Quran - The Word of God or Man.

claurianta

Peace brother Ahmed,

First of all, let me make one thing clear. I'm not saying in any way that following Muhammad's way in the salat is wrong in any way. I fully respect your right to do it that way, and I agree that it is accordance with the Qur'an. So no problem there.
I guess there might be a bit of a difference on how we came to the Qur'an and its teachings. I am not a Muslim by birth. I was baptized Christian when I was a baby, but I never held their beliefs. Over the years I sort of tried to discover what is it that is right for me... and many times I would realize I had gone the wrong way, and then I would change my ways. So I agree with you on the arrogance/ego aspect... it has no place in religion. I have however felt some sort of guidance coming from outside of myself, directing me in the right direction. From what I had seen of Islam, based on the practices of the sunni, shi'a, and sufi, I realized that there were things that went against my beliefs there. I did realize though that it was the closest to my own beliefs, despite these differences. Then one day I picked up the Qur'an to read it, because I really felt the need to know what it said... it was a sort of urge that I can't quite explain. I do know some arabic, but not enough to attempt reading the Qur'an in it, so obviously I had to go with a translation. When I read it, I really felt that this is already what I believe in... and the way I already was directing my life. There were few things that at first sight just didn't seem right, but when read as a whole, I realized that I was just misreading.
I thus believe that that which is essential in the Qur'an, the immutable laws of human conduct, are is some sense already inscribed in all of our hearts. The problem is that our nafs just gets so screwed up that we can't read our heart. The Qur'an is there to remind us of what is in our heart, to help us to find what God has placed inside every single one of us. It's there to be found without the Qur'an, but that's the difficult way, the way that takes years and years of self-searching, of accepting who we are and realizing that there is something higher than us.
Therefore, I had already before reading the Qur'an, and before acquinting myself with the hadith, found in my heart a method that allowed me to praise God, a method that I see as being compatible with the Qur'an. I will not elaborate on it because I think my way is appropriate to me, and I wouldn't want others to try and take after me, because my method probably won't be correct for them.

One of the most important things I have learned though, which I believe very much is in harmony with the Qur'anic ayat that says there is not compulsion in religion, is that much harm is done when I force myself to do something. If I force myself to do something, then I am not doing it genuinely. So I am faced with the choice of trusting my heart and knowing I am in contact with God in my own way, or forcing myself to conform to the way the Prophet showed. I will not force myself to do something which I desire to do, while fully recognizing that at some point in the future, as I develop spiritually, I may well end up desiring to contact God in another manner. Ultimately we have to realize that it is not our choice. We are nothing when it comes to these matters. We must follow some guidance in the manner. You choose to follow the guidance of Muhammad, and I what I believe God has placed in my heart for me to follow, but not to impose on others. And I think either way is correct. Mine may be more risky, but I have such confidence in God to believe that he will not lead me astray. I have very many times encountered the evil forces, and I thank God for giving me the ability to in the end distinguish between that which is good and that which is not.

unknownuser

Salaam Ahmed,

Your replies to my previous last two posts warrants senselessness, meagerness, unconstructive, personal and a high degree of prejudice. It?s not an atom?s worth of consideration. I?d rather respond to someone?s constructive, rational and intelligent criticism and there are quite a few on this forum, perhaps not interested or not quite ready for this topic.

Besides, you profess conflicting, biased and close-minded views. You boast about not being a Sunni, open-minded and unbiased, yet everything you project and promote is nothing but strictly Sunnism (part of idol-worshipping dogmas) by unprecedented Quranic injunctions just like any Mullah.

When someone asks a question or mentions something, you quickly substantiate by saying ?its not in the Quran? or challenge them to bring a verse. On the contrary, when you cannot substantiate your own views in strict and clear support of a verse when asked to bring forward, you start taking about Muhammad?s preaching and explanations outside the fold of Quran, and that too being unsubstantiated and incomplete (the topic of salaat being one for example). When I bought forward verses from the Quran by several well known interpreters, you arrogantly and defiantly rejected them all by saying that these are all men?s works and has no bearings, yet you bring about the same interpreter?s verses to support your views, specially that of Shakir. This sort of tactics is double standard, hypocritical and misleading. You may be knowledgeable about Arabic linguistics like many others but understanding the Quranic ?message? thereof seems quite appalling.

