i believe Quran and Bible

@CEO3

The Quran and there is no doubt about this was revealed in original Quranic Arabic, written down and still today same words (you need to have studied Arabic to understand significance of this)

Why do I need to study Arabic to be able to "understand" the Quran ?
Fact is that even the people who did study Arabic disagree on the meaning of many surah's so one can at least argue about the quality/precision of "the message".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you say versions washed off and rewritten, wouldnt you need previous version to ascertain difference?

Sure, click me!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

And research by whom? You quote a theory, which is just that and 1 other, where the proof of authenticity by non muslim historians alone are countless.

Could you cite some of these (many ?) non-Muslim sources ?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...even if as u say Quran not valid, you have to admit that a 6 yr old that can quote any verse in the Quran at will is amazing?

True but even more I admire 6 year old good chess players.

So what does this prove ?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It was the Romans, who persecuted the christians beforehand, who compiled the bible not the original christians and before that unknown who was in charge. Qurans collation was always in hands of original muslims whose characters were par excellance.

May be, but if you accuse the Romans of corrupting the bible you implicitly admit that god did not protect the gospel.
Why should he do it in one case (Muslims) and not in the other (Christians) ?



Doesn't make sense: Airmano

Edited by airmano - 22 December 2016 at 8:21am

Ceo3 wrote: 2Acts wrote: Ceo3 wrote: 2Acts wrote: Ceo3 wrote: Going back to about 700AD there is proof via discovered Quranic script that what we have today is exactly the same. Also non muslim historians prove that Muhammad SAW did speak the words. Now criticisms of Quran are from the mouth of Muhammad SAW up until when it was written down. There were 100s of companions who memorised the Quran and they come together to collate into book form. Some doubt this method, however today their are millions in the world who have memorised the Quran all 6000 plus verses in order, from 6 yrs old. You can take one from Malaysia, to Egypt to England to USA and they will all recite the same. No other book ever has been on such a large scale been commited to memory. In 1972 a large number of ancient Quranic manuscripts, dating from first century of Hijra were discovered in the Great Mosque of Sana�a (Yemen), which significantly differs from the present standard one. This challenges the orthodox Muslim belief that the Quran, as it has reached us today, is �the perfect, timeless, and unchanging Word of God�. It means the Quran has been distorted, perverted, revised, modified and corrected, and textual alterations had taken place over the years purely by Human hands. Millions have memorised the Quran. Really !Which Quran ? The original one or the changed one ? Muslims willnever know because Uthman destroyed the originals ! Like a drowning man clutching on straws, your retort if not anything offered some amuzement. How have these manuscripts differed? Is it the grammatical content, writing style or is each word still the same as per 1400 years ago? Kindly check your facts. Millions have memorised 1 Quran, and one can only memorise from a teacher which links back to beginning of Islam. So we have 2 solid methods of having preserved the Quran. Can the followers of Bible and Torah make the same assertion? Surely you must concede Quran better chance of preservation than other books. Also Islam came when there were better writing instruments and the full light of history was shining. The truth hurts! You want proof? Ok.Many of the manuscripts showed the sign of palimpsests, i.e., versions very clearly written over even earlier washed off versions. Research suggests that the Sana�a manuscripts are not only variants to the present version of the Quran, but the Sana�a manuscripts themselves were variants of earlier version, re-written on the same paper. It means, Allah�s claim that original text is preserved in heaven on golden tablets (Q 56: 77�78; 85:21�22), which none can touch except angels is also a fairy-tale. The Arabic scholar Puin's other radical theory is that pre-Islamic sources have entered the Quran. The Arabic sholar Wansbrough�s concluded that the Quran evolved only gradually in the seventh and eighth centuries after a long period of oral transmissions. You say millions have memorised the Quran. What Quran ? You have no original. The Sanaa Quran is the oldest and it proves the Quran you are all memorising is not reliable. And actually the Bible is the most validated of all ancient writings. More ancient copies exist than any other ancient writing, for example the Roman history of Julius Caesar, and others. Plus these copies cover a huge and wide geographic area that prevents them from being gathered together and falsified. In which language was the bible revealed? Or better still what language was it written down by Constantinople 300 yrs after Jesus AS? The Quran and there is no doubt about this was revealed in original Quranic Arabic, written down and still today same words (you need to have studied Arabic to understand significance of this) after about 10yrs of death of Rasullulah SAW. If you say versions washed off and rewritten, wouldnt you need previous version to ascertain difference? And research by whom? You quote a theory, which is just that and 1 other, where the proof of authenticity by non muslim historians alone are countless. How many have memorised the bible word for word, even if as u say Quran not valid, you have to admit that a 6 yr old that can quote any verse in the Quran at will is amazing? It was the Romans, who persecuted the christians beforehand, who compiled the bible not the original christians and before that unknown who was in charge. Qurans collation was always in hands of original muslims whose characters were par excellance.In the process the romans, included aspects of zeus and their pagan superstitions into the bible to suit their ideals. Did you know the first mention of trinity was only in the reign of Constantine, when he had to choose which of the different christian sects to support?

