R
Reuben_J
Guest
That is a reasonable conclusion. I have second thought about the revelations myself since there is no evidence that Mohammad discerned whether they were from Allah or not. The angel being the principal messenger is a problem too though not all revelations especially in the later years were given through the angel Gabriel. It makes one wonder why the definition of angel is so different from the earlier understanding in the Bible if the Quran is supposed to confirm it.The Meccan verses of Quran, I have no problem with. Muhammad may claim to come from God, and I won’t say anything although I disagree.
But the violent Medina verses lead me to believe (a) Muhammad was tricked by the devil, so he wan unable to differentiate good and evil, or (b) Uthsman in the 700AD rewrote/corrupted the unknown real verses since it was burnt. He did that, because the Medina verses give him the full un-overthrown-able leadership.
Well, how can we know for sure since the original is burnt already. Authenticity can only be given by arguments or claims. No facts, nor even logic can be presented.
I suppose scientifically all argument and evidence for the original Quran is unviable since Uthman destroyed the hard copies. It does not matter whether the destroyed versions were only dialect variations. But in a scrupulous examination on whether the Quran is original or not, I agree with you, you can’t back it anymore with solid evidence simply because the culprit destroyed it. We just have to take the word of Uthman for the present version of the Quran. What a pity – he destroyed the evidence for the uncreated word of Allah forever.
And may I add - we can never know for sure whether all the revelations were compiled in the Quran. Quranic verses were written on many different media. A goat ate one such manuscript and some others were lost. Not counting those verses that Uthman might omit.