Has the Holy Quran undergone any changes in its history?

[CricketCartoons]

If you don't have knowledge about something then you can't give your opinion on it.

If a Hindu, who doesn't know much about Christianity, tries to give his opinions on Christianity then it won't work.

the key is he doesn't know much about Christianity, not that he is a hindu. You only need to have knowledge, not actually follow the belief system.

 

[andy0204]

the key is he doesn't know much about Christianity, not that he is a hindu. You only need to have knowledge, not actually follow the belief system.

You need knowledge as well as believe if you are following a religion.

 

[Technics 1210]

Mods should really change the thread title now.

 

[MenInG]

Mods should really change the thread title now.

Let the discussions continue

 

[daytrader]

The reality of providence is conveyed to us through the literary images of the Pen, the Preserved Tablet, and the records of deeds. Allah decreed all things on the Preserved Tablet, which in an absolute sense does not change. However, the fulfillment of those decrees can change based upon the actions we take. If Allah decreed an evil fate for us, He may change it if we sincerely supplicate to him or perform a good deed for His sake. Our God-given will, subordinate to the will of Allah, directs the destiny Allah brings into being for us. All people ultimately have two possible destinations decreed in the afterlife, Paradise or Hellfire, and only one of them will be fulfilled.

These literary images are the best and easiest way to understand what is an otherwise complicated philosophical controversy. In light of this, the scholars told us to suspend judgment at the texts and to avoid the hazards of debating this topic.

An extract from an essay on the subject of Qadr and free will, you can read the full article here: https://yaqeeninstitute.org/justin-...e-decree-and-free-will-in-islam/#.Xgx6LrenyDY

Beautifully explained. Thank you for sharing

 

[Slog]

This thread is a bit of a circus (atleast the first page till they followed) but in their rush to pick an argument with [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] and condemn him, posters with little knowledge are essentially going against what is the whole point of believing in Islam or a religion.

Islam in itself asks Muslims to have faith and the whole point of faith is to believe what Allah has asked us to without making futile attempts to justify. Muslims often point out to ridiculous things in their rush to 'prove' Islam and here its more of the same. All it does is make a joke of the matter in hand.

Do Muslims here genuinely believe that Christians or Jews or Hindus do not have as much 'belief' in aspects of their religion as they do? Do they think those religions do not have the same stories going around as 'proof'?

Muslims believe that Quran is the uncorrupted word of God because we are asked to believe and that in itself should be enough. Shouldn't need to bring arguments like 'prose' etc and make yourself look foolish.

 

[Mamoon]

This thread is a bit of a circus (atleast the first page till they followed) but in their rush to pick an argument with [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] and condemn him, posters with little knowledge are essentially going against what is the whole point of believing in Islam or a religion.

Islam in itself asks Muslims to have faith and the whole point of faith is to believe what Allah has asked us to without making futile attempts to justify. Muslims often point out to ridiculous things in their rush to 'prove' Islam and here its more of the same. All it does is make a joke of the matter in hand.

Do Muslims here genuinely believe that Christians or Jews or Hindus do not have as much 'belief' in aspects of their religion as they do? Do they think those religions do not have the same stories going around as 'proof'?

Muslims believe that Quran is the uncorrupted word of God because we are asked to believe and that in itself should be enough. Shouldn't need to bring arguments like 'prose' etc and make yourself look foolish.

The problem is that people are uncomfortable with the fact that faith is essentially blind. It is not limited to Islam only - followers of pretty much all religions try to provide proof to justify why they are on the right path.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Some laughable posts. Either prove the Quran has been corrupted or accept you cannot.

 

[miandadrules]

But bro you know that the finality of the Quran is an important part of our religion and faith so we need to be careful how we word stuff.

What [MENTION=107753]uberkoen[/MENTION] has posted is just the tip of the iceberg. And this is all from legitimate Islamic sources.

This isn’t taught in Islamic institutions for obvious reasons.

 

[miandadrules]

He explained it once, he prayed for something that came true so he has blind faith in it.

And I think thats true for lot of us, not everyone is able to completely be like you , [MENTION=5869]yasir[/MENTION], [MENTION=1080]miandadrules[/MENTION] .

I genuinely have respect for you guys for going all the way but I think its ok to be in the middle as well..

I don’t think it’s ones beliefs that are a cause for concerns.

It is a persons actions.

On this site we have practicing Muslims who preach and exhibit compassion and caring for the fellow beings. Exemplary human beings.

On the other hand you have many that espouse some vile, extremist views which they justify with religious cloaking. Slavery, oppression, murder and rape to name a few.

 

[miandadrules]

There is evidence, in fact a lot of evidence. Look at the lower text of the Sanaa manuscript for example.

There is a study by Dr. Kieth Small entitled "Textual Criticism and Qur'an Manuscripts" which does a comparison of the popular modern Quranic text to 22 other copies of the Quran including many of the earliest manuscripts we possess as well as several medieval manuscripts and one modern edition of the Warsh text used by many Muslims in North Africa and Yemen. He focused his work specifically on Surah 14:35-41. In just these seven verses, he found nearly 350 variants among all the manuscripts he examined.

Moreover, The very story of the Quran's collection reports the addition of at least one verse. In Sahih Al-Bukhari (Volume 6, book 61, number 509), it is said that after Muhammad's death there was a battle in which many people who had memorized the Quran had died. The close companions of Muhammad who were leading the Muslim community were concerned that portions of the Quran could be entirely lost if they didn't collect all of the Quran into one written volume. Abu Bakr sent a man to gather all of the Quran together, saying:

"you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it in one book." He began the project of "collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him."

From this work, one official copy of the Quran was produced and remained with Abu Bakr until he died.

