Z
ZAKI
Guest
If you are talking about translations by different people then yes…if you are talking about the Quran itself then no.
wasalam
- Status
wasalam
B
Byzantine_Wolf
Guest
In that case, you are unaware of the textual variants that do exist in Koranic history.
There exist, for example, variants found in the Koranic understanding of Abdullah ibn Masud and Ubayy ibn Ka’b, two men trusted by Mohammad himself as being some of the most reliable at memorizing the Koran. There are to this day, when one studies various Koranic manuscripts, textual traditions that are linked to these two men. Even Yusuf Ali, in his famous commentary for the Koran, mentions a famous variant of S. 33:6 that adds and he is a father to them after their own selves, which is linked to Ubayy ibn Ka’b’s understanding of the original Koran.
Now I do not believe that the mere existence of textual variants among various manuscripts denotes a theological error, but if Muslims today are going to argue that the Koran is holy because it is 100% perfect and all the manuscripts agree 100% in every which way, then that argument simply falls flat on its face. Muslims can therefore either acknowledge Islamic and textual tradition regarding the development of the Koran, or they can continue to be inconsistent in their treatment of the Koran vs. the Bible. If they choose the latter, then, once again, they are presenting nothing useful to this forum.
B
Byzantine_Wolf
Guest
That is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. You should be aware by now that non-sequitors do not work on me, and if you attempt one I will call you out. I’m sorry, but I have little patience for those who attempt to avoid responding to an argument.
Are you serious? Please tell me this is a very early April Fool’s Day post, because I stated “how come” in my post. I think everyone can perfectly see I did. I am not going to answer a question I already addressed many times.
Diverting from the topic and asking questions which the other person already has answered shows a lack of respect for those you are entering discussion with.
J
Jolly_Joe
Guest
I said nothing about translations. The Arabic text varies, parts have been changed, such as the worship of Allah’s daughters, other parts lost like what the goat ate. The idea that the Arabic Qurans are all in supernatural agreement is a myth, a false teaching, one commonly still taught and believed though no serious student of the Quran text could believe it.
Believing that myth leads to the very common arguement against the Bible that since there are textual variants it’s completely corrupt and not to be trusted at all. A strange thing indeed since Mohammed used the Bible himself to judge cases. Mohammed didn’t teach the Bible itself was corrupt, he taught that the Christians he knews corrupted the writings, of that he was likely correct.
Muslims like to claim all sorts of supernatural differences between the Quran and the Bible, the reason they are so amazing is that they aren’t true.
Hence the statement that Muslims use double standards. It’s a nice way of saying it.
H
Hadi
Guest
Example.
In codex sinaiticus, there is no “Son of God” in the beginning of Mark (Mark 1.1)
codexsinaiticus.org/
Is there something similar you can show us from the Quran ? …I want to see an example , not a story.
In codex sinaiticus, there is no “Son of God” in the beginning of Mark (Mark 1.1)
codexsinaiticus.org/
Is there something similar you can show us from the Quran ? …I want to see an example , not a story.
B
Byzantine_Wolf
Guest
I did in my next-to-previous post, citing a specific textual variant and its source and even a respected Muslim scholar who acknowledged the existence of such a variant (he also acknowledged two others, if one reads his notes). I don’t know what you mean by “not a story,” as I haven’t seen anyone tell a story yet.
As for the Codex Sinaiticus, I find it inconsequential if a variant exists in Mark 1:1, as that is not the only incident in which the phrase “Son of God” happens in the Gospel of Mark. Studying the manuscript specifically, the phrase occurs in specific reference to Christ in Mark 3:11, 5:7, and 15:39, and Mark 14:61-62 has Christ affirming Himself as the Son of God and making reference to a Messianic prophecy that spoke of divinity.
H
Hadi
Guest
Can you show me an Arabic source,or the added phrase in Arabic …thanks
B
Byzantine_Wolf
Guest
The original source (I’m guessing you mean the Koran) was in Arabic. I don’t have the original phrase’s Arabic rendering on hand right now, but an entire phrase added in is much different than a simple grammatical change.
That seems inconsequential to me, given the source is based on the tradition, and is confirmed by Muslim sources that are not attempting to deface the religion.
H
Hadi
Guest
I tried to search what you mentioned and ended up in a website that quotes Alsyoty… but I have his book “اللإتقان في علوم القرأن” and I couldn’t find what they mention , can you give specif page number of what you said… thanks
B
Byzantine_Wolf
Guest
Certainly.
In some Qira’ahs, like that of Ubayy ibn Ka’ab, occur also the words “and he is a father of them”, which imply his spiritual relationship and connection with the words “and his wives are their mothers”. [Abdullah Yusuf Ali, *The Meaning of the Holy Quran, 11th edition, Note #3674]
To put things in perspective, here is the passage Yusuf Ali is talking about.
The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers. Blood-relations among each other have closer personal ties, in the Decree of Allah. Than (the Brotherhood of) Believers and Muhajirs: nevertheless do ye what is just to your closest friends: such is the writing in the Decree (of Allah). [S. 33:6]
And here it is with the variant:
The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, and he is a father of them, and his wives are their mothers. Blood-relations among each other have closer personal ties, in the Decree of Allah. Than (the Brotherhood of) Believers and Muhajirs: nevertheless do ye what is just to your closest friends: such is the writing in the Decree (of Allah). [S. 33:6; variant in bold]
Two other variants Yusuf Ali discusses:
Notice that in the usual Arabic texts (that is, according to the Qira’ah of Hafs) the word qala is here and in 21:112 below, as well as in 23:112, spelt differently from the usual spelling of the word in other places (eg., in 20:125-126). Qul is the reading of the Basrah Qira’ah, meaning, “Say thou” in the imperative. ibid, Note #2666]
The Hafs reading is “Qala”, “He will say”. This follows the Kufah Qira’ah. The Basrah Qira’ah reads “Qul”, “Say” (in the imperative). ibid, Note #2948]
S
sedonaman
Guest
So who wrote down the Qur’an ? Men! Who said it was “written correctly” ? A man! And he did it for his own self-aggrandizement. Why did the apostles write down the Gospels? It would have been much easier for them to forget the whole Jesus thing and not be martyrs who suffered torturous deaths.
Why do you persist in this line of reasoning? If it were correct, then any logical person should reject Islam because the Qur’an is also the product of human hands [never mind it is a mishmash of contradiction and non sense]. Mohammed was illiterate so he couldn’t even have written it down himself; it was written down after his death by Men! who got it second and third hand. And a lot of the original was burned; one was eaten by a goat. Why would a god let his true word be eaten by a goat?
S
sedonaman
Guest
Because the so-called message from the alleged angel is incoherent. Why would a god send a message that contradicts itself?
B
Byzantine_Wolf
Guest
Don’t fall for his flamebait. :doh2:
P
planten
Guest
The Quran was at least dictated by Muhammad and he got it written down word for word. Did you want that God should send down a written book to mankind?? You can see your own fallacy.
**The Quran was well looked after. It was memorised and recited in the five daily prayers. There were thousands of those persons who had memorised the Quran from A to Z.
Even today, you will not find any difference in the text of the Quran. But you know how many bible (gospels ) were burnt or rejected at the council of Nicene in year 325 A.D. There were thousands of gospels which were rejected and called false. Only four gospels were approved. Why??
An Emperor had come to the help of the christians and that after 300 years of hiding and suffering. During that time all the truth of the Jesus teaching was lost.**
S
sedonaman
Guest
Pray tell how it got “written down word for word.” Who wrote it? Men, that’s who. If being written down by men is a disqualifier for the validity of a scripture, then Islam and Mohammed fail their own test. Just one more reason to reject Islam.
That’s the only way that will make true what you are saying. How do you know what the writer heard was what Mohammed said? In the end, whatever is written ultimately has to have been written by a man or men.
This has got to be one of the weakest arguments for the validity of the Qur’an as the word of Allah. I do not believe that anything can be memorized the same way, word for word, by even a few, much less by “thousands”. Even so, all memorization proves is that the Qur’an can be memorized. So can a lot of other things, but that doesn’t make them holy scripture.
You still have not addressed that little tidbit about the seventh century Qur’an found in Yemen. It is a true Qur’an because it dates from first century of Hijra and was discovered in the Great Mosque of Sana’a (Yemen). By your own definition, the Qur’an you have is not a true Qur’an, so all your claims are out the window, and Islam is false and Mohammed is false. The present standard one significantly differs from the ancient Yemeni Qur’an [the modern version has the word “sword” removed]. Carbon dating system confirmed that the ancient Qur’an is not one forged by religious rivalries or kafirs [infidels/non-believers]. Moreover, the ancient Qur’an [complete with the word “sword”] was discovered by Muslims, not kafirs. The one you have is different because it has been corrupted by men who wrote it down for their own benefit. Please see again.
Why do you always have to use Christianity as a comparison? Why not atheism? In any event, why does Mohammed use the Gospels to validate himself and Islam? The assertion that the Bible provides validation for Mohammed’s prophethood and ultimately the Qur’an being the word of God presupposes that the Bible functions as a criterion for determining truth and falsehood. This assumes that the Bible is a trustworthy document which can be used to demonstrate that the Qur’an is correct. But it can’t be trustworthy because the Bible is a corrupt document. Even if it were trustworthy and hence a criterion for truth and falsehood, the Bible can also serve to falsify the Qur’an, which it definitely does since the two books are diametrically opposed to each other when it comes to the essentials of faith, i.e. God, Christ, salvation etc.
Can’t you see the dilemma of contradiction you, Mohammed, and the Qur’an are in? If anyone is stuck in a fallacy, it is Mohammed, for using as proof scripture that rejects Islam. Face it; you can’t get there from here, and Mohammed is the Bootstrap Prophet.
This is an interesting statement since Islam claims that Jesus was one of its greatest prophets. How can Jesus even be considered since Mohammed came over 300 years after Jesus’ teaching was supposedly lost? If they had become lost, how would anyone, much less Mohammed, even know what Jesus’ teachings were? But if Jesus is a prophet of Islam, just what are his teachings according to Islam and Mohammed?
B
Byzantine_Wolf
Guest
I’ve cited evidence, and only from Islamic sources and traditions, that show the fallacy in the Muslim belief that the Koran is 100% perfect and preserved with absolutely no textual variants. Please respond to those sources and not just repeat an argument.
Congratulations, you have just shot yourself in the foot and shown everyone simply how inexperienced you are in regards to Christian history and especially the history of the canonization of scripture. There was nothing done at the Council of Nicea that had to do with the canon of scripture. If you want to prove your point, please quote from the original text of the council that deals with scripture.
That is not the case. What Christians such as Irenaeus, Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement (who all had ties to the apostles of Christ) were writing in the post-apostolic era is exactly what Christians were writing after the Council of Nicea. I’ve discussed this before. Again, you are simply repeating an argument with no demonstration, while ignoring the points brought forward by your opponents and seeking to divert the topic elsewhere.
Now, please cease it with your common game of running to Christianity when Islam comes under attack. Respond to the evidence of textual variants in the history of the textual development of the Koran. Continually playing a non-sequitor shows to everyone here that you are avoiding any real defense.
W
wina
Guest
Sedonaman, have you noticed Planten’s posts for these long? he usually posts over and over the same things and he will ignore when he couldn’t answer our questions.
B
Byzantine_Wolf
Guest
Or he’ll claim he missed them and ask we post them again, as if he’s the only person on the entire internet who doesn’t know how to navigate between the various pages.
S
sedonaman
Guest
Oh, yes. Another tactic he uses is that our questions are “too long” and don’t leave room for him to reply, after all there is a 6,000 character limit. Never mind that you can break a reply up into several posts. [Remember, he has made close to 4,000 posts and knows how to use the site’s features like font sizes, colors, etc.]
He also denies a debate took place, even after presented evidence:
Originally Posted by planten.
samaan.
samaan.
samaan.
samaan.
samaan.
samaan.
samaan.
So we suspect that “planten” has been “planted” here to sabotage this forum.
D
DeusVult09
Guest
I have got a question. Why did Mohammad say when the call to prayer sounds that Satan takes off farting across the sky so as not to hear it? Im not making it up your prophet actually made such an absurd statement.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 11, Number 582:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah’s Apostle said, “When the Adhan (call to prayer) is pronounced Satan takes to his heels and passes wind with noise during his flight in order not to hear the Adhan. When the Adhan is completed he comes back and again takes to his heels when the Iqama is pronounced and after its completion he returns again till he whispers into the heart of the person (to divert his attention from his prayer) and makes him remember things which he does not recall to his mind before the prayer and that causes him to forget how much he has prayed.”
Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 11, Number 582:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah’s Apostle said, “When the Adhan (call to prayer) is pronounced Satan takes to his heels and passes wind with noise during his flight in order not to hear the Adhan. When the Adhan is completed he comes back and again takes to his heels when the Iqama is pronounced and after its completion he returns again till he whispers into the heart of the person (to divert his attention from his prayer) and makes him remember things which he does not recall to his mind before the prayer and that causes him to forget how much he has prayed.”
- Status