How do you Know
Critic:-
You say the Quran is Revelation from the Angel Gabriel to the Prophet Muhammad. How do you know? Because the Quran says so? This is circular reasoning.
Comment:-
You think that the Bible is Revelation from God. How do you know? Is it because the Bible says so? This is circular reasoning. Which is even less believable because we know the NT consists of writings by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Paul.
In general new converts believe that the Quran is revelation from God because of the way the Quran affects them. This is like looking at a beautiful sunset or nature and recognizing that God created them.
Citic:-
Furthermore - the Quran is inconsistent on this point. Three contradictions in 2:97 and 16:101-103 Who brings the revelation from Allah to Muhammad? The ANGEL Gabriel [297], or the Holy Spirit [16:102]? The new revelation confirms the old [2:97] or substitutes it [16:101]?
Comment:-
There are no contradictions in the Quran. it is your understanding which is at fault. If a friend sends you a letter, is the letter from the friend or the Post Office or the Postman who brings it?
Critic:-
It says the Quran is PURE Arabic [16:103] but there are numerous foreign, non-Arabic words in it. And this is not pure Arabic - it has many grammatical errors. This is an interesting point when you consider that the Muslims claim it was written in Heaven.
Comment:-
It is inspired, not written in heaven in Arabic.
Who says it has grammatical errors?. Who made the grammar? English has many words that originally come from French or German or even India. They have become part of the language. Does this make them foreign?
Critic:-
Many different places and on different mediums like leaves and clay pots and much was lost Zaid did his best and so did Uthman but the fact is that the battle of Yammama saw many of those who had committed the verses to memory killed. Uthman new this and destroyed surviving manuscripts. What is the real Quran? No - one knows since there is little manuscript evidence.
Comment:-
The verses were memorized by many people. The Quran contains all the verses which were collected. No one has ever claimed that it contains anything other than what was revealed.
But nothing like that can be said about the NT.
Critic:-
Still further, there appear to have been only a few disputes among the Sahaba (Muhammad's "companions", i.e., his immediate followers) about the text of the Qur'an while Muhammad lived, unlike those which arose soon after his demise. All these factors explain the absence of an official codified text at the time of his death. The possible abrogation of existing passages, and the probable addition of further ayat (the Qur'an nowhere declares its own completeness or that no further revelations could be expected) prevented any attempt to achieve the result desired very soon thereafter by his closest companions. It also appears that new Quranic passages were coming with increasing frequency to Muhammad just before that fateful day, making the collection of the Qur'an into a single text at any time all the more improbable.
Comment:-
This applies more to Christianity. They did not even have an NT until centuries after the death of Jesus. There are still contradictions between the accepted Gospels and there are still numerous apocryphal gospels. And there are a great number of sects. Interpretation is, of course, different from Text. Muslims do disagree about interpretations but not about the text.
Critic:-
There is plenty of evidence that there was no revelation of God at all but rather copying from other sources. Muhammad synthesized Islam from several sources: Judaism, Christianity, Sabeanism, paganism, and his own changing personal theology. A quick review of the Quran shows that Muhammad was influenced by various Jewish sources.
Comment:-
This critic wishes to dictate what is revelation and what it should contain!! This is nonsense. The teachings of Jesus can be found in the OT and in numerous other Sources e.g. Hindu, Buddhist and so on. Are these, therefore, false? And not the Word of God? Truth is Truth no matter who it comes through. Its recognition requires insight and inspiration.
Critic:-
Initially, the Torah and the Qur'an basically agree on the narrative. > In verse 31, the two diverge. Then God sent down a raven, which dug the earth to show him how to bury the naked corpse of his brother. -- Sura 5:31. We find a striking parallel between the Quran and a Jewish book of myths and fables. (The "Pirke Rabbi Eliezer", according to the Encyclopaedia Judaica, is a pseudepigraphic work, attributed to Rabbi Eliezer b. Hyrcanus [first century], but written most probably in the 8th century. It was thought to be earlier than the Qur'an for a long time and some Christian books still reflect this assumption.......The similarity is obvious. The only difference is that the Qur'an says Cain did the burying, the Pirke says Adam did the burying.
Comment:-
This critic says it is a copy and then say it varies!!. Why? That is the question.
The stories in the Quran are meant to teach something. It is this truth which should be the focus of attention. We see a striking parallel between the story about Jesus' birth and crucifixion and the same in many other traditions. What do you make of that?
Critic:-
That is why We laid it down for the Israelites that whoever killed a human being, except as punishment for murder or other villainy in the land, shall be deemed as though he had killed all mankind; and that whoever saved a human life shall be deemed as though he had saved all mankind. -- Sura 5:32.
Comment:-
Is the Critic denying the truth of it?
If it is an important truth why should it not be in the Quran. As the Quran tells us that it confirms previous scriptures should it not illustrate this fact?
Critic:-
Initially, there appears to be no connection between verses 31 and 32. Why the life or death of one should be as the salvation or destruction of all >mankind in not made clear in the Qur'an.
Comment:-
What a naive reading!!!
This critic is, of course, demonstrating his own limited understanding or desire not to understand or desire to find fault.
These verses occur in a greater context. Why confine attention to verses 31 and 32 only. The words "For this cause We prescribed..." should have made the wiser reader ponder about the implications.
The story here tells us that Cain's sacrifice was not accepted because the intention behind it was impure - Cain was unrighteous. Abel's was accepted because he was righteous. This made Cain jealous and he increased his sin by killing Abel. But he did not bury the body. The Crow is a scavenger. It reminded Cain of his sin, but also showed him that he was ineffective in hiding his sin. The story is symbolic. It is about unrighteousness trying to kill righteousness. It is about two tendencies in the mind of man (Adam) and about two kinds of people in whom one or the other tendency is uppermost. Since man (Adam) has been created to serve God, this tendency to kill the righteous is a tendency to kill mankind.
It also sets an example which others follow and has further consequences which is symbolized by the crow. There are other implications which I leave others to meditate upon. These verses can well apply to this critic in that he also secretly wants to kill all Muslims and Islam.
Critic:-
When we turn to another Jewish record the Mishnah Sanhedrin, we find the link between the story and what follows:
We find it said in the case of Cain who murdered his brother, "The voice of thy brother's bloods crieth" (Gen. 4:10). It is not said here blood in the singular, but bloods in the plural, that is, his own blood and the blood of his seed. Man was created single in order to show that to him who kills a single individual it shall be reckoned that he has slain the whole race, but to him who preserves the life of a single individual it is counted that he hath preserved the whole race. Mishnah Sanhedrin, 4:5
Here is a passage from the Mishnah! The Mishnah is a Jewish commentary on the Torah. How did a Rabbi's commentary make its way into the Qur'an and be quoted as word from Allah? Simple, Muhammad had heard these teachings from the Jews, and repeated them later as he recited "revelation".
Comment:-
We see that the interpretation given by the Rabbi is too simplistic and the Quran improves upon it. Note that the descendants of the person killed does not constitute the whole of mankind. Note also that this Jewish story does not make an exception for killing murderers or those who make mischief in the land. They are not included in the purpose for which man was created.
Critic:-
Clearly Muhammad had no knowledge of the source of the theory set out in the Mishnah but, in hearing it related, simply set out the Rabbi's suppositions as the eternal decree of God! Just think, some Jewish Rabbi's thoughts now are comprised in the Qur'an!
Comment:-
The silliness of these remarks is now evident. These rather pathetic critics assume that the Quran can be interpreted by them at their naive level. I think that some of them do possess the intelligence to understand things if they make the necessary effort. But it is their prejudices which make them stupid.
----------<O>----------