Is the Quran imperfect?

  • Thread starter Thread starter thedavidwilson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Although a number of the early Muslims who had memorized the Qur’an did die in battle, the fact of the matter is that there were many others who did survive those battles and I trust their fear of Allah and their utmost devotion and dedication to their faith infinitely more than I trust the intentions of the detractors of Islam who only wish to do whatever they can to discredit the Qur’an.
Essentially you are admitting that your faith is based on your blind trust of people whom you never met.
There is a Biblical verse which prophecies the coming of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and which partly explains why Muslims have absolutely no doubts about the authenticity and veracity of the Qur’an.
"And this [is] the blessing, wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death. And he said, The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand [went] a fiery law for them."… Deuteronomy 33:1
  1. No mention of Mohammed in this verse.
  2. If you are equating Mohammed with the LORD who came from Paran with ten thousand saints, you are equating Mohammed with God, because that is what this verse is talking about.
Muslims have no problem at all accepting that this is indeed a prophecy in the Bible which has been fulfilled.
  1. In the time of Moses when God appeared on Mt. Sinai.
  2. In the advent of Jesus Christ, who is God.
Christians and Jews however refuse to believe that it is even a prophecy.
We believe its a prophecy of Jesus Christ and a historical reference to God on Mt. Sinai. But not anything to do with Mohammed.
No matter, the point is that it is not just the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who is responsible for the rise of Islam and the preservation of the Qur’an in it’s original form.
With the help of Allah, it was also the efforts of these “ten thousands of saints” during and shortly after the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) that has enabled the Qur’an and also his Sunnah to be preserved so precisely and meticulously that has ensured that the Message of Islam will never be corrupted or lost till the Last Day when the world finally comes to an end.
The fact is, since the original Quran was burned, no one can prove that the Quran was preserved at all. It is simply a Muslim claim, an unproven and unprovable claim.
Incidentally, Zaid bin Thabit, may Allah be pleased with him, was also one of the many Companions who had memorized the Qur’an by heart and so he would certainly have known whether or not any verses were missing or added.
That is debatable. It was to his best interest to pretend that the Quran was preserved. It is a mystery why the original was so quickly disposed of. Another Muslim here admitted that the originals did not match the memorized version, so the originals were burned and a new version was written which conformed to the memorized version.

But whose memorized version? And how do we know that he didn’t substitute his words for Mohammed’s? Mohammed was dead by then.

CONT’D
 
CONT’D
The following is the report transmitted in the Sahih Bukhari:
Code:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to 'Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an,
Admission that there were problems with the memorized versions.
so he said to 'Uthmfin, ‘O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Qur’an), as Jews and the Christians did before’. So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, ‘Send us the manuscripts of the Qur’an so that we may compile the Qur’anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you’. Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin Az-Zubair, Sa’id bin Al-'As and 'Abdur Rahman bin Hari-bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies.
Admission that correctons were made to the Quran after Mohammed had passed. Mohammed was not the final editor of the Quran.
'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, ‘In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur’an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish as the Qur’an was revealed in their tongue’. They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa.
Since Uthman is the man who ordered all originals burned, it is doubtable that he returned any orignal manuscripts. Especially when his stated goal was to standardize the Quran.
'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur’anic materials whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.
So why would he return any original?
Zaid bin Thabit added, ‘A verse from Sura al-Ahzab was missed by me when we copied the Qur’an and I used to hear Allah’s Apostle reciting it. So we searched for it and found it with Khuzaima bin Thabit Al-Ansari’. (That verse was): ‘Among the Believers are men who have been true in their convenant with Allah’ (33: 23).
If we could compare to the originals we could confirm if this were true. But since Muslims burned the originals, there is no way to confirm the truth of this last statement. Zaid could have simply made it up himself.

Sincerely,

De Maria
 
Just so we all know, Ali Dashti is **not **a Shi’a scholar, he’s a very anti-Islamic Persian secularist.

But regarding the quote, I’ve yet to see anyone point out a *specific *example of the Qur’an using incomplete sentences, adjectives and verbs not inflected without observation of the concord of gender and number, illogical and ungrammatically applied pronouns etc… Unfamiliar Arabic words I’ll accept, but I don’t see how that’s a problem.

