The current quranic text might contain some falsehoods!

Armanaziz

Salamun Alaik truthseeker11

What proofs are you talking about?

By having faith in Qur'an in its entirity, I am convinced that I am being guided aright. The proof comes not in one verse - it comes in the full package - how the book guides me in its entirity. Going through the entire Qur'an from beginning to end to discuss this is beyond the scope of this thread, and I am not yet ready for that excercise. But perhaps someday, if my Master wills, I will take it up upon me.

The statement "the proofs are clear enough for those who have faith" is a dangerous statement.

The statement seems dangerous to you probably because you misunderstood what I meant by "those who have faith." By this phrase I DID NOT mean, "those who believe in Qur'an blindly." Rather I meant, "those who have faith in Allah and the last day." To explain further whoever accepts upholding his God-gifted senses of right and wrong as his inviolable obligation (i.e. faith in Allah), and accepts accountability to the same authority for all of his actions (faith in the last day) - if they approach Qur'an with pure intensions - will find the Qur'an, in its entirity, to be a wise guide that gives away finer and finer insights the more they ponder about it. At least I know it by first-hand exprerience.

Let's assume Arman and I stumble upon 10 glasses full of water. The water seems to be identical as far as human senses are concerned. Odorless, colorless, tasteless. There is a note next to the glasses saying "this water has been sent to you from God". Arman immediately starts drinking the water (despite my attempts to stop him) and after finishing the first 8 glasses everything is fine. So far, no harm caused by the water seems to be "the proof" that the water has not been poisoned. Unbeknownst to the two of us, in reality the final glass was not sent from God but was sneaked in by someone else and contains a deadly poison which is odorless, colorless, tasteless, mixed with water.

Arman says he has faith in the note and "the proof", and advises me to drink the remaining two glasses without any fear because "the proofs are clear enough for those who have faith". I happen to disagree with Arman and take half of the remaining two glasses to the laboratory to conduct further tests to determine the truth. Arman drinks the remaining two half glasses. I, on the other hand, discover the deadly poison and avoid drinking the water. Guess what happened?

Let me rephrase your analogy in a more practical way. Let's say both of us are travelling a foreign land together and are extremely thirsty while crossing a dessert. We ran out of water and not sure if we can make to the next town. Suddenly by mercy of the Infinite Creator we stumble upon a dessert camp who serve bottled water.

The camp serves us two bottles of clean water labelled, say, "WAIAKEA". That is the only label known to both of us, the other labels are unfamiliar. I am saying, I have drunk many bottles of "WAIAKEA" before and I have faith in it. You are saying, "What is the externally verifiable proof that this camp guys are not trying to poison us. I've also drunk "WAIAKEA" before and found it OK, but that doesn't mean all "WAIAKEA" bottles are safe. And I cannot trust the labels on the bottle claiming it to be 100% safe water because that would be circular refernce. I'd rather go to the town and perform laboratory test on the water before I drink it."

Perhaps, you are logically sound in your reasoning, but -

Your doubt alone does not PROVE that the water bottle is indeed poisoned.
Your extra caution may be fatal for you if you cannot make to the town in time.

Where does the infinite Creator say "I did not make the proof evident to everyone because the day the proof will become clear and evident to everyone - it will be already GAME OVER"?

What al-quran allegedly says is

4153 We will show them our signs in the horizons, and within themselves, until it becomes clear to them that this is the truth .............

1736 And do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and heart, all these you are responsible for.

Where are the signs in the horizons and within ourselves that makes it clear that the current text of al-quran has been protected and no falsehood has entered it?

As far as signs within ourselves is concerned - I know I see them, up to you to search for your own. As to the signs on the horizon - I am waiting just like you. But unlike you I am in no haste.

2137-40 Humans have been created of haste. I will show you My signs, so do not hasten Me. And they say, "When is this promise, if you should be sincere?" (Only) if those who fepressed (faith) but knew the time when they will not avert the fire from their faces nor from their backs and they will not be helped - rather, it will come to them unexpectedly and bewilder them, and they will not be able to repel it, nor will they be reprieved.

(My personal translation, cross checking is recommended.)

In reality, signs have started appearing that indicate that the current quranic text might contain falsehoods.

Now you have come to the point my friend... if the above statement is true, then and ONLY THEN, you can say Qur'ans claim of divine protection is false. You would be right to doubt the bottled water if you really see some signs that the bottled is tempered or the quality of the water is compromised. Until then you have said nothing.

That's why in my initial reply to you I cut all the non-sence and directly started discussing the 13 points which you presented as signs that the current quranic text might contain falsehoods. And I have explained to you why am not convinced by any of those 13 arguments. And I am happy to discuss them again.

If you can convince me that signs have started appearing that indicate that the current quranic text might contain falsehoods. Trust me, indeed you will find me among those who uphold their God-gifted conscience and intellect. Just a caveat - you or I do not understand the "interpretation" of a verse is NOT a sufficient proof that the verse is false. You have to positively demonstrate the falsehood.

It is a simple question. If you cannot say yes the answer would be no! If the sailor cannot say yes then the sailor is doubtful about the compass being 100% reliable and the answer would be No.

You did not get the compass analogy at all. The compass is NOT SUPPOSED TO point to the direction of the destination. The compass does reliably what it is meant to do, to show north and south. But it is up to the sailor to see the signs and figure out the route to the destination. That is why whether the compass correctly directs to the destination has no yes/no answer. Rather the one who is asking the question is unaware of what the compass is meant to do.

For the same reason whether Qur'an is true or false is not the right question to ask. Falsehood cannot enter Qur'an's text. But falsehood CAN and WILL enter reader's mind if the reader is bent on to applying a false interpretation over it.

On the other hand - those who are conscious and uphold their God-gifted sense of right and wrong; they are the ones for them Qur'an will not fail to be a wise guide and a wise reminder. Untill you proove or demonstrate otherwise - that is a faith that I am not ready to give up.

37 does not say "none know its FIXED interpretation except God" but says "none know its interpretation except God". "Interpretation" means any valid interpretation and includes all valid interpretations. How can a verse that none can know the interpretation of except God, guide anyone?

For example

"He killed it" can mean "he did very well" or it could mean "he murdered it". Both are valid interpretations. If God says that only It knows the interpretation of "he killed it", then no one else can know both interpretations, irrespective of the context. So to everyone else "he killed it" will appear the same as "hrkbsgdjkgbmcxz". In that case, why would God include the sentence "he killed it" in any passage that it inspires, knowing it would be incomprehensible to anyone else?

Even if "interpretation" is a fixed meaning, then only that meaning is acceptable as the truth and all other "new insights" and "alternate interpretations" will be falsehood and cannot be used for guidance. Only the fixed original interpretation known by God can be the truth and useful for guidance. Hence it doesn't make any sense whatsoever to include verses that no one can correctly comprehend, in a book meant for guidance of mankind.

