• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Qur'an and translations

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Correct in a way, but I'm not sure what you mean by a highly censored library, you mean its true meaning is hidden? Frankly, it's not a perfect book, it has been rewritten many times, but keep in mind that Islam relies on the Bible.

No, I mean it in the very literal sense, that the Bible is quite literally a censored library of books. What I mean is that each book of the Bible was written separately, and compiled later by various people, leaving many, many books out because of on-the-surface "contradictions."

...So overall yes, the Bible has been translated into different languages, but the bottom line is the base of the Bible is 3 languages, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, all the manuscripts agree with that, in other words arguing about King James is truly a worthless argument because it's not the original language of the Bible.

I know that, but tell that to the groups of people who believe the KJV to be the true version. (there are actually people who believe that) The reason I used it as an example is because English is my native language, and I can't speak or read Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek, so I need a translation. I used the KJV as an example of when translations of texts lose their meanings over time because of evolving languages.

...but claims that the Bible is corrupted...

Where does the Qur'an ever mention the Bible? It only mentions (so far as I've read it) the Law, and the Gospel, both of which were sent by God. (It says) So if it were to say that the Bible is corrupted, then it would be a contradiction.

Ahh but you it is very important to know how it reads too, if I make a small mistake in writing, and that mistake is a legit mistake, it could give the verse a very different meaning, if there's a Quran manuscript out there somewhere written in the original system, people need to be able to read it to confirm for themselves that the modern day Quran is indeed the same Quran, and unchanged or unmodified, other than that, a person cannot make this claim, and Islam certainly cannot make this claim, because history proves that it has been rewritten.

And as I said, in order for people to continue to understand its original meaning, it has to be rewritten to keep up with the evolving language. If it were to stay in the same language the whole time, even if people could read it, it would likely make no sense, and/or people would get lost in translation because of the change in the meanings of words.
 
Last edited:

Ashuri10

Member
No, I mean it in the very literal sense, that the Bible is quite literally a censored library of books. What I mean is that each book of the Bible was written separately, and compiled later by various people, leaving many, many books out because of on-the-surface "contradictions."

Agreed.

I know that, but tell that to the groups of people who believe the KJV to be the true version. (there are actually people who believe that) The reason I used it as an example is because English is my native language, and I can't speak or read Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek, so I need a translation. I used the KJV as an example of when translations of texts lose their meanings over time because of evolving languages.
This is the same story with the Quran, people who convert to this day still don't know Arabic, or at least not in the sense to be able to read and understand, therefore they need a translation, if the King James has translation errors than who's to say the English translations of the Quran don't have any error in them too?

Where does the Qur'an ever mention the Bible? It only mentions (so far as I've read it) the Law, and the Gospel, both of which were sent by God. (It says) So if it were to say that the Bible is corrupted, then it would be a contradiction.

The Quran tells Muslims that the Christians and the Jews no longer keep original rules of God, and it is accepted by Islamic scholars as well by the main-stream Muslims that the Bible is corrupted, any Muslim will tell you this today, this is one of their main claims when they try to convert a person who's already a Christian or a Jew, if the Bible is not corrupted and Muslims approve of it, what's the need for the Quran?

And as I said, in order for people to continue to understand its original meaning, it has to be rewritten to keep up with the evolving language. If it were to stay in the same language the whole time, even if people could read it, it would likely make no sense, and/or people would get lost in translation because of the change in the meanings of words.

That's fine, I agree with that, but my point is Muslims claim that the Quran has not been rewritten or modified, I just proved why this claim is false, that's all.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Agreed.

This is the same story with the Quran, people who convert to this day still don't know Arabic, or at least not in the sense to be able to read and understand, therefore they need a translation, if the King James has translation errors than who's to say the English translations of the Quran don't have any error in them too?



The Quran tells Muslims that the Christians and the Jews no longer keep original rules of God, and it is accepted by Islamic scholars as well by the main-stream Muslims that the Bible is corrupted, any Muslim will tell you this today, this is one of their main claims when they try to convert a person who's already a Christian or a Jew, if the Bible is not corrupted and Muslims approve of it, what's the need for the Quran?



That's fine, I agree with that, but my point is Muslims claim that the Quran has not been rewritten or modified, I just proved why this claim is false, that's all.

