Islam's Incorruptible Qur'an Is Corrupt

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

And as an ex-Muslim hater, I am quite familiar with the usual stance and tactics used by the anti-Muslim crowd. And some of your posts strongly resemble them.

As you refuse to rebut or debate the thread's points regarding Qur'an,......

I want you to know that you are not dealing with a "Muslim hater".

Your idea of "universal brotherhood" seems rosy but it fails to work in the real world... unless you expect Muslims to accept "universal brotherhood" with the same people who bash them for their faith. Muslims also believe in "universal brotherhood" but within the boundaries of faith.

As difficult as it may be for you, as illustrated by your words, I kgnow that all humans are FIRST and FOREMOST my universal brethren. The faith and religion of others is as superficial to me as skin color, land of origin, or nationality.

Anger and frustration do arise in me at times, but at the conclusion of all events, and forever in the mind and heart is the kgnowledge that each individual human is to be appreciated, loved, and accepted.



If the tone or intent of the op or the OP appear to promote negativity, let it be understood that the intent is to tear down ignorances, misconceptions, and incorrect beliefs in order to cultivate the "universal brotherhood" that Islam has blinded you to and keeps you from understanding.



One Love, One Mankind, One and All.

Peace.

reply to post by Sahabi

As difficult as it may be for you, as illustrated by your words, I kgnow that all humans are FIRST and FOREMOST my universal brethren. The faith and religion of others is as superficial to me as skin color, land of origin, or nationality.

You didn't address my main point. I'll repeat it here again...

Sahabi : The religious superiority complex that once blinded me with notions of “us separate from them” and “Muslims differentiated from non-Muslims” has been lifted, and I now see only fellow humans, and strive towards universal brotherhood

sk0rpi0n : That is a loaded statement.
You have slipped in your personal assessment that concepts such as “us separate from them” and “Muslims differentiated from non-Muslims” has something to do with a "religious superiority complex".

People of every faith/nationality/race distinguish themselves from those who are different from them. So you have the "Xs" and "non-Xs" (or simply "Ys" and "Zs"). That doesn't mean they have a "superiority complex" so lets apply the same to Muslims.

sk0rpi0n

Had the Koran been so "corrupted", Islam would not have lasted so long, let alone go on to become the second largest religion in the world today

Maybe not – this guy thinks islam only survived the death of mo by imposing the death penalty for apostasy

Well OP looks like there were only fakers to take on your challenge .I will admit I could never be able to do what you have done ..I am glad this thread is here so I can send my friends here to look at the evidence you have presented . I know they are not as adept as some of the people that have tried to disprove you but I think its obvious that they have not ...peace

Sahabi
reply to post by sk0rpi0n

 

As difficult as it may be for you, as illustrated by your words, I kgnow that all humans are FIRST and FOREMOST my universal brethren. The faith and religion of others is as superficial to me as skin color, land of origin, or nationality.

I kgnew that you were ether Kgnow or his soul
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

any how seven Ahruf is a big confusion and those who collected seven Qiraat it had nothing to do with the hadith of seven Ahruf. even if we consider this hadith as Sahih.
more over those Qiraats have not been Mutawatir.
these people declare that seven Qiraats have not been Mutawatir (widespread).
ibn al Jazari
al suyuti
fakhr al din al Razi
khoei

we have only one Quran with one correct Qiraat. if some of Sahabis differs in the Qiraat of Koran this is their own problem. moreover none of them was after altering Koran. they were after the correct Qiraat. nowadays Koran is 99% the true mutawatir Qiraat ! which is according to the Qiraat of Hafs or Warsh. the difference is little. very little.

more over if you want to open the eyes of muslims you should participate in sites which the majority of their users are muslims. unless it may be considered as misinformation for non muslims.

reply to post by the2ofusr1

as some of the people that have tried to disprove you but I think its obvious that they have not

He hasn't "proven" anything because he has NOT demonstrated that the writers were actually arguing over the actual doctrines of the Koran. That has NEVER been the case. In Islam, there was never a council of Nicea type of meeting to decide on doctrines and concepts, hundreds of years after the prophets death.