The very next Hadith in the collection (Volume 6, Book 61, Number 510) explains that by the time of the third Caliph, Usman, Muslims were reciting the Quran differently from one another so significantly that it threatened to tear the Muslim community apart. Usman sent for the full copy of the Quran that Abu Bakr had made, and also sent for all the written fragments of Quranic material throughout the land and commissioned a yet another project of collecting the Quran. He ordered the production of a new authoritative edition of the Quran, a copy of which was sent to each province. All the other Quranic material was burned. The hadith ends by noting that a verse had been left out of Abu Bakr's edition that was found and added to Usman's collection.

Once again, this verse was found only with Khuzaima bin Al-Ansari, the same person who had remembered a verse no one else knew the first time the Quran was collected.

Apart from the additional verses added. Hadith also provides evidence of missing verses.

In Sahih Muslim, Book 017, Number 4194, Umar is quoted as saying:

"Verily Allah sent Muhammad (may peace be upon him) with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it."

In Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 8, Book 82, Number 816, Umar is quoted as saying

"I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, 'We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book,' and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed."

A'isha, is also said to have reported:

"The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it," (Sunan Ibn Majah, Volume 3, Book 9, Number 1944).

Moreover, we also find evidence that some of the early reciters that were considered to be great were also either forgetful or reciting different version of the Qur'an.

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 103 reads:

"Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) was mentioned before 'Abdullah bin 'Amr. The latter said, 'That is a man I continue to love because I heard Allah's Apostle saying, ' Learn the recitation of the Qur'an from (any of these) four persons: 'Abdullah bin Masud, Salim the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa, Ubai bin Kab, and Muadh bin Jabal.' I do not remember whether he mentioned Ubai first or Muadh."

This same Abdullah bin Masud is also reported in Sahih Al-Bukhari as having said:

"By Allah other than Whom none has the right to be worshiped! There is no Surah revealed in Allah's Book but I know at what place it was revealed; and there is no Verse revealed in Allah's Book but I know about whom."

We cannot question, then, that Muslim tradition holds Masud as a particularly complete and trustworthy source for the Quran. Yet Muslim tradition is filled with hosts of examples of where Masud's readings were different from the standard text. In fact, some sources say his version of the Qur'an was three Surah's shorter.

Nonetheless, Masud criticized the version of the Qur'an compiled by Usman. He said

"The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Qur'an. I like it better to read according to the recitation of him (Prophet) whom I love more than that of Zayd Ibn Thabit," (Ibn Sa'd, Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, Vol. 2, p.444).

He also accused Usman's scribes of adding three extra suras (1, 113 and 114) that had never been part of the original, and of making many other small changes to the text.

Ubai bin Kab is listed above alongside Masud as one of the great reciters of the Quran commended by Muhammad himself. Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 527 records about Ubai bin Kab:

"Umar said Ubai was the best of us in the recitation (of the Qur'an) yet we leave some of what he recites."

Whereas Ibn Mas'ud omitted three surahs (1, 113 and 114) from his Qur'an mashaf (codex), Ubay ibn Ka'b had 116 surahs in his, including two extra short surahs, al-Hafd (the Haste) and al-Khal' (the Separation), which he placed between what are surahs 103 and 104 in Usman's Qur'an

Abu Musa al-Ash'ari, one of the early authorities on the Qur'an text and a companion of Muhammad, claimed a surah which resembled at-Tawba (also known as Bara'at) in length and severity was forgotten and lost, but included a passage on the greed of man, which is not in today's Qur'an. (Sahih Muslim Book 5, Hadith 2286). Even ibn Abbas was unsure whether it was part of the Qur'an or not (Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 76, Hadith 445) Ubai said that it was considered as a saying from the Qur'an for a while during Muhammad's lifetime (Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 76, Hadith 446). Al-Suyuti records the recollection by Abu Waqid al-Laithii of the occasion when the lost passage about the valleys was revealed. He says that Muhammad claimed it as a revelation from Allah, just like when he received other revelations.

(I would like to add here that the above also means that the whole bring a Surah like this challenge was already met back in the time of the Prophet and the caliphs as there were non-Qur'anic surahs and verses that sounded very much like those of the Qur'an. Surah al-Hafd and Surah al-khal', and the verses about Adam and the valleys sounded so Qur'anic that they were at one time believed to be so by speakers of 7th century Arabic, Sahabah no less. Those who claim that these were once part of the Qur'an and later abrogated, or that Al-Hafd and Al-Khal' were du'as given to Muhammad by Jibril need to explain why they were abrogated when there is no obvious reason, or why Allah allowed confusion to arise about the status of the latter two when they were recorded in the mashafs of three companions.)

Furthermore, people claim that early muslims had memorized the Qur'an which has ensured its authenticity. Yet, we find from Hadith that even Muhammad himself used to forget verses of the Qur'an so how is it possible to rely on the memorization of these early muslims. Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Hadith 558:

Narrated Aisha:

Allah's Messenger heard a man reciting the Qur'an at night, and said, "May Allah bestow His Mercy on him, as he has reminded me of such-and-such Verses of such-and-such Suras, which I was caused to forget."

Further evidence of the Qur'an being altered can be found in other Muslim sources including the tafsir.

Narrated ‘Aasim ibn Bahdalah, from Zirr, who said:

Ubayy ibn Ka‘b said to me: How long is Soorat al-Ahzaab when you read it? Or how many verses do you think it is? I said to him: Seventy-three verses. He said: Only? There was a time when it was as long as Soorat al-Baqarah, and we read in it: “The old man and the old woman, if they commit zina, then stone them both, a punishment from Allah, and Allah is Almighty, Most Wise.” (Musnad Ahmad 21245)

“Aisha narrates: ‘Surah Ahzab contained 200 verses during the lifetime of Prophet but when the Quran was collected we only found the amount that can be found in the present Quran". (Tafsir al Qurtubi)

Some laughable posts. Either prove the Quran has been corrupted or accept you cannot.

