Is the Qur'an a hoax or not?

Great Debates
1

Following on from the Who Killed Jesus? thread, I’ve decided to address this here to allow the debate to open up a little more.

However, before we actually move on to discuss whether or not Jesus did actually die on the cross, let’s first examine whether or not the Qur’an itself is considered as a reliable source as it claims to hold the answer. Just to help this discussion (and let’s please keep it at that) go smoothly, I’d like to start off with a list of basic assumptions to be kept in mind so that we narrow down the topic of discussion:
[list=1]
[li]There is a God, only one God, and this is the same God for Christians, Jews and Muslims with no distinction[/li][li]Jesus did exist as a real person, and did perform miricles, and was sent by God to the people (the issue of whether or not he referred to himself as the Son of God is not relevant)[/li][li]All the prophets sent before Jesus were real, did perform miricles and bring about prophecies, and were sent by God[/li][/list=1]
OK, now I believe the Qur’an itself to be a miricle sent down by Allah/God for the following reasons (and these are facts, not my own personal opinion):
[ul]
[li]It’s the only book to exist that is completely unaltered and remains ‘protected’ in it’s original form[/li][li]As a backup mechanism for it’s protection the original language is still in everyday use, and there are members who learn the whole thing by heart (they’re called Hafiz)[/li][li]The language of the Qur’an is such that it cannot (and indeed has not) been copied, altered or changed in anyway - which is another backup mechanism. There are challenges in the Qur’an inviting people to alter it without it being picked up, no-one has yet succeeded in writing a single verse[/li][li]The Qur’an itself contains information that was not available at the time, such as an accurate description of human development within the womb which has been endorsed by top US Scientists as being accurate. Such information was not scientifically available until centuries after the Qur’an was revealed[/li][/ul]
These things suggest to me that the Qur’an is not just an ordinary book, and special attention needs to be paid when considering it.

There are several other things to consider also. One is the fact that Islam has not changed as the Qur’an has not changed. This shows strength and security in Muslim beliefs that will not be changed one day just to suit the moment. I’ll mention the incident which happened in the UK only a few years ago where the Church of England expressely forbade homosexuals to congregate, and then one day as numbers fell they changed their mind and said it was OK for homosexual behaviour. Who is in authority to make such a decision? No-one but a man, a mere man who is NOT the messenger of God, so how could this person decide whether or not to change a faith? (Note: I’ve personally got nothing against homosexuals, I’m merely talking from a religious POV, so please do not take any offence)

The Church of England has also resorted to advertising, to name one such advert they placed a picture of Jesus on a cross with the slogan “Body Piercing? Jesus had his done 2000 years ago” underneath to appeal to the teenage ‘market’. What sort of a religion needs to “advertise” for supporters. Sure, knowledge of said religion needs to be made, but blatent billboard advertising I feel is a step in the wrong direction.

And also you get Christian Monks and Nuns who live a life of celebacy because they believe they are ‘married’ to God. Surely Christians believe (along with Jews and Muslims) God created Adam and Eve to compliment each other, how can anyone in their right mind think that they could abstain from that and choose God as a suitable life-long partner. God is above these things, he is to be worshipped and feared, not married!

Christianity has made several contradictions along the line, as opposed to Islam which has stuck steadfast to how it always was and will not change its ways to attract more muslims.

Let’s also consider the historical view. First of all you get the Jews who believe God created Adam and Eve, Noah built an Arc and Moses spoke to God and delivered the Jews from Egypt. Christians believe in all this also, AND they believe in Jesus too which the Jews do not! Why is this? Surely if Jesus was indeed sent by God (his birth itself was a miricle) and came along with proof and could perform miricles which no-one else could, I fail to see the problem in having faith and believing him when he said Christianity is the way after Judaism began to crumble!

Why not take it one step further. If you can believe that, why not believe that God sent Mohammad to preach about Islam when Christianity began to falter. After all, there is a very small difference between Islam and Christianity, but there are crucial differences. And surely if the Christians believe it happened once (when Christianity came to replace Judaism), surely it could also have happened to them which is what Islam was.