I do find some wisdom the Quran portrays. But much of it is history, unrelated, inconsistent and irrelevant to OUR time and dating back to hundreds perhaps thousands of years even before the Quran was compiled and written by men. Even the calendaring is outdated. Quran also adjudicates by starting its verses to ?recall? or ?remember? throughout its contents. It is not possible for any human today, to recollect any event whatsoever that took place back then, let alone verifying the information in truth as per 1736. Is it a contradiction or blind belief? If neither, then what is it? If it?s a blind belief, then 1736 and as well as the ?recall/remember? statements become meaningless or perhaps totally misconstrued. I believe and it certainly makes sense that those statements were addressed to the people of their times who had the knowledge and knew those events. To reflect/understand upon those events today, is one thing, but to recall/remember them is out of question.

2228, 2282, 411-15 and many other verses for example, are irrelevant to OUR time. Beside some contradictions, I also find several verses quite dreadful. Keeping all the above in mind and what I have previously elaborated, the Quran cannot possibly be the actual words of GOD but that of a man or men?s perspectives directly related to the events of their times.

The story of Abraham written in the Quran makes an excellent point of what I have been talking about in this thread. If Abraham already had the scripture written down for him, then the stories as depicted in the Quran about him would become rather nonsensical. His wisdom and intelligence in reflecting upon the natural and realistic wonders of the world entranced his love for the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth and everything within and beyond (a reflection of life/nature/reality). Such were the people of powerful minds and great love. Their stories went down in book form as ?truth? and became ?revelations? that took the shape of ?religions?.

People throughout the world have been comparing Quranic translations for centuries. Today, there are more translations/interpretations of this book in every language manifold, than any other book one can imagine. Come to think of it realistically, it has caused more confusion and divisions within its Islamic Religious fold. One such case is a miniscule (a tiny spec) of what is being witnessed on this forum alone. How many members here have already opened up new websites to promote Quranic message with varying perspectives and at the same time promoting several other translations/interpretations by linking other websites for ?comparative study? and continue to develop revised versions, perhaps hundreds more to come?

Lastly, injecting cocky/brashful statements such as ?Allah said this or that?, ?Allah forgot this or that?, ?did Allah say this or that?, ?Allah didn?t say this or that?, ?Allah knew this or that and that?s why it is this or that?, ?Allah deliberately did this and that?, ?Allah couldn?t have done this or that? and so on and so forth, is just one pathetic way of making a mockery out of the book itself and taking Allah?s name in vain at every step of the way. The book itself warns this but their followers seem ignorant. At least be respectful and considerate towards the contents of the book you dearly call ?Allah?s Words? rather than playing god without certainty.

Sorry mate, just relating facts as seen per your posts.

claurianta

Danish,

While there is much sense in your post, please do try to keep the tone respectful. We all have different interpretations, and we do have a God given right to the freedom of opinion, however skewed our opinion may be. Only God may judge whether we are on the correct path or not.

Though I respect you opinion about the Qur'an being the word of man, I am of another opinion - I believe that more likely than not the Qur'an (that is, the written work we have in our hands) is mostly the work of beings more knowledgeable than humans; angels come to mind as the most likely authors. I say mostly their work because I acknowledge the possibility of human error and malice in the transcription process.
I feel that you are falling into the same trap you are warning of - you have come to the realization that the Qur'an is not the verbatim words of God, and therefore automatically say that it is the word of man without considering the other possibilities, such as angels, jinn, aliens. Logical thinking requires us to analyze all the possibilities, and only reject those that we have conclusive proof against. All the other possibilities, well, they remain just that possibilities. And so I will agree that there is a possibility it was written by man, but the evidence points me to say that it was most likely authored by someone more knowledgeable and less prone to error than us humans. While the possibility remains that this "other" is God, I do believe that the evidence points to some dilligent creation of his that authored it... Jibril and his buddies perhaps?

