The compilation and editing of the Qur'an

[shaks]

The Qur'an's take on Noah and Moses for example is quite different from Genesis to Deuteronomy. I would say it is so different that the characters have been reinvented by Muhammad.

Well i can turn around and say that if those explanations are different than whats given in the Quran, then its probably changed over thousands of years as Quran in UNCHANGED. so again, you see, theres no answer to these arguments.

We are supposed to read the stories of Prophets and learn a lesson from them rather than get into minor details of say how many sons Noah had etc. The only idea , given in the stories of Noah, Lut, Ibrahim (peace be upon them) is that if you deny Allah's commandments, you are bound to be doomed,, wouldnt you agree with that...

The Qur�an mentions in Surah Al-Imran: Say: �O people Of the Book! Come To common terms As between us and you: That we worship None but Allah; That we associate No partners with Him; That we erect not, From among ourselves, Lords and patrons Other than Allah.

That is what we must focus on rather than getting into itsy bitsy details. Ive read Quran's Tranlsation in ENglish as i dunno Arabic. I've read bits from Bible and Torah in English as i dunno Hebrew. a translation is NEVER a real thing so there are always differences in explanantions when translated by different authors. We must keep that in mind... However, one message that is clear from day one of creation .. "There is NONE worthy of WOrship but GOD".

Or it could be your arguments and proofs are not very convincing.

And i fail to see what convinces you. How can one convince you if you dont want to be convinced????

I don't believe what Islam teaches about Jesus. He is not just a prophet.

Islam teaches he is just a Prophet just like Moses, Ibaraham and Mohammed (Peace be upon them). Like i said , if you dont wanna be convinced, no one can convince you.

Lost what?
Please be civil.

I am being civil, i think you the wrong idea..... All i was trying to say is the reason why is it so hard for a CHristian to accept islam is cuz IF he accepts Islam, everything he ever believed in simply breaks down.. and not many people want to believe that they've been misguided all their life so they simply lose another oppertunity to Embrace Islam.. Again, didnt mean to offend you.

Um, Jesus. Who is God incarnate. The Word who was with God at the beginning of creation (John 1)

??? Wheres your argument ????

Those who met Jesus in the flesh met God on the preverbial roundabout, in the market place, in their homes.

Well hindus claim that about Krishna. Christians claim that about Jesus ..... Which one is it ???? Again just a statement.... not explanaing HOW or WHY so i'll just DENY it.. dnno what else to do with it.

The Christian ideal that we walk and remain in the presence of God all day

Muslims believe that EVERY human being, doesnt matter what religion they are from , remain in the presence of God. IF that wasnt the case all non muslims would drop dead right this moment. Our Allah is God of heavens and Earth and everything in between including all nations and religions. Not just a God of Muslims who operates in middle east.

Ok. What does God say to you? What is God like in your experience?

That is not to be disclosed to anyone.... not even a muslim unless necessary. It is said that telling others about your personal cimmunication with God is being Cruel to that person. i dont wanna be cruel to you. DO NOT think im trying to escape yur question.
Its just NOT possible... One's communication with God is a matter of heart and soul which is PURE ENERGY. So that PURE communication CAN NOT be interpreted using languages we speak as God doesnt speak to us in English or Arabic. Hope you understand this... so if you hear whisperes in english .. its probably satan .. God doesnt need english.

That is how God knows me. In person. I know God in person. I don't simply follow rules.

I believe thats blasphemy. You know God?? how did he create this universe??? where did this energy come from ??? When is the day of judgement ???? you going to heaven or hell ???

If you did know or even got closer to him, he'll tell you to follow his LAST Prophet and would tell you JEsus NEVER got crucified. I dunno who do u speak with but watch out... its not who u think it is.

The Bible says very similar things. They are not novel concepts to a Christian.

YEah i know and thats why we respect Bible. knowing JEsus was a Prophet of ISLAM and he promoted same VALUES (not practices) as all other Prophets... i.e. love, mercy, worship GOd etc.

But you fail to do the same for Islam and Our Prophet , cuz like isaid, if you believe that... than everything modern christianity tells you breaks down.

I'm just pointing out that your argument does not work and why.

I know it wont work and i know why wont it work. But im still supposed to fulfil my duty of taking this message to whoever i can for ALLAH's sake. not to earn any worldly respect. Im fulfilling my job to best of my abilities. and you are denying it to best of your abilities.... Exactly the difference between a believer and an unbeliever.

If I don't believe the Quar'an there is no point telling me it is so because the Qur'an says it. Get it?