The statement highlighted in bold would be true for any human written book. But not to a divine book - the author of whom is aware of the past and present and future. Say, In 700 A.D. a man named "Bob" killed a cat. and in 2030 A.D. another man named Bob would would do very well in figuring out an ancient text.

It is then possible for God to make the statement "Bob killed it" to actually have two separate insights to two separate generations - if that is how He wants to guide mankind. And to me that would be the best proof of divine authorship. Those who do not have faith in the statement as divine statement can never agree that a 700AD text can have an interpretation that only makes sense in 2030AD no matter how clear the external signs are. But those firmly rooted in knowledge would say, "We have faith in it - everything is from our Master. Only our Master knows the interpretation of it. Who knows, perhaps another Bob in 3030AD will kill a tiger and the statement would still give yet another new insight! How many different insights it can give is only known to the author.

I blindly follow nothing. Not anymore than a sailor who "blindly" follows a compass. Under all circumstances I have accepted upholding my God gifted conscience and intellect as my primary and inviolable obligation to my Master. Searching for signs of my Master in Qur'an or in the universe is secondary to the earlier statement. Those who are blind are not equal to those who can see.

handshake

Glad that we could agree on something. To me the faith on our God gifted sense of right and wrong is ALL THAT REALLY MATTERS. As long as you have that - even if you loose faith on the compass, you still have the stars to guide you. Allah is your Master and my Master. Let's be slave to Him.

May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.

Ameen.

Regards,
Arman

Man_of_Faith

Salaam alta,

I liked a lot of what you wrote. Honestly I begin to suspect that "Hell" is being given a new body, in THIS world, over and over again. The way out is through separation of the spirit from the flesh. And surely this is pretty much Hell.

The blank soul has no memory since memory is stored in the flesh and which could enable this reasoning to be viable. However, the predisposition, quality and starting condition of the body, is determined depending on success of the previous body (state of soul) if one failed to reach the state of absolute dissolution.

This is another religion's concept I know, but I sense a sanity in it.

You probably know negative traits of your personality, if you are honest to yourself, such as innate insecurity etc. These have not always any explanation in childhood experiences and people usually associate it with genes. Some are greedy, evil-spirited and insane. It seems all connected. It would also appear such as that a person like Adolf Hitler would be reborn severely crippled, perhaps mentally handicapped like Downs Syndrome. Yet everyone, even if handicapped, is deserving to be treated with mercy.

The life is all about realization, gain a sound soul and be and do good, and very importantly "Separate the spirit from the flesh". The sectarian crowd distorts meanings like amen and salam to impose that they mean something else. The traditional piety is abstention from the world and is true, but the people generally forget that it includes being sound and perfect in judgment too. When you gave dissolved your ego, then you are ready, for it clouds your judgment. Jesus said something about being like a child. If one thinks a little they would understand what he meant.

Salaam

truthseeker11

Salamun Alaik Arman,

You still haven't answered the simple question that I asked you a few posts back!

By having faith in Qur'an in its entirity, I am convinced that I am being guided aright. The proof comes not in one verse - it comes in the full package - how the book guides me in its entirity. Going through the entire Qur'an from beginning to end to discuss this is beyond the scope of this thread, and I am not yet ready for that excercise. But perhaps someday, if my Master wills, I will take it up upon me.

The proof that the current text of al-quran has been protected and is the truth in its entirety has to come from external sources as per 4153.

if they approach Qur'an with pure intensions - will find the Qur'an, in its entirity, to be a wise guide, that gives away finer and finer insights the more they ponder about it. At least I know it by first-hand exprerience.

So you should have no problem answering this simple yes, no question

Do you accept that the current text of al-quran is the truth in its entirety?

Let me rephrase your analogy in a more practical way. Let's say both of us are travelling a foreign land together and are extremely thirsty while crossing a dessert. We ran out of water and not sure if we can make to the next town. Suddenly by mercy of the Infinite Creator we stumble upon a dessert camp who serve bottled water.

The camp serves us two bottles of clean water labelled, say, "WAIAKEA". That is the only label known to both of us, the other labels are unfamiliar. I am saying, I have drunk many bottles of "WAIAKEA" before and I have faith in it. You are saying, "What is the externally verifiable proof that this camp guys are not trying to poison us. I've also drunk "WAIAKEA" before and found it OK, but that doesn't mean all "WAIAKEA" bottles are safe. And I cannot trust the labels on the bottle claiming it to be 100% safe water because that would be circular refernce. I'd rather go to the town and perform laboratory test on the water before I drink it."

Perhaps, you are logically sound in your reasoning, but -

Your doubt alone does not PROVE that the water bottle is indeed poisoned.
Your extra caution may be fatal for you if you cannot make to the town in time.

Your analogy is not accurate. I never ran out of water so my extra caution would not be fatal. I still had the minimum essential laboratory tested water bottles (262) to survive. Extra water would have been good but I didn't really need it to survive, so better safe than sorry.

As far as signs within ourselves is concerned - I know I see them, up to you to search for your own. As to the signs on the horizon - I am waiting just like you. But unlike you I am in no haste.

Strawman faulty assumption. Where did I say I am in haste? I have the minimum essential water bottles to patiently survive.

You are admitting that you are still waiting for the external evidence; then how do you know that the current quranic text is the truth in its entirety? According to 4153, the truth will be verified by both signs in the horizons and within ourselves.

That's why in my initial reply to you I cut all the non-sence and directly started discussing the 13 points which you presented as signs that the current quranic text might contain falsehoods. And I have explained to you why am not convinced by any of those 13 arguments. And I am happy to discuss them again.

There are actually more than 25 points but perhaps you haven't read all my posts. Some of the points you discussed have already been further discussed by me in subsequent posts with Wakas.

Furthermore, this is a Strawman. I didn't say that those 13 points are "signs" that the current quranic text might contain falsehoods. Some verses caused apparent contradictions in the current quranic text or did not make any sense, which raised the possibility that the current quranic text might contain some falsehoods and I am trying to resolve those issues. That is why I have said many times that I am still waiting for the original quranic text inspired to Prophet Muhammad to be discovered to see if there is any difference. In my understanding, 159 and 4142 refer to the original quranic text preserved in lawh mahfouz (8522) and not the current quranic text, unless it is proven that both texts are exactly the same.

Perhaps you missed the following in one of my replies to you

There is also the fallacy of Division in the above argument. 159, 4141-42 and 3669 referring to al-zikr and quran, does not mean they are referring to the current text of al-quran, because the current text of al-zikr or quran could be different from the original text of al-zikr or quran. Additional evidence is needed to first prove that the current text is the same as original text.

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9606464.msg364565#msg364565

If you can convince me that signs have started appearing that indicate that the current quranic text might contain falsehoods. Trust me, indeed you will find me among those who uphold their God-gifted conscience and intellect. Just a caveat - you or I do not understand the "interpretation" of a verse is NOT a sufficient proof that the verse is false. You have to positively demonstrate the falsehood.

