Adonis Diaries

“Quran is a heresy to the Bible; and the Bible a heresy to Quran”? A reply to my article

Posted on: September 24, 2011

“Quran is a heresy to the Bible; and the Bible a heresy to Quran”? A reply to my article

A certain Ben Canaan replied to my article

I contend that discussing religious matters is a total luxury: These kinds of discussions should be relegated to people who have nothing better to do but to swallow enormous amount of time, so that time passes by quickly.  Like playing cards, tric trac, “tawila”, watching every night a serial story that never ends…I think it is a horrible custom to indoctrinating the innocent kids on religious dogma, at their early age.

I admit that when a close relative dies, and the kid asks: “Where is my friend?” that we are in a tight spot.  If I am not 100% confident in my answer (total faith in my belief system) I should rather be honest and reply :”Kid, I still have no idea. I may never have an answer to your dilemma. Time might bring you some relief, and maybe an acceptable resolution…”

I have written about the historical context of religions, their repercussions to social structures, and avoided like the plague indulging in the stupid dogmas, and playing the apologetic to any kind of religion.  What can I do when I receive comments and replies that are dogmatic in nature, and the only substance are referring to Books that are doubtful as sources to any valid knowledge?

Ben Canaan replies states (with a few slight editing):

“The heresy of Quran is a half truth because the Quran is a heresy to the Bible; and the Bible is a heresy to Quran. The purposeful divergence of Quran from the Bible is only in the most fundamental theological issues with profound moral implications.
Quran claims that it was revealed as the last testimony, fulfillment, and restoration of the same message of God in all previous religions. Thus, the Quran only addressed the controversial issues in the Bible that need to be restored.

The divergence of Quran from the Bible was exactly the point that intended to be addressed and reformed metaphorically. One essential point, which is a common factor in all Judeo-Christian sects and theologies is the “Original Sin”,  and which the Quran intended to (redeem mankind from any accusation inherited from the “Original Sin” concept): man should be guiltless from any consequent persecution.

Quran discarded any implications of the Original Sin and the Role of the Female/Eve in the myth. Hence, it asserts that we are all born as perfect “muslims” clear of any innate sin. In fact, even animals, plants, planets, stars, and the entire universe are in the perfect state of “Islam”.

Being born in the perfect state of “Islam” is signified by the name “islam”, which indicates that we are intrinsically, (a) Submissive, (b) Peaceful, and (c) Perfectionists. These are the only three meanings that can be derived from the Arabic word “Muslim”, and the three meanings indicated by being “Muslim” in the Quran.

Another important issue of divergence, restoration, or reform is the conceptualization of God. The Quran puts a heavy emphasis on the concept that God can only defined by negation, such as: ”There is no god but God”, and “there is nothing like God”.

According to the Quran, “No vision can grasp God, but God grasp is over all vision. God is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things” (Qur’an 6:103).  “Say: God is God, the One and Only; God, the Eternal, Absolute; God begetteth not, nor is God begotten; And there is none like unto God.” (112:1-4).
Contrary to the Bible, Quran asserts that God is the existence of a single and absolute truth that transcends the world; a unique and indivisible good Will, which is independent of the entire universe, but the only sustainer of any existence.

God, according to the Quran is the most fundamental cognitive necessity, logical axiom, and unifying reference point, which is implicit in all logics, moral, and meanings of our lives.

Of course, this is not the account of the very well-known historical figure known to the Hebrews as, Rabbi Yeshua ben Yoseph (7–2 BC/BCE – 30–36 AD/CE)” End of comment.

Ben Canaan included a link that I felt obligated to delete with “extreme prejudice”: My blog is not structured to handle religious dogmas of any kind.  I leave these time-wasting subjects and topics to specialized blogs, and refuse to disseminate total nonsense that are the basis of so much calamities, atrocities, and horror stories.

The first sentence got my attention and I thought this paradox might be clarified.  Unfortunately, the rest of the reply had no connection with “The heresy of Quran is a half truth because the Quran is a heresy to the Bible; and the Bible is a heresy to Quran”, given that the term heresy is such an easy and comfortable resolution to cutting off on any religious discussions.

What is it that comments and replies on religious topics go on tangents? Isn’t that proof enough that religious topics on dogmas and abstract notions cannot sustain any sort of rational discussions, and are doomed to diverge toward exotic line of reasoning?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s




September 2011

Blog Stats

  • 1,518,768 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by

Join 764 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: