this is true, God said they he would himself make sure that this book, unlike other religious texts, isn't altered in any way.
Buy on AliExpress.com
Bible bashing (12 Viewers)
- Thread starter jaecole
- Start date
this is true, God said they he would himself make sure that this book, unlike other religious texts, isn't altered in any way.
Buy on AliExpress.com
As a linguist, I do realise purity is conserved in rare cases from a sole lingual point of view. However, as a student of sociology, psychiatry and politics, I also know that languages or translations are not the only influence on literary works.
Well-read bestsellers such as the Qur'an with enormous political consequences are very appealing to leaders of man who seek tools to widen their influence and power. That's a sad fact of this world and I would be VERY surprised if the Qur'an had managed to escape this evil.
Obviously, manipulating a book like the Qur'an would be much more difficult (if not impossible) nowadays but you must consider there were times when over 90 percent of populations were illiterate! This and many more other historical and political situations and facts would relatively easily allow the people in the right places to print their mark on the Qur'an, the Bible or the Torah.
Bare in mind I'm not insulting your faith; I have no way of proving what I deem to be likely. That makes my opinion just as much a conviction as yours.
Well-read bestsellers such as the Qur'an with enormous political consequences are very appealing to leaders of man who seek tools to widen their influence and power. That's a sad fact of this world and I would be VERY surprised if the Qur'an had managed to escape this evil.
Obviously, manipulating a book like the Qur'an would be much more difficult (if not impossible) nowadays but you must consider there were times when over 90 percent of populations were illiterate! This and many more other historical and political situations and facts would relatively easily allow the people in the right places to print their mark on the Qur'an, the Bible or the Torah.
Bare in mind I'm not insulting your faith; I have no way of proving what I deem to be likely. That makes my opinion just as much a conviction as yours.
May I also add these points (which I found in, and copied from, well-written posts in another forum):
"..[T]he method/tradition of preserving the text of the Holy Quran is through TWO solid channels:
1. In written form
2. Through memorizing whole text ( word by word): In every period of Muslim History there were/are Huffaz (those who memorized, knew the whole Quranic Text, word by word).
and
3. There are numerous Books of Commenteries on the Holy Quran.
4. Countless religious scholars experts/students on Quranic Text in every age who spend their whole life fo this noble cause.
5. Countless Calligraphers (scribes with beautiful handwriting) in every age.
6. Countless Qaarees (those who know the art of reading-tajweed- the text properly)"
"...Islamic history has a continuous tradition with unbroken chain of keeping its spiritual treasure in written form and through solid memorization."
"The matter/issue of variant readings of arabic text is already known to the scholars of Islam from the beginning. Variant readings issue doesn't change anything because it has to do with how to pronounce/write certain words and nothing to do with the meaning.
A person, who is totally unaware of arabic language may not comprehend this issue. But if you learn arabic then you will see this is not an issue which some bias Christian missionaries/orientalists trying their best to create confusion among ignorant people.
Like for example in English the word divorce is pronounced as "daivors" and also as deevors" or the word 'colour' is also written without 'u' as "color". These kinds of variations do not change the meaning and impact.
Initially Arabic text just like Hebrew, was written without vowels/diacritical marks. When Islam spread rapidly in early centuries and people of different arab tribes/dialects and of other languages embraced Islam and started learning the Holy Quran properly, for their purpose diacritical marks/signs were invented in order to preserve the original Quraish dialect. But the main body of the text remained as it is because Arabic is not like English.
In arabic in order to insert diacritical marks you don't have to touch/disturb the main text. All you need to do is add marks on top or bottom of the main text without touching/altering/disturbing the main text. If someone due to his ignorance contest that in some cases it does effect the meaning of the certain words, even then it is not an issue because the proper meaning of certain words can be easliy figured out by keeping in mind the whole context. "
Besides, Arabic is a living language unlike other religion's books which are either dead or changed and emerged as modern, such as Greek, Hebrew and Sanskirit etc."
"..[T]he method/tradition of preserving the text of the Holy Quran is through TWO solid channels:
1. In written form
2. Through memorizing whole text ( word by word): In every period of Muslim History there were/are Huffaz (those who memorized, knew the whole Quranic Text, word by word).
and
3. There are numerous Books of Commenteries on the Holy Quran.
4. Countless religious scholars experts/students on Quranic Text in every age who spend their whole life fo this noble cause.
5. Countless Calligraphers (scribes with beautiful handwriting) in every age.
6. Countless Qaarees (those who know the art of reading-tajweed- the text properly)"
"...Islamic history has a continuous tradition with unbroken chain of keeping its spiritual treasure in written form and through solid memorization."
"The matter/issue of variant readings of arabic text is already known to the scholars of Islam from the beginning. Variant readings issue doesn't change anything because it has to do with how to pronounce/write certain words and nothing to do with the meaning.