Just in case you missed it.

Look forward to your retort.

 

[KingKhanWC]

For those who are really interested, not anti-Islam trolls behind their keyboard.

I suggest you read The History of the Quranic Text, from Revelation to Compilation: A Comparative Study with the Old and New Testaments. Muhammad Mustafa Al-Azami. He has refuted Dr Keith with ease. Read it.

 

[PakLFC]

Unsure why you think the Bible is impossible to memorise.

It’s just that nobody would bother. There isn’t any point. If you want to know something, just look it up.

You could change a lot of verses and the central theme would still remain - treat others as you would like them to treat yourself, forgive those who trespass against you, ask Jesus for forgiveness from sin in order to gain salvation.

Rather you ask Allah for forgiveness as only he not some human being can forgive you, never! Only then will you enter heaven otherwise complete dalmatian awaits. Now, as the Bible is in English is is impossible to memorise. The original Bible no longer exists.

 

[shaz619]

Top post, although there were lot of monetary benefits for conversion over the years and still is in India but their choice.

[MENTION=46929]shaz619[/MENTION] what do you think on the same question that you asked Mamoon.

I tolerate his view but don't understand it as a holy book vindicates a religion in terms of its individual purpose and not the view of those who are against it or don't follow it anymore. I understand that there is an element of blind faith 100% among all followers no matter how much research we do but to also have this blind faith with the knowledge that the Holy Quran doesn't necessarily prove or strengthen the existence of Islam as the ultimate Religion doesn't make sense to me. For example, one could say they are practising Christians but have a view where the Bible doesn't support or prove their religion, you could say the same maybe for Hinduism or another religion to. But that's just my slight confusion what do you think ? am not calling anyone a non-muslim or anything like that, I think it's not good to define the views of other people for them, this is why we have so many bloody explosions and idiots running in to towns with suicide vests.

 

[JaDed]

I tolerate his view but don't understand it as a holy book vindicates a religion in terms of its individual purpose and not the view of those who are against it or don't follow it anymore. I understand that there is an element of blind faith 100% among all followers no matter how much research we do but to also have this blind faith with the knowledge that the Holy Quran doesn't necessarily prove or strengthen the existence of Islam as the ultimate Religion doesn't make sense to me. For example, one could say they are practising Christians but have a view where the Bible doesn't support or prove their religion, you could say the same maybe for Hinduism or another religion to. But that's just my slight confusion what do you think ? am not calling anyone a non-muslim or anything like that, I think it's not good to define the views of other people for them, this is why we have so many bloody explosions and idiots running in to towns with suicide vests.

In my mind atleast its the duality and ignorance of myself ,I choose to ignore the logical fallacies in my religious scriptures , I know of em but I try not to debate on them (sometimes I can't control esp coz the current govn).

Imagine growing up questioning the concept of it but being religious for the sake of parents and then conditioned so much by it that to have faith in it even in later years without assuming its logical but being able to worship without knowing it in detail because there is some sense of comfort around it , visiting temples and giving in , feeling more peaceful than fighting against it.

Most of my religious comfort is because of my Mom doing Puja or going to Gurudwaras, and being away from them in a different country, going to a temple or Gurudwara gives me that comfort.

I think it's not good to define the views of other people for them

Like what specifically? I genuinely believe moral compass isn't tied to religion..

 

[shaz619]

In my mind atleast its the duality and ignorance of myself ,I choose to ignore the logical fallacies in my religious scriptures , I know of em but I try not to debate on them (sometimes I can't control esp coz the current govn).

Imagine growing up questioning the concept of it but being religious for the sake of parents and then conditioned so much by it that to have faith in it even in later years without assuming its logical but being able to worship without knowing it in detail because there is some sense of comfort around it , visiting temples and giving in , feeling more peaceful than fighting against it.

Most of my religious comfort is because of my Mom doing Puja or going to Gurudwaras, and being away from them in a different country, going to a temple or Gurudwara gives me that comfort.



Like what specifically? I genuinely believe moral compass isn't tied to religion..

In terms of the scripture or any scripture in any religion for that matter, arguing against it but still having faith / being practising is very interesting but I understand your point of view in terms of the comfort it brings you and at least there is an explanation behind it there and I see can how it brings you peace. And in terms of the not defining the views of other people, I meant it in the sense where for example am speaking for your views as if am more aware of your beliefs if that makes sense when that is not my place but when it comes to the moral compass yes there is good and bad every where regardless.

 

[miandadrules]

For those who are really interested, not anti-Islam trolls behind their keyboard.

I suggest you read The History of the Quranic Text, from Revelation to Compilation: A Comparative Study with the Old and New Testaments. Muhammad Mustafa Al-Azami. He has refuted Dr Keith with ease. Read it.

I’ve read it.

Doesn’t address any of the issues raised.

Happy to one proven wrong. Hopefully, someone will post relevant parts.

 

[DeadBall]

In my mind atleast its the duality and ignorance of myself ,I choose to ignore the logical fallacies in my religious scriptures , I know of em but I try not to debate on them (sometimes I can't control esp coz the current govn).

Imagine growing up questioning the concept of it but being religious for the sake of parents and then conditioned so much by it that to have faith in it even in later years without assuming its logical but being able to worship without knowing it in detail because there is some sense of comfort around it , visiting temples and giving in , feeling more peaceful than fighting against it.

Most of my religious comfort is because of my Mom doing Puja or going to Gurudwaras, and being away from them in a different country, going to a temple or Gurudwara gives me that comfort.