After all, why was Christianity sent in the first place? Was it a replacement for Judaism, or a completely separate religion? If it was indeed to replace Judaism (or to correct the flaws), then why is the same not possible with Islam - which still carries continuing proof which is the Qur’an!

At the end of the day, God has not sent down 3 separate religions, he’s sent the same one with is basic monotheism (ok, there were differences like the muslims being restrained from eating pork, and praying 5 times a day, but the basic theme was the same). The only reason 3 exist today is because man has not listened to God’s messengers and kept the old ways which they’ve also been changing along the way. Just concentrating on Christianity I’ve already pointed out the changes made simply to follow the times. It seems the Church is shifting it’s position to accomodate society when it should be the other way around. And the bible itself, there’s so many different versions now, who knows what the original said. How many of you can honestly say you’ve read your religious book in it’s original form. Many, if not all, Muslims can say they have!

This is the strength of Islam which it derives from the Qur’an. It has not changed and is still available in it’s original form for scrutiny and inspection. This is a continuing miricle left behind by Mohammad as clear proof that he is authentic.

Now, what I would prefer, if anyone feels like making any comments, is that comments are backed up with proof or intelligent reasoning or basis, rather than just saying “No it’s not!” with no furthur explanation.

2

I have no information on the fourth item, though it and the third sound like bollocks to me. But by the standards set forth in the first two points are equally applicable to the Book of Mormon, and probably any number of other religious sects. In other words, the Qur’an is nothing special.

3

I realize that this is a matter of faith for you, and as such, is not neccesarily debatable by reason, but I would argue that

is incorrect. Islam has divided a great deal over the years, as different groups have interpeted the Qur’an differently, and debated which Hadiths should be considered authentic. Who was the first Caliph? Abu Bakr al-Siddiq or 'Ali ibn Abi Talib? Are the gates of Ijtihad (or 'Aql, if you prefer) open or closed? Are the Wahabis right? The Sufi?

4

**

Why would you make this assumption? This is not neccesarily true. Christians (for the most part) believe in a triune God (made of three parts). This is a belief not shared by Judaism and Islam.
Yes, I know that some Christians will disagree with me, but, at some level, you do believe that God is composed of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Such a belief is outside Judaism and, I would imagine, outside Islam as well)

**

Why do you make this assumption? Judaism does not hold that Jesus performed miracles and was not a prophet.

**

Why do you assume this? Who says all prophets perform miracles?

**
Dr. Suess’s The Cat in the Hat exists in it’s original form, completely unaltered and is protected in it’s current form by copyright law. Jews believe the Torah exists in it’s original form. Even if the Qur’an does exist in it’s original form, what does that prove? It simply proves that people were careful when copying.

**

There are people who know many books by heart. There are people who know the Torah, Mishna, Talmud and other Jewish books by heart. In addition, the language of the Torah (Hebrew) is still in common use today. Still doesn’t prove that they were God given.

**

You’ll have to provide more detail on this. How is this done?

**

How accurate? I’m sure the Qur’an doesn’t mention every detail of development or else it would be larger than medical libraries devoted to the subject of neonatology.

In any event, even if correct, just because the Qur’an is correct about human fetal development, doesn’t mean it’s correct about anything else.

**

The same could be said for many other religions and practices. The Catholic church has not changed as you claim the CofE has. Orthodox Jews still keep the same mitzvos they have kept for thousands of years.

**

Irrelevant to the truthfulness (or lack thereof) of the Qur’an. Instead of bashing other religions, provide positive proofs to your own.

**

Irrelevant to the truthfulness (or lack thereof) of the Qur’an. Instead of bashing other religions, provide positive proofs to your own.

**

And you are stating as fact that no other religion has not changed? And your proofs for that are…

**

Well, Jews believe that Noah built an ark, but otherwise you got it right so far.

