Of Shakespeare, Mozart, Picasso .. and God

[hamba2han]

Hello again hamba,

Why should I accept the Qur’an as truth, other than the prophet Muhammad said so?

Is it very difficult to identify a play from Shakespeare, a musical composition from Mozart or a painting from Picasso?

I do not think that it would be difficult at all for a connoisseur of the arts to do this because every one of these master craftsmen would leave a distinctive mark in all of their masterpieces which would be identifiable as coming only from them.

Similarly, is it difficult at all to identify the work of the greatest ‘Master’ there is?

Islam teaches that the Qur’an is one such ‘Masterpiece’ and there is indeed a way to test and ascertain whether or not it does come from the greatest ‘Author’ of all.

The following are all the relevant posts from the thread for anyone wishing to determine for themselves the truth of the Qur’an:

1, 13, 34, 65, 126, 131, [136](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php? p=2105491&postcount=136), 144, 147, 162, 191, 238, 253, 258, 260, 263, 278, 301, 302, 319, 323, 336, 351, 352, 356, 361, 369

 

[porkscratchings]

Is it very difficult to identify a play from Shakespeare, a musical composition from Mozart or a painting from Picasso?

I do not think that it would be difficult at all for a connoisseur of the arts to do this because every one of these master craftsmen would leave a distinctive mark in all of their masterpieces which would be identifiable as coming only from them.

Similarly, is it difficult at all to identify the work of the greatest ‘Master’ there is?

Yes to the first 2 paragraphs but no to the last.

Here’s why.

In the case of a connoisseur of the arts recognising a work of art from a master writer/painter - there’s no problem. It is also not difficult for an ordinary person (of whatever religion/geography/culture) to recognise the greatness in shakespeare, mozart or Picasso.

When it comes to the Koran - there’s a problem. A connoisseur of the arts is not allowed to evaluate the Koran, nor is any expert allowed to state anything contrary to the view that the Koran is a masterpiece. Religious fanatics will make death threats to anyone who disagrees with this. So where Picasso has been evaluated as a master by people who have free will to say he is rubbish, no such freedom has been allowed to any evaluating the Koran. So in effect, the world must say the Koran is the work of the greatest master/ the greatest masterpiece - or die.

In conclusion - we cannot access whether the Koran is a masterpiece due to the lack of freedom for scholars to properly evaluate the book without death threats. 1 billion people, conditioned to regard the Koran as a masterpiece, backed up by threats of death should anyone of them dissent - does not constitute evidence that the Koran is a masterpiece or that any of its claims to come from God. In fact , the contrary is much more likely due to the censorship imposed by muslims upon themselves and upon the world at large.

However we can assert that Mozart, Picasso and Shakespeare are the works of great masters because we have all the information/evidence related to these people and free access to their works in order to make a proper judgement.

 

[Mr.Bee]

Hamba,

You state in one of your threads:
And yet this is the way the Qur’an approaches people i.e. to invite them to examine and try their best to find any mistakes or discrepancies within it and hence determine for themselves the Truth of Islam.

I found a mistake: Everybody can’t agree that there’s no mistakes. If it is truely perfect then it should be obvious.

Both Muslims and Christians when backed in a corner revert to the same arguement: “It is right, you just can’t see it…”.

I admire your faith Hamba.

 

[inJESUS]

the Quran gives a challenge and who is the judge? Muslims.

time after time i fail to realize how Muslims can really believe this challenge is from God…it so smells of humanity , and flawed reasoning as well in addition to circular reasoning : the Quran must be divine because it says so…if you read it and do not find it divine (because of apocrypha, talmud and legend forgeries to mention a few) then you must be wrong because the Quran says so. Just what kind of childish challenge is this and what kind of brainwashing is it that makes rational people believe God gives flawed arguments to prove himself?

 

[CTA1967]

Is it very difficult to identify a play from Shakespeare, a musical composition from Mozart or a painting from Picasso?

Um, I would have to think that there is more historical evidence connecting a work of art to Shakespeare, Mozart, or Picasso than there is connecting the Koran to God. And all those posts that you listed have nothing but circular arguments. Basically, you’re saying, “Islam teaches that the Koran is the Word of God presented by Mohammad, therefore I will use internal evidence to prove that this is true.” I’m pretty sure that doesn’t work for historians.

