Merged What the quran really says.

[Scorpion]

It very much is your agenda. The koran has been subject to plenty of critique up to and including the bloody murder of critics. And so has the bible.

You seem to be unaware that the critiques you offer apply equally to all the abrahamic religions and have been done to death so often that it is rather boring.

I have not seen much criticism of the Quran over past centuries. There is one book entitled ' the original sources of the Qur'an ' by William Tisdall.
I actually just got a copy of it in paperback, but I have read some of it before because it is available, free to read on the internet.

I am fully aware there is a direct correlation between the Quran and the bible.

It is my argument that Muhammad stole most of his material from the bible because it occurred to him he could scare people into following him by pretending to get a message from God.

The bible is obviously full of trash, but I am not bothered about that and I do not intend to study the bible to find flaws in it because it has been done by experts.

 

[Scorpion]

Super. What is your opinion of the barbarous scumbaggery as set forth in the bible?

Spiritualist teachings are that the bible is an ancient book largely full of myths, and there is no devil and there is no hellfire. I have heard mediums In trance say these things,and I accept these modern revelations over the texts of the bible.

 

[Scorpion]

In the following verse Muhammad reveals that people of his time thought someone was teaching him foreign texts. Ha! I had come to that conclusion myself, Just from reading the fourteen hundred year old texts.

Quran 16.103. We know indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him." The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.

 

[Scorpion]

Muhammad also says the Holy Spirit has brought the revelations, but he must have been refering to the Angel Gabriel, because he says at sura 2.97 it was he who revealed the quran to his heart. So Muhammad did not understand the bible references to the holy spirit.

16.101. When We substitute one revelation for another,- and Allah knows best what He reveals (in stages),- they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them know not.

16.102. Say, the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation from thy Lord in Truth, in order to strengthen those who believe, and as a Guide and Glad Tidings to Muslims.

 

[Scorpion]

The quran states quite clearly that God is one, and it is a blasphemy to say Jesus is the son of God, at sura 5.72 and it is a blasphemy to say God is part of a trinity. at sura 5.73.

Sura 5.72 They do blaspheme who say: "Allah is Christ the son of Mary"

Sura 5.73 They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no God except One God.

But the bible says you may be forgiven for blasphemy against Jesus, but to deny the Holy Ghost will not be forgiven. Therefore if the bible is right then Muhammad was an unforgivable blasphemer.
Only one book can be right, and there is no room for adjustment here. So it is quite clear that the quran does not confirm all the previous messages, as it claims to do at sura 10.37

Sura 10.37 This quran is not such as can be produced by other than Allah; on the contrary it is a confirmation of revelations that went before it, and a fuller explanation.


It is clear where Muhammad got the idea of claiming he received the quran from the angel Gabriel in the bible, as the angel is sent to Zacharias to tell him of the coming of John the baptist at Luke 1.11 to 1.20 The angel Gabriel also visited Mary to tell her about Jesus at Luke 1.27

But the bible states that it was the Holy Ghost that spoke through Jesus, and later the through the disciples, so the angel Gabriel was not required to tell the word of God, as God himself in the form of the holy Ghost speaks with the mouth of his true messengers.
Therefore what doubt can there be that Muhammad invented a lie about God, and said he was told what was written on a tablet in heaven, and he remembered the message and passed it on to his followers. There can be no clearer indictment of Muhammad as a false prophet than the denial of the trinity, and the power of the holy spirit to speak through a true messenger.
Muhammad could not speak without thinking about his words, as he might contradict himself or make errors. Which of course, he did do anyway. But he gave himself time to go away and think up his next statement by claiming he had to get the message from Gabriel.


The following are the bible texts that state denying the Holy Ghost is an unforgivable sin, but denying Jesus is not.

Matthew:12:31: Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

Matthew:12:32: And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

Matthew:3:29: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:

Luke:12:10: And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.


These are some more verses that explain the concept that the Holy Ghost is God within us. which is the message Muhammad denies, and for which there is no forgiveness.

1Co:6:19: What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

1Co:12:3: Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

1Jo:5:7: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.


The only conclusion anyone can really draw from this complete contradiction between the message of the New Testament, that the Holy Ghost enters true prophets, and God speaks through them, and the message of the quran that Muhammad claims he received as dictation from the angel Gabriel.
Is that Muhammad has committed the unforgivable blasphemy by denying The holy ghost and that Jesus was a part of God, and as a consequence denying the concept that God is within us all.

 

[Craig B]

Is that Muhammad has committed the unforgivable blasphemy by denying The holy ghost and that Jesus was a part of God, and as a consequence denying the concept that God is within us all.

So Muhammad believed rubbish about various things, and you believe rubbish about various things, some the same rubbish and some different rubbish from what Muhammad believed.

The non believer doesn't care about these differences. Why refute the Quran by quoting from the NT? Why refute one unevidenced dogma by citing another unevidenced dogma? Take your dogmas to some fundie bible thumper blog, where they will be more appreciated.

