tribalbeeyatch

And none of your contortions have convinced me otherwise. It's the plainest interpretation of the text.

River

ok. Thaz good....I suggest you ignore me.

tribalbeeyatch

I'm sure that you would like it if your ridiculous assertions about the perfection of the Koran went unchallenged, but don't hold your breath. If it's not me, then it will be someone else.

Iasion

Greetings River,

Thanks for your reply,

Strangely, you entitle your post :
No proof of variant Qurans with omitted Suras

and then you ignore the evidence of Qurans with omitted Suras which I presented.

Let me remind you -
The Quran of Abdullah Ibn Mas'ud omitted Suras 1, 113, and 114.

Are you aware of this early variant Quran?
How does it affect your claim that there are no Qurans with different Suras?


You then claim :
This is merely the hand-waving of apologists (one of whom you then quote).

The fact is that TWO of the pre-Yamama Qurans, the Quran of Ubayy ibn Ka'b and also the Quran of Ibn Abbas have these Suras included.

Do you claim these are not variant Qurans?


I do have more questions, which you should answer yourself, not send me off to some apologist site - I can quote endless sites to support me - so what?


There is evidence of verses lost from the Quran, e.g. much was lost in the battle of Yamama -

Many (of the passages) of the Qur'an that were sent down were known by those who died on the day of Yamama ... but they were not known (by those who) survived them, nor were they written down, nor had Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman (by that time) collected the Qur'an, nor were they found with even one (person) after them. (Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif, p.23).

Are you aware of evidence that much of the Quran was lost at Yamama?
How does that affect your claim of "perfection" for the Quran?


There is specific evidence of verses removed from the Quran :

"We used to read a verse of the Qur'an revealed in their connection, but later the verse was cancelled. It was: "convey to our people on our behalf the information that we have met our Lord, and He is pleased with us, and has made us pleased". (Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 5, p.288)."

Are you aware of such evidence of verses lost from the Quran?
How does that affect your claim of "perfection" for the Quran?


Are you aware of evidence that the first Qurans were NOT collected until well after Mohamed's death, from various sources?
How does that affect your claim of "perfection" for the Quran?


Are you aware that Uthmann eventually chose one version of the Quran and had the others - even that of the best reciter and memoriser - destroyed?
How does that affect your claim of "perfection" for the Quran?



Then this bizzare waffle:
Pardon?
YOU bring up a silly story, embellish it with childishness, then you ridicule MY credulity?

But then, you're a person who seem to believe the penis is between the coccyx and ribs - well, it appears yours is between your left and right eyebrows.

Iasion

Bob K

If the gods existed and wanted to send humans a message, why should they do so in code? Sending a message via a code in a book that is supposed to be a holy book is a method that might not be noticed, or interpreted correctly.

If you were a god, would you send messages in code in holy books? What would be the logic in doing so? Would not your words by themselves--by their sheer beauty and logic and accurate description of people/things/events--be enough?

If so, then what do we make of the fact that we find ugliness (the sanctioning of slavery, the intolerance including the killing of dissenters, the treatment of women, etc.), contradictions, inaccuracies, etc., in holy books? What message are we supposed to get from these challenges to beauty/logic/accuracy? Are the gods somehow tempting us to doubt their existence? Or are all these confusions simply the result of an ineffective attempt by some humans to fabricate an holy book?

We still have to see the appearance of a god--willingly or unwillingly--which would be the only true proof of the existence of gods. No credible person has reported seeing one, no credible person has captured one and tortured it until it confessed it was a god and forced it to perform stunts that would prove it is a god (because it theoretically would have more knowledge and more capabilities for using that knowledge than humans).

Where are we without the gods?

Challenge: What would serve as proof of the existence of gods?

How could we test the hypothesis that a thing claiming to be a god is really a god? What would we expect to be its characteristics?

Would it have more knowledge than humans individually or collectively?

Would it have more capabilities for using that knowledge than humans individually or collectively?

Would the characteristics of having more knowledge and capabilities for using that knowledge be enough for proof of the existence of a god?

What about immortality? Would we expect/demand that it be immortal?

What if it were more knowledgeable/powerful but was mortal? Would it still be a god? If we could kill it, would it still be a god?

What if it were mortal and produced new gods by reproduction of some kind (details are not important herein)? Would it still be a god?

What if it were mortal, and only a little more knowledgeable/powerful than humans individually? Kinda-sorta like a super-human, but more in the sense of a superior human? Would it still be god?

Would we worship gods that were mortal and only slightly more knowledgeable/powerful than individual humans?

How would we worship them (what specifically would we do)? For what purpose would we worship them if they were only slightly more knowledgeable/powerful than humans? Their ability and willingness to kick human ass up and down Main Street all day long and all night long, too, might be good reason to give them their due--whatever that might be. But what if they were mortal and we could kill them to keep them from kicking our asses individually/collectively up and down Main Street? Would we kill them and eliminate the ass-kicking?

Without standards for the perception, evaluation, and analysis of gods, without an expectation of the characteristics of gods, we might not be able to perceive/evaluate/analyze a god if it appeared to us or if we captured one.

So, what would be the characteristics of gods and what would be the proof of the existence of gods?

River

- Iasion


If there exists a Koran with 2 extra Suras....then produce it . You can't merely state that they were destroyed. Scholarship is based on Evidence. And you have no evidence to Yield. And who cares where my ----- is located.

Iasion

Greetings River,


Initially,
you admitted to no knowledge at all about these textual problems with the Quran,
then,
you IGNORED the evidence in my first post,
then again,
you IGNORED most of my pointed questions in my 2nd post,
and now,
you still show total IGNORANCE of the development of the Quran.


Because you are totally ignorant of the textual problems with the Quran, I will make another post detailing the evidence.


Iasion