Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

For Debate #12263

Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2010 9:13:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
http://www.debate.org...

I am testing/trying to invent a new form of debate additions, and in such threads, I will not reply to anything. These are merely additions for debates.

---

The Authenticity of the Qur'an


During the time of the beloved Prophet, the Arabic language had as much as seven dialects. The most advanced one was the Quraishi dialect, and this was the one that the Qur'an was revealed in.

When Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was alive, many people had the Qur'an memorized, and it was written down on many things, so it was there but not "compiled" as one whole book yet.

When the beloved Prophet died, Islam kept expanding, and due to different dialects in the Arabic language, some Arabs wrote down the Qur'an with some different dialects. It was, and this is undeniable, originally in the Quraishi dialect, so we do know that that version is the original, but it was not the only one during the reign of the third caliph, Uthman. What ultimately happened was that Uthman got very concerned in fear of the Qur'an being exposed to distortion of some kind.

Now, since the original was and is the Quraishi dialect, Uthman ordered to burn the unoriginal copies of the other versions, in order to preserve the original version. How do we know that he had the original version?

1. The original was the Quraishi dialect.

2. Had even a letter of the original Qur'an been fully distorted by Uthman himself, numerous authentic hadith would write about it.

3. The high number of Arabs who memorized the Qur'an would object to it immediately, just as with the case of the unoriginal copies. There would be bloodshed over that.

4. Uthman had absolutely no need of changing the Qur'an. Would he have done it in order to make more authoritarian laws? Absolutely not. First and foremost, the biggest part of Shari'a Law is actually found in authentic hadith, narrations from the Prophet, not the Qur'an. The Qur'an speaks about some things in general, but authentic hadith are extremely many in numbers, and they elaborate on things etc. What Uthman would do would be to distort the words of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). It is illogical to say that he would have distorted the Qur'an for more authority. The Qur'an is the basic law, yes. Even today, the Saudi Arabian constitution is the Qur'an.

5. The Qur'an is a mathematically structured book. This point is made in the official debate.

6. As indicated above, it was impossible for Uthman to have an unoriginal copy of the Qur'an, because it is nothing but a fact that the Quraishi dialect was the real, and even the beloved Prophet spoke it. No person who knows history of those times can deny this in any logical way. The Muslims would strongly oppose any distortion, they would be after Uthman, and many similar things would happen had Uthman actually touched a word of the Qur'an.

Furthermore, we have ancient copies of the Qur'an that are just like the Qur'an we have today. Which other book has this? No other book has been preserved for such a long time and this perfectly, nor will any other be.

http://www.sunnipath.com...
http://www.saudinf.com...
http://www.irfi.org...

There are incredibly many old copies of the Qur'an that fully match each other, and of course, the one we have today. Arabs were very good at memorizing things, and they would usually write about even some totally unimportant events. Why would they not write about the Qur'an suddenly being changed by Uthman?

Moreover, every month of Ramadan, Muslims recite a 'juz' of the Qur'an per day. The Qur'an is divided by 30 juz, and every month in the Lunar Calendar (Islamic calendar, the most precise in the world), there are 30 days. So, during Ramadan, Muslims recite one juz per day for 30 days. This helps them memorizing it etc. When the Arabs memorized the Qur'an this way and such similar ways, how could it ever be possible for anyone to distort the Qur'an? What would Muslims think about a Qur'an they cannot recognize? Would they not write about it? Would they not fight each other for it? Would they not seek to slay Uthman for such a corrupt deed?

Also, let us for the sake of argument say that the Qur'an was indeed distorted by Uthman. I ask, how come we still have one Qur'an today? How come there has not been a single leader, a political tyrant, perhaps, who also distorted the Qur'an to be a large, unmemorable book, and with laws that are extremely strict? Why has this not happened? And would some people from small, isolated villages anywhere in the world not have a Qur'an copy that was a little bit different? Why not at least recite it in a different way? No, this is fortunately not the case.

The Qur'an has remained pure and unchanged since it was fully revealed, and there is historical, archaeological, and logical evidence for this. Just the fact that Muslims have almost always been hated could mean that some non-Muslims would have tried to change the Qur'an successfully, but it has never been possible. Muslims are split into many sects, but none of them have different versions of the Qur'an. In Iran, they recite and memorize the Qur'an in Arabic. They do the same in Saudi Arabia. In all countries with Muslims, this is done. Which other book has this amazing history behind it? Which scholars do you see successfully defending the authenticity of their holy books? Do Buddhists say that the Tipitaka were unchanged? No. Do the Hindus say that the Vedas were unchanged? No. Do Catholics say that the Bible has never been changed? No, and Protestants are clear witnesses. Who are the only ones saying, and with ultimate proof, that their holy book has never changed? Then Muslims.

Praise be to God.

---

Reference for debate: #12263
http://www.debate.org...
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 7:18:10 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
is it that you're trying to get around the 8000 character limit??
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2010 7:30:47 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/23/2010 7:18:10 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
is it that you're trying to get around the 8000 character limit??
I referred to some sites, but Cereb did not seem to get what he wanted from them. They were too large to read. So, I created this thread and used it as my own reference. It is to save character space, yes, because that was really important in the last round. That is why the first reference in my debate with CN is this thread. I think it is a good idea, so I used it.