The quran

  • Thread starter Thread starter ZuzuBailey
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Due to Islamic sensitivities, the early manuscripts of the Koran has yet to be critically studied by scholars using the method of literary criticism. But that may be changing as scholars are emboldened to question traditional Islamic ideas about the Koranic texts.

Christoph Luxenburg, for example, proposed that the parts of the Koran derived from a Syraic Christian Lectionary. Not all the words are written in Arabic, as held by centuries of Islamic interpretors, but many of the words are in Aramaic, the language of the Syraic Church. Luxenburg’s thesis radically, but plausibly, revises some of the traditional readings of the Koran. Among them, the Koran apparently promises Muslims martyrs white grapes, not virgins.

See Wikipedia article
 
If he was of Satan he would not have told his followers to give alms to the poor to pray to God(your god our god as pope John Paul II said we worship the same god the one god the living god) thats a parapahse of the speech he gave to some muslims so i may be a little off there… but answer my question why the commands of chairty of mecy of honest of worship if it is of satan who he know is all that is evil
Do not Hindus give alms, and Budhaists?
Are they not false religions.?

Mohammed counterdicted the very words of Jesus. He denied that Christ came in the flesh, Is this not of Satan?
 
I don’t really have anything to hide about Islam. I’d be sad to see this thread turn the way of so many others, the way you’re taking it now…

The Qur’an was transmitted orally by multiple narrators, through multiple chains. So were the ahadith about not fighting non-combatants, so much so that this has the highest status of authenticity. I present it to you as a teaching of the actual religion–not as the teaching of a few extremists who would like to make the blood lawful of anyone who disagrees with them. I don’t take my religion from these extremists–Islam has two sources, the Qur’an and the teachings of Muhammad, and they invent their own on a divergent path. Sorry for this kind of a rant, but every single time the Qur’an talks about going to war, it is for a very good reason. Not saying that Muslims have always followed it, but that’s kind of the point.
Amy your fight is not with us. It is with those of your own religion who insist and teach that Islam is a violent religion. Until Islam is taken back from those that would use the Quaran to justify thier attacks on nonMuslims then teh problem is not with us it is with them.
 
Oh, I posted these verses for the other effect, to show that Islam is not ‘satanic.’ Muslims are told that Satan is their avowed enemy and to seek refuge in God from Satan who is accursed and rejected and evil.
Satan is full of trickery and lies that we can never know for sure. He sure can make us lose a footing by his flattery if he wants to. What does it matter to sacrifice a few principles if he can win the bigger one?

As I said somewhere, the origin of the Quran is questionable - if it was from angel, then what angel? or from Mohammad’s own mind or from those bits and pieces he gathered from his wife and uncle-in-law.

To me the Quran does not prove anything, least of all that it is from God. But of course it’s just me and the opinion is personal.
 
Well I won’t contest the first part as I’m not privy to the methodologies of satan, I don’t see why there must be an “Either/Or” set up.

Why must he be either under satan or a madman?

I find the idea that he was an agent of satan dubious at best and blatant non-sense at worst, the claim he was insain is possible however there is absolutly no data to support it so I don’t know why’d you paint him with that brush
You make a good point there so lets throw out both those argurments if he wasnt an agent of satan or mad than how and why did he create Islam im interested to hear your opion on this matter
 
The Qur’an was transmitted orally by multiple narrators, through multiple chains. So were the ahadith about not fighting non-combatants, so much so that this has the highest status of authenticity. I present it to you as a teaching of the actual religion–not as the teaching of a few extremists who would like to make the blood lawful of anyone who disagrees with them. I don’t take my religion from these extremists–Islam has two sources, the Qur’an and the teachings of Muhammad, and they invent their own on a divergent path. Sorry for this kind of a rant, but every single time the Qur’an talks about going to war, it is for a very good reason. Not saying that Muslims have always followed it, but that’s kind of the point.
If the Hadith is so peaceful, as you claim, then perhaps you could explain this article to us: Turkey in radical revision of Islamic texts
Why would 1400 years of religious interpretation need to be altered unless they thought there was something wrong with it? Turkey, to its credit, has been trying to reform Islam for more than a decade. But in doing so, they have acknowledged that there is something within Islam that needs to change. This is something that needs to be acknowledged by all Muslims who wish to call themselves moderate. I pray that this does not bring the wrath of Jihad down on Turkey.

