How can Muslims be assured that the Qur'an is the Word of God?

Discussion in 'Abrahamic Religions' started by Affectionate, Nov 1, 2005.

  1. mansio

    mansio Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nahiz

    In Qur 86-5 the word mimma, a contraction of min (from) and maa (what), means "from what, of what" and refers to "maa'in daafiqin" spilled water (i.e.semen) in 86-6.
    I don't see any problems of translation.

    According to the Encyclopaedia of the Orient Merneptah died a natural death in high age, according to examination of his mummy. He suffered from arthritis, had calcification of the arteries and had a kind dental surgery because of his bad teeth.
     
  2. n4h1z

    n4h1z Thirst for 'Ilmi...

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    0
    Peace to all...

    Yes , you are right...there is no tranlation problem. But the main point is still that the word "nutfah" is not in use in 86:6 or 86:7
    Wether the word "mimma" or "maa'in daafiqin" refers to "water emitted"( fluid semen)...still it doesnt refer to the cellular sperm(spermatozoa)...coz in other verses in the Quran the word "nutfah" is used to refer to sperm which is the cellular part of the semen....Allah knows best...
    Anyway I'll try to get more info on this matter. I'll try to get some views from Quran interpretors/scholar/expert... For the benefit of us both...

    Could you give me the link to the Encyclopedia of the orient.
    I still think it is more reliable to get the source from somebody who examined the mumie first hand....anyway we all have the right to choose..

    Peace....:)
     
  3. mansio

    mansio Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    0
    Apa kabar Nahiz

    The links are encyclopaedia of the orient or lexicorient. I don't like to give links as they are so many.

    My messages are getting shorter and shorter. It's maybe a good thing because some people here cannot put up with detailed discussions. I sometimes wonder what's the use of a "discussion" forum.
     
  4. n4h1z

    n4h1z Thirst for 'Ilmi...

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    0
    Peace to mansio...

    Khabar Baik...Merci et vous?

    same here...maybe it's all just for the sake of utilising IT..maybe we're all here.. trying to escape primitivity...lol:p
     
  5. Saltmeister

    Saltmeister The Dangerous Dinner

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,130
    Likes Received:
    2
    Well, if you were going to respond to what I posted on the Jewish and Zoroastrian embodiments of evil, perhaps you could start on that while you think of something else to debate about. While this isn't a thread on the Bible, if the Quran is based on the Bible we could perhaps discuss it a bit.

    Perhaps one thing I'd like to add to what I said about Satan, is that the passage in chapter 14 from Isaiah makes references to astrology in introducing its concept of Lucifer. These include "the morning star" (Lucifer himself) and "stars of God" (the angels). It also refers to places on earth that are sacred to the Jewish people such as "mount of assembly" (could this be the Mount of Olives or something similar?) and "sacred mountain."

    Then there's the heaven/earth concept where he will ascend "above the tops of the clouds" and be made like "the Most High." Obviously He wants to exalt himself above God.

    Astrology is about celestial bodies. It is used here for the purpose of prophecy. Since I don't know much about Zoroastrianism (hardly a help) other than the basics of its theory on the embodiment of good and evil, it would be hard to comment on how Zoroaster used astrology to portray good/evil forces.

    Astrology is different to philosophy in the sense that you can use existing objects (celestial) in the natural world/universe to describe a spiritual concept. If the Jews had an alternative to expressing their views on Lucifer, then they may have been more original than we think.

    If the references to the morning star (Lucifer), the angels (stars of God), the Mount of Olives (mount of assembly) are unique in this passage of Isaiah, then it may not have been influenced by Zoroaster.

    Moreover, Isaiah's followers (who obviously may have filled in the remaining passages in Isaiah after his death) may not even have met Zoroaster!!! Isaiah was a prophet, not a diplomat or ambassador. His followers might not have been that keen to receive ideas from foreigners. Zoroaster might have met the Jewish High Priest and Rabbis, but Isaiah and his followers were probably a more reclusive group, though not necessarily a secret society. The prophets of Israel might have got involved in politics, but they didn't live by politics.