The signs I referred to are not the 25 + points but external signs outside of the current quranic text, and I have already discussed those signs in detail in earlier posts that perhaps you missed.

You did not get the compass analogy at all. The compass is NOT SUPPOSED TO point to the direction of the destination. The compass does reliably what it is meant to do, to show north and south. But it is up to the sailor to see the signs and figure out the route to the destination. That is why whether the compass correctly directs to the destination has no yes/no answer. Rather the one who is asking the question is unaware of what the compass is meant to do.

I did get the compass analogy but it appears that you didn't get it.

If the compass is 100% reliable then it will point to north and south accurately and the sailor will be able to use it to navigate to the destination with 100% accuracy, even if it doesn't point directly to the destination. Suppose the destination is 30 degrees NW. If the compass points to north and south with 100% accuracy, then it will also point to 30 degrees NW with 100% accuracy and sailor can use it to reach the destination with 100% accuracy. So the answer will be yes, if the compass is 100% reliable.

So once again

Do you accept that the current text of al-quran is the truth in its entirety? Simple yes, no question.

For the same reason whether Qur'an is true or false is not the right question to ask. Falsehood cannot enter Qur'an's text. But falsehood CAN and WILL enter reader's mind if the reader is bent on to applying a false interpretation over it.

Based on your reply above, you should have no problem answering this simple yes, no question

Do you accept that the current text of al-quran is the truth in its entirety?

On the other hand - those who are conscious and uphold their God-gifted sense of right and wrong; they are the ones for them Qur'an will not fail to be a wise guide and a wise reminder. Untill you proove or demonstrate otherwise - that is a faith that I am not ready to give up.

Strawman again. When did I question your conscience?

The statement highlighted in bold would be true for any human written book. But not to a divine book - the author of whom is aware of the past and present and future. Say, In 700 A.D. a man named "Bob" killed a cat. and in 2030 A.D. another man named Bob would would do very well in figuring out an ancient text.

It is then possible for God to make the statement "Bob killed it" to actually have two separate insights to two separate generations - if that is how He wants to guide mankind. And to me that would be the best proof of divine authorship. Those who do not have faith in the statement as divine statement can never agree that a 700AD text can have an interpretation that only makes sense in 2030AD no matter how clear the external signs are. But those firmly rooted in knowledge would say, "We have faith in it - everything is from our Master. Only our Master knows the interpretation of it. Who knows, perhaps another Bob in 3030AD will kill a tiger and the statement would still give yet another new insight! How many different insights it can give is only known to the author.

I don't know why you cannot understand something so simple

According to 37, NONE knows the correct interpretation of allegorical verses except God. Therefore, no matter what you interpret them as, your interpretation will be false.

You talk about discussing the points in my first post but you have still not given reasonable explanations of some points that I have repeatedly brought to your attention.

Here they are again

159 and 4142 by themselves cannot be used to argue that the current quranic text is protected and no falsehood can enter it, due to circular argument fallacy. God knew this, so why did It inspire those verses but did not give concrete proof of protection of al-zikr to all the readers? It would have been extremely easy for God.
Some verses in the current quranic text cannot be interpreted by us because their correct interpretation is known only to God (37). No matter how those verses are interpreted, the interpretation will be false. So how can we verify that those verses are the truth using external evidence and knowledge as per 4153 and 1736, if we can't even interpret them?

To verify the truth of those verses we have to know their interpretation. But then if God tells us the interpretation of those verses so that their truth can be verified, then 37 will be falsified!

The Quran says God protects the book and falsehood cannot enter it. Then it says we will be shown evidence in the horizons, until it becomes clear to us that the verses are the truth. However, God has not shown any evidence in the horizons that makes it clear to everyone that the book has been protected and no falsehood has entered it. This is a contradiction.

It would have been extremely easy for God to preserve/provide external evidence that the current quranic text has been protected and no falsehood has entered it.

The current quranic text claims it has clear revelations (1015, 2216, 579, 6511 etc.). 37 says that none know the interpretation of some verses except God, thereby admitting those verses are unclear. That is a contradiction.

Why didn't God make all the verses simple and clear, when It could have easily done so?

The current quranic text claims its verses are guidance for the righteous (22), clarification for the people (313, and reminder for the worlds (12104, 3887). 37 says that none know the interpretation of some verses except God. So how can verses that cannot be comprehended by anyone except God, serve as guidance, clarification and reminder?

Regards,

May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.

truthseeker11

Salaam Altaf,

Thank you for the intellectually stimulating post. I apologize for the delayed reply because I had to put a lot of thought into this.

The traditional karmic model in which the consequences are imposed and forced upon us by a vindictive God cannot be the truth due to the shortcomings you pointed out. The actual karmic process designed by the infinite Creator is elegant and perfect with no flaws and is based upon complete free will. It is a complex process which is difficult to understand but it works. The information I am going to share with you is really hard for some people to take in. It took me a while to really process it all, but in the end it all made sense.

The above theory is good and looks very just but there is a problem in its application. According to the karmic law of cause and effect, a person?s present life circumstances are explained by his/her actions in a previous life; and his/her life circumstances in that life are explained by his/her life circumstances in a life previous to that one; and so on indefinitely. So the solution hoped for regarding inequalities never seems to come to an end.

What if I told you that the karmic cycle can be ended with a simple forgiveness from the wronged person?! This forgiveness can be obtained at any time - during the incarnation or in between lives. Thus the probability of the karmic cycle to end sooner increases. Additionally, we are immortal beings in reality and have an eternity to learn all the lessons so we can choose to incarnate as many times as we want to balance the karma and make spiritual progress.

Furthermore, does it really seem fair that when a person who has lived a long life dies and is reincarnated, he/she must start all over again as a baby with her maturity, life experiences, wisdom, and memories completely erased?

What if I told you that we choose to forget the life experiences, wisdoms, and memories of our past lives?! In between lives, we revert back to spiritual beings and remember all life experiences, wisdom, and memories of all our past lives. This spiritual being is called the higher self which is at a 6th density vibration state of existence and only has a mental and spiritual body. The higher self keeps going in and out of various incarnations to learn various lessons and make spiritual progress towards eventual removal of illusion of separateness from the infinite Creator. Thus the infinite Creator experiences itself through infinite ongoing temporary manifestations of its parts.

The higher self reviews and evaluates the most recent life and the lessons learned, and goes through a healing and resting phase if necessary (if it has gone through extreme pain and suffering in previous incarnation). Then it chooses out of its own free will to enter a new 3rd density vibration incarnation to learn the remaining lessons and balance the karma. Even though it is given the choice of remaining in the 6th density vibration, invariably the higher self freely chooses to go back to the 3rd density vibration because some lessons can only be learned in that state. It freely chooses among various life plans presented to it to help learn the remaining lessons and to balance the karma, for example it chooses its parents, role, and life circumstances in the new life, similar to choosing subjects, majors, minors etc. in university. Then it chooses to forget all memories in the new incarnation. The scientific mechanism is flooding of the baby with Oxytocin while in the womb, which causes infantile amnesia.