So, in conclusion, let's keep our discussions civil, our minds open, and our hearts steady.

thegod

claurianta wrote...
Though I respect you opinion about the Qur'an being the word of man, I am of another opinion - I believe that more likely than not the Qur'an (that is, the written work we have in our hands) is mostly the work of beings more knowledgeable than humans; angels come to mind as the most likely authors.

when u say that u believe its most likely that the angels authored the quran, do u mean the angels wrote of their own will or at the decree of god? -)

claurianta

when u say that u believe its most likely that the angels authored the quran, do u mean the angels wrote of their own will or at the decree of god? -)

Well, I don't think they went against the will of God... seeing as according to the Qur'an they are rather incapable of doing so. Whether it was by their own initiative or whether God prompted them to do so... that is a question I don't have an answer for, at least not yet.

thegod

claurianta wrote...
Well, I don't think they went against the will of God... seeing as according to the Qur'an they are rather incapable of doing so. Whether it was by their own initiative or whether God prompted them to do so... that is a question I don't have an answer for, at least not yet.

if and when u do get an answer, be sure to share it! -) in the meantime what do u think about the following

3 7 He is the One who sent down to you the Scripture, from which there are firm verses; they are the essence of the Scripture; and others which are similar to each other. As for those who have disease in their hearts, they will follow what is similar from it seeking to confuse, and seeking to derive an interpretation. But none know its interpretation except God and those who are well founded in knowledge, they Say "We believe in it, all is from our Lord." And none will remember except the people of understanding.

the words i am interested in knowing ur views about at the moment are..."He is the One who sent down to you the Scripture,..." and "...We believe in it, all is from our Lord."

ofcourse, if u want to give ur views on more than that...cool! -)

unknownuser

Salaam Ahmed,

Peace mate

Your replies to my previous last two posts warrants senselessness, meagerness, unconstructive, personal and a high degree of prejudice. It?s not an atom?s worth of consideration. I?d rather respond to someone?s constructive, rational and intelligent criticism and there are quite a few on this forum, perhaps not interested or not quite ready for this topic.

lol mate, I thought after the above firey introduction that you should not respond to me but it seems you just had a ride on your high horse when you said that then you stepped down to continue, LOL bro, let me see what you have to say about my ignornace

Besides, you profess conflicting, biased and close-minded views. You boast about not being a Sunni, open-minded and unbiased, yet everything you project and promote is nothing but strictly Sunnism (part of idol-worshipping dogmas) by unprecedented Quranic injunctions just like any Mullah.

mate what you say above is baseless, I'm not a sunni but you can keep promoting this lie, it is just a small dust in thin air, in all cases I have to give my account to Allah not to any human, but if following the prophet as the Quran told us is something you consider sunni then I'm proud to be

When someone asks a question or mentions something, you quickly substantiate by saying ?its not in the Quran? or challenge them to bring a verse. On the contrary, when you cannot substantiate your own views in strict and clear support of a verse when asked to bring forward, you start taking about Muhammad?s preaching and explanations outside the fold of Quran,

the above is a clear cut manipulation, I only use the Quran, I never use the hadith in my debates also, I provided 3 compelling verses that clearlly tell us that the prophet should teach us things we don't know and is not Quran neither wisdom

what is your refute to the 3 verses I posted?

and that too being unsubstantiated and incomplete (the topic of salaat being one for example). When I bought forward verses from the Quran by several well known interpreters, you arrogantly and defiantly rejected them all by saying that these are all men?s works and has no bearings,

you brought different translations by different humans, hence they are different then telling me here it is the work of man, lol

obvioulsy you don't get my point, I don't give a fluke if you bring in 100 transltions to the Quran, what counts for me is the Arabic Quran and it has one translation in my mind because I'm a native arabic speaker

yet you bring about the same interpreter?s verses to support your views, specially that of Shakir. This sort of tactics is double standard, hypocritical and misleading.

I believe you totally missed the plot here danish, you brought in different translations to prove that it is the work of men, and this has no merit to me really neither to the common sense, if you bring verses discussing the meaning yes I will look at it

no hypocricy here other than the one you made up in your mind

You may be knowledgeable about Arabic linguistics like many others but understanding the Quranic ?message? thereof seems quite appalling.

excuse me, I spent 25 years in my life reading the Quran almost daily, this is a knowledge bro, alhamullelah that it was all fun for me and I enjoyed it to the max and still enjoying it

I do find some wisdom the Quran portrays. But much of it is history, unrelated, inconsistent and irrelevant to OUR time and dating back to hundreds perhaps thousands of years even before the Quran was compiled and written by men.

firsly you can't just bring these accusation without a single proof, you need to make up a case and present it, not the chat chat type of crap and accustaions without any back up, now prove to me the incosistancy in the Quran please

for the history similarities with other scriptures, this is actually great as it confirms that the messages are coming from the same God and humans just messed it up but unfortunatlly for them they can't mess with the Arabic Quran

Even the calendaring is outdated.