 

[Scorpion]

So Muhammad believed rubbish about various things, and you believe rubbish about various things, some the same rubbish and some different rubbish from what Muhammad believed.

The non believer doesn't care about these differences. Why refute the Quran by quoting from the NT? Why refute one unevidenced dogma by citing another unevidenced dogma? Take your dogmas to some fundie bible thumper blog, where they will be more appreciated.

The sub title of this part of the forum is 'religion and philosophy'.

Therefore I am in the right place, and if you don't want to discuss religion maybe it is you that should take yourself elsewhere.

 

[Peregrinus]

The sub title of this part of the forum is 'religion and philosophy'.

Therefore I am in the right place, and if you don't want to discuss religion maybe it is you that should take yourself elsewhere.

Making unevidenced claims is not "discussing," it is making unevidenced claims, more commonly known as proselytizing. And, as noted above, using unevidenced claims to support/deny other unevidenced claims boils down to a waste of your time, our time, and bandwidth.

 

[Scorpion]

Here are more blood thirsty and contradictory verses from sura 8.
Verse 8.65 says believers can defeat odds of ten to one. But in the next verse he thinks the better of it, and makes the odds two to one.

8.65 O Apostle! rouse the Believers to the fight. If there are twenty amongst you, patient and persevering, they will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, they will vanquish a thousand of the Unbelievers: for these are a people without understanding.

8.66 For the present, God hath lightened your (task), for He knoweth that there is a weak spot in you: But (even so), if there are a hundred of you, patient and persevering, they will vanquish two hundred, and if a thousand, they will vanquish two thousand, with the leave of God: for God is with those who patiently persevere.

Then in the next verse Muhammad says he will not take prisoners until he has subdued the land. This presumably means captives will be killed.

8.67 It is not fitting for an apostle that he should have prisoners of war until he hath thoroughly subdued the land. Ye look for the temporal goods of this world; but God looketh to the Hereafter: And God is Exalted in might, Wise.

 

[Scorpion]

I saw an article by a Professor Armstrong who is supposed to work for Nasa, stating that Iron could not have been formed on Earth as it requires to much energy to make Iron atoms. So when the quran says that Iron was sent down by Allah, at sura 57.25 this is evidence the quran is from God.
But every cosmologist knows that Iron atoms were formed in the first stars, and released into space when they went super nova. So all the heavy atoms like Iron were formed in stars and they gathered together in orbit around the sun and formed the earth. So when the quran says Iron was sent down by Allah, it is mistaken.

In fact it is common parlance in the quran to say that Allah sent stuff down from heaven and the phrase, Sent down, appears 42 times in the knoble quran.

At sura 39.6 the quran states that he sent down eight head of cattle in pairs.


There is also the matter of Allah sending down Manna and Quails, sura 2.57

More importantly the quran states Allah sent down a table of food.
Sura 5.112 to sura 5.115 tells of a story that God sent down a table of food for Jesus and the disciples. But this story appears nowhere in Christian doctrine, and it is assumed to be a miss interpretation by Muhammad, of the meaning of the last supper. As described in the bible at the Acts of the Apostles. Chapter 10.9 to 10.16

 

[Craig B]

I saw an article by a Professor Armstrong who is supposed to work for Nasa, stating that Iron could not have been formed on Earth as it requires to much energy to make Iron atoms. So when the quran says that Iron was sent down by Allah, at sura 57.25 this is evidence the quran is from God.

Lumps of iron do fall from the sky very frequently, in the form of iron meteorites. Of course these don't come from God; they have a natural origin.

In the same way as the Quran, the Bible contains accounts of miracles and things sent by God, and these are equally false. Miracles consist of events that are not understood by the people who observe them, like a lump of iron falling out of the sky. But we now do understand that phenomenon.

If the Quran is mistaken about manna falling from the sky, is not the Torah, from which Muhammad pilfered the story, equally mistaken? Or are you saying that a ridiculous story is false when it appears in one holy book, but true when it appears in another?

 

[Scorpion]

Lumps of iron do fall from the sky very frequently, in the form of iron meteorites. Of course these don't come from God; they have a natural origin.

I assumed the bulk of the iron in the earth was part of the earths formation, and only a small amount comes from meteorites.

If the Quran is mistaken about manna falling from the sky, is not the Torah, from which Muhammad pilfered the story, equally mistaken? Or are you saying that a ridiculous story is false when it appears in one holy book, but true when it appears in another?

No I am saying the bible is wrong, and so is the Quran.

My argument is largely that Muhammad plagiarised the bible and quotes it as factual when the bible stories are largely myths. I am thinking of the parting of the red sea, and Jonah and the whale, and Noah's ark, all of which are mentioned in the Quran as history. When in reality they are only myths.

I am saying the bible is largely bunk and the Quran is stolen bunk.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Do you think that 'spiritualists' and 'mediums' are a more reliable source than the Quran or Bible?

What about Hindu texts? where do they fit in?

