Perfect Preservation of the Quran

[pescatarian09]

were u born a muslim?

Yes

 

[Artful Revealer]

I am satisfied by God when He says that the He will preserve His book (Q 15:9). That's enough for me as a Muslim.

However, I see that for someone who isn't Muslim, what is written in the Quran is not enough, because they do not believe it is God's word in the first place. Saying that the validity of Islam is not affected by the Quran couldn't be further from the truth. Its like saying that Judaism/Christianity remain unchanged in the absence of the Old and New Testament. In many ways, religions are their books.

If you would be familiar with my body of work, you would understand what I meant. I have vigorously criticized the Bible during my presence on VC, all the way back to 2011. The fact that the Bible has not been perfectly preserved, something I have no problem admitting, does not make me throw away the scriptures or the Christian faith. In fact, I became a Christian in spite of realizing the scripture was imperfect, because I recognized an overall meaning that remained coherent all the way through, regardless of scriptural inconsistencies.

Acknowledging the basic fact that scripture has fallen victim to the imperfect hands of men is liberating. It's a strength. Clinging on to the demonstrably incorrect belief that scripture is immune to such corruption, is a weakness.

 

[pescatarian09]

If you would be familiar with my body of work, you would understand what I meant. I have vigorously criticized the Bible during my presence on VC, all the way back to 2011. The fact that the Bible has not been perfectly preserved, something I have no problem admitting, does not make me throw away the scriptures or the Christian faith. In fact, I became a Christian in spite of realizing the scripture was imperfect, because I recognized an overall meaning that remained coherent all the way through, regardless of scriptural inconsistencies.

Acknowledging the basic fact that scripture has fallen victim to the imperfect hands of men is liberating. It's a strength. Clinging on to the demonstrably incorrect belief that scripture is immune to such corruption, is a weakness.

I respectfully disagree.

 

[Resistor]

Acknowledging the basic fact that scripture has fallen victim to the imperfect hands of men is liberating. It's a strength. Clinging on to the demonstrably incorrect belief that scripture is immune to such corruption, is a weakness.

You are still asking them to agree with you over a misrepresentation of their claims, which is just dishonest on your part.

 

[Artful Revealer]

I respectfully disagree.

That's fair. But at the least take this as cautionary advice. Next to the theological controversies Christianity has been subjected to for centuries, for more than 150 years, the Bible has been subjected to academic scrutiny. For the Quran and Islam, this exposition to academic scrutiny has only just begun. Given the popularity of religious polemics on the internet, Islam is facing rough times ahead.

 

[Artful Revealer]

You are still asking them to agree with you over a misrepresentation of their claims, which is just dishonest on your part.

What is their claim and what is my representation of their claim?

 

[pescatarian09]

That's fair. But at the least take this as cautionary advice. Next to the theological controversies Christianity has been subjected to for centuries, for more than 150 years, the Bible has been subjected to academic scrutiny. For the Quran and Islam, this exposition to academic scrutiny has only just begun. Given the popularity of religious polemics on the internet, Islam is facing rough times ahead.

Its like swatting flies. Their arguments are empty, and fall apart when subjected to criticism.

 

[Resistor]

For the Quran and Islam, this exposition to academic scrutiny has only just begun.

But really if you know anything of the history of orientalist scholarship, all you and such people are doing is repeating the same tired Orientalist strawmen as if they have discovered something new and revolutionary.

 

[pescatarian09]

That's fair. But at the least take this as cautionary advice. Next to the theological controversies Christianity has been subjected to for centuries, for more than 150 years, the Bible has been subjected to academic scrutiny. For the Quran and Islam, this exposition to academic scrutiny has only just begun. Given the popularity of religious polemics on the internet, Islam is facing rough times ahead.

Islam has been subject to Christian scrutiny since the Crusades, and even before that.

 

[Artful Revealer]

But really if you know anything of the history of orientalist scholarship, all you and such people are doing is repeating the same tired Orientalist strawmen as if they have discovered something new and revolutionary.

Moving the goal posts is the new strategy of many muslims, but some Islamic scholars are admitting themselves that there are new questions coming from the academic world that traditional Islamic apologetics doesn't have answers to.

 

[Resistor]

What is their claim and what is my representation of their claim?

The Qur'an is perfectly preserved, through oral tradition (taught by Muhammad himself and which are widely recorded), supplemented by lots of manuscript evidence that is not itself considered representative (as scribal errors are known and unanimously recognized by Muslims) but supplemental to the reality of the claim which tackles multiple aspects at once.

You are moving the goalposts to make it being about that because some manuscript has a scribal error that the Qur'an is suddenly changed, even that many other manuscripts will obviously not have that mistake. You are not critical and you are agenda driven.

 

[Resistor]

Islam has been subject to Christian scrutiny since the Crusades, and even before that.

Correct, and propaganda since that period too (where Catholics started getting very scared of the apparent competition). Many such myths are becoming regurgitated by modern Evangelical again which is just plain ignorant.

 

[Resistor]

Moving the goal posts is the new strategy of many muslims, but some Islamic scholars are admitting themselves that there are new questions coming from the academic world that traditional Islamic apologetics doesn't have answers to.

Yasir Qadhi is just one guy, but his comments were taken out of contexts by Christian apologists which is just what Christians do. Nothing new and revolutionary is reached here, it's something Muslims have been saying since the 7th century.

 

[Artful Revealer]

Yasir Qadhi is just one guy, but his comments were taken out of contexts by Christian apologists which is just what Christians do. Nothing new and revolutionary is reached here, it's something Muslims have been saying since the 7th century.

So you have the answers that even Ibn al-Jazari, according to Qadhi, didn't have?

 

[Artful Revealer]

Most relevant from 12.40 minutes

3 years later ...

 

[AspiringSoul]

That's fair. But at the least take this as cautionary advice. Next to the theological controversies Christianity has been subjected to for centuries, for more than 150 years, the Bible has been subjected to academic scrutiny. For the Quran and Islam, this exposition to academic scrutiny has only just begun. Given the popularity of religious polemics on the internet, Islam is facing rough times ahead.

what exactly is 'academic scrutiny'? you mean if some white guy says it it must be academic?

or is it this guy?

whilst christianity was preserved in europe and left alone, muslims were at odds with hindus, sikhs and buddhists in india, zoroastrians and others in persia, christians in the west aswell as jews..for centuries. not academic enough? i mean jews and hindus are pretty intelligent in my experiences. All in all, no religion has been scrutinised more than islam.


what's the best academic argument ever invented against islam? in recent memory if i remember it was a white guy saying 'DA REAL MECCA WUZ PETRA BTW'
if i remember correctly, if was a 24-7 gay parade in the entire christian world when they discovered that argument. not a day went by id idnt see it posted on here.
academic...Jay Smith et al. white guy in a keffiyah = legitimacy.

tell me where that petra argument went? acamadic scrutniteh doe...double mind doe

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

With respect @AspiringSoul you rely too heavily on personal attack, bluster and genetic fallacy. Rhetoric even when employed for a good cause can become a Pyrrhic Victory.

 

[AspiringSoul]

With respect @AspiringSoul you rely too heavily on personal attack, bluster and genetic fallacy. Rhetoric even when employed for a good cause can become a Pyrrhic Victory.

it's about getting a point across, not looking like a virtuous twat. you should know by now, that isnt me.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

it's about getting a point across, not looking like a virtuous twat. you should know by now, that isnt me.

By way of empathy, making it less about Islam and more about approach, I find both Richard Dawkins and Ricky Gervais to be pompous, grandiose fools. I am tempted when anyone posts anything they say to let rip at them, but it is their atheistic and materialistic ideas I chiefly oppose.

From experience (and this might make me sound old), rather than entering into identity politics of the personal merits or failures of evolutionists and creationists, the cause of debate is best served by examining and either rebutting or supporting their ideas.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

The essence of the OP is that there is a modern Islamic argument propounded mainly by uninformed Muslims that the Bible has been so heavily corrupted that there needed to be fresh revelation sent by Allah to Muhammad, and that conversely the Qur’an has been miraculously preserved. Both statements are challenged by investigation.

The point is not that the message of the Qur’an is destroyed if evidence of variant texts emerges, or that the Bible is suddenly elevated in value by demonstrating textual preservation, but that the argument itself is not one worth making.

There appear to be about 3.5% of the 5000+ remaining Biblical manuscripts that show variance, particularly those Alexandrian codexes and papyri. I examined this in another thread. There were and are still Qur’anic variants globally (North Africa etc), evidence of lost sayings etc.

All this to say that there may be reasons to accept or reject the teachings of either faith, but this one is not it.