- Mar 1, 2011
- 1,679
- 43
1500 Year Old Bible Predicted the Coming of Prophet Mohammed
- May 21, 2004
- 1,775
- 1,891
[h5][/h5]
Upon the command of the Prophet
his Companions would write down what was revealed of the Noble Quran. They used, for this purpose, palm branches stripped of leaves, parchments, shoulder bones, stone tablets, etc. About forty people were involved in this task. Among them was Zayd Ibn Thaabit
who showed his work to the Prophet
. Thus, the Quran was correctly arranged during the Prophet’s life, but it was not yet compiled into one book. In the meantime, most of the Prophet’s Companions memorised the Quran.
When Abu Bakr
became Caliph after the Prophet
died, a large number of the Companions were killed during the War of Apostasy. 'Umar Ibn Al-Khattaab
went to the Caliph and discussed the idea of compiling the Quran into one volume. He was disturbed, as most of those who memorised it had died. Then, Abu Bakr
called for Zayd and commissioned him to collect the Quran into one book, which became known as the 'Mus-haf.'
After Zayd
accomplished this great task and organized the Quran into one book, he submitted the precious collection to Abu Bakr
who kept it in his possession until the end of his life. During the caliphate of 'Umar
it was kept with his daughter Hafsah
who was also a wife of the Prophet
.
During the Caliphate of 'Uthmaan
Islam reached many countries, and readers began to recite the Quran in different ways (dialects). 'Uthmaan
then had various copies made and sent them out to the different Muslim lands, lest these dialects would cause alterations to the Quran, and kept the original copy with Hafsah
. Thus, the Quran remained preserved and the Caliph was very much pleased with his achievement.
Today, every copy of the Quran conforms with the standard copy of 'Uthmaan
.
Upon the command of the Prophet
When Abu Bakr
After Zayd
During the Caliphate of 'Uthmaan
Today, every copy of the Quran conforms with the standard copy of 'Uthmaan
- Oct 16, 2010
- 2,339
- 2,132
Ofc they are subjective, that post was regarding why I personally believe. Everyone must ultimately accept/reject Islam or any other religion for themselves.
sillyputty
Banned
- Aug 31, 2011
- 3,634
- 21
Professor Ellen van Wolde, a respected Old Testament scholar and author, claims the first sentence of Genesis "in the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth" is not a true translation of the Hebrew.
Prof Van Wolde, 54, who will present a thesis on the subject at Radboud University in The Netherlands where she studies, said she had re-analysed the original Hebrew text and placed it in the context of the Bible as a whole, and in the context of other creation stories from ancient Mesopotamia.
She said she eventually concluded the Hebrew verb "bara", which is used in the first sentence of the book of Genesis, does not mean "to create" but to "spatially separate".
The first sentence should now read "in the beginning God separated the Heaven and the Earth"
Source
"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?"
(Qur'an 21:30)
Hold up son.
Now you're talking about creation?
We went from the origin of the quran to a completely separate discussion about the creation of the universe?
So now we're lending credence to the notion that god created the universe?
OK... Lets say allah/god/zeus...whatever... created the universe...by what mechanism? What is a snap of the fingers? Was it a "always existed" thing? What process occurred for this to take place?
This is the problem with religious answers...they don't provide a mechanism for things to occur. We don't just say "evolution causes life"...no Its Evolution by way of natural selection and genetic differentiation.
Those are the MECHANISMS for evolution to take place.
What are the processes, steps, mechanisms for the "creation" of the universe to take place?
On top of that, you are hung up on the translation of a word from a now unspoken language?
But previously when I asked you why Uthman had to convince Mas'ud to give up his version of the Quran your source you kept referring to blamed it on a translation error...so now its only a translation error when it benefits you? Hilarious.
Dude are you serious?
I'm convinced that you're either trolling or just really ignoring obvious and blatant shortcomings.
I would correct the bible too if I made a religion 600 years after Christianity was started.
Thats like comparing Einstein to Issac Newton.
- Jun 10, 2006
- 3,149
- 987
I think it's dumb how people debate all the time about stuff that might or might not have been from the bible and earlier scriptures. If religion is all about faith, then all we have to do is believe right? What's the point in reading and being skeptical over something that anyone could have wrote.
I'm from a Catholic family btw, just my two cents.