A very brave and honest post.

 

[andy0204]

Atheist has taken over the thread.

 

[uberkoen]

Some laughable posts. Either prove the Quran has been corrupted or accept you cannot.

Already done earlier in the thread using Islamic sources

 

[uberkoen]

Atheist has taken over the thread.

There would be no discussion on the topic if it was only being discussed by followers of a specific religion. The fact that it is being discussed and debated means people who have differing opinions would need to express their views.

 

[yasir]

Basic question is how we are measuring, Did Quran changed or not or at what rate??

Do we have 500 year old Quran? 800 year old? 1000 year old? 1200 year old and most importantly, 1400 old or first original version??

Once we have those, than it’s easy to go through the debate like this... I have never heard of 1300/1400 year old complete Quran, kept anywhere in the world... How can faithful claim with authority that it has not changed??

There are many books, which has not changed in last 400/500 years, including Bible...As publishing industry and technology has matured, things are easy to reproduce with confidence over time. I bought Dewan Ghalib, 25 years ago in Pakistan and now here, both are exactly same. Many books, like Origin of Species (which has 10s of millions of copies sold), remains the same...

Most of what we know today as Quran (much like Bible) was compiled 200 years after prophet death... Again nobody can present 630 AD Quran to the world today. I would be happy so see the oldest complete copy of Quran

 

[Slog]

lol.
Not sure why my earlier post was deleted but we have proof the Quran has not changed. The Birmingham library has the oldest Quran(written down) radiocarbon dated to between 568 and 645 CE. It is exactly the same as we have today, which proves it hasn't changed at all. There are ignorant Muslims too I can see on this thread who think their own God lied. lol.

Here you are showing your ignorance.

The Birmingham manuscript is just two parchments and likely not even a whole chapter let alone be the copy of the whole Quran. You seem to believe it is the oldest Quran itself

I believe like you that there is no alteration and that there is evidence but using faulty evidence just makes your case weaker and puts question mark in credibility

 

[Technics 1210]

Unsure why you think the Bible is impossible to memorise.

It’s just that nobody would bother. There isn’t any point. If you want to know something, just look it up.

The Bible did give birth to the printing press.

 

[1ManArmy]

Atheist has taken over the thread.

They don't "believe" in religion but are obsessed about it.

 

[andy0204]

They don't "believe" in religion but are obsessed about it.

Even though Iam not that religious still I have never questioned on my religion(sometimes questions come in my mind but i ignored it)
These are the people they will do arguments but when it comes to practical they will hide in their caves.

 

[The_Odd_One]

I never understood the fascination with this claim which in my opinion has no significance or whatsoever.

First of all the burden of proof falls on the people making this claim. What is their evidence that Quran has never changed?

Second, I can prove them wrong by simply making a single change in my own copy of the Quran.

Third, there is a lot of controversy regarding the compilation of Quran. Did not Satan make prophet Muhammad add two false verses in the Quran? Was not Quran compiled for the first time after prophet's death? Did not Usman add diacritical marks to the Quran? Remember that Arabic words mean completely different things when pronounced differently. Do not some Muslims believe that some verses are missing from the Quran?

 

[KingKhanWC]

Here you are showing your ignorance.

The Birmingham manuscript is just two parchments and likely not even a whole chapter let alone be the copy of the whole Quran. You seem to believe it is the oldest Quran itself

I believe like you that there is no alteration and that there is evidence but using faulty evidence just makes your case weaker and puts question mark in credibility

I never stated its the full Quran. You are not understanding as usual. Two pages accurate is more than any two pages from any other religious text found today from this time period. There are complete Qurans from other times which show the same.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Already done earlier in the thread using Islamic sources

You copied and pasted from some Islamic hater. lol. Try searching again using his name for anyone who has refuted him and you will find it.

You aint got a clue, you just read hate sites and think you know more than Muslim scholars. All of these allegations are nothing new, smarter people than you have tried and failed.

Post a link or copy and paste and I can post 2 in response.

 

[IAJ]

Good post.

However, how can a science student like you believe in the errors in the Quran? Do you ignore those errors from the all knowing all powerful God?

What errors? I usually try to avoid discussing these things, but what errorr are you talking about?

 

[The_Odd_One]

Yes I ignore. if I don’t, I would lose faith and I don’t want that to happen.

Religion is beautiful because it gives you hope. A child who loses his parent is comforted when he/she is told that the parent is in heaven which is a better place in this world. It is a lot better than thinking that that his parent is now nothing but a decomposed corpse.

Religion also gives poor people hope. You would hardly find a poor person in Pakistan who is not religious and it is obviously ironic because they have very little - if anything - to be thankful for. However, they carry on with their lives because they hope that they will be rewarded in the afterlife.

If they start to believe that there is no life after death and this is all they have, they would probably kill themselves after killing the rich people.

You are not being intellectually honest.

All the hope and comfort offered by religion are false and can be easily derived from other sources. Anyone who commits suicide will go to hell according to both Christianity and Islam. What hope and comfort does it offer to that child whose parent committed suicide? Similarly, if anyone's parents were non-believers, they are still bound for eternal hell. I would rather find peace in a decomposed corpse than something burning in hell for eternity.

Religion is the tool that exploits and abuses poor people. People spend their hard earner money on donations which brings no benefits to them personally. If people worried more about this life in this world, they would be in far better condition. The promise of a better afterlife stops them from doing the hard work that can improve their life in this world.

I found your last statement pretty ironic because a large number of religious people kill infidels on the promise of a reward in their afterlife.

 

[Slog]

I never stated its the full Quran. You are not understanding as usual. Two pages accurate is more than any two pages from any other religious text found today from this time period. There are complete Qurans from other times which show the same.

