I have no objection to u conveying the message of ur faith, but that was not the intention of ur first post, which makes claims about the Koran by comparing it to Mozart, Shakespeare and Picasso.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.
Actually, what I think you really need to do first is to take off those blinkers that I suspect you are wearing unwittingly.I have no objection to u conveying the message of ur faith, but that was not the intention of ur first post, which makes claims about the Koran by comparing it to Mozart, Shakespeare and Picasso.
U r claiming perfection and truth for the Koran and then expect everyone to take ur word for it.
Perfection or truth must be proven in order to be substantiated.
I’m asking for u to substantiate what u say.
If something is true - it remains true no matter who looks at it, i.e. the background and faith of the person doesn’t matter.Actually, what I think you really need to do first is to take off those blinkers that I suspect you are wearing unwittingly.
What “blinkers” you may ask?
Well, it is the perception that it is impossible for God to be anything but all-loving and all-compassionate
that the Judaeo-Christian culture has imparted in your mind since childhood… and which makes it extremely difficult for not only Christians and Jews but also atheists and agnostics to reconcile the things that they see happening in the world with the question of why does God allow such things to continue happening. no one believes in this because we believe He is Just as well.
There are 99 names belonging to Allah which refers to His many attributes and of them, here are a few which adequately describes God as being the Greatest Terrorist there is.
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. which Quran?
Narrated Ubayy ibn Ka’b
Ubayy told of Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) meeting Gabriel and saying, “I have been sent, Gabriel, to a people who are unlettered, among whom are old women and old men, boys and girls, and men who have never read a book.” He replied, “The Qur’an, Muhammad, **has been sent down in seven modes.”**Tirmidhi transmitted it. (Hadith of Tirmidhi, Number 694)
Where are the seven modes?
Who gave Uthman the right to burn 6 other modes sent from Allah?
Narrated Alqama:
…How did Ibn Um 'Abd (i.e. 'Abdullah bin Mas’ud) use to recite Surat-al-lail (the Night: 92)?" I recited:–
“By the Night as it envelops By the Day as it appears in brightness. And by male and female.” (92.1-3) On that, Abu Darda said, “BY ALLAH, the Prophet made me read the Verse in this way after listening to him, but these people (of Sham) TRIED THEIR BEST to let me say something different.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 57, Number 105)
What do we read in the present Quran?
**And by Him Who created **male and female; S. 92:3
i see addition here.
what about:
“The prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers…” 33:6
this is Uthmans copy. Lets see another copy:
IN SOME QIRAATS, LIKE THAT OF UBAI IBN KA’B, occur also the words ‘and he is a father to them,’ which imply his spiritual relationship and connect on with the words, ‘and his wives are their mothers.’ Thus his spiritual fatherhood would be contrasted pointedly with the repudiation of the vulgar superstition of calling any one like Zaid ibn Haritha by the appellation Zaid ibn Muhammad (xxxiii. 40): such an appellation is really disrespectful to the Prophet." (Abdullah Yusuf Ali, The Holy Qur’an, p. 1104, fn. 3674)
“… **An unusual reading of the Qur’an includes, ‘He is a father to them,’ **but it is no longer recited since it is AT VARIANCE with the version of 'Uthman.’” (Muhammad Messenger of Allah (Ash-Shifa of Qadi 'Iyad), Qadi 'Iyad Musa al-Yahsubi, translated by Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley.
Ah so another mode has additional words that Uthman deleted.
these are but few example to burst the pinky bubble of perfect pure 100% Quran.
Hamba,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.
That’s a bold statement to make.… 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…
You have actually mentioned in your post the name of the person who more than anyone, played a pivotal role in ensuring that the purity of the Qur’an has indeed been preserved for posterity i.e. Zayd ibn Thabit (Zaid Ibn Thabit), may Allah be pleased with him.That’s a bold statement to make.