  1. *]In sura 2:177, the word Sabireen should be Sabiroon because of its position in the sentence (since it is a human plural, it should remain in the masculine plural form?).
    *]In sura 7:160, the phrase “We divided them into twelve tribes,” is written in the feminine plural: Uthnati Ashrat Asbaataan. Due to the fact that it refers to a number of people, it should be written in the masculine plural form: Uthaiy Ashara Sibtaan, as all human plurals are automatically male in Arabic.
    *]In sura 4:162, the phrase “And (especially) those who establish regular prayer…” is written as al Muqiyhina al salaat, which again is in the feminine plural form, instead of the masculine plural: al Muqiyhuna al salaat (?). It is important to note that the two following phrases, “(those who) practice regular charity, and (those who) believe in Allah…” are both correctly written in the masculine human plural form.
    *]In sura 5:69, the title al Sabioon, referring to the Sabians, should be written al Sabieen.
    *]In sura 63:10, the phrase “I shall be” is written akun (which is in the 3rd person?). Yet since this word refers to the future (& is in the 1st person) it should be written akunu.
    *]In sura 3:59, the words Kun feekunu should be written, Kun fakaana.
    http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/quran.htm#I5
    And also, at the time the Qur’an was written there was no standardised Arabic language. Grammar rules were only developed later, and they were developed from Arabic as it’s utilised in the Qur’an, so how anyone can claim the Qur’an has grammatical errors is beyond me. It’s like saying the Oxford English Dictionary has spelling mistakes…
    Several problems with this logic.

    First of all, language standardization is a fairly recent phenomenon. In the absence of language standardization, we can compare to contemporary writings to see whether the writing in question makes any sense. Is the Quran in conformity with the Arabic writings of the times?

    Next, if the Arabic language was standardized based on the Quran, then it was either not respected by Arabic speakers or it became obsolete, because, as can be seen in my reference, there are definitely grammatical discrepancies between the standard used above and the Quranic starndard.

    Finally, if it is true that there was no official Arabic standard before the Quran existed, then it is RIDICULOUS to claim that Mohammed spoke in perfect Arabic or that the Quran was written in perfec Arabic. You can only claim it is perfect because you believe it is perfect. However that is another instance of blind faith. You can’t prove it was perfect language because there was no official standard with which to compare.

    Sincerely,

    De Maria
 
So, the challenge is to produce in Arabic, three lines, that do not fall into one of these sixteen al-Bihar, that is not rhyming prose, nor like the speech of soothsayers, and not normal speech, that it should contain at least a comprehensible meaning and rhetoric, i.e. not gobbledygook.
Okay, so let me know if I’m understanding you correctly. You’re saying that because the Koran does not follow any known standards of typical Arabic grammar and sentence structure, but is still at least somewhat comprehensible, that it must have been inspired by God? I have an 8 year old niece who is super smart in math, but not so great at writing. Yet even with her frequent misspellings and gramatical errors, her homework is still understandable. Does this mean that she is being inspired by God as well?

Besides, even if you’re right, Satan is terrifyingly intelligent, and such a feat of skillful deception through the clever use of human language shouldn’t be too hard for him.

And regarding the beginning of your posts, why would God dictate His Truth in a way that couldn’t be adequately translated into every language on the planet? One of the many things I find truly beautiful about the Old and New Testaments is the fact that they CAN be translated into any language, and not lose their meaning.
 
Besides, even if you’re right, Satan is terrifyingly intelligent, and such a feat of skillful deception through the clever use of human language shouldn’t be too hard for him.
Perhaps we are giving the quran too much credit. Perhaps Satan did not inspire it: it is too flawed!. Maybe it was just some crazy guy sitting in a cave making it up and stealing from aramic documents of the time. I bet Satan is having a good laugh at this one. So much trouble with so little effort on his part.😉
 
There are really too many things being discussed in this thread and so perhaps it would be better for me to start a new thread on just one specific topic.

Anyhow, to touch on just one matter that has been raised here:
Why would God dictate His Truth in a way that couldn’t be adequately translated into every language on the planet?
Probably because this is something that Satan is simply not capable of doing.
 
There are really too many things being discussed in this thread and so perhaps it would be better for me to start a new thread on just one specific topic.

Anyhow, to touch on just one matter that has been raised here:

Probably because this is something that Satan is simply not capable of doing.
You understimate the devil, Hamba! He’s the great deceiver and liar.

Vickie
 
There are really too many things being discussed in this thread and so perhaps it would be better for me to start a new thread on just one specific topic.

Anyhow, to touch on just one matter that has been raised here:

Probably because this is something that Satan is simply not capable of doing.
Satan has an intellect far supeior to ours (we can never out smart the devil, we have to rely on God’s grace) and he has inherent knowledge, i.e. does not have to “learn” anything. This is true for any angel. Unfortunately Satan has used his free will to go against God and try to destroy us. The things the devil makes, while never perfect like something God would make, what he makes will be very close to miraculous to our intellects.