The higher self being a positive 6th density vibration part of the infinite Creator is just and fair, and using its free will it freely choose to play a role in the next life which will help to balance the karma and learn remaining lessons, and sometimes even freely chooses to play a role not involving any karma, just for experience or to learn a lesson. That role can also be a negative role for reasons I will explain later.

Following are some reasons why we choose to forget our past lives

We do not remember our past lives because it frees us to make different choices. We can quite literally start over in our relationships with others because we are not carrying any past baggage. For example, if you knew someone had killed you in a past life, you might not be able to forgive them or allow them to make it up to you. Similarly, if you had married someone in a past life, you or the other person might feel as if you had to do it again. Being clear of such previous associations, you are free to do what best makes sense for the person you are today.
It makes it easier for us to live our life now. Simply put, if we knew the precise relationship that we have had with everyone we love, feel friendship for, work with, or meet even casually, we would live in a state of information overload.
If children were born with full access to spiritual memory, very little learning would be required. A child would be able to speak right away, perhaps in a language from a previous life. It may wonder where its family, job and home have gone. There would be great confusion at each and every birth! Children fully versed in astrophysics, psychology, sociology and so on, would be telling their parents how to behave and demanding full adult rights and independence. Not befitting for a helpless physical frame. This bizarre upside-down scenario would result in a totally different type of civilization. Therefore a child must be born with a clean slate in order to receive the programming of this life. 200 years ago for example, societal norms would have been quite different, technology, food, industry, behaviors ? all of which would need to be relearned in the present day and not carried over from a new life. If not, a child would simply never fit in. It's possible however, that this is the very reason some are born feeling like they are not of this time, or old fashioned.
A key reason for the forgetting is for us to start a new lifetime of learning and discovery without tainting our experiences with those from previous lives. Our personality and whole approach to life may be totally different in this lifetime than to others, and this learning curve wouldn't have been possible if we hadn't undergone the forgetting. For example, you may have the propensity for extreme sports in this life, but the play it safe, chess playing mathematician you were in a previous life, would never have dreamed of such activities. This way you can experience both.
Another reason for the forgetting at reincarnation are the spiritual implications. Imagine if we were all born with full knowledge of our past lives (whether on Earth or elsewhere) and the periods in between on higher planes. We'd all have pretty comprehensive knowledge of the universe and incarnation here would be far less meaningful. People might seek the conditions of a previous life, perhaps wish for revenge for past wrong doings, some may not wish to be attached to a physical body, belief systems would be utterly different ? plus further bizarre implications that can't even be imagined.
If we had much better lives or were very wealthy in our past lives, it can cause us to be depressed in this life if it is not as good or if we are poor. Imagine that in your past life you were good looking, had lots of friends, good money and job, but in this life your "lesson" is a bit harder. You don't have it so easy. Memories from your past life will would just make you bitter about this life.
Similarly if we did very bad things in our past lives, it will weigh on our conscience and can cause us to be depressed when we remember that. We will feel the pains and sufferings of a life if it went very poorly. It is too much for us to cope with, too much burden. We have enough to do today, with taxes, children, and with our immediate problems and karma and it would be more confusing and we couldn't conquer the tasks at hand in this life.
Would you want to remember who murdered you or your family? Would you want to remember which tribes/cultures/countries you warred with? Would you want to remember loved ones who you have no hope of ever finding again? For your own sanity, wouldn?t it be better to forget those past lives and start over with a clean slate? It's a way to keep us sane, to keep us from detesting those who?ve wronged us in the past?to keep us from living lives of constant revenge and hatred.
Forgiveness is a lot easier when you have already forgotten! Easier to break the karmic cycle through forgiveness!

We do remember some things though. We don?t have the details but we have certain key hints as to who we are. The type of music we like, the people we are most attracted to, the types of food we like, the clothing we wear, certain periods of history that we identify with.

In our subconscious we have all memories from all our past lives stored and we can remember them if we really want, through meditation, regression hypnosis, astral projection, or channeling with our higher self.

Many entities incarnate on Earth overcome the forgetting. Children sometimes describe events from past lives and others regress and remember as adults. Their spiritual memories may also activate at any point in their lifetime ? activation involving intuition, a knowing, a memory of something but an inability to remember precisely what and when.

Spiritual teachers, those involved in service to others, or fighting inequality and poverty, those protecting our planet and doing other good works, are examples of people who overcome the forgetting and become activated. This could be termed a 'spiritual awakening' which is different for everybody.

Another difficulty for the karma/rebirth solution has to do with free will. An initial advantage of this solution to the problem of evil is that real moral agency is preserved. In fact, moral agency is central to the karma/rebirth solution our moral decisions self-determine our future experiences, making us responsible for our own destiny. Upon further reflection, the view seems to run contrary to free moral agency.

Consider the example of a man contemplating the rape and murder of a woman. Suppose he has done so before, and has thus far not been caught. He is considering redirecting his life by turning himself in to the authorities and receiving the consequences of his actions. But just as he is pondering this option, a woman strolls by and his mad passions for rape and murder begin to burn within him. He now has the choice to continue down the path of destruction or put a stop to it. If he decides to attack the woman and does so, then on the karmic account the woman was not completely innocent after all; she is paying the price for her former evil actions. In that case, the rapist is not truly free to act as he does, for he is simply following mechanistically the effects of karmic justice. He is merely the instrumental means for meting out the justice requisite for this woman?s previous moral failings. If, however, the woman does not deserve such moral recompense, then karmic justice will ensure that she does not receive it. In that case, the rapist will be unable to engage in the attack.

The problem that arises has to do with locating the moral freedom in this system. If the rapist is deterministically carrying out justice on his victim, then it seems that he is not truly a free moral agent after all. He is simply a cog in the karmic justice machine. It is disconcerting to affirm a moral system in which we understand raped and murdered victims to be themselves morally culpable for such acts of brutality against them. On the other hand, suppose the rapist really is free to attack the woman. If she was not deserving of such an act, this would be a serious violation of the law of karma whereby suffering occurs only because of one?s previous evil actions. If in attempting to justify such actions, the defender of the karmic system replied that the woman would in a future life receive a reward for such a morally gratuitous act, this does not appear to be consistent with karma, for this would run counter to the central principle of karma in which evil and suffering are the effects of one?s previous deeds.

What I am about to say might be another jolt for you but think deeply about it. All creation is a tiny part of the infinite Creator and has been manifested by the Creator in lower vibration states, so that the Creator can experience itself. In the absence of free will, there is no negative and the experiences are less diverse and spiritual growth of the creation, which increases the vibration and results in eventual dissolution of illusion of separateness from the infinite Creator, is very slow. The presence of free will requires the presence of negative, which creates a polarity with the positive, and thus causes exponential increased potential and diversity of experiences and accelerated spiritual growth. This is why free will was initiated by the infinite Creator, and negative was allowed to exist.