Which language was the bible revealed? Before it was in written form the oral tradition would have been Aramaic and Greek, and later when written down it was in Greek. Did you know Greek was the most widely read and spoken of the ancient languages and it is also the most precise in terms of grammar of the ancient languages. This was to the advantage of spreading the Christian message. It means the words of Jesus and his disciples was extremely accurate. Not like the clumsiness of Islam which is constrained by only one language � Arabic, which most Muslims don�t even speak and understand. Actually Constadine never wrote the Bible. His church translated it however into the Latin language. However by that stage the Bible was written in many languages, for example Coptic, Aramaic, Greek , Syriac and Aramaic . Languages differ but the meaning remains the same. It was not constrained by just one clumsy language like Arabic.

You ask if versions of the Sanaa Quran were washed off and rewritten, wouldn�t it need a previous version to ascertain the difference? That�s my point. There were different versions that all disagreed with each other. Also remember before the Quran was compiled it was oral and written on scraps of paper, bone etc. What the Sanna Quran shows is that early Muslims could not agree what it said.
You ask research by whom? It was conducted by Gerard Puin an Arabic scholar and an authority on Qur'anic historical orthography, the study and scholarly interpretation of ancient manuscripts. He is also a specialist in Arabic paleography. He was a lecturer of Arabic at Saarland University. He understands Classical Arabic better than most Muslims on this planet.
You ask if I am amazed that a 6 year old can quote the whole Quran. No not really. All most of them do is recite it like parrots without even knowing what it means.

You say Qurans collation was always in hands of original Muslims whose characters were par excellance. What you forget was that Uthman had to destroy all copies that did not agree with his version. Were the original Muslims characters par excellence ? The fact remains they fought each other in civil war and disagreed over what version of the Quran to believe. Most of the early caliphs were murdered. Not much excellent character there !

You need to learn more about Church history. The Bible canon was well established before Constatine was born. And actually The first canon was the Muratorian dated to about AD 180. Long before Constatine. So your idea of the Romans including aspects of zeus and their pagan superstitions into the bible is not based on historical fact.

Did you know the Trinity is not even mentioned in the Bible but the three aspects of God - God the Father, God The Son and The Holy Spirit are found in the canonised scriptures long before Constatine and the Roman Church came into being. Christological discussions and debates about the three aspects of God - God the Father, God The Son and The Holy Spirit were happening long before Constatine.

Dear 2Acts,

While i give proof of accepted sources you provide nothing but conjecture. You provide nothing to base you arguments on except what you were told in sunday classes. The only comment worthy of responding to is the one where muslims dnt know arabic. And how many christians know original greek you claim bible was written in?

Please provide source of reputable scholars who asert Bible was written before constantine then we can proceed with discussion,

Ta

@Ceo3

1. I did not say understand Quran, i said understand significance of Arabic being the chosen language. At the advent of Islam arabs reverted simply by listening to the words of the Quran as the structure and poetic substance could not have been man made. 1400 Years and none has come close to producing a Surah to match this, not even you'all super computers.

We had a 54 pages long discussion about this, only to find out that nobody is even remotely capable to give an [exhaustive] list of criterias which competing surah's would have to fulfil to win this challenge.
Equally, nobody had the faintest suggestion on how to constitute an objective committee in order to decide on this issue.

I therefore also launch a challenge: You will never be able to do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

. Wikipedia, really? Nothing there when clicked.

Yes, Wikipedia; really !
If you had only read the top in the link I gave you would have found the little "lamp logo" with "Did you mean: Sanaa manuscripts?" and the corresponding link.

It took me one second to see that.
That much for your willingness to look for information outside
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Airmano: Could you cite some of these (many ?) non-Muslim sources ? CEO3: Ok, since no proof from you side. Petra Sijpesteijn, professor of Arabic language and culture at Leiden University, Martin Lings.

Hm, I asked for some sources you give me names.
Martin Lings became a Muslim, so in contrast to what you wrote he is a Muslim source.

Concerning your so far only non-Muslim(?) source: Petra Sijpesteijn. It is probably not much of a surprise that a professor for "Arabic and the early Islamic world" writes about Mohamed. Admittedly I only flew over a couple of pages she wrote. Not much praising of Mohamed as far as I could see. Would you have some citations of her you find particularly telling ?
And do you have some more of the "many non_Muslim sources" as you say ?
Especially I'd love to hear about non-Muslim scientists who made their findings after getting inspired by the "Quranic miracles".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. A game where memorisation of 1000 possible scenarios vs over 6000 verses in order.

When I was a kid I played theatre. There I memorized entire pages in a couple of days. Again: So what ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Torah and Bible were not protected from mans influence. Therefore another religion with close to 2 billion followers had to be.

Sorry, this was not my question.
Once more: Why did God not protect the bible and the Thorah ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dont forget your very own Michael Hart called Muhammed SAW top in his analysis.

My Michael Hart ?
May be you should read my contribution on page 11 in this very same thread.
Obviously he put Mohamed on place #one for reasons I would not call very flattering.

So rather watch out whom you cite in your favour.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therefore it is known without doubt by historians he never told a lie growing up and always honest. Even the tribes refered dispute to him based on his character alone.

The tribes that survived, say. Does your logic also apply to the Banu Qurayza ?.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Einsteins comment of God, the man whose theories are being disproved by the day.

Which of his accepted theories have been disproven ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yet the science of Quran still holds....

Pardon me ?


Airmano

Edited by airmano - 01 January 2017 at 3:05pm