A person, who is totally unaware of arabic language may not comprehend this issue. But if you learn arabic then you will see this is not an issue which some bias Christian missionaries/orientalists trying their best to create confusion among ignorant people.
Like for example in English the word divorce is pronounced as "daivors" and also as deevors" or the word 'colour' is also written without 'u' as "color". These kinds of variations do not change the meaning and impact.
Initially Arabic text just like Hebrew, was written without vowels/diacritical marks. When Islam spread rapidly in early centuries and people of different arab tribes/dialects and of other languages embraced Islam and started learning the Holy Quran properly, for their purpose diacritical marks/signs were invented in order to preserve the original Quraish dialect. But the main body of the text remained as it is because Arabic is not like English.
In arabic in order to insert diacritical marks you don't have to touch/disturb the main text. All you need to do is add marks on top or bottom of the main text without touching/altering/disturbing the main text. If someone due to his ignorance contest that in some cases it does effect the meaning of the certain words, even then it is not an issue because the proper meaning of certain words can be easliy figured out by keeping in mind the whole context. "
Besides, Arabic is a living language unlike other religion's books which are either dead or changed and emerged as modern, such as Greek, Hebrew and Sanskirit etc."
Actually El Cid is a good pooproom reading. As for the commedia which by the way has nothing "divine" about it is not nearly as good as hailed. On the other, It definitetly succeeded in apprehending the spirit of ignorance and your weekly auto da fe of its time. "And when his hand he had stretch'd forth...To mine, with pleasant looks, whence I was cheer'd...Into that secret place he led me on"
++ [ originally posted by Erik ] ++
As a linguist, I do realise purity is conserved in rare cases from a sole lingual point of view. However, as a student of sociology, psychiatry and politics, I also know that languages or translations are not the only influence on literary works.
Well-read bestsellers such as the Qur'an with enormous political consequences are very appealing to leaders of man who seek tools to widen their influence and power. That's a sad fact of this world and I would be VERY surprised if the Qur'an had managed to escape this evil.
Obviously, manipulating a book like the Qur'an would be much more difficult (if not impossible) nowadays but you must consider there were times when over 90 percent of populations were illiterate! This and many more other historical and political situations and facts would relatively easily allow the people in the right places to print their mark on the Qur'an, the Bible or the Torah.
Bare in mind I'm not insulting your faith; I have no way of proving what I deem to be likely. That makes my opinion just as much a conviction as yours.
As a linguist, I do realise purity is conserved in rare cases from a sole lingual point of view. However, as a student of sociology, psychiatry and politics, I also know that languages or translations are not the only influence on literary works.
Well-read bestsellers such as the Qur'an with enormous political consequences are very appealing to leaders of man who seek tools to widen their influence and power. That's a sad fact of this world and I would be VERY surprised if the Qur'an had managed to escape this evil.
Obviously, manipulating a book like the Qur'an would be much more difficult (if not impossible) nowadays but you must consider there were times when over 90 percent of populations were illiterate! This and many more other historical and political situations and facts would relatively easily allow the people in the right places to print their mark on the Qur'an, the Bible or the Torah.
Bare in mind I'm not insulting your faith; I have no way of proving what I deem to be likely. That makes my opinion just as much a conviction as yours.
...
Politically, the only thing men in power can change is how they teach the Quran to ignorant people. You can't change the verse
As for people being illiterate, there's no concern. Ever since the prophet Mohammed (pbuh) and his companions have memorized the Quran, the chain of people who memorized it word for word has not been broken. Thousands of people till this day know the Quran by heart. Hundreds of them are half my age!
Here's a brief history if you're interested.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/compilationbrief.html
I really wish you knew Arabic. Also, you have no idea how serious learning/memorizing the Quran is.
Everything is known. The number of words, where each verse was first recited by the prophet. It's a whole science.
It shouldn't. Because It's not just one chain. It's many. My grandfather knew it word for word. It's very common. The grammer itself even makes it hard to change the positions of words. The context and pronounciation changes. You change a pronounciation => the meaning changes, but looking back at the text, the grammer becomes wrong. you change the grammar, the flow of the words across verses changes and the meaning doesn't make sense. Not to degrade it to human work, but it's like a long complex poem the flows.
Think of it this way, we pray 5 times a day. In each prayer we recite random chapters from the Quran. Imagine millions of people over 1400 years reciting this little book over and over again everyday. The Qur'an is not something we have on the shelve. It's used and heard everyday.
It's a known fact that currupt Islamic leaders' only chance of changing something to due with the Quran is to teach its meaning differently to people ignorant to the language or the meaning as a whole. If they ever even hinted at changing the words, then they won't even make it through the night. It's that serious. Nobody would stand for that.
Also, this is a requirment in Islam, when we pray, if the Imam (the person leading the daily prayer)even misspronouces a word, the people behind him would say loudly "subhan allah," to notify the Imam that he has made a mistake. The Imam would re recite the verse. If he still makes a mistake, one of the people praying would correct him. Mind you, in regular/correct prayers, nobody but the Imam is allowed to speak!!
