Announcement

Collapse

Islam Guidelines

Theists only.

This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to Islam. This forum is generally for theists only, and is not the area for debate between atheists and theists. Non-theist may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.



Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

A Superbly Flawed Quran..

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A Superbly Flawed Quran..

    If some of our muslim (or bahai) friends, like siam want Christians to believe in their Quran, then some really serious re-thinking needs to be done, by such muslim propagandists, to convince us that the Quran does contain some semblance of truth worth believing.

    When people or propagandists, like siam, claim that the Quran is 'a dictation' from an original in heaven, it only makes siam's case worse. Then the original 'mother of the book', or 'ummul kitab' (QS13/39) itself was the source of the errors and misrepresentations of reality that are found abundantly in the Quran. An "eternal error and flaw".

    So, for example, in Sura 6/101 it claims "How can God have a Son, when he does not have a wife." Repeated in sura 72/3 "He (God) has not taken a wife (consort) or a son..". & in many other places of the quran this misrepresentation is repeated, ad nauseum

    The Bible, the Gospels and Christians have never believed nor accepted the notion and view, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God through biological or sexual reproduction! We repudiate this perverse idea that the quran impugns on us, baselessly.

    In John 1 v.13 it is said that Children of God were "were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God." So there was absolutely no physical or sexual relationship ever involved between "God and a wife"! (perish the thought), as what the quranic verses erroneously claim.

    Another clear flaw and erroneous claim of the Quran is that "Christians worship three gods", comprising of: God the father, the Virgin Mary
    And their Son (5/116), etc

    By the time of muhamad's birth the Church long already had an orthodox Creed which all Christians confessed & professed. None ever confessed to a divine "Father, Mother and Son" Trinity!

    The Nicene Creed of the Church, which was the orthodox creedal confession 300 years before the existence of muhamed, prophet of islam, never subscribed to the "Trinity" of surah 5/116! This ayat of surah 5 is nothing more than a gross misrepresentation of the Christian Holy Trinity, which really was "God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit".

    Now, if the Quran was truly a "dictation" from the original 'mother of the Book' (Q13/39) then this mother of the Quran is therefore already fundamentally flawed and erroneous, itself (or herself)!

    The above two misrepresentations of the quran are sufficient evidence to dismiss the Quran and its "source" as grossly imperfect and flawed. If they cannot get the basic fundamentals of the Christian Gospel right, from the very beginning, then the Quran is really not worth believing in by ANY measure, its just superbly flawed!

  • #2
    Actually, it is not only the divine source of the Quran that is dubious and hence, questionable. When it was allegedly "received here" (piecemeal) on earth, there were even bigger problems which the primitive & early muslims admitted to and tried to resolve on their own plane!

    Ibn Khaldun the orthodox muslim scholar, in his celebrated work "Muqadimmah", admitted to major issues of language and orthography which throws the Quran into grace doubt and unreliability.

    Here, ibn Khaldun comments on the incompetence of the Arabic scribes and tge relationship to muhammad islam's "prophet"-

    "Arabic writing at the beginning of Islam was, therefore, not of the best quality nor of the greatest accuracy and excellence. It was not (even) of medium quality, because the Arabs possessed the savage desert attitude and were not familiar with crafts.

    "One may compare what happened to the orthography of the Qur'an on account of this situation. The men around Muhammad wrote the Qur'an in their own script which was not of a firmly established, good quality. Most of the letters were in contradiction to the orthography required by persons versed in the craft of writing…

    "Consequently, the Qur'anic orthography of the men around Muhammad was followed and became established, and the scholars acquainted with it have called attention to passages where (this is noticeable).

    "No attention should be paid in this connection with those incompetent (scholars) that the men around Muhammad knew well the art of writing and that the alleged discrepancies between their writing and the principles of orthography are not discrepancies, as has been alleged, but have a reason. For instance, they explain the addition of the alif in la 'adhbahannahU 'I shall indeed slaughter him' as indication that the slaughtering did not take place (lA 'adhbahannahU).

    The addition of the ya in bi-ayydin 'with hands (power),' they explain as an indication that the divine power is perfect. There are similar things based on nothing but purely arbitrary assumptions. The only reason that caused them to (assume such things) is their belief that (their explanations) would free the men around Muhammad from the suspicion of deficiency, in the sense that they were not able to write well.They think that good writing is perfection. Thus, they do not admit the fact that the men around Muhammad were deficient in writing."

