Perfect Preservation of the Quran

[AspiringSoul]

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.

Yh, there's so much i could say to this but im mostly agreeing with you. i just wish you knew how much and the extent of it in my own way of thinking.

your opinions on islam are largely misinformed, you dont understand..but as a clue, read the parable of weeds..

24 Jesus told them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25 But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26 When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.

27 “The owner’s servants came to him and said, ‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?’

28 “‘An enemy did this,’ he replied.

“The servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’

29 “‘No,’ he answered, ‘because while you are pulling the weeds, you may uproot the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.’”




or read this

Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar: When we were sitting with the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), he talked about periods of trial (fitnahs), mentioning many of them. When he mentioned the one when people should stay in their houses, some asked him: Apostle of Allah, what is the trial (fitnah) of staying at home? He replied: It will be flight and plunder. Then will come a test which is pleasant. Its murkiness is due to the fact that it is produced by a man from the people of my house, who will assert that he belongs to me, whereas he does not, for my friends are only the God-fearing. Then the people will unite under a man who will be like a hip-bone on a rib. Then there will be the little black trial which will leave none of this community without giving him a slap, and when people say that it is finished, it will be extended. During it a man will be a believer in the morning and an infidel in the evening, so that the people will be in two camps: the camp of faith which will contain no hypocrisy, and the camp of hypocrisy which will contain no faith. When that happens, expect the Antichrist (Dajjal) that day or the next.


when we're under the duality of ego...we're under the battle of light and shadow.
here's a sufi perspective..
when the light is at the zanith point, the shadow is weakest...
when the light is at it's lowest point, the shadow is huge.

as in, it's why the worst ones...are dominating this world. think about how that applies when you see big personality muslims. the ones on truth arent known, put it that way.

here's another closer clue

Narrated Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman: The people used to ask Allah's Apostle about good, but I used to ask him about evil for fear that it might overtake me. Once I said, "O Allah's Apostle! We were in ignorance and in evil and Allah has bestowed upon us the present good; will there by any evil after this good?" He said, "Yes." I asked, "Will there be good after that evil?" He said, "Yes, but it would be tained with Dakhan (i.e. Little evil)." I asked, "What will its Dakhan be?" He said, "There will be some people who will lead (people) according to principles other than my tradition. You will see their actions and disapprove of them." I said, "Will there by any evil after that good?" He said, "Yes, there will be some people who will invite others to the doors of Hell, and whoever accepts their invitation to it will be thrown in it (by them)." I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Describe those people to us." He said, "They will belong to us and speak our language" I asked, "What do you order me to do if such a thing should take place in my life?" He said, "Adhere to the group of Muslims and their Chief." I asked, "If there is neither a group (of Muslims) nor a chief (what shall I do)?" He said, "Keep away from all those different sects, even if you had to bite (i.e. eat) the root of a tree, till you meet Allah while you are still in that state." (Book #56, Hadith #803)


note, the first evil, it's sign was the loss of jerusalem. which gave rise to sufi islam.

salahuddin came in the world in a time when sufi giants like these guys existed

Abdul Qadir Gilani - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Mu'in al-Din Chishti - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

hence sufi islam picked up..as it says 'dakhan'
the fall of sufism via the rise of wahabism..and hence the rise of house saud, the fall of the ottomon caliphate (the muslims and their CHIEF, notice it doesnt say caliph, big difference because the sultanate was not a caliphate)..and now we find ourselves in the last state.
prophet Mohammad was saying 'be a loner, stay away from those sects'.


we live in the age of information...and the ones who got in first, monopolised it. leaflets, to books, vhs, cd, dvd, internet/google websiites, youtube.

the Quran and prophet Mohammad defended the bible, they only criticised the false interpretations, which is why the camp of hypocricy followed false interpretations of that very verse. the irony.

as for the Quran's preservation, the Quran authenticated the Bible, the Torah and injeel, in the 7th century. so the greek septuagint or the masoretic texts, were authentic from that pov. they are divinely authenticated...whereas the hadith are not. yet which one do muslims follow?

scimitar accused me of being a non-muslim on the basis that 'he is suspect, he quotes the bible, but not the hadith'
even though it wasnt true...i quote the hadith all the time.

 

[Artful Revealer]

what exactly is 'academic scrutiny'?

Critical examination by scholars.