    Prophets aren't confined to writing about philosophy and theology, they may use astrology in their prophecies as well.
     
  6. mansio

    mansio Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    0
    Excuse me Nahiz and Saltmeister, I wasn't talking about you at all.

    I was angry because on another thread some people couldn't stand a discussion on "the name of God". I was actually refering to that other thread in the second part of my last post.
     
  7. n4h1z

    n4h1z Thirst for 'Ilmi...

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    0
    Peace mansio...

    No need to apologize...i knew it since...;)
     
  8. Saltmeister

    Saltmeister The Dangerous Dinner

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,130
    Likes Received:
    2
    lol

    It's funny how something like that happens and the whole thread just stops just like that.
     
  9. mansio

    mansio Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thread awake!
     
  10. aburaees

    aburaees Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    0
    How can anyone be sure that anything is the word of God, especially when he hasn't signed any of our religious documents. Hey I'm a beurocrat.

    :)
     
  11. Zaakir

    Zaakir part of the ummah

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    0
    as a muslim, we have to faith and trust in Allah s.w.t....Allah s.w.t tells us He will protect the Quran, free from corruption...its the pure un altered word of God, when in arabic anyway as some words cannot be efficiently translated, this is how we know the Quran is the word of God, the Quran, as Allah s.w.t tells us doesnt go against the previous laws, its an extension, so to speek, it confirms the previous jaws, ie, the injil and the torah
     
  12. cyberpi

    cyberpi Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    0
    As a person who submits to the creator of the Universe, I question everything including the universe. I was born with eyes and a mind for a reason.

    Can you produce the authentic Injil and Torah that the Qur'an confirms and requires us to believe in equally? I encounter so many Muslims that say they have been corrupted and so I ask them, who's fault is that? It is our duty to study and preserve them. The Qur'an commands Muslims to tell others that we believe in them. So please, produce this authentic Injil and Torah that the religion of truth has kept and requires me to believe in... or have former Muslims truly lost them.
     
  13. cyberpi

    cyberpi Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    0
    In fact, while I'm on the subject of questioning everything, in the pursuit of understanding, the Qur'an says "We created the heavens and earth..." and the Qur'an says "He created the heavens and earth..." and the Qur'an says "Allah created the heavens and earth...". I have my opinion on this matter, and I have heard others, but I still ask everyone, which is God (swt)... "We" or "He"? Should it not be from him, "I"?
     
  14. Light

    Light Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    0
    The 'We' or 'He' is more due to linguistic and proper manner of addressing. In the arabic language and even some other language, an individual does not refer himself as I, but they tend to say we. It sound more polite. Thus, in the Quran God referred HIMself as WE more often.

    1. In the Quran, God make challenges to mankind to come out with a book similar to the Quran.
    Amazingly, after 1400 year up till today and until the end of the world, no one will ever managed to achieve that. This is one credible evidence that just shows that Quran is the Word of God.

    2. God says that HE will protect this book. By HIS word, it was protected from corruption. As the Quran today is the same one 1400 year ago.

    3. Quran doesn't lie of the past, present and future events. In one of the shorter surah..
    This surah was revealed before Abu Lahab, the arch-enemy of Islam in the prophet (pbuh) time, passed away. It was revealed while he is still active opposing Islam and Muhammad (pbuh). To test that the Quran is true, Abu Lahab just have to say the shahadah (become a Muslim) to falsify this surah. This is because, Allah has said in other surah that a person will be saved from the hellfire by his proclaimation of the faith (shahadah). The history shows that he died later as a non-believer, even after he heard this surah and have the remaining part of his life to repent.

    Above are 3 reasons why Muslims are sure that the Qur'an is the Word of God. There are more... god willing.
     
  15. mansio

    mansio Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    0
    Light

    Your reason #2 is not really convincing as God did not succeed in protecting his Word from corruption before the Quran was revealed.

    As of the reason #1 imitations of the Quran have been written. But the challenge is impossible to meet as the exact terms of it are different with every Muslim.

    As of the Abu Lahab story I don't really see the point in it as we do not have the original documents that could corroborate the story.
    Anyway Abu Lahab has the extraordinary honour to have his name mentioned from all eternity next to that of God himself.
     
