Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
and is it free of mistakes?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What evidence is there that the Koran is the word of God?
- Thread starter Agnostic75
- Start date
and is it free of mistakes?
Sure. It says so.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that God hath power over all things?Sura 2:106; 16:101, Ali.
Why should it be necessary for God to change or substitute any of his own revelations or verses for something better?
Did he not know at that time of writing the original verse that it was not the best decision or advice or command? I cant imagine God would make the mistake of giving inadequate advice.
Another is in that the Quran says that muslims are not to force their religion on anyone. Let there be no compulsion in religion. Thy duty is only preaching. We have not made thee keeper over [the Unbelievers]. What! wilt thou compel men to become believers? No soul can believe but by the permission of God. Thy duty is to make (The Message) reach them: It is our part to call them to account. Obey not the Infidels and Hypocritesyet abstain from injuring them. Summon thou to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and with kindly warning: dispute with them in the kindest manner. (Sura 2:256; 13:40, Ali; Sura 3:19; 6:106, 107; 10:99, 100; 16:126; 33:44, 47, Rodwell)
But then we find this: Believers, wage war against such of the infidels as are your neighbors, and let them find you rigorous. And when the sacred months are passed, kill those that join other gods with God wherever ye find them; and seize them, besiege them, and lay in wait for them with every kind of ambush: but if they shall convert, and observe prayer, and pay the obligatory alms, then let them go their way, for God is Gracious.Sura 2:186-190, 212, 213; 8:12; 9:5, 124; 47:4,
Either God wants muslims to be peaceful with non believers and not compel anyone to follow islam, or he wants muslims to fight non believers and force them to submit to Islam.
Which is it?
There is the contradiction of who was the first muslim. The Quran says that Abraham was neither Jew nor Christian; but he was sound in the faith, a Muslim. (Sura 3:60; 5:48, 111) But according to Sura 39:14, it was Muhammad SAY: I am bidden to serve God with a sincere worship: and I am bidden to be the first of those who surrender themselves to him, (Muslims).
Or the contradiction about who is in line for salvation and who is not. Sura 2:59 Verily, they who believe (Muslims) and they who follow the Jewish religion, and the Christians, and the Sabeites,whoever of these believeth in God and the last day, and doeth that which is right, shall have their reward with their Lord: fear shall not come upon them, neither shall they be grieved.
But then we see the opposite teaching Whoso desireth any other religion than Islam, that religion shall never be accepted from him, and in the next world he shall be among the lost. Infidels now are they who say, God is the Messiah, Son of Mary! . . . Whoever shall join other gods with God, God shall forbid him the Garden, and his abode shall be the Fire. They surely are Infidels who say God is the third of three, for there is no God but one God. (Sura 3:79; 5:76, 77)
Either all 3 Abrahamic religions lead to salvation as the first sura says, or only Islam leads to salvation. Which is it?
If the Quran says that there is no contradiction, then that in itself is a contradiction, yes?
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
A-ManESL
Well-Known Member
You are misquoting or misinterpreting these verses.
This is with reference to specific injunctions within the Quran, which were enforced gradually. For example 2:219 didnt forbid gambling and drinking, 4:43 forbade Muslims to come to prayer in a drunken state, and 5:93 prohibited drinking altogether. Since sudden application of many injunctions would have drastically affected the nascent Muslim community, a gradual approach was implemented.
It is that Muslims have to be peaceful with non-believers. The verses prescribing violence are in the context of a war period. Many anti-Muslims quote these verses to show their bias.
The first Muslim in the sense of time is supposed to be Adam(pbuh) and not Abraham (pbuh). The first Muslim, in the sense of first as the epitome of a believer (like in Western countries we hear the notion of "first gentleman of the country", "first lady of the country") is Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). That is not to say, that he is the only first person, or that Muhammad (pbuh) is better then other Prophets, for as he himself said "Do not give me preference over the other Prophets".(Source)
I think you should say verse 2:62 instead of 2:59.
All true religions lead to God (the idea of salvation being Christian in nature is improper to use here)
You are making a misinterpretation of the word Islam in the verse 3:85 (which you have stated as 3:79). In the Quranic setting, the word Islam didnt imply the religion or the whole system as such but simply submission. For example, this Quran translates 3:85 as follows: "For, if one goes in search of a religion other than self-surrender unto God, it will never be accepted from him, and in the life to come he shall be among the lost." Many Qurans even replace the word religion above by system or way of life, for the word deen used in the actual Arabic doesnt quite convey the sense of the word religion. The other verses you quoted are condemnations of putting up false Gods in the simplistic sense, which is how the Arabs of the 7th C understood the notion of more then 1 God. I think you need to read these verses more carefully yet.
