The Qur'an

[currentchristian]

Unlike the Bible, the Qur'an was birthed relatively recently (7th century C.E.), over a relatively short period of time (quarter of a century), as an alleged direct revelation from The God (Allah) to one man, allegedly a prophet named Muhammad. It was very quickly codified as one text and has remained in that form to this very day. The historicity of the Qur'an is much more attested to than the historicity of the Bible and its provenance is more certain.

 

Here are some links:

 

University of Southern California Compendium of Muslim Texts

 

History of the Qur'an

 

Wikipedia entry on the Qur'an

 

Contradictions in the Qur'an (Christian website)

 

Recitation of Qur'an (mp3 or Real Player)

 

 

So what do we think about the Qur'an?

 

-CC in MA

[Jun]

More Abrahamic garbage.

[Astreja]

I think it's a poorly written anthology of plagiarized Greek, Indian and Arabian texts, assembled from the POV of a committee of local elites who were attempting to create a pan-Arabian federation in the 7th and 8th centures C.E.

 

Any poetry and good stuff in there is rendered unpalatable by the constant threats to slay unbelievers.

[Metroplex]

To Currentchristian:

 

You are doubting the very book you claim to believe in and endorse a book that denies many of the doctrines that you hold dear.

Seriously, it amazes me how after reading this website and seeing the hyposrisy of christianity and their leaders (closet-gays and apostates/heresy making) you still believe.

 

p.s. you say you believe in only ONE god, yet you forget you really believe in THREE.

You are deeply brainwashed and controlled by the christian cult and held in the fear of hell, that is why you dare not leave this bullshit ideology.

[currentchristian]

To Currentchristian:

 

You are doubting the very book you claim to believe in and endorse a book that denies many of the doctrines that you hold dear.

Seriously, it amazes me how after reading this website and seeing the hyposrisy of christianity and their leaders (closet-gays and apostates/heresy making) you still believe.

 

p.s. you say you believe in only ONE god, yet you forget you really believe in THREE.

You are deeply brainwashed and controlled by the christian cult and held in the fear of hell, that is why you dare not leave this bullshit ideology.

 

Hi Metroplex. I am not in any way endorsing the Qur'an. I simply want to learn what others think about it. I have a very open mind and enjoy discussing all subjects. I'm a free thinker.

 

I do not believe in hellfire, Metroplex, so this doctrine certainly is not my motive for remaining Christian. I remain Christian because it makes sense to my heart and to my head. I have integrated these two sources of my being. I am not brainwashed, as you charge. I think that's a very harsh accusation to throw at another whom you don't know. I would never, ever, ever, call you or anyone on this forum brainwashed. I respect you as individuals and your views as reasonable choices.

 

I have never written on this forum that I believe in the Trinity -- a word that does not appear in the Bible, by the way. You are making assumptions.

 

-CC in MA

[Lightbearer]

The Quran is as evil as an other religious text.

 

[Vixentrox]

It's rubbish just like the Bible is and spawns as many fanatics as the Bible has.

[neverclear5]

Same shit, different deity!

[Kurari]

Same shit, different deity!

 

Agreed.

[currentchristian]

Same shit, different deity!

 

I think it's the same deity.

 

-CC in MA

[Skankboy]

Same shit, same deity.

 

Arabic cultural spinoff...

[Antlerman]

I find it very revealing how that it takes proven inaccuracies in the Bible and restates them as facts, except changing a little element here, and a little element there to give itself the "authoritative" position over the Bible as it's "corrector". Oh yes, it is the "corrected" myth, if correcting myth even makes sense?

 

As far as the original texts goes, who knows? All competing manuscripts were gathered up and burned out of existence because some Caliph needed to control the disagreements by choosing just one of the many to put his support behind. So, beginning 150 years after Mohammed, we now have only manuscript. Therefore offering not much validation as to any originals.

 

At least with the Bible, there are 35,000 bits a pieces scholars can work off of to determine the most likely originals. What happened back then was a travesty of antiquity that like the religious zealots of today, see no value in preserving history in their efforts to be in control of others. Phooey!!

[Kurari]

Same shit, different deity!

 

I think it's the same deity.

 

-CC in MA

 

 

I agree, but they insist it's something different!

 

"Ew! We don't want the Christian god's cooties!"

[currentchristian]

I find it very revealing how that it takes proven inaccuracies in the Bible and restates them as facts, except changing a little element here, and a little element there to give itself the "authoritative" position over the Bible as it's "corrector". Oh yes, it is the "corrected" myth, if correcting myth even makes sense?

 

As far as the original texts goes, who knows? All competing manuscripts were gathered up and burned out of existence because some Caliph needed to control the disagreements by choosing just one of the many to put his support behind. So, beginning 150 years after Mohammed, we now have only manuscript. Therefore offering not much validation as to any originals.

 

At least with the Bible, there are 35,000 bits a pieces scholars can work off of to determine the most likely originals. What happened back then was a travesty of antiquity that like the religious zealots of today, see no value in preserving history in their efforts to be in control of others. Phooey!!

 

Antlerman, can you pass along some links about what you've just posted? I'll do some searching, too, but if you have them handy... It has been my impression that the Qur'an came to Muhammad over a 22-year period, was written down by others in his lifetime, and set in stone shortly after his death. I'd like to know more about what you write.

 

Thanks.

 

-CC in MA

[Dave]

So what do we think about the Qur'an?

I don't know about the "we" bit, but to me the koran is just another religious text that should be given the same treatment as any other book of fiction.

 

 

....I'm a free thinker.....

Actually, you are not. The traditional use of the term "Free Thinker" as used in the non theist community is one that is free, or unburdened, by belief in gods and other myths.

[currentchristian]

So what do we think about the Qur'an?

I don't know about the "we" bit, but to me the koran is just another religious text that should be given the same treatment as any other book of fiction.

 

 

....I'm a free thinker.....

Actually, you are not. The traditional use of the term "Free Thinker" as used in the non theist community is one that is free, or unburdened, by belief in gods and other myths.

 

I did not say that I am a Free Thinker, but a free thinker.

 

-CC in MA

[currentchristian]

I find it very revealing how that it takes proven inaccuracies in the Bible and restates them as facts, except changing a little element here, and a little element there to give itself the "authoritative" position over the Bible as it's "corrector". Oh yes, it is the "corrected" myth, if correcting myth even makes sense?

 

As far as the original texts goes, who knows? All competing manuscripts were gathered up and burned out of existence because some Caliph needed to control the disagreements by choosing just one of the many to put his support behind. So, beginning 150 years after Mohammed, we now have only manuscript. Therefore offering not much validation as to any originals.

 

At least with the Bible, there are 35,000 bits a pieces scholars can work off of to determine the most likely originals. What happened back then was a travesty of antiquity that like the religious zealots of today, see no value in preserving history in their efforts to be in control of others. Phooey!!

 

Found a couple myself, Antlerman. Muy interesante!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Muhammad

 

This one indicates that within 20 years of Muhammad's life the Qur'an was "canonized" and, as you wrote, other documents not included were destroyed.

 

-CC in MA

[SilentLoner]

Here are some interesting excerpts:

 

Koran 40:67-40:73

Do you not see how those who dispute the revelation of God turn away from the right path ? Those who have denied the Book and the message We sent through Our apostles shall realize the truth hereafter: when, with chains and shackles round their necks, they shall be dragged through scalding water and then burnt in the fire of Hell.

 

Koran 18:28-30

For the wrongdoers We have prepared a fire which will encompass them like the walls of a pavilion. When they cry out for help they shall be showered with water as hot as molten brass, which will scald their faces. Evil shall be their drink, dismal their resting-place.

 

Koran 22:19-22:23

Garments of fire have been prepared for the unbelievers. Scalding water shall be poured upon their heads, melting their skins and that which is in their bellies. They shall be lashed with rods of iron. Whenever, in their anguish, they try to escape from Hell, back they shall be dragged, and will be told: 'Taste the torment of the Conflagration!'

 

They sure love listing hell threats.

[currentchristian]

Here are some interesting excerpts:

 

Koran 40:67-40:73

Do you not see how those who dispute the revelation of God turn away from the right path ? Those who have denied the Book and the message We sent through Our apostles shall realize the truth hereafter: when, with chains and shackles round their necks, they shall be dragged through scalding water and then burnt in the fire of Hell.

 

Koran 18:28-30

For the wrongdoers We have prepared a fire which will encompass them like the walls of a pavilion. When they cry out for help they shall be showered with water as hot as molten brass, which will scald their faces. Evil shall be their drink, dismal their resting-place.

 

Koran 22:19-22:23

Garments of fire have been prepared for the unbelievers. Scalding water shall be poured upon their heads, melting their skins and that which is in their bellies. They shall be lashed with rods of iron. Whenever, in their anguish, they try to escape from Hell, back they shall be dragged, and will be told: 'Taste the torment of the Conflagration!'

 

They sure love listing hell threats.

 

I wonder if any Muslims take references such as these as metaphor/symbol as opposed to literal truths? Anyone know?

 

-CC in MA

[Antlerman]

Antlerman, can you pass along some links about what you've just posted? I'll do some searching, too, but if you have them handy... It has been my impression that the Qur'an came to Muhammad over a 22-year period, was written down by others in his lifetime, and set in stone shortly after his death. I'd like to know more about what you write.

 

Thanks.

 

-CC in MA

The story of the burning of the other Koran versions under Caliph Uthman 150 years after Mohammed comes from a hadith (tradition) of Anas bin Malik:

Hudhaifa bin al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan.

Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the reading (qiraa), so he said to Uthman, "O Prince of the Believers! Teach this nation before they differ as the Jews and the Christians differ about the Book

(al-kitab)."

 

So Uthman sent to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts (suhuf) so that we may copy them in the (religious) books (masahif) and return them (the manuscripts) to you." So Uthman sent to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts (suhuf) so that we may copy them in the (religious) books (masahif) and return them (the manuscripts) to you."

 

Hafsa sent them to Uthman.And he ordered to copy them into the (religious) books (masahif). Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Koran (al-Koran), then write it in the voice of Quraish as it came down (was revealed) in their language."They did so, and when they had copied the manuscripts (suhuf) into the religious books (masahif), Uthman returned original manuscripts (suhuf) to Hafsa.

 

Uthman sent to every province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Koranic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.

(Orders all other versions, parts and notes (including Hafsa's manuscripts, that is including Said bin Thabit's Koran), to be burned.)

From here: http://www.solbaram.org/articles/islam04.html

 

 

Like they say, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link

[Dave]

I did not say that I am a Free Thinker, but a free thinker.

Either way, the label doesn't apply.

[NotBlinded]

I did not say that I am a Free Thinker, but a free thinker.

Either way, the label doesn't apply.

Sure it can:

 

Bertrand Russell:

 

"The expression "free thought" is often used as if it meant merely opposition to the prevailing orthodoxy. But this is only a symptom of free thought, frequent, but invariable. "Free thought" means thinking freely--as freely, at least, as is possible for a human being. The person who is free in any respect is free from something; what is the free thinker free from? To be worthy of the name, he must be free of two things; the force of tradition, and the tyranny of his own passions. No one is completely free from either, but in the measure of a man's emancipation he deserves to be called a free thinker. A man is not to be denied this title because he happens, on some point, to agree with the theologians of his country. An Arab who, starting from the first principles of human reason, is able to deduce that the Koran was not created, but existed eternally in heaven, may be counted as a free thinker, provided he is willing to listen to counter arguments and subject his ratiocination to critical scrutiny. ... What makes a free thinker is not his beliefs, but the way in which he holds them. If he holds them because his elders told him they were true when he was young, or if he holds them because if he did not he would be unhappy, his thought is not free; but if he holds them because, after careful thought, he find a balance of evidence in their favor, then his thought is free, however odd his conclusions may seem."

 

From here: Is "Freethinker" Synonymous with Nontheist?

 

Like the paper goes on to say, "The time has come for freethinkers to think freely about their definition of freethought."

[currentchristian]

The story of the burning of the other Koran versions under Caliph Uthman 150 years after Mohammed comes from a hadith (tradition) of Anas bin Malik:

 

Hey, Antlerman, isn't this Caliph Uthman codifying the Qur'an within a few years of Muhammad's life, not 150 years? Wanting to clarify the timeframe of this Caliph? Is this the Caliph who is Muhammad's son-in-law? Here's a wiki link.

 

-CC in MA

 

 

I did not say that I am a Free Thinker, but a free thinker.

Either way, the label doesn't apply.

 

Seriously, Dave, are you omniscient? Otherwise, I simply do not understand how you can make that judgment and proclaim it ex cathedra.

 

-CC in MA

 

I did not say that I am a Free Thinker, but a free thinker.

Either way, the label doesn't apply.

Sure it can:

 

Bertrand Russell:

 

"The expression "free thought" is often used as if it meant merely opposition to the prevailing orthodoxy. But this is only a symptom of free thought, frequent, but invariable. "Free thought" means thinking freely--as freely, at least, as is possible for a human being. The person who is free in any respect is free from something; what is the free thinker free from? To be worthy of the name, he must be free of two things; the force of tradition, and the tyranny of his own passions. No one is completely free from either, but in the measure of a man's emancipation he deserves to be called a free thinker. A man is not to be denied this title because he happens, on some point, to agree with the theologians of his country. An Arab who, starting from the first principles of human reason, is able to deduce that the Koran was not created, but existed eternally in heaven, may be counted as a free thinker, provided he is willing to listen to counter arguments and subject his ratiocination to critical scrutiny. ... What makes a free thinker is not his beliefs, but the way in which he holds them. If he holds them because his elders told him they were true when he was young, or if he holds them because if he did not he would be unhappy, his thought is not free; but if he holds them because, after careful thought, he find a balance of evidence in their favor, then his thought is free, however odd his conclusions may seem."

 

From here: Is "Freethinker" Synonymous with Nontheist?

 

Like the paper goes on to say, "The time has come for freethinkers to think freely about their definition of freethought."

 

I agree with Bertrand Russell on this, notblindedbytheblight. Thank you for defending my honor!

 

-CC in MA

[Dave]

I did not say that I am a Free Thinker, but a free thinker.

Either way, the label doesn't apply.

Sure it can....

No, and I don't buy into arguments from authority. You should know that by now.

[NotBlinded]

I did not say that I am a Free Thinker, but a free thinker.

Either way, the label doesn't apply.

Sure it can....

No, and I don't buy into arguments from authority. You should know that by now.

I know, but did you read the entire article? Would it matter if I said the article is on the Infidels site? (hehe) It really does make sense if you can....erm....open your mind a little.

 

*turns and runs away*