  16. aburaees

    aburaees Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, put yourself in Abu Lahab's shoes... would you convert to a religion, or obey a prophet who has eternally condemned you to hell? I just think that this Surah made it impossible for Abu Lahab to ever become Muslim.

    As for "new" Surahs, I think most Muslims aren't in a position to be able to judge them against Qur'anic Surah's. Only the experts can do that, the rest of us can only take their word/explanation for it.

    A perfectly preserved book... that hasn't been changed... I still don't know what this means. I find it a problem that there are several Hadiths (in Bukhari & Muslim) that talk about lost verses. Apparently, Sunnis aren't supposed to doubt the authenticity of these Hadiths... then again, there are those who would rather doubt the Hadiths than doubt the Qur'an.

    Rashad Khalifa distributed a Qur'an that omitted 2 verses, does this constitute corruption? Or was it as he said, that the Qur'an shouldn't have contained these verses in the first place?

    There must be another assurance that Muslims can seek to qualify their belief in the Qur'an. Prophecy for example, some kind of un-parallelled wisdom, or the influence it has on people worldwide?

    .
     
  17. Zaakir

    Zaakir part of the ummah

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    0
    gime a chnace to look over all that...as i have a very limited knowledge?from all of your posts i have read you try to give this view of islam of being 'false', 'made up' the beleifs in islam as afr as i know are obviously the shahada, but the Quran is 100% accurate the word of Allah s.w.t, i remember reading about a story that was in the Quran but got ommitted, becasue Allah had chosen this to be the cause, just as alchol wasnt forbidden untill the religion grew, becasue Allah s.w.t knows what is best and knew man would accept if they could drink...beleive me its HARD...
     
  18. aburaees

    aburaees Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    0

    Zakir bro, I think you misunderstand me. I don't try to give the view of Islam being false. The Qur'an is not false. However, since there are many different sects in Islam, it is obvious that there are some false beliefs floating around.

    I appreciate that you're new to Islam and you might not realise the authority that a lot of Muslims attach to Bukhari and Muslim.

    .
     
  19. cyberpi

    cyberpi Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    0
    That is the excuse I hear, to which I say please don't try to call God (swt) impolite or a liar. 'HE' is 2nd person. 'WE' is 1st person. There is NO proper Arabic mixing those two. The common excuse is for plural 'WE' versus singular 'I'. But in the Qur'an God (swt) refers to himself as 'I'. For example, a few verses 2:33, 3:55, 3:56, 4:118, 4:119, 5:12, 5:110, 5:115. The two words 'WE' and 'I', even in Arabic, convey very different information.

    I consider it a lie, or at best conjecture, to say "We believe", "We think", or "We will do XYZ" on this planet without a communication, an omniscient spirit, or an agreement (covenant) between each individual. People are clothed with flesh and isolated from each other. I have no idea what you believe and you have no idea what I believe, so it is a lie for either of us to say what "we believe" without communication and agreement between us. It is far more polite to respect the soul of another by saying, "I believe" and letting the other person describe for themselves what they believe. I consider it an abomination that anyone says, "We believe", "We think", or "We will do XYZ" on this planet without a communication of agreement or a spirit that has no requirement for eyes to see and no requirement for ears to hear.

    I know that rubs more than a few alledged Muslims the wrong way, but it shouldn't because it is the truth, or rather the nature of the truth in this world. If anyone needs proof: I am thinking of an Island surrounded by water. What Island am I thinking of? Can anyone answer in truth? Alternatively, it is noted in the Qur'an, for example 2:8-9 that some people will say, "We believe", and yet they are NOT believers. Thus even with communication it is conjecture to say, "We believe" because some people will LIE, and God (swt) knows those who do. Again, which Island was I thinking of? Surely God (swt) knows but does anyone here?

    For the relationship between Muslims though, verses like 2:136, 3:84, or 5:7, there is a communication (the Qur'an) and a covenant, so then it becomes reasonable to say "We". I would simply cite the verse though because there is a problem in that many of the alledged Muslims do NOT believe in the items listed in 2:136 or 3:84, for they have never even read them. Knowing this, it would be an outright lie to say, "We believe" when so many have no clue. All part of the struggle.