As for the behavior of Mohammad, you said in post 65 that how he acted was perfectly fine according to our Bible, which leads me to believe that you didn’t even read our Bible before deciding that it’s corrupt. Please read Matthew chapter 5 so you can see why we don’t approve of Mohammad’s behavior.

If you believe in a perfectly good and loving God, and your idea of a divine book is one that teaches how to be perfectly good and loving, then the morals set forth in the Bible definitely provide more proof of divine inspiration.

 

[Mr.Bee]

I found a mistake: Everybody can’t agree that there’s no mistakes. If it is truely perfect then it should be obvious.
QUOTE]

It would also seem that Muslims can’t even agree.

Big flaw

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

What, no prophecy?

I’m still amazed that the Qur’an is willing to go against history and deny the crucifixion (Qur’an 4:157).

 

[Mr.Bee]

Hamba,

You state in one of your threads:
And yet this is the way the Qur’an approaches people i.e. to invite them to examine and try their best to find any mistakes or discrepancies within it and hence determine for themselves the Truth of Islam.

I found a mistake: Everybody can’t agree that there’s no mistakes. If it is truely perfect then it should be obvious.

I’m waiting… ?

Another discrepancy - is that translations of the Qur’an into other languages damage the meaasge. I would think God would have figured that out.

Mozart, on the other hand, doesn’t need translating.

 

[hamba2han]

I’m waiting… ?

Another discrepancy - is that translations of the Qur’an into other languages damage the meaasge. I would think God would have figured that out.

Mozart, on the other hand, doesn’t need translating.

There is a reason why it is called ‘faith’ and if everyone is in agreement, then it would no longer be a test of faith, would it?

Do men think that they will be left alone on saying, “We believe”, and that they will not be tested?
We did test those before them, and Allah will certainly know those who are true from those who are false … Al-Qur’an, 29:2&3

As for Mozart, I would think that it is possible to translate musical notes into visual images or perhaps phonetic sounds… but as with the Arabic of the Qur’an, would watching or hearing the “translated Mozart” be as emotionally moving as listening to the original music?

 

[hamba2han]

As for the behavior of Mohammad, you said in post 65 that how he acted was perfectly fine according to our Bible, which leads me to believe that you didn’t even read our Bible before deciding that it’s corrupt. Please read Matthew chapter 5 so you can see why we don’t approve of Mohammad’s behavior.

If you believe in a perfectly good and loving God, and your idea of a divine book is one that teaches how to be perfectly good and loving, then the morals set forth in the Bible definitely provide more proof of divine inspiration.

Can you point out just one “morally reprehensible” thing in Christian eyes, that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did that was not done by other Prophets named in the Bible?

Do Christians not consider the Prophets of God (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all) to be morally righteous role models?

 

[hamba2han]

Yes to the first 2 paragraphs but no to the last.

Here’s why.

In the case of a connoisseur of the arts recognising a work of art from a master writer/painter - there’s no problem. It is also not difficult for an ordinary person (of whatever religion/geography/culture) to recognise the greatness in shakespeare, mozart or Picasso.

When it comes to the Koran - there’s a problem. A connoisseur of the arts is not allowed to evaluate the Koran, nor is any expert allowed to state anything contrary to the view that the Koran is a masterpiece. Religious fanatics will make death threats to anyone who disagrees with this. So where Picasso has been evaluated as a master by people who have free will to say he is rubbish, no such freedom has been allowed to any evaluating the Koran. So in effect, the world must say the Koran is the work of the greatest master/ the greatest masterpiece - or die.

In conclusion - we cannot access whether the Koran is a masterpiece due to the lack of freedom for scholars to properly evaluate the book without death threats. 1 billion people, conditioned to regard the Koran as a masterpiece, backed up by threats of death should anyone of them dissent - does not constitute evidence that the Koran is a masterpiece or that any of its claims to come from God. In fact , the contrary is much more likely due to the censorship imposed by muslims upon themselves and upon the world at large.

However we can assert that Mozart, Picasso and Shakespeare are the works of great masters because we have all the information/evidence related to these people and free access to their works in order to make a proper judgement.

Considering the rewards that await the believer in the Hereafter and also the punishment that awaits the disbeliever, then really EVERYONE needs to be a connoisseur of the Truth, not just the “experts”.

 

[inJESUS]

Can you point out just one “morally reprehensible” thing in Christian eyes, that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did that was not done by other Prophets named in the Bible?

marring his adopted son’s wife?