 

[AspiringSoul]

Critical examination by scholars.

only counts when theyre white, british, american or nordic.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Yh, there's so much i could say to this but im mostly agreeing with you. i just wish you knew how much and the extent of it in my own way of thinking.

your opinions on islam are largely misinformed, you dont understand..but as a clue, read the parable of weeds..

One of my favourite pieces of writing was by C.S. Lewis, entitled “Meditation in a Toolshed”

It talks about seeing things from the outside and from the inside. As far as I can tell, you have never been a Christian or understood Christianity from the inside (as in coming to faith in the gospel) so you see it from the outside - what you and read and observe in others.

The converse applies to me with Islam. Apart from a dream I had when I visited a mosque and was presented with an analogy for how Islam works, I have limited knowledge of the Qur’an and at best a fractured and incomplete view of Islam as practiced as expressed by Muslims I have met and online interactions.

Because of that there is a limit to how well we can express and address each others faiths and that naturally leads to anger, frustration and tensions.

 

[AspiringSoul]

One of my favourite pieces of writing was by C.S. Lewis, entitled “Meditation in a Toolshed”

It talks about seeing things from the outside and from the inside. As far as I can tell, you have never been a Christian or understood Christianity from the inside (as in coming to faith in the gospel) so you see it from the outside - what you and read and observe in others.

The converse applies to me with Islam. Apart from a dream I had when I visited a mosque and was presented with an analogy for how Islam works, I have limited knowledge of the Qur’an and at best a fractured and incomplete view of Islam as practiced as expressed by Muslims I have met and online interactions.

Because of that there is a limit to how well we can express and address each others faiths and that naturally leads to anger, frustration and tensions.

Look at Philo, he was a hellenised jew living in Alexandria. He picked up this greek concept called the Logos, a completely foreign idea, but it clicked in him and he said 'that is basically what we call 'the image of God''. He then went on to integrate it into jewish thought and decided to metaphorically call it the 'only begotten Son of God'.
I tend to do that a lot. I've argued that even the Logos concept is really from Vishnu in hinduism and hence 'the incarnations of vishnu'.

If you read the Bhagvad Gita..and actually decide to not think of it as 'Jesus vs Krishna' but instead as 'this is the logos speaking' you'll see it in a whole other way and think 'damn this book was amazing'.
However the muslim in me was what allowed me to filter the deeply mystical statements and not take them literally.
so if Vishnu the universal consciousness speaks through Krishna and says

O Arjuna! There is nothing higher than Me; all is strung upon Me as rows of pearls upon a thread. O Arjuna! I am the Fluidity in water, the Light in the sun and in the moon. I am the mystic syllable Om in the Vedic scriptures, the Sound in ether, the Virility in man. I am the Fragrance of earth, the Brilliance of fire. I am the Life Force in all beings, and I am the Austerity of the ascetics. Know, O Arjuna, that I am the eternal Seed of being; I am the Intelligence of the intelligent, the Splendour of the resplendent.

even then i understand that neither krishna nor universal conciousness are God in onf themselves. The UC ie the LOGOS/Image/Vishnu, is more like a prism reflecting the Immanence of God as a myriad of qualities/attributes. So when someone experiences that level of consciousness, they more or less do experience 'God' but there's a subtle key difference. When ibn arabi did, he called it 'unity of Being' where he went on to describe it almost as a literal unity and merging into God, which led many muslims to reject him.

The point being, it's important to uphold the left brain logical perspective at all times too and to understand that even though the Logos is God's ETERNAL EXPRESSION, it is still not 'first' in the true sense. The macrocosm and microcosm are both expressions. It is the primordial power expressing itself as a singular consciousness and as the many. In most mythologies the watery abyss/primordial waters is the origin and everything emerges from it.

Even Genesis 1 is misunderstood. It begins with
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

what follows is the mythical explanation only..it doesnt mean that from verse 2 onwards the earth already exists.

2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

the 'earth' here is a reference to all matter...there was no matter, 'formless and empty'.
the Spirit of God HOVERING OVER THE WATERS is the point of causation.
In hinduism this version is told like this

Matsya - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

(btw, this is not meant to be confused for the flood/deluge story, this is about the origin of the spirit of man from the universal spirit)

it's interesting that here this is described as a fish. The fish is the ichthys symbol in christianity, which imo represents unity from duality and hence it is about merging back with the Logos (again i need to explain that logos/vishnu/waters/universal consciousness/universal spirit/image are all interchangebly used by me but refer to the same thing).

In islamic thought, the Water is also symbolically called 'the primordial ink' out of which 'THE PEN' writes the book of creation and hence all things in creation come after that.
Now that is interesting because The Pen/Qalam is the name of a chapter in the Quran. The introductory letter (some of the Quran's chapters begin with a letter or several letters)...NUN (chapter 68)..
Basically Nun in semitic languages and in heiroglyph form, is THE Fish.

Nun (letter) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

in egyptian mythology the concept of Nun represents the same story, of the origin from the watery abyss

Nu (mythology) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The name on Nu is paralleled with nen "inactivity" in a play of words in, "I raised them up from out of the watery mass [nu], out of inactivity [nen]"

Ii look at this theme of 'The Fish' or 'The Pen' as interchangeable descriptions of this first emergence from the water abyss...and equate it to the 'Spirit of God' which is no doubt, the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit 'proceeds from the Logos'.

It is The Holy Spirit that calls itself 'The FIRST AND THE LAST' and this again is a key point. In hinduism that third level, from vishnu, you have causation and dissolution, represented by Brahma and Shiva (creator and destroyer). Although hindusim seperates them all as seperate deities as did egyptian mythology, the higher perspective sees them all as manifestations of the One. Advaita Vedanta in hinduism is closer to monothiesm and sikhism in that sense albeit a monist/panthiest pov still.


Look at Plotinus, he lived in the lifetime of Jesus yet had no direct connection to christianity, judaism or Jesus. He was a greek man who travelled to persia, picked up on their ideas and came up with his original version of the trinity.

Plotinus - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

read about The One and The emenation from the One.

Then you have St Augustine. Go and read his book 'Confessions of st augustine'. He searched for his truth in the near eastern religions, converted to manichaism but even then he wasnt satisfied due to it's dualistic problem. He eventually discovered the material of PLOTINUS and that helped him filter through the New Testament terms of Father, Son and Holy Spirit..emerging in his version of the trinity, for which he wrote his book 'On the Trinity.
Augustine was an outsider looking in basically and he came with ideas that were outside christianity on most levels.


it goes without saying that the metaphysical experiences of many hundreds of other people lead us to the same 'truths' all described in their own unique ways.
of the women, Rabia al basri from the muslim world and Madam Guyone from the christian would are also fascinating characters. i know more about madam guyone though, that is because obv im fluent in english first and foremost.

I think you should be more accepting of 'outsider influence' in a multicultural world where we both speak the same common language. you're more like a 1st century jew who shut yourself off from the likes of philo, plotinus, augustine nevermind Jesus.

basically, judaism turned into a race and cultural issue, when it should have been about Truth in of itself. God punished jews when they followed polythiesm of other nations, but when the greeks, despite their polythiesm, came closer to the truth via the development of their philosophy (which was integrating many other belief systems), the majority of jews rejected it.

I should also add that imo, it is the philosophers who planted the seeds and religions were the fruit. Even Jesus, was the fruit of the seed planted by David vi athe psalms. He is the archetypal idea born in spirit rather than flesh and hence is called The Son of David, The philiosophers brought the concept of the Logos/image incarnation. such an idea didnt exist in the old testament.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Predating all the Greek philosophers, Moses penned Genesis. It would seem that a great place to start on the ideas you present above is the Book of Genesis @AspiringSoul

What can we know of the God who reveals Himself “in the beginning”?

Who really is the God of Genesis?

Genesis portrays God as not only one, but more than one; this is confirmed in the New Testament which states that God created everything through Jesus.

creation.com

 

[Artful Revealer]

only counts when theyre white, british, american or nordic.

If you say so.

 

[AspiringSoul]

If you say so.

islam has been dissected and obsessed over by hindus far more than it has white people. there are way more of them too. christianity kind of just got it's own area in western europe where no one else bothered them. muslims literally walked into ancient cultures/languages and religions and had to deal with them all. the consequence being that muslims are better trained in religious discourse, because we're used to it. it comes at us, from all angles.

