Quran - Word for Word.
-
i don't believe those verses are false.
There are various versions of the Arabic Quran that are out there. They differ in many aspects (be they vocal, diacritical pointsor, graphic, etc) but I don?t think that matters because they all convey the same message.
I do believe that the exact words are preserved.
I aint gonna waste any more time trying to work out if those verses are really false. They don't sound "false" and those two verses do not decree any law/s so it aint that important to me and they won't help me progress.
peace,
sugar -
There are various versions of the Arabic Quran that are out there. They differ in many aspects (be they vocal, diacritical pointsor, graphic, etc) but I don?t think that matters because they all convey the same message.
I do believe that the exact words are preserved.
I aint gonna waste any more time trying to work out if those verses are really false. They don't sound "false" and those two verses do not decree any law/s so it aint that important to me and they won't help me progress.
peace Sugar
yes, the message is more important than the words. And only the people who want to understand it will understand it.
And that's what I don't get about those two verses. Even if they were part of the original quran, the exclusion of those verses cannot be used against his ideas because they are hardly the backbone of the quranic message.
and if you do believe the exact words are preserved, what do you think about all the other versions of the quran. And what about the early manuscripts that were destroyed by the early muslim leaders when compiling the quran?
they have only slight differences, but they still prove that it hasn't been preserved word for word. -
yes, the message is more important than the words. And only the people who want to understand it will understand it.
How do you understand the message if not through the words?
And that's what I don't get about those two verses. Even if they were part of the original quran, the exclusion of those verses cannot be used against his ideas because they are hardly the backbone of the quranic message.
RK had very convoluted ideas.
and if you do believe the exact words are preserved, what do you think about all the other versions of the quran. And what about the early manuscripts that were destroyed by the early muslim leaders when compiling the quran?
Wow, where did you get these stories from , Phoenix? How do you authenticate these tales?
they have only slight differences, but they still prove that it hasn't been preserved word for word.
If in fact those books are al-quraan, sure. But they're not.
-
what do you think about all the other versions of the quran. And what about the early manuscripts that were destroyed by the early muslim leaders when compiling the quran?
they have only slight differences, but they still prove that it hasn't been preserved word for word.i do believe that an unaltered copy of al-quran is out there somewhere and i am sure one of these many versions of "code 19" will confirm that in the future.
peace,
sugar -
There never was a true Bible. Bible comes from biblia, meaning collection. The Bible is a collection of chosen books and manuscripts that fitted the Chrsitian doctrine. But i you refer to like the Psalms of David, yes those are changed. But not in comparison to the Quran. Only minute details of the Quran has changed. Not big changes as with other books.
-
Wow, where did you get these stories from , Phoenix? How do you authenticate these tales?
;D
this is where i got them fromMany Muslims believe that Abu Bakr, the first Caliph (reigned 632-634) ordered the first compilation of the different fragments of the Qur?an, from odd parchements, pieces of bone, and the memories of Muhammad?s followers. Shi?as reject the idea of Abu Bakr?s compilation of the Qur'an, claiming it was Ali who made the compilation of Qur'an immediately after the death of Muhammad. Uthman (Caliph 644-656) ordered a compilation of the Qur?an due to disputes arising about recitation. The relation of this compilation to that of Abu Bakr?s reign is not clear. If Abu Bakr?s compilation were in existence, it is not clear how disputes arose which required Uthman to compile the Qur?an. Some traditions consider the first compilation to be the basis of the second (which requires the first to be incomplete), others that the first never existed, and others still that the two compilations were made independently but were found to be identical. The Qur?anic compilation of Uthman?s reign was completed between 650 & 656, about 20 years after Muhammad?s death, and about 40 years after the first revelations. Muslim?s consider that the text of this compilation, known as the ?rasm?, is the same text as that of the Qur?an today. Uthman ordered all alternative copies to be destroyed. The oldest physical text of the Qur?an is to be found on inscriptions on the Dome of the Rock, built in 691. Some Qur'anic fragments have been dated as far back as the seventh or eighth century. The oldest fragments yet found are from San?a in the Yemen. Both the San?a fragments and the Dome inscriptions differ slightly from the current text (only in diacritics). The oldest comprehensive copy of the text is from the ninth century, over one and a half centuries after Muhammad?s death.
Critics argue that the absolute political and religious authority of the caliphs would have allowed them to easily add or remove text during the compilation process, (as later caliphs may have tried to do so after).
Supporters of the Qur'an claim its initial circulation as a spoken text, and claim that the several hundred companions perfectly memorized the Qur'an. Islamic sources suggest that Muhammad would recite the Qur'an in its entirety (that is, including both the earliest and the most recent elements) once every Ramadan but twice in the year he died. Also, The Qur'an was not only transmitted orally but also were written down by the four scribes selected by Muhammad. Some supporters of Quran argue that the claimed consistency and mathematical structure of Quran shows that Qur'an should have had one author. Some non-Muslim academics reject the notion that the Qur'an of today is markedly different from the Qur'an recited at the time of Muhammad's death. See Qur'an for further information about Compilation of Qur'an.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Islam
but if this isn't reliable information, I will be more than happy to recant.
-
There never was a true Bible. Bible comes from biblia, meaning collection. The Bible is a collection of chosen books and manuscripts that fitted the Chrsitian doctrine. But i you refer to like the Psalms of David, yes those are changed. But not in comparison to the Quran. Only minute details of the Quran has changed. Not big changes as with other books.
peace
by Bible, I meant the message brought by Jesus.
-
Also that wasn't called the Bible
-
Peace all,
Since many refrain from participating in what was originally asked for, for whatever reasons, and this thread becoming deviated, I shall continue.
I would like for anyone to present exactly and precisely, word for word, in Arabic (not in its current grammatical form) and as well as its translation, to begin with on the following manuscript
-
Peace,
I copied and pasted a portion of one of the earliest manuscripts from my documents file. When I sign in, I can see it but when not signed in, I don't see it. Mods/admin, please explain? Also please let me know how to magnify a document file which can be readily and clearly read, if that's the case, or any other suggestions. Thanks.
-
DanishI copied and pasted a portion of one of the earliest manuscripts from my documents file. When I sign in, I can see it but when not signed in, I don't see it. Mods/admin, please explain? Also please let me know how to magnify a document file which can be readily and clearly read, if that's the case, or any other suggestions. Thanks.
Danish, some questions you won't answer below
-
How do you know that's an 'early manuscript'?
-
If a guy 1400 years ago wrote his own al-quraan and purposely distorted it, would you know about it now?
-
Why do you accept manuscripts to be true just because the source you acquire it from says so?
-
-
Danish, some questions you won't answer below
Then don't ask. ??? Think and follow what was requested for.
-
I wasnt asking for your benefit but to show objective and sincere people here that your position is precarious. Like a house of cards..
THINK and follow what was requested, don't ramble.
-
don't ramble.
well, i was sick and tired of "Slam dunk", thanks for inspiring me with a replacement, now please let me know when you want the Quran to rumble you
cheers
-
Peace,
I copied and pasted a portion of one of the earliest manuscripts from my documents file. When I sign in, I can see it but when not signed in, I don't see it. Mods/admin, please explain? Also please let me know how to magnify a document file which can be readily and clearly read, if that's the case, or any other suggestions. Thanks.
Peace Danish,
I'm not sure if that's a settings issue with this board, where you can view certain document/image files only when signed in. On the other hand, in terms of magnifying, as far as I know, an image has to magnified externally and then inserted here. Unless when pasted it was really big to begin with and a mod wou have to reduce the size and repost it again. Please pm me if this doesn't answer your question.
-
Thanks Zein. Nadia brushed me in on this and I shall try it again. But can you see the image of the manuscript on my earlier post, whether signed in or not? I know there's an 'attachment browser' in the Additional Options...button from where I uploaded a jpeg file in PDF format saved in my documents section and then hit "post". Perhaps I am not correctly following the uploading procedure. Please advise.
Peace.