Islam's Incorruptible Qur'an Is Corrupt

Every religious work was written by human beings and therefore is corrupted.

No detailed analysis neccessary, just comon sense.

Originally posted by logical7
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

the thousands of historical and scientific errors in the Qu'ran. Address the facts

how about you post one of the thousands of error here and we discuss if its a fact or wishful fiction?

that nothing in the
Qu'ran was revealed information but
was already known.

i answered that, even if i agree that it was already known, wasn't there also a lot of wrong information available, how could anyone differentiate and choose only the right ones?
Could you please answer this?

edit on 20-8-2013 by logical7 because: (no reason given)

I believe they didnt pick the right ones thats why the Koran has errors but your in good company so does the bible as well. But there is one difference the bible claims to be inspired by god where the Koran claims to be dictated through Gabriel from god. Thinking its being a direct source should be very accurate after all god knows all.

You know something just occurred to me if i were Mohammad i dont now how comfortable i would have been having the angel of death visiting me. I wonder if he knew?

Originally posted by truthermantwo
alot of these holy texts written by followers of God heard voices, in todays world they would be put in a mental hospital and given strong cocktails of drugs. I believe in visions, and i believe there was a time when these voices were not so corrupted and could convey things properly rather than confused lies and such that cause people to harm another, What we call God we dont even understand, yet we still argue and fight like uneducated children. I think its all stupid.

Everyone hears voices, some just think it's their own thoughts because some voices tend to speak to your mind while you yourself are also taking thought of things. Even the people on this site commenting think all of their thoughts are their own. But are they really?

The difference in what is written is who you listen to. Some can actually discern who or what is doing the talking. For some, God speaks to them, and for others the fallen ones (rebellious fallen angels) do. Some times it's demons doing the talking and they try to make people believe they are gods.

Muhammad for example recited what he heard and someone tried to write it down for him. He heard these voices when he was in a convulsive epileptic fit, foaming at the mouth. He claimed it was an Archangel but was it really. I doubt it.

So the Quran is corrupt because the voices doing the talking kept contradicting themselves with the person they were talking to which was Muhammad. But everyone, including you hears voices in perceived thoughts, only some know that they are voices and some don't. If you take time while thinking you may notice it.

reply to post by dragonridr

You know something just occurred to me if i were Mohammad i dont now how comfortable i would have been having the angel of death visiting me. I wonder if he knew?

if you just knew that Gabriel is not the angel of death, you wouldn't have posted the above post but good that atleast now you know

reply to post by Sahabi


Assalam Alaikum.

The greeting is universal so don't be alarmed my friend and you are not the first to enter something and leave it, we have all done this many times.

It is unfortunate that you entered a fold if Islam that I consider to be hardlined and literalist in its approach and outlook on everything related to the religion of Islam and the world as a whole and I am pretty sure it has molded your particular view of the world.

I will go as far as saying the Salafi's in the UK are predominately responsible for a lot of young people adopting very hardlined and extreme views of the world, taking a literal approach they are unable to understand the context of what they are reading or understand that there is a balance to everything.

I personally follow the Sufi order and my way is considered esoteric and un-islamic by some (like the Salafi brothers) however this is a small point but I wanted you to understand that I tend to take a much broader and more open minded view of the world as a whole.

I follow the ways of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) because as a person he represented an ideal, a way of living and being that was of benefit to everyone, he would always ask of himself "how can I be of benefit to my neighbour" and I am sure that is no different to the teachings of Jesus, Moses and all the other enlightened individuals.

If we look at the facts alone and measure up the character of those people vs those in the modern world we can't help but recognise that they lived their life in a way that we should try to emulate, if only on a small part - maybe the world would be a better place as a result.

You claimed to be a "young Sheikh" - there are many people who claim that title or who are afforded the title but I doubt you actually understood the responsibility such a title brings or the blessings that it afforded you (had you done I am sure your view of the world would be much more 'sympathetic' and empathic). But the choice was yours and I fully respect you for that, I do not hold you in any lesser view than myself.

Now you have attacked the Qur'an and by doing so in the way you have, you have proven that you did not understand the knowledge you had acquired, and at such a young age it is not really your fault that you did not fully comprehend the wisdom behind the words you were reading (had you done you would have seen that the meanings transcend the mere ink on the paper).

It is easy to pick apart any book, when you do that it's just ink on paper, letters in words, words that hold a value or not. When someone acts on those words they bring them to life and if the person puts some meaning behind them then maybe that's a part of faith and our spirituality...which I think you have not fully understood yet or recognised.

