To: IN_GOD_I_TRUST who wrote (1205 ) 9/28/1998 1:26:00 PM From: Raymond James Norris Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1542
A couple more Qu'ran translations that show Sura 22:52 talks about Satan putting false messages in a prophet's mouth, not vanity or desires.... All the verses you quoted say the exact same thing. I don't see any differences in them. All say that Satan "threw," "proposed," "put obstacles," or "try to tamper" with the messages. Notice all don't say he did tamper, but that he "threw," "attempted," etc. So now what I find is many translational differences....so as you were saying, how easy is the Qu'ran to translate? Steve, the above is not the Qur'an but approximations of the meaning of the Qur'an. As usual, I think I should let the Qur'an answer on this account (as it answers all its critics): Surah 16:103 We know indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him (Muhammad Pbuh)." The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear. Surah 41:44 Had We sent this as a Qurán (in the language) other than Arabic , they would have said: "Why are not its verses explained in detail? What! a foreign (tongue) and (a Messenger) an Arab?" Say: "It is a Guide and a Healing to those who believe; and for those who believe not, there is a deafness in their ears, and it is blindness in their (eyes): they are (as it were) being called from a place far distant!" The Qu'ran I look at might be right or wrong, according to you, or whoever translates it. Oh I'm so confused! Oh please. All the verses you quoted were simply different approximations of the meaning of the Qur'an in english. All verses said the exact same thing using different words to convey different messages. To "throw falsehood" or "put obstacles" or "propose opposition" all mean the same thing. Maybe I need to learn the native dialect this book is written to find out the real translation because I am confused. Maybe. That's the best way to know God's actual words. Because translations always lose something from the original language. That's acceptable so long as the Translators are consistent . By example, I mean by that that if a translator refers to "horse" from the Spanish "Cabello," he/she should translate "cabello" as "horse" at every section it appears in. Otherwise, they'd be inconsistent in their own texts. Peace be unto you, Norris