All OP has done is ascribe a false controversy to something that was never controversial in the first place. And like the user above me stated - spread misinformation for non-Muslims.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n
You say he hasn't proven anything .I said no one has disproved his claims yet . It would seem convenient to Islam to have never had a formal debate as to who said what and why they may have said it ,but unlike Christians who have talked about the things that were said to get to the heart of the matters .Islam says a lot with all the different writings and sayings but fails to address the discrepancies the OP has put in this thread . Falling to answer his charges only looks bad on Islam . If you go over the posts in this thread and were to throw out the ad-hominems ,the nonsensical , and the posts like this one , OP would only be left with one page of stated facts . You should really address the OP and allow him to walk you through it ,so you can explain and show us all how these things can be instead of trying to shrug them off as some sort of folly .

It does matter who said what and when they said them .Even if you have to wonder why they may have said when they said them ,you will have to understand them .But if its believing just for the sake of believing something weather true or false then have at it . But if its about the truth ,then figure it out and address the OP ....peace

reply to post by the2ofusr1

I said no one has disproved his claims yet .

...then figure it out and address the OP

His claims can be easily disproved by the fact that there was never an argument among Muslims over the actual content of the Koran. That is proof that there was no corruption to begin with and so his claim that there is "corruption" is seriously flawed.

OP would only be left with one page of stated facts .

OP is left with one page of a false controversy.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n
If the documents were collected and burned or destroyed like the op has shown ,then that should raise the question as to why ? They were after all closer to the time of the originals .Why destroy the originals and create something new claiming to be the original ?.. You cant have it both ways ...Saying there are 7 things and only having one thing seems to come short in answering what those other 6 things may have said . Do you see the hole in the Islamic boat ? There is water coming in and it needs a bucket brigade ,not someone re arranging the deck chairs ...peace

reply to post by the2ofusr1

If the documents were collected and burned or destroyed like the op has shown ,then that should raise the question as to why ? They were after all closer to the time of the originals .

Why destroy the originals and create something new claiming to be the original ?..

You seem to think that the originals were all destroyed and a completely new one was written.
That is not the case. It would have been impossible for one man to fool the hundreds of the others who had memorized the Koran.

You cant have it both ways ...Saying there are 7 things and only having one thing seems to come short in answering what those other 6 things may have said .

The 7 had to do with dialect and translation... there were NO contradictions with regard to the actual theological message, as the OP is trying to imply and as you have come to believe.

Google 7 ahruf and click on an Islamic site for an explanation... that is, if you sincerely want a Muslim take on this matter. Here is one Muslim site


If you believe a former Christian who spent a few years as a Muslim would have a better answer... go with the OP. It doesn't change reality.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n
Nor does what you have said on this thread change the facts of what the OP has posted .Its the facts in the OP that are to be refuted ,which you have not done .....peace

sk0rpi0n
reply to post by the2ofusr1

 

If the documents were collected and burned or destroyed like the op has shown ,then that should raise the question as to why ? They were after all closer to the time of the originals .

Why destroy the originals and create something new claiming to be the original ?..

You seem to think that the originals were all destroyed and a completely new one was written.
That is not the case. It would have been impossible for one man to fool the hundreds of the others who had memorized the Koran.

You cant have it both ways ...Saying there are 7 things and only having one thing seems to come short in answering what those other 6 things may have said .

The 7 had to do with dialect and translation... there were NO contradictions with regard to the actual theological message, as the OP is trying to imply and as you have come to believe.

Google 7 ahruf and click on an Islamic site for an explanation... that is, if you sincerely want a Muslim take on this matter. Here is one Muslim site


If you believe a former Christian who spent a few years as a Muslim would have a better answer... go with the OP. It doesn't change reality.

Well i followed your link and there blaming dialect for the differences again and the op has showed us that isnt the case. Are you going to address the fact that there are different versions? Or just ignore the facts and say well there not really different there kind of the same??

reply to post by dragonridr

Well i followed your link and there blaming dialect for the differences again and the op has showed us that isnt the case.