    Other verses indicate a similar problem:

    49:14 (Yusufali) The desert Arabs say, "We believe." Say, "Ye have no faith; but ye (only)say, 'We have submitted our wills to Allah,' For not yet has Faith entered your hearts. But if ye obey Allah and His Messenger, He will not belittle aught of your deeds: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."
    49:15 Only those are Believers who have believed in Allah and His Messenger, and have never since doubted, but have striven with their belongings and their persons in the Cause of Allah: Such are the sincere ones.

    So, faith is something more than just saying, "we believe" and it is an individual's actions that reflect whether or not the person is a true believer. It is also practiced that by stating the Shahadah that nobody can say you are NOT a Muslim (a person who submits to the will of God (swt)). Again, both verse and practice demonstrate that it is only a person's testimony and actions that reflect what they believe. This point of individual responsibility is also made in Qur'an verses that indicate that individuals are judged and their family and friends are of no benefit or aid on that day of judgement. God (swt) knows people and does NOT need testimony from relatives.

    Having said that, the bulk of the Qur'an is verifiably NOT directly from God (swt)... where you see 'He' or 'Allah' it is 2nd person. The correct word is 'inspired', or a message 'revealed'... it is indirect. For example: 4:163, 11:49, 12:102, 35:31, 42:13 indicate this. The Bible is the same way: the Gospel means 'good news' and in the bible it is a disciple of Christ (Muslims per the Qur'an ) testifying to what Jesus (pbuh) said, who said things from God (swt), some of which were about God (swt). The indirection is also clear (to me) in the Qur'an verses like 91:13 which say, "But the Messenger of Allah said to them: 'It is a She-camel of Allah!...'". Unless of course a person claims that Allah (swt) commanded the angel Jibreel (Gabriel) to reveal to the messenger Muhammud (pbuh) to place in the Qur'an what the messenger Muhammud (pbuh) had formerly said or would say?! Other places are stated 2nd person: 5:110 "Then will Allah say: '...'"

    So there remains this 'WE' in the Qur'an, which is mixed with 'HE'. If the two were separated Surat to Surat then one could argue that 'WE' is the voice of God. Not the case... a verse like 22:16 has it all mixed:

    Yusufali: Thus have We sent down Clear Signs; and verily Allah doth guide whom He will!
    Pickthal: Thus We reveal it as plain revelations, and verily Allah guideth whom He will.
    Shakir: And thus have We revealed it, being clear arguments, and because Allah guides whom He intends.
    Khalifa: We have thus revealed clear revelations herein, then GOD guides whoever wills (to be guided).

    My interpretation? A large number of Muslims conjecture that the Holy Spirit and the angel Gabriel are one and the same. 2:97 indicates the Angel Gabriel, 16:102 indicates the Holy Spirit brought the revelation. My opinion that is similar to concluding that the Angel Gabriel and prophet Muhammud (pbuh) are the same, or that the Holy Spirit and prophet Muhammud (pbuh) are the same. Not the case. It is my interpretation that the Surat with 'we' and 'he' is the voice of the angel Gabriel.

    As I said, nobody here (I think) knows which Island I was thinking of. Imagine a world where you did know what I think without my ever having to say it. I would be naked and vulnerable but that would change things entirely. Then anyone could speak for what I believe. It is noted in the Qur'an that every action or word is by God (swt)'s leave, but I am not referring to actions. I am referring to the scope that one's spirit can see. The spirit does not have eyes, and yet the spirit does see. That changes the situation entirely. We are each naked to the core.

    I consider this to be what Jesus (pbuh) describes in John 14-11: Believe me I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake. Or, John 14-17: Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
     
  20. cyberpi

    cyberpi Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    0
    I should add that I adhere to the belief that the Nicean creed is flat wrong... if there is a Trinity to me it is the values: Faith, Love, and Truth.... heart, soul, and mind... from the Qur'an: Faith and good deeds, patience and mercy, and of course Truth. Don't want to confuse anyone... no Trinitarian here.
     

Share This Page