The logical consequence of free will is the presence of both negative and positive. Without the negative there can be no free will and spiritual growth will be very slow due to lack of polarity. So the villains (negative entities) and the freely chosen negative experiences are necessary for heroes (positive entities) to be able to use free will to choose positive experiences and achieve accelerated spiritual growth. Some souls have to be negative for free will to exist, so some advanced souls freely volunteer to play the negative role in service to the infinite Creator. The advanced higher self sometimes freely chooses to play a role not involving any karma, just for experience or to learn a lesson, and that role can also be a negative role.

What would you say if karma is actually not about suffering or punishment imposed or forced by a vindictive God, as the effect of a negative action in the past life, but about balancing your experiences from all possible perspectives so spiritual growth is accelerated? What if all souls choose out of free will what role (negative or positive) to experience in the next life before they are incarnated?

For example in one life a soul chooses to be murdered or raped, even though it has not murdered anyone before or raped anyone before, just so that it can experience murder or rape and learn a lesson and grow spiritually. In another life it voluntarily chooses to be a murderer (like the friend of God that Moses met!) or a rapist so that it can balance the experience from both perspectives and in the process also help a fellow soul balance karma. This act might appear to be a selfish act (service to self) from the 3rd density vibration perspective, but in reality it is service to other in the grand scheme of things by helping a soul balance its karma! Therefore, in reality there is no right or wrong, but just experience.

The karmic process is designed in such a way that enough souls volunteer to play the required role so that everything balances out in the end. Some souls are so inclined towards the service to others path, that even though they have graduated to the higher density vibrations, they sacrifice some time from their spiritual journey and volunteer to come back to the 3rd density vibration just so they can help their fellow souls, or be on the receiving end of pain and suffering which does not involve any karma, or be messengers for the divine message. Such souls are called Wanderers.

Jesus, Muhammad, friend of God that Moses met etc. are examples of Wanderers. Jesus was in 4th density vibration when he reincarnated back in 3rd density and currently he is in 6th density vibration. Muhammad was in 6th density vibration when he reincarnated back in 3rd density. Both of them, along with Gabriel, belong to the 6th density vibration social collective by the name of Yahweh! I am pretty sure that Noah and all Abrahamic prophets were Wanderers belonging to the Yahweh 6th density vibration social collective. The Wanderers don't always end up as prophets or messengers. They could also be the neighbor next door who is constantly helping others, or the beggar on the street, or an orphan child, who have devoted their incarnation unselfishly to helping 3rd density beings. Currently there are 70 million Wanderers on this Earth!

No brother, my knowledge about aliens, UFO etc is limited to Hollywood's Independence Day, Aliens, The Day the Earth stood Still etc. Actually I haven't thought about it much. But yes I have seen people who have been possessed by (jinn, shayateen, angels, higher celestial beings or positive/negative energy or i don't know what to call them) such things. I have seen these people speaking in somebody's (the one who is possessing) voice and even telling their own cause of death. And no this time it's not Hollywood's The Exorcist. It's real. I mean, i dont know how to explain such stuff.

To have a better and comprehensive idea of how the divine system works in the Universe and Earth, you should learn about aliens/"jinns". Without this knowledge your understanding will be limited and you will have difficulty comprehending many things. If interested, I can give you some information in a subsequent post about actual known evidence of existence of aliens and UFOs, for example documented UFO crashes, alien bodies and live aliens recovered, alien autopsies, other alien encounters like alien abductions, reverse engineering of alien technology etc. Most of our modern technology including the computer, cell phone, advanced energy and weapon systems etc. are a result of reverse engineering of alien technology from the 1947 Roswell, New Mexico UFO crash, recovery of alien bodies and autopsies.

Maybe they (shayateen and jinn) are negative higher density beings, like you said. It could be a possibility.

The aliens/"jinn" can be of any higher density vibration from the 4th to the 7th and are either positive or negative. Shayateen can be human or jinn and are those humans or jinns that are NEGATIVE (who have chosen to walk the negative service to self STS path). The negative jinns cannot be of higher than early 6th density vibration, because at the mid 6th density vibration they all convert to positive service to others vibration out of their own free will, for further spiritual progress into the upper 6th density vibration. Hence most of 6th density vibration beings and all 7th density beings are POSITIVE.

Hmmm...your definitions for the 3 types of wahi do carry a plausible appeal. But at this stage, I can neither confirm nor deny your hypothesis. Yes some of the current quranic text does "appear" to be an amalgamation of all 3 types of wahis. But somehow I think and I have really come to believe that the compilers of the Uthmanic era really didn't comprehend at all as to what task they were doing. I feel, the true essence of the text/wahi is there but it is so scattered that now every ayah and every word feels like a jigsaw puzzle to be solved. And frankly, we just cant hide behind the facade of translation each and everytime the brick is thrown at us. But what i am thinking is that if according to type # 3 it's from "spiritually advanced human" then how can the wahi be Negative...i mean, if a human is spiritually advanced, he/she should emanate positive transparency and energy, right? only a spiritually degraded human would transmit Negative wahi...that's what i think...your thoughts please.

I think maybe the way I worded the phrase caused a misunderstanding. The word negative was supposed to refer to both categories that followed. I should have said negative jinn and negative spiritually advanced humans.

Spiritually advanced doesn't necessarily mean having positive vibration. Spiritual advancement has nothing to do with being positive or negative (up to early 6th density vibration). A spiritually advanced being could be walking the service to self path out of its free will, thereby of a negative vibration. For example, a human or alien/"jinn" who knows telepathy, and telekinesis, and has other supernatural powers chooses to walk the STS path and therefore be negative. I can give the analogy of a body builder or MMA fighter. Just because someone is a body builder or black belt MMA fighter doesn't necessarily mean positive, he/she could easily be negative also.

The infinite Creator allows that due to Law of Free Will and for karmic purposes as I described above.

Your last point came like a jolt! I would like to have more details on it as to who were the two humans and what wahi did they receive exactly. and who is "Allah?"

8922 what if the ayah means like this And your Lord comes, and Its angels, rank upon rank...yeah but still the inherent problem of omnipresence is not solved...

This "Allah" thing is a bit complicated. What if I told you that certain NEGATIVE higher density beings (5th density vibration from Orion Constellation) pretended to be "Allah" and inspired verses as if they were being inspired by the infinite Creator, just to deceive 3rd density humans? 3rd density humans can be error prone and can have difficulty differentiating between a type 2 wahi from a type 3 wahi, even when they are spiritually advanced.

Following is my hypothesis

The 5th density negative Orion beings inspired/channeled certain verses to Prophet Muhammad pretending to be "Allah".
Prophet Muhammad wrote those verses down and recited them to scribes and other companions as soon as inspired/channeled.
Soon thereafter type 2 wahi came to him informing him of the deception and he erased/struck out those verses from his copy and told everyone about the deception and instructed them to erase those verses from their copies also.
Some codices of some scribes/companions continued to have those verses and they were transmitted forwards as the current standard text.