A book is a book after all but Allah (god) has promised to protect "His Book" which does not take a physical form and requires the person to take a journey to understand, we all go on this journey, whether you wear a religious label or not but there is something profound behind everything and there is no reason to discount that revelation came to these great people.

I dare you to put your personal character against these people, like the Prophet Muhammad and measure yourself as a person - at least on a literal level, as a mythology you would still find yourself lacking my friend.

If I focused on all the flaws in life I would be of no use to myself or to others and I would not receive the benefits that are in front of me. The Qur'an with all it's flaws, as you state, still gives people (who open their hearts) a guide post with which to correct their lives.

And for those that like to sit on the fence and state that Islam is religion of violence - the world has gone through hundreds if not thousands of wars, before and after Islam so to state that it is the ONLY religion that abhors violence is an insult to the intelligence of mankind.

Every peaceful process came about from some conflict, one right defending against another wrong, history is replete with such events.

Thank you for posting this, it has only increased my conviction and given me more reasons to study my religion.

That is one of the secrets of Islam, from the outside, with a closed heart it looks like any other man made religion, however it has layers, when you witness the divinity behind it you realize its not about the material world, there is a supernatural power behind everything.

Peace to you my friend.

Originally posted by Fromabove

Originally posted by truthermantwo
alot of these holy texts written by followers of God heard voices, in todays world they would be put in a mental hospital and given strong cocktails of drugs. I believe in visions, and i believe there was a time when these voices were not so corrupted and could convey things properly rather than confused lies and such that cause people to harm another, What we call God we dont even understand, yet we still argue and fight like uneducated children. I think its all stupid.

Everyone hears voices, some just think it's their own thoughts because some voices tend to speak to your mind while you yourself are also taking thought of things. Even the people on this site commenting think all of their thoughts are their own. But are they really?

The difference in what is written is who you listen to. Some can actually discern who or what is doing the talking. For some, God speaks to them, and for others the fallen ones (rebellious fallen angels) do. Some times it's demons doing the talking and they try to make people believe they are gods.

Muhammad for example recited what he heard and someone tried to write it down for him. He heard these voices when he was in a convulsive epileptic fit, foaming at the mouth. He claimed it was an Archangel but was it really. I doubt it.

So the Quran is corrupt because the voices doing the talking kept contradicting themselves with the person they were talking to which was Muhammad. But everyone, including you hears voices in perceived thoughts, only some know that they are voices and some don't. If you take time while thinking you may notice it.

edit on 20-8-2013 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)

Ok for historical accuracy there is no evidence Mohammad had epileptic seizures in fact he didnt foam at the mouth. It was reported he looked physically drained and broke into a cold sweat. He didnt lose bodily functions during his ah will call it trances??? I believe this was made up to discredit Mohammad and his revelations but to do that we just look at the wrightings not how they were attained thats just a matter of faith.

reply to post by dragonridr

you might as well say were made of cheese the statement has the same validity.

sure some are made of much more cheese than others

anyways, the cheese gets broken down in digestive tract and get assimilated as simpler protein, fat etc molecules.
You could as well say that you are made of pork!

Humans being made from earth/dust is just more comprehensive in its meaning and simpler truth.
The purpose to mention that in scriptures is to remind us so that we learn some much required humility by reflecting on our humble origin be it dust or a clinging drop emitted. Ever pondered over this reality?

In debating over the dust, we forget the essence of why that fact is mentioned, its not just to have a scientific debate but also to learn a philosophical/spiritual lesson.

reply to post by old_god


See what your doing is wrong you claim to be enlightened. And you say because the op doesnt see things like you do when it comes to Islam he is confused.This doesnt sound very enlightened to me at all. It seems to me your telling him hes wrong without explaining why. This seems to be a trend in his life he apparently asked questions and well everyone seems to have ignored the question much as you are doing. If the Koran speaks to you great however dont tell other people they are wrong in there beliefs he obviously became disillusioned because of the contradictions in what he was taught. Some people chose to ignore those and follow a faith others do not.

As-salamu alaykum

reply to post by dragonridr


I never said he was wrong, I merely posed the question that his views were immature, a difference. I am never claim to be enlightened either, I am just a cynical old partially senile man who has lived far far too long to be bothered by anyone else's views.

Neither do I claim the Qur'an to be correct...For an incorrect book it's remained untouched for 1400 years, that's pretty good going if you ask me and it has a chain of narration and support from hadiths that in themselves have to be marveled if only from an academic point of view.

My point (and I should have clarified this) is that whether you believe or not, whether you are something or not, I do not judge you, I give you a chance to prove me right, that you are a good person and you have great potential...however give someone enough rope and they will hang themselves eventually.

I am hoping the OP will not go around prejudging other Muslims just because he did not experience the Islam others did (and this shows that his path is different, his journey is different) and I hope he understands that does not make them any lesser than him or make him any lesser than them.

I would have not have taken the approach the OP did were I in his position, the "universal brotherhood" the OP speaks of, would have given me enough of a conscious heart and mind to realize I would be of more service to my fellow brothers if I didn't openly attack them, flouting my ego.

Good day my friend!

reply to post by Sahabi

Hey Sahabi!

I was in the process of writing out one of my usual text-wall long posts, when through my own foolishness, the window was closed. So, you're lucky, and I'm frustrated, and I'll be brief .

You say you were of the Salafi persuasion, which I suppose would be useful in bolstering your authority as a follower of the "truest" or "most original" form of Islam, as my Salafi acquaintances are constantly trying to convince me (though I've never spoken to a Bait al-mal before ), although that's not really a viewpoint I subscribe to. Salafist interpretation has its own little quirks and sillinesses, if you ask me. You say you were jokingly referred to as "Young Sheikh". If you don't mind me asking, what WAS the actual level you reached in your Islamic studies before abandonning the faith?
Personally, I consider myself non-denominational, although my approach to religion is usually to focus purely on the Quran and the Sahih Hadith, with occasional reference to a all-around check of post-Muhammad scholars of several sects in order to test the veracity of specific Hadith or rulings. So you see, sources are very important to me.

I bring up your background not to disparage you or anything, I am just curious then, how exactly you chose your sources. Several of them aren't universally (or even majority) accepted sources, and many of them are far out of the bounds of the timeframe of what a Salafist would consider follow-worthy, and some of them are at the level of presenting a thesis that hasn't even been reviewed. Please note, I am talking about your sources, and not your opinions.
For example, Ibn Al-Baiyi's collection of Hadith (even the version verified by ad-Dhahabi), Siyar a`lam al-nubala, Sunan al-Kubra (as opposed to the Sunan al-Sughra), Bihar al-Anwar, Al-itqan fil-ulum al-Quran, "Jawab", and the Tafsir al-Wahidi, and even Tafsir ibn Kathir (while I admit it is used by absolute beginners of Islam, I would imagine, considering the errors in it, you wouldn't need or use it), far removed from the "purist" Salafi timeframe, and well into the "Mansukh! Mansukh!" time period in medieval times that most Islamic scholars today don't agree with.

Perhaps more minor in comparison to those texts, I am curious why a person as studied as yourself would need answering-islam as a source, not only where you've explicitly provided references, but also many of your over-all arguments. Finally, in your explanation of mas'haf (I'll get to that in a bit), you provided a source that not only disagreed with the specific point you were trying to make, but also disagrees with another point (about abrogation).

Now about your claim that the Quran is only the Quran when spoken, I have to disagree, considering the Quran calls itself "The Book". It is also considered to be "the Recitation/Reading", but that just shows that either form of transmission is valid, and considered "The Quran".

Also, you mention the kufic script as a much later creation, a common argument I see in criticism of the Quran online, but it existed and was prevalent enough even to be used for the inscriptions during the building of the mosque at the Dome of the Rock!

Finally, out of curiousity, how would someone confuse the "J" with "B", "T", "N" in the original script? And how is the presence of different qiraat a sign of the corruption of the Quran?


EDIT: Turns out I wasn't so brief after all . Just wanted to add, while you probably can't change it any more, your original post had an error where you referred to verse 92:3 as 9:3.

reply to post by dragonridr



The history tells a different story about how Muhammad suffered from epilepsy and this was when he had gotten all of his revelations. And it's probably why the Quran contradicts itself so much.


www.faithfreedom.org...

Originally posted by Sonny2

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by Sonny2

 

lots of people freak out over the possibility.... it is only those who really look who will find the truth...

yeah, paid Israeli guy might be right!

Look at his signature, he is a buddhist

I told ya, he was never a muslim, just spread his propaganda.

He probably thinks that his stone god is better than Muhammad's

edit on 19-8-2013 by Sonny2 because: (no reason given)

this is........weird?

reply to post by Fromabove

Actually, it isn't "history" so much as medieval (back when epilepsy was considered a filthy and disgusting disease) historians, with later historians just picking up with the idea until the 19th century. Serious modern scholarship (secular or Islamic) all totally reject the epilepsy diagnosis, which is good, because it makes no sense- Muhammad began his revelations at the age of 40, long after signs of epilepsy should have being showing, and had no gradual deterioration (as is associated with epilepsy)- his episodes remained the same "level" from the beginning to the end, with him being quite cogent (or at least equally cogent) until he died in his 60s.

Peace and greetings to you, Sahabi (and everyone else).

I have no words that would do this magnificent topic justice. So I'll simply say BRAVO!

THESE are the topics that are needed on ATS. Information well-presented with purpose and tenacity.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I'm certain that this information will help a great many people understand Islam in a different light. Sadly, it appears to be the same "light" (or darkness) that twisted all other monotheistic religions in years past.

Peace, love, and blessings to all.

I am sorry I have nothing to add I just wanted to say this is well put together and really should be a model for how posts should be on ATS. Thank you for the education, your time and making me think of something new.

Originally posted by logical7
reply to post by dragonridr

 

You know something just occurred to me if i were Mohammad i dont now how comfortable i would have been having the angel of death visiting me. I wonder if he knew?

if you just knew that Gabriel is not the angel of death, you wouldn't have posted the above post but good that atleast now you know

Ah but your wrong Gabriel is known as the archangel of Annunciation, Resurrection, Mercy, Revelation and Death. Also known in Hebrew orthography as Gabri-el. The angel who gave the Annunciation of Christ's birth to the Virgin Mary, and also the angel responsible for blowing the Trumpet on Judgment Day.Heres some other names for him as well Abruel, Djibril, Jabiel, Jabriel, Jabrilae, Jabriyel, Jibrail, Jibra'il, Jibril (Arabic), Ashu, Bahram, Sarush, Serosh, Sirush, Sirush Asha, Sirushi, Sraosha, Srosh (Zoroastrian)

Originally posted by Fromabove
reply to post by dragonridr

 

The history tells a different story about how Muhammad suffered from epilepsy and this was when he had gotten all of his revelations. And it's probably why the Quran contradicts itself so much.


www.faithfreedom.org...

no as i said this was just an attack used on the prophet even during his own time but he did not have the symptoms of epilepsy it was merely used because people with epilepsy where thought to be unclean and impure. As i said his only physical symptoms where sweating and exhaustion he stayed coherent the whole time it wasn't a seizure.

Originally posted by solongandgoodnight

Originally posted by Sonny2

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by Sonny2

 

lots of people freak out over the possibility.... it is only those who really look who will find the truth...

yeah, paid Israeli guy might be right!

Look at his signature, he is a buddhist

I told ya, he was never a muslim, just spread his propaganda.

He probably thinks that his stone god is better than Muhammad's

edit on 19-8-2013 by Sonny2 because: (no reason given)

this is........weird?

No its not a person seeking to learn the truth will look into other religions he might believe there is some truth in Buddhist texts doesnt make him a Buddhist why dont you ask him? As for me there are parts in the Koran i believe to be true doesnt mean im a Muslim.

reply to post by dragonridr

Originally posted by dragonridr
Ah but your wrong Gabriel is known as the archangel of Annunciation, Resurrection, Mercy, Revelation and Death.

Depends who you ask, really.
Jews consider the "Angel of Death" to be Samael. Samael doesn't really make an appearance under that name in Christianity, so Christians (and muslims) usually consider the "Angel of Death" to be Michael. Some muslims (and Jews) also consider Azrael to be the Angel of Death, but again, Azrael doesn't really make an appearance in the Christian scriptures.

According to some Jewish traditions (I'm having trouble finding a source right now), Gabriel is considered "Angel of Death over Kings", and there are 5 other Angels of Death (for different tasks).

Originally posted by babloyi
reply to post by dragonridr

 

Originally posted by dragonridr
Ah but your wrong Gabriel is known as the archangel of Annunciation, Resurrection, Mercy, Revelation and Death.

Depends who you ask, really.
Jews consider the "Angel of Death" to be Samael. Samael doesn't really make an appearance under that name in Christianity, so Christians (and muslims) usually consider the "Angel of Death" to be Michael. Some muslims (and Jews) also consider Azrael to be the Angel of Death, but again, Azrael doesn't really make an appearance in the Christian scriptures.

According to some Jewish traditions (I'm having trouble finding a source right now), Gabriel is considered "Angel of Death over Kings", and there are 5 other Angels of Death (for different tasks).

edit on 20-8-2013 by babloyi because: (no reason given)

Ah was that you almost admitting i was right you came so close. Seriously I could go on about angels the wife is a total fanatic about them i know way to much about them. But i do have a question for you since you seem to like responding.Something ive wondered about why does the Koran use the Bible and Torah to prove its valid. I all ways found it strange that this is the only religious text in the world that uses other religions to validate it.