I think this thread is on topic. It started with evidence that the quran is not of divine origin; now we are talking about what origin it could be: Satan. I think you are upset that there is so much evidence that the quran has errors and is not as perfect as muslims claim.
 
Originally Posted by hamba2han
There is a Biblical verse which prophecies the coming of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and which partly explains why Muslims have absolutely no doubts about the authenticity and veracity of the Qur’an.QUOTE]
I thought the bible was corrupted? How can you make an argument based on the bible. Could you please provide me the uncorrupted verses of the bible and evidence of their validity as opposed to the corrupted verses? I think this is one of those things us non-muslims cannot understand because we are not muslim. :rolleyes:
 
Bro, you’ve got to understand. Almighty Allah asks muslims to look for muhammad in the Holy Bible. Yet the Holy Bible is corrupt. Dilema right. The Holy Bible must be corrupt otherwise Muslims will see muhammad is no prophet; yet the Holy Bible must not be corrupt in order to reveal about muhammas.Dilema again. So Amighty Allah was able to preserve some passages that could refer to his prophet after a complete annihilation of context, yet he could do not much to the rest of his words. You’ve got to have logic, deep theological reasoning , and a good understanding of the majesty of God in order to understand this bro. Come on yu can do better…
 
Putting aside all eloquence bs, one has only to see that allah, who is supposed to be all-knowing, did not get not even one Christian doctrine correct and people still want you to believe the author is God, relying on beauty and preposition/word choice.
 
Bro, you’ve got to understand. Almighty Allah asks muslims to look for muhammad in the Holy Bible. Yet the Holy Bible is corrupt. Dilema right. The Holy Bible must be corrupt otherwise Muslims will see muhammad is no prophet; yet the Holy Bible must not be corrupt in order to reveal about muhammas.Dilema again. So Amighty Allah was able to preserve some passages that could refer to his prophet after a complete annihilation of context, yet he could do not much to the rest of his words. You’ve got to have logic, deep theological reasoning , and a good understanding of the majesty of God in order to understand this bro. Come on yu can do better…
Oh…now it makes sense! 😉
 
Satan has an intellect far supeior to ours (we can never out smart the devil, we have to rely on God’s grace) and he has inherent knowledge, i.e. does not have to “learn” anything. This is true for any angel. Unfortunately Satan has used his free will to go against God and try to destroy us. The things the devil makes, while never perfect like something God would make, what he makes will be very close to miraculous to our intellects.

I think this thread is on topic. It started with evidence that the quran is not of divine origin; now we are talking about what origin it could be: Satan. I think you are upset that there is so much evidence that the quran has errors and is not as perfect as muslims claim.
Well, I was going to respond directly to hamba, and be all eloquent and stuff, but it looks like dave has done so for me. 😛 Well said!

However,
Probably because this is something that Satan is simply not capable of doing.
I would argue that the exact opposite is true. I don’t think Satan would be capable of inspiring a “holy” text translatable into every human language. Satan is definitely intelligent enough to construct a phenomenally intricate and convincing (if horribly wrong) text in one language, but I don’t think God would allow him to make one that is universally perfect.
 
Some claim that the Qur’an was the work of the devil. Let us examine how much sense (or non-sense) this allegation makes.

If he authored or inspired the Qur’an, why would Satan curse himself and call himself the worst enemy of man?

Verily Satan is an enemy to you: so treat him as an enemy. He only invites his adherents, that they may become Companions of the Blazing Fire. (Al-Qur’an 35:6)

Did I not enjoin on you, O ye Children of Adam, that ye should not worship Satan; for that he was to you an enemy avowed?- (Al-Qur’an 36:60)

Why would Satan command that before reciting the Qur’an, one must first say:

**“…I seek refuge in God from Satan the accursed.” ** (Al-Qur’an 16:98)

How could Satan so vehemently condemn himself? Is it really acceptable to common sense to hold the view that Satan would ask people to do good, to be moral and virtuous, to worship none but God, to not follow Satan or his whispers, and to avoid and struggle against evil?

To hold such a view is clearly repugnant to reason, as Satan has only undermined himself through this means if he is the author. Even the Bible attests:

“And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but is coming to an end.” (Mark 3:26)

This argument applies to any “Satanic forces”, be they “evil spirits”, “deceitful aliens”, etc.
 