Tell me about these Qurans from other times pre 750 AD (or even let’s say 1000 AD) which are exactly same as today.

As I said I agree that it hasn’t changed but would like to increase my knowledge base and be able to point to actual evidence

 

[Slog]

You copied and pasted from some Islamic hater. lol. Try searching again using his name for anyone who has refuted him and you will find it.

You aint got a clue, you just read hate sites and think you know more than Muslim scholars. All of these allegations are nothing new, smarter people than you have tried and failed.

Post a link or copy and paste and I can post 2 in response.

You’ve literally not offered any response and just done a runner. If anything you are weakening your own case and no wonder the Muslim world finds itself in this state when people like you with half baked knowledge are the supposed defenders

 

[KingKhanWC]

You’ve literally not offered any response and just done a runner. If anything you are weakening your own case and no wonder the Muslim world finds itself in this state when people like you with half baked knowledge are the supposed defenders

lol. What case. Im no defender, Im merely passing time. You believe Quran hasn't been altered, same here. There is nothing for me to prove, made my points. If people don't like it then go ...

I doubt the Muslim world is suffering because of my responses on here )

 

[uberkoen]

You copied and pasted from some Islamic hater. lol. Try searching again using his name for anyone who has refuted him and you will find it.

You aint got a clue, you just read hate sites and think you know more than Muslim scholars. All of these allegations are nothing new, smarter people than you have tried and failed.

Post a link or copy and paste and I can post 2 in response.

So, where's the response then?

 

[Ronaldo7]

lol. What case. Im no defender, Im merely passing time. You believe Quran hasn't been altered, same here. There is nothing for me to prove, made my points. If people don't like it then go ...

I doubt the Muslim world is suffering because of my responses on here )

I think he doesn't actually believe the Quran has not been altered, he's just saying that so he doesn't commit some type of sin

 

[topspin]

So, where's the response then?

Why should he respond to a deluded Uber driver like you?

No wonder all you could do was copy and paste rather than form your own arguments.

 

[uberkoen]

Why should he respond to a deluded Uber driver like you?

No wonder all you could do was copy and paste rather than form your own arguments.

So, basically what you're saying is you're not able to respond to the points raised.

As expected. The only ones deluded are the ones still believing in the myth.

 

[barah_admi]

Tell me about these Qurans from other times pre 750 AD (or even let’s say 1000 AD) which are exactly same as today.

As I said I agree that it hasn’t changed but would like to increase my knowledge base and be able to point to actual evidence

The oldest copy if the quran found was at Birmingham university, which dates to within 3 decades of the prophet pbuh, this is a pretty well know fact. I'm surprised you havent heard of it.

 

[Slog]

The oldest copy if the quran found was at Birmingham university, which dates to within 3 decades of the prophet pbuh, this is a pretty well know fact. I'm surprised you havent heard of it.

It’s not a copy of the Quran.

It’s 2 pages. Please don’t have half baked knowledge.

 

[barah_admi]

It’s not a copy of the Quran.

It’s 2 pages. Please don’t have half baked knowledge.

Two pages from where? Disney's Lion King?

they are two pages of a Quranic manuscript, which date to within 30 years of Prophet Muhammad PBUH. It contains portions of Surah Khaf and I think Surah Taha, they are, upon inspection the same as modern versions of the surah. Yes there may be differences in script and the addition of vowel sounds which may have come later, but the content, the words and the composition is the same.

YOu can deny it all you want but this hypocrisy does not end well.

 

[Slog]

Two pages from where? Disney's Lion King?

they are two pages of a Quranic manuscript, which date to within 30 years of Prophet Muhammad PBUH. It contains portions of Surah Khaf and I think Surah Taha, they are, upon inspection the same as modern versions of the surah. Yes there may be differences in script and the addition of vowel sounds which may have come later, but the content, the words and the composition is the same.

YOu can deny it all you want but this hypocrisy does not end well.

Copy of the Quran implies a whole copy of the entire book.

Two parchments do not even constitute a chapter.

 

[barah_admi]

Copy of the Quran implies a whole copy of the entire book.

Two parchments do not even constitute a chapter.

I repeat, they were found, are withing 30 years of the Prophet PBUH and unchanged when compared to the modern text in relation to those surahs. If you can not deny that, then take a step back. If you carry on you will only find humiliation.

In fact, what is your stance? If the Quran has changed, then bring forth your evidence, as if two pages can survive 1400+ year but an entire book can't?

The Sana's scripts derive from the 7th century, within decades of the life of Prophet Muhammad PBUH, there are thousands of pages currently under research in Germany which date to a similar or slightly later period of time. No other religious text a manuscripts that to close to their origins, and no other has texts that are the same then as they are now.

You asked for evidence, here it is. Now you either accept it or you don't.

 

[Slog]

I repeat, they were found, are withing 30 years of the Prophet PBUH and unchanged when compared to the modern text in relation to those surahs. If you can not deny that, then take a step back. If you carry on you will only find humiliation.

In fact, what is your stance? If the Quran has changed, then bring forth your evidence, as if two pages can survive 1400+ year but an entire book can't?

The Sana's scripts derive from the 7th century, within decades of the life of Prophet Muhammad PBUH, there are thousands of pages currently under research in Germany which date to a similar or slightly later period of time. No other religious text a manuscripts that to close to their origins, and no other has texts that are the same then as they are now.

You asked for evidence, here it is. Now you either accept it or you don't.

My point is you can’t use two parchments to conclusively prove that the Quran wasn’t changed. That’s just common sense. Quran is several hundred pages long.

In any case I don’t believe it was changed either so I do not need to bring any evidence to suggest otherwise.