what is that argument bro?, it is inadmissable as I don't care if the calendar has been updated or not this is not part that I have to believe in, I do my fasting and Haj according the Lunar year as the Quran said and I live my daily life according to the other calendar and that is enough for me, I'm not going to private invistigate it really but if you want to do it, be my guest but please pass on your discovries and I will look at it, consider me lazy bro

Quran also adjudicates by starting its verses to ?recall? or ?remember? throughout its contents. It is not possible for any human today, to recollect any event whatsoever that took place back then, let alone verifying the information in truth as per 1736.

you have no argument because verse 1736 NEVER SUGGESTED TO VERIFY ANY INFO, this is something the Quran alone muslims made up and I refuted it tens of times so far, I can have another go with you, possibly you have the magic trick to convince me

Is it a contradiction or blind belief?

according to your understanding of 1736, do you ever follow anything blindly?, before you answer I can assure you that you do, for example you follow street directory in an area that you haven't been before, logically speaking that is considered following blindly, did you verify that the map in the street directory is right before you follow it? of course not

then you follow it because you trust the dude who made it while you never met that dude, that is bloody the same thing exactly to what i'm following

if you read the verse again you will read the word "Takkif" which means Cause to folloo NOT to follow, therefore 1736 means DON'T CAUSE OTHERS TO FOLLOW WHAT YOU LACK KNOWLEDGE IN

now I want you to show me where it said verify all info first in 1736

If neither, then what is it? If it?s a blind belief,

no it is not, because it was verified by the following

some other dudes
myslef through my brain that is used for common sense

then 1736 and as well as the ?recall/remember? statements become meaningless or perhaps totally misconstrued.

well forget 1736, you totally misunderstand it, but let's discuss the word remember

you have no argument because the word remember means just to recall the incident in our minds through the Quran reading, all the incidents that happened in the past are not seen by us and it is part of the belief to believe in it, becuase it was said to us in the Quran by Allah not by humans, and 22-3 clearly say this book is guidance for the the believers who believe in the UNSEEN

I believe and it certainly makes sense that those statements were addressed to the people of their times who had the knowledge and knew those events. To reflect/understand upon those events today, is one thing, but to recall/remember them is out of question.

it was addressed to all, the ones who saw it and the ones who didn't see it, I consider all the incidents that happened in the Quran that I saw it because the informer was Allah and not a human, if it was a human then it is totally different story

2228, 2282, 411-15 and many other verses for example, are irrelevant to OUR time. Beside some contradictions, I also find several verses quite dreadful. Keeping all the above in mind and what I have previously elaborated, the Quran cannot possibly be the actual words of GOD but that of a man or men?s perspectives directly related to the events of their times.

if you are going to discuss contradictions in any verses then please don't brief as above, I need elaboration in a clear manner if you want me to reply to it, forget the history records as i replied to this above, I want to see the contradictions you are alleging please

The story of Abraham written in the Quran makes an excellent point of what I have been talking about in this thread. If Abraham already had the scripture written down for him, then the stories as depicted in the Quran about him would become rather nonsensical. His wisdom and intelligence in reflecting upon the natural and realistic wonders of the world entranced his love for the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth and everything within and beyond (a reflection of life/nature/reality). Such were the people of powerful minds and great love. Their stories went down in book form as ?truth? and became ?revelations? that took the shape of ?religions?.

fine bro if that what you chose to believe, i chose to believe something far more simpler and not confusing as the above, cheers

People throughout the world have been comparing Quranic translations for centuries. Today, there are more translations/interpretations of this book in every language manifold, than any other book one can imagine. Come to think of it realistically, it has caused more confusion and divisions within its Islamic Religious fold. One such case is a miniscule (a tiny spec) of what is being witnessed on this forum alone. How many members here have already opened up new websites to promote Quranic message with varying perspectives and at the same time promoting several other translations/interpretations by linking other websites for ?comparative study? and continue to develop revised versions, perhaps hundreds more to come?

I like that the Quran took the world by storm and still doing it, it is sure different to any religious book lol this makes me happy indeed hoping that I'm one of the rare humans who will achieve the proper knoweldge of the Quran with Allah Willings

Lastly, injecting cocky/brashful statements such as ?Allah said this or that?, ?Allah forgot this or that?, ?did Allah say this or that?, ?Allah didn?t say this or that?, ?Allah knew this or that and that?s why it is this or that?, ?Allah deliberately did this and that?, ?Allah couldn?t have done this or that? and so on and so forth, is just one pathetic way of making a mockery out of the book itself and taking Allah?s name in vain at every step of the way. The book itself warns this but their followers seem ignorant. At least be respectful and considerate towards the contents of the book you dearly call ?Allah?s Words? rather than playing god without certainty.

I guess you are making more mockery to say indirectly that Allah is a clear cut liar by telling us that He is the only Quran author while you come and say it is written by men for sure

my mockery is an inncocnet example to clear some ignornace while your mockery is a clear cut conviction (Allah forbids)

Sorry mate, just relating facts as seen per your posts.

peace be with you

unknownuser

Hello Claurianta,

If you have a God given right to freedom of opinion, then you must have a God given right to freedom of using your mind, eyes and ears to reason and judge what you do and say is wrong or right. The causes and affects that happen, seen and experienced in one's real life is just one simple way of understanding and realizing what measures be taken.

Nothing in my previous posts carries disrespect or incivility, but a rational rebuttal to substantiate how and what was being said. Perhaps you?re a very sensitive type and not the type who could take criticism and respond with constructive authority.

Though I respect you opinion about the Qur'an being the word of man, I am of another opinion - I believe that more likely than not the Qur'an (that is, the written work we have in our hands) is mostly the work of beings more knowledgeable than humans; angels come to mind as the most likely authors. I say mostly their work because I acknowledge the possibility of human error and malice in the transcription process.

If you acknowledge the possibility of error and malice (a strong word) in the Quran that we have today, then it?s simply mind boggling to even think of attributing it to ?higher beings?, let alone GOD. Besides, what proof do you have that the Quran may have been the works of angels, aliens or jinns. NONE! and a dead end.

I feel that you are falling into the same trap you are warning of - you have come to the realization that the Qur'an is not the verbatim words of God, and therefore automatically say that it is the word of man without considering the other possibilities, such as angels, jinn, aliens. Logical thinking requires us to analyze all the possibilities, and only reject those that we have conclusive proof against. All the other possibilities, well, they remain just that possibilities. And so I will agree that there is a possibility it was written by man, but the evidence points me to say that it was most likely authored by someone more knowledgeable and less prone to error than us humans.

It seems that you?ve skipped, ignored or simply not ?brushed up? enough for what I?ve been talking about, hence making statements as in bold above. You don?t have one single evidence to prove that the Quran was authored other than man, let alone knowing what, why, how and who wrote the Quran in the first place. The ONLY way out for you and others is by picking and choosing verses from within the book itself to support (not prove) your biased and unconstructive points, which you?ve already acknowledged to be of ?error and malice?, not to mention the inconsistencies, incomplete sentences, contradictions, unrelated and irrelevant statements, etc. How is it even possible to call it GOD?s Words or even angel?s words, is a shame, let alone making all sorts of ?opinions?. This is by no means a constructive discussion and thus the petty personal feelings that come about as pointed out by you.

Much of what the Quran advocates has already been revealed in previous books, the events of which took place millenniums ago. As I mentioned earlier, all we can do is take note of it, reflect upon it and use it to understand our own current paths, just like zillion other spiritual and inspirational books, poetry/poems, movies, songs, sayings, etc. that touch are hearts. Most importantly, the reality/nature and all that is seen, heard and witnessed first hand, speak of itself as its truest and purest form in real life situations and what better way to understand, contemplate, reason, learn and act upon as such in order to lead a good life.

claurianta

if and when u do get an answer, be sure to share it! -) in the meantime what do u think about the following

3 7 He is the One who sent down to you the Scripture, from which there are firm verses; they are the essence of the Scripture; and others which are similar to each other. As for those who have disease in their hearts, they will follow what is similar from it seeking to confuse, and seeking to derive an interpretation. But none know its interpretation except God and those who are well founded in knowledge, they Say "We believe in it, all is from our Lord." And none will remember except the people of understanding.

the words i am interested in knowing ur views about at the moment are..."He is the One who sent down to you the Scripture,..." and "...We believe in it, all is from our Lord."

ofcourse, if u want to give ur views on more than that...cool! -)

It is an interesting problem, and I will point you to 1038, and I will give you two translations, one from the paper copy I have, and another from the free-minds version

Paper version - This Qur'an could never have been produced except by Allah. It is a confirmation of that before it and an exposition of the Book. There is no doubt about it. It is from the Lord of the Worlds.