I KNOWWWWWWWWW.. and i dont mind you can kick me in the face and that'll be a confirmation.. that if you try to Spread message of God, u;ll always face strong opposition... Just like Moses, JEsus and Mohammed (peace be upon them).

So if you believe me and consider whatever i say ... I WIN
if you dont believe me and make fun of me ... I STILL WIN


cuz im not doing it for ME or YOU... Im doing it in the name of Allah
Subhan Allah i love my way. cant be anything better than this.

 

[The Midge]

shaks: Go back to the OP. I have pointed out that there are similarities in the way in which the Bible and the Qur'an was compiled that they are equal in their reliability. I don't think you can argue that one is more reliable than the other because at a point in history there was opportunity for changes to be made. It turns out that varients in the recitation or the text were distroyed.

The status of Muhammad is another issue.

I am not convinced by you because your arguments are not convincing. If I believed in Islam of course I'm not going to believe in Christainity so they are mutually exclusive. That is another example of circular reasoning- an argument that relies on it's self for proof. If your are having a discussion then there is no point in expecting them to change their mind just by simply stating your own belief without some sort of evidence. I have seen Christian and Muslim make the same mistake. And athiests too. Just about everyone on these forums do it to some extent.

I'm am not trying to make fun of you as a person. I am trying to attack your argument because it is inheritantly foolish. God will allow us to be foolish, and suffer the consequences in my experience. Humility is good for us. One who acts a fool in God's name is known to be a fool by their actions.

I believe I speak to you in part to fullfill the great commision. That does not make my words any more or less wise or convincing. Claiming such will of no use. We are also taught in 1 Corinthians 13 that if we do great things, preach procalim teh faith, do great works of charity, it is empty if we do not do it out of love. I am pleased to say that I declare the Gospel for you, out of love and compassion, not merely to discharge an obligation or score religious merit points.

I cannot accept the teaching of Muhammad because he denied that we are saved through the Lord Jesus Christ. I think that Islam teaches works when the Apostles taught that we are saved by Grace, that is a gift. (Discipleship is about following the commands and prescriptions of God and is our spiritul growth). His teaching are not in accordance with the Way, that the Jesus is not the Jesus of the Qur'an. Of course it is equally hard for a pious Muslim to accept Christianity because it would over turn his world view. It is a reversible argument so is not helpful for making your case.

Jesus taught us to pray to "Our Father" as a person we relate to not cosmic energy. God is concerned about us loving him and following His words as a sheep would follow it's shepherd in ancient Palestine. I don't listen to God to get a new insight on the dimensions of the universe. God wants to be with us for the sake of company and love, as friends or family (we are adopted as sons or so the Bible teaches). For us to spend time with Him. Christians can get too wraped up in the 'Lords work', trying to impress to ralise this. This the lesson of Mary and Martha (Luke 10: 38 - 42). What God says to us in prayer is that He is in love with us. God wants to be with us forever. It is something to be shared in fellowship with the Church.

Back to the OP again. It is not my intention to prove or disprove the Bible over the Qur'an or Christianity over Islam. It is to point our that the texts are both equaly reliable accounts of the teaching of great founders of faith. Or other wise. This is quiet apart from whether or not the contents of that teaching is true. What I am saying is that Islam has no more a special claim to textual authority than Christianity.

 

[shaks]

Koooool .. as long as you you admit that ive presented Islam to you , im happy. Like i said i never thought for a moment that you'd agree with it.

I can well understand why you cant/wont agree with me and i dont have a problem with it.

Islam has no more a special claim to textual authority than Christianity.

It has but you fail to see it. And its still fine.

About Jesus Christ saving us... i do not believe in that as only Allah can save us from hell fire. Prophets cant to do it without his permission.

So anyyyway. I've done my bit n u've done yours..... LEts just wait till the day of judgement and see who was closer to truth yeah. Keep in mind .. ALLAH will make all decisions that day, not Jesus, or any other messenger. Islam is submission to Allah.

Peace

 

[Futuwwa]

When it comes to textual reliability of their holy books, it is sometimes fun to watch the attempts of Christian polemicists.

Yes, there are hadiths which imply that some people had differing opinions on what should be in the Quran. Which proves, well, that some people had differing opinions on what should be in the Quran (if one assumes the hadiths to be true). There were disagreements when the Bible was canonized too, but these same polemicists don't seem to be bothered by that. Not that I'm saying that the existence of disagreements prove anything, just pointing out double standards.

These same Christian polemicists regard the Gospels as an accurate account on the life and teachings of Jesus based on the fact that the authors were people close to Jesus. But then, Othman ibn Affan (editor of the Quran) was close to Muhammed too, actually being his secretary, writing down many of the revelations as they came!