Regards
This is with reference to specific injunctions within the Quran, which were enforced gradually. For example 2:219 didnt forbid gambling and drinking, 4:43 forbade Muslims to come to prayer in a drunken state, and 5:93 prohibited drinking altogether. Since sudden application of many injunctions would have drastically affected the nascent Muslim community, a gradual approach was implemented.
It is that Muslims have to be peaceful with non-believers. The verses prescribing violence are in the context of a war period. Many anti-Muslims quote these verses to show their bias.
The first Muslim in the sense of time is supposed to be Adam(pbuh) and not Abraham (pbuh). The first Muslim, in the sense of first as the epitome of a believer (like in Western countries we hear the notion of "first gentleman of the country", "first lady of the country") is Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). That is not to say, that he is the only first person, or that Muhammad (pbuh) is better then other Prophets, for as he himself said "Do not give me preference over the other Prophets".(Source)
I think you should say verse 2:62 instead of 2:59.
All true religions lead to God (the idea of salvation being Christian in nature is improper to use here)
You are making a misinterpretation of the word Islam in the verse 3:85 (which you have stated as 3:79). In the Quranic setting, the word Islam didnt imply the religion or the whole system as such but simply submission. For example, this Quran translates 3:85 as follows: "For, if one goes in search of a religion other than self-surrender unto God, it will never be accepted from him, and in the life to come he shall be among the lost." Many Qurans even replace the word religion above by system or way of life, for the word deen used in the actual Arabic doesnt quite convey the sense of the word religion. The other verses you quoted are condemnations of putting up false Gods in the simplistic sense, which is how the Arabs of the 7th C understood the notion of more then 1 God. I think you need to read these verses more carefully yet.
Regards
Last edited:
Evandr
Stripling Warrior
The first test of a religious doctrine is "does it fit together logically, having no need to depend on smoke and mirrors or mindless rhetoric to bind it together" If not then it must be said that God is a God of confusion; any religion that must confess confusion cannot be of God for God is not a God of confusion. I did not have to dig very far to realize that the concepts supporting a belief in Allah are the most illogical and confusing doctrines the world has ever know; even Catholicism, the second most confusing dogma ever known, fares better under examination.
The second test must be "will you learn the same thing from the religious leadership of a given religion regardless of where you go to be taught within said religion", If not then there is no consistency in the doctrine and therefore it is in a constant state of flux never having a firm foundation. Any vehicle of religion wherein you will find servants of God legally authorized to act in the name of God will have a firm foundation, nothing wavering. Islam defends its points of doctrine individually as if they were bits of straw that cannot be cohesive enough to make broom nor bail.
The Koran fails both of these test miserably and that is just two of the startlingly obvious ways that the doctrines of Islam, with even a minimal degree of intelligent investigation, fail to stand outside the realms of those who believe that they are being successful at pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps. That is why to argue with hard liners, or those wanting to stay in power, one is often met with violent and sometime deadly totalitarian tantrums.
None are so blind as those who will not see yet perhaps the Islamic community is crazy like a fox - the text of the Koran can be molded together in such a way that any Muslim can do anything they want any time they want and turn to the Koran for support, kind of like a "catch all" grab bag of excuses to justify any action and/or belief be it good or bad.
Gaura Priya
IRL
Belief in God is absolutely not confusing. the Qur'an is simple: submit to God alone, who is One without a second, and that God has sent Prophets and Messengers to every culture and in every community. And Muhammad is a Prophet of God.
And where in Christendom will you find any unified voice? If you are speaking of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, then you will find it one Church among many, as much as there are many denominations in Islam. After all, the Ahmadiyya Muslims believe that they have true Islam and the only form of true Islam with authority on Earth.
And yet the Bible and the Book of Mormon are complete with wars and rapings, pillaging and killings. Christianity has done so many things in the name of God over hundreds and hundreds of years, showing that Biblical fanaticism is just as deadly.
How like the Bible, and the Book of Mormon. Any action can be justified with any large volume of authoritative text, not just the Qur'an.
Gaura Priya
IRL
Gaura Priya
IRL
Evandr
Stripling Warrior
This is exactly what I am talking about. It seems that Allah is the handle that justifies anything that a Muslim wants to do. Believing in Allah is one thing but making sense of what is called His Doctrine is quite another. Professing a belief in a deity does not somehow clarify confusing and very often starkly contradictory dogma such as is found in the Koran.
Pardon me if I appear to be preaching but you did ask so I will tell you that their is absolute unity of thought and doctrine in the LDS Church leadership and anyone who preaches their own interpretations of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is quickly sanctioned and/or removed from their position of responsibility. No man has the right to interpret the word of God save His prophet and apostles and in the LDS Church their is presented an absolut unity of thought and action among its leaders and training materials. Also, There is a pure and logical method wherein the Gospel fits together leaving no need for smoke and mirrors. There may be great unity in some other churches but very rarely is their no need therein to rely upon some great mystery to explain the simple truths of the Gospel, mysteries that the LDS Church has no need of.
