IceTea quoted the fact that there is a Biblical obligation to execute by stoning for certain sins, pointed out that it is not practiced by Jews nowadays, and then said:

This just proves the corruption of the Bible and changed by people. Because everything they don't like they remove it and they keep what they like and also they add what they find it good for them...Look at the Quran all rulings available nothing removed and nothing added.

This is puzzling to me. Again, I know little about the Koran. But I ask: Aren't there certain leaders and scholars invested with the authority to interpret it? Isn't there a tradition of interpretation and application of the verses in the Koran? Is that interpretation "adding," according to Muslims? They would object to that suggestion, I would guess.

In the same way, the Jewish people received from Moses a tradition of interpretation and application of the verses in the Hebrew Scriptures. At Sinai, the Jewish Sages were invested with the authority to interpret the Hebrew Scriptures and apply it in contemporary situations as the need arises.

(As far as stoning is concerned, the Jewish Sages teach that the death penalty is only administered when we have the temple in Jerusalem is standing. Once it was destroyed, until it will be rebuilt by the Jewish Messiah, the death penalty has not been able to be carried out.

In any case, it appears unfair to reach this conclusion without discussing it first with an Orthodox Jew, who is familiar with his own texts.)

Why must interpretation have been necessary from the outset?

The basic reason that the text of the Hebrew Scriptures is not left to individual interpretation is that then it would not be a Law in any meaningful sense!

Think about it: if each individual would be authorised to make an individual interpretation of general rules of law, e.g., the American Constitution, then there is no law and order, but anarchy! Everyone will interpret the law as it suits him! No one would even think to suggest such an arrangement in interpretation of secular law, so to render Divine, Eternal Law to such meaninglessness is surely absurd and unthinkable!

So if the Jewish Rabbis have decided to interpret the laws in certain ways, that is not "corrupting," "adding," or "subtracting." On the contrary--that is itself the Will of the Creator, for without guidance in its application, the Law could never have been kept in the first place.

Could you briefly repost about your concept of interpretation, cause if you are asking if an aya can be seen differently according to a scholar or another well i'd say a big no, this happens many times only for some Hadees. But before getting into a discussion, sorry my english, i need to understand what you mean by interpretation . Thanks a lot.

I'm having difficulty interpreting your post.:) what's an aya? is it a verse? and what are Hadees?

By interpretation I mean:

1. Unwritten, orally transmitted tradition of interpretation dating back to the original Revelation at Sinai.

2. Application of existing texts to contemporary circumstances by use of general principles of inerpretation dating back to the original Revelation at Sinai.

Sorry i do apologize, yes aya is verse included in Surah , a chapter of the Quran, and guess what, am reverted Muslim but not arab :p
Hadeeth are words of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) which were reported from his companions during his life and collected also, and are a completion of Holy Quran, helping believers on their walk on the right path.
Back to your thread, ummm must think about it :duh: be back later, or if you are lucky :tiered: Icey will surely answer

if you are asking if an aya can be seen differently according to a scholar or another well i'd say a big no, this happens many times only for some Hadees

:confused: So it does happen sometimes that there is a need for interpretation of the text, reading into it meaning not explicitly stated? And that interpretation is rendered by certain authority figures, no?

Monotheism, the charges of "corruption of the Bible" come up every time there is a discussion of anything having to DO with the Bible-

and, essentially, whenever there is conflict between what the Quran says and what the Bible (old or new testament) says, someone pops up with "that PROVES the Bible is corrupted".

Because, you see, there is a verse in the Quran that says Allah promised that He would protect the Quran and it would never change. Thus, by their logic, any conflicting information MUST mean the non-Quranic source is wrong.

There have been some pretty nasty fights about the topic, as a matter of fact. Let's see if this one degenerates too :wink:

As you can see, I am not familiar with the discussions here.

NO, I do not want any nasty fights, Heaven forbid.

(BTW, as a Jew, I do not accept the Christian texts as part of the Bible.)

I simply wished to make a point about the legitimacy of having a tradition of inerpretation.

Originally posted by monotheism
As you can see, I am not familiar with the discussions here.


It's such aa long-running argument that people have started to use short-hand to re-hash the same old arguments :p It can be hard to follow for the newcomers, so I thought I'd clue you in :)

BTW, I'm an ex-Christian so, while I don't accept Christian texts as the One True Word of God, that's my background and frame of reference for discussions ... and meant no insult by including NT writings under the heading "Bible". Actually I was unaware that Jews use the term Bible at all? I thought the "old testament" is the Torah?

thanks for "cluing me in"! :)