And before anyone tries to compare this to the period known as the Christian Reformation, do some reading. It wasn’t a time of radical changes in beliefs and doctrines, resulting in a more cuddly Christianity. It was a period of Protestant attempts to destroy Catholicism, which failed. This article seems to be a pretty accurate and informative take on the subject: The Reformation: A Break With Christian Consensus
 
**
Quote:
An angel would never have told Mohammed that there is no Trinity,
Unless there is no trinity.
Quote:
that Jesus was not God,
Unless he wasn’t.

But there IS Trinity, and Jesus IS God.

I confess there is no God but Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and Jesus is God Incarnate.

If you do not confess this as well, you will spend eternity in flames with your precious Mahomet and the demonic impostor who call him/herself Gabriel.**
 
If you do not confess this as well, you will spend eternity in flames with your precious Mahomet and the demonic impostor who call him/herself Gabriel.
Come on now, don’t start to presume you know who’s damned and who isn’t. Only God knows that. You should be praying for those who don’t believe, not shouting fire and brimstone. Look up the Catholic position on “invincible ignorance”, maybe it will soften your heart a bit.
 
**
Quote:
An angel would never have told Mohammed that there is no Trinity,
Unless there is no trinity.
Quote:
that Jesus was not God,
Unless he wasn’t.

But there IS Trinity, and Jesus IS God.

I confess there is no God but Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and Jesus is God Incarnate.

If you do not confess this as well, you will spend eternity in flames with your precious Mahomet and the demonic impostor who call him/herself Gabriel.**
Wow. Such respect as this shown, no wonder the Catholic faith is viewed with such respect.
 
Due to Islamic sensitivities, the early manuscripts of the Koran has yet to be critically studied by scholars using the method of literary criticism. But that may be changing as scholars are emboldened to question traditional Islamic ideas about the Koranic texts.

Christoph Luxenburg, for example, proposed that the parts of the Koran derived from a Syraic Christian Lectionary. Not all the words are written in Arabic, as held by centuries of Islamic interpretors, but many of the words are in Aramaic, the language of the Syraic Church. Luxenburg’s thesis radically, but plausibly, revises some of the traditional readings of the Koran. Among them, the Koran apparently promises Muslims martyrs white grapes, not virgins.

See Wikipedia article
On the subject of the Quran, it cannot be divorced from Mohammad as it came from him. I am interested in frank critique of this book because the interest it generates today. Both good and bad deeds alike are committed in the name of the Quran.

First to come to mind would be the question of whether it came from God or not, not whether it is the same copy produced 1400 years ago though that can be debated too.

Muslims argument on this would be very circular. It was from God because the verses in there say it was and because it says so therefore it is.

Then Mohammad – was he a prophet of God who brought the Quran. The argument is, yes he was because the verses in the Quran allude to this and so therefore he was.

Any proof or evidence or something to back the Quran as words of God or Mohammad as prophet? The argument is, yes, the Quran itself is a miracle. There is no other book as beautiful and able to reveal things seen and unseen then. The fact that nearly two billion people believe today is proof enough, what do you want any more?

And what about Mohammad, what evidence to show that he was prophet of God? Was there any miracle or something to back this up? Yes, the miracles like splitting of the moon and night journey to Jerusalem are some of them.

But these points stop short of actually proving or even lending credible evidence that they were from God. The reasoning is circular and the miracles have no relevance to the mission and the purpose of the Quran.

A couple of things that were missing would certainly help to establish the authenticity of the divinity of the Quran and the prophethood of Mohammad. Material witness who saw Gabriel speaking to Mohammad and relevant miracles attributed to Mohammad.

Reuben
 
How do muslims know that the Quran has not been altered or changed? What proof is there?
They don’t. There is actually proof it has been altered.

The quran was supposedly recited by muhammed throughout his life. Verses of the quran were written down on bark and scraps of paper. When the muhammed died there was not codified collection of these pieces make and reviewed by muhammed. Right there should raise alarms. There is no evidence that the book called the quran today would be recognized by muhammed.

After his death there immediately started arguments over the various pieces of text floating around and people were essentially following various forms of islam based on the version or type of the text they had.

The 3rd caliph named Uthman decided to remedy this. He sent around for all the scraps that the quran verses were written on. he then codified it into a single book. Unfortunately he burned all the scraps so we have no idea if the book he created was the exact thing (or even close) to what muhammed supposedly recited.