Do Christians not consider the Prophets of God (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all) to be morally righteous role models?

 

[CTA1967]

Can you point out just one “morally reprehensible” thing in Christian eyes, that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did that was not done by other Prophets named in the Bible?

Do Christians not consider the Prophets of God (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all) to be morally righteous role models?

Um, why don’t you just look at a historical account of Mohammad for his behavior? And no, we don’t consider the prophets to be our morally righteous role models. We follow Jesus for our morality.

 

[hamba2han]

I would expect that Catholics would try, as far as possible, to choose the best among themselves to be their Pope.

Is there a reason then why Christians would believe that God will not also choose the best amongst all of his creations to be his Prophets?

Christians really do need to understand that the Prophets of God (peace be upon them all) deserve far greater reverence than the Pope because unlike him, they were actually appointed by God Himself.

 

[inJESUS]

Is there a reason then why Christians would believe that God will not also choose the best amongst all of his creations to be his Prophets?

yes, that’s why there is no place for Muhammad after Jesus. God does not regress.

 

[porkscratchings]

Considering the rewards that await the believer in the Hereafter and also the punishment that awaits the disbeliever, then really EVERYONE needs to be a connoisseur of the Truth, not just the “experts”.

What did i say in my posts about threats, huh?

If u claim the Koran is the truth, then u must prove it. Whereas I already have issues with the Koran’s claims to truth.

Koran’s errors on Jesus:

Jesus’ mother tongue was Aramaic. In his own lifetime he was called Yeshua in Aramaic, and Jesu in Greek. This is like calling the same person John when speaking English and Jean when speaking French: Jesu, pronounced “Yesoo”, is the Greek form of Aramaic Yeshua. (The final -s in Jesu-s is a Greek grammatical ending.) Yeshua is itself a form of Hebrew Yehoshua’, which means ‘the Lord is salvation’. However Yehoshua’ is normally given in English as Joshua. So Joshua and Jesus are variants of the same name.

It is interesting that Jesus’ name Yehoshua’ contains within it the proper Hebrew name for God, the first syllable Yeh- being short for YHWH ‘the LORD’.

Yeshua of Nazareth was never called ‘Isa, the name the Qur’an gives to him. Arab-speaking Christians refer to Jesus as Yasou’ (from Yeshua) not ‘Isa.

Conclusion - the Koran’s gets Jesus’ name wrong!!

Jesus did not receive a book

According to the Qur’an, the ‘book’ revealed to ‘Isa was the Injil. The word Injil is a corrupted form of the Greek euanggelion ‘good news’ or gospel. What was this euanggelion? This was just how Jesus referred to his message: as good news. The expression euanggelion did not refer to a fixed revealed text, and there is absolutely no evidence that Jesus received a ‘book’ of revelation from God.

The ‘gospels’ of the Bible are biographies

The term euanggelion later came to be used as a title for the four biographies of Jesus written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the ‘gospels’. This was a secondary development of meaning. Apparently this is where Muhammad got his mistaken idea of the Injil being a ‘book’.

Koran gets it wrong by using a corrupted form of a greek work, and so mistakenly calls ‘the gospels’ a book of final revelations - which the gospels is not.

Other errors of the Koran:

Mariam the mother of ‘Isa is called a sister of Aaron, and also the daughter of Aaron’s father ‘Imran (Hebr. Amram). Clearly Muhammad has confused Mary (Hebr. Miriam) with Miriam of the Exodus. The two lived more than a thousand years apart!

In the Bible Haman is the minister of Ahasuerus in Media and Persia (The Book of Esther 3:1-2). Yet the Qur’an places him over a thousand years earlier, as a minister of Pharoah in Egypt.

The claim that Christians believe in three Gods — Father, son Jesus and mother Mary — is mistaken. The Qur’an is also mistaken to claim that Jews say Ezra was a son of God. (At-Taubah 9:30) The charge of polytheism against Christianity and Judaism is ill-informed and false.

The Qur’an has a Samaritan making the golden calf, which was worshipped by the Israelites in the wilderness (Ta Ha 20:85) during the Exodus. In fact it was Aaron (Exodus 34:1-6). The Samaritans did not exist until several centuries later. They were descendants of the northern Israelites centuries after the Exodus

The ‘two horned one’ (Al-Kahf 18:82) - Alexander the Great - was never a Muslim. Yet the Koran makes the ridiculous claim that this pagan warlord was a muslim!!

