The Accuracy of the Quran

[CamilleBonparte]

If the Quran were the true word of God, then surely it would not be mistaken about what Christians believe in? I give you the following verses from the Quran (taken from http://www.submission.org/suras/sura5.html) :

[5:73] Pagans indeed are those who say that GOD is a third of a trinity. There is no god except the one god. Unless they refrain from saying this, those who disbelieve among them will incur a painful retribution.
[5:74] Would they not repent to GOD, and ask His forgiveness? GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.
[5:75] The Messiah, son of Mary, is no more than a messenger like the messengers before him, and his mother was a saint. Both of them used to eat the food. Note how we explain the revelations for them, and note how they still deviate!

[6:101] The Initiator of the heavens and the earth. How can He have a son, when He never had a mate? He created all things, and He is fully aware of all things.

A few problems here.

1. Christians do not believe that God is a third of a trinity, nor that there are other gods beside the one God.

2. Christians don't believe that Mary is/was a God. Even the Catholic Church officially states that Mary is not a divine being.

3. Of what relevance is it that Mary ate food? Unless the Quran is asserting that Christians hold Mary to be divine, thus requiring no sustenance. As I said, not the case.

4. 6:101 asks how God can have a son when he had no mate. This implies that Christians believe that God mated with Mary and Jesus was begotten that way. Obviously not the Christian belief.

So again I have to ask the question: How can the Quran be the true word of God when it fails to properly represent what the Christians it attempts to refute, believe in? There's no other way to interpret this than as someone writing about things that they have little knowledge of, surely.

Like the last verse I quoted there says, "He is fully aware of all things". You'd think he'd be aware of what the people he is criticizing believe in.

[Squiggle]

I've wondered for a while how Muslims can possibly defend the Quran under any serious scrutiny. Hopefully there are some responses in that regard.

[Viking Prince]

It is a matter of belief. The followers of Islam believe it to be the revealed word of God. That does not mean that the human understanding and writing of the revealed words is perfect or complete. It is still for Islam the true word of God. I am Christain and Lutheran and I have other beliefs of what constitutes to me the true word of God. Yet, I have no interest in claiming that the Quran is not a true word of God.

[Squiggle]

It is a matter of belief. The followers of Islam believe it to be the revealed word of God. That does not mean that the human understanding and writing of the revealed words is perfect or complete. It is still for Islam the true word of God. I am Christain and Lutheran and I have other beliefs of what constitutes to me the true word of God. Yet, I have no interest in claiming that the Quran is not a true word of God.

You make that claim every time you affirm your belief in Christianity? Nor is the tautology, Muslims believe the Quran because they believe the Quran really an answer as to weather they should believe the Quran, especially in light of these potential inaccuracies.

[Biggreenfellow]

1. Christians do not believe that God is a third of a trinity, nor that there are other gods beside the one God.

2. Christians don't believe that Mary is/was a God. Even the Catholic Church officially states that Mary is not a divine being.

3. Of what relevance is it that Mary ate food? Unless the Quran is asserting that Christians hold Mary to be divine, thus requiring no sustenance. As I said, not the case.

4. 6:101 asks how God can have a son when he had no mate. This implies that Christians believe that God mated with Mary and Jesus was begotten that way. Obviously not the Christian belief.

1) Well, I assume they are referring to 'the father, the son and the holy ghost', interpreting the Father as God, the Son as Jezus (who is also God) and the Holy Spirit as yet another, or the same, God. This seems to imply that there are more then one Gods.
2) How do you deduce that Islam thinks Mary is a God from this statement? That is not what that said. Mary doesn't come into it, as far as I can tell.
3) They say Jezus is messenger and Mary a Saint, both of them mortal, and as such, both of them need food to sustain them. So, at the one hand they state that Jezus can't be God,or God's son, as he needs food, and that Mary is also but a mortal, presumably uncapable of giving birth to a God? (Obviously, I'm not sure about all this, as I'm no Muslim, just giving my interpretation on the quotes you gave)
4) They are not implying that Christians believe God mated with Mary, but that God, setting the rules of life and the universe (IE you gotta mate to make kids), must have taken a mate to produce a child, and since he didn't, Jezus isn't his.

Again, this is my interpretation of the quotes. Which brings me to my next point; the Qur'an is like the Bible: a document written by man, presumably under divine inspiration, but with no proof to back this claim up. Both have a host of inaccuracies, and both Muslims and Christians explain these away.

I find the arrogance displayed in this thread mind-boggling, really; you 'attack' a faith through inaccuracies in their Holy Book, while you explain away similar 'assaults' on your own Holy Book with one-liners as 'He works in mysterious ways' or 'It's all open for interpretation'.

Note that I use 'you' in a general term, I know you haven't actually used those arguments, at least, not as far as I can remember, but they are favourites among other Christians. Also note that I am aware you didn't really attack or assault their faith per se, I just couldn't find a suitable description, English is not my native tongue and it is rather early here.

You make that claim every time you affirm your belief in Christianity? Nor is the tautology, Muslims believe the Quran because they believe the Quran really an answer as to weather they should believe the Quran, especially in light of these potential inaccuracies.

Why should it be impossible for someone to believe in his God, and let others the freedom to believe in theirs without having the need to 'expose' them? And isn't the tautology you mention the same for Christians? You believe in God because you believe in God, yet you have no evidence to back this up. You're hardly in the position to demand evidence from another faith.

Also, off-topic, I'm terribly disappointed that you didn't respond to my apology PM the other day. I guess you're not really into the 'turning the other cheek' and 'forgive and forget' side of Christianity? What would Jezus say!

[CamilleBonparte]

1) Well, I assume they are referring to 'the father, the son and the holy ghost', interpreting the Father as God, the Son as Jezus (who is also God) and the Holy Spirit as yet another, or the same, God. This seems to imply that there are more then one Gods.

You assume wrong. It is well known that Muhammad and most muslims from that time mistakenly believed that the trinity (three distinct essences of a single God) was actually a triad of gods, with Jesus and Mary worshipped as gods alongside Allah (the Abrahamic god). Now, I understand where this came from, it's been mentioned a few times...heretical Christians whom engaged in worship of Mary likely had contact with Muhammad, leading him to falsely believe that this was simply what Christians believed. However, Muhammad is supposed to have received revelations from God - that's what the Quran is supposed to be. Therefore for this mistake to persist in what is supposed to be a holy text proves that the "revelations" could not have come from God, as they are based on false information.

4) They are not implying that Christians believe God mated with Mary, but that God, setting the rules of life and the universe (IE you gotta mate to make kids), must have taken a mate to produce a child, and since he didn't, Jezus isn't his.

Except the Quran also says that Mary was chaste, and that Jesus WAS a virgin birth! So that explanation doesn't work. What the Quran is saying is that God is above engaging in the low animal behavior that is sex. This implies that Christians who believe that Jesus was the son of God believe that God DID indeed mate with Mary.

Again, this is my interpretation of the quotes. Which brings me to my next point; the Qur'an is like the Bible: a document written by man, presumably under divine inspiration, but with no proof to back this claim up. Both have a host of inaccuracies, and both Muslims and Christians explain these away.

Actually the infallibility of the Quran was my point. As for the bible, like I said, make a separate thread for that topic, this one is about the Quran.

I find the arrogance displayed in this thread mind-boggling, really; you 'attack' a faith through inaccuracies in their Holy Book, while you explain away similar 'assaults' on your own Holy Book with one-liners as 'He works in mysterious ways' or 'It's all open for interpretation'.

Note that I use 'you' in a general term, I know you haven't actually used those arguments, at least, not as far as I can remember, but they are favourites among other Christians. Also note that I am aware you didn't really attack or assault their faith per se, I just couldn't find a suitable description, English is not my native tongue and it is rather early here.

Wait, so am I being arrogant or aren't I? First you say I attack the Islamic faith and explain away similar assaults on my own, and then you say I didn't do either. Which is it? Once again you're trying to turn the thread into a criticism of Christianity. So once again...make your own thread instead of trying to derail this one.

[Biggreenfellow]

You assume wrong. It is well known that Muhammad and most muslims from that time mistakenly believed that the trinity (three distinct essences of a single God) was actually a triad of gods, with Jesus and Mary worshipped as gods alongside Allah (the Abrahamic god). Now, I understand where this came from, it's been mentioned a few times...heretical Christians whom engaged in worship of Mary likely had contact with Muhammad, leading him to falsely believe that this was simply what Christians believed. However, Muhammad is supposed to have received revelations from God - that's what the Quran is supposed to be. Therefore for this mistake to persist in what is supposed to be a holy text proves that the "revelations" could not have come from God, as they are based on false information.

Except the Quran also says that Mary was chaste, and that Jesus WAS a virgin birth! So that explanation doesn't work. What the Quran is saying is that God is above engaging in the low animal behavior that is sex. This implies that Christians who believe that Jesus was the son of God believe that God DID indeed mate with Mary.

Actually the infallibility of the Quran was my point. As for the bible, like I said, make a separate thread for that topic, this one is about the Quran.

And I am addressing this thread with my argumentation that you are in no position to MAKE this thread, seeing how your Holy Book is in exactly the same position as the Qur'an. You ignore the fallibility of the Bible, yet you insist that Muslims do not. In fact, you ignore half of the points I brought up, which quite frankly looks like avoidance behaviour to me.

Wait, so am I being arrogant or aren't I? First you say I attack the Islamic faith and explain away similar assaults on my own, and then you say I didn't do either. Which is it? Once again you're trying to turn the thread into a criticism of Christianity. So once again...make your own thread instead of trying to derail this one.

Since this is my first post in this thread, I fail to see how I 'once again' try to derail anything. Frankly, the irony of this whole response (you pretty much manage to misinterpret EVERYTHING I tried to say) is so funny it's almost sad. So let me spell it out for you:

I said 'the arrogance displayed in this thread', not the arrogance displayed by you alone. But yes, I think you, too, are arrogant. Arrogant enough to ask Muslims to answer questions you blatantly refuse to answer, under the pretext of 'not wanting to derail your thread'. As for my mention of attacks and assaults, I found attack and assault too harsh for what you are doing, so that was the reason of my little disclaimer at the end. Note the use of 'per se'.

[basics]

" It is a matter of belief. The followers of Islam believe it to be the revealed word of God. That does not mean that the human understanding and writing of the revealed words is perfect or complete. It is still for Islam the true word of God. I am Christain and Lutheran and I have other beliefs of what constitutes to me the true word of God. Yet, I have no interest in claiming that the Quran is not a true word of God. "

Viking Prince,

Then you are a very silly fellow. The Holy Bible is the finished work in which we may know what God requires of men and it is not compatible with any other work including the Koran. God cannot teach one thing to one person and the exact opposite to another yet that is more or less what you are inferring by your post.

The Bible is about salvation without works through the grace of God given freely to those that He has called is calling and will call simply because it is God who justifies. The Koran is about its adherents working their socks off in the hope that these works are seen as good enough to be granted something that none of them will ever know about until they are dead when it is too late, that something being mercy.

If that is what the Lutheran church teaches then my advice would be that you get out as soon as possible.

[Viking Prince]

Of course I do not. Why would you even suggest that I make such a claim? I do not proclaim that parking tickets are not the true word of God either. There are a large number (perhaps infinite) claims that I do not make. Like most believers of faith, I proclaim my faith. In the course of a religious service, when the bible is read -- the congregation will proclaim the verses read as the word of God. Proclamations tend to be limited and often codified such as the Nicene Creed.

[Squiggle]

Of course I do not. Why would you even suggest that I make such a claim? I do not proclaim that parking tickets are not the true word of God either. There are a large number (perhaps infinite) claims that I do not make. Like most believers of faith, I proclaim my faith. In the course of a religious service, when the bible is read -- the congregation will proclaim the verses read as the word of God. Proclamations tend to be limited and often codified such as the Nicene Creed.

By the very nature of what the Bible is- affirming the one true God, that he was made flesh and sacrificed himself for our sins etc- is is the final chapter. At the very least it is wholly and completely inherently incompatible with Islam which says Jesus was *not* the son of God. Sorry Viking, when you hold to a world view you necessarily reject competing world views. If I subscribe to the A theory of time, I can not subscribe to the B theory. Every time you affirm Christianity is true you reject Islam. More over, under Christian belief without the atoning sacrifice of Jesus we are all doomed. We all require salvation, therefore it is a moral imperative to inform this of others and make a case for it.

If Christianity is true, every single Muslim is damned. If Islam is true, every single Christian has committed Shirk and is damned. We necessarily condemn and refuse the other.

Some of many sources used in the Koran were



Mohammad only knew of heretics, so that's what he thought about Christianity.

If this is true it certainly explains why Mohammad was wrong, and obviously precludes the Quran from being the word of God. I hope one of the few Muslims on twc comes in here however, I at least want to know what a Muslim would say to this blatant error.

[boofhead]

Some of many sources used in the Koran were

The New Testament (canonical and apocryphal) and various heretical doctrines. On his journeys between Syria, Hijaz, and Yemen, Mohammed had every opportunity to come in close touch with Yemenite, Abyssinian, Ghassanite, and Syrian Christians, especially heretic. Hence, while the influence of orthodox Christianity upon the Koran has been slight, apocryphal and heretical Christian legends, on the other hand, are one of the original sources of Koranic faith. (See Muir, op. cit. infra, 66-239; Tisdall, "The Original Sources of the Qur'an", London, 1905, 55-211.)

Mohammad only knew of heretics, so that's what he thought about Christianity.

[CamilleBonparte]

Mohammad only knew of heretics, so that's what he thought about Christianity.

Ah yes but the Quran is said to be divine revelations given to Muhammad from God himself, so it doesn't answer the question asked in the OP.

It is a matter of belief. The followers of Islam believe it to be the revealed word of God. That does not mean that the human understanding and writing of the revealed words is perfect or complete. It is still for Islam the true word of God.

These are obvious facts that don't even need to be stated. Yes, muslims do believe in Islam. However my question stands. If it's the word of God, why is it incorrect in it's understanding of that which it addresses?

If only Christians would subject their own Holy text to the same scrutiny as this...

You should make a thread about this very topic rather than attempting to de-rail this one. I'd be eager to respond, but I don't want my thread going off-topic.

[AngryTitusPullo]

Some of many sources used in the Koran were Mohammad only knew of heretics, so that's what he thought about Christianity.

Maybe during Muhammad's time the Christians he met weren't considered heretics. I mean early Christians were from the middle east, not Rome or Germany.

[Gromovnik]

Maybe during Muhammad's time the Christians he met weren't considered heretics. I mean early Christians were from the middle east, not Rome or Germany.

You know that there were christians in 1st century Rome, and 2nd century Germany?

[Squiggle]

Maybe during Muhammad's time the Christians he met weren't considered heretics. I mean early Christians were from the middle east, not Rome or Germany.

Yeah except they were considered heretics...

[black-dragon]

If only Christians would subject their own Holy text to the same scrutiny as this...

I could see Muslims interpreting the inconsistencies away, though, just like Christians do with the Bible.

[boofhead]

If only Christians would subject their own Holy text to the same scrutiny as this...

Christian analysis of the Bible supercedes muslim analysis of the Koran probably ten-thousand fold.

[black-dragon]

Christian analysis of the Bible supercedes muslim analysis of the Koran probably ten-thousand fold.

In academia, that's certainly true. The issue is more complex than I care to take the time to expand on fully, but basically what I mean is that your average Christians tends to be far more charitable to the Bible than to other religious texts.

[Viking Prince]

You are trying to use empiric evidence to challenge articles of faith. Poking holes in a document written in the hands of man is not the same as poking holes in an article of faith. I would no sooner wish to attack the Quran as an original revelation from God than the New Testament from the bible. What you are trying to do is neither right nor fair to the men (or women) who made the honest attempts to put the revelation to human words.

[Squiggle]

You are trying to use empiric evidence to challenge articles of faith. Poking holes in a document written in the hands of man is not the same as poking holes in an article of faith. I would no sooner wish to attack the Quran as an original revelation from God than the New Testament from the bible. What you are trying to do is neither right nor fair to the men (or women) who made the honest attempts to put the revelation to human words.

The Quran is a direct message of the Angel Gabriel [speaking on behalf of God] to Mohammad, it is meant to be by definition accurate, correct, and infallible. It holds as presented here every bit of inaccuracy and fallibility. Articles of faith are untenable if what you have faith in is show to be objectively flawed. I dont know why you add in what you "want" to do or not. First, this is a discussion thread asking what Muslims think of it, not a point of attack. Secondly, as I have already written, every Muslim is forfeit, so if this point is critical to any Muslim who reads it, if it tears down his fundamental faith in the Quran, good, because I can help build up what is so necessary for his salvation. And you as a Christian should be happy about that as well.