Hall of FameHall of Fame  Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp  chatChat
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin
InterReligious Dialogue
 Whyislam.org Forums : General : InterReligious Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: Allegations against preservation of the Quran! Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 14 Next >>
Author Message
The_Rock
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4521
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote The_Rock Replybullet Posted: 03 August 2012 at 10:34am
Waheed,
 
I appreciate your response. I believe the specific assertion being made is that the loan words mean different things in the original language.
 
What many orientalists are saying is that at some point there was an attempt arabize the quran, in the process of moving from arabic-syriac to classical arabic, many of the verses became unintelligible.
 
The problem isnt just one of translation.
 
The issue is that these scholars are invalidating the orthodox quranic compilation story.
 
They are saying that many texts/hands created an evolving text.
 
These texts were in arabic-syriac and other languages.
 
A single leader came along, lets call him uthman, he forced a compilation of the text in what was to become classical arabic.
 
The people who performed this exercize lets call him zayd bin Thabit et al, were unfamiliar with arabic-syriac.
 
In the process of this compilation they lost about 1/5 of the verses in translation.
 
What has resulted is an unintelligible recitation, unless one has knowledge of syriac-arabic at which point most of the problems are resolved.
 
In essence the quran you have today, was the authored by Zayd ibn Thabit on the instruction of Uthman.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Magister
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 5223
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Magister Replybullet Posted: 03 August 2012 at 10:45am

Can you provide specific examples?

Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Aviatrix  
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
WhyIslam Forum Moderator
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 11488
Forum Rating: 123
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Aviatrix Replybullet Posted: 03 August 2012 at 10:49am
The_Rock, is it convenient for you to take one person's opinion as fact, when it disagrees with everyone else in the academic field? Those claims you're making have in fact been widely criticized:

Luxenberg’s argument that the Qur’an has Syro-Aramaic origins has been widely discredited by the academic community. His attempts to identify an underlying Syro-Aramaic reading of the Qur’an have been viewed with great suspicion by other scholars. His methodology has been described by Angelika Neuwirth as “presupposing its very results”. D.J. Stewart describes Luxenberg’s attempts to reconstructthe Qur’an from an Aramaic reading as being “implausible and often demonstrably wrong”. Even Scholars, such as Gerald Hawting, who have questioned Orthodox Muslim understanding has described Luxemberg’s work as “arbitrary”. (Hamza Andreas Tzortzis)

You may read his brief overview of the criticism here: http://theinimitablequran.com/respondingtodispacthes.pdf

Edited by Aviatrix - 03 August 2012 at 10:51am
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Magister
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 5223
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Magister Replybullet Posted: 03 August 2012 at 10:54am
Is this that guy who says that when the Palestinian terrorists are dying for "virgins", the correct translation would be "olives"?

Edited by Magister - 03 August 2012 at 10:59am
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Aviatrix  
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
WhyIslam Forum Moderator
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 11488
Forum Rating: 123
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Aviatrix Replybullet Posted: 03 August 2012 at 10:56am
Grapes, I think.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Magister
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 5223
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Magister Replybullet Posted: 03 August 2012 at 11:00am
ahh, okay. thanks sister. Now I know who the Rock is talking about.
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
The_Rock
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4521
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote The_Rock Replybullet Posted: 03 August 2012 at 11:20am
On the contrary Aviatrix.
 
 
In the academic world of history everyone has an opposing opinion, Mr Tzortiz, an apologist has provided sound bites to refute a seminal work.
 
This is not a question of my academic is greater than yours.
 
There are many that disagree with luxenberg, especially those that that produced papers and agree with orthodoxy (there are many that receive funding for this)
 
There are many that agree with him. Gerd Puin is one.
 
In my opinion his work has opened an interesting avenue of study.
 
What I do take as fact is that islamic history as presented by the orthodoxy is based on logical deductions and subjective interpretations.
 
Let us take the inscriptions on pyramids as an example. We dont really need someone to memorize and communicate it to us, because we still have the original inscription.
 
We have copper plates, iron pillars temples from far older civilizations even today, so we know without relying on anyone what they said.
 
It is astonishing that the caliphate with its growing power could not inscribe in some permanent medium its single greatest text.
 
why do you think that is?
 
Is it because the Quran was too unimportant to commit to writing on a permanent medium?
 
Or could it be that the Quran was a hodge podge of variant texts that were committed to writing only once a political leader had it committed.
 
What is really interesting is that the hadith literature itself leads us in that direction, with the hadiths of missing suras and verses, as well as the now infamous "satanic verses".
 
As I stated, I agree that islamic history is more or less accurate, except the first 30 or so years.
 
Those in my opinion are highly mythologized.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
waheed1  
Admin Group
Admin Group

Whyislam Shura
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 3986
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote waheed1 Replybullet Posted: 03 August 2012 at 11:23am
There is nothing unintelligible in the Qur'an. Please, the rock, go get a good translation. They sell them or even give away freely everywhere. Read slowly, write down verses Abd ask questions.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
The_Rock
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4521
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote The_Rock Replybullet Posted: 03 August 2012 at 7:33pm
Perhaps this not being communicated correctly.

I am not commenting on the Quran, it's literary style or unintelligibility.

I am simply stating that Islamic history as postulated by the orthodoxy is not verifiable.

The Quran may be a unique wonderful book. But that is of little concern to me.

The issue to me is simple.

It's the issue that Muslims make central to their assertion of the validity of their beliefs.

That it's perfectly preserved.

In reality Islamic texts themselves refute this assertion.

Moreover Islamic texts openly claim that the history is lost and that they needed a logical framework to decide truth from falsehood.

I must ask Muslims, given the sheer weight of evidence against an accurate transmission of the Hadith and Quran, why do you believe it?
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Aviatrix  
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
WhyIslam Forum Moderator
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 11488
Forum Rating: 123
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Aviatrix Replybullet Posted: 03 August 2012 at 10:03pm
Gerd Puin is equally refuted and criticized in his own academic field.

The_Rock, you're taking an extreme and bizarre opinion, trying to pretend that Islamic history somehow doesn't exist. Just because the Qur'an wasn't inscribed on copper? Seriously?

Moreover, there absolutely are not missing surahs or ayaat, and what you call the "satanic verses" are not more than a myth.

You can choose not to believe the Qur'an is from God, but I'm surprised you're not embarrassed by trying to peddle this nonsense which doesn't even hold up amongst non-Muslim scholars of Islam.

And as I have presented, as well as many others (including Waheed and Shenango), there is an abundance of evidence demonstrating the means of transmission of the Qur'an, and yes, even verifying the accuracy of the transmission.

But if you don't even believe the Qur'an is from God, why do you care? If you've got to go find the wackiest out there theories which have been completely discredited in order to prove your point, why persist?
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
The_Rock
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4521
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote The_Rock Replybullet Posted: 03 August 2012 at 10:10pm
What is this evidence aviatrix?

I am simply stating that your version of Islamic history is no more valid than luxenberg or puin because there is no evidence to support either version.

At least they are basing their study on linguistics, archeology history and deductive reasoning as well as Islamic sources.

So I ask again what empirical evidence do you have to support your version?

Edited by The_Rock - 04 August 2012 at 12:26am
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Franco  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member

Religion: Agnostic(Agnostic)
Posts: 283
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Franco Replybullet Posted: 04 August 2012 at 12:05am
Originally posted by waheed1

There is nothing unintelligible in the Qur'an. Please, the rock, go get a good translation. They sell them or even give away freely everywhere. Read slowly, write down verses Abd ask questions.
 
I hope you're serious about this.
 
10:53 And we verily did tell unto the Children of Israel a fixed abode and did provide them with good things, and they differed not until the knowledge came to them.
 
Where was this fixed abode? Where is it now?
 
What's the knowledge? How did they differ once it came to them?
 
(Sorry if I have the wrong number or have copied incorrectly. I wrote this down a long time ago  and find my own handwriting to be almost unintelligible.)
 
 
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Aviatrix  
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
WhyIslam Forum Moderator
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 11488
Forum Rating: 123
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Aviatrix Replybullet Posted: 04 August 2012 at 1:34am
Originally posted by The_Rock

What is this evidence aviatrix?

I am simply stating that your version of Islamic history is no more valid than luxenberg or puin because there is no evidence to support either version.

At least they are basing their study on linguistics, archeology history and deductive reasoning as well as Islamic sources.

So I ask again what empirical evidence do you have to support your version?


The history has been documented extensively. Thousands of reports, there are books on the histories, collections of the reports, there are even dictionaries from the period. You've just decided to ignore them, for reasons I can't begin to imagine.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Aviatrix  
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
WhyIslam Forum Moderator
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 11488
Forum Rating: 123
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Aviatrix Replybullet Posted: 04 August 2012 at 1:45am
Probably 10:93 is what you're looking for, Franco:

And We had certainty settled the Children of Israel in an agreeable settlement and provided them with good things. And they did not differ until [after] knowledge had come to them. Indeed, your Lord will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning that over which they used to differ.

The place where they were settled is the areas around Jerusalem, where the Children of Israel went after 40 years in exile in the desert, which is what they did after leaving Egypt.

Where is it now? It's called Israel and Palestine.

The knowledge is a reference to the Mosaic Law, which they received in those years in the desert, and knowledge from the prophets which they had among them. Though the Law and the prophets, they had things explained to them--what's right and wrong.

But still they separated into sects among themselves. That's one meaning of "they differed." But also that they disagreed with each other, with their prophets, with the laws. And it could mean more things than that too, I'm not sure of the tafseer of this ayah.

But it's a long way from unintelligible, isn't it?
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 14 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums version 8.03
Copyright ©2001-2006 Web Wiz Guide
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed by members of the Whyislam Forum do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of the Whyislam Team, or any of its subsidiaries, or parent organizations.