The following is an excerpt:

"And this [is] the blessing, wherewith moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death. And he said, The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand [went] a fiery law for them." … Deuteronomy 33:1

This prophesy is reported at the end of Deuteronomy in association with the story of the death of Prophet Moses (pbuh). It was a blessing and glad tidings bestowed by Prophet Moses upon his followers just prior to his death. It was designed to give his followers hope upon the occasion of the passing of their prophet that God is not abandoning them, rather, the best is yet to come, and He shall continue to bless mankind with His guidance and His light.

Sinai is a reference to Moses (pbuh). It is an obvious reference to mount Sinai where Moses (pbuh) received his revelation (Exodus 19:20).

Seir is a reference to Prophet Jesus (pbuh). It is usually associated with the chain of mountains West and South of the Dead Sea extending through Jerusalem, and Bethlehem, the birthplace of Jesus (pbuh). It was later extended to include the mountains on the East side as well (Dictionary of the Bible, John L. McKenzie, S.J., p. 783). However, Seir is also identified with the Northern border of the tribal territory of Judah and usually with Saris near Kesla (Chesalon), barely nine miles West of these two cities (The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary, by Allen C. Myers, pp. 921-922, and The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, V4, p. 262) Prophet Moses (pbuh) never in his lifetime entered Palestine, and thus, this could not be a reference to him.

Paran is a reference to the city of Makkah in the Arabian Peninsula. The wilderness of Paran is where Abraham’s wife Hagar and his eldest son Ishmael settled (Genesis 21:21) in the Arabian desert, specifically, Makkah. Makkah is, of course, the capital of Islam in Arabia and the birthplace of Mohammed (pbuh). Mount Paran is the chain of mountains in that same region which the Arabs call the “Sarawat mountains”. Muhammad (pbuh) received his first revelation in the cave of “Hira’a” located in these mountains. Jesus never in his life traveled to Paran. Mohammed, however, was born there. He became the prophet of Islam there. And it was the capital of the Islamic religion in that day and this. No prophet of the Bible ever came from the Arabian city of Paran (Makkah). Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is the only prophet of God who has ever fulfilled this prophesy.

We also read in verse 33:2 that a fiery law shall issue forth from the right hand of the prophet from Paran. Muhammad (pbuh) did indeed come with a new law called the Shari’ah. The reference to “right” hand is a reference to strength, justice, and guidance. In Islam, all clean and desirable actions are performed with the “right” hand (eating, shaking hands, etc.), while all other actions are done with the left hand (washing one’s private parts, picking up garbage, etc.). In the Qur’an, the good are described on the Day of Judgment as receiving their book of deeds in their “right” hands, while the wicked receive theirs in their “left” hand. This can be seen for example in Al-Haqah:13-37. This general attitude is also conveyed in the Bible. We read:

“Biblical phrases referring to the right hand reflect a widespread human cultural attitude, namely the recognition that for most people the right hand is both stronger and more adept than the left, and is the hand with which many tasks are instinctively undertaken … Eccl. 10:2 links ‘a wise man’s heart’ with his right hand, and ‘a fool’s heart’ with his left. When the Son of Man separates the sheep from the goats at the Last Judgment, it is to the damned ‘on the left hand’ that he says, ‘Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire’ (Matt. 25:41) …The right hand is often mentioned as a symbol of strength, both for human beings and anthropomophically for God (e.g. Job 40:14; Isa. 48:13)”

A Dictionary of Biblical Tradition In English Literature, David Lyle Jeffrey, p. 442.

This fiery law that shall issue from the right hand of the prophet from Paran will be a new law for the children of Israel and not the same one they had been practicing in the time of Moses (pbuh) and later. This is held out by simple logic; if I already own something, then I can not say that my neighbor shall bring “for me” this same “something” which I already own. In such a case, he would have “brought” nothing and it would have been more logical to say he would “confirm” the preexistent law. No prophet of the Bible ever in his lifetime either came from Paran or preached the replacement of the law of Moses (pbuh). Even Jesus (pbuh) came to confirm and reinforce the law of Moses (Matthew 5:17-19), as explained in detail in chapter one. Muhammad (pbuh) is the only prophet of God who fulfilled both of these requirements.

However, if we look closely, we will find that the prophesy contains one more requirement. It tells us that this prophet from Paran who will bring a fiery new law shall come with 10,000 saints. Once again, two years before the death of prophet Muhammad (pbuh), in the year 630 AD, he lead 10,000 of his followers to their final and decisive victory against the pagans of Makkah. This was one of the most bloodless victories of all history. The Muslims took control of Makkah, the capital of paganistic Arabia, virtually without a single casualty. Upon entering Makkah victorious, Muhammad did not take it’s inhabitants as prisoners. Even though these people had been torturing himself and his companions, and killing many of them over many years, still, Muhammad commanded that they not be tortured, nor should retribution be sought against them. Rather, he pardoned them all and set them free. Most of them entered into Islam.

Once again, we find that prophet Moses (pbuh) was appointed seventy very close and devout followers (Exodus 24:1-9, Numbers 11:16-25). Jesus (pbuh) was appointed eleven very close and devout followers (if we were to exclude Judas), as seen in Matthew 10:1-5, Mark 3:14-19, etc. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), once again, is the only Prophet to fulfill this requirement.
 
Some claim that the Qur’an was the work of the devil. Let us examine how much sense (or non-sense) this allegation makes.

Hamba, satan’s goal is to lead people away from truth. The Bible is clear, anyone who gives a diffrent gospel, any prophet who is not sent by Jesus, any prophet who denies Jesus is the Son of God, he is an ennemy to Truth, an ennemy to us and hence devilish, not from God. Remember that when satan tricked Adam and Eve, he did not trick them by saying “i am bad curse me”. He tricked them but making them believe things against what God said, by making them believe that God did not mean this or that.

Ever heard about the sheikh who work on freeing people from “evil eyes” and spells ecc? these sheikh use exactly the Quran to free someone from a spell. Yet these same people invoke jinn and demons, telling people they are “good spirits”. Satan has no problem if you curse him all day long. Satan wants you away from the Truth, away from God’s salvation and when Muhammad denies Jesus’ salvation, well from a biblical point of view he is not from God.
 
read ALL the passage.

This is the blessing that Moses the man of God pronounced on the Israelites before his death. He said: The Lord came from Sinai and dawned over them from Seir; he shone forth from Mount Paran. He came with myriads of holy ones from the south, from his mountain slopes. Surely it is you who love the people; ALL THE HOLY ONES ARE IN YOUR HAND. AT YOUR FEET THEY ALL BOW DOWN,
 
… From a geographical point of view, it is absurd as well since the highlands of Paran are in the Sinai Peninsula, about 1,000 km away from Mecca. Furthermore, Sinai, Seir and Mount Paran refer to the locations that Israel traversed during their 40-year sojourn in the desert:…
The Bible itself states that Paran lies in the Arabian desert and this can only mean that it is specifically Makkah as can be seen in the following excerpt which actually comes from a webpage at answering-islam would you believe!

Some difference of opinion has arisen as to where “Paran” actually is with some people mistakenly concluding that it is in Sinai. However, this is resolved very simply by recognizing the following four points:
  1. The Bible tells us in Genesis 21:21 that Ishmael, the son of prophet Abraham and the father of the Arabs, settled in “Paran.” This is where he would live and die and this is where he raised all of his children. Ishmael was the father of the Arabs. Thus, we would be justified in assuming that the Arabs should be better acquainted with where their father (and them themselves) lived than any other nation, and it is a well established fact among the Arabs that their father Ishmael was the founder of the city of Makkah, as well as the one who, with the help of prophet Abraham (pbut) built the holy house of God, the Ka’aba, in that city.
  2. The Arabs and Jews are Semitic cousins. They descend from the same father, prophet Abraham (pbuh). Their languages, Arabic and Hebrew, are very similar in many respects since they have a common ancestry. However, Arabic never died out as a spoken language for many centuries as Hebrew did. In Arabic, the word Paran is pronounced “Faran” which means “Two who migrated.” This word is used in the Qur’an to convey the meaning of “emigrating to your Lord” or “escaping to your Lord”. This can be found in the verse of Al-Thariat(51):50. Indeed, Ishmael and his ther, Hagar, did in fact emigrate (as witnessed by the Bible too) to this location which would later become the city of Makkah.
  3. The Bible itself distinguishes between the wilderness of Sinai and the wilderness of Paran in Numbers 10:12. It is quite clear from this verse that they are two different locations.
  4. The Lebanese Christian, Kamal Salibi, places Paran in close proximity to Makkah. On page 215 of his book ‘The Bible Came from Arabia’ he says: “… the place in question could have been Faran, in the Zahran highlands, bordering on the basaltic desert of Harrat Al-Buqum. In any case, this Faran was no doubt the Biblical Paran”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top