**

You’re assuming that Judaism began to crumble? I must have been asleep that day…

**

The same argument applies to you as applied to the Jews in Jesus’ day. What proof is there that God sent Mohammad? Why do you assume that if you accept the story of Jesus as written that you must, as the next logical step, assume that Mohammed’s story is true. It is perfectly logical to say that Jesus’ story is correct and that God did not send Mohammed.

**

Small differences? I’d say that the divinity of Jesus is a HUGE difference.

**

Not if you believe that Jesus is the messiah and the purpose of all creation. If so, why would you need a Mohammed to come along later?

**

That depends. Who are you asking? A Christian or a Jew? And from history it is plainly clear that Christianity did not replace Judaism as the latter is still very much alive and with us today, 2000 years later.

**

Well, if you hold that Jesus was God (and hence flawless by definition) and his ministry was flawless, why would you need a later Mohammad?

**

Your opinion.

**

How many versions of the Torah are there out there? How about The Cat in the Hat?

Zev Steinhardt

5

One more thing, Jam Shady…

Simply stating this is not enough. What does the Qur’an state about fetal development? Exactly. And then we can decide if the information was unavailable in Mohammad’s time. After all, it’s not like in Mohammad’s time people had never seen a fetus before…

Zev Steinhardt

6

[QUOTE]
[ul][li]It’s the only book to exist that is completely unaltered and remains ‘protected’ in it’s original form [/li]
[li]As a backup mechanism for it’s protection the original language is still in everyday use, and there are members who learn the whole thing by heart (they’re called Hafiz) [/li]
[li]The language of the Qur’an is such that it cannot (and indeed has not) been copied, altered or changed in anyway - which is another backup mechanism. There are challenges in the Qur’an inviting people to alter it without it being picked up, no-one has yet succeeded in writing a single verse [/li]
[li]The Qur’an itself contains information that was not available at the time, such as an accurate description of human development within the womb which has been endorsed by top US Scientists as being accurate. Such information was not scientifically available until centuries after the Qur’an was revealed[/ul] [/li][/QUOTE]
Your first and third points are, in fact, not accurate. Your second point is no more (and possibly less) than the Masoretes and their descendants can claim regarding the Hebrew text of the Jewish Scriptures.

Islam is about where Chrsitianity was around 1850 (give or take a bit) regarding the provenance of its holiest book. There are a number of scholars within Islam who are aware that the traditions regarding how the Qur’an was compiled are not wholly consistent and there is a growing awareness that the methods used in the early Caliphate to organize the Suras into the compilation we have, today, can be examined, even if one chooses to not challenge them.

As Christianity reacted with the Fundamentalist movement (with its insistance on inerrancy and literalness) to the increased examination of Scripture that evolved into the documentary hypothesis regarding the Torah/Pentateuch and similar re-evaluations of the Prophets, the Writings, and the New Testament, so factions within Islam have reacted to an examination the origins of the Qur’an with a hard line insistence that the Qur’an was written once and has been preserved infallibly without change or error.

Unfortunately, there is a historical record awaiting examination (portions of which have been published) that indicates that the “purity” of the compilation and handing down of the Qur’an are part of the mythological process of establishing Islam rather than a simple recording of events.

I am NOT challenging the quality of the Qur’an or claiming that Mohammed or his followers “just made it up.” There is nothing to have prevented God/Allah from having inspired the work. (For example, without photocopiers or even a printing press, it would not have been outside the realm of possibility that Mohammed recorded the same messages in slightly different words for different groups at different times and the redaction could have been no worse than the Allah-inspired selection of the best example of each Sura.) However, there is ample information that more than one example of many Suras did exist, so the idea that it was all written directly from God’s voice to the Prophet’s pen is simply historically inaccurate.
Regarding your fourth point, you would need to explain exactly what is described that “could not” have been known. The ancients had a surprising amount of knowledge that did not always translate well into the European tradition.

7

Excuse me, but since when are “unchanging” and “strong” synonymous?