    (Muqqadimah, Ibn Khaldun, vol. 2, p.382)

    Comment


    • #3
      In case some propagandists try to ignore the above discrepancies of the historiography of their Quran, by claiming there were sufficient "memorisers of the quran" to secure authenticity, that's no great help either!

      The so-called hafizs' memories were not good enough to secure caliph Uthman's confidence in the plethora of memorized quran readings and the multiple versions floating around by the time of this 3rd caliph. So he commanded the surrender BY FORCE, ALL the quran versions - and/or variant readings extant in his era and destroyed them forever in a bonfire.

      Then he re-published a new quran version through the self-appointed editorial committee headed by Zaid bin Thabit and forced all the muslims to read/recite that only. Did Allah ever send angel Jibril/Gabriel to command Uthman to do this exercise?? Never..!

      This just proves that today's Quran is the product of human tampering and redaction and has an earthly history, & puts paid the sanctified idea of a purely divine Quran, when it clearly is not. The republished Quran of uthman was not welcomed by many senior muslims, like Ali, Ubayy b.Kab and Abdullah b. Masud.

      Memorised recitations of the Quran were never safeguards of its authenticity, as the above show!

      These documentary facts above, are all recorded in the most reliable hadiths of Bukhari and al-Muslim. So anyone can check it out for themselves.

      Comment


      • #4
        Brubaker's latest Book, on at least 20 corrections that were made into the Quran, can be found here:

        https://www.amazon.com/dp/1949123030

        Brubaker is an academic in this field, but he has found the subject is of wider interest. Corrections in Early Qurʾān Manuscripts: Twenty Examples is an introduction to the range of the phenomenon.

        Brubaker has designed it to be accessible to non-specialists. In it, he selects a group of corrections from a variety of early Quran manuscripts of this early period.

        For each example, he shows a picture and gives a brief description, followed by a diagram showing the correction in relation to a modern standard edition of the Quran.

        These proofs support the fact that the Quran, from earliest times or even today, is not original or even authentic.

        A really good read for all truth-seekers.

        Comment


        • #5
          re: above points...
          1) The choice to believe or not believe is the responsibility of the person and while I am willing to engage in conversations about Islam/Quran...any decisions/choices that result from such conversations is the sole responsibility of the decision-maker.
          2) "The preserved tablet"---The Quran mentions a preserved tablet and there are opinions as to what it may mean. General opinion is that the Quran was/is a preserved tablet in heaven.
          https://aboutislam.net/reading-islam...-to-humankind/
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavenly_Quran
          Others may have the opinion that the heavenly Quran is "destiny" as in God's thoughts/decrees---which has much wider range/power than the "earthly Quran" which is Guidance/message......
          I do not have an opinion on this matter as I have not studied it yet....until I do, I accept the general opinion....
          3) Surah 6 verse 101--- I have repeated this many times---Instead of reading Quran verse in peices---try to read them in cluster with the previous and following verse in order to understand the context.

          SAHIH INTERNATIONAL
          100. But they have attributed to Allah partners - the jinn, while He has created them - and have fabricated for Him sons and daughters. Exalted is He and high above what they describe
          101. [He is] Originator of the heavens and the earth. How could He have a son when He does not have a companion and He created all things? And He is, of all things, Knowing.
          102. That is Allah, your Lord; there is no deity except Him, the Creator of all things, so worship Him. And He is Disposer of all things.
          Yusufali.
          100.Yet they make the Jinns equals with Allah though Allah did create the Jinns; and they falsely having no knowledge attribute to Him sons and daughters. Praise and glory be to Him! (for He is) above what they attribute to Him!.
          101.To Him is due the primal origin of the heavens and the earth: how can He have a son when He hath no consort? He created all things and He hath full knowledge of all things.
          102. That is Allah your Lord! there is no god but He the Creator of all things: then worship ye Him: and He hath power to dispose of all affairs.

          The Quran is explaining the concept of monotheism to a people who are steeped in polytheism for generations. The Meccan polytheists claimed God/Allah had daughters, others that he had sons and partners. Attaching an "other" to the One God IS polytheistic because the nature of monotheism that the Quran advocates for is that God has no partners, associates, division.....etc. God is Uniquely ONE.

          Christians reading the Quran should remember that the Quran is NOT simply addressing Christians but all humanity...and Christians as well as others are part of that humanity. The Quranic explanation of monotheism is very close to the Jewish understanding of God as ONE.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
            ....

            Another clear flaw and erroneous claim of the Quran is that "Christians worship three gods", comprising of: God the father, the Virgin Mary
            And their Son (5/116), etc

            By the time of muhamad's birth the Church long already had an orthodox Creed which all Christians confessed & professed. None ever confessed to a divine "Father, Mother and Son" Trinity!