Saying that a small mistake/change sticks out like a sore thumb is an understatment!
Everything is known. The number of words, where each verse was first recited by the prophet. It's a whole science.
As a human being; that frightens me even more than the possibility of alternations to the written book itself
Because It's not just one chain. It's many. My grandfather knew it word for word. It's very common. The grammer itself even makes it hard to change the positions of words. The context and pronounciation changes. You change a pronounciation => the meaning changes, but looking back at the text, the grammer becomes wrong. you change the grammar, the flow of the words across verses changes and the meaning doesn't make sense. Not to degrade it to human work, but it's like a long complex poem the flows.Think of it this way, we pray 5 times a day. In each prayer we recite random chapters from the Quran. Imagine millions of people over 1400 years reciting this little book over and over again everyday. The Qur'an is not something we have on the shelve. It's used and heard everyday.
It's a known fact that currupt Islamic leaders' only chance of changing something to due with the Quran is to teach its meaning differently to people ignorant to the language or the meaning as a whole. If they ever even hinted at changing the words, then they won't even make it through the night.
It's that serious. Nobody would stand for that.Also, this is a requirment in Islam, when we pray, if the Imam (the person leading the daily prayer)even misspronouces a word, the people behind him would say loudly "subhan allah," to notify the Imam that he has made a mistake. The Imam would re recite the verse. If he still makes a mistake, one of the people praying would correct him. Mind you, in regular/correct prayers, nobody but the Imam is allowed to speak!!
Saying that a small mistake/change sticks out like a sore thumb is an understatment!
++ [ originally posted by Majed ] ++
I don't take it as an insult at all Erik. I know you're just speaking of logic. Also, excluding steeling my avatars, I don't recall anything maliscious on your part.
...
Politically, the only thing men in power can change is how they teach the Quran to ignorant people. You can't change the verse
As for people being illiterate, there's no concern. Ever since the prophet Mohammed (pbuh) and his companions have memorized the Quran, the chain of people who memorized it word for word has not been broken. Thousands of people till this day know the Quran by heart. Hundreds of them are half my age!
Here's a brief history if you're interested.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/compilationbrief.html
I don't take it as an insult at all Erik. I know you're just speaking of logic. Also, excluding steeling my avatars, I don't recall anything maliscious on your part.
...
Politically, the only thing men in power can change is how they teach the Quran to ignorant people. You can't change the verse
As for people being illiterate, there's no concern. Ever since the prophet Mohammed (pbuh) and his companions have memorized the Quran, the chain of people who memorized it word for word has not been broken. Thousands of people till this day know the Quran by heart. Hundreds of them are half my age!
Here's a brief history if you're interested.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/compilationbrief.html
Still, it's an amazing story in itself to not have that altered at all over time, even with the spread of the Quran throughout Africa, places as far away as Indonesia, etc. Maybe the way it's repeated and practiced isn't as subject to the perils of the infamous "game of telephone" that human communications are so subject to.
But there must have been points of reconciliation. Human memory is not infallible -- particularly when there are people involved who didn't have the support groups when they spread the influence of Islam across the world.
But reconciliation, I imagine, there must have been a linguistic bit check. A CRC. When two recitations of the Quran from different, disperse regions failed the checksum, there must have been methods of correction.
Let's see, 10th Commandment. Now how did that go again?:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's condom, er condominium, thou shalt not cover thy neighbor's wife, nor his manhood, nor her maid a milking, nor his ox, nor his fat ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's. Except on Tuesday."
Does that sound right?
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's condom, er condominium, thou shalt not cover thy neighbor's wife, nor his manhood, nor her maid a milking, nor his ox, nor his fat ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's. Except on Tuesday."
Does that sound right?
++ [ originally posted by swag ] ++
Let's see, 10th Commandment. Now how did that go again?:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's condom, er condominium, thou shalt not cover thy neighbor's wife, nor his manhood, nor her maid a milking, nor his ox, nor his fat ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's. Except on Tuesday."
Does that sound right?
Let's see, 10th Commandment. Now how did that go again?:
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's condom, er condominium, thou shalt not cover thy neighbor's wife, nor his manhood, nor her maid a milking, nor his ox, nor his fat ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's. Except on Tuesday."
Does that sound right?
True. The Quran is not as old as the other holy books.
No doubt. Like you said, we're human. There must have been mistakes made along the way, but they'd stick out like a sore thumb and they've ALL been corrected. If a wrong version was spread, you'd have people following a different Quran today. This, however, doesn't exist.
No doubt. Like you said, we're human. There must have been mistakes made along the way, but they'd stick out like a sore thumb and they've ALL been corrected. If a wrong version was spread, you'd have people following a different Quran today. This, however, doesn't exist.