 

[Scorpion]

Do you think that 'spiritualists' and 'mediums' are a more reliable source than the Quran or Bible?

What about Hindu texts? where do they fit in?

Yes. I tend to think some spiritualist trance mediums are allowing spirits to speak through them, and the spirits of the departed are in a better position than us to know what is true.

I have some respect for the Upanishads as they are probably inspired, even though they pre date the bible.

Spiritualism confirms some of the teachings of the Hindus, such as reincarnation and karma, but it does not pay much regard to the many Gods.
Spiritualist teaching say that we do not reincarnate as animals, nor do animals become humans. Each species is evolving in its own right.

 

[quadraginta]

Just resurrecting this thread to see if it has nay more life in it.

An apt description.

Shame it was by accident.

 

[Craig B]

I assumed the bulk of the iron in the earth was part of the earths formation, and only a small amount comes from meteorites.

You're right. However, the iron in the earth is combined with other elements, and is not visible as pure iron, but normally as unimpressive red powder.

When you see a lump of pure iron, unless man made, it has fallen from the sky. So "God sent it" to us. The first iron to be used as implements was probably meteoritic in origin. A knife blade of meteoritic iron has been found in an Egyptian tomb, made at a time before smelting of iron ore had been invented. Muhammad's account makes sense, not as a gift from God, but as observation of a natural phenomenon, not understood at the time.

No I am saying the bible is wrong, and so is the Quran.

My argument is largely that Muhammad plagiarised the bible and quotes it as factual when the bible stories are largely myths. I am thinking of the parting of the red sea, and Jonah and the whale, and Noah's ark, all of which are mentioned in the Quran as history. When in reality they are only myths.

I am saying the bible is largely bunk and the Quran is stolen bunk.

Agreed.

 

[Thor 2]

So Muhammad believed rubbish about various things, and you believe rubbish about various things, some the same rubbish and some different rubbish from what Muhammad believed.

The non believer doesn't care about these differences. Why refute the Quran by quoting from the NT? Why refute one unevidenced dogma by citing another unevidenced dogma? Take your dogmas to some fundie bible thumper blog, where they will be more appreciated.

I don't know. I quite like to see these attempts by the followers of one kind of woo trying to discredit another kind of woo. The religious don't have a good track record of showing tolerance for each other as we all know.

Mind you I did see a show once where spokesmen for Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, and Hinduism were having a jolly gathering, and were all over each other with gushing statements, expressing tolerance of each others set of beliefs. The general consensus seemed to be that all religion was good and somehow wholesome.

Did experience a slight nausea when I saw this to be honest, although I must admit this kind of tolerance is heartening to see.

 

[quadraginta]

I don't know. I quite like to see these attempts by the followers of one kind of woo trying to discredit another kind of woo. The religious don't have a good track record of showing tolerance for each other as we all know.

Mind you I did see a show once where spokesmen for Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, and Hinduism were having a jolly gathering, and were all over each other with gushing statements, expressing tolerance of each others set of beliefs. The general consensus seemed to be that all religion was good and somehow wholesome.

Did experience a slight nausea when I saw this to be honest, although I must admit this kind of tolerance is heartening to see.

 

[Craig B]

I don't know. I quite like to see these attempts by the followers of one kind of woo trying to discredit another kind of woo. The religious don't have a good track record of showing tolerance for each other as we all know.

Mind you I did see a show once where spokesmen for Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, and Hinduism were having a jolly gathering, and were all over each other with gushing statements, expressing tolerance of each others set of beliefs. The general consensus seemed to be that all religion was good and somehow wholesome.

Did experience a slight nausea when I saw this to be honest, although I must admit this kind of tolerance is heartening to see.

This is heartening I suppose, because it's better than homicidal maniacs burning one another for heresy.

It reflects the prime oddity of religion. The defining characteristics of any religion are its factual beliefs, which differ from one religion to another (is Jesus a god or a prophet of God?) while the things they claim to value most are the moral precepts, which are in general much the same across the religious spectrum (love your neighbour is good stuff).

 

[abaddon]

I have not seen much criticism of the Quran over past centuries. There is one book entitled ' the original sources of the Qur'an ' by William Tisdall.
I actually just got a copy of it in paperback, but I have read some of it before because it is available, free to read on the internet.

I am fully aware there is a direct correlation between the Quran and the bible.

It is my argument that Muhammad stole most of his material from the bible because it occurred to him he could scare people into following him by pretending to get a message from God.

The bible is obviously full of trash, but I am not bothered about that and I do not intend to study the bible to find flaws in it because it has been done by experts.

Oh really? We have an islamist to hand posting islamist crap. I am posting against him and you are not. Odd that.

Why is that. Surely this is your chance, After all this guy is a mad islamist. But OK, your are afraid. Sure I can understand why you might chicken out, WT actual F? You have the opportunity to make your case to an actual islamic wingnut and you are afraid to even open your beak?

Credibility is not a boomerang. Once you chuck it away, it is not returning.