Shortly after the death of the so-called Messenger, Muhammed, the first caliph, Abu Bakr As-Siddiq, ordered the scribe Zayd ibn Thabit to collect the manuscripts and make one copy of the Qur’an. He did so with the assistance of the hundreds of companions of the prophet who had memorized the Qur’an. Later, the third caliph, ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan, again asked Zayd to oversee the copying of the Qur’an. This was sent to all the provinces of the Muslims, with orders that all other manuscripts be burned. This was to ensure that there would not be various readings of the Qur’an.
Caliph Uthman solved the problem by having all the versions of the Quran gathered together. Any verse to which two people could attest as having come from the Mohammed’s mouth was retained. Everything else was burned. Now, it is important to remember that Mohammed was the last and greatest of the prophets/messengers. Caliph Uthman never claimed divine inspiration. So the obvious question arises: how do we know Uthman burned the right things? Is it possible he burned all or part of the real Quran while retaining a false Quran? After all, he was not guided by God, as Mohammed supposedly was.
Actually it is difficult to distinguish a musical composition from Mozart from his contemporaries…say Haydn. Unless you have an advanced degree in music, you probably do not have the skill set to do this with any degree of certainty. It boils down to stylistic nuances.Is it very difficult to identify a play from Shakespeare, a musical composition from Mozart or a painting from Picasso?
And we’re back to a circular-like argument…You have actually mentioned in your post the name of the person who more than anyone, played a pivotal role in ensuring that the purity of the Qur’an has indeed been preserved for posterity i.e. Zayd ibn Thabit (Zaid Ibn Thabit), may Allah be pleased with him.
There is a reason why the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) himself chose him to be his personal scribe and this is because the Prophet (pbuh) saw a young boy named Zayd ibn Thabit showing an extraordinary ability to memorise and recite complete Suras of the Qur’an.
And the fact that Zayd ibn Thabit was the one who was in charge of compiling the first written Qur’an at the time of the first caliph, Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him) and then later on using this manuscript to make numerous copies of the Qur’an during the time of Caliph Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him), means that the integrity and purity of the Qur’an has most certainly been meticulously preserved for posterity by Zayd ibn Thabit and various other Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), who had also committed the entire Qur’an to memory.
Remember what you wrote in your previous post:And we’re back to a circular-like argument…
The original Qur’an is lost, so there is no evidence that the “Qur’an is 100% pure”. We only have the testimony of Muhammed and his friend, Zayd ibn Thabit. And without the Qur’an, we have no reason to believe their testimony. That’s why it’s like a circular argument.
Oh well, it’s too bad that the Qur’an doesn’t fit in with any prophecy; I’d have more respect for it if it did.
What I can see is a “hundreds of companions” trying to figure out what is the Qur’an. So, yes, I do see the Qur’an being lost. I mean, if it wasn’t lost, why would you need “hundreds of companions” trying to find it - so to speak.Remember what you wrote in your previous post:
… the first caliph, Abu Bakr As-Siddiq, ordered the scribe Zayd ibn Thabit to collect the manuscripts and make one copy of the Qur’an. He did so with the assistance of the hundreds of companions of the prophet who had memorized the Qur’an. Later, the third caliph, ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan, again asked Zayd to oversee the copying of the Qur’an…
Did you see anything in there about the original Qur’an being lost??
I certainly didn’t.
which Quran?
Zayd ibn Thabit (may Allah be pleased with him) was assisted by hundreds of the companions who had memorized the Qur’an in it’s entirety.What I can see is a “hundreds of companions” trying to figure out what is the Qur’an. So, yes, I do see the Qur’an being lost. I mean, if it wasn’t lost, why would you need “hundreds of companions” trying to find it - so to speak.
Discredit? No, I’m just looking for evidence. Circular arguments is not evidence. Your circular argument is that Muhammed chose Zaid to be his scribe, because Muhammed thought that Zaid had a good memory. And why should we believe Muhammed? Because Zaid told us he is a messenger of God! Go figure.… You really are clutching at straws here in your attempts to discredit the purity and integrity of the Qur’an.