Free-minds.org version - This Qur'an could not have been produced without God, but it is to authenticate what is already present, and to give detail to the Scripture in which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds.

Now, what makes me wonder a bit is the usage of three different words in the Qur'an - Umm al Kitab (="Mother of the Book), al Kitab (="the Book" or "the Scripture") and al Qur'an (="the Reader" or "the Message"). Putting 37 and 1038, it would seem that they are not the same. Only part of al Kitab is from Umm al Kitab (37), whereas al Qur'an is an exposition or a detailed version of al Kitab (103.

Now think of the of the People of the Book (ahl al Kitab) that the Qur'an talks of in several places. These people were sent al Kitab through previous Prophets (Moses for example; see 253), and since I think we can all agree that an arabic al Qur'an was not sent down to Moses or the other People of the Book, the arabic Qur'an we have does not equal al Kitab.

So, Umm al Kitab is not the same as al Kitab is not the same as al Qur'an.

So what to make of 1038? This is where a close analysis of the arabic is what will be important... see the two widely differing translations above. Having looked at the arabic, the free-minds.org translation looks to be more true to the text than the paper copy I have - the "but" (present as "lakn" in the arabic) is key to the understanding here I believe. What is the purpose of this "but"?

Why would the Qur'an say that God wrote the Qur'an, but that it is only a confirmation of that which is only present? Would it not be more appropriate to just use the conjuction "and" (w in arabic)? The "but" only makes sense if it is not the word of God, but it is only a confirmation, which could not have been made if God did not exist. That is to say, if God did not exist, then there is no way the angels could have been able to put together the Qur'an, because they wouldn't have had the proper guidance from al Kitab.

So then we do run into trouble with 37, because here we see that God revealed (nazal) al Kitab to someone, presumably Muhammad. By 443, it would seem that this revelation happened in one night, which is not the case with the Qur'an... as we all know it took several years for the Qur'an to be revealed. So what is this al Kitab, which was given to both Moses and Muhammad? What is its relation to the Qur'an? These are indeed difficult questions. Personally I believe that while definitely Umm al Kitab, and probably al Kitab are God's original work, the Qur'an is not - it is a derivative work based on al Kitab. I think that al Kitab is not something that can be written down on paper in human language, and therefore in order for those who have not been revealed al Kitab directly to have some sort of guidance, it is necessary to make some sort of explanation or translation, which is an arabic al Qur'an.

So from this I deduce that we have Umm al Kitab, which is the collection of immutable laws; Al Kitab, which contains the Umm al Kitab, is probably more of a collection everything related to these laws; and al Qur'an which is either an arabic 'translation' of Al Kitab, or simply an explanation of its contents - an exposition of the main concepts and an explanation thereof with examples etc. This, however, is purely personal opinion, and I know that as I study more al Qur'an, I will discover new things. Just looking at the different passages mentioning al Qur'an, al Kitab, and Umm al Kitab has made me really think about the subject and the what I have so far figured out is outlined above.

claurianta

not to mention the inconsistencies, incomplete sentences, contradictions, unrelated and irrelevant statements, etc.

At this point I'm going to join the chorus of other voices and ask you to give one concrete proof of each of the following in the arabic Qur'an inconsistency, incomplete sentence, contradiction, irrelevant statement. Because, honestly, I would like to know, and I think it would further my understanding of your position.

unknownuser

Brother claurianta

I believe you have the wrong understanding regarding Umma Al Kitab in 37

the arabic words says "Huna Umma Al Kitab" Huna is referring to the Muhkamat verses i.e. Umma AlKitab means the foundation of the Quran, i.e. the Muhkamat verses are the foundation "the base" of the Quran, this is 100% bro and I'm sure about it

37 never talked about other books but the Quran and specifically the Muhkamat verses which are the foundation of the Quran. (Huna Umma Al Kitab)

peace bro

thegod

claurianta wrote...
Now think of the of the People of the Book (ahl al Kitab) that the Qur'an talks of in several places. These people were sent al Kitab through previous Prophets (Moses for example; see 253), and since I think we can all agree that an arabic al Qur'an was not sent down to Moses or the other People of the Book, the arabic Qur'an we have does not equal al Kitab.

hmmmm! so u propose quran, al kitab and umm al kitab are 3 different scriptures! ok, if i get it right, u are saying when god is referred to as having revealed the kitab, it does not necessarily imply quran was also revealed by god! further, u have stated that it seems that the quran is an exposition of the kitab! cool! -)

before we get into that, what do u say about this

4 82 So do they not consider The Koran, and if (it) were from at other than God, they would have found in it much difference/disagreement.

