was revealed as such.

2) ""severest penalty", "heavy doom", and "severe chastisement" can mean differ things." are translations that get a point across. The point is rather "self evident". If you want to try and argue about the possible shades between the words using semantics, then that is your choice.

You go through an opinionated view of the three words used to translate the Quran. You stated, " "Severest penalty" is the worst thing (imho, to be seperated from God for eternal would be the severest penalty)". That is conjecture, since our opinions are not a formal method to derive an understanding from the Quran, and the last I looked, the same is true with most books with any serious meaning. You also stated, A "heavy doom" and a "severe chastisement", while bad, is not the same.". How do you know? From what bases are you able to state your opinion as fact?

Is it possible that they all have the same meaning?

In then end, they are simply translations, expressions of the Quran.

So is Sura 3.4 a "perfect sura" if different scholars can not agree exactly on its mean?

1) You have not demonstrated that the translations greatly differ beyond games of semantics such that they somehow conflict with one another.

2) Your question has buried in it, the unargued assumption that,

this question makes the assumption that imperfect translating, or differences in nuances in translating, is the same as an imperfect revelation.  

"The idea of Gd speaking to man takes many forms. As an example, the Church claims Gd spoke to a whore. So Christians believe that Gd spoke to Moses and to a whore. What does this mean for Moses? Or for the whore for that matter? What conclusion can be reached? " Again, pardon my lack of knowledge, but where does it say that God spoke to a whore?

The Samaritan woman.

I also understand (but maybe mistaken) that according to the Prophet Muhammad, the Qur'an is a continuation of previously written scriptures (also known as the Old Testament or Toran and the New Testament). If that understanding is accurate, then does the Qur'an delete the authority of the older scriptures or does it complete them?

Gd is the authority. The Quran is a revelation from Gd, by His Authority.

It confirms past scriptures.

We have no way of knowing what is true and what is not true in the older scriptures.

The older scriptures are not relevant in terms of authority, no more than that which was revealed to Noah relevant to Moses, although the Torah recognizes Noah and his covenant with Gd.

StephenC wrote: Can we not agree that: 1.  God is perfect. 2.  Man is not perfect. 3.  To claim that something made by man is perfect is a blasphemy against God. Do you disagree with any of the three are incorrect? Now as for the Qur'an, wasn't it actually written by the "companions" of Muhammad (some of it after he left the Earth)?

No, it was recorded, not created by Man, according to Allah.