Then we're both on the same page, now.

But the way I see it, the Qur'an shouldn't have to repeat what the Law and the Gospel said, because they've already been said. I think when the Qur'an said that Christians and Jews didn't keep the original rules, I think that means that they don't follow the Law, like they're supposed to. So it's not the Law it's talking about, but the ones who are supposed to follow it and don't.
 

Ashuri10

Member
Then we're both on the same page, now.

But the way I see it, the Qur'an shouldn't have to repeat what the Law and the Gospel said, because they've already been said. I think when the Qur'an said that Christians and Jews didn't keep the original rules, I think that means that they don't follow the Law, like they're supposed to. So it's not the Law it's talking about, but the ones who are supposed to follow it and don't.

Yes, but keep in mind that if the Jews and Christians do not follow the law, but their Bible is not corrupted, there would be no need to accept the Quran, instead they should all just believe the Bible.

This is the thing with religion, everyone claims to be the correct path, but in the end who are we kidding, I say do as you please, if you feel that Islam can make you the best person possible and help the world be a better safer place, then all power to you, if Christianity gives you that then all power to you as well, and so on.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Yes, but keep in mind that if the Jews and Christians do not follow the law, but their Bible is not corrupted, there would be no need to accept the Quran, instead they should all just believe the Bible.

A wake-up call, maybe?
 

Ashuri10

Member
Well, if you're not following the rules, and you don't realize it, don't you need someone to tell you?

That depends on how you look at things, if I'm going around stealing things, hurting others, and doing things that are clearly bad to society, then I need a kick in the butt lol, but if I do everything good and try my best to be the best human possible, but at the same time I believe in Krishna, Shiva, and Brahma, who's to say I'm not already following the rules?

That's one thing, the other thing is let us for the sake of argument pretend that the whole world only consisted of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, I know this is an ignorant way of looking at it but let's just go down to that level for one second, the Muslim claim is that Christians and the Jews do not worship the same God because they made partnership to God, maybe this argument can be said for Christians who believe in the Trinity, but what does that have to do with the Jews? Judaism like Islam does not make any partnership to God, why even bother converting them?
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
That depends on how you look at things, if I'm going around stealing things, hurting others, and doing things that are clearly bad to society, then I need a kick in the butt lol, but if I do everything good and try my best to be the best human possible, but at the same time I believe in Krishna, Shiva, and Brahma, who's to say I'm not already following the rules?

That's one thing, the other thing is let us for the sake of argument pretend that the whole world only consisted of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, I know this is an ignorant way of looking at it but let's just go down to that level for one second, the Muslim claim is that Christians and the Jews do not worship the same God because they made partnership to God, maybe this argument can be said for Christians who believe in the Trinity, but what does that have to do with the Jews? Judaism like Islam does not make any partnership to God, why even bother converting them?

Well, leaders of Judaism at the time were being very hypocritical and not really following all the rules. Jesus made this very clear, assuming it is historically accurate. But, Jesus also once said that those who aren't sick don't need a doctor.

Here's how I see it:

The Law was sent to Moses, for all the people. Some followed it correctly, and found the kingdom of God. Job is a good example.

However, many didn't quite get it, and so Jesus, the Word made flesh, was sent to preach the good news, or Gospel, that all humankind could now have a way to find the kingdom of God, and not just the Jews. Some got it, and found the kingdom of God. Yet still, there were those who still didn't get it.

So the Word was given to Mohammad to dictate to scribes, which led to the Qur'an. Now, still others got it, and found the kingdom of you get the idea :D. Yet still, there were many who didn't.

And that's where I think Baha'i comes in.

And it will keep happening until everyone finally gets it.

That's how I see it, when looking at only the Abrahamic faiths.

Now, as for the other religions, I firmly believe that they all have a piece of a giant puzzle, and when you look at them all, they complement each other very well, on a philosophical level. On the level of details, such as which god we're talking about, that's inconsequential, as they're all the same god, who goes by different names and incarnations.
 
Last edited:

Ashuri10

Member
Well, leaders of Judaism at the time were being very hypocritical and not really following all the rules. Jesus made this very clear, assuming it is historically accurate. But, Jesus also once said that those who aren't sick don't need a doctor.

Here's how I see it:

The Law was sent to Moses, for all the people. Some followed it correctly, and found the kingdom of God. Job is a good example.