 

[AspiringSoul]

Predating all the Greek philosophers, Moses penned Genesis. It would seem that a great place to start on the ideas you present above is the Book of Genesis @AspiringSoul

What can we know of the God who reveals Himself “in the beginning”?

Who really is the God of Genesis?

Genesis portrays God as not only one, but more than one; this is confirmed in the New Testament which states that God created everything through Jesus.

creation.com

right, but what relevance does that have to the story of St Augustine and his conversion to christianity, only because he'd read the works of Plotinus?

It's a bit like if a random east asian person, studied taoist philosophy and buddhism, then studyied sufism and finally reading the new testament, thinking 'woah, now that taoist and sufi stuf makes perfect sense, i had no idea christianity was connected to all this ancient wisdom, i must be a christian'.
had he just picked up Genesis, he;'d have said 'yeh it's a load of bs'.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

The question is whether the “Doctrine of the Trinity” predates people’s realisation of it. I like this image of the relationship between OT and NT…



Btw @AspiringSoul - you may actually like the following - a Jew admitting only one kind of Judaism can be true.

 

[Artful Revealer]

islam has been dissected and obsessed over by hindus far more than it has white people. there are way more of them too. christianity kind of just got it's own area in western europe where no one else bothered them. muslims literally walked into ancient cultures/languages and religions and had to deal with them all. the consequence being that muslims are better trained in religious discourse, because we're used to it. it comes at us, from all angles.

Do you have examples of Hindu-Islamic polemics or scholarly sources that engage in textual criticism of Islamic scripture or texts?

 

[AspiringSoul]

Do you have examples of Hindu-Islamic polemics or scholarly sources that engage in textual criticism of Islamic scripture or texts?

i havent been on a desi forum in a long time, but i was probably on 5..and even back in the chatroom days, any 'desi' one, was absolutely littered with hateful arguments from both sides. since hinduis outnumbered muslims esp, there wasnt a day i was in that part of the interet, they werent constantly flaming and attacking islam. that's not direct evidence, but im just saying if you want examples you'd have to be familiar with us, with desi people, with our history and how we interract.

on that note, here's a random link

http://www.srimatham.com/uploads/5/5/4/9/5549439/a_hindu_criticism_of_islam.pdf

in fact i agree with a lot of what the hindu says in this..but that's because im familiar with hinduism through my own interractions with hindus online inc the severe hatred and obsession they had for islam and it's scriptures.

a quote
The Hindu civilization is over 7000 years old, we already have minds to understand ― Vedanta philosophy is amongst the most sublime and holistic there is (there is no philosophy in “revealed” religions). Focus your mind on Me, be devoted to Me, offer worship to Me, bow down to Me. Engaging your mind in this manner and regarding Me as the supreme goal, you will come to Me. Gita 9:34. Hindus were discussing philosophy, theology, ethics and the meaning of life over 4000 years before the advent of Islam. How is submission to this self-obsessed Arabian deity for our personal benefit? And why should men enforce his law if he is mighty and omnipotent? In what way are his laws superior to those of the democratic nations or those of other civilizations? Why would an omnipotent creator and law-giver entrust the administration of his sacred laws to fallible humans who he knows are going to fall short of his standard of perfect justice?

the point here being that in the last 1300 yrs of islam in india, the arguments havent changed.
when i tell you guys, that 'the concept of the logos is from hinduism' it tends to go over your heads. how can i prove it? if you understand the under lying cosmological truths which are universally shared..you would accept the idea whatever language or religion and recognise shared truths.
for example when i say 'primordial power', you immediately know what i mean.
so if hindus say that the primordial power is Brahman. i can just say 'ok so this brahman concept is the same as Allah?'

if you're asking for direct links, books etc of hindus, centuries ago, actually dissecting and attacking the Quran, you're not likely to find that info directly unless hindus choose to translate and publish it. im just familiar with the pov of actual hindu-muslim polemics and history. and know that they've dissected and scrutinised every aspect of islam you can think of, already, for a lot longer than christians have.

my own personal experiences on desi forums was, it was a 24-7 flame war from those guys..and it hasnt changed. i even had hindus follow me onto wup-forum (due to my username), join it and then start flaming and trolling there.