Midge, this is not in any way an attack on you or your thread. I'm just ranting. Your dedication to dialogue and exchange rather than in-your-face polemicism impresses me.

 

[Snowbunny]

About Jesus Christ saving us... i do not believe in that as only Allah can save us from hell fire. Prophets cant to do it without his permission.

that has a lot to do with why we believe Jesus Christ is God...

 

[Amoz]

I have been doing a little reading into the Qur'an and it's origins, mostly from general secular entry level comparative religion books. It would seem that the Qur'an

• is "Virtually certain" was not transcribed completly until after Muhammeds death. The Qur'an is does not/ never did have a complete autograph- all be it a dictated one as some of it would have existed in a oral or unedited version.
• Fragments of Qur'anic texts found on coins, inscriptions and other literature show some varience in texts. e.g. the theological epistle of Hasan al Basri around 700 AD)
• Muhamed died in 632. Uthman's text which is the standardised unvaried text still in use today was not set down until about 20 years after the prophets death (around 650). There are older text fragments with some variations (I don't know what the extent of these might be- copy errors spellling or phrasing?)
• The Qur'an was collected from various souces by people such as Abu Bakr (reigned 632 to 634) and Uthman himself.
• The Hadiths or story traditions were not canonised until ninth and tenth centuaries.
• It is said that the pious son of the Caliph Umar said "Let none of you say he has the whole Koran in his possesion. How does he know what the whole of it is? Much of the Koran has gone."

My point is that it is as simplistic to assert that the Qur'an is the exact words given to the prophet as it is to say that the Christian New Testament was written within living memory by eye witnesses. Both statements need qualification. It would appear that there is just as much opportunity for editing and coruption of the Qur'an as the Bible texts. To say otherwise is a statement of faith.

There is no doubt that there are stories regarding the authenticity of the Quran, the NT, the OT and every other 'holy book' in the world. Such claims can be rebuffed using the scripture at hand in terms of analysis of contradictions and errors, from which the Quran is free.

The fact remains that a written copy of the Quran was compiled into one written book during the Prophet’s life. Some accounts state that it was compiled immediately after Prophet Mohammed died by his companions during the rule of Abu-Bakr (which lasted for only 2 years). What Uthman (The third Khalifa) did was produce perfectly written copies (i.e. written professionally in a unified style of writing) and sent them to all parts of the empire. The reason he did that was to prevent anyone making his own copies in a far part of the empire with a different style of writing and cause confusion as to the meanings of the words. What Uthman burned were fragments that had different style of the written word, not copies with different words. These are historically recorded facts.

Peace

 

[Skillganon]

shaks: Go back to the OP. I have pointed out that there are similarities in the way in which the Bible and the Qur'an was compiled that they are equal in their reliability

Hello Midge.

No offense but you are reading into lot of miss-information. The bible does not come close to the reliability of the Quran.

 

[Islam_mulia]

My apologies Brother if I may say some things which are not in agreement with you:

Yes, there are hadiths which imply that some people had differing opinions on what should be in the Quran. Which proves, well, that some people had differing opinions on what should be in the Quran (if one assumes the hadiths to be true).

The hadiths all say the same thing: The Companions of the Prophet did not object to the compilation of the Quran made by Zaid ibn Thabit and were in agreement with the contents of the Quran. The compilation was made shortly after the Prophet passed away. For a detail explanation please read or google for Ulum Al-Quran by Ahmad Von Denffer.

But then, Othman ibn Affan (editor of the Quran) was close to Muhammed too, actually being his secretary, writing down many of the revelations as they came!

I dont think 'editor' is a right choice of word. My apologies again but what Uthman did was to ensure that the Muslims follow the Quran as recited in the Quraish dialect. Uthman actually based the written Quran on the mushaf of Abu Bakar, kept by his daughter Hafsa. He did not 'change or add' (if that implies 'editing') any words into the Quran. I might be wrong, but I have not read Uthman being a scribe for the Prophet. There were many scribes of course, one of them is Zaid ibn Thabit.

I am on holidays and will not be able to respond until Sunday. Nevertheless, I will, insya Allah, look at the points raised in the OP and together we can tackle the issue.

My apologies if I offend you.

 

[Skillganon]

read or google for Ulum Al-Quran by Ahmad Von Denffer.

It's funny you mentioned it, I am Just reading that now.

 

[Amandine]

Except Muhammads teaching condradicts the former teaching, so presumably is not of the same source. In contrast the Christian canon incorporates the Jewish one.

Incorporates Jewish texts, but with a completely different interpretation...