I'm from a Catholic family btw, just my two cents.
sillyputty
Banned
- Aug 31, 2011
- 3,634
- 21
...if your religion comes from a book...
...and you can't validate the book...
...how can you believe whats in the book?
Faith isn't something to be proud of if you can't validate what it is that you're blindly supporting.
You would rather believe in what doesn't make sense...than to know if it makes sense or not.
Ok. Why don't you believe in any of the OTHER religions?
Uh...What???
Well why teach kids that volcanoes and earthquakes are the result of god's wrath instead of actually tectonic plates and underground massive geological movements?
I don't know why this is important...maybe...too...see if its true or not?
So its good enough for you as long as it says god wrote it...but you don't care if its true?
How does that even make sense?
Why did it take 40 people...22 years to write ONE book?
Was Muhammad just making it up along the way? You would think God would just INSTANTLY zap it into his brain or something.
[h5]
[/h5]
It was correctly arranged...but not compiled...[h5]
[/h5][h5]Odd choice of words...
[/h5]
The Ridda wars...muslims...fighting over islam (and some politics)...hm....I wonder why they would do that? Wasn't the Quran only in one variant?
[/h5][h5]
[/h5][h5]
[/h5][h5]
[/h5][h5]
[/h5][h5]He couldn't have...made it up...could he?
[/h5][h5]
[/h5][h5]Funny how Muhammad dies and leaves all these wives behind...must have married them...really young...
[/h5][h5]
[/h5][h5]How many ways are there to read ONE book?[/h5][h5]
[/h5][h5]Dialects won't change whats ON THE PAGES...unless they straight up change the entire thing...[/h5][h5]
[/h5][h5]sounds like we have VERSIONS in play...
[/h5][h5]
[/h5][h5][/h5][h5][/h5]
My point exactly.
Your story FAILS.
If you gave the OG copy to Hafsah...why not copy HER version and send it out? Why use Uthman's (the caliphate at the time) version and spread that one around?
Did you not realize how many contradictions there were in this whole thing?
The Quran has Versions homie.
Uthman burned all the other versions that weren't his.
- Jun 10, 2006
- 3,149
- 987
I don't think you get my point buddy. Faith doesn't have to depict something that's solely about religion. I believe in God because I choose to, and I hope there is a heaven out there. No where did I say earthquakes are the result of religious beings. And since we're on the subject, I took a course about earthquakes and learned the information from a textbook, which is based on scientific research and real evidence. Do all these variations of the bible have a works cited page? No, someone just wrote it down and the information gets passed on to people who think they know everything about their "real" God.
My point is, I don't care what anyone believes in. You can choose to believe in whatever you want, I wouldn't down you for it. Just don't be one of those people going around shoving your beliefs into other peoples' throats, because not everyone believes in the same thing.
My point is, I don't care what anyone believes in. You can choose to believe in whatever you want, I wouldn't down you for it. Just don't be one of those people going around shoving your beliefs into other peoples' throats, because not everyone believes in the same thing.
- Mar 4, 2011
- 10,459
- 8,940
- May 21, 2005
- 3,130
- 10
Originally Posted by OnTheNephs
[h5][/h5]
Upon the command of the Prophethis Companions would write down what was revealed of the Noble Quran. They used, for this purpose, palm branches stripped of leaves, parchments, shoulder bones, stone tablets, etc. About forty people were involved in this task. Among them was Zayd Ibn Thaabitwho showed his work to the Prophet. Thus, the Quran was correctly arranged during the Prophet’s life, but it was not yet compiled into one book. In the meantime, most of the Prophet’s Companions memorised the Quran.
When Abu Bakrbecame Caliph after the Prophetdied, a large number of the Companions were killed during the War of Apostasy. 'Umar Ibn Al-Khattaabwent to the Caliph and discussed the idea of compiling the Quran into one volume. He was disturbed, as most of those who memorised it had died. Then, Abu Bakrcalled for Zayd and commissioned him to collect the Quran into one book, which became known as the 'Mus-haf.'
After Zaydaccomplished this great task and organized the Quran into one book, he submitted the precious collection to Abu Bakrwho kept it in his possession until the end of his life. During the caliphate of 'Umarit was kept with his daughter Hafsahwho was also a wife of the Prophet.
During the Caliphate of 'UthmaanIslam reached many countries, and readers began to recite the Quran in different ways (dialects). 'Uthmaanthen had various copies made and sent them out to the different Muslim lands, lest these dialects would cause alterations to the Quran, and kept the original copy with Hafsah. Thus, the Quran remained preserved and the Caliph was very much pleased with his achievement.
Today, every copy of the Quran conforms with the standard copy of 'Uthmaan.
No. That is sugar-coating and altering facts right there..
This will be long,but bear with me...
The Qur'an is not perfect. You can tell it was man made. There are different words and language as if different authors put it together. It is not consistent. In some passages the word "I" is used as if God is talking and sometimes it is talking about God in third person.
I have read up on the “purity of the Qur’an
- Oct 16, 2010
- 2,339
- 2,132
I've seen that same exact paragraph of lies copy/pasted in different threads regarding the Qur'an on at least 3 different occasions - and it's been refuted every time. If you had bothered to read the sources provided you would have known better than to post that again.
Just one example of the level these liars will stoop down to in an effort to attack Islam:
"For example, Ubai had several Suras in his Qur’an that Uthman took out from the standardized text."
A little research will show you that the "Surahs" Ubay had in "his Qur'an" were not Surahs at all, but two Hadiths he had heard from the Prophet (pbuh) which related to/further explained some Ayat in the Qur'an, so Ubay wrote them down next to these Ayat in his own personal notebook for his own study/reflection, not the Qur'an/"his copy of the Qur'an" - and Ubay never claimed it as such. He himself recognized that the Hadiths were NOT part of the Ayat of Qur'an and so did all other companions, obviously. Thus is would make perfect logical sense that Uthman would not use such personal notebooks when disseminating the Qur'an since it could cause confusion, especially to those outside the Arabian peninsula, who actually could mistake the Hadith (which were later compiled themselves separately) as being Ayat. The claims that Ubay and others had different Qur'an's all together is a bold faced lie, as are the rest of the claims in that garbage.
So again, this was only one example, if you bother to read the sources provided you will see how dishonest and deceiving folks are when trying to attack Islam, yet all their myths are shattered through a bit of research.
http://www.quranicstudies.com/articles/history-of-the-quran/the-masahif-of-the-companions.html
EDIT: Might as well place the whole wiki entry here given how unbelievably ignorant people are on the subject:
[sup]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uthman_ibn_Affan#cite_note-12[/sup]
Just one example of the level these liars will stoop down to in an effort to attack Islam:
"For example, Ubai had several Suras in his Qur’an that Uthman took out from the standardized text."
A little research will show you that the "Surahs" Ubay had in "his Qur'an" were not Surahs at all, but two Hadiths he had heard from the Prophet (pbuh) which related to/further explained some Ayat in the Qur'an, so Ubay wrote them down next to these Ayat in his own personal notebook for his own study/reflection, not the Qur'an/"his copy of the Qur'an" - and Ubay never claimed it as such. He himself recognized that the Hadiths were NOT part of the Ayat of Qur'an and so did all other companions, obviously. Thus is would make perfect logical sense that Uthman would not use such personal notebooks when disseminating the Qur'an since it could cause confusion, especially to those outside the Arabian peninsula, who actually could mistake the Hadith (which were later compiled themselves separately) as being Ayat. The claims that Ubay and others had different Qur'an's all together is a bold faced lie, as are the rest of the claims in that garbage.
So again, this was only one example, if you bother to read the sources provided you will see how dishonest and deceiving folks are when trying to attack Islam, yet all their myths are shattered through a bit of research.
http://www.quranicstudies.com/articles/history-of-the-quran/the-masahif-of-the-companions.html
EDIT: Might as well place the whole wiki entry here given how unbelievably ignorant people are on the subject:
Uthman is perhaps best known for forming the committee which produced multiple copies of the text of the Qur'an as it exists today. The reason was that various Muslim centres, like Kufa and Damascus, had begun to develop their own traditions for reciting the Qur'an and writing it down with stylistic differences.
This copy of the Qur'an is believed to be one of the oldest, compiled during Caliph Uthman's reign.
During the time of Uthman, by which time Islam had spread far and wide, differences in reading the Quran in different dialects of Arabic language became obvious. A group of companions, headed by Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman, who was then stationed in Iraq, came to Uthman and urged him to "save the Muslim ummah before they differ about the Quran" . Uthman obtained the complete manuscript of the Qur'an fromHafsah, one of the wives of the Islamic prophet Muhammad who had been entrusted to keep the manuscript ever since the Qur'an was comprehensively compiled by the first Caliph, Abu Bakr . Uthman then again summoned the leading compiling authority, Zayd ibn Thabit, and some other companions to make copies of the manuscript. Zayd was put in charge of the task. The style of Arabic dialect used was that of theQuraysh tribe to which the Prophet Muhammad belonged. Hence this style was emphasized over all others.
Zayd and his assistants produced several copies of the manuscript of the Qur'an. One of each was sent to every Muslim province with the order that all other Quranic materials, whether fragmentary or complete copies, be destroyed. As such, when the standard copies were made widely available to the Muslim community everywhere, then all other material was burnt voluntarily by the Muslim community themselves. The annihilation of these extra-Qur'anic documents remained essential in order to eradicate scriptural incongruities, contradictions of consequence or differences in the dialect from the customary text of the Qur'an. The Caliph Uthman kept a copy for himself and returned the original manuscript to Hafsah.
While Shi'a and Sunni accept the same sacred text, the Qur'an, some claim that Shi'a dispute the current version, i.e. they add two additional surahs known as al-Nurayn and al-Wilaya.[sup][11][/sup] Nonetheless, Shi'as claim that they are falsely accused of this, as they believe, like Sunnis, that the Qur'an has never been changed and it is with reference from sunni hadeeth books that this inference is drawn not only by uninformed shias but sunnis too.[sup][12][/sup][sup][13][/sup]
[sup]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uthman_ibn_Affan#cite_note-12[/sup]
sillyputty
Banned
- Aug 31, 2011
- 3,634
- 21
You're seriously going to attempt to refute a statement that disproves your point?
SOMEONE BEFORE UTHMAN HAD A QURAN EDITED PREVIOUS VERSIONS.
What the hell else would you have to prove?
Uthman took something that existed...and changed it!
Whats your proof of what Ubay used for his quran and what was in his quran? You're just asserting this and not allowing for the fact that this claim might be fabricated by rulers like Uthman to improve their image against those who resisted adopting new versions of the quran
On top of that Hadiths are still respected additions and supplementary topics to the Quran so whats the matter with including them? The prophet said it, right?
And why did Uthman take it out?
Son..you JUST said they were apart of the Ayat...
No it doesn't. You just contradicted yourself. You said Ubay had stuff that explained ayat...then you turn around and say that it doesn't.
Figure out which story you're sticking to. You've turned your head around twice now.
The claims that Ubay and others had different Qur'an's all together is a bold faced lie, as are the rest of the claims in that garbage.
What would Uthman "unify" if there weren't different versions of the Quran?
So again, this was only one example, if you bother to read the sources provided you will see how dishonest and deceiving folks are when trying to attack Islam, yet all their myths are shattered through a bit of research.
http://www.quranicstudies.com/articles/history-of-the-quran/the-masahif-of-the-companions.html
http://www.quranicstudies.com/articles/history-of-the-quran/the-masahif-of-the-companions.html
I have no agenda to "attack" islam.
Its your sources that do NOT support your claims is the problem.
Again, this claim says its a problem of "dialect" or some other spoken consistency issue.
Then it basically says, versions of the Quran before uthman were to be taken cautiously... but how would Uthman know what was what? Those versions existed before he came to power...so how can he say that their versions are inaccurate? Your story keeps falling apart man.
Then why does he only adopt HIS version?
Again, you're being ignorant.
A new ruler came to town. He eliminated all the competition. His name, was Uthman.
EDIT: Your Wiki source says what we've been saying all along. Uthman burned all his competitors qurans and adopted only his....but says they were burned..."voluntariliy"...
Yeah right. This is the year 600 AD and written language is probably more valuable than gold...and they BURNED their version of their sacred book?... Voluntarily?...Under a new ruler?
Stop it son.
- Oct 16, 2010
- 2,339
- 2,132
Good thing we have ignore lists, cannot fathom the level of stupidity I read on here.
sillyputty
Banned
- Aug 31, 2011
- 3,634
- 21
Ah yes...when someone replies and refutes each line of your response then everyone else is stupid.
- Aug 23, 2007
- 16,132
- 9,292
straight bickering in here
