Original Quran was burnt

[TomaszA]

There is no way to know for certain that the Qur’an of today is exactly the same as when Muhammad recited.

The initial mushaf compiled by Abu Bakr was destroyed after Uthman’s canon. Likewise all other Qur’ans were destroyed. Although some claim that several of the original four canonical Qur’ans Uthman published survive till this day, there is actually no evidence to support this. What we have in Teshkent and Topkapi are old but not original.

This may be surprising to Muslims but there are textual variants of the Qur’an, as there are different ways of reciting the Qur’an. As textual criticism of the Qur’an progresses, and more sources become available to scholars, more will be revealed.

 

[jay29]

I don’t have a Qur’an handy who are the “We”?

That is one heck of a question!

 

[Muslim_Woman]

Salaam/peace

…

Is that you the same G S from
L I ? Nice surprise

 

[Muslim_Woman]

Salaam/peace

This made me laugh so hard, eaten by a goat, thats priceless!

even if it’s truth that a goat ate few written lines of the Quran …so what ??? It does not mean that Muslims lost those verses forever.

I told u Quran was memorised since the beginning . Millions Muslims memorised the whole Quran ; an ordinary Muslim like me knows several chapters of Quran & recite those in daily prayers from memory.

If all the holy books are lost from the world , only Muslims will be able to get back it as they memorised the whole Quran & it will take only few hours to recite & written down again.

 

[TomaszA]

Salaam/peace
I told u Quran was memorised since the beginning . Millions Muslims memorised the whole Quran ; an ordinary Muslim like me knows several chapters of Quran & recite those in daily prayers from memory.

The problem is we don’t know what you memorized reflects what was originally recited.

 

[inJESUS]

If human being were able to corrupt the whole Bible in the same way, crossing different lands and different continents, in different languages and in all the churches of our planet (which needs a divine intervention to make it achievable back then), i wonder what makes it so hard to corrupt a much smaller book within the same region.

 

[NeedsFaith]

Q=

If Muhaamad was such a “honesy” man and eveyone believed him.
How does one know that ?

 

[cathopologist]

Sooooo the 3rd Caliph sent word out for people to send him their compies of the verses of the koran. He then compiled or codified them into the koran and BURNT the disagreeing copies. So we have no record of what existed before this point so we have no proof the the present day koran was not midified by the Calif.

**Perhaps the one action which caused the most controversy for Uthman during his reign, however, was his attempt to develop a definitive text of the Qur’an at the expense of all others. His aim was simply to establish one true text of the revelation, in order for all Muslims to know what the Qur’an consisted of, what order it should be in, and how it should be written. **Despite the controversy, Uthman was able to complete this task, which has since been recognised as a significant achievement in Islamic history. It reduced the number and frequency of disagreements over dogma, but many devout believers at the time accused Uthman of tampering with the sacred book.

These disagreements grew so large that parties from Egypt and Iraq would convene in Medina to address their grievances to Uthman directly. Eventually, the parties grew impatient with Uthman and laid siege to his house for more than 20 days in 656. Despite the crowds outside his home, Uthman refused help from his old friends, and the siege ended when some members broke into the house, and assassinated Uthman, while reading the Qur’an, and his wife, and threw his body on a dung heap where it languished for three days. He was eventually buried in Medina.

Apparently the other Muslims were so outraged by his actions that they threw his lifeless body onto a dung heap.

Supposedly there is a copy of the koran that dates before the great burning in Yemen, but the Yemenese authorities will not allow anyone to study it. I wonder why?

Because there is strong evidence suggesting the Qur’an is an evolving text, rather than an ‘uncreated’ text. There are several ayas that have its words changed/replaced throughout the centuries. If the Yemen authorities give the go-ahead for non-Muslim Islamic scholars to probe the Yemeni texts, imagine what damage it can do to Islam.

 

[planten]

If human being were able to corrupt the whole Bible in the same way, crossing different lands and different continents, in different languages and in all the churches of our planet (which needs a divine intervention to make it achievable back then), i wonder what makes it so hard to corrupt a much smaller book within the same region.

inJesus, Quran is not smaller than the bible. There is hardly anything from Jesus in your bible.

Nobody said the whole bible was corrupted. You corrupted only a few parts without considering all aspets of the case. That made the corruption quite evident (visible).

 

[cathopologist]

inJesus, Quran is not smaller than the bible. There is hardly anything from Jesus in your bible.

Nobody said the whole bible was corrupted. You corrupted only a few parts without considering all aspets of the case. That made the corruption quite evident (visible).

Of course not. If the Bible in many parts refutes Islam and Mohammad in its teachings, then those verses are corrupt. This is Muslim logic. The question is, why would we Christians, believe the lies of the Qur’an if it sprang 600 years after Christ? If the Qur’an was uncorrupted, why did Uthman’s enemies claim he corrupted their texts? If he was such a saint, why do several non-biased sources show they threw his body onto a pile of dung? Is this how Islam respects its heroes?

 

[swariffin]

Of course not. If the Bible in many parts refutes Islam and Mohammad in its teachings, then those verses are corrupt. This is Muslim logic. The question is, why would we Christians, believe the lies of the Qur’an if it sprang 600 years after Christ? If the Qur’an was uncorrupted, why did Uthman’s enemies claim he corrupted their texts? If he was such a saint, why do several non-biased sources show they threw his body onto a pile of dung? Is this how Islam respects its heroes?

Dear brother,

Islam always claim that the later is the better. But, when it turns out that the Satanic Verses came later than Quran, they quickly deny it. So inconsistent.

It is to the earlier that the later must be verified against.

 

[Sam_777]

Q=

If Muhaamad was such a “honesy” man and eveyone believed him.
How does one know that ?

Hi NeedsFaith ,

Certain Hadiths demonstrate Muhammed as a man with high morals, those hadiths that Islamic clerics classify them as authentic, and some hadiths demonstrate Muhammed with nasty deeds which usually (but not always) found in less graded hadiths.

The question is, did those nasty deeds really happen and early Muslim clerics tried to demolish them to screen Muhammed!, the same way Uthman did to Quran!

Could it be that Muhammed is really a good man but got possessed by Satan which led him to all those nasty deeds!. But what is considered for some as bad deeds, such as polygamy and killing might not considered bad in the eyes of Muslims.

Could it be that Muhammed is not at all a good man, but all those hadiths about him are fabricated, since there no other sources to verify that other than Islamic history!

Could it be that Muhammed is really an honest man and every one else is wrong (including the Jews and the Christians), that what I thought all my life till I have read the Bible, there where I 've found a better person than Muhammed, a better words than Quran, and a better God than Allah.

However, I think the only way to know that is by his fruit as said by Jesus:
“By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?” (Matthew 7:16).
When I read that sentence it answered a question that all my life I have been asking myself “Why Muslims treat their Muslims brothers so badly in Arabian Peninsula (the source of Islam)?”

 

[planten]

Of course not. If the Bible in many parts refutes Islam and Mohammad in its teachings, then those verses are corrupt. This is Muslim logic. The question is, why would we Christians, believe the lies of the Qur’an if it sprang 600 years after Christ? If the Qur’an was uncorrupted, why did Uthman’s enemies claim he corrupted their texts? If he was such a saint, why do several non-biased sources show they threw his body onto a pile of dung? Is this how Islam respects its heroes?

Quran came 600 years after the bible NT. So you think it is wrong. But bible NT came about 1500 to 1800 years after the Torah. So that must be more corrupt, according to your logic. What was the need of the NT. Was it required to nullify the law of Moses? And to permit you to eat Pork? there must have been some problem, some necessity that is why bible NT was needed.

 

[planten]

Hi NeedsFaith ,

Certain Hadiths demonstrate Muhammed as a man with high morals, those hadiths that Islamic clerics classify them as authentic, and some hadiths demonstrate Muhammed with nasty deeds which usually (but not always) found in less graded hadiths.

The question is, did those nasty deeds really happen and early Muslim clerics tried to demolish them to screen Muhammed!, the same way Uthman did to Quran!

Could it be that Muhammed is really a good man but got possessed by Satan which led him to all those nasty deeds!. But what is considered for some as bad deeds, such as polygamy and killing might not considered bad in the eyes of Muslims.

Could it be that Muhammed is not at all a good man, but all those hadiths about him are fabricated, since there no other sources to verify that other than Islamic history!

Could it be that Muhammed is really an honest man and every one else is wrong (including the Jews and the Christians), that what I thought all my life till I have read the Bible, there where I 've found a better person than Muhammed, a better words than Quran, and a better God than Allah.

However, I think the only way to know that is by his fruit as said by Jesus:
“By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?” (Matthew 7:16).
When I read that sentence it answered a question that all my life I have been asking myself “Why Muslims treat their Muslims brothers so badly in Arabian Peninsula (the source of Islam)?”

Sam, It is a lie to say that original Quran was burnt. The original was kept safe and all other copies which were not authentic, they were destroyed.

It was like in year 325 .A.D. only four gospels were kept and all others were designated as false and destroyed. hope you understand now.

 

[planten]

Dear brother,

Islam always claim that the later is the better. But, when it turns out that the Satanic Verses came later than Quran, they quickly deny it. So inconsistent.

It is to the earlier that the later must be verified against.

** Swariffin, you should prefer the Da Vivi Code to Bible NT. That is more accurate than bibel. It tells about the secret marriage of Jesus and he having a son too. And the more important, the Da Vinci Code is the latest for you. It came much after the bible NT, by your same logic.**

 

[cathopologist]

Quran came 600 years after the bible NT. So you think it is wrong.

Why don’t you embrace the Ba’hai faith since it came several centuries after the Qur’an? Afterall, the Ba’hais also revere Mohammad as one of their prophets.

But bible NT came about 1500 to 1800 years after the Torah. So that must be more corrupt, according to your logic.

The Bible is the uncorrupted Word of God. Nobody claims it to be corrupted, only Muslims. The genealogy of the Word goes back before the NT, before the OT. “I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.” - Revelations 1:8

What was the need of the NT.

So that the Word can debunk lousy claims from non-Christians.
**Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? - Isaiah 53:1
**
You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me - John 5:39

Was it required to nullify the law of Moses?

The Laws are still there. “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.” - Matthew 5:17
Only an ignorant would not see them. If you changed your shirt, does it mean you’re no longer planten? Find better means to debunk Christianity if you must stick to this addiction.

And to permit you to eat Pork? there must have been some problem, some necessity that is why bible NT was needed.

Are you jealous we are allowed to eat pork? Even the Uzbekistani Muslims eat pork - when they were supposed to be fasting for Ramadan! Pork is just the start of the list on their menu. How about tender dog meat?

 

[Catholic_JIMMY]

There is no ‘original’. The Qur’an is an oral recitation, not a book, it was only written down for documentary purposes.

And we know it’s the word of God (not Muhammad) because dozens of people memorised it completely by the time Muhammad (pbuh) died, and there are now somewhere in the region of 10 million people who know it all by heart. Muslims recite Suras from it at least 10 times a day and the whole thing is recited at least once every Ramadan; also whenever someone (say, an Imam) is reciting the Qur’an and makes a mistake or gets stuck, the people behind will correct him.

So the chances of it being forgotten are next to none.

Maybe Muhhumed did not marry a 9 year old. Maybe it was put in by some “confused person” in a later version of the Qur’an.

 

[planten]

Maybe Muhhumed did not marry a 9 year old. Maybe it was put in by some “confused person” in a later version of the Qur’an.

catholic JIMMY, please show where in the Quran is written that Muhammad married a 9 years old. It is better not to start a bad subject because it will lead to illegal pregnancy of Mary in very young age (about 10 years).

If you are a Catholic then please come out with the reference from the Quran about Muhammad marrying any 9 yeras old. Perhaps you are a highly un-informed person.

 

[swariffin]

** Swariffin, you should prefer the Da Vivi Code to Bible NT. That is more accurate than bibel. It tells about the secret marriage of Jesus and he having a son too. And the more important, the Da Vinci Code is the latest for you. It came much after the bible NT, by your same logic.**

No way, Planten. My logic is that the latest must be verified against the earlier. I did verified the Da Vinci code against the Bible, and I believe that Da Vinci code is wrong. Don’t think that i share the same logic with yours. We, the christian never said that the NT supersedes the OT. We say the NT and the OT goes along together, forming a collections of written God’s revelation to human. Remember, there are also the unwritten God’s revelations too.

Your view that the latest supersedes the earlier. That is why I conclude that Satanic Verses supersede Quran BASED ON YOUR LOGIC, NOT MINE.

You know something that Dan Brown miss? Look at the original painting of Da Vinci of the last supper. Compare it with the Bible. See the background of Da Vinci painting. You can see an open window with a far away view outside the place where the last supper occured. That means the moment of the painting was about the earlier stage of the last supper. Compare it with the bible. At the early stage (when the sky still bright as the painting described), Judas was still there. Look at the painting too. There are so many cups and so many breads laying around the table. In that case, the moment where Jesus said “This is my body” was not occured yet at the time of the painting suggests. So, if Da Vinci said that Mary Magdalene was there, there should be 14 people in that painting. It would be 12 deciple including Judas who should still be there, Jesus, and Mary Magdalene. How many people in the painting? there are 13. Dan Brown indeed missed something in his story. Don’t say that one of the deciple went out for pissing.

 

[swariffin]

Sam, It is a lie to say that original Quran was burnt. The original was kept safe and all other copies which were not authentic, they were destroyed.

It was like in year 325 .A.D. only four gospels were kept and all others were designated as false and destroyed. hope you understand now.

Please tell us where the original copy of Quran that was kept safe, and why the Muslim authority do not show it to the world?

Nope. Not all of the apocript book were destroyed. Some of them are still used as a reference only, such as the pseudo-matthew which Muhammad copied as the Mariam letter in Quran. That is different than the 325 AD you said. That is where the RCC got the name of the grand parents of Jesus (from Mary’s side).