            The Nicene Creed of the Church, which was the orthodox creedal confession 300 years before the existence of muhamed, prophet of islam, never subscribed to the "Trinity" of surah 5/116! This ayat of surah 5 is nothing more than a gross misrepresentation of the Christian Holy Trinity, which really was "God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit".
            4) Surah 5.v116---is part of a story beginning in 111 about the disciples of Jesus, son of Mary. The disciples declared they had faith but then asked for a "sign"---a table set with food. Jesus, son of Mary asked them to have faith, yet they insisted on a "miracle". This was then sent down to them on the condition that they must not resist faith from thereon. God then asks of Jesus son of Mary (116) if he preached that he and his mother were Gods besides God...and Jesus, son of Mary replies that he did not preach what he had no right to preach and had he any such thoughts---God would have known what was in his heart/mind. Verse 117 goes on to say that Jesus, son of Mary declares that he preached only that which God commanded.

            for more info---see " Theotokos" a term used for Mary "Mother of God"---The Eastern Syrian Church used the term since the 3rd century.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theotokos

            5) Nicene Creed---Again u might want to refer to history. There was a split between the Eastern and Western Churches regarding the nature of Jesus Christ.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Honorius_I
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East%E2%80%93West_Schism

            There is not one defined Christianity but many Christianities that have a range of ideas within.

            Comment


            • #7
              U are wrong again, as usual Siam! Quoting from fringe, minority views about church history doesn't make it a historical fact whatsoever! We have the ancient and corroborative, documented records of the church Fathers and their congregations from BEFORE the Council of Nicea that preserved reliably the kerygma or proclamation of the church and also the Christian dogmas. Before that, we also have the epistles of the Apostles and followers of Christ.

              These records and manuscript evidence do not show any proof of Mary or virgin worship by the church or the earliest followers. Theotokos is nothing about "Mary-worship" like what is claimed in Q5/116. It only meant that Mary is the "Son of God bearer" but never meant she was a "mother of God" and must be worshipped as such.

              Emperor Constantine did the Christians a great favor by gathering all the Bishops, Elders and leaders of the Christian church and to officially give them a space and platform to re-state the established doctrines of Christianity in corporate and confessional form.

              No aberrant or false, new doctrines were created at the Council of Nicea. All the church doctrines that were already theologically accepted were recognised officially and stated in creedal form.

              Nothing about Mary worship was admitted or endorsed there. Nor in the NT books.

              The koran and Muhamad absorbed a heretical cultic teaching-very likely the Collyridians, who actually worshipped virgin Mary as a goddess.

              Then Mohamed/koran regarded this as genuinely taught by Jesus Christ as declared in sura 5/116.

              When He taught no such thing! The Koran cannot be the word of God with so many such errors.

              Originally posted by siam View Post
              4) Surah 5.v116---is part of a story beginning in 111 about the disciples of Jesus, son of Mary. The disciples declared they had faith but then asked for a "sign"---a table set with food. Jesus, son of Mary asked them to have faith, yet they insisted on a "miracle". This was then sent down to them on the condition that they must not resist faith from thereon. God then asks of Jesus son of Mary (116) if he preached that he and his mother were Gods besides God...and Jesus, son of Mary replies that he did not preach what he had no right to preach and had he any such thoughts---God would have known what was in his heart/mind. Verse 117 goes on to say that Jesus, son of Mary declares that he preached only that which God commanded.

              for more info---see " Theotokos" a term used for Mary "Mother of God"---The Eastern Syrian Church used the term since the 3rd century.
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theotokos

              5) Nicene Creed---Again u might want to refer to history. There was a split between the Eastern and Western Churches regarding the nature of Jesus Christ.
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Honorius_I
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East%E2%80%93West_Schism

              There is not one defined Christianity but many Christianities that have a range of ideas within.

              Comment


              • #8
                Muslims reading the Bible should shed & objectively distance themselves from the jaundiced and prejudiced misrepresentations the Koran forces upon them.

                So many examples can be adduced from the koran and some of them show that muhamed was not even conversant or even familiar with authentic & the orthodox Gospel as expressed in the orthodox creeds centuries before muhamed was even conceived!

                The Holy Trinity, the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus Christ, the identity and mission of Christ, the Church in the NT, etc are grossly misrepresented in the Koran.

