Islam's Incorruptible Qur'an Is Corrupt

reply to post by logical7

The general theme of western view is very anti-God

This ^^^ is ridiculous. You do not understand "the West", just as you say non-Muslims do not understand Islam.

logical7
do you think Prophet Muhammad pbuh is a Prophet sent by God who recieved a revelation(Qur'an)?

Not a chance. Muhammad, a murdering thief and liar, never gave any proof of his claim that he had heavenly visions. And all his stories are full of historic and scientific errors. He obviously just repeated stories he heard from the Gnostic Christians, Jews, Pagans and Zoroastrians. And he got the stories mixed together and screwed them up. Easily debunked.

wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

The general theme of western view is very anti-God

This ^^^ is ridiculous. You do not understand "the West", just as you say non-Muslims do not understand Islam.

5 billion people on this planet find a whole lot of Islam to be anti-God and anti-civilized.
So, using logicals own words, the general theme of Islam is anti-God and anti-civilized.
I guess it can work that way right back at him.

Islam claims to be following 'visions of God' but the fact that Muhammad was a fraud
means that a billion people are following something not of God. That's rather 'anti-God' ...

reply to post by logical7


Well this shows how little you understand of western culture. First its not anti god its the ability to decide on your own.When a majority of people have the freedom to chose often times they end up believing in some other religion or not at all. Funny how you think the west is evil you can see it in your posts but when people have the freedom to live there lives the way they see fit you get nudists etc. But when you have no freedom and told what to believe you get terrorists.Because they believe there message is the right one and willing to die for it.

reply to post by dragonridr

Funny how you think the west is evil you can see it in your posts

Yes indeed. And no matter how much we try to 'enlighten' him to what it's really like (he's NEVER been here) he persists in condemning "the West" and all non-Muslims as beneath him;

and accuses us of only looking at sensationalized propaganda to "confirm our bias." But fails to acknowledge that he is CONSTANTLY trying to confirm his own bias, despite several of us (outnumbering the Muslim contributors) daily refuting his "prejudice" and sensationalized "view" of Westerners as Godless heathens who don't know how to behave civilly.

Always quick to say "nuh uh! you're just looking to confirm your uneducated prejudiced views without really learning about Islam." And so it goes, day in and day out. We're all a bunch of out-of-control harlots or pimps, drunken to oblivion on a daily basis, stuffing our faces with bacon, and completely without morals or conscience.

THAT is his view of "the West". But WE are the ones who are wrong, so wrong!

reply to post by dragonridr


Your thread is an attack on a verse stating that Allah would preserve the Qur'an. In fact, the Qur'an has been preserved. You've offered no premise for your disagreement, other than propositions, assumptions and the twisting of scholars' statements. Your argument is an exercise in intellectualizing your emotions, not scientific research. And you've stated that you were well informed and respected among the Sunnis, as your defense against bias.

People are putting labels on you because there's no logical premise for the attack, other than your discontent with what you claim is a lie. People feel the need to critique you since you've not been forthcoming in who you are and what you stand for.

The source of the information is more important than the content. For example, what is your religious stance now? Why did you convert to Islam and then suddenly turn against it? Acting out your "resentments" as a faceless blogger doesn't lend credence to your cause.

A person is more than the words that he writes. People are very good at using selective expressionism to influence others.

If you have scientific data on the nature of the different Qur'ans, and good evidence that their existence proves that the accepted version is what you are calling "corrupted", lets see your critical analysis. You haven't said that your an Islamic scholar or linguist who is seasoned in the field of ancient languages. You haven't quoted your sources from any particular scientific publication.

dragonridr
reply to post by logical7

 

Well this shows how little you understand of western culture. First its not anti god its the ability to decide on your own.When a majority of people have the freedom to chose often times they end up believing in some other religion or not at all. Funny how you think the west is evil you can see it in your posts but when people have the freedom to live there lives the way they see fit you get nudists etc. But when you have no freedom and told what to believe you get terrorists.Because they believe there message is the right one and willing to die for it.

Not sure what the point of comparing nudists to terrorists is. The US is being called a terrorist state by everyone I know (around the world) for destroying Iraq and Afghanistan's infrastructure, stealing petroleum resources and killing more than 2 million people. The western culture promotes public fear of non-American terrorism, while conducting its own openly, enjoying the benefits of nationalistic propaganda.