However, many didn't quite get it, and so Jesus, the Word made flesh, was sent to preach the good news, or Gospel, that all humankind could now have a way to find the kingdom of God, and not just the Jews. Some got it, and found the kingdom of God. Yet still, there were those who still didn't get it.

So the Word was given to Mohammad to dictate to scribes, which led to the Qur'an. Now, still others got it, and found the kingdom of you get the idea :D. Yet still, there were many who didn't.

And that's where I think Baha'i comes in.

And it will keep happening until everyone finally gets it.

That's how I see it, when looking at only the Abrahamic faiths.

Now, as for the other religions, I firmly believe that they all have a piece of a giant puzzle, and when you look at them all, they complement each other very well, on a philosophical level. On the level of details, such as which god we're talking about, that's inconsequential, as they're all the same god, who goes by different names and incarnations.

If you believe that all religions are legit (I like the idea, it shows tolerance), then why should it matter what Jews and Christians believe in? And why must they embrace Islam to be exact?

Saying that all the religions are part of God's plan, if some believe that the Trinity is pagan, what makes Hinduism any legit?

You see I like that you're willing to accept and tolerate everyone's belief, but at the same time if you choose to do so, you have to keep in mind that by this logic, there's no wrong path, because God, Gods, or whatever can be worshipped in many different ways, also keep in mind that there's a number of people who don't even believe in a God, they too could be on a right path of their own, in the end, who are we to judge who's got it right and who has not? We're left with a bunch of books that make very strong claims, but no evidence, this is the fact.

Don't get me wrong, I believe in the existence of a God, is he the same God that the Bible describes, not quite, I have my own beliefs and what makes sense to me might not be accepted by others, but that's fine, we are all unique individuals and we were all given brains to think with and make whatever personal choices that makes us feel better.
 

Sahar

Well-Known Member
The evidence is very logical evidence, and that is the study of the Arabic language and its development.

First let us look at what the Muslims themselves believe, according to Muslims, the Qur'an itself as a book never really existed in the days of Mohammad, rather it was memorized, and instead it was written on any objects found near by such as pieces of leaves, stones, parchment or leather, and so on, not only that, but they were also written by men who Mohammad chose, not by Mohammad himself, it wasn't until after the death of Mohammad that the Qur'an was put into paper.

Now let's look at the logical respond to why the Qur'an must have been rewritten at least more than once, the first thing we should look at is the Arabic alphabets, if you compare modern day Arabic to the Arabic of the 6th century, they are nothing a like, in fact, if we take an Arabic text from the 6th century and post it on this website (Which I will in a second), chances are hardly anyone will be able to read it, also let's not forget that the Arabic alphabets are not Arabic, they are Aramaic originally, and they come from the Nabatean Aramaic alphabets, this is a fact.

Now that we got the origin out of the way, let's look at how Arabic as an alphabet has changed, if you know anything about Semitic alphabets, you'll know that the original alphabets are known as Abgads, (Because they start with Alaph, Beth, Gamal, Daleth, and so on), Arabic on the other hand is no longer an Abgadi alphabet, because it no longer retains its original roots, instead, the Arabic alphabets have been tweaked with a lot after the death of Mohammad, and went through a major evolutionary change (Which was a good change for the language, but not for the history of the religion), so this let's look at these changes:

a) Arabic during Mohammad's days did not have dots, for those who know anything about Arabic today, they know that there are many dots that actually differentiate between letters, for example the letters 7(H)aa', Khaa', and Jeem all look like the same without any dots, but in reality they all produce different sounds and depending on where the dot is or not, you get a certain sound out of it, same goes for other letters such as Baa', Taa', and Thaa', also Ayin and Ghayin, also daal and dhaal, raa' and zaay, and so on.

So from this, we know 100% that the Qur'an has been rewritten at least once, because clearly the Arabic of Mohammad's days must have been very different and there was no dots, the question is who put the dots on the real Qur'an and how do we know there are no errors there?

b) The development of the dots was finalized during the 8th century (2 centuries after Mohammad), the next thing is the vowels, which are very very important also, vowels in Arabic were in development during the 8th century but were not finalized until the 9th century, and they are important because sometimes a word can mean different things depending on the vowels put on it, for example there's a word spelled with kaaf-taa'-baa', or to make it short k-t-b, this is the root for "To Write", but this word depending on the vowels can either mean "He wrote", or "It was written", or "Books", but depending on which vowels you put in there of course, so once again this ensures us that the Qur'an was once again modified for a second time.