Perhaps 6112 now makes more sense?

6112 And as such, we have permitted the enemies of every prophet, shayateen of mankind and jinn, to inspire (yoo7a) each other with fancy words in order to deceive. Had your Lord willed, they would not have done it. You shall disregard them and their fabrications.

This is one of the main reasons why I am patiently awaiting discovery of the original text of Quran written by Prophet Muhammad himself, to compare with the current standard text.

Please study the following two books in detail, which are the type 2 wahi to 2 humans in 1980's. Please carefully read those books with an open mind after wiping out all preconceptions and biases. I have given these links before but very few have taken the time to read them entirely and study their basic message. When I first started reading them, I was so excited I couldn't sleep for 2 nights and it took me weeks to finish reading them. Their message makes complete sense to me and I will appreciate your thoughts once you have understood their complete message. A lot of their message is almost the same as the positive verses of Quran.

Readers can raise this point that 6112 could be applicable to these 2 books. The answer is that a negative entity never channels service to others (STO) message. The simplest way to tell if any inspired message is from a negative or positive entity is to study the message. All STO messages are inspired by positive entities and all STS (service to self) messages are inspired by negative entities. I have come across many wahis that were inspired by negative entities and I could easily tell by STS content of the message. The message of these 2 books is completely STO and there was no STS content that I noticed, and it resonated with my conscience, intellect, knowledge and real world evidence.

1st book is initially difficult to understand but once you become familiar with the key terms used then it will become easier. It uses extremely precise scientific language and I recommend reading the study guide first so you can get familiar with key terminology.

1st book

http//www.llresearch.org/library/the_law_of_one_pdf/the_law_of_one_pdf.aspx

You can read this first as a study guide before you read the 1st book

http//divinecosmos.com/start-here/books-free-online/23-the-law-of-one-study-guide

2nd book

http//www.deepspring.org/books/Aaron001119.pdf

Once you have finished these I will give you some additional material to read.

Regards,

May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.

Armanaziz

Salam truthseeker11.

Salamun Alaik Arman,

You still haven't answered the simple question that I asked you a few posts back!

Your earlier question, a few posts back, to me was actually this

?Do you know with 100% certainty that the current text of al-quran contains the truth in its entirety??

But now you have changed your question to

?Do you accept that the current text of al-quran is the truth in its entirety??

For the earlier question I did not have a yes / no answer because I do not agree that any statement written in human language can be ?certified? as truth or false in absolute sense. Based on language and semantics every statement that apparently appears to be truth can be read and interpreted as ?false? from some other perspective.

However, I do have an yes / no answer for your changed question

?Do you accept that the current text of al-quran is the truth in its entirety??

YES, I do. I do accept the understanding that I derive from the Qur?an, in its entirety, is the truth (from my perspective). Just like a sailor cannot guarantee that a compass will always lead to the destination (irrespective of who is using it), but he can at least guarantee, he personally can find the route to the destination using the compass.

For me, ?That is the book ? no doubt in it..? is not a certification of Qur?an?s accuracy ? this is the methodology. And that is why instead of putting this statement at the very end, the statement has been put affront in Qur?an. Only when we accept that there is no doubt in Qur?an are we able to strike out all false, obsolete and contradictory ?interpretations? and take the best guidance appropriate for our time and society.

The absolute truths and absolute interpretations are known only to the Infinite Creator? we, humans are only on a journey towards that truth.

===

The proof that the current text of al-quran has been protected and is the truth in its entirety has to come from external sources as per 4153.

They have to and they will. I thought we both agreed that none of us are in any hurry for that to happen.
Then what is the issue?

===

Your analogy is not accurate. I never ran out of water so my extra caution would not be fatal. I still had the minimum essential laboratory tested water bottles (262) to survive. Extra water would have been good but I didn't really need it to survive, so better safe than sorry.

I said, your extra caution may be fatal for you if you cannot make to the town in time.

If you are confident you can sustain the journey? my best wishes with you.

I never said believing or accepting Qur?an is a mandatory requirement for salvation. Rather I said, those who lose the compass still have the stars to guide them.

===

You are admitting that you are still waiting for the external evidence; then how do you know that the current quranic text is the truth in its entirety? According to 4153, the truth will be verified by both signs in the horizons and within ourselves.

Does 4153 say, halt your faith in Qur?an until ALL the signs are apparent? Rather the way I see this, these signs will be shown to everyone. Those who are guided aright by my Master will be shown the signs in time. Those who are destined to be deviated, will see the signs too late.

As far as I am concerned, the signs that I have seen ?within me? are sufficient.

===

There are actually more than 25 points but perhaps you haven't read all my posts. Some of the points you discussed have already been further discussed by me in subsequent posts with Wakas.

I discussed the 13 ?numbered? points in your first post of the thread. I admit I have not gone through all of your other posts in details. I?ll try to take a look. Thanks for highlighting this.

===

My summary responses (mostly recurrence of what I already sai) to your recurring questions

159 and 4142 by themselves cannot be used to argue that the current quranic text is protected and no falsehood can enter it, due to circular argument fallacy. God knew this, so why did It inspire those verses but did not give concrete proof of protection of al-zikr to all the readers? It would have been extremely easy for God.

See my remarks above about 4153.

Some verses in the current quranic text cannot be interpreted by us because their correct interpretation is known only to God (37). No matter how those verses are interpreted, the interpretation will be false. So how can we verify that those verses are the truth using external evidence and knowledge as per 4153 and 1736, if we can't even interpret them?

To verify the truth of those verses we have to know their interpretation. But then if God tells us the interpretation of those verses so that their truth can be verified, then 37 will be falsified!

Nobody knows what Fermat meant when he claimed he had a proof of his theorem that was too large to fit in the margin. But that does not prove that his statement was false. On the contrary search for the meaning of his statement has enhanced mankind?s mathematical reasoning ability.

Many a times absence of a firm interpretation is more ?illuminating? than an interpreted statement.

I explained this in detailed in my last post how an All-Knowing God can provide statements with multiple correct insights (for different generations) ? and how limited-knowledge humans can take one / some of the valid insights and still be guided aright without knowing the complete interpretations. Probably you did not understand that because you are expecting Qur?an to be like any other human written book for which having a single verifiable interpretation is assumed as a prerequisite for ?accuracy?.

The Quran says God protects the book and falsehood cannot enter it. Then it says we will be shown evidence in the horizons, until it becomes clear to us that the verses are the truth. However, God has not shown any evidence in the horizons that makes it clear to everyone that the book has been protected and no falsehood has entered it. This is a contradiction.

It would have been extremely easy for God to preserve/provide external evidence that the current quranic text has been protected and no falsehood has entered it.

See my remarks above about 4153.

The current quranic text claims it has clear revelations (1015, 2216, 579, 6511 etc.). 37 says that none know the interpretation of some verses except God, thereby admitting those verses are unclear. That is a contradiction.

Why didn't God make all the verses simple and clear, when It could have easily done so?

See my response for no 2.

The current quranic text claims its verses are guidance for the righteous (22), clarification for the people (313, and reminder for the worlds (12104, 3887). 37 says that none know the interpretation of some verses except God. So how can verses that cannot be comprehended by anyone except God, serve as guidance, clarification and reminder?

See my response for no 2.

Seems like much of our discussion is going in a circular path. I would try to refrain from answering recurring questions from my next response to save both your and our time. So unless you have any new question for me, this could be my last post on this thread.

To summarize our discussion you demand clear external proof for Qur?an before you take the ?risk? of accepting it as God?s word? but I find that accepting Qur?an as the God?s word is the prerequisite to get the correct guidance from it. You refrain from riding the boat of Qur?an lest it sinks ? so you?d rather swim with the life-jacket (262). I, on the other-hand, ride the boat with full confidence because I still have the life jacket (262) as my last resort ? should the boat sinks or I fall.

For you is your resolution, for me is mine.

May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman

truthseeker11

Salamun alaik Arman,

Your earlier question, a few posts back, to me was actually this

?Do you know with 100% certainty that the current text of al-quran contains the truth in its entirety??

But now you have changed your question to

?Do you accept that the current text of al-quran is the truth in its entirety??

For the earlier question I did not have a yes / no answer because I do not agree that any statement written in human language can be ?certified? as truth or false in absolute sense. Based on language and semantics every statement that apparently appears to be truth can be read and interpreted as ?false? from some other perspective.

However, I do have an yes / no answer for your changed question

Thank you for admitting that you are not 100% certain that the current text of al-quran contains the truth in its entirety. When you can't answer "yes" to that question, it clearly means you doubt if it contains the truth in its entirety. This is exactly the same as saying "the current text of al-quran might contain some falsehoods". So we are both in perfect agreement about this.

By not answering the question as "yes" you CLEARLY admit you are doubtful, however, you go on to say later in your post that your methodology is "only when we accept that there is no doubt in Qur?an". This is a contradiction.

For me, ?That is the book ? no doubt in it..? is not a certification of Qur?an?s accuracy ? this is the methodology. And that is why instead of putting this statement at the very end, the statement has been put affront in Qur?an. Only when we accept that there is no doubt in Qur?an are we able to strike out all false, obsolete and contradictory ?interpretations? and take the best guidance appropriate for our time and society.

If you don't have any doubt that the current text of al-quran contains the truth in its entirety then you should have no problem answering this question as "yes"

Do you know with 100% certainty that the current text of al-quran contains the truth in its entirety?

The methodology of "only when we accept that there is no doubt in Qur?an" eliminates usage of conscience, intellect/reasoning, knowledge and external evidence as the primary and correct methodology to arrive at the truth.

If only having no doubt in al-quran was the correct methodology, then al-quran would not have contained any mention of conscience, intellect/reasoning, and verification using knowledge and real world evidence. The correct methodology is to use conscience, intellect/reasoning, knowledge and external evidence to arrive at the truth (3030, numerous verses on "aql" and "fikr", 1736, 4153), and then have no doubt.

Having no doubt in al-quran, without first using conscience, intellect/reasoning, knowledge and external evidence to verify its truth is the same as BLIND BELIEF, and goes against the quranic methodology of using conscience, intellect/reasoning, knowledge, and external evidence to verify the truth.

By proposing the methodology of "only when we accept that there is no doubt in al-quran" (blind belief), you are contradicting yourself from an earlier post of yours in which you admitted the following which I agreed with

I blindly follow nothing. Not anymore than a sailor who "blindly" follows a compass. Under all circumstances I have accepted upholding my God gifted conscience and intellect as my primary and inviolable obligation to my Master. Searching for signs of my Master in Qur'an or in the universe is secondary to the earlier statement. Those who are blind are not equal to those who can see.

Are you 100% certain "That is the book - no doubt in it" refers to the CURRENT text of al-quran?

IMO that verse refers to the original al-quran preserved in "lawh mahfouz" (8522)

What if someone inserted a few man made verses in al-quran many years after its revelation? This later text will still have "That is the book - no doubt in it", but by following the methodology of "only when we accept that there is no doubt in al-quran", you will accept the later text containing some falsehoods without any doubt, which will lead to acceptance of some falsehoods as the truth. Hence this methodology is flawed.

The right methodology would be to arrive at the truth of a verse (just like al-quran advises 3030, numerous verses on aql and fikr, 1736, 4153), BEFORE having no doubt in that verse.

Using this right methodology, I have been able to verify and accept a large portion of the current text of al-quran as the truth and have no doubt in the truth of that portion, which contains enlightening and awesome truths and is enough for guidance (262, 569). It is only a few verses of the current text of al-quran that I have not been able to verify as the truth using the right quranic methodology, and I have doubt only in those few verses. I am patiently awaiting external signs for verification of the truth of those few verses before accepting the entire current text of al-quran as the truth.

?Do you accept that the current text of al-quran is the truth in its entirety??

YES, I do. I do accept the understanding that I derive from the Qur?an, in its entirety, is the truth (from my perspective). Just like a sailor cannot guarantee that a compass will always lead to the destination (irrespective of who is using it), but he can at least guarantee, he personally can find the route to the destination using the compass.

Wow ..... YOU ARE STILL USING EVASIVE MANEUVERS! This is Strawman fallacy. I never asked about your understanding. You say "yes, I do" but then qualify your answer by saying it pertains to your understanding derived from al-quran, instead of pertaining to the current text of al-quran. So once again you evaded answering my question.

My question was not this

"Do you accept "your understanding that you derive from al-quran in its entirety" is the truth?"

My question was

"Do you accept that the current text of al-quran is the truth in its entirety?"

Since you continue to use evasive maneuvers I will have to rephrase my question to leave you no wiggle room

The current text of al-quran, in its entirety, is the truth. Is this premise true?

159 and 4142 by themselves cannot be used to argue that the current quranic text is protected and no falsehood can enter it, due to circular argument fallacy. God knew this, so why did It inspire those verses but did not give concrete proof of protection of al-zikr to all the readers? It would have been extremely easy for God.

See my remarks above about 4153.

Your remarks about 4153 do not give an explanation for this point.

4153 does not say anything about truth becoming clear on or after the last day, therefore clearly implying a promise to show external signs to make the truth clear for all the readers during their lifetime. Millions upon millions of people have died, and almost 1400 years have passed, but still the promised external signs verifying the truth of 159 and 4142 are nowhere to be seen.

It would have been EXTREMELY EASY for the God to provide external signs to all readers proving the protection of al-zikr.

