Verse 42:23 and how to interpret it, disciplines of interpreting Quran.

[pocaracas]

The form of guidance is always never revelation alone, but with with helpers to interpret it.

We will look at the verses surrounding all the wage verses, and than see an interconnection of themes with respect to the wage of the final message to humanity.

So much blah blah blah about I-don't-know-who paying Mo some wage?!

And those verses don't even seem to follow on to what you say. You seem to be saying that Mo asked for such wages, while other prophets didn't.... but those verses seem to hint that no wage is due... except for some spiritual thing... So... it's the same as nothing?


Anyway, the sentence I quoted above is the one that caught my eye the most...
Why the need for "helpers"?
Why would the all mighty god need humans?
Why should anyone trust those who claim to be such "helpers"? What makes these people trustworthy, and not charlatans?
Why would we need the message to be carried and interpreted by a human vessel?

What does god need with a helper?
What does god need with an interpreter?
What does god need with a message holder?
What does god need with a book?

[Mystic]

Pocaracas you ask good questions but you do as if Quran didn't address them in detail and throughout.

[Brian37]

I was accused of being deceptive with adding an interpretation in brackets "of mine", implying that is obviously implied in Quran.

In this thread, I will show some ways I apply in interpreting this verse, and perhaps it will help people interpret Quran or other scriptures with some rigorous disciplines.

When it comes to Quran by Quran, I would divide interpretation of a verse in the following way:

1. The Primary expression of the words in Quran, if a word throughout Quran is emphasized with one meaning, and there is no reason to assume otherwise, it means that very thing.
2. The context of the verses in it's surrounding, this means the context of the verses in its surrounding, what is the flow in the Surah.
3. The interconnection of verses containing the same subject.
4. The interconnection of verses with respect to the subject.

As for 3 and 4, the only difference is that the latter contains themes that are interconnected but not necessarily the exact same subject directly.  And each verse on the same subject, has to be with respect to its context and surroundings.

When it comes to sayings attributed to the Messenger, I would not dismiss no matter what scholars say about their weakness, but see if they are proven in Quran. That way, the Messenger words if true would help give insight to Quran.

The same is then true of the family of the reminder who should be given a chance to prove their case in Quran.

I will apply these disciplines with respect to verse 42:23 and we will see who is being deceptive about it.

 I was wondering where you went.  Glad you didn't "rage quit" this website. I like you, I just wish you were not so dreamy eyed. 

Now having said that.

You have heard us repeat time after time, and not just to Muslims, but Christians as well, "Quoting a holy book, to prove a holy book, is called circular reasoning."

It doesn't prove anything no matter who is doing it or what book they are trying to defend.

"Insight"? 

Yea so what? Everyone of every religion thinks they have the correct "insight".

Mystic, I say the same thing to you, that I do say Catholic Lady, "That was then, this is now". Not to mention the fact our species is far older than any written religion of any label. It was understandable back then when humans wrote those thing and sold those bad claims, of ANY religion, because nobody knew any better back then. Our species has much better knowledge of the nature of reality than old books of mythology.

[Mystic]

And I've heard it many times from you Brian.

So many false swords you give up on finding the true sword. Doesn't seem rational position to give up on the truth because of so many falsehoods out there.

[drfuzzy]

It's just fairy tales, MK.  There is no proof that any god exists.  All "holy books" are demonstrably flawed.  You're wasting your time.  And there is no reason why we should give a crap what your little book of fables says.  They were all written by con-artist witch doctors who only wanted power over others.  

And anyone who tries to teach about the books is a con-artist who wants to use his fantasies to gain power over others.  
And anyone who tells me what god wants, or what god says, is a liar.

[Minimalist]

Poor MK does not understand that atheists do not care about his holy horseshit.

Or perhaps he does because if he brought his bullshit to the wrong sect of his fellow nutjobs they'd throw rocks at his head.  We won't do that.

But neither will we take him seriously.

[pocaracas]

Pocaracas you ask good questions but you do as if Quran didn't address them in detail and throughout.

Whatever reason is given to any of those questions, it is given because of the patent absence of any divine creature on Earth.

It is clear that only people can pass on the information of god to other people.

[Brian37]

And I've heard it many times from you Brian.

So many false swords you give up on finding the true sword. Doesn't seem rational position to give up on the truth because of so many falsehoods out there.

MK this isn't a Shakespeare play and I am not Hamlet and you are not Othello.

[chimp3]

Amazing how believers can make their sock puppet gods say what ever they want them to say!

[The Valkyrie]

Why does a "holy" book need interpretation?

Why does it always seem that they're deliberately vague?

Why can't an all knowing god be clear in it's messages?