I would say the oldest Qur'an that resembles modern Qur'ans comes no earlier than the 9th century, 3 centuries after Mohammad, so to claim that Islam has the original book unmodified is a big major false statement that does not match history, finally, wait for me to reach 15 posts so I can post pics from links and compare between the two Arabic writings, this should be in no time, so wait for an hour or so ;)
Is that how you proved that the Qur'an was modified through history? :cover:
Some modifications of the Arabic writing were made to make it easier for us to read. They are all recited the same, with dots or without the dots, with tashkeel or without tahskeel.
 

Sahar

Well-Known Member
Ohh and by the way, while modern Arabic only uses vowels optionally, dots are not an option, which did not exist during Mohammad's days.
Maybe us can't do it easily but there are specialists who can, just like I can't understand all the different scripts easily but there are specialists who can. Reading the Qur'an is basically based on recitation not on writing.

I bring this up because many Muslims like to claim that the Bible has been rewritten, therefore it's no longer valid, I agree that the Bible has been rewritten, but so has been the Qur'an.
Proof? You haven't proved that a single word of the Qur'an was changed yet.
 

Sahar

Well-Known Member
Here you go Fazl, can you read these for me?

Image%2823%29.jpg

Image%2822%29.jpg

Image%2821%29.jpg
ًWell, I can read them..it took me some time. :)
 

Ashuri10

Member
Maybe us can't do it easily but there are specialists who can, just like I can't understand all the different scripts easily but there are specialists who can. Reading the Qur'an is basically based on recitation not on writing.

So let me get this straight, you're claiming that a book that big and thick and so sophisticated is based on oral tradition only? You're right, logic says that the human brain can indeed memorize a book that is 500+ pages with no errors :rolleyes:

Sorry sister, but this is none sense, the Quran has a written history, it was not only based on oral tradition as you claim.

Proof? You haven't proved that a single word of the Qur'an was changed yet.

The problem is you have not proved that a single word from the Quran has NOT changed, your claim is that the Quran is based on oral tradition, if that's your proof, than jazzakiallah for that logic, I guess oral tradition does not make any errors :cool:
 

Ashuri10

Member
ًWell, I can read them..it took me some time. :)

Ok, then for the sake of argument, would you be able to post links to the modern Arabic Surah's that match the pages I provided.

I ask this not because I'm against Islam or I want to find mistakes, the Qur'an itself has enough mistakes and contradictions similar to the Bible for me to actually bother with this subject, I'm simply challenging the Islamic claim that the Quran was never rewritten, I proved that this was false because as you can see the Quran has gone through many development stages, first it was written on leaves, stones, leather, and so on, then it went on to papers, then the dots were added, then the vowels were added, all this and you tell me it was not rewritten and it's unmodified?

For the record, I respect Islam as a faith as much as I respect any other religion out there, but Islam like any other religion is not error free, and history and logic both prove that.
 

Sahar

Well-Known Member
So let me get this straight, you're claiming that a book that big and thick and so sophisticated is based on oral tradition only? You're right, logic says that the human brain can indeed memorize a book that is 500+ pages with no errors :rolleyes:

Sorry sister, but this is none sense, the Quran has a written history, it was not only based on oral tradition as you claim.



The problem is you have not proved that a single word from the Quran has NOT changed, your claim is that the Quran is based on oral tradition, if that's your proof, than jazzakiallah for that logic, I guess oral tradition does not make any errors :cool:
Heck, many Muslims memorize the entire Qur'an, and children at the age of eight and nine. And indeed Muslims at the time of the prophet memorized the Qur'an.
Hassaan ibn Thebit for example recited the Qur'an in front of the prophet (I believe more than one time) so that his recitation could be approved by the Prophet. When Muslims started to lose Hafazat Al Qur'an, those who memorize the Qur'an, in the battles during the Khilafa of Abu Bakr, Umar suggested to collect the entire Qur'an together.