The Qur’an mentions the Holy Spirit in connection with Jesus, using phrases which come from the gospels. Ibn Ishaq (Life of Muhammad) reports Muhammad as saying that this ‘Spirit’ was the angel Gabriel (cf also An-Nahl 16:102, Al-Baqarah 2:97). However the Biblical phrase ‘Spirit of God’ (Ruach Elohim) or ‘Holy Spirit’ can only be understood in light of the Hebrew scriptures. It certainly does not refer to an angel.

Jesus’ alleged foretelling of Muhammad’s coming (As-Saff 61:6) appears to be based on a garbled reading of John 14:26, a passage which in fact refers to the Spirit.

these are only the highlights of the errors of the Koran - the rest is in here answering-islam.org.uk/Intro/islamic_jesus.html****

If the Koran is the revelation of Allah, then why is Allah such a poor student of history and greek language? U’d expect the all-knowing God not to make such stupid mistakes.

cont in next post…

 

[porkscratchings]

Contined from prev post…

This is what I think. Either the Koran is an attempt at deception by misrepresenting the Bible stories and other religions, or that it was written by peopel limited in awareness of the biblical languages and history in general.

Therefore it is impossible for a reasonable person to accept the claims of the Koran being the revelation of God or as truth for that matter.

I don’t think I will be worried about the hereafter (assuming that there is a ‘hereafter’).

I have proved my argument. Now it is for u to prove what u say.

 

[porkscratchings]

Can you point out just one “morally reprehensible” thing in Christian eyes, that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did that was not done by other Prophets named in the Bible?

Do Christians not consider the Prophets of God (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all) to be morally righteous role models?

Quoted from Al-Bukhari:

Some of the people from the tribe Ukl came to the Prophet and embraced Islam; but the air of Medina did not agree with them, and they wanted to leave the place. And the Prophet ordered them to go where the camels given in alms were assembled,and to drink their milk, which they did, and recovered from their sickness. But after this they became apostates and renounced Islam, and stole the camels. Then the Prophet sent some people after them, and they were seized and brought back to Medina. Then the Prophet ordered their hands and feet to be cut off as a punishment for theft, and their eyes to be pulled out. But the prophet did not stop the bleeding, and they died.

U can many acts of cruelty by Mohammed from Arab sources.

 

[Mr.Bee]

There is a reason why it is called ‘faith’ and if everyone is in agreement, then it would no longer be a test of faith, would it?

Do men think that they will be left alone on saying, “We believe”, and that they will not be tested?
We did test those before them, and Allah will certainly know those who are true from those who are false … Al-Qur’an, 29:2&3

As for Mozart, I would think that it is possible to translate musical notes into visual images or perhaps phonetic sounds… but as with the Arabic of the Qur’an, would watching or hearing the “translated Mozart” be as emotionally moving as listening to the original music?

I’m having a little trouble understanding this one.

It’s all based on faith. But providing something in a language I can’t understand, and expecting me to trust someone who speaks that language, or go learn that language with all the subtle nuances, is not a test faith.

I have the same problem with the Bible as well, Hamba.

Walt Disney translated music into visual images, it didn’t change the music.

 

[hamba2han]

If u claim the Koran is the truth, then u must prove it.

Read the first post of this thread.

I also need to add that my main purpose on these boards is to convey the Message of Islam through dialogue and questions & answers.

It is entirely up to each forum participant or viewer to decide for themselves whether or not to accept this Message.

I’m having a little trouble understanding this one.

It’s all based on faith. But providing something in a language I can’t understand, and expecting me to trust someone who speaks that language, or go learn that language with all the subtle nuances, is not a test faith.

I have the same problem with the Bible as well, Hamba.

Walt Disney translated music into visual images, it didn’t change the music.

I do not understand where you are going with this argument.

The Qur’an is 100% pure since not a single word or letter of the Qur’an has ever been added, changed or deleted since it was completed some 1400 years ago.

And although it will never be as good as reading and understanding the Qur’an in it’s original Arabic, nevertheless there is really no harm at all in you reading the translation of the Qur’an.

After all, even if it is only say 80 or 90% accurate, reading the translated Qur’an is still a whole lot better than not reading it at all.