                The Son of God and the Son of Man expressions are not hapax legomena statements Christ made of Himself in the historical manuscript record. They are found abundantly in the Bible. Anyone with a clear and clean mind can figure out its exegetical meaning. Not once do they mean a biologically reproduced son of God like what sura 6/101 mistakenly claims!

                GOD does not need a wife to produce a son, this is the korans worst misrepresentation of the Biblical meaning.

                Even Muhd had this same kind of discussion with a delegation of Christians from Najran who had a discussion in madinah about "The Son" in the Koran (surah 3/59.. & surah 112).

                The Christians rejected muhd's preaching and propoganda to accept islam at that point. They could see that he grossly misunderstood and misrepresented the Sonship of Jesus Christ. They left him after he tried to convert them to islam anyway, which was the right thing!

                Muslim dawagandists and missionaries are in much the same way today. If their "prophet" muhamed failed badly, how much more they themselves with their misguided, faulty and prejudiced arguments?

                Comment


                • #9
                  The earlier term for Mary in common use was 'meter theou' which is more literally 'mother of God' (the term Theotokos was not apparently widely used until the 5th century); this is generally only used now in iconography, abbreviated as 'MTh'. Regardless of the term used, Mary was never regarded as God; one looks in vain for any such argument advocating that.
                  Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                  Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                  sigpic
                  I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                    The earlier term for Mary in common use was 'meter theou' which is more literally 'mother of God' (the term Theotokos was not apparently widely used until the 5th century); this is generally only used now in iconography, abbreviated as 'MTh'. Regardless of the term used, Mary was never regarded as God; one looks in vain for any such argument advocating that.
                    thanks---interesting info

                    In any case, In the Quranic verse in question---S5,v116---God asks Jesus if he told people "to take me and my mother for two Gods besides God"? and Jesus, son of Mary and Messenger of God replies that he did not say what he had no right to say.
                    Can any Christian point to any direct quote or saying of Jesus, son of Mary where he declares himself and his mother to be 2 Gods besides God?
                    .....Therefore any misconception any Christian may have had regarding God as One is cleared up here in the Quran.
                    God is ONE----I believe this is a statement that Christians cannot disagree with?---am I correct?
                    If so, the Quranic statement that there are not 2 more Gods besides God is also correct. Therefore, any Christian believing that there are more than one Gods is incorrect and the Quran is simply stating the obvious.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      @DZ
                      I do not know much about Christian doctrine or history---but Constantine is relevant to "Western" Church history? ---from what little I know---the Nestorian/Syriac Churches were already established in the East and Far East by the 4th Century?---they were translating their bibles into Chinese and such?
                      r u familiar with this part of history?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        https://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/quran-literature

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The koranic quote from Q5/116 are words it assumes Jesus Christ allegedly taught His followers 600 years before muhd's appearance.

                          And of course they are erroneous and untrue! In the Gospel & NT manuscript records the Lord Jesus Christ NEVER taught any such heretical nonsense.

                          He Himself actually, positively and affirmatively identified Himself with deity and divinity. As the Son of God - Matt.11:27, Luke 10:22, etc and as the Son of Man - in ALL FOUR Gospels, a prophetic throwback to Daniel 7:13-14 ff.

                          As such Jesus Christ DID claim worship as God, for Himself as recorded in John 20:28 -

                          "Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!”

                          Jesus said to him, 'Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.' "

                          Would Jesus Christ have endorsed Apostle Thomas' worship of Jesus as Lord and GOD, if He was indeed not divine in nature? Christ actually went FURTHER than that, besides endorsing Thomas's worship of Christ, Jesus went on to BLESS ALL of humanity who have not (yet) seen Jesus as Thomas did that glorious day, and yet believed as he did in Jesus Christ as "LORD and GOD"!

                          So it is crystal clear in the entire NT, which includes the Gospel portion in it obviously, Jesus Christ proclaimed and declared His deity and divinity without any hesitation. He did that in both words and actions / deeds. And so His followers and disciples accorded to Him the due worship, naturally.

                          Not once in the Holy Bible did Jesus ever declare, teach or enjoin the 'worship of His earthly mother Mary' as what sura 5/116 presumptiously says.

                          I am not concerned or even bothered with whatever titles later churches gave to Mary. Meter theou or theotokos or whatever, they do not in the least translate into a command from God or Jesus to worship her in even the slightest fashion.

                          The false trinity of God, the Son Jesus and His mother Mary is referenced in the sura 5 (al maidah) verse in the Koran.