Jews believe that Jesus and Mohammed both contradicted the Torah and therefore do not believe them to be messiahs nor prophets.

 

[Skillganon]

Incorporates Jewish texts, but with a completely different interpretation...

Jews believe that Jesus and Mohammed both contradicted the Torah and therefore do not believe them to be messiahs nor prophets.

Funny ones say that, I was reading the OT, and it is not only Jesus & Muhhamed(pbut) that they rejected but many apostles before them.

I will check up again with the OT.

 

[peaceful soul]

Funny ones say that, I was reading the OT, and it is not only Jesus & Muhhamed(pbut) that they rejected but many apostles before them.

I will check up again with the OT.

Exactly what does that prove? There is no Mohammad in the Bible.

 

[Futuwwa]

I dont think 'editor' is a right choice of word. My apologies again but what Uthman did was to ensure that the Muslims follow the Quran as recited in the Quraish dialect. Uthman actually based the written Quran on the mushaf of Abu Bakar, kept by his daughter Hafsa. He did not 'change or add' (if that implies 'editing') any words into the Quran. I might be wrong, but I have not read Uthman being a scribe for the Prophet. There were many scribes of course, one of them is Zaid ibn Thabit.

I am on holidays and will not be able to respond until Sunday. Nevertheless, I will, insya Allah, look at the points raised in the OP and together we can tackle the issue.

My apologies if I offend you.

No sister, it is I who shall offer you my apology. "Editor" was the first word I could think of to easily describe for all (nonmuslims included) to understand who he was. I had no intention of implying that Othman changed the contents of it.

 

[Exegete12]

....

About Jesus Christ saving us... i do not believe in that as only Allah can save us from hell fire. Prophets cant to do it without his permission.

........Peace

Salaam Shaks,

God did give Jesus that permission.

So I would like to invite you to meet Him as your Lord and Saviour, invite Him into your heart and mind, and let your mind be renewed by the infilling of the Holy Spirit.

I pray God will remove the spiritual blindness over you and that you will come to know the Lord Jesus Christ as your personal Saviour. I pray this in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, who is your intercessor in heaven, if you will only just let Him be. Amen.

 

[Futuwwa]

Hannah, your proselytization attempts are as sweet as always

 

[Snowbunny]

Salaam Shaks,

God did give Jesus that permission.

So I would like to invite you to meet Him as your Lord and Saviour, invite Him into your heart and mind, and let your mind be renewed by the infilling of the Holy Spirit.

I pray God will remove the spiritual blindness over you and that you will come to know the Lord Jesus Christ as your personal Saviour. I pray this in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, who is your intercessor in heaven, if you will only just let Him be. Amen.

Amen

 

[Amandine]

Funny ones say that, I was reading the OT, and it is not only Jesus & Muhhamed(pbut) that they rejected but many apostles before them.

I will check up again with the OT.

OT? Jews do not read the Old Testament.
Jews read the Bible (Tanakh).

 

[Futuwwa]

I guess people talking about the OT when talking about your scriptures must annoy you. I'd personally also prefer talking about it as the Tanakh, thing is just that people won't always understand what I mean.

Should I also annoy people by using the Hebrew names of the books of the Torah rather than the Latin ones?

 

[Snowbunny]

i know what you mean amandine but i think the old testament and what you call the tanakh are not precisely the same... the rabbi i had dinner with explained that the canon for the tanakh is slightly different than what is in the old testament for most bibles... there are books in the OT that are not in the tanakh

 

[The Midge]

There is no doubt that there are stories regarding the authenticity of the Quran, the NT, the OT and every other 'holy book' in the world. Such claims can be rebuffed using the scripture at hand in terms of analysis of contradictions and errors, from which the Quran is free.

Because Uthman destroyed all the ones he did not like?

The fact remains that a written copy of the Quran was compiled into one written book during the Prophet’s life. Some accounts state that it was compiled immediately after Prophet Mohammed died by his companions during the rule of Abu-Bakr (which lasted for only 2 years). What Uthman (The third Khalifa) did was produce perfectly written copies (i.e. written professionally in a unified style of writing) and sent them to all parts of the empire. The reason he did that was to prevent anyone making his own copies in a far part of the empire with a different style of writing and cause confusion as to the meanings of the words. What Uthman burned were fragments that had different style of the written word, not copies with different words. These are historically recorded facts.

Peace

In bold: You contradict yourself in seubsequnt sentences. The information I have suggests the Qur'an was not compiled until after the prophets death.

As for your other point: we will never know will we? Which leaves room for some suspicion for those of us who are cynical. History is often the opinion of they who write it at best and a cover up at worst.