# The Koran



## Hippo (Jan 23, 2009)

When talking to my Muslim friends the point they keep making over and over again is the lack of textual variants in the Koran. This is put down to immediate care being taken to ensure the purity of the text

Is the Koran textually pure or have their been variats which have been suppressed?


----------



## discipulo (Jan 23, 2009)

Mohamed couldn’t read or write, quite appalling isn’t it? so his followers were writing it after hearing his so called teachings.

There were some kind of consensus (I don’t know the history of it, just know that only the K in Arab is considered «inspired» ) on which texts to include, as there were many different versions and witnesses of M. messages.


----------



## PresbyDane (Jan 23, 2009)

It is even worse that he had so many gramatical errors in the stuff he did write that the had to change the grammer rules for arabic 
+ How can mohammad call himself (or at least the muslims call him) the profet to the world, when the biggest part of the world do not speak arabic, there is not a lot of meaning comming through then is there?


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Jan 23, 2009)

The Arabs had a history of memorization which explains the ability for the Koran to be learnt off by heart and then spread across the Muslim world _before_ being written down and different places and then being brought together and then found perfect. There is nothing divine about it. As a culture they had simply learnt to rely less on writing and more on oral tradition.

The whole Koran is poetry and has a metrical beat so it is not hard to remember. Without even wanting to I have the first surah 100% memorized and could repeat it back easily with no mistake. Someone who actually wanted to remember it then should have little problem.


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Jan 23, 2009)

Abd_Yesua_alMasih said:


> The Arabs had a history of memorization which explains the ability for the Koran to be learnt off by heart and then spread across the Muslim world _before_ being written down and different places and then being brought together and then found perfect. There is nothing divine about it. As a culture they had simply learnt to rely less on writing and more on oral tradition.
> 
> The whole Koran is poetry and has a metrical beat so it is not hard to remember. Without even wanting to I have the first surah 100% memorized and could repeat it back easily with no mistake. Someone who actually wanted to remember it then should have little problem.




Interesting. I wasn't aware of the metrical beat of the Q'uran.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Jan 23, 2009)

It is one of the claims behind the Koran being divinely inspired. Mohammed (or I suppose the Koran) challenges unbelievers to write something as beautiful as the Koran. The claim is that no man could make something so poetic and yet so deep and meaningful.


----------



## discipulo (Jan 23, 2009)

Abd_Yesua_alMasih said:


> It is one of the claims behind the Koran being divinely inspired. Mohammed (or I suppose the Koran) challenges unbelievers to write something as beautiful as the Koran. The claim is that no man could make something so poetic and yet so deep and meaningful.



But the Devil could...

Mohamaed claims the Archangel Gabriel visited him, but we know who he was! 

_But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed._ Galatians 1:8

_No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light._ 2 Corinthians 11:14


----------



## Guido's Brother (Jan 23, 2009)

Chad VanDixhoorn is fairly well-known today for his work on the Westminster Confession. But back in the day, Chad was a student at the University of Western Ontario and he wrote a series of papers on textual problems in the Qur'an. I happen to have them. If VanDixhoorn is right, the truth is that Quranic commentators have recorded "a great many variant readings." Some commentators even held that parts of the Qur'an were missing.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Jan 23, 2009)

Guido's Brother said:


> Chad VanDixhoorn is fairly well-known today for his work on the Westminster Confession. But back in the day, Chad was a student at the University of Western Ontario and he wrote a series of papers on textual problems in the Qur'an. I happen to have them. If VanDixhoorn is right, the truth is that Quranic commentators have recorded "a great many variant readings." Some commentators even held that parts of the Qur'an were missing.



Really? I have never heard of this. I would be interested in examples.


----------



## Guido's Brother (Jan 23, 2009)

Here are couple of relevant quotes and VanDixhoorn's sources:

"In fact, Ali, Abdullah, Ubbay, and Hudaifa _all_ held that parts of the Qur'an were missing, and the Mutazalite scholar, al Nazzam, accuses Abdullah of denying two Surahs that _he_ held to be part of the Qur'an."

There's a footnote to John Burton's The Collection of the Qur'an, 124, 130-131, 117 and 200. 

"Jeffrey's work is basically a catalogue of textual variations (comparing today's text with the oldest sources) from 15 primary codices, 13 secondary codices, and some unnamed codices. He sees this as the first step towards a critical text of the Qur'an (similar to the critical texts of the Bible). His work has not made Muslim apologists particularly happy, though Von Denffer acknowledges the usefulness for his work."

The reference there is to Arthur Jeffrey's The Qur'an as Scripture.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jan 24, 2009)

James White is studying deeply in these textual issues. Call his Radio show, details at http://www.aomin.org


----------



## Dieter Schneider (Jan 24, 2009)

For textual variations see 'The Origins of the Koran'. Also check 'Textual Criticism Of The Koran' and here.


----------



## CovenantalBaptist (Jan 24, 2009)

Guido's Brother said:


> But back in the day...



Brings back sweet memories of the old bookclub, Wes. Did you hear that Chad's now on our side of the pond again? I'm a bit out of contact, but it would be neat to do a reunion sometime this side of glory. 

For those who are interested, some of the results of Chad's work (as well as some of his friends) have been put online here: Reformed Internet Ministries with their resources on Islam here.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Jan 24, 2009)

I wonder if I should show my cousin this.

He wants to go study at an Islamic school in Egypt or Saudi Arabia.


----------



## PMBrooks (Jan 24, 2009)

I teach Islamic studies. I don't have time to give a long explanation but I wanted to give a summary answer real quick to the topic. 

First, there is debate about if Muhammad could actually read. He was a tradesman and very successful. Normally someone could not carry on business if they did not have at least basic skills in literacy. He might not have been a great writer, but he might have had basic skills. 

After the time of Abu Bakr, competing variations of the Koran were collected and burned. The leadership of the Islamic community "decided" to make one version of the Koran the official copy of the Koran. 

This is why there is not much textual criticism that can be done on the Koran as can be done on to the extent on biblical manuscripts.

However, there have been some studies that have analyzed even the "official" variations. I have not personally read them, but they might be interesting. 

PMB


----------



## Hippo (Jan 24, 2009)

PMBrooks said:


> After the time of Abu Bakr, competing variations of the Koran were collected and burned. The leadership of the Islamic community "decided" to make one version of the Koran the official copy of the Koran.



This is what all my Muslim friends deny and what I would like to find more about.

The tactic sure was succesful, it is a way of hiding any underlying problems.


----------

