Saturday, January 08, 2011

The Koran’s Achilles heel!

Islam makes the absurd claim that the Koran is the absolute literal word of god (the language god speaks, thinks and writes in), which was dictated to, but not written by, Mohammed. Unlike the Holy Bible, there is no human mediation possible in the words of the Koran. Nevertheless, once the book called the Koran is opened to historical verifiability and higher critical interrogation among true scholars and Muslim, non cult members, it cannot be substantiated as god's pure word.

Like most cults, Islam is an all-or-nothing proposition. Any fault in the Koran that was entrusted to humankind, or doubts as to the truthfulness and reliability of Mohammed (not to mention uprightness), should cause the whole system to disintegrate for all but the severely manic. Muslims already subconsciously realize this, because they fly into tantrums whenever either Mohammed or the Koran is 'disrespected'. Under Sharia law any criticism of either Mohammed or the Koran is blasphemy which is punished by death (even the NYT reports this information).

This paranoid, hypersensitive defensiveness and outrage at candid criticism are not the reactions of a confident belief system, but that of an insidious information-control cult. Reactions of this nature give clear evidences of Islam's core deficiencies. In short, they are disingenuous efforts at shielding a terminal vulnerability, an attempt to cover an Achilles heel.

The location of that Achilles heel was amply demonstrated by the Satanic Verses affair, the Motoons rage, and by the Organization of the Islamic Conference's insidious attempts to introduce global laws against 'blasphemy' of Mohammed (not to mention the recent slaughter of vulnerable Christians, Human rights advocates and defenseless office workers worldwide). In fact, the Muslims themselves have put on public display their most vulnerable and dreadful pustule, which is the questionable (though unquestioned) character of the 'Prophet' himself.Ron jr muslim

Note: The above words are highly edited annotations of an anonymous and mostly veiled human source. As I recall, the editor himself was terribly offended and deeply hurt by the recent abduction of his insubordinate, eldest son by a subversive, Islamic conspiracy cult whose goal was to kill (again, see Hebrews 6.6) the Jesus of Holy Scripture.


Anonymous said...

The Quran, unlike the present day Bible, is God's word. Just read this:

The Bible they say was inspired by God to various human beings and the Christians use this to justify the many contradictions in it. The Bible is according to the men who wrote it and re-rote it, by just that alone, we know that it is not the direct word of God. However, no one can bring forth any evidence that the Quran was not from God.

Anonymous said...

As salaamulaikum,

'Islam' does not teach that the language of god is Arabic, nor does it state that God is limited by language. In fact it is humans who are limited to communicate in terms of language. God says in the Quran:

...We sent not a messenger except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people, in order to make (things) clear to them. Now Allah leaves straying those whom He pleases and guides whom He pleases: and He is Exalted in power, full of Wisdom.

So every messenger who was sent spoke the language of his people.

Verily We have sent thee in truth, as a bearer of glad tidings, and as a Warner: and there never was a people, without a Warner having lived among them (in the past).

And god sent messengers to every single nation on earth. so it is abundantly clear that god communicated with all of humanity through his messengers in the language of the people so that they may pay heed.

In particular the Quran was revealed to prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) who was born amongst the Arab people

Had We sent this as a Qur'an (in the language) other than Arabic, they would have said: "Why are not its verses explained in detail? What! (a Book) not in Arabic and (a Messenger an Arab?" Say: "It is a Guide and a Healing to those who believe; and for those who believe not, there is a deafness in their ears, and it is blindness in their (eyes): They are (as it were) being called from a place far distant!"

non-Arab Muslims strive to learn Arabic so that we can derive greater benefit from the Quran and so that we may appreciate in its true beauty. This is because no translation can ever do justice to the Quran.

wallahu alim (and God knows best)

Anonymous said...

The Qu'ran is God's word which he chose to reveal to human's containing the True message of His unity which had been corrupted by the hands of man in the past scriptures which were His exact word when revealed as well. The Qu'ran, unlike these other revelations has been preserved. The essence, the message of pure monotheism, of God with no partner or chosen race is only to be found in the Quran and within it's pages this is preserved. To say that God thinks, speaks or writes in the way you have said it is to apply human characteristics to God in order to limit Him and lampoon His Greatness. God is Indescribable. But that too is a description. Using human language can point us to God by the limited concepts we are capable of, but can never describe God fully. We can only be pointed to Him and fall on our faces in utter awe of His Glory and shed tears because of the incomprehensible breadth of His Mercy. Allow our hearts to be cleansed and turned by the all encompassing indescribable Guidance of His Love. He is all powerful, and us?, our thoughts and our languages could never reach His Majesty and Glory. By His Will Alone do we have hope.

revdrron said...

In Christianity, the Word, the Logos, becomes flesh through the incarnation in Christ-Jesus. For Muslims, it is impossible for Allah to have a son, because the Word, the Logos, is the Koran. In other words, in Islam, the Logos becomes Scripture, and in Christianity, the Logos becomes flesh, it becomes completely human.

revdrron said...

According to tradition,
Allah revealed the Quran to Angel Gabriel.
Gabriel revealed it to Muhammad.
Others transcribed the Quran.
The Caliphs burnt incorrect copies of the text, so that the true Quran remained.

The Quran of today is the same as the original.

There is no tape recording of what Allah told Gabriel, the only primary witness. Muhammad was the only one who heard the Quran directly from Gabriel, making him a secondary witness. Others transcribed the Quran. Therefore, even if one relies on Muhammad as a witness, he or she must also trust that anonymous people transcribed the text accurately. Even then, the fact that the Caliphs burnt the text implies that people can have the wrong version of the Quran, which discredits the theory that it is perfectly preserved. If one accepts the perfect preservation theory, one must trust that the Caliphs preserved the original Quran. Further, one could accept that Muhammad was a true witness but that Gabriel was really Satan or a person who misled Muhammad.

Let's for arguments sake assume we are willing to accept just one witness. But the Quran notes that people questioned Muhammad’s credibility.

In the 7th century people were superstitious and believed in all kinds of absurd things. Muslims often refer to the pre-Islamic Arabian age of ignorance as jahiliya. The fact that some 7th century people believed in Muhammad is no proof of the truth of his message.

In judging the credibility of witnesses, one must ensure that they are not being bribed. Yet the Caliphs and Muhammad were given special rights and statuses in Islam. For example, the Quran is biased towards Muslims and males. Then by burning the text, without preserving the original versions, one cannot confidently dismiss claims that the Caliphs changed the Quran to suit their own agenda. Perhaps, the Caliphs were afraid that people would abandon Islam if they realized that the text was poorly preserved.

So how can one not at least doubt that the text is perfectly preserved? Further, if a text was not perfectly preserved one would expect to see grammatical errors which seem to exist in the Quran. (see