Recitation is number one and we have the writing too. When people learn to read the Qur'an, they basically learn how to recite, to pronounce each letter the way the Arabs did and the Prophet did not on how they write it!!
 

Sahar

Well-Known Member
I ask this not because I'm against Islam or I want to find mistakes, the Qur'an itself has enough mistakes and contradictions similar to the Bible for me to actually bother with this subject, I'm simply challenging the Islamic claim that the Quran was never rewritten, I proved that this was false because as you can see the Quran has gone through many development stages, first it was written on leaves, stones, leather, and so on, then it went on to papers, then the dots were added, then the vowels were added, all this and you tell me it was not rewritten and it's unmodified?
So because the Qur'an was written on leaves then was written on papers, this is how you prove the Qur'an was modified!!! :run:
The writing of the Arabic was modified but nothing of the Qur'an was changed.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
If you believe that all religions are legit (I like the idea, it shows tolerance), then why should it matter what Jews and Christians believe in? And why must they embrace Islam to be exact?

Saying that all the religions are part of God's plan, if some believe that the Trinity is pagan, what makes Hinduism any legit?

You see I like that you're willing to accept and tolerate everyone's belief, but at the same time if you choose to do so, you have to keep in mind that by this logic, there's no wrong path, because God, Gods, or whatever can be worshipped in many different ways, also keep in mind that there's a number of people who don't even believe in a God, they too could be on a right path of their own, in the end, who are we to judge who's got it right and who has not? We're left with a bunch of books that make very strong claims, but no evidence, this is the fact.

Don't get me wrong, I believe in the existence of a God, is he the same God that the Bible describes, not quite, I have my own beliefs and what makes sense to me might not be accepted by others, but that's fine, we are all unique individuals and we were all given brains to think with and make whatever personal choices that makes us feel better.

Well, I think that many philosophers said much of the same things as religious teachers and leaders, without even realizing it. So, I consider them all legit, even the ones that we would consider barbaric. Granted, not every single tiny little detail was the same, but that's because I don't believe ANY of the holy books were dictated to scribes by God, or gods, or whatever. I believe that they were all written by men, men with flaws, and those flaws can lead to confusion and inconsistencies, such as the question of whether or not it was two of every animal or seven of every clean animal. But they all spoke of a universal truth. What is that truth? Well, let's let someone who's got nothing to do with religion answer that. "Beeeeee goooooooood." :D
 

Ashuri10

Member
Heck, many Muslims memorize the entire Qur'an, and children at the age of eight and nine. And indeed Muslims at the time of the prophet memorized the Qur'an.
Hassaan ibn Thebit for example recited the Qur'an in front of the prophet (I believe more than one time) so that his recitation could be approved by the Prophet. When Muslims started to lose Hafazat Al Qur'an, those who memorize the Qur'an, in the battles during the Khilafa of Abu Bakr, Umar suggested to collect the entire Qur'an together.

Recitation is number one and we have the writing too. When people learn to read the Qur'an, they basically learn how to recite, to pronounce each letter the way the Arabs did and the Prophet did not on how they write it!!

I'm not denying that you cannot memorize, you can indeed try to memorize, but the bigger the thing you need to memorize the more error there will be, you have no proof that these people did not make errors in their memory, your only proof is that your book says so, therefore it must be true.

Have you played the game where you whisper something in someone's ear and they pass it along, do this for a change, gather 10 kids, and whisper a sentence in their ear, not a word, have them whisper this to one another, eventually this sentence will not sound exactly the same.

The second thing is how can you guarantee that these people did not manipulate the Quran to their own good? Some people say Paul manipulated the message of the New Testament, well how do we know these people who wrote the Quran did not do the same?
 

Ashuri10

Member
So because the Qur'an was written on leaves then was written on papers, this is how you prove the Qur'an was modified!!! :run:

Ok, so based on this respond, you seem to be shocked when I say that the Quran has been modified, almost as if you saw a ghost.

The writing of the Arabic was modified but nothing of the Qur'an was changed.

Yet right in the next sentence, you confirm this modification, very interesting.

By the way, I still wanna see the modern sura's for the pages I provided, I'm just curious to what the modern Arabic would look like, not because I wanna prove anything, I already proved that the Quran was rewritten, I'm just really interested because I love languages in general, specially the semitic languages and their development.
 
Last edited:
Top