claurianta

Brother claurianta

I believe you have the wrong understanding regarding Umma Al Kitab in 37

the arabic words says "Huna Umma Al Kitab" Huna is referring to the Muhkamat verses i.e. Umma AlKitab means the foundation of the Quran, i.e. the Muhkamat verses are the foundation "the base" of the Quran, this is 100% bro and I'm sure about it

37 never talked about other books but the Quran and specifically the Muhkamat verses which are the foundation of the Quran. (Huna Umma Al Kitab)

peace bro

Peace brother Ahmed,

Look at 37 again. Does it use the word "al Quran", or the word "al Kitab"? It uses al Kitab, and more precisely, it doesn't use "hadha al Kitab", so it is not "this Book" but rather "the Book". The is the same al Kitab that was given to Moses (253). We actually have a fourth term that I have recently found, "al furqan", the Criterion, which was also revealed to Moses (253) and Jesus (5113), and mentioned in 33-4 as being separate from al Kitab, the Torah, and the Injeel.
So we have here SIX entities al Kitab (253, 37, 5113, 454), Umm al Kitab (37, 1339), al Quran (2185), al Furqan (253, 34), the Torah and the Injeel (33, 5113).
Now, there is repetitive references to al Kitab being revealed BEFORE al Qur'an (253, 454 for example - the ahl al Kitab have al Kitab before the revelation of al Qur'an - if they didn't, they would be ahl al Torah or ahl al Injeel or ahl al Furqan, but they are not; they are ahl al Kitab) so then how can al Qur'an = al Kitab??? Or was al Qur'an revealed prior to it being revealed to Muhammad? (NO, it was not).

So what do we know of these six entities?

Al Furqan given to Moses (253, 214 and Aaron (214. It is clarified by al Qur'an (2185). Revealed during a battle (841).
Al Umm al Kitab It is precise in meaning, and forms part of al Kitab (37); it is with God (1339); it mentions al Kitab (434).
Al Kitab given to Moses (253, 287) and the descendents of Abraham (454), and Jesus (1930); there is no doubt in it (22); it is recited by the Jews (244) and the Nazarenes (2113); authenticated by a messenger or God (2101); has a people (ahl al Kitab 2105, 2109); it is the truth (2144); it is well known (2146) BUT a messenger was sent to teach al Kitab and what was not known (2151); the pious believe in it (2177); sent down with the Prophets (2212) so they may judge between the people in what they were disputing; separate from al Furqan, al Torah and al Injeel (33-4, 349); part Umm al Kitab, part allegory (37); revealed to Muhammad (37); much of it was hidden by ahl al Kitab (515); taught to Jesus (5110); fully details all things (5154); detailed/expounded by al Quran (1037); conferred upon the progeny of Lot (2927); part of al Kitab was inspired to Muhammad (3531); sent down in one night (443)
al Quran considered Kitab (a book) but never al Kitab (413); sent down during Ramadan (2185); could not have been produced without God (1037); authenticates that which is already present (1037); details/expounds of al Kitab (1037); guides to that which is upright (179); something is cited in it (1741); it is a healing and mercy to the believers (1782); neither the humans nor the jinn can create Qur'an like it (178; was not sent down all at once (2532, 7623); it is easy to learn (5417, 5422); marked by God (551)
Al Torah a guidance and a light (543); authenticated by Jesus (546); no indication as to which prophet it was given, but it is possessed by the Jews (543); it is revealed (544)
Al Injeel given to Jesus (546); a guidance and a light (546); it has a people (ahl al Injeel - 547)

Now, seeing as there are manifest differences in how al Kitab and al Qur'an are described in the Qur'an, and the fact that in no part of the Qur'an does it say that the two are one and the same, or even that one is part of the other. And nowhere in the Qur'an does it say that Huna Umma al Kitab refers to anything that is actually in al Qur'an, but rather that which is in al Kitab. I must admit that I am still a bit confused on how these all can be put together, but for me it is now clear that al Kitab and al Qur'an are not identical, and therefore that which is said about al Kitab (such as 37) cannot automatically be applied to al Qur'an. Al Kitab is al Kitab, and al Qur'an is Al Qur'an.

unknownuser

not to mention the inconsistencies, incomplete sentences, contradictions, unrelated and irrelevant statements, etc.

At this point I'm going to join the chorus of other voices and ask you to give one concrete proof of each of the following in the arabic Qur'an inconsistency, incomplete sentence, contradiction, irrelevant statement. Because, honestly, I would like to know, and I think it would further my understanding of your position.

Surely, you can join and sustain your voice along with the chorus, but make sure you know and understand the lyrics and rhythm. The majority of Muslims have a blind faith in believing the Quran to be the exact words of GOD, thenceforth the inconsistencies, contradictions and irrelevant issues are ?blinded? as subjected to their faith. With such mindsets, it becomes somewhat arduous to relate and emphasize conflicting and revocable points. This is one of the main reasons of declaring my opening as well as my last statement in my first post. Secondly, there are not one but many inconsistencies, contradictions and irrelevant/unrelated issues that have been already talked about and discussed not only on this forum but on the World Wide Web. Search and research for yourself. Hint type ?contradictions in Quran (or Koran)?, and ?inconsistencies in Quran (or Koran)?.

I?ll share a few inconsistent/unrelated verses pertaining to OUR time for your inquisitive mind.

And the divorced women should keep themselves in waiting for three courses; and it is not lawful for them that they should conceal what Allah has created in their wombs, if they believe in Allah and the last day; and their husbands have a better right to take them back in the meanwhile if they wish for reconciliation; and they have rights similar to those against them in a just manner, and the men are a degree above them, and Allah is Mighty, Wise.

(As for) the fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each of them, (giving) a hundred stripes, and let not pity for them detain you in the matter of obedience to Allah, if you believe in Allah and the last day, and let a party of believers witness their chastisement. The fornicator shall not marry any but a fornicatress or idolatress, and (as for) the fornicatress, none shall marry her but a fornicator or an idolater; and it is forbidden to the believers.

And as for those who are guilty of an indecency from among your women, call to witnesses against them four (witnesses) from among you; then if they bear witness confine them to the houses until death takes them away or Allah opens some way for them.

Notice that in the Islamic shariah, the women and men committing adultery are stoned to death and not confined to their homes. Also notice that the Quran often mentions burning in hell and fuels of fire, etc. throughout its pages. The stone-age history tells us that in those times people of all sorts were burnt alive and stoned for indecent acts and disobedience to their superiors, hence reflecting the verses talked about. These events took place and got written down in books long before even the Quran was invented.

These acts of stoning to death and burning people alive culminates from historic times and were real. Witnessing the barbaric and cruel nature of such events, people with great minds of peace and tranquility ordained these events to become submissive and morally righteous by policing and implementing rules and regulations as understood in the Quran (and ofcourse pre-Quranic books). If not, then burn them, stone them, kill them, etc., etc. as some of its traces are still apparent in the dogmatic Islamic religious world.

Here?s another. Not only are these two following verses rather irrelevant to OUR time but are somewhat unsound when it comes to accuracy of proper distribution and has been discussed in detail on this and other forums. Now let us see if YOU can figure it out and provide us with a definite breakdown of shares for each and every individual these verses talk about pertaining to their historic times and I shall bring another family tree for you to solve its shares from in exact accordance to these verses

Allah enjoins you concerning your children The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females; then if they are more than two females, they shall have two-thirds of what the deceased has left, and if there is one, she shall have the half; and as for his parents, each of them shall have the sixth of what he has left if he has a child, but if he has no child and (only) his two parents inherit him, then his mother shall have the third; but if he has brothers, then his mother shall have the sixth after (the payment of) a bequest he may have bequeathed or a debt; your parents and your children, you know not which of them is the nearer to you in usefulness; this is an ordinance from Allah Surely Allah is Knowing, Wise.

And you shall have half of what your wives leave if they have no child, but if they have a child, then you shall have a fourth of what they leave after (payment of) any bequest they may have bequeathed or a debt; and they shall have the fourth of what you leave if you have no child, but if you have a child then they shall have the eighth of what you leave after (payment of) a bequest you may have bequeathed or a debt; and if a man or a woman leaves property to be inherited by neither parents nor offspring, and he (or she) has a brother or a sister, then each of them two shall have the sixth, but if they are more than that, they shall be sharers in the third after (payment of) any bequest that may have been bequeathed or a debt that does not harm (others); this is an ordinance from Allah and Allah is Knowing, Forbearing.

claurianta