Just that the evidence put forward in relation to the Birmingham manuscript is not as conclusive as you May want to project.

At the end of the day I believe that the Quran has not changed because Allah promised that He will protect it. That alone is enough for me and I don’t flawed evidences to strengthen my belief

 

[barah_admi]

My point is you can’t use two parchments to conclusively prove that the Quran wasn’t changed. That’s just common sense. Quran is several hundred pages long.

In any case I don’t believe it was changed either so I do not need to bring any evidence to suggest otherwise.

Just that the evidence put forward in relation to the Birmingham manuscript is not as conclusive as you May want to project.

At the end of the day I believe that the Quran has not changed because Allah promised that He will protect it. That alone is enough for me and I don’t flawed evidences to strengthen my belief

But I gave you several other pieces of evidence. You can claim or not claim whatever you like, your arrogance was hurt and you went on the offensive. For me, the matter is over.

 

[Slog]

But I gave you several other pieces of evidence. You can claim or not claim whatever you like, your arrogance was hurt and you went on the offensive. For me, the matter is over.

You’re dealing in a lot of conjecture at this point which only shows frustration on your part. But carry on!

 

[srh]

Time to refer Chapter 109 of Holy Quran here:

109:1 - Say, "O disbelievers,
109:2 - I do not worship what you worship.
109:3 - Nor are you worshippers of what I worship.
109:4 - Nor will I be a worshipper of what you worship.
109:5 - Nor will you be worshippers of what I worship.
109:6 - For you is your religion, and for me is my religion."

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The holy Quran is quite explicit in how to deal with disbelievers. Effectively it instructs us to tell them to do one.

A British translation could read "on yer bike son. Nothing to see here."

 

[andy0204]

So much infiltration in this thread.
If you don't believe ok that's fine but show your fustration in another thread or make another thread.
We will not interfere in that because our work is to give daavat it's his/her choice whether to accept it or not.
And you people are scholars so we will not waste our time in this.

 

[KingKhanWC]

So, where's the response then?

Ive given you the name of the book to read. Or do you want me do go down your intellectual line and become a copy and paste king from hate sites?

The oldest copy if the quran found was at Birmingham university, which dates to within 3 decades of the prophet pbuh, this is a pretty well know fact. I'm surprised you havent heard of it.

The guy doesn't understand two pages is a lot of evidence. The Quranic Arabic language couldn't be challenged by poets and writers at the time and never has since this day. The two pages are identical to todays Quran. No other religious book has anything similar, this should tell you a lot and if you have an open mind will tell you Quran is the word of God because God has promised to protect it and this true today as it was a thousand years ago.

 

[miandadrules]

Ive given you the name of the book to read. Or do you want me do go down your intellectual line and become a copy and paste king from hate sites?



The guy doesn't understand two pages is a lot of evidence. The Quranic Arabic language couldn't be challenged by poets and writers at the time and never has since this day. The two pages are identical to todays Quran. No other religious book has anything similar, this should tell you a lot and if you have an open mind will tell you Quran is the word of God because God has promised to protect it and this true today as it was a thousand years ago.

Which site has he cut and paste from? Would be good if you could substantiate it.

Also, as you don’t believe anyone else has read the book you’ve mentioned why don’t you post or reference the relevant sections.

 

[MenInG]

Which site has he cut and paste from? Would be good if you could substantiate it.

Also, as you don’t believe anyone else has read the book you’ve mentioned why don’t you post or reference the relevant sections.

Think its a valid question from KKWC - and one for the poster to answer. In fact applies to all in here.

Too much of posting and very few references to back them up with.

 

[miandadrules]

Think its a valid question from KKWC - and one for the poster to answer. In fact applies to all in here.

Too much of posting and very few references to back them up with.

He’s provided references.

Where is the confusion?

 

[miandadrules]

Think its a valid question from KKWC - and one for the poster to answer. In fact applies to all in here.

Too much of posting and very few references to back them up with.

In fact it is KKWC that made the accusation that it is was from a hate site, without providing anything in support.

So, I agree that we need to substantiate what we say. At the moment Uberkoen has been the only one to do so.

 

[MenInG]

He’s provided references.

Where is the confusion?

No confusion but how can we determine whether the site he is using is a hate site or genuine friend of Islam?

 

[shaz619]

No confusion but how can we determine whether the site he is using is a hate site or genuine friend of Islam?

These threads should be closed, people would be surprised by my own personal view on faith however I think it is sickening and disturbing that hate crimes are being committed towards an entire religion and religious community by insecure non-believers and atheists who just want to be able to justify filthy fornication and consumption of alcohol, these people are no different to ISIS and are as big a problem in our world. There's a saying in the great language of mirpuri "oh thori tha izzat karoh" have at least a little respect, any self respecting muslim would not allow Islam or the Holy Quran to be vilified in this manner.

 

[KingKhanWC]

So, where's the response then?

The oldest copy if the quran found was at Birmingham university, which dates to within 3 decades of the prophet pbuh, this is a pretty well know fact. I'm surprised you havent heard of it.

These threads should be closed, people would be surprised by my own personal view on faith however I think it is sickening and disturbing that hate crimes are being committed towards an entire religion and religious community by insecure non-believers and atheists who just want to be able to justify filthy fornication and consumption of alcohol, these people are no different to ISIS and are as big a problem in our world. There's a saying in the great language of mirpuri "oh thori tha izzat karoh" have at least a little respect, any self respecting muslim would not allow Islam or the Holy Quran to be vilified in this manner.

[MENTION=8]MIG[/MENTION] totally agree with the above. There is no constructive debate but anti-Islam members just want to fuel more hatred for a religion which is already facing unjustified abuse. This then turns into hate crimes, peoples sisters, mothers, fathers are being murdered. An elderly Muslim man was murdered by a chap who was fuelled with such hate rhetoric.