He didn't "show" anything. He has simply concluded for himself, using his own standards - that the Koran is "corrupt".

Are you going to address the fact that there are different versions? Or just ignore the facts and say well there not really different there kind of the same??

You seem to have a lot of faith in the OP.
If one wants to learn Islam from an anti-Islamic, he might as well go learn the theory of evolution from a young earth creationist.

Anyway, to answer your question about the versions (ahrufs) OP himself says in this postthat nobody knows what the 7 ahrufs were.

However, the existence of 7 ahrufs don't automatically point to "corruption". That's a non-sequitor.
We can deduce that they made no real difference because NO Muslims argued over the actual theological content of the Koran. So the fact that 7 ahrufs existed are irrelevant.

reply to post by the2ofusr1

Nor does what you have said on this thread change the facts of what the OP has posted .Its the facts in the OP that are to be refuted ,which you have not done .

OP's claims are easily refuted by the real facts that -
- Muslims never argued over the theological content of the Koran.
- Hundreds of Muslims had already memorized the Koran. So no one man could have re-written the Koran and present it as the "official" one.

OP's claim is that the Koran is "corrupt" because of things that took place before the final canon. That's an opinion not a fact, not to mention a false premise to begin with.

sk0rpi0n
reply to post by dragonridr

 

Well i followed your link and there blaming dialect for the differences again and the op has showed us that isnt the case.

He didn't "show" anything. He has simply concluded for himself, using his own standards - that the Koran is "corrupt".

Are you going to address the fact that there are different versions? Or just ignore the facts and say well there not really different there kind of the same??

You seem to have a lot of faith in the OP.
If one wants to learn Islam from an anti-Islamic, he might as well go learn the theory of evolution from a young earth creationist.

Anyway, to answer your question about the versions (ahrufs) OP himself says in this postthat nobody knows what the 7 ahrufs were.

So then your saying the Koran lied and they didnt exist? Well that dont make much sense then that means the koran was corrupted. However if they did exist that means there was obviously differences since there was great concern the message of islam would be corrupted. So apparently this is called being between a rock and a hard place.

However, the existence of 7 ahrufs don't automatically point to "corruption". That's a non-sequitor.
We can deduce that they made no real difference because NO Muslims argued over the actual theological content of the Koran. So the fact that 7 ahrufs existed are irrelevant.

Of course Muslims dont argue over this point its called faith and people very rarely challenge their faith.But that really doesnt address the facts does it? So why bother to destroy all those versions of the Koran if as you say they were irrelevant?

Absolutely stunning work OP. Without a doubt one of the very best threads this entire website has seen in years.

Starred, flagged, bookmarked for further researching and a big thanks to you.

reply to post by g2v12


You call this thread "BS" and "TROLL",..... but you did not provide any source-evidence to rebut or debate not even a single point made in this thread. There are many points made here, I have referenced Qur'an, Authentic Ahadith, historic record, and the statements of caliphas, sahaba, and Islamic scholars,.... you provided nothing.

Assalamu alaikum.

Sahabi
reply to post by g2v12

 

You call this thread "BS" and "TROLL",..... but you did not provide any source-evidence to rebut or debate not even a single point made in this thread. There are many points made here, I have referenced Qur'an, Authentic Ahadith, historic record, and the statements of caliphas, sahaba, and Islamic scholars,.... you provided nothing.

Assalamu alaikum.

You posted a version of history using erroneous assumptions from your disillusioned interpretation. You attempted to establish the veracity of your opinion by prefacing with some assumed knowledge of the books and clout among the Muslims without showing any proof other than words typed on a computer screen. Islamic scholars spent decades studying the Qur'an, Hadith and other historical evidence without seeing the discrepancies you've laid claim to in your short period of study. I suppose you have a superior intellect or some privileged connection with God. From where I'm standing, you look like some unfortunate fellow with an inferiority complex.