8

Bless you, Zev.

To summarize then - faith is faith.
You believe that your assertions in your OP are true. You are welcome to your beliefs, and I do not begrudge you them, any more than I begrudge Zev for his beliefs.
But your beliefs are not evidence that the facts you believe are actually correct.
Don’t attempt to use logic to buttress your beliefs. It’s impossible - any logical argument for the correctness of a particular religion is necessarily mandated upon unprovable assumptions. Not necessarily right or wrong, simply unprovable.

BTW,

appears not to be the case.
http://www.uweb.ucsb.edu/~leem/Files/Qurantheories.html

Sua

9

Zev! You’ve found us out! We are the secret Church of the Holy Kitty, and Dr. Suess is our prophet. Our Holy Book is neverchanging and perfect, all praise to the Holy Copyright Laws of the United States.

10

And just who are these (ahem) “top US Scientists?”

11

Well, Jam…sounds like it’s time for some reconsideration!

As for discussions that try to “prove” a religion is true based on a few nuggets of info which have been proptly stripped by the collective genius of the teeming millions…let this be an example.
As for what I personally consider more legitamate evidence for a book, oh let’s say, the Bible, I look at books written by staunch atheists, agnostics, etc. who - now here’s the catch - actually took a few weeks to READ the book they spend months or years denouncing and realize there is something there, something that transcends human understanding and is worthy of their faith.

Read Josh McDowell’s book for free. More Than A Carpenter

12

The koran is as silly and irrelevent to the modern world as Joseph Smith’s writings.

13

monty2_2001, meet Mr. Kettle.

The crux of the posts criticizing Jam’s OP is that he posits belief as fact.

So why the hell are you positing your beliefs as fact?
And at least Jam made an argument. All you give us is a cursory, conclusory statement. A pretty offensive one to a whole mess of Dopers, as well.

Sua

14

From “Joseph Smith’s writings”

[quote]
[list][li](2 Ne 2:25) And men are, that they might have joy.(Alma 41:10) Behold, I say unto you, wickedness never was happiness.[/li][/quote]

From the Noble Qur’an

Looks extremely relevant to this modern-world dweller and not a bit silly at all.

15

Non-silly, relevant version of my posting above:

From “Joseph Smith’s writings”:

[quote]
[ul][li](2 Ne 2:25) And men are, that they might have joy.(Alma 41:10) Behold, I say unto you, wickedness never was happiness.[/ul][/li][/quote]

From the Noble Qur’an:

Looks extremely relevant to this modern-world dweller and not a bit silly at all.

16

Everyone else has already done an admirable job addressing the shortcomings of Jam Shady’s arguments, so I won’t bother there.

I’ll just note how tickled I am ( in an odd way ) to see Muslim witnessing on the board. Never let it be said this isn’t an equal opportunity community. Now where are those proselytizing Buddhists? Gotta be one around here somewhere… :wink:

  • Tamerlane
17

Not exactly proselytizing, but does this cheer you up, Tamerlane?

18

Wait a minute, I’m confused. Does one have to sound like an idiot to join this thread or not?

Idiot version first: I am religious (true). I have studied the Bible, the Qur’an and the Book of Mormon (true). I have figured out the ultimate truth among the three of them, and I’m happy to share which I picked (true). Also, in my extensive studies at my local church/temple/mosque I learned all the bizarre and (on the face of it) unbelievable statements other religions have made about themselves. Also, I am utterly insensitive to the feelings of millions of people who don’t happen to be brought up in the same tradition as mine.

Oh, shoot. I guess I gave away the punchline.

Non-idiot version: spend some time worshiping with somebody outside your faith, and then come back to this forum and claim their faith is wholly based on a corrupt text. I’d be interested.

19

Monty: Hey, I did miss that one. Interesting thread, pity it didn’t continue for a bit longer. Thanks :).

  • Tamerlane
20

Wouldn’t it be easier to call the Bible a hoax and piss off three religious groups in one go? :smiley: