I have given up on the Muslim community for this reason

[Neptin]

1. January '19

Recall in January my thread on Qur'an support for Geocentric or Flat earth model of the universe. My sole intention was not necessarily to cite the Qur'an as wrong, it was to draw attention to what I find the Qur'an actually states Vs what people say the Qur'an states. My finding on the Qur'an left me doubting the heliocentric model, and for once I decided to consider the flat fixed earth argument.

What this post is about is not necessarily on the Qur'an, but on Muslims' approach to Qur'an, how this approach breed so much negativity that I've given up on the community, whether the Qur'an alone or traditional.


2. How do Muslims approach the Qur'an?

They view the Qur'an as;

The literal, infallible and perfectly preserved word of God.

This approach to Islam is WRONG as I will show, but it is also very toxic because all forms of Muslim fanaticism and terrorism is predicated on this view of the Qur'an.


3. Let's see a few verses of Qur'an.

Qur'an 96.02 -  Createth man from alaq.
Qur'an 23: 12-14 - Verily We created man from a product of wet earth. Then placed him as a drop (of seed) in a safe lodging; Then fashioned We the drop a alaqa, then fashioned We the alaqa little lump, then fashioned We the little lump bones, then clothed the bones with flesh, and then produced it as another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of creators!

3. Alaqa meaning in Arabic

One of the stages of embryo or fetus is an 'alaqa' or 'alaq', according to Qur'an. Here are the meanings of 'alaqa' in Arabic; 'something that clings', 'blood clot', 'leeches'.

4. Meaning of Alaqa in Qur'an in Muslim history

All through Muslim history, 'blood clot' have been generally agreed as the meaning of 'alaqa' in relation to embryology in Qur'an. This is so because, blood or clot was generally taught in the 7th century as an early stage of embryo during gestation. All the earliest tafsir agree. You can see why majority of Qur'an translation translate the term as clot.

As we all know, the implication of this is that the Qur'an verse is wrong. Never is the embryo a clot. But, the Qur'an cannot be wrong, because it is the literal, infallible and preserved word of God.

5. Meaning of Alaqa in Qur'an at 21st century

So, in the 20th century, when it was proven that the embryo is never blood, some Qur'an translators and Muslim scholars began to reconsider alternative meaning for the word 'alaqa'. "Leeches, leech like clot, clinging substance, embryo" are all words that scholars and translators have now referred to alaqa.

6. What does Alaqa really mean in Qur'an?

Whether we believe Qur'an meant 'alaqa' as blood clot or not is beside the point. Recall, we have always agreed the Qur'an is clear, that it delivers its message with pin point precision in choice of word. The point here is that Qur'an uses a word that also mean 'blood clot' to describe an embryonic stage. This negates the infallibility of the text, and thus the text's divinity or preservation.

NB: Also, see Qur'an 86:5-7, where it seemingly states that sex fluids or gametes comes out from 'between the backbone and the ribs.' This is incorrect.


7. What is wrong in the Muslim community

My problem with the Muslim community is just how much these concerns with the Qur'an are either overlooked or concealed from the public, in fear of raising doubts, in order to preserve the view of Qur'an infallibility.

8. Consequence of proclaiming the Qur'an is infallible

What happens when we approach the Qur'an as the infallible and perfect? We're inadvertently supporting the fanatics and terrorists. We may not agree with their interpretation of the Qur'an, but we agree with them that the Qur'an is infallible. This is enough green light for them to apply what ever they understand as Qur'anic; amputating thieves, slavery, offensive jihad, jizya, persecuting Qur'an critics or blasphemers, gender inequality in testimonies and inheritance  etc.

Peace.

[Jane]

Hi I don't think you're alone. 

I believe in the Qur'an but I don't believe it's infallible and the true word of God, not the current version we have on earth. I think the real scripture (Torah, Injeel and Qur'an) are all with God which is what it means when it says in the Qur'an "We will surely preserve the Revelations" but the versions we have on earth are corrupted.

It's nothing but arrogance of Muslims to declare that earlier scriptures have been corrupted but say the Qur'an has not. We're not supposed to make distinction between the messengers so why argue that God Himself did by presrving the later scripture but not the earlier? 'Qur'an-Alone Muslims' or 'Qur'anists' need to be careful not to turn the Qur'an into another idol by considering it to be perfect. I was guilty of that for many years actually.

It's nowhere near perfect. The sura order has been changed messing up the flow. The sura headings and Bismillah appear to be additions. As do Suras 1, 113 and 114 as they are apparently Du'a prayers that were added in. There's significant cross-over between the Qur'an and the Zoroastrian scriptures that needs investigation IMO.

We know that Caliph Uthman created the Qur'an as we know it, changing the order and destroying what didn't fit with his version. Since he was murdered I think that's a sign from God that He was angry with that. I think the original Qur'an as memorised by Muhammad will never be known again unfortunately.

I study the Old Testament inc. the Psalms and the Qur'an (never the New Testament which is mostly pro-Roman propaganda IMO) and try and work out from them what God wants us to understand; plus whatever I can get from trying to be aware of God to try and work out how God wants us to live.

I would call myself a Monotheist not a Muslim. Islam is a way of life that is mostly idol worship IMO. It doesn't describe me.  I still like talking and debating with Muslims, Qur'an-Alone or Regular, from time to time (although traditionalists tire my patience pretty quick).

Maybe you could adopt a similar path?

[good logic]

Peace Jane.
Traditional Muslims do not follow Qoran. They claim they do, but they have other books more important to them like hadith books.
They only give lip service to Qoran.
As for the Qoran we have now ,one either looks at it deeper to study it  or gives it lip service and pretend to follow it like the Traditional Muslims or ditch it and not waste their time on it.

The real value of the true "Muslim" is their character and morals (Sirat Al Mustaqueem) and it does not depend on any other person or religion.. Following GOD Alone is givng up all other false relidgions, sects and bad /evil ways.

The bottom line is what is the message of Qoran about how should one lead their life here.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

[Wakas]

peace Neptin, all,

As has been said before many Muslims have not read Quran (in a language they understand) and in reality they follow Quran + a mix of other sources. Not to mention there is an issue of sincerity/bias/etc.

1) When someone considers The Quran infallible it should be appreciated by them that only the Arabic Quran could be claimed to be infallible, NOT their understanding of it. As soon as a reader reads a text they automatically interpret it in their own mind and take away a certain understanding..... which may or not be accurate.

2) Quran itself contains internal self-checking mechanisms one can apply to their understanding, guidelines on how to study it etc Discussed here: http://www.quran434.com/study-method.html
Most interpreters do not apply these, or at least certainly not consistently.

If you are advocating it should be preached to them that Quran is fallible and this would mitigate the damage of their wayward interpretations then I dont think that will work because if they accept your argument Quran is fallible they wouldn't bother following it. I think it is better to educate them on what Quran itself says in terms of the two points above.


Lastly, The Quran verses examples you cited are poor, and these so-called problem verses have been discussed in the past.


edit: word in red, meant to say fallible, not infallible

[huruf]

Hi I don't think you're alone. 



It's nothing but arrogance of Muslims to declare that earlier scriptures have been corrupted but say the Qur'an has not. We're not supposed to make distinction between the messengers so why argue that God Himself did by presrving the later scripture but not the earlier? 'Qur'an-Alone Muslims' or 'Qur'anists' need to be careful not to turn the Qur'an into another idol by considering it to be perfect. I was guilty of that for many years actually.

It is not  muslims that declare that it is the books themselves that say it. The bible says it is not revealed by God, thoush some parts of it may be.

As to contents, sure the Bible is way oer the Qur'an from the vey beginning just that part where God makes a male human and then after the fact realises that the male is alone. It seems He hadn't thought of it before, and for the convenience of the male, He creates de female from a rib and the female is bad, becuse she is the one that leds poor male into the fall, and that is why God's as a punishments makes that women give birth painfully...

Really sublime, way, way over the Qur'an. And that is just the benginning.

Salaam 

[Neptin]

Hi I don't think you're alone. 

I believe in the Qur'an but I don't believe it's infallible and the true word of God, not the current version we have on earth. I think the real scripture (Torah, Injeel and Qur'an) are all with God which is what it means when it says in the Qur'an "We will surely preserve the Revelations" but the versions we have on earth are corrupted.

It's nothing but arrogance of Muslims to declare that earlier scriptures have been corrupted but say the Qur'an has not. We're not supposed to make distinction between the messengers so why argue that God Himself did by presrving the later scripture but not the earlier? 'Qur'an-Alone Muslims' or 'Qur'anists' need to be careful not to turn the Qur'an into another idol by considering it to be perfect. I was guilty of that for many years actually.

It's nowhere near perfect. The sura order has been changed messing up the flow. The sura headings and Bismillah appear to be additions. As do Suras 1, 113 and 114 as they are apparently Du'a prayers that were added in. There's significant cross-over between the Qur'an and the Zoroastrian scriptures that needs investigation IMO.

We know that Caliph Uthman created the Qur'an as we know it, changing the order and destroying what didn't fit with his version. Since he was murdered I think that's a sign from God that He was angry with that. I think the original Qur'an as memorised by Muhammad will never be known again unfortunately.

I study the Old Testament inc. the Psalms and the Qur'an (never the New Testament which is mostly pro-Roman propaganda IMO) and try and work out from them what God wants us to understand; plus whatever I can get from trying to be aware of God to try and work out how God wants us to live.

I would call myself a Monotheist not a Muslim. Islam is a way of life that is mostly idol worship IMO. It doesn't describe me.  I still like talking and debating with Muslims, Qur'an-Alone or Regular, from time to time (although traditionalists tire my patience pretty quick).

Maybe you could adopt a similar path?

Thanks, I'd like the term 'monotheist', but I'd like to avoid 'identities' and focus on 'ideas' at this point. I feel the Christchurch mosque shooting and Sri Lankan Easter bombings is a warning to us all, that religious identities breed division, distrust and discrimination among us. We're divided enough on race, ethnicity, and nationality, we don't need to deepen this division with religion.

[spodacus]

Salam,

The only message that the Qur'an is trying to convey are three things:
1. Allah (The God) is One
2. There is a Warning of a Day that we will be judged by Allah.
3. Live your life in such a way to please Allah on that Day (by giving to charity, standing up for others, etc...)

As far as I can see the Qur'an is very consistent on the only message it was sent to deliver. No where does it contradict itself that there is only One God or that there is an upcoming Day of Judgement or that you should help others in need through sadaqa.

I fail to see how the meaning of "alaaq"  or whether earth is flat/round changes the main message of the Book? If you want answers to scientific questions reference a science book. If you want guidance on how to live your life in a less than hedonistic way then reference Qur'an.

Just my 2 cents.

[good logic]

Just to follow on from the statement that Uthman created Qoran, I find it odd that Uthman do not make such a claim in it. Rather the author/creator of Qoran says things like:

69:38
I swear by what you see.
69:39
And what you do not see.
69:40
This is the utterance of an honorable messenger.
69:41
Not the utterance of a poet; rarely do you believe.
69:42
Nor the utterance of a soothsayer; rarely do you take heed.
69:43
A revelation from the Lord of the universe.

  In fact Uthamn or any other human that dealt with Qoran have been told this:

69:44
Had he uttered any other teachings.
69:45
We would have punished him.
69:46
We would have stopped the revelations to him.
69:47
None of you could have helped him.
69:48
This is a reminder for the righteous.
69:49
We know; some of you are rejectors.
69:50
It is but sorrow for the disbelievers.
69:51
It is the absolute truth.
69:52
Therefore, you shall glorify the name of your Lord, Most Great.

A human created it indeed?!!!! Who?
GOD bless you all.
Peace.

[huruf]

The Qur'an does not need to prove anything of itself if you read it or hear it or remember it and it helps, that is your proof. If it does not, then discard it for that reason but there is no use in attempting to shuffle the fault on imagined shortcomings of Qur'an. It is flawless, by itself, not because of this history or that history or because of gossiing about this or that, supposedly hisotrical or not.

The Qur'an is the proof of itself. If it does not convince you , then discard it, but what is the use of bringing up against it flimsy an whimsical gossip about it.

Just as any other book justifies itself by its contents or fails by its contents, the gossip about a book do not make it better or worse. If somebody cannot get something of a particular book and some other prople can, the answer is obvious. the failure is not of the book.

Salaam 

[Jafar]

1. God alone or attitude of islam has nothing to do with any book (such as quran)
The evidence is within the quran itself it told stories of past people who are claimed as muslims but never read the quran.

2. It's true that some people has developed a syndrome of idolization of quran.
Yet it's a common pattern found within any human, it gives them a (false) sense of pride and formed a unique identity which can be used for bonding among them. A sort of criteria to be used to classify 'us' (believers) and 'them' (the unbelievers).

3. With this post; you're 'attacking' the idol within the lairs of it's idolators.
But I guess you know this already and already know what to expect too.. LOL
Yet as a social experiment, try posting the same thing in another group and you'll get the same response.
Try posting a statement that Bible is not infallible within Christian's forum, Torah is not infallible within Judaism forum or Liverpool FC is not the best football club in the world within Liverpool FC forum or Ali Jinnah is not infallible within Pakistani forum or Mao Zedong is not infallibe within Maoist forum or USA is not infallible within American nationalist forum and you'll get the same response.

4. Correlating the 'terrorist' with those who believe that quran (or any other things) as infallible is far fetched.
It's true that they share a common thing but it does not qualify the later to be equal to the before mentioned. Not all Liverpool FC fans are hooligans and not all Nazis / German Nationalist are murdering maniacs and not all white superiority are klux klux klan and not all Bible believers are Christians extremist.