A better explanation of these events is given here:
answering-islam.org/Quran/Text/index.html

This page also lists the hadiths that claim there are lost books of the quran and the current day variants in quranic texts.

May God give the grace to muslims to want to know and accept His love.
 
They don’t. There is actually proof it has been altered.

The quran was supposedly recited by muhammed throughout his life. Verses of the quran were written down on bark and scraps of paper. When the muhammed died there was not codified collection of these pieces make and reviewed by muhammed. Right there should raise alarms. There is no evidence that the book called the quran today would be recognized by muhammed.
That’s a fairly ironic criticism for a Christian to make isin’t it?
After his death there immediately started arguments over the various pieces of text floating around and people were essentially following various forms of islam based on the version or type of the text they had.
The 3rd caliph named Uthman decided to remedy this. He sent around for all the scraps that the quran verses were written on. he then codified it into a single book. Unfortunately he burned all the scraps so we have no idea if the book he created was the exact thing (or even close) to what muhammed supposedly recited.
A better explanation of these events is given here:
answering-islam.org/Quran/Text/index.html
This page also lists the hadiths that claim there are lost books of the quran and the current day variants in quranic texts.
May God give the grace to muslims to want to know and accept His love.
alrighty
 
A couple of things that were missing would certainly help to establish the authenticity of the divinity of the Quran and the prophethood of Mohammad. Material witness who saw Gabriel speaking to Mohammad and relevant miracles attributed to Mohammad.
Material witnesses who saw Gabriel speaking to Muhammad:
Umm Salamah, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, Abu Hurayrah, Ibn 'Abbas, Anas bin Malik, Jareer bin 'Abdallah, Abu Dharr, and Abu Maalik Al-Ashja’ee. That’s eight different people who have reported seeing Gabriel speaking to Muhammad (while they were in his presence) , and they have reported it through various chains.

Will you not then believe?
 
Material witnesses who saw Gabriel speaking to Muhammad:
Umm Salamah, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, Abu Hurayrah, Ibn 'Abbas, Anas bin Malik, Jareer bin 'Abdallah, Abu Dharr, and Abu Maalik Al-Ashja’ee. That’s eight different people who have reported seeing Gabriel speaking to Muhammad (while they were in his presence) , and they have reported it through various chains.

Will you not then believe?
Sure it was an angel they seen?
Nahhh dont believe them!
 
The quran was supposedly recited by Muhammed throughout his life.
Supposedly? There is voluminous authentic proof of this fact. The Qur’an is recited by every single Muslim every single day. Every year the entire thing is recited over the period of a month, a little every night. The entire thing has been memorized by countless Muslims throughout history, and is memorized today exactly the same way. Supposedly recited? Sheesh.
Verses of the quran were written down on bark and scraps of paper.
True! The Qur’an was revealed in pieces, a little at a time. It was revealed to Muhammad, and he recited it to his followers–they memorized it and they wrote it down on whatever they could find.
When Muhammed died there was not codified collection of these pieces make and reviewed by muhammed.
This is also true! However, before Muhammad died he recited the entire Qur’an to the angel Gabriel TWICE to check it for accuracy. Literally HUNDREDS of Muslims had the entire Qur’an memorized–word for word, in order. There was no compilation of the Qur’an, however all the Muslims knew the Qur’an for their prayers and many like I said had the entire thing memorized–including the order, beginning to end.
Right there should raise alarms.
As has been pointed out, this isn’t necessary. We don’t have a record of ANY of Christ’s sayings being written down in his lifetime, much less an entire text preserved from God.
There is no evidence that the book called the quran today would be recognized by Muhammed.
There is, in fact, abundant evidence for this fact.
After his death there immediately started arguments over the various pieces of text floating around and people were essentially following various forms of islam based on the version or type of the text they had. The 3rd caliph named Uthman decided to remedy this.
Your starting statement could be true, but when you mention Uthman you’ve gone off track because you missed the compilation of the Qur’an, which happened long before Uthman! Let me explain.

There was a battle while Abu Bakr was caliph (and he was only for two years after the death of Muhammad!) during which many of the people who had memorized Qur’an had been killed. So, it was Umar’s idea (notice, Umar, not Uthman) to have the Qur’an written down in one single volume because the memorizers were being killed. Abu Bakr was leary of doing that, because that hadn’t been done before, to compile the text, but eventually agreed. So it was while Abu Bakr was the caliph, within two years after the death of Muhammad, that the Qur’an was compiled. The scribes did use some of the written pieces but they were writing down anew, and every single verse had to be verified by at least two people who had memorized it before it was written down and included. And may I remind you that there were still many many people who had the entire Qur’an memorized. The volume which arose from this effort was kept with Abu Bakr until his death and then it was kept with Hafsah, who was the daughter of 'Umar and widow of Muhammad.