We will all have to answer for our actions or lack of actions when our faith is being abused , even on forums on the day of judgement.

 

[miandadrules]

No confusion but how can we determine whether the site he is using is a hate site or genuine friend of Islam?

He’s provided Islamic sources. You don’t need a hate site. You can simply go straight to the source.

This accusation made by KKWC is totally baseless. Which is why I asked him to show which hate site this is from? It’s just another ad hominem, which is illustrated by his reluctance to substantiate anything.

 

[miandadrules]

[MENTION=8]MIG[/MENTION] totally agree with the above. There is no constructive debate but anti-Islam members just want to fuel more hatred for a religion which is already facing unjustified abuse. This then turns into hate crimes, peoples sisters, mothers, fathers are being murdered. An elderly Muslim man was murdered by a chap who was fuelled with such hate rhetoric.

We will all have to answer for our actions or lack of actions when our faith is being abused , even on forums on the day of judgement.

A man was killed because it was suggested that the Quran hasn’t been preserved?

Please show which rhetoric in this thread promotes hate?

 

[James]

The oldest copy if the quran found was at Birmingham university, which dates to within 3 decades of the prophet pbuh, this is a pretty well know fact. I'm surprised you havent heard of it.

That’s really interesting, had not heard of that.

 

[uberkoen]

Think its a valid question from KKWC - and one for the poster to answer. In fact applies to all in here.

Too much of posting and very few references to back them up with.

Everything in my post is referenced. It's all hadith and Tafseer. You can look up references on any website of hadith book you wish.

 

[uberkoen]

These threads should be closed, people would be surprised by my own personal view on faith however I think it is sickening and disturbing that hate crimes are being committed towards an entire religion and religious community by insecure non-believers and atheists who just want to be able to justify filthy fornication and consumption of alcohol, these people are no different to ISIS and are as big a problem in our world. There's a saying in the great language of mirpuri "oh thori tha izzat karoh" have at least a little respect, any self respecting muslim would not allow Islam or the Holy Quran to be vilified in this manner.

Don't know what you're on about. I have quoted islamic references and nothing outside of islamic references. The Tafsir and the hadith i quoted are accepted by all muslim sects and communities. There is no vilification or hatred, its a discussion. If the topic is too sensitive for you don't read.

 

[uberkoen]

That’s really interesting, had not heard of that.

Not the complete book just fragments.

 

[uberkoen]

[MENTION=8]MIG[/MENTION] totally agree with the above. There is no constructive debate but anti-Islam members just want to fuel more hatred for a religion which is already facing unjustified abuse. This then turns into hate crimes, peoples sisters, mothers, fathers are being murdered. An elderly Muslim man was murdered by a chap who was fuelled with such hate rhetoric.

We will all have to answer for our actions or lack of actions when our faith is being abused , even on forums on the day of judgement.

No constructive debate? I quoted Islamic references. As I've said numerous times already. Whatever I've said comes straight from Tafseer and Hadith. This is constructive debate. In fact, it is still tilted towards religion as I'm only using Islamic sources and not quoting anything outside of it. You can ignore it all you want but that does not change the fact and you are unable to come up with a reply hence such a post

 

[barah_admi]

That’s really interesting, had not heard of that.

You should look into it, along with several other manuscripts in Germany which date within the first century of Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Don't know what you're on about. I have quoted islamic references and nothing outside of islamic references. The Tafsir and the hadith i quoted are accepted by all muslim sects and communities. There is no vilification or hatred, its a discussion. If the topic is too sensitive for you don't read.

The thread was never about hadith or Islamic references. It was about the Quran being altered or rewritten by the Chinese originally. Why do you even need to go to hadith or other references when you have access to the Quran directly?

 

[uberkoen]

The thread was never about hadith or Islamic references. It was about the Quran being altered or rewritten by the Chinese originally. Why do you even need to go to hadith or other references when you have access to the Quran directly?

The question was "What evidence is there that the Qur'an has been altered". I provided the evidence using Islamic sources acceptable by a majority, if not all, Muslim sects.

Also, if you read my post I have provided evidence from within the Qur'an itself as well

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The question was "What evidence is there that the Qur'an has been altered". I provided the evidence using Islamic sources acceptable by a majority, if not all, Muslim sects.

Also, if you read my post I have provided evidence from within the Qur'an itself as well

The Islamic sources you quote aren't evidence either. They are commentary on the Quran or translations which themselves are open to bias due to human nature or error. Maybe you should present your arguments as conjecture rather than evidence, I think that would be more accurate.

 

[yasir]

The Islamic sources you quote aren't evidence either. They are commentary on the Quran or translations which themselves are open to bias due to human nature or error. Maybe you should present your arguments as conjecture rather than evidence, I think that would be more accurate.

We are just playing with words here... Adhiath and tasfeers has been used as primary source to interpret Quran, throughout the Islamic history...It is impossible to explain many verses in Quran, without any references to Adaith or tafseers, I would challenge anybody to explain Quran without quoting those two(tafseer and Adiath). That is the very reason Bukhari spent so much time and energy in collecting Adhaith...BTW: Adiath and Tafseers are not written by enemies of Islam, they were written by Muslims only...we are down playing those references when it goes against the main stream POV?

Secondly, their is no primary or secondary evidence that Quran has not changed. As I said earlier There is no complete copy of Quran(not even 50% or 1/3) from the first century...this concept only stems from few verses in the Quran itself, which is a weak evidence in itself...How come admin are not coming down on those lack of evidence based post here with same vigor ??

 

[yasir]

No confusion but how can we determine whether the site he is using is a hate site or genuine friend of Islam?