Where's all that freedom you are so proud of? There's nothing worse than ignorance in a vacuum of information.

Sahabi
reply to post by g2v12

 

The comparison of Qur'ans from different times periods, dialects and regions doesn't bear the veracity of the poster's claim that there is significant contextual corruption.

We are not discussing Qur'ans from merely "different time periods".

We are discussing the fact that today's Qur'an,... word for word,... letter for letter,... can not be found at all in the earlier periods. The Qur'an that we have today can not be found identically, until much further times. Not during the time of Muhammad, or Abu Bakr, or Umar, or Uthman. Even the manuscripts from the early Ummayd Caliphate differ from today's Qur'an.

Differences include, but are not limited to additions, omissions, different words, varying consonant spelling, varying verb and noun tense and gender usage. In addition to these differences, there is also noted difference of sentence and verse placement. By changing sentence arrangement, the context of the understanding is changed.

As illustrated in the op, the oldest known Qur'an that is completely and fully intact dates to 1203 AD/CE, which would be about 571 years after Muhammad's death. And I'm not even sure if this Qur'an is identical to today's, because I have not found a reproduced facsimile production of the manuscript for analysis. [1]

 

Adding more information would only reveal the parlay of semantics (i.e. tomatoe, tomotoe).

What is the point in this? Because in the Qur'an, Allah said that He would guard it from corruption, and also because Muslims continue to falsely believe and proclaim that the Qur'an that we have today is identical to Muhammad's original.

edit on 9/13/13 by Sahabi because: (no reason given)

There is no scientific or archeological evidence that the Qur'an of today has been changed, since it came from verbal tradition. There is no scientific method to revert back to the verbal traditions used to write the Qur'an. Therefore, there is no reason to suspect that Qur'an is corrupt to begin with.

Sahabi
reply to post by g2v12

 

Nothing worse than a convert prejudiced by bitter disillusionment.

This is not true. I am not prejudiced towards Islam, because I acknowledge that it contains some beautiful teachings and concepts. I accept that it had some wonderfully positive effects upon mankind. However, I understand and know that Islam tarnishes those treasures by mixing-in teachings of religious superiority complexes, religious separation and dominance, religious distrust, slavery, sexism, and homophobia. We have to come together in Love as a united mankind,... not be separated or cultivating suffering because of religion. We, mankind, are fragmented. We must remember that we are brethren, and have true compassion and love for one another through that realization alone.

I do not hate Muslims. Muslims are my brethren, just as all humans are also. This discussion is regarding the religion on its own.

Assalaamu alaikum

Wa alaikon assalam wa rahmatullah wa barakatu, and this is the best post in the whole thread, because at least one can see something of who you are and what you believe.

I have two things to say, (1.) The Qur'an was written from verbal traditions, therefore it is impossible to prove or disprove the accuracy of the Qur'an scientifically, unless one could travel back into time and witness the process for himself. Whether Allah's promise that the Qur'an would be preserved is true or false, is a matter of faith. (2.) Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi who studied the Qur'an and Islam stated, "the more I study Islam, the more realize that Islam is not spread by the sword".

He was always sowing peace between his people and the Islamic community at large, and was loved and respected by people from all faiths.

The distinction between good and bad Muslims (Christian, Jews, etc.) lies in cultural references, ideologies and individualistic compulsions that effect our perceptions of the prophets' narrative. If you really love your brethren, as you say, then its not about nihilism. By emphasizing the negative or evil energy in the world you are in effect giving life to that which is dark and foreboding.

If you really want to bring people together, tell them the truth because truth is love and those who love truth will come together and find harmony in it. Feed the enlightenment and make it stronger. Whether you are Jew, Christian, Islamic or something else, put your mind to what really matters and let the lost find their way.

reply to post by g2v12


Boy you said alot but just showed you were confused and understood nothing in the thread. First isnt my thread i didnt create it. Next what would you expect to find in a scientific journal where not dealing with science. Unless your making the claim the Koran is scientifically accurate because we know its not. This is a problem to be proved by scholars not scientists. And any scholar looking at the Koran can see changes were indeed made even Islamic scholars admit it. They get around it by saying the message is the same. But this leads to one important truth. Simply how do you know the original meaning wasnt lost? Well you dont but id say any time something is changed from the original something is lost. The Koran and the bible have the same problem really a group of people decided what to include and what not to include.They made decisions saying this or that wouldnt be included so this is called information bias. There shaping your beliefs by deciding what you should read and what you shouldnt. Knowing this do you still believe that the message couldnt have been lost?

dragonridr
reply to post by g2v12

 

Boy you said alot but just showed you were confused and understood nothing in the thread. First isnt my thread i didnt create it. Next what would you expect to find in a scientific journal where not dealing with science. Unless your making the claim the Koran is scientifically accurate because we know its not. This is a problem to be proved by scholars not scientists. And any scholar looking at the Koran can see changes were indeed made even Islamic scholars admit it. They get around it by saying the message is the same. But this leads to one important truth. Simply how do you know the original meaning wasnt lost? Well you dont but id say any time something is changed from the original something is lost. The Koran and the bible have the same problem really a group of people decided what to include and what not to include.They made decisions saying this or that wouldnt be included so this is called information bias. There shaping your beliefs by deciding what you should read and what you shouldnt. Knowing this do you still believe that the message couldnt have been lost?

I believe that the Creator is infallible. There is no way to prove scientifically or through any scholarly work, that the Qur'an has lost its original message or that it has been preserved fully intact. Its simply a matter of faith that He has preserved it - or does Allah lie?. I've met allot of people who became fanatics by either, (A) pseudo-intellectualism or (B) mindless subservience to incompetent leaders (preachers) or simply uninspired judgements. Combine the two and its intellectual dereliction. Noam Chomsky said, "a true intellectual is a mind that checks itself." Here we have what religious minded people might call an atheist, speaking the wisdom of all of the prophets combined in one sentence.

So, there you are, such a free thinker, you can choose between options A or B.

I remember a young Muslim fanatic who swore that much of the Hadith were not corroborated in the Qur'an. In some key instances, such as the case of executing apostates, that may be true. But he was roaming the Islamic forums emphatically and desperately challenging the popular culture which emphasis physical Jihad and the other evolutionary aspects of "killing" through interpretations. I see it and understand it. I understand how it was cultured and developed, not only in the east but from the west. But, we are dealing with the entity of subtle destiny, which shows great momentum in the past 25 years, and its an integral element of the time line bearing very low probability of being altered. So, when I find a small but profound piece of truth, a truth that could fundamentally change the entire dynamic of world social order, I keep it to myself.

I quote Isa, "would you give your pearls to swine?" In effect, those who deserve truth are those who find it. Truth is both a gift of intellect (from God) and the ethereal fabric of thought which permeates all matter with knowledge.

We are living in a world rapidly digressing toward a state of chaotic savagery. Folks are immersed in self flattering with their regalia, fantasies, and dreams, such that even the obvious encroachment of utter disaster in this eleventh hour is ignored. When this house of cards collapses, this so called freedom, and every material thing we love and enjoy is gone, and we are all hungry, unmedicated, without the crutch of technology and fully cognizant of our hapless interdependence - what then? One proof of the existence of God is in the fact that man is so incompetent, that his species would perish forever and destroy the surface of planet in the process.

When the prophets Muhammad and Isa return, there will nothing but the hope death or the salvation of God.

wildtimes

reply to post by logical7

 

The general theme of western view is very anti-God

This ^^^ is ridiculous. You do not understand "the West", just as you say non-Muslims do not understand Islam.

I understand the west, I do not agree with some things and some beliefs that are considered acceptable. I also object strongly if anyone is judged badly if they want to avoid these things or do things some other way.

You say that West is not anti-God then it implies that the views you have about God and religions is a minority.
The Islamic Worldview revolved around the basic facts that there is God and that God communicates to humans through prophets and revelation.

If you can respect this and everything that rests on this basic foundation then i may agree that you are not anti-God.

logical7
The Islamic Worldview revolved around the basic facts that there is God and that God communicates to humans through prophets and revelation. If you can respect this and everything that rests on this basic foundation then i may agree that you are not anti-God.

How absurd. A person has to agree with 'everything that rests on that foundation' .. in other words ... has to agree that the murdering thug Muhammad had revelations ... otherwise that person is anti-god??? And then you only 'MAY' agree that they aren't 'anti-god'. Typical Islamic arrogance ... and error.

I wish we still had barfing smilies. I'd have to interject more than a few right here ...

FlyersFan

logical7
The Islamic Worldview revolved around the basic facts that there is God and that God communicates to humans through prophets and revelation. If you can respect this and everything that rests on this basic foundation then i may agree that you are not anti-God.

How absurd. A person has to agree with 'everything that rests on that foundation' .. in other words ... has to agree that the murdering thug Muhammad had revelations ... otherwise that person is anti-god??? And then you only 'MAY' agree that they aren't 'anti-god'. Typical Islamic arrogance ... and error.

I wish we still had barfing smilies. I'd have to interject more than a few right here ...

How about reading my reply a bit carefully rather than creating a strawman?
A lot of difference between accepting/agreeing and respecting the choice/belief of others.
I respect your choice of belief in trinity, i do not agree with it and think its just polytheism disguised as monotheism.
I also did not mention any specific religion, i just mentioned that God communicates with revelations through prophets, how right people are in rejecting Jesus pbuh or Muhammad pbuh or Moses pbuh is a completely seperate topic.
I will hold on to what i said that if someone does not respect the above belief and tries to show that anyone who holds them as low in anyway is anti-God and being labeled this way shouldn't be a problem as they do not believe in a communicating God anyway and yet claim to have figured out the Creators plan of how things will work out..

reply to post by logical7

anti-God ..well now that is a new one for me ..I thought that only Satan was anti- god
And to think that I have been studying about the AntiChrist all along ...

reply to post by logical7


The west you have the right to believe what ever you want.And you also have the right to disbelieve as well . N ow not being for something doesnt automatically make you against it either. This is a very big problem with Islam there is no grey area its black or white.Unfortunately the real world doesnt work that way and until Islam realizes not believing in Allah doesnt mean your against him things are going to continue down there current paths. And turmoil will continue in the middle east sometimes you just have to live and let live. As-salamu alaykum

dragonridr

reply to post by logical7

 

The west you have the right to believe what ever you want.And you also have the right to disbelieve as well . N ow not being for something doesnt automatically make you against it either. This is a very big problem with Islam there is no grey area its black or white.Unfortunately the real world doesnt work that way and until Islam realizes not believing in Allah doesnt mean your against him things are going to continue down there current paths. And turmoil will continue in the middle east sometimes you just have to live and let live. As-salamu alaykum

WalekumAssalam wa-Rehmatullahi wa-Barakatu
(may peace, mercy and blessings of Allah be on you too)
it makes me happy that you wish peace to me and i am more than willing to wish the same back. Sadly not everyone wants it even if they outwardly claim to be ambassadors of peace.

You said live and let live right?
Well this thread is a proof that not everyone wants it or are you going to make an exception when Islam bashing or for that matter any religion bashing threads are made? Before anyone jumps and misinterpret my words let me clear that the above is not my stand. My stand is a bit different, live n let live but discuss the differences respectfully.

Trying to tell others that their religion or for that matter all religions are wrong and on the other hand getting offended when being called wrong or anti-God is highest level of hypocrisy!
If i can be called a homophobe then shouldn't there be a word that labels people who don't believe in God and revelations? Atheist doesn't seem enough how about Deiophobe! or does being called anti-God/.."phobe" seems insulting?
How words are coined in a society says a lot about their worldview and beliefs.
Everyone is ofcourse and should be free to believe whatever they want but it should extend to everyone and not just atheists. Right?
If i believe in God and believe that there is a hell for people who deserve it and i seek to avoid it by being good then, i am free to do it and i'l blast anyone who tries to patronize me or tell me what my kids should or should not be taught.
Anyone claiming that hell does not exist and assuring it 100% true just makes me shake my head as they are even going against common sense and reason that they hold so high. Nobody can be 100% sure of something not existing
and using that justification that idea of hell has been used to control the masses so its untrue is also ridiculous.
Anything being abused does not automatically make it a myth.
The FACT is that we have a CREATOR and just because some people claim that God is talking to them and then demand donations does not automatically refute the idea that there were genuine messengers with whom God communicated. I am not asking anyone to accept this, i am objecting that anyone should deny this possibility based on some observations as its against common sense and logic and they would be just insulting their own high held faculties of reason.

reply to post by logical7

The Islamic Worldview revolved around the basic facts that there is God and that God communicates to humans through prophets and revelation.

If you can respect this and everything that rests on this basic foundation then i may agree that you are not anti-God.

BASIC FACTS? Wow, how absolutely absurd.