Now, this was the single existing compiled volume which had been crosschecked and everything this way. While 'Uthman was caliph, people started teaching the Qur’an incorrectly (because by then Islam had spread to lands which were not so well versed in Arabic, and the Qur’an is in Arabic) so to preserve the Qur’an, five COPIES were made of the original volume, and sent out to the major Muslim cities. The same scribes made these copies as the original, as far as I know. It was then, to make sure that nobody would confuse the actual authentic COPIES with those random pages, bark, etc., which hadn’t been verified or compiled, that everything else was burned.
He sent around for all the scraps that the quran verses were written on. he then codified it into a single book. Unfortunately he burned all the scraps so we have no idea if the book he created was the exact thing (or even close) to what muhammed supposedly recited.
This is your mistake, which I have clarified above. It was not Uthman who compiled the Qur’an, it was scribes, and it happened before Uthman was caliph. So he didn’t codify it–he only had it copied.

The Qur’an is really a major interest of mine, and there is an excellent book in English which explains all this in further detail, and the Arabic scripts used and how manuscripts are dated and also finer points on understanding the Qur’an and manuscripts which survived. It’s called “'Uloom al-Qur’an” (i.e., Sciences of the Qur’an) by Ahmed von Denffer. Islamic Awareness (islamicawareness.org) also has tons and tons of information about compilation of the Qur’an and manuscripts, which can clarify all those poor misconceptions you learned at answering-islam. 🙂
 
Do not Hindus give alms, and Budhaists?
Are they not false religions.?

Mohammed counterdicted the very words of Jesus. He denied that Christ came in the flesh, Is this not of Satan?
Hisalone. Religions are false, specifically, only if those believing in them realize they are false. They are always false to those of other religions looking at them objectively. Giving alms is “Christ like” whether one is a Hindu, or Budhist.😦
 
Hisalone. Religions are false, specifically, only if those believing in them realize they are false. They are always false to those of other religions looking at them objectively. Giving alms is “Christ like” whether one is a Hindu, or Budhist.😦
Hello again. Forgot to say, the Religion of Islam recognizes Christ as a Prophet so I really think they realize He had a physical body. As far as Muhamed contradicting the Words of Jesus, I don’t know. I haven’t read the Qu’ran.🙂
 
Here is an interesting piece of information.

Muslims believe that every group of people on earth received a prophet from God, someone with inspiration to warn them and teach them how they are supposed to live. That way nobody would have an excuse. However, Muslims do not believe that those messages were always preserved in their original form, and only some of the messengers are named in the Qur’an. Muslims also believe that Muhammad was just the last messenger, and the Qur’an the last book, to call all people to the truth.

So Islam does not discount the possibility that other religions were actually traditions originating from a true message from God, which would explain some remarkable similarities.
 
Material witnesses who saw Gabriel speaking to Muhammad:
Umm Salamah, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, Abu Hurayrah, Ibn 'Abbas, Anas bin Malik, Jareer bin 'Abdallah, Abu Dharr, and Abu Maalik Al-Ashja’ee. That’s eight different people who have reported seeing Gabriel speaking to Muhammad (while they were in his presence) , and they have reported it through various chains.

Will you not then believe?
No, why in the world would you base your entire life on the reported sightings of eight people 1,300 years ago?
 
I should mention that many scholars DO in fact date the Gospels to within 40 years of Jesus’s death, all prior to the destruction of the Temple in 70 a.d. It is accepted that they were all finsihed by 120 A.D. by even the most liberal of sources, while most hold that they were all finished before 100 A.D. St John lived to be over 100, so assuming that he was younger than Jesus by a few years, he would have been alive as they were written.

If you study bardic tradition, they way oral stories are told from generation to generation, it is not a big deal for a work to remain unchanged for a decade or four. The issue that is better to raise is did Muhammid really see what he says he saw. Many people saw Jesus, and some followed him. I know that Sister Amy has been kind enough to put some witnesses on here for us, and she is the first Muslim to do so. Where can we find more information on these witnesses?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top