think about me...the zest and energy i bring to this forum, my scope of understanding ideas across multiple religions/philosophies...i am a desi person. the hindus are basically the same as me in ethnicity (i mean, my caste being hindu before they converted to islam) and hence they bring the same energy and attention i do, just different sides. they werent sitting around counting daffodils for centuries before they came to islam. in fact my actual ancestors were athiest hindus before their conversion to sufi islam.
my point being indians are far far more adept with these topics than you christians...and they're far worse when it comes to flame wars and attacks, in my own experiences. there was a sikh guy rimming israel/jews, reporting me to them, constantly obsessed with attacking islam from all sides..and he was a mod on one of those forums...and one of many more like that.

when you go on twitter and see the 'INDIAN IS WID YEW' and 'indian-israeli frandship' love letters...you also should understand that they're more obsessed with us than you guys ever could be. they live and breath islam more than anything else in the world.

 

[Artful Revealer]

i havent been on a desi forum in a long time, but i was probably on 5..and even back in the chatroom days, any 'desi' one, was absolutely littered with hateful arguments from both sides. since hinduis outnumbered muslims esp, there wasnt a day i was in that part of the interet, they werent constantly flaming and attacking islam. that's not direct evidence, but im just saying if you want examples you'd have to be familiar with us, with desi people, with our history and how we interract.

on that note, here's a random link

http://www.srimatham.com/uploads/5/5/4/9/5549439/a_hindu_criticism_of_islam.pdf

in fact i agree with a lot of what the hindu says in this..but that's because im familiar with hinduism through my own interractions with hindus online inc the severe hatred and obsession they had for islam and it's scriptures.

a quote
The Hindu civilization is over 7000 years old, we already have minds to understand ― Vedanta philosophy is amongst the most sublime and holistic there is (there is no philosophy in “revealed” religions). Focus your mind on Me, be devoted to Me, offer worship to Me, bow down to Me. Engaging your mind in this manner and regarding Me as the supreme goal, you will come to Me. Gita 9:34. Hindus were discussing philosophy, theology, ethics and the meaning of life over 4000 years before the advent of Islam. How is submission to this self-obsessed Arabian deity for our personal benefit? And why should men enforce his law if he is mighty and omnipotent? In what way are his laws superior to those of the democratic nations or those of other civilizations? Why would an omnipotent creator and law-giver entrust the administration of his sacred laws to fallible humans who he knows are going to fall short of his standard of perfect justice?

the point here being that in the last 1300 yrs of islam in india, the arguments havent changed.
when i tell you guys, that 'the concept of the logos is from hinduism' it tends to go over your heads. how can i prove it? if you understand the under lying cosmological truths which are universally shared..you would accept the idea whatever language or religion and recognise shared truths.
for example when i say 'primordial power', you immediately know what i mean.
so if hindus say that the primordial power is Brahman. i can just say 'ok so this brahman concept is the same as Allah?'

if you're asking for direct links, books etc of hindus, centuries ago, actually dissecting and attacking the Quran, you're not likely to find that info directly unless hindus choose to translate and publish it. im just familiar with the pov of actual hindu-muslim polemics and history. and know that they've dissected and scrutinised every aspect of islam you can think of, already, for a lot longer than christians have.

my own personal experiences on desi forums was, it was a 24-7 flame war from those guys..and it hasnt changed. i even had hindus follow me onto wup-forum (due to my username), join it and then start flaming and trolling there.

think about me...the zest and energy i bring to this forum, my scope of understanding ideas across multiple religions/philosophies...i am a desi person. the hindus are basically the same as me in ethnicity (i mean, my caste being hindu before they converted to islam) and hence they bring the same energy and attention i do, just different sides. they werent sitting around counting daffodils for centuries before they came to islam. in fact my actual ancestors were athiest hindus before their conversion to sufi islam.
my point being indians are far far more adept with these topics than you christians...and they're far worse when it comes to flame wars and attacks, in my own experiences. there was a sikh guy rimming israel/jews, reporting me to them, constantly obsessed with attacking islam from all sides..and he was a mod on one of those forums...and one of many more like that.

when you go on twitter and see the 'INDIAN IS WID YEW' and 'indian-israeli frandship' love letters...you also should understand that they're more obsessed with us than you guys ever could be. they live and breath islam more than anything else in the world.

Like you said, I wasn't asking for modern-day dynamics of Hindu-Islamic polemics unless in documented form, nor theological debates, but historical, scholarly textual criticism. I was kind of specific about that and you went off on a tangent about me supposedly claiming Islamo-criticism in general was exclusive to western civilization.

And who's the "us" in "obsessed with us"? If you mean muslims, then you're delusional.

PS: The Hindu equivalent of Logos is rta, like the Zoroastrian asha, derived from PIE. hrtas (truth). Doesn't take away from Jesus being exactly that, the Truth, as He proclaimed.

 

[Lizard King]

Are Hindus the ones with little red dots on their forehead ? If so they seem to be successful at running motels around where I am .

 

[AspiringSoul]

Like you said, I wasn't asking for modern-day dynamics of Hindu-Islamic polemics unless in documented form, nor theological debates, but historical, scholarly textual criticism. I was kind of specific about that and you went off on a tangent about me supposedly claiming Islamo-criticism in general was exclusive to western civilization.

And who's the "us" in "obsessed with us"? If you mean muslims, then you're delusional.

PS: The Hindu equivalent of Logos is rta, like the Zoroastrian asha, derived from PIE. hrtas (truth). Doesn't take away from Jesus being exactly that, the Truth, as He proclaimed.

1) my response to that was merely that islam has been subject to criticism and scrutiny far greater than christianity by a wider range of people.

the only kind of academic research that matters comes in the form of actual archeological discoveries eg the oldest dated mosque which points to THE kaba, not petra (remember the 24-7 christian gangbang on here over that topic?).

Show me what archeological evidence ie Quran manuscripts, have thus far has disproven the muslim claim?

so far everything is in sync eg the oldest dated mosque points to the kaba. early Quran manuscripts have been compared and there were no differences except minor differences in style (not word for word difference, but in how arabic is written eg the position or lack of vowels accompanying the letters). Basically it is like in english where we have abbreviations, commas, full stop, brackets etc. If you read an earlier version ommitting them, it wouldnt make a difference provided whoever wrote it understood it.

2) im a major defender of the bible and a critic of these crap muslim scholars (zakir naik for example) and their attacks against the bible, thus contradicting the Quran itself.
the Quran, in the 7th century confirmed that the existing Torah and Gospel were 'the Word of Allah' 'truth and guidance', hence any type of suggestion that they're 'corrupt' leads to a major problem. The only criticism that is justified is to dismiss non-verified interpretations and translations, but the same is true for the Quran.

3) No, the hindu concept of Vishnu, the universal consciousness, is what the IMAGE OF GOD/WORD/LOGOS refer to.
the concept of Rta is the equivalent of Dharma itself which is the equivalent of torah/shariah ie the law, the natural order of things

Saying 'Jesus is THE TRUTH/RTA' is irrelevant...he isn't the Trancendent power that the Father is. He is secondary. Whilst the Logos incarnated as Jesus in the flesh, it doesnt limit the logos to Jesus, so why have you? the logos is universal, but you've relegated it into 'that bearded white fella in israel, our boy', the exotic greco-roman multicultural poster boy' ie 'give to ceasar what belongs to ceasar'. that is to say it's the messiah ben joseph archetype the romans loved, a submissive king of jews..not a conquering davidic messiah at all.
the only only only and only reason you love Jesus so much is because the romans moulded him into your archetypal white boy.
if Jesus was chinese, you motherfuckers would hate him, whereas im the one who talks about the Logos/vishnu incarnations but extend the same truth for all people and times.

besides islam's version of the trinitarian concept is far smoother and superior. no santa claus, no raindeers, just The Essence of God, Immanence on the Macrocosmic level and the microcosmic ie Ar-Rahman and Ar-Raheem.
seriously though, every single chapter of the Quran except one, begin with those words...so islam has emphasised the truth more frequently and in a better way than christianity did.
the spirit of truth/comforter/holy spirit revealed the quran...

'he will speak only what he hears' 'he will not speak on his own'
if the holy spirit is GOD/co equal in Godhead with The Father, then wh would God not speak on his own, but only speak what he hears?
rather, it makes sense that the holy spirit functioning through people, would leave xtianity behind (as is suggested in Revelation 2 and 3...and remember all 7 churches/cities are muslim cities) and find a prophet and a new revelation
'bring you ALL THE TRUTH'
'speak only what he hears'
'tell you all that is to come' (prophecy ie a new prophet).

'but textual criticacisms doe....but petra is da kaba doeee'

 

[Artful Revealer]

1) my response to that was merely that islam has been subject to criticism and scrutiny far greater than christianity by a wider range of people.

the only kind of academic research that matters comes in the form of actual archeological discoveries eg the oldest dated mosque which points to THE kaba, not petra (remember the 24-7 christian gangbang on here over that topic?).

Show me what archeological evidence ie Quran manuscripts, have thus far has disproven the muslim claim?

so far everything is in sync eg the oldest dated mosque points to the kaba. early Quran manuscripts have been compared and there were no differences except minor differences in style (not word for word difference, but in how arabic is written eg the position or lack of vowels accompanying the letters). Basically it is like in english where we have abbreviations, commas, full stop, brackets etc. If you read an earlier version ommitting them, it wouldnt make a difference provided whoever wrote it understood it.

2) im a major defender of the bible and a critic of these crap muslim scholars (zakir naik for example) and their attacks against the bible, thus contradicting the Quran itself.
the Quran, in the 7th century confirmed that the existing Torah and Gospel were 'the Word of Allah' 'truth and guidance', hence any type of suggestion that they're 'corrupt' leads to a major problem. The only criticism that is justified is to dismiss non-verified interpretations and translations, but the same is true for the Quran.

3) No, the hindu concept of Vishnu, the universal consciousness, is what the IMAGE OF GOD/WORD/LOGOS refer to.
the concept of Rta is the equivalent of Dharma itself which is the equivalent of torah/shariah ie the law, the natural order of things

Saying 'Jesus is THE TRUTH/RTA' is irrelevant...he isn't the Trancendent power that the Father is. He is secondary. Whilst the Logos incarnated as Jesus in the flesh, it doesnt limit the logos to Jesus, so why have you? the logos is universal, but you've relegated it into 'that bearded white fella in israel, our boy', the exotic greco-roman multicultural poster boy' ie 'give to ceasar what belongs to ceasar'. that is to say it's the messiah ben joseph archetype the romans loved, a submissive king of jews..not a conquering davidic messiah at all.
the only only only and only reason you love Jesus so much is because the romans moulded him into your archetypal white boy.
if Jesus was chinese, you motherfuckers would hate him, whereas im the one who talks about the Logos/vishnu incarnations but extend the same truth for all people and times.

besides islam's version of the trinitarian concept is far smoother and superior. no santa claus, no raindeers, just The Essence of God, Immanence on the Macrocosmic level and the microcosmic ie Ar-Rahman and Ar-Raheem.
seriously though, every single chapter of the Quran except one, begin with those words...so islam has emphasised the truth more frequently and in a better way than christianity did.
the spirit of truth/comforter/holy spirit revealed the quran...

'he will speak only what he hears' 'he will not speak on his own'
if the holy spirit is GOD/co equal in Godhead with The Father, then wh would God not speak on his own, but only speak what he hears?
rather, it makes sense that the holy spirit functioning through people, would leave xtianity behind (as is suggested in Revelation 2 and 3...and remember all 7 churches/cities are muslim cities) and find a prophet and a new revelation
'bring you ALL THE TRUTH'
'speak only what he hears'
'tell you all that is to come' (prophecy ie a new prophet).

'but textual criticacisms doe....but petra is da kaba doeee'

So do you have historical academic documents, whether archeological or literary, of Hindus or other peoples scientifically criticizing Islamic scripture, yes or no?

I'm not interested in your critical race theories about why I believe what I believe about Jesus, nor your mischaracterisations about how I supposedly restrict the Logos to Jesus. Jesus is the revealed Logos, as I've always maintained.

 

[Lizard King]

Fred Flintstone is always saying Yabba Dabba Do in the cartoon. I am beginning to wonder now if there is a mystical aspect to that. Spelled backwards Od Abbad Abbay sounds kind of Arabic?

 

[AspiringSoul]

So do you have historical academic documents, whether archeological or literary, of Hindus or other peoples scientifically criticizing Islamic scripture, yes or no?

I'm not interested in your critical race theories about why I believe what I believe about Jesus, nor your mischaracterisations about how I supposedly restrict the Logos to Jesus. Jesus is the revealed Logos, as I've always maintained.

i like how you're so specific in your criteria, but it's just to cover up all the insecurities you really do have and the lack of honesty and integrity too.

i just criticised 'academic research' and 'science' in my last post, so your question is null and void. it has zero weight with me.
however to answer you
-Centuries ago
-different language

'but can we google it doe?'

any idea how daft you are coming across here? if something occured in india 900 years ago...it would just be a commonpace study and critique of the Quran by some 'academic hindus', why would a thing so common get hand picked and make it to google? it isnt so much that christians like to document everything they have, it's that they are very selective in the type of data they dig out as if it means something to the rest of us. literally 'academic' means 'white people'. if it's documented and proclaimed by white people, it becomes so so so important it has to be proclaimed...whilst the rest of the world doesnt give a damn.

Here's an example of real textual criticism free from 'derp sceince, derp acamdeicz'
imagine this came from european xtians against islam, you would have championed it.


it is from Arab christians in the lifetime of prophet Mohammad.

they rejected islam and prophet Mohammad on the basis that the Quran wrongly identified MARY MOTHER OF JESUS with MARIAM DAUGHTER OF AMRAM/SISTER OF AARON/MOSES.
in fact even the existence of this argument in the hadith, proves that the Quran hasnt changed since, at least on this topic. that the christians in the 7th century, in the lifetime of prophet Mohammad, could read and understand this subject via the Quran and could directly reject prophet Mohammad.

the core criticism itself is absolutely sound and valid by my books. im all for legitimate concern and questioning of this kind.

prophet Mohammad's response was that it was basically just poetic not literal ie that mary the mother of Jesus is not the literal daughter of Amran/sister of aaron (obv because neither the prophet nor the Quran confuses that chronology, it was already well establishjed that Jesus came at the end..and Moses was a long time before, the Quran lists a series of prophets incx David and Solomon.

This too is a fair answer that logically adds up, since the Quran repeatedely outlighted jewish prophetic geneology various times, so muslims were not under the illusion that Jesus was the literal nephew of Aaron and Moses for example.



i think what you really were hoping for is some discovery of an earlier quran manuscript, contradicting the current Quran...
and it hasnt happened.

Can you explain to me why Ron Wyatt is criticised by 'academic experts'?
Ron Wyatt 'discovered' the location of the real mt sinai apparently, but the best bit was those areas were already marked and gated by the arab muslims...ie they were commonly known by muslims without 'da google scientics doe'
you need google science, everyone else needs common knowledge.


"Archaeologist Joe Zias of Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) has stated that "Ron Wyatt is neither an archaeologist nor has he ever carried out a legally licensed excavation in Israel or Jerusalem. In order to excavate one must have at least a BA in archaeology which he does not possess despite his claims to the contrary. ... [His claims] fall into the category of trash which one finds in tabloids such as the National Enquirer, Sun etc."

that is funny to me.
the christian discovered 'damn these jews were lying....the muslims knew the real location all along' and the response is 'welly ou dont have a BA' wow....ba doe. yet you have israeli academics denying David was even real....ie the hypthosis is biased and then they mine for evidence that suits tha hypethesis. it has no validity whatsoever.

again let me reiterate a point i made in a previous post, academic research commonly goes off a given (usually biased) hypothesis. when they mine for data and evidence, they typically tend to search for anything serving and proving the hypothesis. it's so selective that it means nothing to me.

as for textual criticism of the bible....muslims have done it for over 1000 years right? you only know because you're familiar with muslims and christian-muslim polemics.
we dont typically need to produce google sciencez to prove it. you only need familiarity with a religion to know 'they've dissected us'.
'but but da academicz doe, da ba special knowledge doe'
fuck off man.

 

[Artful Revealer]

Relax your butthole and expel your anti-white demons.

People criticising Islam because they misidentified Mary is not academic. That's just highlighting a discrepancy or contradiction between two stories.

It's quite funny how triggered you get about me asking for documented scientific examinations of scripture (academic isn't just controversy or polemics). It's a fact that textual criticism is a scientific discipline that saw the light in 18th century Germany and was instantaneously applied to the study of the Bible. The Quran became the subject of such scrutiny much later. If you claim that muslims have applied textual criticism to the Bible for a millennium, that's fine if that's the case, but then present the evidence, which is something I would actually love to see if there was such a thing.
But all I see is frustrated diatribes that reek of racist envy.

 

[Artful Revealer]