                          Which had never been intimated by Jesus Christ at all in the relevant historical records. Truly Biblical, orthodox Christianity had never worshipped virgin Mary. Except for heretical and heterodox groups like the Collyridians that took and worshipped her as a goddess.

                          Muhamed & the Koran had subsequently and much later on, picked up the heretical ie. False and erroneous teachings of the cultic collyridians and assumed them to be the true, Christian teachings - which obviously they are NOT!

                          None of the Canon of Biblical scripture had ever enjoined Mary-worship, except for what muhamed & his koran fallaciously assumes centuries later, after the fact.

                          No, Christians have NO Misconception of the oneness of God. The Trinity is not about worshipping "three Gods". We worship ONE GOD, Who expressed Himself in a Triune way in the Bible and the authentic teachings of Jesus Christ.

                          It is your koran siam and your founder of islam muhamed, who both made fatal & erroneous misconceptions & misguided statements it forces on to the lips of Jesus Christ like that found in suram5/116! So tragic..!



                          Originally posted by siam View Post
                          thanks---interesting info

                          In any case, In the Quranic verse in question---S5,v116---God asks Jesus if he told people "to take me and my mother for two Gods besides God"? and Jesus, son of Mary and Messenger of God replies that he did not say what he had no right to say.
                          Can any Christian point to any direct quote or saying of Jesus, son of Mary where he declares himself and his mother to be 2 Gods besides God?
                          .....Therefore any misconception any Christian may have had regarding God as One is cleared up here in the Quran.
                          God is ONE----I believe this is a statement that Christians cannot disagree with?---am I correct?
                          If so, the Quranic statement that there are not 2 more Gods besides God is also correct. Therefore, any Christian believing that there are more than one Gods is incorrect and the Quran is simply stating the obvious.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Get to know some history about the Collyridian heresy that existed in Muhameds time -

                            https://www.cathedralofthesoul.org/s...Feminine?_amp_

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The orthodox Christian doctrine and theological position of the church regarding the divine nature of Christ was already clearly and firmly established at the Council of Ephesus i.e. 431 CE. Over 200 years before Islam's arrival.

                              Emperor Constantine did the church a big favor by endorsing the Council of Nicea circa 325 CE and at the following Council the 2 natures of Christ was unmistakably recognised and given creedal formula.

                              Such Church councils are important so that heresy, heterodoxy and false teachings could not take root in a church that was growing exponentially, worldwide. And had to give a concise, precise and theologically and Scripturally authentic statement and summary of Faith that was passed down from Jesus Christ through the earliest Apostles (hawarii).

                              The very first church Council was convened in Jerusalem by all the apostolic leaders of the church in 48 AD and recorded in Acts 15. The Christian leaders discussed very important matters affecting the life of the early church and the earliest Christians).

                              At the Council of Ephesus (431 AD) it was affirmed that Christ Jesus, in his divine nature as the uncreated Word of God (Logos in Greek, Kalimatullah in Arabic), "proceeded ie. born of the Father (God, the First Cause of everything), without a Mother."

                              In other words, God's Word proceeds eternally from God alone, from eternity past, without a beginning. So, God's Word is eternal And UNCREATED. That's what the "without a mother" phrase means, above.

                              In Syrian Christian orthodox expression: 'La min tsivyana d'basra, wla min tsivyana d'gabra' means: Born not from blood, nor from flesh.

                              Furthermore, in the orthodox Canon of Faith or kanun al-iman (Christian Confession) it underscores the fact that the Word of God descended (came down) from heaven through the power of the Holy Spirit and became human ie. incarnated through the Virgin Mary..("Nazala minas sama'i wa tajjasada bi-Ruh al-Quddus wa min Maryam al-Adzra'i wa ta'anas")

                              This principle, further summarised at the Council of Ephesus as "born through a mother, without a human father."

                              This means the Virgin birth of Christ happened "in time and space" (fi az-zaman wa al-makan) from Virgin Mary without the touch of a human male.

                              Jesus proceeded, or came out from God the Father as His eternal, uncreated Word - hence Jesus' divinity, and incarnated (came down, nazala) on the earth through the Virgin Mary, hence His human form.

                              Jesus has 2 natures - divine And human in Himself. And so has the Koran interestingly.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by Christian3, Today, 07:17 AM
                              0 responses
                              1 view
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Christian3  
                              Started by Trucker, 10-23-2020, 11:09 AM
                              10 responses
                              36 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post siam
                              by siam
                               
                              Started by Dan Zebiri, 03-30-2019, 05:15 AM
                              131 responses
                              18,634 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Dan Zebiri  
                              Working...
                              X