Some verses in the current quranic text cannot be interpreted by us because their correct interpretation is known only to God (37). No matter how those verses are interpreted, the interpretation will be false. So how can we verify that those verses are the truth using external evidence and knowledge as per 4153 and 1736, if we can't even interpret them?

To verify the truth of those verses we have to know their interpretation. But then if God tells us the interpretation of those verses so that their truth can be verified, then 37 will be falsified!

Nobody knows what Fermat meant when he claimed he had a proof of his theorem that was too large to fit in the margin. But that does not prove that his statement was false. On the contrary search for the meaning of his statement has enhanced mankind?s mathematical reasoning ability.

Yet again, fallacy of false analogy.

Fermat never claimed "none know the interpretation except Fermat".

If no one other than the author knows the correct interpretation of a statement, then the statement cannot be proved or disproved or verified to be true or false by someone other than the author.

Many a times absence of a firm interpretation is more ?illuminating? than an interpreted statement.

This is nonsense. A statement that cannot be correctly interpreted can never be "illuminating".

37 does not say "none know its firm interpretation except the God" but says "none know its interpretation except the God", which includes all correct interpretations.

I explained this in detailed in my last post how an All-Knowing God can provide statements with multiple correct insights (for different generations) ? and how limited-knowledge humans can take one / some of the valid insights and still be guided aright without knowing the complete interpretations. Probably you did not understand that because you are expecting Qur?an to be like any other human written book for which having a single verifiable interpretation is assumed as a prerequisite for ?accuracy?.

37 says "none know its interpretation except the God", which includes all correct interpretations. This means that no one except the God can know ANY CORRECT INTERPRETATION. ALL CORRECT INTERPRETATIONS are subset of "interpretation".

Even if you know ONE correct interpretation out of the many correct interpretations, you will know its interpretation, and 37 will be falsified.

When "none know its interpretation except the God", then it is IMPOSSIBLE to verify its truth.

The Quran says God protects the book and falsehood cannot enter it. Then it says we will be shown evidence in the horizons, until it becomes clear to us that the verses are the truth. However, God has not shown any evidence in the horizons that makes it clear to everyone that the book has been protected and no falsehood has entered it. This is a contradiction.

It would have been extremely easy for God to preserve/provide external evidence that the current quranic text has been protected and no falsehood has entered it.

See my remarks above about 4153.

Your remarks about 4153 do not give an explanation for this point.

See my remark above in point #1

The current quranic text claims it has clear revelations (1015, 2216, 579, 6511 etc.). 37 says that none know the interpretation of some verses except God, thereby admitting those verses are unclear. That is a contradiction.

Why didn't God make all the verses simple and clear, when It could have easily done so?

See my response for no 2.

Your response for #2 does not give an explanation for this point.

See my response above in point #2

The current quranic text claims its verses are guidance for the righteous (22), clarification for the people (313, and reminder for the worlds (12104, 3887). 37 says that none know the interpretation of some verses except God. So how can verses that cannot be comprehended by anyone except God, serve as guidance, clarification and reminder?

See my response for no 2.

Your response for #2 does not give an explanation for this point.

See my response above in point #2

Seems like much of our discussion is going in a circular path. I would try to refrain from answering recurring questions from my next response to save both your and our time. So unless you have any new question for me, this could be my last post on this thread.

Your inability to provide reasonable answers to my questions and reasonable explanations to the points raised, and usage of logical fallacies, is what is causing the circular discussions. You can easily break the circular path and our discussion can progress once you provide reasonable answers to my questions and reasonable explanations for the points raised, and avoid logical fallacies.

To summarize our discussion you demand clear external proof for Qur?an before you take the ?risk? of accepting it as God?s word? but I find that accepting Qur?an as the God?s word is the prerequisite to get the correct guidance from it. You refrain from riding the boat of Qur?an lest it sinks ? so you?d rather swim with the life-jacket (262). I, on the other-hand, ride the boat with full confidence because I still have the life jacket (262) as my last resort ? should the boat sinks or I fall.

Your summary generalizing my stance to the entire al-quran is incorrect (when you say Quran it means entire al-quran). You also clearly missed where I have repeatedly said "current text of al-quran" and not "al-quran". Therefore the above statements of yours contain Strawman fallacies. Please see my remarks near the beginning of this post.

Regards,

May the infinite Creator guide us to the truth.

Armanaziz

Salamun alaik truthseeker11,

I intend to stop replying on circular discussions. But perhaps in your last message there are a couple of points I could respond to.

Since you continue to use evasive maneuvers I will have to rephrase my question to leave you no wiggle room
The current text of al-quran, in its entirety, is the truth. Is this premise true?

I am not using any evasive maneuvers. I am just using the ?cet. par.? type of disclosure that is required to qualify any statement. For example, let me ask you this question

?The sun rises in the East? - Is this premise true?

Hope now you?ll understand why one cannot provide an unqualified ?True/False? certification to any statement. The meaning of any statement in human language is subject to the reader?s understanding.

Are you 100% certain "That is the book - no doubt in it" refers to the CURRENT text of al-quran?

IMO that verse refers to the original al-quran preserved in "lawh mahfouz" (8522)

For me "That is the book - no doubt in it" is the methodology to read and understand from the CURRENT text of al-quran. I am convinced that if one approaches the CURRENT text of al-quran with pure intensions upholding his God-gifted intellect and conscience he will be able to derive the right guidance and there is no doubt about it.

What if someone inserted a few man made verses in al-quran many years after its revelation? This later text will still have "That is the book - no doubt in it", but by following the methodology of "only when we accept that there is no doubt in al-quran", you will accept the later text containing some falsehoods without any doubt, which will lead to acceptance of some falsehoods as the truth. Hence this methodology is flawed.

Yes good questions here. This is how it is for me ? My Master has made the CURRENT text of al-quran available to me ? and I have personally found it to be an adequate guide. That?s all that matters to me.

Even if I were born in Prophet Muhammad?s time and heard the verses of Qur?an from him first hand, I could still ask these questions ?

What if Muhammad is making it up?
What if Muhammad inserted few of his own statement in it?
What if angel Gabriel inserted few of his own statement in it? Etc. etc.

So the doubt of the doubters who demand ?external verification of authenticity? can never be satisfied until the God and angels appear from behind the clouds. So, wait for that to happen, if that's what you want.

The companions of the Prophet had the challenge whether they would accept the text brought by the Prophet as divine based on exercise of their own intellect and conscience ? I too have the same challenge whether I would accept the text available to me as divine based on exercise of my own intellect and conscience. I am applying the same methodology to evaluate the authenticity of Qur?an that I would have done if I were at the time of Muhammad (pbuh). I am evaluating it myself using my own intellect and conscience which I consider to be my direct obligation to my Master. I am on my personal journey in discovering the Qur?an and up until now I am fully convinced that the CURRENT text of al-quran contains right guidance to those who are conscious.

May Allah guide us all to the straight route.

Regards,
Arman