No, I cannot respect these as "basic facts." It is magical, delusional thinking. You are laboring under the things that ONE MAN (and a quite flawed one at that) said, 1400 years ago. There is NO PROOF he was legitimate; there is NO EVIDENCE that some angel gave him these messages. The FACT is that there is NO GOD here among us today -- judging, forgiving, smiting, fixing, or keeping score on people - there are only OTHER PEOPLE smiting - killing - hating people in the name of their wrathful and jealous "God."

I will hold on to what i said that if someone does not respect the above belief and tries to show that anyone who holds them as low in anyway is anti-God and being labeled this way shouldn't be a problem as they do not believe in a communicating God anyway and yet claim to have figured out the Creators plan of how things will work out..

"Anyone who holds them as low" ?
When did I EVER say that?

You can THINK that people in the West do not believe in "communicating God" all you want...I don't think you're "low" - I think you're delusional. And, since I know English is NOT your native tongue, I need to ask you kindly to clarify ---- do you mean "communicating God" (as in - a God who communicates with us?) or "communicating WITH God" (as in - being able to ask/talk and receive an answer)?

Your native culture is not BETTER; it is DIFFERENT. That does not make it WRONG. You are one of the MOST JUDGMENTAL people I have EVER come across.

I communicate with "God" every day of my life.
I find Islam to be a stifling, rigid, non-compassionate "religion" especially when it comes to what others believe! - but that does NOT make me anti-God. You have no claim to how I "should" communicate with God, or how God "should" or "will" communicate with me....

how dare you??!

In my eyes, you have enslaved YOURSELF to something (a deity) that not only cannot be proven, but IS NOT HERE TO ASK ... revelation is a VERY questionable claim, and if you cannot see that, you are blinded indeed. Blinded by fear, superstition, and the 'sayings' of others.

Your mind is firmly closed;
and

NO
YOU DO NOT
UNDERSTAND
THE
WEST.

Find God for YOURSELF - within YOURSELF! And stop worrying about 'Hell' - it doesn't exist.

Anyone claiming that hell does not exist and assuring it 100% true just makes me shake my head as they are even going against common sense and reason that they hold so high. Nobody can be 100% sure of something not existing
and using that justification that idea of hell has been used to control the masses so its untrue is also ridiculous.

Do some research, logical7, on the MYTH OF HELL, and how it got started.
Here's a handy link for you:
30ce.com...

The myth of hell developed steadily after Yeshua's death in 30 CE, but it does not appear in the Old Testament, the New Testament, Yeshua's teachings, the Acts of the Apostles, Paul's epistles, or the other epistles in the canon. The explanation of how it developed in the church follows.

.....

By the second century, however, the church leaders, in their zeal to convert people to become followers of Yeshua, read references to fire and judgment in the Bible to mean that people who did not convert to their version of Yeshua's theology would not simply die--they would be thrown into a fire that would burn eternally. They based this belief on the pagan descriptions of a hell at the time.

The first adoption of the pagan beliefs by a Christian writer was in the Apocalypse of Peter, probably written between 125 and 150 CE that remained in various church lists as a canonical text for centuries. It contains what the author claimed were the words of Yeshua as he instructed Peter after the resurrection about the signs of the end times. It also contains a variety of punishments awaiting sinners in hell and the pleasures of heaven. The descriptions clearly came from Homer, Virgil, Plato, and Orphic and Pythagorean traditions. The hell myth wasn't in the Old Testament or Christian tradition before this writer developed it out of pagan traditions.

Do your homework, and RELAX, for crying out loud!
:eyeroll:

It really makes me wonder how you would behave if you KNEW there was no hell, though....
are you frightened of what you might 'unleash' within yourself? You sound like a caged animal. Sorry, just, my (educated, non-Muslim) Western opinion.

wildtimes
Sorry, just, my (educated, non-Muslim) Western opinion.

Never say 'sorry' for having an educated, secular, non-muslim, Western opinion.
It's a lot healthier than having an uneducated, religious, intolerant opinion.
(I'd insert a 'thumbs up' smilie but all we have are the crappy new ones to pick from)

reply to post by FlyersFan


Thanks, FF.
Yeah, I hate the new smileys too.....
not very expressive.


I just DON'T GET how people can claim "basic facts" - WE JUST DON'T KNOW - and THAT is the basic fact.

:wink:

Your title should read most religions are corrupt, but i guess that wouldent fit in a certain agenda, they are good things in religion, but there all mainly tools to control the masses.