He is quoting Adaith with numbers, most of them are Sahi Adiath, which is highest authenticity level, if you or anybody else can prove those references are wrong, please reply back. There is no point of friend or foe of Islam, when it comes to Quran or Adaith, specially Sahi Adaith...

BTW: Atleast Bukhari Sahi Adiath (Most of sahi Adiath) are available on internet, anybody can read and reference them.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

We are just playing with words here... Adhiath and tasfeers has been used as primary source to interpret Quran, throughout the Islamic history...It is impossible to explain many verses in Quran, without any references to Adaith or tafseers, I would challenge anybody to explain Quran without quoting those two(tafseer and Adiath). That is the very reason Bukhari spent so much time and energy in collecting Adhaith...BTW: Adiath and Tafseers are not written by enemies of Islam, they were written by Muslims only...we are down playing those references when it goes against the main stream POV?

Secondly, their is no primary or secondary evidence that Quran has not changed. As I said earlier There is no complete copy of Quran(not even 50% or 1/3) from the first century...this concept only stems from few verses in the Quran itself, which is a weak evidence in itself...How come admin are not coming down on those lack of evidence based post here with same vigor ??

Doesn't change the fact that ahadith and tafseer are not the Quran. Doesn't matter whether they were compiled by friends or enemies of Islam.

 

[yasir]

Doesn't change the fact that ahadith and tafseer are not the Quran. Doesn't matter whether they were compiled by friends or enemies of Islam.

Nobody is saying Ahadith are part of Quran. But without them nobody can understand Quran either...85% of Muslims are Sunni Muslims, they value both of them as primary source to explain Quran.

You cannot cut it both ways, either they have no value or they are primary source to explain Quran all the time. You cannot cherry pick when you feel like.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Nobody is saying Ahadith are part of Quran. But without them nobody can understand Quran either...85% of Muslims are Sunni Muslims, they value both of them as primary source to explain Quran.

You cannot cut it both ways, either they have no value or they are primary source to explain Quran all the time. You cannot cherry pick when you feel like.

No one is trying to cut it both ways. There is the believer view, and there is the disbeliever view, you can cherry pick whichever one suits you. Even the Quran gives you that choice, this isn't a zero sum game.

 

[ishtiaq_ctg]

I believe Quran has never been tempered. The messege of it hasn't changed. But some things should be mentioned such as
1. Quran wasnt compiled in a book form at the time of the Prophet(PBUH).

2. the arrangements of the Surahs(Chapters) were probably decided by the ones who compiled the book. The present day Quran also has verses which were abrogated.

3. Ali(RA) did compiled Quran in a book form by arranging the chapters by their revealed order. This version wasnt accepted by the muslims though

4. As there is not even a single alternate version of the Quran ever found anywhere, it is from a neutral view can be accepted that Quran more or less has remained same throughout the history

 

[uberkoen]

I believe Quran has never been tempered. The messege of it hasn't changed. But some things should be mentioned such as
1. Quran wasnt compiled in a book form at the time of the Prophet(PBUH).

2. the arrangements of the Surahs(Chapters) were probably decided by the ones who compiled the book. The present day Quran also has verses which were abrogated.

3. Ali(RA) did compiled Quran in a book form by arranging the chapters by their revealed order. This version wasnt accepted by the muslims though

4. As there is not even a single alternate version of the Quran ever found anywhere, it is from a neutral view can be accepted that Quran more or less has remained same throughout the history

Can you tell me what you’re basing this on and reference it properly please

 

[miandadrules]

No one is trying to cut it both ways. There is the believer view, and there is the disbeliever view, you can cherry pick whichever one suits you. Even the Quran gives you that choice, this isn't a zero sum game.

Believer view vs disbeliever view?

What about the weight of evidence view?

 

[yasir]

No one is trying to cut it both ways. There is the believer view, and there is the disbeliever view, you can cherry pick whichever one suits you. Even the Quran gives you that choice, this isn't a zero sum game.

My question was very simple:

1. How old is the oldest full copy of Quran??

Books don’t change in modern publishing era. Bible in last 500/600 years has not changed. For get about holly books, Dihwan Ghalib has not changed since Ghalib wrote it...

It’s factor of when book is written, in modern times, they are easily reproduce-able, since minimal human intervention...

But for Quran, like many books of that or older times, there is no evidence that it has not changed, mainly because we don’t have original Quran, not even within 200 years of Prpohet’s death.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Believer view vs disbeliever view?

What about the weight of evidence view?

You can use the weight of evidence to choose whichever view suits you best.

 

[miandadrules]

You can use the weight of evidence to choose whichever view suits you best.

Of course you can.

If you lack integrity.

 

[Stewie]

Going through this thread, I see a lot of non Muslims claiming Quran can be changed just like Torah, zaroor, bible, etc and Muslims of course claiming it can’t be.. both sides are not fully understanding each other.

Muslims, when they say it can’t be changed, are coming from a place of faith. We strongly believe that it has and will retain its original form. This concept is hard for people of other Abrahamic faiths to understand because other books over time have gone over various edits.

So far in 1400 years, Quran has retained its form. It is divinely ordained to remain in this form till the end of time, we believe.
Being a Haafiz, (someone who memorized the Quran) is a big achievement amongst Muslims and there are thousands of Hufaaz in the world.

A tradition which is 1400 years old and feels so strongly about the originality and authenticity of Quran, has a lot of inertia and I don’t believe, even logically speaking, it will be this easy to upset it. There will always be people amongst us who will resist any such changes. You think Muslims in China will quietly accept any changes made to the book by the Chinese? They already face much persecution there.. I don’t think this will deter anyone from using the untouched Quran in its purest form or even smuggling it into China.