The Bible and book of Mormon both contain a great deal of history, more so then doctrine because the doctrine of Christ is really quite simple. You attempt to discredit the Gospel by claiming it has sanctioned wickedness which it has not and never will, only wicked men have done so. Not everyone who utters "God - God" or "Lord - Lord" will be known or accepted of God. It is the nature of man to warp pure doctrine for their own gain and then try to implement it by force, even if what a person is trying to establish is atheism. Unfortunately what Christ set up quickly fell prey to the wickedness of man who was quick to maintain the association with the Gospel while completely distorting it into something absolutly devoid of authority and the associated blessings of God.
In the Book of Mormon the two primary fighting factions, the Nephites and the Lamanites, spen a thousand years (600 BC to 400 AD) fighting among themselves in some of the worst carnage the world has ever witnessed, eventually destroying both nations. This does not mean that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is not real and endowed with power and authority, it only means that there is only a precious few (comparatively speaking), that will take it and show the proper respect necessary not to destroy it. Judging God by a warped Gospel is like taking a perfect cake, mashing it, adding garbage to it, defecating on it, roasting it in a hot oven and then presenting it as cake because you point to the original recipe after which a group of onlookers decides that cake is bad because the example you present stinks.
Evandr
Stripling Warrior
That is nonsense, you have not established the source as being valid and therefore you cannot claim the validity of the product. Even the Book of Mormon needs to be accepted or rejected by responsible examination and logically thoughtful argument, not to mention personal and private effort to seek the source of the words. All indications are that if not for the willingness of its devotees to sustain it and blindly overlook the immense flaws in it, the Koran would quickly fall under the weight of its own confusing rhetoric.
Although the Bible has not come 2000 years without being badly blemished by wicked interpreters seeking to persuade the masses to thier own will, or perhaps well intended interpreters that simply got it wrong, I believe that it at least started as a real and exact book of scripture. There is plenty to indicate that the Koran started out invalid and thusly the claim to an unchanging text does not somehow give me cause to validate it.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
Just like how the Bible is free from error, right?
there are a handful of copyist errors scattered throughout the bible, but no outright contradictions of teaching or belief
Is that until Uthman standardised it
Come now Pegg,isn't the Bible like the Quran full of errors,even if it wasn't nothing written in it could prove its the word of a God
All books that depict words of wisdom and love come from people who believe in these facts. But by virtue of causality they all have to come form an original and mighty source in the universe - referred to mostly as God.
What makes Koran or other religious books worthy of reading and contemplation is the inner brilliance of the message of LOVE and desire to reach its source , the rest is mostly politics.
What makes Koran or other religious books worthy of reading and contemplation is the inner brilliance of the message of LOVE and desire to reach its source , the rest is mostly politics.
Rainbow Mage
Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
The Koran obviously must be the word of god because it tells us so! Anything we read in a book must automatically be true!
All joking aside, I just like with the Bible, believe the Koran contains the word of God, but not literally. It's metaphors and parables. I reject hadith and Islamic interpretations of it, much as with the Bible and Christians.
All joking aside, I just like with the Bible, believe the Koran contains the word of God, but not literally. It's metaphors and parables. I reject hadith and Islamic interpretations of it, much as with the Bible and Christians.
Koran talks about Islam which means the art of surrendering to the notion of one almighty...... You either believe or you do not. There is no challenge there. The actual challenge begins when you say yo do!
Then as a Muslim you are to walk a little more responsibly to all beings around you and devote yourself only to spreading wisdom of LOVE.... No conquering no battles (unless to self defense).... Tht is Jihad al Akbar ( The first mighty jihad for any Muslim).... All good men and women have said the same thing in many different ways thru history... But sometimes with blood shed... This world is still under construction. There is hope, we have come a long way and future and its revelations are yet to be experienced by our future generations....
Then as a Muslim you are to walk a little more responsibly to all beings around you and devote yourself only to spreading wisdom of LOVE.... No conquering no battles (unless to self defense).... Tht is Jihad al Akbar ( The first mighty jihad for any Muslim).... All good men and women have said the same thing in many different ways thru history... But sometimes with blood shed... This world is still under construction. There is hope, we have come a long way and future and its revelations are yet to be experienced by our future generations....
Rainbow Mage
Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
Shiraz you just said the Quran talks about Islam to mean surrender to God. That isn't speaking of a religion. Neither is Muslim. Muhammad obviously meant something else by Muslim then modern Islamics do, because he said all the messengers had been Muslims, but we know they were mostly Jews.
BruceDLimber
Well-Known Member
In addition to itself and various Islamic sources, the Baha'i scriptures and other official Baha'i sources confirm the Qur'an's status as valid, God-sent scripture.
Peace,
Bruce
Peace,
Bruce